Does your reputation precede you?

[mrgoodstuff]

You've made frequent comments over the years about how you like players. I was wondering how you define "player"?
Because it's one thing to be good with the ladies, but to me the term "player" suggests that a guy will "play" women, meaning basically he manipulates them to his own end. Is that an aspect of how you define players?

A "player" engages the game similar to a woman.

 

[Lynx nkaf]

Aside from just the "we want what others have" its this in one sentence.

I was branch swinging several years ago and had an overnighter and do to the other blowing my phone up i suspected she was going to possibly show up. I got up early before overnighter left for work and as i suspected there was a big fat note under plates windshield wiper explaining to plate she was going to be played by me. Lol
I spun them both for several months.
Thos perticular 2 i bet would have did a 3 way too but didnt persue it.
Competition anxiety. Yes its real and its all it really is.
Ill have what shes having. It happens between mothers and daughters too. Especially in the music scenes...

"I'll have what she's having" like a restaurant menu item, lmao. Competition anxiety exists and is a workable plan.

I think it could also work on effeminate men in 2020. And no, I will not use this.

 

[mrgoodstuff]

"I'll have what she's having" like a restaurant menu item, lmao. Competition anxiety exists and is a workable plan.

I think it could also work on effeminate men in 2020. And no, I will not use this.

That's crazy

 

[Lynx nkaf]

That's crazy

ya buddy I know.
What's crazy is a lot of what we learn here can be used on effeminate men "the new women"

I swear I will not game effeminate men. Attraction/desire is paramount and if he's effeminate I'll puke.


But just saying though.

 

[logicallefty]

Why do you write "your" instead of "you're"? Is it because your phone autocorrects and you leave it that way, or do you just not care about the difference?

OMFG!

Raise your right hand I will swear you in!!

 

[BeExcellent]

That's true @zekko I have. For whatever reason I have always been involved with men of this archetype, from my first boyfriend through my husband, through my recent ex BF and those who were in between. I get bored easily and I am smart and well calibrated socially with high EQ. I've had plenty of solid men who do not fit the archetype ask me out over the years...and I find I need more of an edgy type man.

I define a player as a man who is charming, and comfortable around women, who is unapologetically bold and sexually overt in a subtle way. A player has an appeal to women that is part of how he exists in the world. The men who I have known have been devastatingly sexy, and usually very good looking (the male models and so forth) but they also have a certain bearing in the way they carry themselves. They are brash and they come off as confident. None of them start off taking women too seriously. But I would say there are two types in getting to your specific question about manipulation.

Type 1 is the man who is a playboy. He loves women, makes no bones about the fact that he loves women, and is openly resistant to being tied down to one girl. He is charming, and part of being charming is telling people what they want to hear and/or what they believe about themselves. He doesn't reveal everything he is up to, for it is his business alone, but he doesn't need to deceive to accomplish his own means, which is to enjoy himself, enjoy the company of various women, and he plays the game smoothly and without malice. He operates from a place of confidence within himself and enjoys the company of women because he truly enjoys women...but he is OK being alone and he is OK without women.

Type 2 is more dangerous. He is a deceiver at heart because although he shares the qualities of being charming, comfortable with women, and so on, his core personality runs along dark triad lines. He appears confident because of his narcissism and he is a user toward most people he comes across. He relies on the facade that he builds to hide who he really is. He is ashamed of who he is if he thinks about it, because he knows he hurts people, but he himself is deeply hurt and fears facing his own pain. This is the sort who will overtly lie and manipulate for his own means and ends. He does not like himself, is not OK being alone, is not OK without women, for he requires external validation constantly. But he is smooth and so it typically takes time for his true nature to reveal itself.

I've been in relationship with both types. For some reason I recognize what I am dealing with, recognize it early, and part of my own pathos is a fascination with figuring out men like this. I know how to behave to appeal to either type, and I enjoy the boldness of both, the openness of the Type 1 men and I like trying to solve the brokenness of the Type 2 men (for they are broken and have learned to seduce women as part of self destructive impulsive high risk behavior for the dopamine hit...which then crashes of course)...both types can love, although the Type 2 guys are much more difficult to reach emotionally. My recent ex was a Type 2. But he let me in emotionally. Well he didn't so much let me in as I let myself in. But he was vulnerable once I was in...something he had not allowed before, and something he found very scary.

But if you become the person who the player trusts? You have the keys to the kingdom.

Ask me how I know, lol

 

[BeExcellent]

You've made frequent comments over the years about how you like players. I was wondering how you define "player"?
Because it's one thing to be good with the ladies, but to me the term "player" suggests that a guy will "play" women, meaning basically he manipulates them to his own end. Is that an aspect of how you define players?

