Laura: The most common dating advice is to ‘be yourself’ and ‘show you’re interested.’ What if the secret to a lasting relationship is actually doing the opposite? Sophia: Hold on, doing the opposite? You mean, like, be someone else and act completely bored? That sounds like a recipe for disaster. Laura: Not exactly! But what if being a little less available, a little less eager, is what actually builds irresistible attraction? Sophia: Okay, now you have my attention. That flies in the face of everything we're told about being open and vulnerable. It sounds a little bit like playing games. Laura: It does, but that's the provocative premise at the heart of Never Chase Men Again: 38 Dating Secrets to Get the Guy, Keep Him Interested, and Prevent Dead-End Relationships by Bruce Bryans. Sophia: Bruce Bryans... I've heard his name. He's one of those no-nonsense, straight-shooting relationship coaches, right? His advice can be pretty polarizing. I’ve seen reviews where readers either call his work a life-saver or criticize it for reinforcing traditional gender stereotypes. Laura: Exactly. He's not an academic researcher, but a coach who built a following by offering very direct, practical advice. And this book, which has a pretty mixed but passionate reception online, argues that women hold the most power when they stop trying to secure a man and start focusing on their own value. Sophia: I like the sound of that. So it’s less about chasing and more about… attracting? Laura: Precisely. And it all starts with this fundamental, almost economic principle of attraction he lays out.

Laura: Bryans kicks off with a bold statement that feels almost primal: "Men quickly tire of that which is easily obtained." He argues that being a challenge is crucial, not just to keep a man interested, but to filter out the lazy men from the ambitious ones. Sophia: I can see how that would be true in a general sense, like with a career goal or a hobby. But in relationships, the word 'challenge' can feel a bit loaded. It makes me think of playing hard-to-get, ignoring texts on purpose, that kind of thing. Laura: And that’s the exact distinction Bryans makes. He says it’s not about feigning disinterest, which high-quality men see right through. It’s about having genuine self-respect that is demonstrated through your actions. It’s about having a life so full and interesting that you simply don’t have the time or energy for games or for people who waste your time. He has this great quote: "High-quality men DO NOT pursue women who...play games...However, what these men do respect are women who have a zero tolerance policy for time wasting and being manipulated." Sophia: Okay, that reframes it. It’s not an act; it’s an authentic state of being. You’re not pretending to be busy; you are busy living a life you love. Laura: Exactly. And he illustrates this perfectly with a story about a woman named Sarah and a man named Mark. It’s a scenario that I think will feel painfully familiar to a lot of our listeners. Sophia: Oh, I’m ready. Lay it on me. Laura: So, Sarah is this vibrant, independent woman. She meets Mark, a successful professional, and there’s an immediate spark. Sarah is enthusiastic, and she does what many of us are taught to do: she shows her interest. She responds to his texts immediately. She rearranges her schedule to be free whenever he suggests a date. She’s being accommodating, open, and available. Sophia: Right, she’s making it easy for him. She’s showing him she’s a team player. That sounds like a good thing. Laura: It sounds like it, but watch what happens. In the first couple of weeks, Mark is engaged. But as he notices just how available Sarah is, a shift occurs. He starts taking longer to reply. He becomes less proactive in making plans. He knows that if he texts her at 9 PM on a Friday, she’ll likely drop everything. She has, without realizing it, communicated that her time is less valuable than his. Sophia: Oof. I felt that in my bones. You think you're being nice and flexible, but the message you're actually sending is, 'My life is on pause, waiting for you.' Laura: Precisely. The story gets worse. Sarah, feeling him pull away, doubles down. She starts initiating more of the contact, suggesting dates, trying to win back his attention. She even starts turning down plans with her own friends just in case he calls. Sophia: Oh, Sarah. No. That’s the classic spiral. You feel the connection slipping, so you grip tighter, which only makes them want to pull away more. It’s a horrible feeling. Laura: It is. And the climax of this little tragedy is when Mark starts canceling plans last-minute, knowing Sarah will be understanding. He’s taken her completely for granted. Finally, Sarah has a moment of clarity. She realizes she’s lost herself in this pursuit. So, she pulls back. Sophia: What does 'pulling back' look like in this case? Does she send him a big 'we need to talk' text? Laura: No, nothing so dramatic. She simply stops initiating. She gets busy with her own life again—her hobbies, her friends. When he does text, she doesn't reply instantly. She makes it clear, through her actions, that she has a full life and isn't always available. She reclaims her own time. Sophia: And let me guess, Mark suddenly sits up and pays attention? Laura: Like clockwork. Suddenly faced with her absence, with the loss of that easy validation, he realizes he might actually lose her. He starts calling, making concrete plans well in advance, and asking about her life. By reintroducing scarcity and demonstrating that her world doesn't revolve around him, she became a 'challenge' worth pursuing again. Sophia: Wow. That story is so powerful because it’s not about a trick she played. It’s about a fundamental shift in her own behavior rooted in self-respect. She didn't change for him; she changed for herself, and his attraction was the byproduct. Laura: That's the entire thesis. It’s not about playing hard-to-get; it’s about being hard-to-get because your life is genuinely valuable to you. Sophia: Okay, so having your own life and not being overly available is the foundation. That makes sense. But the book then gets into some very specific, almost tactical rules for how to operate in the early stages of dating. That feels like the next level, the practical application of this principle. Laura: It is. And this is where we get into the idea of the 'High-Value Filter.'

