[dk902]

Samseau how on earth can you have a 'rape accusation' on a criminal record without bing prosecuted. What kind of fucked up shit is that? The situation is worse than I thought.

[oldnemesis]

(05-10-2012 10:22 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

My uncle was accused of rape, falsely, and fought back. He spent over $50,000 on legal fees.
The woman never showed up to court.

This means he should have got the default judgment and collect from her. Did he?

Quote:

To this day, he gets rejected from jobs because his criminal record has a rape accusation.

I don't get it. How can a mere "accusation" pop up on someone's criminal record? Was he convicted or not?
(please be clear whether you actually have seen the record yourself, or you're just repeating what someone else told you)

[Dr. Howard]

I can't speak to rape accusation specifically but I know that if you go and search around in the Wisconsin Circuit court records you find a) convictions and b) charges of which the person was eventually acquitted. There was a bill floated in Wisconsin a few years back to remove acquittals from the public record but I don't know what happened to it.

So, that being said, I'm sure that a rape charge and subsequent acquittal would show up as public record in Wisconsin the way the law stands and circuit court records are now.

[oldnemesis]

(05-10-2012 12:00 AM)SamBellamy Wrote:  

Why in your opinion are western men and particularly American men so weak and deferential to women? There must be something more to it than just the fact that we are so individualistic and unwilling to yield power to the collective.

You won't like it. This is because Western men bow to pussy. Getting sex here is such a big deal that the most dudes would go to great lengths - approach, listen to her bullshit while carefully pushing your agenda, dealing with cockblocking, flakes etc and even changing themselves - just to get laid. This simply doesn't happen in Europe, Russia or Asia. Sure there always are some dedicated individuals, but the vast majority of people simply doesn't care; if an European dude didn't get laid in six months, nobody would see it as a big deal worth any fixing.

Since getting a pussy is such a big deal here in West, and since the women control access to the pussy, it is no wonder the men succumb to them. It takes so incredibly ridiculous forms that a reasonably attractive American woman, who tells you she's leaving with you, gets completely deadlocked when you tell her "no, you do not". That "how could that happen?? am I getting old and unattractive?" look at her face is so priceless that I now gonna repeat it every time, it is fucking better than sex.

The easiest way to resolve this problem would be if all the guys agreed on a six month moratorium on any sex with women here in US. I bet you'd see a HUGE change in female attitude, appearance, fattiness and in the society in general after that. But of course this will never work in the "me, Me, this is all about ME" America.

[oldnemesis]

(05-10-2012 06:25 PM)wiscanada Wrote:  

I can't speak to rape accusation specifically but I know that if you go and search around in the Wisconsin Circuit court records you find a) convictions and b) charges of which the person was eventually acquitted.

The court trial records are public information, so if one was tried and acquitted, the trial record is public. However Samseau mentioned the "criminal record" which is a very specific thing. It is legal to discriminate because someone had a felony conviction, but if someone was acquitted, it would not be legal.

[SamBellamy]

oldnemesis,

"You won't like it."

No I definitely appreciate your observations on American culture; this is also what made me initially like Roosh. I agree with what you have written of course, but I was hoping for a deeper explanation as to why we are so pussy obsessed. May be it is that American brand of capitalism requires men to endlessly toil in an effort to impress women or maybe there is some other explanation. I am sorry if I am asking you to psycho analyze too much.

On a related note, are there any solutions to this besides a sex strike which of course will never happen.

[SamBellamy]

oldnemesis,

A personal question for you: In a previous thread I have noticed you mention that you do not care about a woman's sexual history (not even for your LTR) and furthermore it doesn't even bother if someone you are in a relationship with has other sexual partners with you concurrently. A woman's sexual history and likelihood for remaining faithful is one of the most important things to me when judging LTR potential; as I think is so for most men. So your approach strikes me as odd, and unnatural. So my question is this; is it just your personality that makes you take this approach or is it your experience that taught you something about women and their nature that makes you see things in a different way? Thanks.

[soup]

I went to public school when I was growing up. The lunch lady, Ethel, was the most disgusting woman I've ever seen. With her obesity, warts, hair-net, and just plain cynicism, I made every effort not to look at her when I got my meal because it literally made me loose my appetite.

