Should married men spin plates?

[Trump]

I agree with your recommendation that men should not get married. I don't endorse the cheating, however.

If men are supposed to be leaders, then they should be good leaders.

A good leader for who? What does having a mistress have to do with being a good leader? A wife is there to get sex from and for business dealings/image. Any resistance to the sex and you got an issue.

They shouldn't half @ss it. Anything worth doing is worth doing well. So if you are going to lead, you should lead well. Part of this is leading by example, and role modeling appropriate behavior. Unless you have an open marriage, and expect your wife to screw around also. I know PUAs say "But men are different, we're built to spread our seed", but I call bullsh!t on that. Not that we aren't built to spread our seed. But for every man that cheats for sex, there is a woman who cheats for the attention. Whatever the rationale, the result is the same.

Do what well? Doing marriage well? Come on bro, you think people wouldn't buy cars and fly airplanes because the inventor had mistresses/cheated on his wife?

Marriage isn't about love and emotion and feelings and being a 'role model'. It's about image and money and doing what is best for you. You get married if it's best for you and you have mistress in case the wife denies sex.

Men often look to the 1950s as an idyllic time, when women were subservient and men ruled the world. But this is one of the reasons women rebelled against that. Too many men abused their leadership position by having affairs, becoming addicted to alcohol, and battering their wives. Had the men led responsibly, perhaps we wouldn't be living in this feminist dominated world right now.

Who are we trying to lead? The women of the world? We are living in a feminist dominated world because too many men and politicians are afraid of women. They wont stand up to them because they think they won't get sex anywhere else.

I don't think anyone is advocating cheating. If the wife always remains young and good looking and always gives you sex and doesn't cause you any emotional issues while expecting more and giving less, who needs a mistress? But alas, nature is not built that way.

 

[Poon King]

To me, 100% commitment would include more than just sexuality. And since marriage in our current society is a bad deal for men, I don't really believe in committing 100%. The nuclear family is a good thing (and would be worthy of 100% commitment), but unfortunately the current culture doesn't value the nuclear family, making it so that a man has to be more lucky than anything if he wants to succeed with one.

I have no problem with polygamy, in fact I've never understood why it is illegal, especially in this country which supposedly has freedom of religion. But I disagree that monogamy is a new thing, it has a much longer history than most PUAs care to admit. And there are some advantages to sexual monogamy - fewer STDs, fewer unwanted pregnancies, etc.

In the times and places that you are speaking of, the woman was expected to remain monogamous while the man was not. But in today's culture, both genders are sexually active. You can stray, but this can break trust, and gives unwitting permission (or perhaps an excuse) for the female to also cheat. If you don't mind sharing a woman's vagina with some other dude's penis, then you might not care. Personally, I find the thought disgusting, but I may be old fashioned.

Male monogamy is a very new thing if you consider the length of human existence.

And while getting "caught" cheating might open the door for the woman to do the same.. chances are she might do it anyway. A man should not choose his behavior or actions based on what he FEARS a woman might do. When he does... he is no longer living on his own terms.

 

[zekko]

A man should not choose his behavior or actions based on what he FEARS a woman might do.

Not out of fear, to set the example. Again, I think that if the man is supposed to lead the relationship, then he should be a good leader. If he considers cheating inappropriate (by either party), then he should set the right example and role model what he considers appropriate behavior. Saying "Do as I say, not as I do" is not being a good leader. If we're going to half @ss it, why should we even bother to lead?

As I've said before, the man must set the example for moral behavior, because it sure as fvck isn't going to come from the woman. I know some see "morality" as bad, and a "social construct", but I firmly believe there is value in morality. A quick and obvious example: If we accept that murder is wrong, we are less likely to get killed. Everybody benefits.

A good leader for who?

In this context, I'm speaking of being the leader in the relationship. This forum is always saying men should be the leaders. Again, if you're going to be a leader, why would you not want to be a good one? If you start a weight lifting program, do you want to slack off about it, or do you want to do it right?

7We are living in a feminist dominated world because too many men and politicians are afraid of woman

Agreed.

