How some women “commit” in an LTR

[sazc]

Simple question for the ladies (and men in drag can participate, I'm fvcking open minded like that).

What do I get from fulfilling "all your needs" that I don't get from a plate relationship within my frame?

Answers on a postcard, ladies/trannies.

Lol shaddap u hate lesbos.

IMO (and I'm only one voice) you get a ride or die.

That said, some plates will absolutely be a ride or die because they aren't inclined to get deep and emotional, they like it on the surface. I'm not sure how many of that type of woman can stay mentally stable as a plate tho.

 

[BeExcellent]

You know @deesade, it really depends on what you want outta life as a man, and more than that as a human being.

Some men are like your one grandfather who was a player until the end. When you talk about him I get the image of the Dos Equuis guy, you know...."The most interesting man in the world", and I think that is great if that is the lifestyle you choose and subscribe to. Mae West was a female version of that lifestyle...one of my favorite quotes from her was "I am a woman who lost my reputation...and never missed it"

Some women (rare, but some) are like Katharine Hepburn, who never married but was the other woman to Spencer Tracy for years, even having a daughter with him. She loved her lover and her autonomy and didn't care what anybody else thought.

It takes guts to swim against the social tide (as your grandfather, Mae West and Katharine Hepburn all did). You for example get shamed by your family all the time for doing something other than what you "should" be doing. I say more power to you. You are correct to be doing life on your own terms however you define that. To hell with everybody else. They aren't living your life. You are.

Some men and some women do want another person to "do life" with. Through the ups, the downs, the good times and the sh1t shows. It's easy to get overly caught up in all the social constructs that society or "they" (whoever the ubiquitous "they" are) dictate about how people are supposed to be and live and do.

I get fed up with the social constructs too honestly, although I believe it is worthwhile knowing how to navigate these constructs. At the end of the day we all have to make individual choices regarding what is most beneficial to our own welfare and well-being.

So the answer to your question:

What do I get from fulfilling "all your needs" that I don't get from a plate relationship within my frame?

Depends entirely on you. If the "plate relationships" suit your needs, then all is well.

What happens here is that there are other men for whom the plate relationships are not enough. Those men must determine what their own needs are and ideally find someone who can meet those needs, and in a reciprocal way he meets hers as well. Relationships happen at the micro level between 2 individual people. They are defined strictly by the people in them. Nothing else matters at the end of the day.

 

[Red Legg]

Some women (rare, but some) are like Katharine Hepburn, who never married but was the other woman to Spencer Tracy for years, even having a daughter with him. She loved her lover and her autonomy and didn't care what anybody else thought.

In my opinion these women are the real unicorns,I am lucky to have a lover like this one right now.

 

[guru1000]

Simple question for the ladies (and men in drag can participate, I'm fvcking open minded like that).

What do I get from fulfilling "all your needs" that I don't get from a plate relationship within my frame?

Answers on a postcard, ladies/trannies.

This is a great topic. Let's not allow our "fuss" ruin a good discussion.

You can't effectively lead if you fail to meet the needs of your followers. (I.e. I no longer met your needs, hence you unfollowed me)

No leader = No alpha

Your frame is whatever you decide it to be whether that be handling her needs or not.

What do you get you ask out of meeting the needs of your subject or your followers? Steadfast loyalty.

He claimed to have a solution. “I never ever developed a sense of who I was and where I was going and what I wanted to do,” Patricia Krenwinkel, who killed for Manson, said recently from prison. “I wanted to please. I wanted to feel safe. To feel like someone was going to care for me. I hadn’t felt that from anyone else in my life.” Manson told the young women he met that they were perfect and beautiful, and that their parents were the problem. He served their needs fully.

I don't use Manson as an example of a guy to aspire to nor is my mention of him to suggest Manson is a guide in any type of capacity, but simply looking objectively at the underlying dynamics without bias, we see that the women under his wing, though unhealthy, were so loyal to his frame, they killed for him. All he did was engage their "needs."

What's important to distinguish is "needs" from "wants." Her desire for a nice dinner, a gold necklace, a weekend getaway: These are her wants. Her longing for a father figure if she was absent a father, her desire for acceptance and belonging if her family ostracized her; her strong desire for love when her mother abandoned her: These are her needs.

Needs don't need to be so dramatic as I delineated above, but were used merely as operating examples.

