[DarkTriad]

(10-14-2012 11:58 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

(10-14-2012 12:47 PM)Gaston Wrote:  

Hah, that's his profession man. You[ve got handled by a pro

No, that's not it really.

Agreed. Nobody got handled, this is just two guys deciding to handle THEMSELVES like gentleman. Iknowexactly is a classy and thoughtful poster, there is no need to get into an e-cock measuring contest...so don't try to stir one up.

[Giovonny]

(10-15-2012 04:58 AM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

(10-14-2012 11:59 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(10-14-2012 11:46 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  

"Am I making it easier for her to fuck me than NOT to fuck me?"

Would you explain this a little bit.. I think I know what you mean but I'd like to hear your examples. Thanks

But first, I opened two chicks ( hired guns who weren't waiting on me) at Starbucks yesterday; but none today-- so I admit all this is too theoretical!

====
I was thinking about your post where you said "you have to work" or something like that. Then I thought of all the stuff one can do to make it easier for a woman to be intimate with you.

It comes from when I used to design computer interfaces for people who were not highly educated. You couldn't just say "There's 32 steps to ring something up, learn them." because these people just weren't smart enough.

You HAD to make it the easy way.

This was the key item of wisdom with computer interfaces as well as any other office or bureaucratic procedure.

IF YOU MAKE THE RIGHT WAY THE EASY WAY, PEOPLE WILL DO IT RIGHT.

IF you make the right way hard, they'll always resist.

I realized this applies to all the steps of seducing a woman-- I think Athlone outlined them in more detail than I understand in the "It Just Happened...[ that I had a million things in place for her comfort]" post he did.

But to oversimplify, women need (1) Appearance of Social Status and a feeling of social comfortableness. (2) Wanton sex (3) Safety from Death/Injury and (4) material comfort

You can help her maintain a "green" light on her continuous checking system which dries up her snatch when too many of those are absent by:

1) Talking to her first makes things much easier for her than waiting for her to talk to you which will take about until the sun burns out.
2) Using tone of voice, body language, grooming, clothes, vocabulary, eye contact, and posture in your one-to-one interaction with her. Convince of Big 3 : Safe, Interesting, Attractive.
3) Arranging things so her complicity is not obvious, the famous hamster deniability decoy. YOu can signal that better things are coming if you want in a subtle way.
4) Calibrate for surroundings, for instance today I was in a Starbucks with tons of horny Asian chicks. They can't have an older guy whispering in their ear in front of the other chicks but they might like it IMMEDIATELY when I get her outside.
5) Following number 4, I've been told card counters ( math aware organized gamblers) vary their bets in a way that is markedly different from regular gamblers. A good seducer must employ the same benevolent calculation in "varying his bets."

By this I mean analogically-- Inside the Starbucks when she's worried about her image, you bet low-- speak formally, don't mention sensuality, whatever your strategy is. As Roosh describes it, don't scare the cat.

But when you've got to an optimal isolation setting you've got to RAPIDLY escalate your bet. Someone described a sophisticated model of low kino before the first night bang rush, but that is precise psy-ops beyond the scope of this essay.

The point is you make it easy for her to keep her dignity in the Starbucks while chatting her up and starting to turn her on. Then you make it easy to have the nasty, vulgar sex she thinks about when she's alone.

At each point you're making it easy relative to what she needs.
At some points making it easy to stay engaged with you requires challenging her. It's easier to be with a man who is strong and can assert his opinions.

I anticipate some people describing this as servile, but it really works the opposite:

The Alpha she wants won't be nervous and attract embarrassing attention in Starbucks/whereever. He'll be confident and talk to her like she already knows him. When she wants to be tied up and abused, well, you can explain later if that feels like being servile when you do it to her.

She isn't going to feel guilty about sexuality if she realizes you are into it also. So making it easy is different here... it might be letting her know you like horny girls.

I read a lot of girls are masturbating several times a week now, and more importantly admitting it in surveys. So she's thinking about her depraved sex life... make it easy to have a better one

People will always take the easiest path, and you can provide it if you understand/can sense what they are looking for at that particular moment.

Thanks for the great explanation! That's a hell of a post. I learned something!

[solo]

(10-14-2012 11:33 PM)xsplat Wrote:  

(10-14-2012 11:17 PM)bodmon Wrote:  

women on the other hand engage in no self-improving behaviours and often end up wasting their prime years on the cock carousel and go waaaah once they've been flung off it.

I hear this premise often, and I question it. Is it the reality that women frequently mis-time their settling as the wall approaches?