[Billy Wolf]

Being Danish and a newcomer to this forum, I think this thread would be ideal to make a proper introduction, as well as my two cents on the topic.

First thing first, I was introduced to Roosh, one morning when I by mere accident overheard that mornings happy-bullshit TV show “GO' Morgen Danmark” in the background. The TV host ridiculed the “Don't Bang Denmark” book., and like all Danes my interest peak when a foreigner have opinions about my country (I thinks it because we are such a small country, and we are afraid we will be forgotten). After the “review” of the book, I just had to read it. 60 seconds later thanks to amazon, a new world opened! And thanks for that.

I had recently just handed in a philosophy of science report, where I briefly discussed a statement by Donna Haraway, a self proclaimed cyborg feminist. However disgusting that may sound, her statement stuck with me. She says, that you observe the world, the observation changes you, and by that you observe the world differently, ultimately making a new observation, and so the infinite loop repeats. Of course she puts it in a very sophisticated language, showing us the many difficult words she has learned.
With this statement in mind it dawned on me that we are simply unable to not-change. We change all the time, and to try not to change is like trying not to age. And with the “Don't Bang Denmark” in front of me, both explaining to me why I so often feel so angry towards women, and pointing out that picking up girls is learned behavior, I started to see matrix code running down the walls of my study.

Here is the funny part, I'm a introvert. Never really had many friends, and therefor a small social circle. I'm not shy or insecure, I just don't like being around people that much. The upside is that I don't have to handle that much bullshit on a daily basis, the downside is of course a less than normal amount of pussy in my life, at least when you live in a country where pussy-access is granted, by the size of your social circle. Don't get me wrong, I'm smart enough to associate myself with guys that have large social circles, upping my chances. Obvious, it is far from the optimal solution, so the next logical step was to read “Bang”. Amazon and 60 seconds later I entered the Game.

Now to make this downright weird, I love the feminists, the short haired, the very tall, manly, loud, crude, boyish, amazonian warrior queens out there. Why? I hear you ask.
Despite my introverted personality trait, I think I have a natural authority about me. In supermarkets, more then often, old ladies ask of price or location for products. If I stand next to the doorway to a bar, girls like to show me their ID's. I even had a two suspicious looking guys leave 7eleven, I assume they thought I was a security guard. And being 195cm I love to see people move out of my way, when I walk down a hallway. However I'm not truly an alpha male. If Jack Nicholson is alpha male in “One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest ”, then I'm the Chief. Does this make any sense?
Anyway, I simply want all the feminist and warriors queens to try to dominate me, to challenge my authority. I want them to fail. And I want them to know they failed. No matter how they turn the table, we are the ones that are doing the fucking, they are the ones being fucked. We penetrate them, we compromise their bodies. We are on top, even when we are at the bottom.
Now the difficult thing here, is to dominate her by letting her know that you simple allow her foolish proactive behavior, yet remain in a inactive state. Is this even possible?

Like Scorpio I don't see women as a weaker sex, since that would require a comparison, and I don't wanna compare women to men. I'll let the feminists do that. In the end they are the ones with the hole, we are the ones with the meat to fill it out.

But with all that being said, I often feel like fighting with my back against the wall. That we somehow, at least in Denmark, are losing this struggle between the sexes. Starting to Game seems like a hopeless endeavor, and from time to time I get overwhelmed by the feeling that there is no more use of men. That men are being reduced to pets, a simple accessory to be shown of to friends and family. The metaphor of the ZOO that Roosh used to describe Denmark's welfare system, resonate within my mind. What is the lion, king of the jungle, gonna do with all his authority, when he lives in a god damn ZOO with no threats and no hunger.

I don't know, but I plan to ditch the danish viking girls, and reintroduce my self to the jungle. Maybe I can even find a girl that actually needs me.

[oldnemesis]

(05-10-2012 08:17 PM)SamBellamy Wrote:  

No I definitely appreciate your observations on American culture; this is also what made me initially like Roosh. I agree with what you have written of course, but I was hoping for a deeper explanation as to why we are so pussy obsessed.

Your question has two meanings, "how did it start?" and "why is it still the case?"