I don't think anyone is advocating cheating. If the wife always remains young and good looking and always gives you sex and doesn't cause you any emotional issues while expecting more and giving less, who needs a mistress?

Are you advocating cheating or not? Because aside from this part, it kind of sounds like you are. By the way, I'm more of an apologist for serial monogamy than lifelong monogamy, just to be clear.

 

[Trunks]

Male monogamy is a very new thing if you consider the length of human existence.

And while getting "caught" cheating might open the door for the woman to do the same.. chances are she might do it anyway. A man should not choose his behavior or actions based on what he FEARS a woman might do. When he does... he is no longer living on his own terms.

Do you see the contradiction here?

 

[Poon King]

Do you see the contradiction here?

NOPE.

 

[PantyWhisperer]

I can vouch for the "she might do it anyway". I was faithful to a fault- to the point of not having any way to feed myself, vagina wise, when cast out on the street. It's a tough call, but you can always stay sharp on your game and stop just short of having the affair. Trophies are available today in the form of nude selfies that women send. And today's women will send them, even women in their 40's. It's the craziest thing. I've built quite a collection which I keep in a locked app on my phone and I enjoy them tremendously.

 

[zekko]

I was faithful to a fault- to the point of not having any way to feed myself, vagina wise, when cast out on the street.

For a forum that so adamantly claims that men don't need women, guys sure get into panic mode quickly when they lose access to them. This is the classic AFC reaction/trap: The guy invests too much in the woman, builds his whole world around her, lets his social connections lapse, and then his wife leaves him. She gets supported by her friends and family, while the man finds himself alone and out in the cold.

The good news is that this doesn't have to happen as long as you keep the proper perspective and mindset. I don't recommend marriage, but if you're already married, you can at least make sure you keep interests of your own and a life outside of marriage. And if you find yourself without any plates, don't fall into desperation, keep the abundance mindset. If I suddenly found myself without any women, I would at least be excited because of all the possibilities.

Trophies are available today in the form of nude selfies that women send. And today's women will send them, even women in their 40's. It's the craziest thing. I've built quite a collection which I keep in a locked app on my phone and I enjoy them tremendously.

Sounds like a nice collection

 

[Poon King]

Not out of fear, to set the example.

Women don't give a sh!t about your "example" or any other man's example.

Women care about what you can do for them and what is in their best interest. Women don't follow rules.. they follow whatever benefits them. I'm shocked you still don't know this.

 

[PantyWhisperer]

For a forum that so adamantly claims that men don't need women, guys sure get into panic mode quickly when they lose access to them. This is the classic AFC reaction/trap: The guy invests too much in the woman, builds his whole world around her, lets his social connections lapse, and then his wife leaves him. She gets supported by her friends and family, while the man finds himself alone and out in the cold.

The good news is that this doesn't have to happen as long as you keep the proper perspective and mindset. I don't recommend marriage, but if you're already married, you can at least make sure you keep interests of your own and a life outside of marriage. And if you find yourself without any plates, don't fall into desperation, keep the abundance mindset. If I suddenly found myself without any women, I would at least be excited because of all the possibilities.


Sounds like a nice collection

I didn't panic due to scarcity, I panicked due to no hunting skills... but yeah, maybe a little was the one-itis effect - she was a master at manipulating things to hold all the power and "shaking my confidence daily." <-- Paul Simon, 1970

 

[Poon King]

I didn't panic due to scarcity, I panicked due to no hunting skills... but yeah, maybe a little was the one-itis effect - she was a master at manipulating things to hold all the power and "shaking my confidence daily." <-- Paul Simon, 1970

One thing I don't understand about a lot of men is why they are so afraid to call women on their sh!t? I do it all the time. Rather than trying to "ignore it" or pretend I don't noticed it.. I simple call her out.

Example:
About a month ago I had one plate flip-flop on me. We had a thing where every week we would order food and watch TV before f*cking. At one point I told her I wanted to see her cooking skills and moving forward we should start cooking together instead of ordering out every week. She agreed.

