A familiar story with questions. II

[RR17]

This quote is getting too long and I need to break it down.

"most of last week" is a blink.

The math of this is approach is that

"consistent change + sufficient time = change she can believe in.

Then you can respond accordingly. Not before. Your w does not yet have a "new you" to respond to. Not enough time or consistency from you.

The only new me she saw was the me that was prepared to dump her a$$. There was as close to NC as possible while living in the same house. This may not have been long enough but it was very different.

Sorry to seem like a wet blanket, but again, this^^ is so short lived and so "not enough" that you are really setting yourself up for disappointment.

Your timeline must be elongated exponentially, or any "results" you see will be puny or temporary.

You need to do a behavior for 90 days before monitoring for results, or do at least 30. Seriously.

I realize this and it was the point of the whole post. I think I may have done a poor job of communicating some of these points, but the main point is that I know it was a short time and that monitor and adjust is where things get tricky. If she moves closer and I continue to go dark, it will have a very different result than if I validate. See what I mean.
I went dark if only for a few days. It had a profound effect. It did.

you are trusting your own questionable judgement here^^^ and you are seeing what you hope is true. Not necessarily what is true.

A "change" of any sort in that brief a time is too short to even notice.

Try not to "notice" anything short of a BIG CLEAR behavior on her part. If the time comes, you will not have to guess or mind read.

Let that^^ sink in.

This is why I said I don't trust my own judgment. No that I don't know the caricature of this W. I do. I also know she is not acting as herself 100%

Asking to be intimate is serious pursuit. Period.

And doing it by text is not to avoid confrontation, but to avoid facing rejection in person.

It comes across as pursuit done with so much fear attached, that it could not be done in person.

Unless it's consensual flirting by text, an attempt for intimacy made in the least intimate format, is not going to go well imo.

Well, consensual flirting is pursuing IMO. How do you know that it is consensual without first pursuing?

I know that texting was avoiding rejection to a point. "No" in a text is also rejection. What it did do is avoid any chance of an argument. That alone was my reason. I don't care about being rejected. I just don't want an argument. She said "I can't" I said "Okay". No more pursuit. No chance of a fight.

more pursuit ^^ with a dose of semantics.

She rejected your request and then you seemed to argue about it. It's not a position you want to be in. The more you challenge her choices - the more you force her to defend them, and the more you corner her.

Here I disagree. It is way more than semantic.

"Can't" is denying any personal ownership and External Locus.
"I won't" say's I refuse to. Internal Locus
Big difference IMO
It is not arguing. She didn't get defensive. The time seemed right and I said it. It had very little to do with my attempted initiation. More to do with owning one's own decisions.