I do not know how and when it started. It would require studying the American social history, which is not something I'm interested in so I have no incentive doing so. Speculations are fine, but only up to the same point.

Now "why is it still the case" is easier to answer. Every culture needs to brag on something. Of course to be worth bragging this something need to be valuable enough in the eyes of the majority of the society. In Russia, for example, people brag about the cars they're buying. In America they brag about pussy they're fucking. So pussy is valuable, and pursing pussy is considered a noble goal for the majority of the society. This provides the positive feedback loop which completes the circuit. And like any positive feedback circuit, it would not change itself without an external force.

Quote:

On a related note, are there any solutions to this besides a sex strike which of course will never happen.

There are, but they won't happen either. The thing is that those solutions would require sacrifice from every individual so the power of his group increases. Such thing won't happen in America because its population will not give up any individual power, and the group power doesn't come from nowhere.

Surprisingly it works quite well in the immigrant communities, especially Asian and Latino, because they know the power of a group, and are not concerned too much about their individual freedoms. This is why they are gaining more and more political power - if you can organize a group which would act together, a lot of people (especially politicians) gonna listen to you very carefully. This is what manosphere failed to do when it had a chance, and instead screwed itself up by turning into the Jezebel for guys.

As a side note, a perfect example of a organized group power is Jewish community. Everyone knows how they are tied together to each others. There are pretty much no individual power inside the group, which makes the group as a whole incredibly powerful.

[oldnemesis]

(05-10-2012 08:27 PM)SamBellamy Wrote:  

A personal question for you: In a previous thread I have noticed you mention that you do not care about a woman's sexual history (not even for your LTR) and furthermore it doesn't even bother if someone you are in a relationship with has other sexual partners with you concurrently.

No, I do not care about this stuff. It is meaningless as an indicator of anything, and there is nothing you can do to prevent it. Several wars have started in past because some kings or queens cheated, where much more was on stake than some lame divorce.

Quote:

A woman's sexual history and likelihood for remaining faithful is one of the most important things to me when judging LTR potential; as I think is so for most men.

You have been brainwashed by the culture. Her prior sexual history is meaningless to estimate the likelihood of her remaining faithful. Pretty much every woman is born a virgin with no sexual partners, does it mean she'll remain faithful to the first dude who fucks her? Of course not.

Not to mention considering a woman's sexual history is judging - basically you put yourself in a position to decide what's right or wrong for another person. Nobody likes that, and what you're likely gonna get is she'll lie to you about her sexual past, and you will not be able to really assess her history anyway. Consider the opposite - if you make it clear to her that it is not such a big deal to you, she'll be much more honest about it. And you won't end up in a situation like one of my buddies who believes his wife never fucked any other guy in her life while I know she fucked at least nine.

Quote:

So your approach strikes me as odd, and unnatural. So my question is this; is it just your personality that makes you take this approach or is it your experience that taught you something about women and their nature that makes you see things in a different way?

It is probably both. The logical component however is huge here - as we say in Russia, if you cannot prevent something, then lead it - you'll have at least some control over it. An important psychological component here is the lack of forbidden fruit - a lot of women cheat because the "situation is right" which typically means nobody would judge her for that. If she knows she can do it anytime without judgment, she is not going to do it just because the "situation is right". Think of it as impulsive purchase - you are more likely to do it if there is a time pressure. Add here that monogamy is not natural, and the significant part of the population sucks at it, and after you think about it for a while, you'll come to the same conclusion.

[Samseau]

(05-10-2012 05:59 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  

(05-10-2012 10:22 AM)Samseau Wrote:  

My uncle was accused of rape, falsely, and fought back. He spent over $50,000 on legal fees.
The woman never showed up to court.

This means he should have got the default judgment and collect from her. Did he?

He got nothing. This was back in the 1980's when false-rapes and feminism was stronger than it is today.

Quote:

Quote:

To this day, he gets rejected from jobs because his criminal record has a rape accusation.

I don't get it. How can a mere "accusation" pop up on someone's criminal record? Was he convicted or not?
(please be clear whether you actually have seen the record yourself, or you're just repeating what someone else told you)

I can't see the record, because no one can look at someone else's criminal record.


