Quote: (06-23-2015 08:35 AM)Maximummax Wrote:
We all know females associate with you when you have something to offer where they get benefitted out of it.
Any one ever done it properly?
Relationships/Friendship/Colleagues.....every association shoule be of something fuitful to women other wise they won't consider you.
Briffault's law is one of those arguments that "proves too much".
That's why it isn't useful when it comes to game.
Let's rock with it.
Three Men
Arnold - strong, good looking, powerful, social status, rich
Billy - not strong, cute face, funny
Carmine - Forceful, abusive
A woman can and will be attracted to all three of those men.
Arnold might be a family man, he might be a cad. She associates with him and gets benefits. But she takes losses.
Billy might charm his way into her pants. She associates with him, but doesn't get the benefits of Arnold.
Carmine thrills her and also scares her. He might even put his hands on her. She associates with him, even though she doesn't get the social/financial benefit of Arnold, the fun and pleasure of Billy... But Briffault law teaches it's believers to find some sort of "benefit" that the woman gets. So the benefit here is that she likes abuse, she likes pain.
The reductionist mindset of a lot of game forums, for whatever reasons gravitates towards Carmine, but the seasoned player just sees that all of these men have something to offer, and they all fuck.
Part of the problem with Briffault's law is that it's from the mindset of a female, and it doesn't really even acknowledge a male sexual strategy.
A man's game is most powerful when he is pursuing MANY. He loses consistently when he pours his resources into the ONE. (sometimes it's a gamble you have to make - but that's really social conditioning)
Most scientists and writers never really consider what this looks like, and how it works.
A lot of guys, guys in the game even, don't even get this.
WIA
