[Deepdiver]

(04-10-2016 04:49 PM)mother Wrote:  

(04-10-2016 03:24 PM)Deepdiver Wrote:  

The Neomasculine Code:

1. Live your Mission, focus on and succeed at it.

2. Take a young woman as your own "The secret of a long life is to take a young wife" ... Cary Grant. Screen her for DNA diseases and always DNA test any offspring to ensure they are in fact yours.

3. Never tolerate poly-sexcapades in your woman of any kind that could easily introduce 26+ debilitating or deadly STDs into your home, not to mention a negative vortex of scumbags into your life. Use "wiseguy" game so that she understands the consequences. Is it better to be loved or feared - a man of wisdom knows the answer is BOTH according to the necessity of the case. Teach her to shoot in self-defense if you are not around and to see your mastery and skills at arms. She will gain deeply ingrained psychological respect for you and fear betraying you.

4. Build your legacy and enjoy your life with your woman who will always be younger and sexy to you. Keep her procreating and caring for your kids as her sacred duty... no Mommy drama wine night's with the neighborhood polysluts giving her temptation and unacceptable ideas or behaviors. If you have to move to a part of the country where the social pressure is to raise a strong traditional family and not poisoned by PolyLGBTQisms.

5. Set up your legacy in Trusts for your kids first and then your wife - never let her get control of your money - because once you pass away she will be a young merry widow cougar and naturally want a few boy toys but still be susceptible to fortune hunting players. They do not get to put their slimy paws on your legacy.

6. Make sure the trusts (half offshore outside of SJW corrupted US courts) have incentives for your kids to do what you want them to achieve and incentivizes your wife to be a good wife and grandmother. Make sure the trusts provide for any eventual grandchildren or great-grandchildren as well.

7. This is how a neomasculine man ensures his genetic line lives on.

Did you write that for this thread?

I like that. Lately I've been finding myself thinking in dynastic and internationalist terms. I want my portrait hanging over the fireplace. And I don't want my descendants to be limited to the opportunities in US or vulnerable to exhaustion of the US.

IMHO, to your list I'd add finding a foreign woman. A woman with a different citizenship would give the children: a second citizenship, a better perspective of the world, more well rounded cultural and language skills, and a plan B for the family to relocate to, if necessary. And hopefully she would have been shielded from (and outright reject) this polyamory, and other PC, nonsense.

Yes - this polyfeminist blue pill foolishness sends my mind into red pill overdrive and this post was the result... for international diversification Google Nomad Capitalist (Andrew Henderson) he is much more of an internationalist including EE, SEA and Latin America than Sovereign Society which is focused more on Panama and Uruguay along with Everbank Commodity Currency Basket CDs with FDIC insurance in Jacksonville, FLA..

[eatthishomie]

CMD+F "porn"

"Not found."

That's a huge part of this conversation that is being left out.

Porn is literally turning men into cucks. If you are being conditioned to get off to watching girls get fucked instead of actually fucking girls yourself, what do you think is going to happen?

Quit porn.

[ovloV]

(04-11-2016 08:54 AM)CrashBangWallop Wrote:  

Gents, let's be clear.

I am not talking about a hundred years ago or a thousand years ago but much much longer.

I.e. during the millions of years when we actually evolved.

What STDs have got to do with this, god only knows.

There are 7 species of great apes, including humans and bonobos. Bonobos could be considered highly polyamorous: they do not mate for life, males have no idea which offspring is their own, males engage in homosexual activities, with the exception of incest they screw each other regardless of age or relation, and the tribe is female dominated.

This type of behavior is not common in humans, but it is definitely in the gene pool.

[PeanutoftheNight]

Don't want to get too far into Deep Forum territory, but societies see eras of great change and contrasts. In the 1920s United States we had a time much like now (albeit with far greater economic prosperity) where women had much more social freedom than before, showed more leg, tied their breasts down had many sexual partners outside of marriage, not only the cock carousel but lesbian action too. Men could continue pre-marital conquests (which basically always existed) without being so hush-hush.