That's true @zekko I have. For whatever reason I have always been involved with men of this archetype, from my first boyfriend through my husband, through my recent ex BF and those who were in between. I get bored easily and I am smart and well calibrated socially with high EQ. I've had plenty of solid men who do not fit the archetype ask me out over the years...and I find I need more of an edgy type man.

I define a player as a man who is charming, and comfortable around women, who is unapologetically bold and sexually overt in a subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) way. A player has an appeal to women that is part of how he exists in the world. The men who I have known have been devastatingly sexy, and usually very good looking (the male models and so forth) but they also have a certain bearing in the way they carry themselves. They are brash and they come off as confident. None of them start off taking women too seriously. But I would say there are two types in getting to your specific question about manipulation.

Type 1 is the man who is a playboy. He loves women, makes no bones about the fact that he loves women, and is openly resistant to being tied down to one girl. He is charming, and part of being charming is telling people what they want to hear and/or what they believe about themselves. He doesn't reveal everything he is up to, for it is his business alone, but he doesn't need to deceive to accomplish his own means, which is to enjoy himself, enjoy the company of various women, and he plays the game smoothly and without malice. He operates from a place of confidence within himself and enjoys the company of women because he truly enjoys women...but he is OK being alone and he is OK without women.

Type 2 is more dangerous. He is a deceiver at heart because although he shares the qualities of being charming, comfortable with women, and so on, his core personality runs along dark triad lines. He appears confident because of his narcissism and he is a user toward most people he comes across. He relies on the facade that he builds to hide who he really is. He is ashamed of who he is if he thinks about it, because he knows he hurts people, but he himself is deeply hurt and fears facing his own pain. This is the sort who will overtly lie and manipulate for his own means and ends. He does not like himself, is not OK being alone, is not OK without women, for he requires external validation constantly. But he is smooth and so it typically takes time for his true nature to reveal itself.

I've been in relationship with both types. For some reason I recognize what I am dealing with, recognize it early, and part of my own pathos is a fascination with figuring out men like this. I enjoy them and they can feel that in my vibe. I know how to behave to appeal to either type, and I enjoy the boldness of both, the openness of the Type 1 men and I like trying to solve the brokenness of the Type 2 men (for they are broken and have learned to seduce women as part of self destructive impulsive high risk behavior for the dopamine hit...which then crashes of course)...both types can love, although the Type 2 guys are much more difficult to reach emotionally. My recent ex was a Type 2. But he let me in emotionally. Well he didn't so much let me in as I let myself in. But he was vulnerable once I was in...something he had not allowed before, and something he found very scary.

The playboys are reminiscent of my father, who was somewhere between Type 1 and Type 2, and so I grew up with an innate understanding and ability to relate to men because of him...and women tend to trend toward men who are rather like their father...

But to be in relationship with these types of men requires an unshakable self confidence. I am always prepared to walk away if necessary and always hold feet to the fire if a man is legit out of line. Otherwise I am easy to be with, chill and cool. I cannot be controlled and sometimes these men are about control, so the inability to control me fascinates them. I do not chase, do not blow up a man's phone, and do not initiate. In fact I have heard men complain that it's too easy when a girl throws herself at a man. The playboys are accustomed to having it easy. They like a woman who is less predictable, where they actually have to make an effort. They hook themselves in time.

Cheers

 

[zekko]

The playboys are reminiscent of my father, who was somewhere between Type 1 and Type 2, and so I grew up with an innate understanding and ability to relate to men because of him...and women tend to trend toward men who are rather like their father...

I can't say I fully like your answer, because I can't really relate to the Type 2s, I've never aspired to have dark triad characteristics, nor do I have even the slightest desire to. But I appreciate your honesty. I agree women tend to be drawn to men who are like their father.

 

[BeExcellent]

I can't say I fully like your answer, because I can't really relate to the Type 2s, I've never aspired to have dark triad characteristics, nor do I have even the slightest desire to. But I appreciate your honesty. I agree women tend to be drawn to men who are like their father.

Apologies for the mostly duplicate response. I started to reply yesterday but then realized I was going to run late for my dinner date...and didn't know it had posted twice...but the information is true. Some men DO manipulate women. Or they will try. I have pretty good radar for this, although sometimes I'll engage despite what I can read...again that is part of my own pathos. But it keeps things interesting.

 

[AttackFormation]

That's true @zekko I have. For whatever reason I have always been involved with men of this archetype ... I get bored easily ... I've had plenty of solid men who do not fit the archetype ask me out over the years...and I find I need more of an edgy type man.

The 'reason' here is about as convoluted or intangible as a brick wall and as remarkable as a piece of gravel... you are a woman, and this (hot, uncontrollable, emotionally thrilling men) is what women want.