I once was arrested for possession of Marijuana. My roommate in college smoked some weed and left the room, and I came into the room afterwards. The place reeked like weed.

The cops came, knocked on the door. I opened the door not knowing who it was. The cops had a search warrant and found paraphernalia. Since I was the only one in the room, I got busted for possession.

It was a Class B Misdemeanor at the time. A year and 900 dollars later, I got it expunged off my record.

To this day, I cannot hold any high level government job because there's a drug related offense on my criminal record. Officer school in the military rejected me even though I scored "alpha" on their tests.


Trust me, the government keeps a record on all of us. You get a rape accusation and you're done.

[oldnemesis]

(05-11-2012 05:49 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

He got nothing. This was back in the 1980's when false-rapes and feminism was stronger than it is today.

You did not answer my question. Was there a trial? If she didn't show up, was there a default judgment?

I'm asking this because a lot of people here in America somehow believe the litigation is a three week process where justice prevails and once you win in a court you'll get your check in the mail the next day. This is not how it works, and you need to put effort. Not as much as you'd put to get a new hot pussy of course, but pretty close.

Quote:

I can't see the record, because no one can look at someone else's criminal record.

He can request his. You can ask if he ever did, and what it stated. I actually find it surprising that you do not know the details like whether he ever been convicted.

Quote:

To this day, I cannot hold any high level government job because there's a drug related offense on my criminal record.

This is different story. You have been convicted for a drug related offense, not merely accused. I don't believe mere accusations would have such dramatic effect as you claim.

[bacan]

(05-10-2012 06:27 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  

The easiest way to resolve this problem would be if all the guys agreed on a six month moratorium on any sex with women here in US. I bet you'd see a HUGE change in female attitude, appearance, fattiness and in the society in general after that. But of course this will never work in the "me, Me, this is all about ME" America.

Funny, this is what girls are already doing. The ones that are giving sex up too easily receive the scorn and resentment of those who are withholding it to maintain their balance of power (slut! skank!).

Overall, I don't get the point of this women are weak post though.

Not trying to argue the opposite, but it seems like a flimsily constructed mish mash of cherry picked examples and facts.

1. Why do women go to bars and clubs in massive packs and refuse to leave their friends?
1. Why do men do the same thing? Those of us that roll solo are few and far between, not exemplary of our gender

2. Why are more women obese than men?
2. Why are men more alcoholic, more drug addicted, more criminal? Less self-control?

3. Why is the Starbucks packed with chicks? Why does every girl have uggs, an iPhone, and makes duck-face in their pictures?
3. Men fall for trends too (although not as absurdly as girls.. ha)

4. Why are female bosses the biggest cunts in the world and make lousy leaders?
4. Who says women make bad leaders? Some of their qualities would have prevented male-leadership errors like the war in iraq and others. More start-up companies these days are founded by women than in the past.

5. Why do women hit men more than men hit women, but have men get arrested for it more often?
5. I don't feel like cherry picking an analogous statistic

6. Why does game work?
6. Interesting theory -- is the foundation of game really demonstrating strength over women or high value in terms of the characteristics that girls find attractive?

[oldnemesis]

(05-11-2012 07:51 PM)bacan Wrote:  

Funny, this is what girls are already doing. The ones that are giving sex up too easily receive the scorn and resentment of those who are withholding it to maintain their balance of power (slut! skank!).

Yep. Women are social creatures, and they're more willing to submit their individual liberties toward the power of the group. This is why they're getting more and more power, and this is why the manosphere gonna bitch more and more without being able to do anything about it.

Quote:

1. Why do men do the same thing? Those of us that roll solo are few and far between, not exemplary of our gender

I don't get this question. When I go out with friends I do so because I want to hang out with them. Sometime the girls approach us, but there is no way I'd leave my friends just because of some stranger chick. We had it once when a few girls joined our group and talked to us, and then she said something like "we're going to my place to party more, why don't you come with us?" Told her my friends won't come, she said so leave those losers there. Told her to get lost. Didn't understand it that time, but now I see that American males value pussy so much that some would probably even leave their friends just to get some.