Then society changed when the depression hit, and we had a new era of moderation again. Women dressed more modestly, their pluralities of partners were again strictly frowned upon (just the consequences alone couldn't be afforded), then the war thrust men into heroic battle and women went to work. In the post-war, the late 60s and 70s hit, and it got even more extreme, briefly calmed, and exploded with the big expansion of the 80s, then the 90s moderated slightly. I think we're in a 20s like era again, and this is an expected (although not rational) expansion on this previous pattern, and the nature of society's technologies make much of this much more visible. I think your average girl in your average town isn't doing this shit, and I have no data but I think that this 'poly-amorous' trend is far less pervasive in the pool of everyday girls than the acceptability of a cock carousel was for the everyday girl in the 20s.

[General Stalin]

(04-11-2016 09:19 PM)eatthishomie Wrote:  

CMD+F "porn"

"Not found."

That's a huge part of this conversation that is being left out.

Porn is literally turning men into cucks. If you are being conditioned to get off to watching girls get fucked instead of actually fucking girls yourself, what do you think is going to happen?

Quit porn.

The only relevance to porn here is the sudden surge of cuckold porn. Men watching videos where the premise is a wife cheating (and often time the "husband" or "boyfriend" watching). That shit is big these days.

This is all part of the social conditioning where men are being bred to be submissive. They are told to respect "strong" and "independent" women and never be "controlling" or attempt to stifle their "freedom."

It's created this perfect storm of women walking all over men and men allowing it and enjoying it.

[samsamsam]

(04-10-2016 06:50 PM)brob Wrote:  

The progressive train never stops. Legalize/normalize one thing, and a couple years later it will be some other fucked up behavior or concept that is being pushed towards acceptance.

What I say below mainly applies to women, who seem to have many more options than the pathetic wimpy men around them.

This is why parents are supposed to set boundaries on children early, it helps the children feel safe knowing there are limits. When there are none and the person is not emotionally sound/stable, I imagine they get addicted to the high of trying something, but like a drug it fails. So they need to do dumber and dumber things to feel anything.

Then when they get judged, well then the additional craziness comes out and they get a high from that. I imagine there will be high suicide rates for the younger generation (mainly women) because at some point, they will not be able to surpass their exploits of their younger years. And the opportunity to feel the joy of having a family, etc will have passed them. Being an Aunt will actually hurt more than feel joy because of the constant reminder and jealousy.

[EDantes]

Just for the record "polyamory" refers to either men or women engaging in sex or relationships with multiple partners.

The OP made it sound like it's only referring to women.

Just going by history as I've mentioned already men having polyamory relations was always fairly "normal"; even in conservative cultures where monogamy is stated to be the norm, it's often a given that a powerful man will have side chicks.

If there's an increase in female polyamory then I'm sure it probably started with the feminist counter-culture movement of the 60s and beyond; historically it's been extremely rare.

Only a few cultures like Tibet has it ever been a social norm (supposedly due to very high male mortality rate),

[Latinopan]

Can't remember the video, but, a guy on YT had a very good explanation, women want to be able to have harems, they want to be able to have a guy that fulfill every single one of her need but that is impossible to find on a single man, modern culture and indoctrination for a generation has allowed women to have multiple men for specific needs, hundreds that like her Instagram pictures, one that pay her bill, and take her to dinner, one she text and uses as emotional tampon, and one that really fuck her, the reason why it has become more and more common is because is the new "in" trendy thing to do, and men allow it.

[Il Bersagliere]

(04-13-2016 03:00 AM)Latinopan Wrote:  

Can't remember the video, but, a guy on YT had a very good explanation, women want to be able to have harems, they want to be able to have a guy that fulfill every single one of her need but that is impossible to find on a single man, modern culture and indoctrination for a generation has allowed women to have multiple men for specific needs, hundreds that like her Instagram pictures, one that pay her bill, and take her to dinner, one she text and uses as emotional tampon, and one that really fuck her, the reason why it has become more and more common is because is the new "in" trendy thing to do, and men allow it.