Or is it more true that they are keenly aware of their timing, and usually get the timing correct to the minute?

Men often talk about women fucking around as if they were dealing coke, got caught out, and are now wasting their years in jail. When the reality is that they sold a little marijuana, and never got caught, and get married or are doing fine being single.

This deeply seated emotional need we have for retribution is clouding perception. Ya, women aren't marrying young anymore, and ya, they divorce. But this is not evidence that they are doing it wrong, it's evidence that they place greater value on the years in their youth then the do on the years in their old age.

Men often have the same attitude. "I'd rather burn out, then fade away". We can be quite conscious about it.

The point of life is not to see who is happiest at age ninety. Maybe it's who is happiest at age 25! This cult of the future, of way-long future time orientation is fine, if that's your thing.

But clearly it's NOT women's thing.

The are doing what they actually want to do, and placing value on exactly what is important to them.

I know it's very frustrating that women don't share our values, and wouldn't the world be full of righteous karma if it were only full of righteous karma. But there is very little of this cosmic retribution that you speak of. Women are born knowing exactly how to play the marketplace - even as the marketplace dramatically changes. They've got it down. And when the occasional girl realizes too late that her previous opportunities have faded, that's no signal that given the chance to do it all over again she'd do it any differently. The value of immediate rewards during high fertility years greatly outweigh other considerations. As you would expect biology to insistently tell her. Five minutes of alpha is not an error of judgment.

(10-14-2012 11:17 PM)bodmon Wrote:  

when men learn game they are making themselves more attractive and worthy of the improved quality of women they aspire to.

Are you talking also about LTRs? A lot of men have experienced fucking girls who are already betrothed, who then go on to marry their fiances. The fiance seems to the girl to be a better long term prospect, even when he is gameless.

Game is a portion of what makes a man attractive for LTRs.

xsplat, is it possible that you have been living in Indonesia a little too long to remember how Western girls are nowadays? If women are doing what they want, as you say, then why is it that a whopping 25% of them are mentally ill (see Athlone's posts about this)? And why are they getting fatter and more unhappy by each year (don't have links for this but I would argue it is so obvious that the burden of proff is on those who claim the opposite)? All this and many other social phenomena of today (like cockblocking, unability to maintain concentration, texting a million times instead of calling, addiction to drugs/medicine etc) are signs that women are not mentally well.

I don't think women are doing what they *really* want, they are doing what the PC culture is telling them what to do and as we all know most women have no clue what they really want.

I think women who are mongamous, stay away from too much careerism and have kids early age better and seem healthier.

I have written about this before but there are biological differences between men and women that make their sexuality different. Men can procreate with several members of the sex at the same time, which women can't. So women were historically more inclined to search for ONE partner which were able to protect and provide for her and the offspring. If the woman slept around she knew the man would be less likely to take care of her and the baby since there was no way of knowing whose the child was. Plus famine and wars etc ensured that men were short in supply and enabled the alphas which could provide for many women and offspring to form harems. I read somewhere on this very forum that only about 40% of all men procreated (can't find the link now). This was basically how the sexual marketplace looked like until the rise of the Welfare state, PC media and feminism etc which is changing it all. In short, men were polygamous, while women were hypergamous (but largely monogamous).

Of course many corporations make a lot of money from promoting the Sex and City lifestyle for women.

And part of what's annoying about Western women today isn't their hypergamy per se, but rather that they don't realise that their lifestyles and HR jobs aren't sustainable and that society's wealth are largely created by men. Don't get me wrong I think there should be a Welfare state but should we really have to pay for things like the sluts' contraception?

[solo]

(10-12-2012 04:12 PM)OGNorCal707 Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 03:35 PM)Vorkuta Wrote:  

(10-11-2012 05:39 PM)OGNorCal707 Wrote:  

I definitely feel that women are more hypergamous than ever and going to continue in the future, they feel every right to date as many guys as they want, or "upgrade" to someone new if they are dating a guy seriously. They all want to date the guy who is 6 ft. 4 in, athletic, handsome, successful, etc., some how they all feel entitled to this, due to having a pussy.

There seems to be some consternation on here about the fact that women want to get the best guys they can. I don't understand why. We all, as men,want the hottest women out there and learn game in order to overcome certain inadequacies such as lack of fame or wealth or looks etc. If a man who is a 6 bangs a 9 we say "awesome work!" but when a woman has the same desire to bang a man who is an athlete or handsome or more successful to her some people act outraged. What do you expect,women to get wet at the idea of banging ugly dudes or unsuccessful failures?!

