[Roosh]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/...story.html

Quote:

I sort of like to analyze, so I was trying to figure out what the match points were, and I think that there were a number: humor, working out, fashion.

Kind of scary that an older woman tries to sense compatibility by methodically going through a checklist.

Quote:

I was a gentleman, and she was definitely a classy lady. But when we took pictures, it wasn’t like we were standing apart from each other. We were actually kind of hugged up. I don’t know if that’s what you’d call a flirt.

Dating sure has changed. Can you imagine meeting a girl and considering her "classy"?

Alas, he was not good enough for her. Another Date Lab miracle!

[Tuthmosis]

Like anything else made in a lab, this shit is too unnatural.

These are making me increasingly convinced that the approach (and what you subconsciously communicate when you cross no-man's-land to do it) is what creates "sparks" for a woman, which is really just polite code for damp pussy.

It's possible to replicate that feeling for them (as with online dating), but if you don't have that in mind--and the corresponding game behind you to do it--you're going to go the way of all these Date Lab guys.

[Brian]

(12-10-2011 01:01 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

Like anything else made in a lab, this shit is too unnatural.

These are making me increasingly convinced that the approach (and what you subconsciously communicate when you cross no-man's-land to do it) is what creates "sparks" for a woman, which is really just polite code for damp pussy.

It's possible to replicate that feeling for them (as with online dating), but if you don't have that in mind--and the corresponding game behind you to do it--you're going to go the way of all these Date Lab guys.

i've been thinking this also - its the rush of the approach and the initial gamesmanship that causes the attraction. pretty much every datelab i read has the guy and girl liking each other, the guy giving a shitty girl 4 stars, the girl saying 3 or 3.5 stars, them talking once or twice and some nonsense about schedules being busy.

[Tuthmosis]

(12-10-2011 01:59 PM)Brian Wrote:  

i've been thinking this also - its the rush of the approach and the initial gamesmanship that causes the attraction. pretty much every datelab i read has the guy and girl liking each other, the guy giving a shitty girl 4 stars, the girl saying 3 or 3.5 stars, them talking once or twice and some nonsense about schedules being busy.

It basically removes the one advantage that men have. In life (at least in this country), the deck is stacked against men. Women have the right of refusal; women have a white-knight establishment on their side that confines us to a tiny operating space; men have mad social expectations (whereas women just have to show up); men can "mess things up" with the slightest of transgressions or slip-ups (being labeled "creepy" at the drop of a hat); women can look and act however the fuck they want now, but men still have to behave as if it's 1870 (chivalrous). The list goes on.

The one thing we have is the ability to craft the approach in a way that mitigates all of those horrible logistical and social disadvantages. This is what game is, at its core. Date Lab removes our last refuge. The men are gagged, bound, blindfolded, and thrown into the lion den. In this way it is a "lab"--a lab where they're performing cruel experiments on lesser men.

Fuck Date Lab.

[Kish]

(12-10-2011 02:16 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

It basically removes the one advantage that men have. In life (at least in this country), the deck is stacked against men. Women have the right of refusal; women have a white-knight establishment on their side that confines us to a tiny operating space; men have mad social expectations (whereas women just have to show up); men can "mess things up" with the slightest of transgressions or slip-ups (being labeled "creepy" at the drop of a hat); women can look and act however the fuck they want now, but men still have to behave as if it's 1870 (chivalrous). The list goes on.

The one thing we have is the ability to craft the approach in a way that mitigates all of those horrible logistical and social disadvantages. This is what game is, at its core. Date Lab removes our last refuge. The men are gagged, bound, throw in to the lion den. In this way it is a "lab"--a lab where they're performing cruel experiments on lesser men.

[Timoteo]

And after all that, it comes down to her not having "sparks" shoot out of her pussy. And that was after going over all the things they had in common - a good basis on which to build. She even went out with him again, then insults him by saying she'd alter her schedule for the "right" guy. Considering her age and what she does for a living, having a man that wants to spend time with you should be welcome, but she still feels the need to be blown away by someone. I think chicks do Date Lab for the chance to get in the newspaper and the free meal.

[tenderman100]

(12-10-2011 11:12 AM)Roosh Wrote:  

Kind of scary that an older woman tries to sense compatibility by methodically going through a checklist.

On POF, search for divorced/separated women between the ages of 40 and 45, and read and look at the profiles.

It's ALWAYS a checklist. Some are absurd in their requirements, others are set down in an effort (failed) to be clever. Women, especially the divorced women, simply CANNOT help themselves. They have these vague notions of romance, and yet they think about men the way they think about grocery shopping.

Here's one I just cut and pasted for your enjoyment.

'A POF 41 yr old lizar Wrote:

[I]have certain qualities that I’m looking for in a "Match".

-someone with a great sense of humor, wit, and can easily laugh at themselves, as well as secretly poke fun of others.
- has hair on the head, not on the back.
-loves languishing on a weekend day, maybe brunch, reading the paper, fooling around, and a good snuggly nap.
- someone who does not wear socks with sandals.
- artsy/creative.
- is tall!!
- does not drive a PT Cruiser.
- enjoys trying new things and having adventures.
- loves to travel.
- fun to be around and can keep their end of a conversation going.
- lives/works in . . . . . . . (or a very, very close suburb).
- has a profile free of spelling errors, and knows the difference between your/you're, and their/there/they're.

[Samseau]

Dude, this thread delivers.


But honestly, I think this guy, who just came out of a 25-year marriage, is going to be rusty as fuck in the dating game, so it's no surprise things didn't work out.

I think he made a mistake here:

Quote:

Monica: Absolutely, those were flirtatious moments. It wasn’t artificial. When there was an opportunity or a moment when it seemed appropriate, I think we both did.

Webster: There’s definitely, definitely chemistry there — definitely. We closed down the place. I think we got kicked out of the restaurant around 11:15.

Monica: We went to the garage, and I think that’s where we exchanged phone numbers. He asked for mine.

Webster: It was funny, because at first it was like, “Well, okay, see you later.” Handshake. And then I said, “What, not even hug?” And then we did hug.

He had her back at his place... and asked for a hug? Come on, there's no sexual tension or desire from him, he's acting like a boy.

He would have had it in the bag had he remembered to get his balls back from his ex-wife.

[Openbar]

Still waiting for the Date Lab article that concludes with "...over breakfast the next morning.."