Quote:

2. Why are men more alcoholic, more drug addicted, more criminal? Less self-control?

Men in general tolerate addictions better than women. I remember a study which claimed that vast majority of those who quit drugs, alcohol or smoking were male. Females are less prone to start doing shit, but it is easier for them to hook up with it, and much harder to get off it.

Quote:

5. I don't feel like cherry picking an analogous statistic

This is because a lot of American men are pussies, so they won't call the cops when their drunk girlfriend hits him. They're scared she'd leave them afterward, and it would take a while for them to find The Pussy, while their friends would pin them for having no girlfriend.

[SamBellamy]

oldnemesis,

"Every culture needs to brag on something. Of course to be worth bragging this something need to be valuable enough in the eyes of the majority of the society. In Russia, for example, people brag about the cars they're buying. In America they brag about pussy they're fucking. So pussy is valuable, and pursing pussy is considered a noble goal for the majority of the society. This provides the positive feedback loop which completes the circuit."

- Makes so much sense. I share your disgust for American men's pussy obsession.

"Add here that monogamy is not natural, and the significant part of the population sucks at it, and after you think about it for a while, you'll come to the same conclusion."

- Why then do you feel the need to stay with someone long term then as you do? Kids? You value the friendship too much? Or something else? I am much younger than you and so perhaps my perspective will change with time but I do not see the point of getting into a LTR with someone and making significant emotional investment into her if she is not even going to be exclusive with me.

[wolf]

(05-11-2012 09:02 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  

(05-11-2012 07:51 PM)bacan Wrote:  

Funny, this is what girls are already doing. The ones that are giving sex up too easily receive the scorn and resentment of those who are withholding it to maintain their balance of power (slut! skank!).

Yep. Women are social creatures, and they're more willing to submit their individual liberties toward the power of the group. This is why they're getting more and more power, and this is why the manosphere gonna bitch more and more without being able to do anything about it.

Quote:

1. Why do men do the same thing? Those of us that roll solo are few and far between, not exemplary of our gender

I don't get this question. When I go out with friends I do so because I want to hang out with them. Sometime the girls approach us, but there is no way I'd leave my friends just because of some stranger chick. We had it once when a few girls joined our group and talked to us, and then she said something like "we're going to my place to party more, why don't you come with us?" Told her my friends won't come, she said so leave those losers there. Told her to get lost. Didn't understand it that time, but now I see that American males value pussy so much that some would probably even leave their friends just to get some.

Quote:

2. Why are men more alcoholic, more drug addicted, more criminal? Less self-control?

Men in general tolerate addictions better than women. I remember a study which claimed that vast majority of those who quit drugs, alcohol or smoking were male. Females are less prone to start doing shit, but it is easier for them to hook up with it, and much harder to get off it.

Quote:

5. I don't feel like cherry picking an analogous statistic

This is because a lot of American men are pussies, so they won't call the cops when their drunk girlfriend hits him. They're scared she'd leave them afterward, and it would take a while for them to find The Pussy, while their friends would pin them for having no girlfriend.

I completely agree with you on all points, but it's hard to not leave your friends when you are not getting any pussy and even a small chance of getting pussy from a girl might be worth it ditching your friends.

I had to pay the price of that, all $65 of it when I left my friends and they took a cab ride home. They were all cool about it as long as I paid them back for the cab.

A lot of guys are scared of their girl leaving because it's so hard to land pussy here in America. Out of 30 girls I dated I managed to fuck 3. Let's not forget how many numbers I got, or how many chicks I talked to get those numbers. It takes months to years for most guys to even land a chick.


Personally I think the thread title should be The Bottom Line: Men Are Weak

Women never changed, they are the same now, and two thousands years ago. It's in their nature to push the boundaries of a man/men.

WE, MEN PUT OURSELVES IN THE POSITION WE ARE NOW IN.

I have to deal with other guy's pussy behavior that they fucking up for me. The bitch has a hard time listening to me when 3 guys are texting her at the same time and blowing up her ego.

One guy is going, "Good night, sleep tight".

Another guy is acting gay to befriend her so they will feel like they made a connection because they talk about everything.

And the third guy is more interested in what I'm doing because he's baffled that I told the chick that she can go fuck whoever she wants.