I feel sorry for the Americans on here because judging by a lot of the embittered posts on here your women must be fucking awful. I mean, really fucking awful.

Sure you have a point, women have every right to hook up with anyone they want and understandably can be picky, I wasn't trying to come off as some whiny loser who complains about women. My point is that we're at a point in a lot of places in the U.S. right now where there aren't an abundance of hot women, which makes less attractive women more desirable than they should be (6-7), and makes competition that much more stiff. It becomes a situation where a lot of guys I feel are dating down, or at least having to put a shit ton of effort into getting girls that aren't even that great (6-7s).

Yes, like OGNorcal points out, it is not the hypergamy per se which is causing the consternation. It is, among other things, their total lack of awareness an understanding of who creates society's wealth and why it is that 5s and 6s can afford to act like 9s nowadays (white knights, feminism, obesity - which takes out more women than men from the market etc).
During 99% of human history a man's looks was not the most important factor in getting girls, physical strenght and ability to protect and provide was.
Whoever on here wrote that today's men are victims of their own success was so right (forgot who it was).

I have a good example of the carousel-riding girl who refuses to settle down. She is a model, 31 years old and looks are beginning to fade and she knows it subconciously but wont admit it. I'm sure she was at least an 8 in her prime and still is in many countries. I took her number over a year ago but then went abroad so we have only really been on one date, but even that date took months of flakiness and shit test to set up. For the last several weeks we have been texting each weekend about having a second date.
I send her a text (she never answers if I call) one night to set up a date the next day, but she always flakes out and gives a total hilariously bullshit reason. I mean, this girl is 31 years old and it is impossible for her to make a commitment even 12 hours ahead of time, or sometimes even 4 hours.

And I bet she thinks she is the only girl I'm working on. She is not even in my top 10 and I couldn't care less if I banged her, in fact I never was that much into her and it's always her that texts me first, it's just that the quantity of decent girls is not so good where I live. She gets a kick of the attention.

She is going to milk every minute of her looks on the carousel and actually expects a guy to commit to her after her best years are LONG gone. The thing is, I'm sure she WILL find a guy but it won't be an alpha and I'm not sure she will be happy about it.

[xsplat]

(10-15-2012 03:04 PM)solo Wrote:  

If women are doing what they want, as you say, then why is it that a whopping 25% of them are mentally ill (see Athlone's posts about this)?

I'm sure the number is at least as high in SE Asia. The levels of incest are higher here, and I think I've heard so are the levels of BPD. Anecdotal and personal experience leads me to believe that SE Asians are more nuts than western girls.

(10-15-2012 03:04 PM)solo Wrote:  

And why are they getting fatter and more unhappy by each year (don't have links for this but I would argue it is so obvious that the burden of proff is on those who claim the opposite)? All this and many other social phenomena of today (like cockblocking, unability to maintain concentration, texting a million times instead of calling, addiction to drugs/medicine etc) are signs that women are not mentally well.

I'm not claiming that there are not social changes for the worse, or even mental health changes for the worse. I'm saying that if you want to understand women's motivation you can't just take your own attitude and transplant it onto women, and then say "There, see! Don't you feel better now?"

There is a reason that women's hypergamy is so rampant now. They are freed from the gossip they get in small communities, they have material security through financial independence and dependence on the state, they have the birth control. This may or not be as mentally healthy as not having those options, but if you want to have a theory of mind that predicts behavior, it's not useful to just try to explain to women what their choices should be, or what their good choices are. That won't modulate their behavior.

We have to know what they WANT. Regardless of if it's a healthy want.

Is it healthy for children to want chocolate and soda? Maybe not, but anyone who understands children will understand what they want.

(10-15-2012 03:04 PM)solo Wrote:  

I don't think women are doing what they *really* want, they are doing what the PC culture is telling them what to do and as we all know most women have no clue what they really want.

I think women who are mongamous, stay away from too much careerism and have kids early age better and seem healthier.

As above. What is healthy is a different question as to what motivates them. Womens fertile years are a different question than their aged years. Women prioritize their fertile years for hypergamy, because that value is much higher to them.

