Hey! Forgive me if this is the wrong section, I only registered last night. Feel free to move or lock or whatever else ![[Image: smile.gif]](https://rooshvforum.network/images/smilies/smile.gif)
Over the years I've heard a lot of men come up with a lot of very interesting theories on the relationship between men and women and their general connecting bridge of 'game'.
So many theories have been thrown around in front of me (with varying degrees of nuttiness) over my ~5 years of heavy red pill interest that I couldn't help but grow a soft spot for them.
I'll start off the topic with some of my favorites, please feel free to weigh in and don't forget to share your own:
It is possible for a woman to have an absolute 0 for sexual interest in a man, but impossible for a man to have that same absolute 0 sexual interest in a woman. Women can be 'friends' with men but men are incapable of *fully* reciprocating this platonic friendship because of how easily we can detach our emotions from sex, and how fast we can go from 0-100 in horniness. Given the correct situation and context, a normal man could end up fucking a (previously acquainted) grotesque beast, whereas that grotesque beast may be in the same situation and context but have no interest whatsoever in said normal man.
Women have many, many variables to their logic. It is possible to be blown off by a woman for months and months and then one day have her call you up for a spontaneous date that ends in fiery sex on your bathroom floor. Women are a lot like the smartphones they love so damn much. You will never need to take them apart and examine their circuits to be successful with them. All you can be held responsible for are your own actions, and sometimes it is better to understand less.
PUA books from the "PUA movement" are all big fucking lies. They came up with douchey acronyms and slang in order to make the pussy starved nerds who bought into the "movement" feel like they're in some way bigger than other people by providing them a false vantage point to look and act from. What they tried to do was ascribe a logical thought pattern (that men are comfortable with) onto an interactive process (which men are NOT comfortable with) so that men could lull themselves into a sense of security in possessing this 'secret underground societal knowledge'. The problem is that this fake sense of security inspired more and more inaction (not to mention painfully awkward social situations) because a man who thinks he knows everything will never be inspired to act and learn for himself. Hence the massive amount of guys who can chat theory for hours and hours but still cannot bring themselves to get so much as a phone number in the real world. Too much information coupled with too little action is toxic to the mind.
Essentially, all the PUA movement did was try to capitalize on men loving theory and hating practice. Encouraging men to attempt to deal with previously researched problems rather than genuine, real life situations.
You can have a whole essay written out in your head, but when you try to put the words on paper it becomes more difficult. That's because information (read: theory) can float freely in neural space, but when it comes time to make order and sense of it, it's suddenly much more difficult.
Problems are creations of the mind and cannot be real without us lending our mental energy to them. Even though you have 5 solid theories on how to thwart competition in the field, when it comes down to it you'll probably just be paralyzed by the massive influx of information as soon as you actually have to deal with another guy in your territory. Too much is worse than too little.
![[Image: smile.gif]](https://rooshvforum.network/images/smilies/smile.gif)
Over the years I've heard a lot of men come up with a lot of very interesting theories on the relationship between men and women and their general connecting bridge of 'game'.
So many theories have been thrown around in front of me (with varying degrees of nuttiness) over my ~5 years of heavy red pill interest that I couldn't help but grow a soft spot for them.
I'll start off the topic with some of my favorites, please feel free to weigh in and don't forget to share your own:
It is possible for a woman to have an absolute 0 for sexual interest in a man, but impossible for a man to have that same absolute 0 sexual interest in a woman. Women can be 'friends' with men but men are incapable of *fully* reciprocating this platonic friendship because of how easily we can detach our emotions from sex, and how fast we can go from 0-100 in horniness. Given the correct situation and context, a normal man could end up fucking a (previously acquainted) grotesque beast, whereas that grotesque beast may be in the same situation and context but have no interest whatsoever in said normal man.
Women have many, many variables to their logic. It is possible to be blown off by a woman for months and months and then one day have her call you up for a spontaneous date that ends in fiery sex on your bathroom floor. Women are a lot like the smartphones they love so damn much. You will never need to take them apart and examine their circuits to be successful with them. All you can be held responsible for are your own actions, and sometimes it is better to understand less.
PUA books from the "PUA movement" are all big fucking lies. They came up with douchey acronyms and slang in order to make the pussy starved nerds who bought into the "movement" feel like they're in some way bigger than other people by providing them a false vantage point to look and act from. What they tried to do was ascribe a logical thought pattern (that men are comfortable with) onto an interactive process (which men are NOT comfortable with) so that men could lull themselves into a sense of security in possessing this 'secret underground societal knowledge'. The problem is that this fake sense of security inspired more and more inaction (not to mention painfully awkward social situations) because a man who thinks he knows everything will never be inspired to act and learn for himself. Hence the massive amount of guys who can chat theory for hours and hours but still cannot bring themselves to get so much as a phone number in the real world. Too much information coupled with too little action is toxic to the mind.
Essentially, all the PUA movement did was try to capitalize on men loving theory and hating practice. Encouraging men to attempt to deal with previously researched problems rather than genuine, real life situations.
You can have a whole essay written out in your head, but when you try to put the words on paper it becomes more difficult. That's because information (read: theory) can float freely in neural space, but when it comes time to make order and sense of it, it's suddenly much more difficult.
Problems are creations of the mind and cannot be real without us lending our mental energy to them. Even though you have 5 solid theories on how to thwart competition in the field, when it comes down to it you'll probably just be paralyzed by the massive influx of information as soon as you actually have to deal with another guy in your territory. Too much is worse than too little.