Need not feed her wants. But feed her needs, and you will have a loyal trooper for as long as you want her.

 

[user43770]

Need not feed her wants. But feed her needs, and you will have a loyal trooper for as long as you want

I understand that you play devil's advocate these days, which I appreciate somewhat, but statements like this only reinforce blue-pill thinking in new posters.

If only it was just a woman's needs that needed to be catered to. That would make things much more simple. The problems is, once a person's needs are met, they start thinking about wants.

Familiarity breeds contempt. That's a fact of life. Focusing on her needs may have helped you at the beginning of the relationship, but eventually she's going to want more. Oh, you don't agree with her new found wants? Well, her old flame on facebook has been promising the world to her. Better tighten your game up. But how can you compete against the limitless fantasies in her mind?

You see what I'm getting at. There aren't any guarantees, and hypergamy doesn't have a schedule. It's just always there.

"Steadfast loyalty" is mostly a fairytale. Especially in an age where feminist beliefs are the norm.

 

[guru1000]

The problems is, once a person's needs are met, they start thinking about wants.

This is an oxymoron. If a person's needs were met and then said person starting thinking about wants, then said person's needs were never met, as part of said person's needs would be to have needs met by an individual worthy of meeting them and in reciprocation said person would feel appreciation, hence the very act of wanting more and being unappreciative after said person's needs were allegedly met is indicative that said person's needs were never truly met.

Familiarity breeds contempt.

Again, if a person's need was met by another wherein familiarity bred contempt, then said person's need was never satisfied by a person where familiarity did not breed contempt, hence the need was never fulfilled.

Best way to understand this, as I know syllogisms are easier to understand to some:

Donald Trump fulfills a need: The need is satisfied and Donald is appreciated.
Donald Duck fulfills a need: The need remains unfulfilled and contempt incites.

Donald Trump does not fulfill a need: The woman may wander.
Donald Duck doesn't fulfill a need: Irrelevant either way.

"Steadfast loyalty" is mostly a fairytale.

For you it is. All my women are loyal soldiers. Open or close your ears. It's your life.

 

[user43770]

This is an oxymoron. If a person's needs were met and then said person starting thinking about wants, then said person's needs were never met, as part of said person's needs would be to have needs met by an individual worthy of meeting them and in reciprocation said person would feel appreciation, hence the very act of wanting more and being unappreciative after said person's needs were allegedly met is indicative that said person's needs were never truly met.

Again, if a person's need was met by another wherein familiarity bred contempt, then said person's need was never satisfied by a person where familiarity did not breed contempt, hence the need was never fulfilled.

Best way to understand this, as I know syllogisms are easier to understand to some:

Donald Trump fulfills a need: The need is satisfied and Donald is appreciated.
Donald Duck fulfills a need: The need remains unfulfilled and contempt incites.

Donald Trump does not fulfill a need: The woman may wander.
Donald Duck doesn't fulfill a need: Irrelevant either way.


For you it is. All my women are loyal soldiers. Open or close your ears. It's your life.

This is old school red-pill.

Past benefit provided by the male does not provide for continued or future association.

- Briffault's Law

 

[guru1000]

This is old school red-pill.

Past benefit provided by the male does not provide for continued or future association.

- Briffault's Law

Past [great sex] provided by the male does not provide for continued or future association.

Present and continued great sex (if good sex were her only need) does provide for continued or future association.

Diametrically, your giving her no sex (if good sex were her only need) guarantees there will be no continued or future association.

Capiche?

 

[user43770]

Past [great sex] provided by the male does not provide for continued or future association.

Present and continued great sex (if good sex were her only need) does provide for continued or future association.

Diametrically, your giving her no sex (if good sex were her only need) guarantees there will be no continued or future association.

Capiche?

Doesn't matter the type of benefit. The main point is that you're expendable, just like the rest of us. Doesn't even matter if you have a manicure.

 

[guru1000]

Doesn't matter the type of benefit. The main point is that you're expendable, just like the rest of us. Doesn't even matter if you have a manicure.

Haha, no more counters in response to strong logic and evidence (Manson).

It's ok Tights, you wouldn't be alone here

The days of hypergamy in this forum are dead. I will crush poster by poster as they appear.

 

[user43770]

Haha, no more counters in response to strong logic and evidence (Manson).

It's ok Tights, you wouldn't be alone here

The days of hypergamy in this forum are dead. I will crush poster by poster as they appear.

