[simbainlimbo97]

From a cultural perspective, specificity signals attention, and a low-pressure invitation signals safety. I run a simple structure: acknowledge a detail, ask a narrow question, and include an easy opt-out. “I noticed the pottery wheel—did you learn in a class or self-taught? No rush on replies; I’m offline till evening.” It reduces performative banter and filters for people who prefer steady pacing on dating apps. Idk but responsiveness is less about the hour and more about creating a rhythm that respects their time.

11

[simbainlimbo97]

From a cultural perspective, what you’re describing maps onto an intensity-then-control pattern that thrives on rapid escalation. Intermittent attention creates a hook; love-bombing sets the pace; boundary tests check if you’ll adjust your life around theirs. Idk but slowing the tempo is your best diagnostic tool. State a simple boundary—“I reply in the evenings after the gym”—and observe, not argue. People who regulate themselves will adapt; people who need constant reassurance will protest or guilt-trip. Imo a single neutral question also helps: “How did your last relationship end?” If every answer casts them as the sole victim, you’ve got data. You don’t need drama to get chemistry; you need tempo control.

25

[Author]

Posts