Sophia: The 'High-Value Filter.' I like the sound of that. It implies you're the one doing the screening, not just hoping to pass someone else's test. Laura: Exactly. It’s about shifting from a passive mindset of 'I hope he likes me' to an active one of 'Let's see if he's worthy of my time and energy.' And one of the most controversial filters Bryans proposes is his rule about communication: prioritize phone calls over texting. Sophia: Oh, here we go. I knew this was coming. In today's world, isn't an unsolicited phone call from someone you barely know a bit… intense? Almost a red flag in itself? Laura: It’s a fascinating point, and Bryans addresses it head-on. He calls texting a "player's weapon." It's low-effort, low-investment, and allows someone to maintain multiple casual connections simultaneously with minimal effort. A man can send the same "Hey, you up?" text to five different women at once. Sophia: That is depressingly true. The efficiency of the modern-day player is something to behold. Laura: But a phone call? That requires singular focus. It requires real-time engagement and a genuine investment of time. Bryans argues that by showing a preference for calls, you are immediately filtering out the men who are only looking for something casual and low-effort. He tells another story, about Emily and David, that drives this home. Sophia: Let’s hear it. Laura: Emily meets David on a dating app. They hit it off, and the texting is constant. It’s fun, flirty, and Emily feels like they’re building a real connection. But she notices that David never, ever calls. Even when they’re making plans, it’s all done over text. She feels a growing frustration, like the connection is stuck in this superficial digital space. Sophia: I can definitely relate to that. Texting can feel like a substitute for real intimacy, a sort of connection-flavored snack instead of a real meal. Laura: What a perfect analogy. So, Emily decides to be direct. She tells David she enjoys their chats but that she’s someone who prefers phone calls to really get to know a person. Sophia: That’s a bold move. How did he react? Laura: His response was incredibly revealing. He admitted he preferred texting because it was easier and less time-consuming. He was hesitant to commit to phone calls because, as he eventually confessed, he was talking to other women and wanted to keep his options open. Sophia: Wow. So the phone call wasn't the issue. The phone call was the truth serum. Laura: Exactly! It was the filter. His unwillingness to make a small investment of time and effort revealed his true intentions. Emily realized he wasn't serious and ended it. She was disappointed, but she saved herself months of wasted time and emotional energy on a dead-end relationship. The phone call preference acted as a high-value filter that protected her. Sophia: That makes so much sense. It’s not about being anti-texting. It’s about using your communication preferences as a diagnostic tool. If a guy isn't willing to meet a simple, reasonable standard, he's showing you who he is. Laura: And this idea of filtering extends beyond just communication. It's about not compromising your core self for anyone. There's a short but powerful story Bryans tells from his own life, which he calls 'The Politician's Promise.' Sophia: I’m intrigued. Laura: He was dating a woman who was incredibly passionate about politics. She had ambitions to run for office. He found her intelligent and attractive, but he realized their life goals were incompatible. He didn't see himself as the supportive husband of a politician. So, he decided to end things. Sophia: That’s a mature decision. Recognizing incompatibility early on. Laura: It is. But here’s the twist. When he broke it off, she was shocked. And she immediately offered to give it all up for him. She said she would abandon her political ambitions if he would stay with her. Sophia: Oh, no. What was his reaction? Laura: He said it was one of the most unattractive things he had ever witnessed. Her willingness to sacrifice her deepest passion, the very thing that made her interesting and dynamic, just to keep a man she’d only known for a few weeks, solidified his decision. He wanted her to be with someone who would celebrate her ambition, not someone for whom she would abandon it. Sophia: That is such a powerful lesson. Your passions and your purpose are part of your value. Giving them up doesn't make you more devoted; it makes you less you. And that’s ultimately less attractive. Laura: It’s the ultimate high-value filter. A high-quality partner wants you for who you are, not for who you’re willing to pretend to be for them.

Sophia: You know, as we talk through these stories and rules, a pattern is emerging. When you boil it all down, it seems like every piece of advice in this book—don't be too available, insist on phone calls, don't drop your passions—isn't really about manipulating the man at all. It's a series of tests for yourself, to reinforce your own boundaries and self-worth. Laura: That's the perfect synthesis, Sophia. Bryans' core message is that you can't control a man's interest, but you can absolutely control your own standards. The book is controversial, and as you noted, some readers find it problematic because it feels like it's putting all the responsibility on the woman to behave a certain way. Sophia: Right, it can feel like a rulebook for 'how to be the perfect woman' to 'win' a man. Laura: It can. But if you look at it from another angle, it's actually giving the woman all the power. The power to define her own value. The power to filter. The power to walk away from situations that don't serve her. It’s not about changing him; it’s about having the strength to choose someone who already meets your standards. Sophia: The power to walk away. That’s it, isn't it? The book is less about 'getting the guy' and more about becoming the kind of woman who knows she deserves a great guy and won't settle for less. The chasing stops because you realize you are the prize. Laura: Exactly. And that self-perception is the most magnetic quality of all. He ends the book with this powerful thought: "The life currency of all relationships are time, energy, and sacrifice – all of which are non-refundable. Don’t waste them on men who don’t deserve your love." Sophia: That’s a line that should be cross-stitched on a pillow. It’s a reminder that your resources are finite and precious. Laura: It really is. And it makes you wonder, in a world that pushes for constant connection and availability, what's one boundary you could set in your own life—not just in dating, but anywhere—to reclaim a bit of that high-value scarcity? Sophia: That's a great question for our listeners. It’s a real challenge. Do these rules feel empowering or outdated to you? Does this approach feel like a healthy assertion of self-worth or a throwback to old-fashioned gender roles? We'd love to hear your thoughts. Find us on our socials and join the conversation. Laura: This is Aibrary, signing off.