[Tuthmosis]

There some nice insights in this discussion. I like where some of the guys have pushed the conversation. In no particular order, some humble contributions:

1. Yes, today's man is also weak. But it's emasculated men--whether that's self-imposed or enforced from exterior forces--who are often weak. This doesn't change the binary I've set up here.

2. Women aren't just weak, they're other things too. Add: prone to delusion, constantly testing, and often path-of-least-resistance (vis-a-vis their looks or domesticity, when not compelled to develop or maintain them).

3. Women also have some relative strengths. I agree with this. It's true, weakness is a bit of a simplification. I think some guys here have accurately implied their ability to use subterfuge, exploit weakness, and plot with one another as strengths. These are historically very valuable skills that, with today's man being as vulnerable to these wiles (because of his dependency on pussy), they're often wielding against men rather than for or with men.

4. The balance and character of these qualities vary from place to place. Much of what I've said here is based on observations in the States. While these inherent qualities are probably pretty universal, I'd say they manifest themselves differently in other regions of the world, based on such factors as culture and push-back by men.

[wolf]

The main point is there are no problems with women.

They have been like that since forever.

Every problem that there is with women is either created by another guy or you(guy).

I think you guys are not getting the aspect that women never change. You are all shocked because now you're learning their true nature. They were always like that, we just gave them free choice to do what they want. Don't complain about tigers attacking people in downtown if you released 5 tigers on downtown.

If one of your hot co-workers or classmates came up to you and took you by the hand and led you to a closet and then she proceeded to undress and lay down on her back with her legs open, the animal nature in you would go balls deep.

[oldnemesis]

(05-11-2012 11:39 PM)SamBellamy Wrote:  

Makes so much sense. I share your disgust for American men's pussy obsession.

It is not disgust. How I feel about it is similar to the crows waiting in the overnight line in front of the Apple store just to buy yet another iSomething - I just don't understand them.

Quote:

- Why then do you feel the need to stay with someone long term then as you do? Kids? You value the friendship too much? Or something else? I am much younger than you and so perhaps my perspective will change with time but I do not see the point of getting into a LTR with someone and making significant emotional investment into her if she is not even going to be exclusive with me.

There are several thoughts about that. The first is that myself I'm not sexually exclusive with her, I fuck other women. So the idea of demanding "faithfulness" (what a shitty word) from her is not very appealing to me. Not only it is hypocritical, but it won't even work with any woman worthy any investment. Of course Roissy crowd tend to have a different opinion, but they typically never been to any LTR and they don't know what they're talking about.

The friendship is what makes the LTR survive for decades. No matter how much lust you have and how emotionally high you are when it starts, it all will be gone sooner or later. Vast majority of it disappears around the two year mark, and this is typically the major break point for a lot of relationships. If you make it past that without struggling, you'll have a very good chance to keep it.

I would say that respect of each others, trust that you can rely on each others and sacrifice your individual interests for the goal of better relationship, and shared common goals are the most definite traits of a successful long-term relationship. As you see, "good sex" is not even in the list. It is because it is not necessary for a successful long-term relationship, as this is something you can get outside the relationship without affecting it. Or not get it at all if this is something you don't really need - just look at older folks in their sixties, or at disabled folks - a lot of them don't have any sex at all, but does it make their relationship less fulfilling?

The main problem why so many American relationship are failing is because the individuals in the relationship are not willing to sacrifice their individual freedoms and interests toward the common goal. Same as above, power of one vs power of the group, "me, Me, it should be all about ME". One needs to be crazy to get into an LTR with a typical American.

[oldnemesis]

(05-12-2012 03:24 AM)wolf Wrote:  

I completely agree with you on all points, but it's hard to not leave your friends when you are not getting any pussy and even a small chance of getting pussy from a girl might be worth it ditching your friends.

If you do that in Russia, you'd be ostracized from the society. The only thing worse than that would be taking a dick in your ass in front of your friends. You'd lose respect of every one of your friends, and once the word is spread you're pretty much alone. This is why it doesn't happen. But, of course, the girls know it too, so no Russian girl would ever tell a guy to "dump those losers", unless she enjoys being beaten up by a group of guys - and most do not.