That sounds like something Stephen Molyneux would say, but not sure.

[hardman]

I dated a 30 year old woman who called herself polyamorous for several months about two years ago. Blue eyed blonde, highly educated, 9+ athletic all natural body. She was extremely open about all topics related to sex and told me all sorts of stories of her past experiences. She practiced polyamory on an emotional level and did not repeatedly sleep with the same man (or woman) that she did not feel a strong emotional bond with. She was highly read on the subject of polyamory, recommended books and articles to me all the time, and believed as some do that polyamory is natural for humans and has evolutionary underpinnings.

She was not in any way ashamed of her promiscuity and stated that she was seeking a primary mate with whom she would be committed to and possibly share a poly lifestyle. After we first slept together we discussed the communication protocol if she were to meet someone else and want to have sex with them. It was a very open and honest conversation. I told her I would almost certainly end the relationship if she slept with another man. She was faithful to me until we ended the relationship, although she did "show me off" to a girlfriend she had previously slept with once when I was staying over (showering) at her place. I think that was her way of suggesting I could sleep with her girlfriend.

When I first met this woman, dating her was something I decided to do mostly out of curiosity (and of course because she was very physically attractive and I wanted to fuck her), and as a result I never felt jealous or possessive about her prior and expected future sexual activities. And the fact she initiated our first sexual encounter was one of the more ego-boosting events of my life. But she is/was actually one of the most interesting persons I have ever met independent of her physical beauty.

She did say several times during our dating that she saw me as "different" and someone who could perhaps fulfill all of her needs, but also felt I should at least experiment with the poly lifestyle. In the end that never happened as we ended the relationship for mostly geographic reasons.

In summary, although she was intellectually committed to polyamory and attractive enough to have her pick of guys (and gals), she was basically just like any guy on here -- she liked sex, she liked having sex with people she was emotionally and physically attracted to, and she wanted to be in a committed relationship. She was willing to compromise on who she would have sex with if the committed relationship was worth it.

[XPQ22]

(04-12-2016 01:27 PM)samsamsam Wrote:  

I imagine there will be high suicide rates for the younger generation (mainly women) because at some point, they will not be able to surpass their exploits of their younger years.

And what of us?

[XPQ22]

(04-13-2016 01:35 PM)hardman Wrote:  

But she is/was actually one of the most interesting persons I have ever met independent of her physical beauty.

The problem is that while there's no shortage of "poly" women in my area, the overwhelming majority of them in their 20s are the hardest "6es" you've ever seen in your life, were women's studies majors, and have the emotional maturity of a llama.

And if she's under 27 and is a "6.5" or above instead of just a "6", her online dating inbox is already full.

It's the perfect role for a hard "6". She's not really attractive or intelligent enough to lock down the high-quality guy she really wants that hits all the bullet points, so, division of labor into different roles as the poster above mentioned. In exchange her suitors get the notion that she's good for quick sex with a less stringent initial qualification process and/or long-term material and emotional outlay.

At least that's the notion.

[hardman]

(04-13-2016 03:05 PM)XPQ22 Wrote:  

(04-13-2016 01:35 PM)hardman Wrote:  

But she is/was actually one of the most interesting persons I have ever met independent of her physical beauty.

The problem is that while there's no shortage of "poly" women in my area, the overwhelming majority of them in their 20s are the hardest "6es" you've ever seen in your life, were women's studies majors, and have the emotional maturity of a llama.

And if she's under 27 and is a "6.5" or above instead of just a "6", her online dating inbox is already full.