(10-15-2012 03:04 PM)solo Wrote:  

I don't think women are doing
I have written about this before but there are biological differences between men and women that make their sexuality different. Men can procreate with several members of the sex at the same time, which women can't. So women were historically more inclined to search for ONE partner which were able to protect and provide for her and the offspring. If the woman slept around she knew the man would be less likely to take care of her and the baby since there was no way of knowing whose the child was. Plus famine and wars etc ensured that men were short in supply and enabled the alphas which could provide for many women and offspring to form harems. I read somewhere on this very forum that only about 40% of all men procreated (can't find the link now). This was basically how the sexual marketplace looked like until the rise of the Welfare state, PC media and feminism etc which is changing it all. In short, men were polygamous, while women were hypergamous (but largely monogamous).

There have been historical periods in our evolution where women leaned more into one of their two mating strategies than the other. Either towards providers or alphas. We know they have a dual mating strategy, as is emphasized by their different approaches during ovulation. It's not that important which ones we are closer to in history now, the strategies are etched into their wants and desires. They even now want to slut it up with alphas. That's innate.

[solo]

Well, I'm yet to go to South East Asia so you probably know better than me. But from my interactions with foreign girls (including South East Asian girls) both abroad and at home I think there is a stark difference in many aspects of their behaviour and personalities compared with that of Swedish girls (I live in Sweden) who IMO resemble how Roosh and others portray American girls. Of course scientifically this proves nothing but it's enough evidence for me.

I think we have to agree to disagree because I don't share the premise that women themselves know what they want, which your arguments are based on. I actually think they are just like the children you mention who (think they) want chocolate and soda.

I'm all for letting women do what they want though. Im just saying they don't know what they want themselves.

I see the dual mating strategy you mention as proof of hypergamy, not polygamy. EDIT: I see providers as alphas, historically. It's just the invention of the Welfare state and feminism which made the providers betas as women were then already provided for and had to look for other criteria when selecting men.

Anyway, I think I'm just slightly bitter from having to deal with a lot of bullshit here lately. I will just look for the girls who share my values and who do exist (though not here in great numbers), the rest can do whatever they want (just not on my payroll).

[xsplat]

(10-15-2012 04:02 PM)solo Wrote:  

Well, I'm yet to go to South East Asia so you probably know better than me. But from my interactions with foreign girls (including South East Asian girls) both abroad and at home I think there is a stark difference in many aspects of their behaviour and personalities compared with that of Swedish girls (I live in Sweden) who IMO resemble how Roosh and other portray American girls. Of course scientifically this proves nothing but it's enough evidence for me.

I think we have to agree to disagree because I don't share the premise that women themselves know what they want, which your arguments are based on. I actually think they are just like the children you mention who (think they) want chocolate and soda.

I'm all for letting women do what they want though. Im just saying they don't know what they want themselves.

I see the dual mating strategy you mention as proof of hypergamy, not polygamy. EDIT: I see providers as alphas, historically. It's just the invention of the Welfare state and feminism which made the providers betas as women were then already provided for and had to look for other criteria when selecting men.

Anyway, I think I'm just slightly bitter from having to deal with a lot of bullshit here lately. I will just look for the girls who share my values and who do exist (though not here in great numbers), the rest can do whatever they want (just not on my payroll).

I'm not really understanding what you mean by children only THINK that they want chocolate.

Also, I think it's very dangerous to assume that there are women who share your values. The whole point of game is to develop a theory of mind for women that is not based upon that male theory of mind. To know that women are very different animals, even when any particular women is appearing to be exactly what we want.

Watch out and don't get conned.

[solo]

When I was a child I wanted many things that I thought would make me happy (toys, video games, candy/chocolate etc). However as soon as I got those things I became unhappy and had I known what they did to my health, appearence and ability to socially interact with girls I would not have wanted those things.
Anyway, this is getting philosophical at this point. And to a certain extent maybe I can digress, yes some (maybe even many) women want to be sluts. But still they want to be sluts because they are told so by the culture. And I think many girls of this generation will wake up at 40 and regret, so it depends how you look at it.

You're right it's good to watch out and not get conned. And maybe this is what everybody says but I like to think I have met some truly good girls since I got into game and at least so far refuse to believe all girls are the same in all aspects.

[xsplat]

(10-15-2012 04:20 PM)solo Wrote:  

but I like to think I have met some truly good girls since I got into game and at least so far refuse to believe all girls are the same in all aspects.

I'm imagining that I can guess your LTR count by such an attitude. I would bet that the more experienced a man is, the less likely he is to hold ideals for women.

Of course the divorced guys are more likely to be disillusioned, but I think so are the guys with higher number counts, and even just the older guys who have remained active in the dating scene.

I'd like to know what you learn over the next ten years. Idealism and age mix like oil and water.

[DarkTriad]

I don't know if Xsplat is always right, but he always make me think.