So a few days later I invite her over and sent a text that says: "My fridge is stocked. Bring your A game. I better not out-cook you". Here is how it went:

HER: "I don't feel like cooking. Lets just do what we always do and order food".
ME: "You agreed to cook with me. Why the change?"
HER: "I didn't agree to cook. You said it would be fun, but I never agreed"
ME: "You agreed".
HER: "Lets just order food."
ME: "No".
HER: "You're so stubborn!"
ME: "Bring your A game. See you soon."

She came over hornier than ever. And yes.. we cooked too.

 

[Top Of The Game]

No! I'm a child of a fella when he was alive cheated. It sucks! Get out of the marriage then go have fun.

 

[guru1000]

One thing I don't understand about a lot of men is why they are so afraid to call women on their sh!t?

Any action based on fear (absent pragmatism) is an overt display of weakness, which women can sniff out immediately. Is it no wonder we have a society filled with weak men?

When you call women out on their crap, you are covertly saying, "I give no fvcks whether you come or go. I appreciate your company, but if you do that crap again, you're getting the boot."

What's priceless is when you take a 9 girl, who has scores of men fawning over/worshipping her, and then throw her out to the curb after calling her out on her shvt. She literally has no clue how to respond as it is so new. And she will return ... corrected. This is how I make soldiers out of women.

 

[zekko]

Women don't give a sh!t about your "example" or any other man's example.

She will follow your lead as long as she values you. See Guru's example above about how women will follow, and your own, about the cooking. If she won't follow, why bother leading then? True, there may come a time when she doesn't value you anymore, and starts to act up. But that's the time when you move on.

I think entering a debate on game from a position of ethics is arguing for a world as you would have it be.

First off, I do not expect ANY woman (or man, for that matter) to act in a fully ethical way. That would be setting yourself up for disappointment, at best. Having said that, some are definitely better than others, and that is why you screen.

Secondly, I've lived on this planet for nearly 56 years now. I've already said that I don't recommend marriage (the power of the state will protect her interests at the expense of yours), and that I view women as replaceable. Don't try to tell me I'm delusional or brainwashed just because I don't believe in cheating.

I value honesty as a trait, both for myself and others. Part of it is that I like to keep my life simple. If you are honest, then you don't have to remember all the lies you have told. And who wants to bother sifting through a bunch of lies? No one is 100% honest, but again some are more honest than others. This is part of my screening criteria. I've known plenty of habitual liars, but I haven't dated any.

 

[marmel75]

Male monogamy is a very new thing if you consider the length of human existence.

And while getting "caught" cheating might open the door for the woman to do the same.. chances are she might do it anyway. A man should not choose his behavior or actions based on what he FEARS a woman might do. When he does... he is no longer living on his own terms.

Researchers have even found that animals they believed were monogamous and mated for life have "side flings"...so basically NO OTHER animal species on earth is monogamous and we are expected to be? Anytime you fight against nature you are doomed to fail eventually. Might not be today, might not be tomorrow, but be damn sure your instinct to Fvck other women will be too strong to overcome at some point

 

[Trump]

One thing I don't understand about a lot of men is why they are so afraid to call women on their sh!t? I do it all the time. Rather than trying to "ignore it" or pretend I don't noticed it.. I simple call her out.

Example:
About a month ago I had one plate flip-flop on me. We had a thing where every week we would order food and watch TV before f*cking. At one point I told her I wanted to see her cooking skills and moving forward we should start cooking together instead of ordering out every week. She agreed.

So a few days later I invite her over and sent a text that says: "My fridge is stocked. Bring your A game. I better not out-cook you". Here is how it went:

HER: "I don't feel like cooking. Lets just do what we always do and order food".
ME: "You agreed to cook with me. Why the change?"
HER: "I didn't agree to cook. You said it would be fun, but I never agreed"
ME: "You agreed".
HER: "Lets just order food."
ME: "No".
HER: "You're so stubborn!"
ME: "Bring your A game. See you soon."

She came over hornier than ever. And yes.. we cooked too.

Bro you are the best poster here by miles and I've printed alot of your posts but come on. You are flirting with her at the same you are questioning why she changed her mind. That's not really calling her out. It's more playful teasing.

I think calling a girl is out would be like the girl agreeing to go on a date several days in advance and then girl saying she has a 6'1 boyfriend the day of the date or something.