It's the perfect role for a hard "6". She's not really attractive or intelligent enough to lock down the high-quality guy she really wants that hits all the bullet points, so, division of labor into different roles as the poster above mentioned. In exchange her suitors get the notion that she's good for quick sex with a less stringent initial qualification process and/or long-term material and emotional outlay.

At least that's the notion.

I understand what is being suggested here and why, but in my experience (western) women who practice poly within a committed relationship tend to be above average in attractiveness and either with or seeking a primary partner who would also be considered above average in attractiveness by both genders.

I do agree that women's studies, evolutionary psych, sociology, and similar educational backgrounds seem to promote the poly lifestyle more than less liberal backgrounds.

Most women who are poly have read one or both of the following books: "The Ethical Slut" and "Sex at Dawn". The latter makes the classical evolutionary argument for polyamory.

[XPQ22]

(04-13-2016 07:36 PM)hardman Wrote:  

I understand what is being suggested here and why, but in my experience (western) women who practice poly within a committed relationship tend to be above average in attractiveness and either with or seeking a primary partner who would also be considered above average in attractiveness by both genders.

Wish there were a magic way to find all of them, at least with online game, since I sure ain't seeing them in my list of "matches" when I sort by "relationship type" on OKCupid.

Sounds like being the "primary" partner would kind of blow, as well. What are you honestly getting that the other dudes aren't getting with less responsibility? An ego boost that you're the "A" guy and not the "B" guy?

Quote:

Most women who are poly have read one or both of the following books: "The Ethical Slut" and "Sex at Dawn". The latter makes the classical evolutionary argument for polyamory.

Heh. Interesting how they're all for that evo-psych bloviation when it suits them, then.

One of the girls I banged last year had "The Ethical Slut" sitting on her bookshelf. Fucked her on her couch after a date lasting not longer than two hours, then never heard from her again.

[Ensam]

(04-13-2016 07:36 PM)hardman Wrote:  

I understand what is being suggested here and why, but in my experience (western) women who practice poly within a committed relationship tend to be above average in attractiveness and either with or seeking a primary partner who would also be considered above average in attractiveness by both genders.

What? This has been the opposite experience of myself and others who have responded. Both genders? Most of the chicks I know into poly are 6s at best. Most are below average with the very rare standout.

Quote:

Most women who are poly have read one or both of the following books: "The Ethical Slut" and "Sex at Dawn". The latter makes the classical evolutionary argument for polyamory.

I would hardly qualify the 'Sex at Dawn' as anything classical. It's shitty evolutionary psychology that serves the author's very obvious agenda.

[XPQ22]

(04-14-2016 12:53 AM)Ensam Wrote:  

What? This has been the opposite experience of myself and others who have responded. Both genders? Most of the chicks I know into poly are 6s at best. Most are below average with the very rare standout.

Yep. I've tried to game about five or six "poly" girls from online at this point, and banged two of them. From my experience here in New England, they are on average about as hard a 6 as 6es come.

I managed to close on a number with one blonde 30 y/o "poly" girl near me a few months ago, who I would rate a 7, and from her profile came off as extremely kind with very little entitled bitch attitude. Most of the time I couldn't even send her a message because her mailbox was full. "But I keep clearing it out!"

I finally got through to her and it took me a full hour of perfect text game to just get a phone number from her, and then she proceeded to jerk me around via text and try to get me to chase (which I guess was successful), deflect my meet suggestions and ghost, and then pop up and ping me again, deflect again, disappear again and so on. She was very cute so I probably let this go on longer than I should have, but I finally threw my hands up in frustration and deleted her number.

Her pipeline must have been enormous and stuffed to capacity; Christ knows how many other suckers like me she had in her phone and was concurrently jerking around. Never again. At least for online game, "poly" girls are pretty straightforward lays if you can get them out, because if they're actually meeting up with you it usually means they really like you.

