From the link:
We must ask ourselves if conquest has a place in modern love. Are games like Hard To Get helping us find companionship or hurting us by creating socially-approved spaces where No is treated as a green light instead of a stop sign?
Who’s this “we”? Men’s and women’s class interests aren’t the same here. Women’s acceptance and even promotion of “Hard to Get” isn’t the problem here. The problem is the set of restrictions placed on women by men which make “Hard to Get” many women’s best chance of survival.
Here’s a quick attempt at knocking out a more patriarchy-blaming analysis:
In a culture where boundary violation is what generates the primary “erotic charge”, men have pinned women into a situation where this is the only way we’re allowed to behave. We’re not allowed to give a flat “no”, obviously. and a flat “yes” is useless to patriarchy because it doesn’t give the satisfaction of violating boundaries. So women are punished for doing anything except for this theatre of nonconsent, which permits men to get their boundary-violating fix.
Conveniently for rapists, limiting women’s options like this also enables men to violate any woman’s boundaries and to blame women for it by telling the women who mean “no” that all those other women, the “coquettish” women, confused the poor rapist so much that he couldn’t tell the difference any more. When in fact of course he could tell the difference, it’s just that different men (or the same men at different times, or with different people) prefer different levels of boundary violation (of a “real” no, of a “theatric” no) to get off on.
This by the way, is also one of the reasons that slut-shaming is a strategy which is in mens’ interest, and not a silly idea that they will stop doing if feminists just show them why it’s so irrational. It actively serves their needs and will continue to as long as boundary-violation is eroticised. One definition of “slut” is just a woman who fails to put up a sufficiently convincing boundary to allow men to believe they’re conquering her.
"No means no" is a vital campaigning slogan (I prefer “everything means no unless you’ve disarmed your coercive power”, but that’s not so catchy) but many women may rightly feel like “no means no” and “yes means yes” aren’t accurate reflections of the dating world they’re trying to survive.