Quote:

I had to pay the price of that, all $65 of it when I left my friends and they took a cab ride home. They were all cool about it as long as I paid them back for the cab.

You don't really have friends here in America. They're at best temporary companions. This is why the most immigrants stuck to their own or similar circles. For example, Latinos or Asians have the very similar sense of friendship comparing to Russians, and I do have friends among them. Even the blacks seem to have much more respect to their friends than your regular white dude.

Quote:

A lot of guys are scared of their girl leaving because it's so hard to land pussy here in America. Out of 30 girls I dated I managed to fuck 3. Let's not forget how many numbers I got, or how many chicks I talked to get those numbers. It takes months to years for most guys to even land a chick.

I wouldn't agree it is hard, but I would definitely agree that for the quality available here in US it should definitely be much better. But hey, the life is what it is.

[SamBellamy]

oldnemesis,

I appreciate your detailed responses. Last time I will bother you on this issue I promise.

- How do you bring this up with a girl? You say a quality girl wouldn't for long put up with you fucking around and I agree, but I can't imagine her putting up with an open relationship either. Do you wait for the two year mark when things are dying down to set up such an arrangement or set things up this way from the start? The only open type relationships I have observed were of the fuck buddy variety. So it was about the sex and not friendship. I realize I haven't had much exposure to older couples. Is it different for older people?

- How did you personally end up in this situation? Was your relationship dying down from being together for a long time and you didn't want to dissolve it completely for friendship, kids, financial reasons etc etc and ended up with a creative arrangement, or did you have such an arrangement from the very beginning?

Thank you.

[oldnemesis]

(05-12-2012 08:19 PM)SamBellamy Wrote:  

I appreciate your detailed responses. Last time I will bother you on this issue I promise.

Don't worry about that.

Quote:

How do you bring this up with a girl? You say a quality girl wouldn't for long put up with you fucking around and I agree, but I can't imagine her putting up with an open relationship either.

This is quite easy as long as you accept the "relationship value" rule. Basically your desire to fuck around decreases your relationship value, and you need to compensate for that. Which way you do it is up to you. Here is an incomplete list of examples:

- Get either a lower quality girl, or a low self esteem girl;
- Find a girl who'd like to enjoy the same freedom (for her your desire would actually bring your value up as a lot of American guys are too insecure about it)
- Compensate with some other value (money, house, whatever). Note that game doesn't carry the relationship value long enough, and this is not something you can rely in the long run.
- Build your value within the relationship.

As you see it is quite simple, and as long as you remember there is no free lunch and that to get something you need to trade in something, you'll be fine. You also need to set the rules of what's acceptable and follow them.

Quote:

Do you wait for the two year mark when things are dying down to set up such an arrangement or set things up this way from the start? The only open type relationships I have observed were of the fuck buddy variety. So it was about the sex and not friendship. I realize I haven't had much exposure to older couples. Is it different for older people?

Yes, it is different in sense that the older people have less entitlement and understand they cannot have everything for nothing, and that you cannot find yourself another person built like a custom car. So they're more prone to compromises and working towards the common goal.

Generally if you're American I'd suggest avoiding LTRs until you're at least 25. People here mature very late, and this means your personality changes significantly until you reach 25yo mark. Which means someone who was a perfectly fine partner for before-25-you is a completely unacceptable to a past-25-you. This is why pre-25 group has the highest divorce rates.

Quote:

- How did you personally end up in this situation? Was your relationship dying down from being together for a long time and you didn't want to dissolve it completely for friendship, kids, financial reasons etc etc and ended up with a creative arrangement, or did you have such an arrangement from the very beginning?

We worked together (and still working together) on it. Nothing in the relationship is fixed, everything changes all the time. This is why people talk about "managing relationships" - no relationship just works, you need to put effort into it.

[azulsombra]

[quote] (05-12-2012 11:24 PM)oldnemesis Wrote:  

[quote='SamBellamy' pid='209451' dateline='1336871960']
I appreciate your detailed responses. Last time I will bother you on this issue I promise.[/quote]

Don't worry about that.