However one thing you didn't do that other women may was eventually settle with a man who was Useful but not Desirable (and then the dysfunctional neurotics who settle with each other).

 

[BeExcellent]

The 'reason' here is about as convoluted or intangible as a brick wall and as remarkable as a piece of gravel... you are a woman, and this (hot, uncontrollable, emotionally thrilling men) is what women want.

Its more nuanced than that. Many of my close male friends (again who are STRICTLY friends) are players. Some are Type 1, some are Type 2. I don't feel attraction for them. Some would sleep with me if I gave them the opportunity, others the friend thing is completely mutual. None are men I harbor a crush on. So just because a man has this psychological profile does not mean I or any other woman is automatically attracted. Attraction and desire have their own alchemy between 2 individuals. I RARELY meet men who I feel compelling attraction for. I am patient in this way as its the compelling attraction I wait for. If that is there then starts the dance between two people. And a man (or a woman) can always blow themselves out with behavioral missteps. Nothing is guaranteed. Players are just better than most men at appealing sexually to women, and they reap the conquests as a result.

 

[AttackFormation]

Its more nuanced than that. Many of my close male friends (again who are STRICTLY friends) are players. Some are Type 1, some are Type 2. I don't feel attraction for them. Some would sleep with me if I gave them the opportunity, others the friend thing is completely mutual. None are men I harbor a crush on. So just because a man has this psychological profile does not mean I or any other woman is automatically attracted. Attraction and desire have their own alchemy between 2 individuals. I RARELY meet men who I feel compelling attraction for. I am patient in this way as its the compelling attraction I wait for. If that is there then starts the dance between two people. And a man (or a woman) can always blow themselves out with behavioral missteps. Nothing is guaranteed. Players are just better than most men at appealing sexually to women, and they reap the conquests as a result.

The types may not necessarily cause desire, but being such a type is a necessary precondition for causing desire.

 

[zekko]

The types may not necessarily cause desire, but being such a type is a necessary precondition for causing desire.

I disagree that a man must be a player to be seen as desirable. If the girl sees him as desirable (for whatever reason), she will infer that he has options. If she sees desirable traits in him, she will think there are other women who will also see those desirable traits in him. Of course it's a big help if the guy has some experience, which in this case actually translates into having maturity. But I certainly do not think a man must be a "male slvt" or whatever you want to call it in order to be desirable. To some women, sure.

 

[BeExcellent]

I disagree that a man must be a player to be seen as desirable. If the girl sees him as desirable (for whatever reason), she will infer that he has options. If she sees desirable traits in him, she will think there are other women who will also see those desirable traits in him. Of course it's a big help if the guy has some experience, which in this case actually translates into having maturity. But I certainly do not think a man must be a "male slvt" or whatever you want to call it in order to be desirable. To some women, sure.

Agreed. Many women are perfectly capable of desiring a non player type man.

 

[AttackFormation]

I disagree that a man must be a player to be seen as desirable. If the girl sees him as desirable (for whatever reason), she will infer that he has options. If she sees desirable traits in him, she will think there are other women who will also see those desirable traits in him. Of course it's a big help if the guy has some experience, which in this case actually translates into having maturity. But I certainly do not think a man must be a "male slvt" or whatever you want to call it in order to be desirable. To some women, sure.

It was in the specific context of BE with her saying she had male friends who were those types but she still wasn't having sex with. I meant that every man she does want to have sex with fits into those types as a precondition.

 

[HyenaPrince]

I disagree that a man must be a player to be seen as desirable. If the girl sees him as desirable (for whatever reason), she will infer that he has options. If she sees desirable traits in him, she will think there are other women who will also see those desirable traits in him. Of course it's a big help if the guy has some experience, which in this case actually translates into having maturity. But I certainly do not think a man must be a "male slvt" or whatever you want to call it in order to be desirable. To some women, sure.

There are some universal traits women find attractive in men. But it eventually boils down to her own neuropsychological wiring. Some women love the wild guy, others go for the business man who's got his sh*t together. Different women, different motivations.

 

[BeExcellent]

It was in the specific context of BE with her saying she had male friends who were those types but she still wasn't having sex with. I meant that every man she does want to have sex with fits into those types as a precondition.

Agree. Fair enough.

 

[2Rocky]

Thinking about this....For a while now...My reputation preceded me but as a NICE guy. A nice social sincere guy. Someone who was comfortable around women. Someone who was polite but didn't sugar coat bull feces. A tough but tender guy.

One recently married friend told me his wife's response to when he told her I'd ended my marriage. It was "Well he won't be single long". which I took as a sign that I was relationship material not a Fack-Boy. Truth was, I kept my low commitment encounters out of public view and didn't go "gaming" in my social circle. (Ok I did do a lot of low level flirting with women in my circles. It was Fishing without a hook.)