But even will-never-set-the-world-on-fire 5s and 6s of this type in online game will try to give you the run around and stick you in texting hell given half a chance. For online game the best strategy is probably to just do a brief rundown of every girl on your "match" list who says she's in a non-monogamous or open relationship every couple of months and send a quick message to any you find bangable. If they're not immediately down to meet by about the 6th message forget 'em and hide their profile from your searches forever.

[Kid Twist]

I'm not even trying to necessarily bang anyone (unless she's actually hot) just understand what this online crap is about, and/or see what happens.

I can attest that XPQ is dead on.

I just wrote on another thread that from a male's point of view (all that matters) the energy that it takes (the fact that it is EXTENDED by these basic bitches, drawn out rather than physically taxing) to MAYBE get a shot is crazy when taking into account that I would not even think of approaching 90% of these girls in real life. I've said that out loud and almost asked myself, why the F are you doing this then, Twist?

I guess the answer is to make it easier on young girls (early 20s) to come out of the shell who want to be with someone who is older (actually have met a couple). Obviously, that could be more easily done by approaches live (and I agree is far superior) but with job and difficulty recuperating in your 30s after a night drinking, with all the idiot time wasting "he's creepy" women out there, the volume has screamed, try me, you have a chance and it costs little with time and energy

You just need to know when to say when, and XPQ is telling you. EARLY.

[eatthishomie]

(04-12-2016 12:54 AM)General Stalin Wrote:  

(04-11-2016 09:19 PM)eatthishomie Wrote:  

CMD+F "porn"

"Not found."

That's a huge part of this conversation that is being left out.

Porn is literally turning men into cucks. If you are being conditioned to get off to watching girls get fucked instead of actually fucking girls yourself, what do you think is going to happen?

Quit porn.

The only relevance to porn here is the sudden surge of cuckold porn. Men watching videos where the premise is a wife cheating (and often time the "husband" or "boyfriend" watching). That shit is big these days.

This is all part of the social conditioning where men are being bred to be submissive. They are told to respect "strong" and "independent" women and never be "controlling" or attempt to stifle their "freedom."

It's created this perfect storm of women walking all over men and men allowing it and enjoying it.

Yeah but porn in general is part of it. Men are literally wiring their brains so that watching girls get fucked gets them off instead of having their dick in actual vagina. That's priming for cuckhood if it ever existed.

[Apollo21]

For me, a commited relationship means marriage...anything else you're just dating.
Even if you're serious about a girl, there's really nothing that says she has to be
faithful to you because that only applies to marriage.

And with the supposed decline of marriage and guys swearing off getting married,
polyamory could be a natural consequence of men abandoning marriage. Without a real
social commitment, quasi-relationships could become a real trend...

[PapayaTapper]

(04-15-2016 10:06 PM)eatthishomie Wrote:  

Yeah but porn in general is part of it. Men are literally wiring their brains so that watching girls get fucked gets them off instead of having their dick in actual vagina. That's priming for cuckhood if it ever existed.

Interesting idea...I think you may be on to something here.

Assuming a guy is heterosexual and is watching guy on girl porn, then the girl he's attracted to is getting fucked by another dude and with enough repetition this could transfer to the real world as being "ok"...maybe even "hot"



(Not big on porn myself but I think this might explain why I've only ever been interested in girl on girl porn)

But the fact that never in the history of civilization have young guys been so exposed to seeing attractive chicks fucked by somebody else is likely a contributing factor (if not actual cause) of the rise in acceptance of being cucked

[HankMoody]

This is my theory - social liberalism is rapidly expanding, and at the same time the quality of men is declining. Men are being told to act more feminine in order to attract women, and females are being told that they should desire feminine males. Unfortunately, it's creating a situation that benefits neither gender, and has lead to the rise of polyamory.