[quote]Quote:

How do you bring this up with a girl? You say a quality girl wouldn't for long put up with you fucking around and I agree, but I can't imagine her putting up with an open relationship either.[/quote]

This is quite easy as long as you accept the "relationship value" rule. Basically your desire to fuck around decreases your relationship value, and you need to compensate for that. Which way you do it is up to you. Here is an incomplete list of examples:

- Get either a lower quality girl, or a low self esteem girl;
- Find a girl who'd like to enjoy the same freedom (for her your desire would actually bring your value up as a lot of American guys are too insecure about it)
- Compensate with some other value (money, house, whatever). Note that game doesn't carry the relationship value long enough, and this is not something you can rely in the long run.
- Build your value within the relationship.

As you see it is quite simple, and as long as you remember there is no free lunch and that to get something you need to trade in something, you'll be fine. You also need to set the rules of what's acceptable and follow them.

[quote]Quote:

Do you wait for the two year mark when things are dying down to set up such an arrangement or set things up this way from the start? The only open type relationships I have observed were of the fuck buddy variety. So it was about the sex and not friendship. I realize I haven't had much exposure to older couples. Is it different for older people?[/quote]

Yes, it is different in sense that the older people have less entitlement and understand they cannot have everything for nothing, and that you cannot find yourself another person built like a custom car. So they're more prone to compromises and working towards the common goal.

Generally if you're American I'd suggest avoiding LTRs until you're at least 25. People here mature very late, and this means your personality changes significantly until you reach 25yo mark. Which means someone who was a perfectly fine partner for before-25-you is a completely unacceptable to a past-25-you. This is why pre-25 group has the highest divorce rates.

[quote]


I highly agree with this advice, I've originally heard it from radio personality Tom Leykis several years ago. There's no reason for an under 25 year old american male to be in a serious relationship. At this age you need to focus on education, career, money and game. These bitches ain't going nowhere.

Being in a long-term relationship under 25 just makes you even more susceptible to getting tied down with unwanted children, marriage and all the drama that go with it ultimately limiting your potential.

[Excelsior]

(05-30-2012 07:26 PM)azulsombra Wrote:  

I highly agree with this advice, I've originally heard it from radio personality Tom Leykis several years ago. There's no reason for an under 25 year old american male to be in a serious relationship. At this age you need to focus on education, career, money and game. These bitches ain't going nowhere.

Being in a long-term relationship under 25 just makes you even more susceptible to getting tied down with unwanted children, marriage and all the drama that go with it ultimately limiting your potential.

Yes, oldnemesis has delivered to us some real gems in this thread, the type of advice that any young American man should value.

This realization is an unfortunate one to come to if you're someone who does like the idea of the LTR, but as a young guy there is simply no practicality in having one. The sheer length of American adolescence (adolescence itself being a bit of a uniquely American concept) precludes it-we just aren't mature enough. Americans really don't tend to mature until their mid 20's, probably a decade after they really ought to.

Even if you individually buck the trend and feel ready for the idea as a young man, the chances of your partner also fitting the bill are minimal. Don't be so sure that your female peers are dying for partners here-young American girls are, contrary to popular belief, possibly more apprehensive about the idea of relationships than young guys are on average due simply to the fact that young dudes operate with a scarcity mentality. Young American girls, as has been well documented, operate with an abundance mentality. They're on top of the world as far as they are concerned-unless you're an elite guy by their particular standards (which can vary slightly by environment), they have no real inclination to slow things down for you.

The bottomline for a young guy is this: you lose money chasing women, but you do not lose women chasing money. Females will be around, your youth is not the time to be singularly focused on them (or on any given one). Get your ducks in order (fitness, education, career, finances) and they'll show up later.

American (and, to a somewhat lesser extent, British and Canadian) men need to learn to stop obsessing over pussy. They'll probably have to do so the hard way (as oldnem said, there's too much ignorance and selfishness for any legitimate strategy to work) but the level of simping, white-knighting and other fuckery is ridiculous here. As a teen, I used to be one of the men engaging in that type of pathetic behavior so I know just how sad a state it really is. People need to grow out of it, because I will assure there is nothing to be gained from it.

Be your own man-quit letting women and the pursuit of women define everything about you. If I could meet my 18 year old self, that's the first thing I'd tell him.