Lol ok, bro.

If you had as much experience as you say you do, then you'd know that familiarity is ultimately a problem in every relationship. It's unavoidable.

You can only "great sex" her in so many ways before it's all boring. It's inevitable.

And that might be why she starts noticing other guys.

Nothing to be angry about. This is evolution. It's bigger than you or me.

 

[user43770]

Haha, no more counters in response to strong logic and evidence (Manson).

It's ok Tights, you wouldn't be alone here

The days of hypergamy in this forum are dead. I will crush poster by poster as they appear.

As far as Manson goes lol, if those women would have spent enough time around him, they would have nagged him to death eventually...just like the rest of us.

 

[guru1000]

You can only "great sex" her in so many ways before it's all boring. It's inevitable

Premise fails as woman's sexual desire for you can increase commensurate with her level of emotional bonding.

As far as Manson goes lol, if those women would have spent enough time around him, they would have nagged him to death eventually...just like the rest of us.

Wholly irrelevant to the argument.

If you have nothing substantial to assert, I'll wait for the next batter up.



.

 

[Sub]

As far as Manson goes lol, if those women would have spent enough time around him, they would have nagged him to death eventually...just like the rest of us.

Guru ex wife divorced and left him for a BBD. All the plastic surgery, stolen suits, juice etc couldn't bring her back.

Guru experienced hypergamy in prison as his cell mates passed him around and left him too for better men.

Poor lol guru. Trying to pass off Manson and a group of drugged out, crazy 5s as "evidence".

What a knee slapper.

 

[user43770]

Premise fails as woman's sexual desire for you can increase commensurate with her level of emotional bonding.

Wholly irrelevant to the argument.

If you have nothing substantial to assert, I'll wait for the next batter up.

Premise doesn't fail, because emotional bonding ends pretty early on in a relationship. After a while, you're left with just sex, but even that gets boring after a while.

So now what? Go on forums and proclaim the opposite? Bug off.

 

[Tenacity]

Below is a link to a blog entry on RPG that has a very interesting comment from a poster named Yareally. The comment was originally posted on therationalmale.com. It’s a little long, but worth the read. And while some of it may not be a revelation, the way Yareallly writes about it is interesting.

https://notesfromaredpillgirl.com/2016/08/24/games-girls-play/comment-page-1/

-Augustus-

This article is the same stuff I've been saying on this forum, in regards to how Social Media and Online Dating have completely transformed the dating marketplace.

It's why I said the DJ Bible is outdated. We are operating in a dating market driven by Social Media, Online Dating, and Texting. There are no mentions of these aspects in the DJ Bible.

The "Pook" level of advice is dead. This is the Age Of The Poon King type of advice, no matter if people want to admit that or not. It's why Poon King is and was, the most popular member in this forum's history. Poon King spoke to the CURRENT TIMES and told the raw, honest, truth.......doesn't matter if it was "negative" or not.

 

[user43770]

I go to great lengths to be multi-cultural or whatever, and this is what I get.

Have to admit that i'm a bit offended and upset by that.



If you are telling me I should meet someone's every need (like a butler or something), only natural that I'm going to ask what I get from that sort of relationship.

Your answer is that I would get to do that for the entirity of my life? Oh joy

Come now ladies (and the men impersonating them). You are being rediculous.

I thought it fitting that our 2 most prominent female posters just so happened to both be damsels in distress at some point in their lives. Lol

All the better reason to dish out advice to a bunch of young, lost causes.

But like I said earlier, I do appreciate an opposing point of view @BeExcellent, and I'm glad you're here to temper down Tenacity's railings.

 

[Augustus_McCrae]

As far as Manson goes lol, if those women would have spent enough time around him, they would have nagged him to death eventually...just like the rest of us.

LMFAO

-Augustus-

 

[Augustus_McCrae]

The days of hypergamy in this forum are dead. I will crush poster by poster as they appear.

Dude, you’re like a bad B movie villain at this point. When you make these pronouncements you might as well just append an evil “Muahahaha!” Laugh on the end.

You should change your name from guru1000 to megalomaniac1000.

-Augustus-

 

[exhausted]

Just a question as i am confused obviously but if hypergamy drives a woman then how come so many women lower themselves to be with chitty beta men?

It seems the attentionwhoring takes precident over natural programming these days.