Sadly, these feminine men invest in their "girlfriend" by moving in with her, spending time with her, maybe even marrying her, etc. The woman likes having a "boyfriend" (really, a live in housewife) because it cuts expenses her half and it's someone to watch movies with on a Friday night. Unfortunately, they're just not all that sexually attracted to their mate, because he acts more like a feminine housewife than a head of household. The women is confused about he she is so comfortable with her boyfriend, and how much she cares about him, but still desires to fuck the guitar player, DJ, and that degenerate lawyer Hank. And hey, this is 2016, why can't she? Can't you love someone in different ways?

From there, she convinces her boyfriend that poly is "a thing", this will "strengthen our relationship", and other hippy dippy horseshit she heard in college or read in some stupid book like Eat Pray Fuck. The man decides to be "open" and give it a try, and she explains that "you're allowed to see other people too." The reality of the situation is the guy might go on a few dates here and there, while she's getting all the cock she wants. The guy has invested so far into the relationship at this point that he doesn't really have a choice, compounded by the fact that "this is real love!" he doesn't think he can do any better.

Boiled down, poly lets women retain the benefit of having what is tantamount to a boyfriend roommate who she is comfortable with, while still fucking men she is physically attracted to. Now she has the best of both worlds, while the male has the worst of both.

Naturally, no masculine male would tolerate a "poly" relationship because it's just a fancy way of saying your women is fucking other guys.

And by the way - this is the difference between poly and having non-committed relationships. You don't hold your fuck buddies out as your girlfriend. She doesn't live you with you. She doesn't go to family events. You don't have joint bank accounts, own properties together, and you're not on the same cellphone plan. Casual dating is a relatively low investment.

Poly is when a women you're heavily invested into admits to fucking other men, and you claim to be okay with it because SJWs said it's a thing. Masculine men do not allow other men to come into their homes and pilfer their woman.

PS - every woman I've ever known in a poly relationship is a 6 or 7. Typically college educated, very liberal, ages ranging from 30 - 40. It's often a woman who got married too young to a beta. I've never met a really hot poly. Further, I wouldn't want to spend a lot of time with someone who is cucking their significant other. Too much drama, and there are enough hot chicks in their 20s without boyfriends / husbands.

[Rhyme or Reason]

Quote:

every woman I've ever known in a poly relationship is a 6 or 7.

So true. It's a tacit acknowledgment of low value.

It's the basic law of supply and demand applied to the sexual market.

[General Stalin]

I've have never seen an online-dating profile of a girl who boasted about being "poly" or in an "open relationship" who was attractive. Not once. They are always fat and/or hideous and have that bossy entitled independant feminist shtick about them.

[godzilla]

^GS ..there def hot ones. (Hank you know what I'm talking about)

They're also probably pansexual too haha and polynomial and polyvagina or whatever.

The guys are always super betas, usually hipsters.

Actually these girls are pretty homogenous (to hipsterism) I'm a clean cut Spanish guy and they reject me almost on the spot. No matter how ugly or hot

I remember this one beta I know who date a girl like this, she had hairy armpits ...instead of asking hr to shave them he just dumped her, she was an 8 so I would just told her to get rid of them.

A lot of these guys not want to try ..so they settle for Bullshit..whatever I guess

[XPQ22]

The good looking ones sometimes say they're doing "relationship anarchy", i.e. just casually dating/FWB multiple dudes, there's no "primary partner" who they live with or do the other things that HankMoody talks about. i.e. what many other young urban Western women are doing, but they've decided to be open about it, and spin it into some kind of "sex positive" lifestyle choice.

No young woman who uses online dating sites for any length of time is truly "monogamous" no matter what their profile data says, IMO. Going on tons of dates, getting banged out by the guys she likes, maybe Netflix and chilling with a few she likes for a while until she moves on to the next batch...it's definitely something, but I don't consider that "monogamy."

There's little doubt that many of them have been exposed to red pill/PUA material given that they use the Internet, and I'm pretty sure that many of them consider themselves to be the female counterpart to a male PUA/player. Remember this the next time a 20-something feminist white girl you see rolling out solo to night game every weekend negs you in a bar.