After 34 years, I finally found an article worth reading by a woman

[Jamo]

I want you to disregard most every post on here and read this very carefully. I have slept w countless women. I have been through many things with women. If you want a woman that you like and want to swoon for you, to fall in love with you it is imperative that you withold sex from her early. You have to turn the tables and make HER want it more than you. If you have sex early. She will have an easier time walking from you. You have to emotionally Fuvk her first. Sex means NOTHING for a woman if it has no emotional attachment behind it. TIME is the key to a woman's heart. Sex early will kill emotional attachment. Listen very carefully. My goal w women is for them to fall for ME. Not vice versa. The greatest tool you have at your disposal is ANTICIPATION.
Disregard this post if you are not wanting the woman to fall for you or if you just want to get laid.

Just to be clear, are you suggesting to deflect a woman's sexual advances, or simply not push for the final deed ASAP?

If you are trying to avoid having sex with a woman who is clearly onto you (making advances) then she is going to assume that either you are gay, or simply not interested.

However if you do not push for the bed ASAP (while making other forms of physical contact) and let things hang in the air for a while then yes, that is acceptable.

 

[Falcon25]

Just to be clear, are you suggesting to deflect a woman's sexual advances

However if you do not push for the bed ASAP (while making other forms of physical contact) and let things hang in the air for a while then yes, that is acceptable.

There you go.

 

[Falcon25]

RT's dead on Falcon. 726 posts, 5 greens, and you're posting that garbage? I realize you mean well, but you're missing the essential essence of DJ'ing.

No, he's not.

 

[Falcon25]

Lol, there seems to be some disagreement about this one.

I agree with Falcon. There's a difference between a ONS and a LTR.
You don't want to "shoot your wad" all in the first night. Play it out more, create anticipation. It's about creating anticipation in HER, not in you. It's flipping the script on her in some respects.

As long as you keep the escalation moving forward you retain the male role. You just slow down the pace. You wouldn't want to get on top of her and blow your load immediately, would you? That's being a bad lover. This is a similar principle. There was a line in a Clint Eastwood movie I saw recently, this girl jumped on top of him and was kissing him frantically. He said "Slow down, we have all of our lives to enjoy each other". "All of our lives" is a bit of hyperbole, but you have more time to stretch things out in a LTR, slow down and enjoy things. Not just jump on her and hump her leg like a horny chiuaua, game over.

Now, this guy, is dead on.

 

[Zarky]

Generalizations are really weird to me. How can anybody say that every single woman will react the same way after having sex early or late? That's really bizarre.

All generalizations are wrong.

All I can speak for are my own experiences, and frankly this quote sums up all my experiences:

the sex is NEVER worth the wait.

The longest, best relps I've ever had were with women who boned down on the first date. One of my MLTRs of 7 years invited me over for a screw after 15 minutes of chatting online. My 2.5 year MLTR and I had sex on the first date and I came all over her tits while she was kneeling on the floor about 2 hours after meeting her. I had a 2 year relp with a chick who invited me over for a shag, a 4 year relp with a woman I met on "adult friend finder," and one chick who was a booty call from the first date (later she found a LTR) has hired me to do some legal work for her and we're still good friends.

The other chicks I've dated who wanted to wait turned out to be sh/tty lays and controlling b/tches and I don't keep in contact with any of them.

YMMV, but to generalize and say that all first-date lays lead to short term, crappy relps is bollocks.

My theory behind it is that the women who are confident in their sexuality, who love sex and think about sex all the time are the ones who are eager and proud to show off their bedroom skills. The ones who want you to "wait" until they've hooked you in some OTHER way are the ones who know they can't hack it in the sack and therefore wait because they know if they show you a crap time between the sheets early on, you'll just bail.

This quote from the article is one I totally disagree with:

It’s quite an anticlimax to get to know each other after you’ve already had sex.

To me, getting to know someone after you've had sex with them is the most "real" experience you can have. If, after you've come, you can still stand to be around a chick, you know she's something special.

I think the OP blew a gasket on this one. Remember: men should never take dating advice from a woman.

 

[runner83]

Disregard this post if you are not wanting the woman to fall for you or if you just want to get laid.

Damn, why didn't you say this to start with, so we all knew to avoid reading this nonsense?

I've enjoyed some of your past posts, but when I see threads like this:

http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=180528

about some girl who you said was different, but (as it turned out upon our further examination) was actually a freak afraid of s*x, I can't help but think the next thread you make will be about "the one", this amazing girl you met (but didn't sleep with), and who you have lost and want to win back.

RT IS on the money as usual.

 

[Falcon25]

Runner,

Go back to fuvking your co-workers. You have poor reading comprehension skills. Read my posts again. You have severe maturity issues and it is very, very difficult to take your posts seriously. Especially since you are 27 and still act like a 17 year old fool in your profession. You have missed the entire point of this post, just like your father, mentor, and counselor, RT.

NEVER did I say don't have sex with the girl you like, I said withold it in the beginning. The problem with the internet, is that people read but don't listen. Listen to each one of my words as you read it. Read it outloud. Again, and then again. Reading comprehension is an important part of your professional life. If you don't have it, it will make you look like a fool.

I can share my experiences with all of you. But I can't teach you how to read. I consider this thread closed. Good luck everyone.

 

[squirrels]

I want you to disregard most every post on here...

We know you do.

If you have sex early. She will have an easier time walking from you.

Good! I WANT her to have the option of FREELY walking from me at any time!!

I want her to be with me because she likes being with me, not because I tricked her into investing time into me with something I read in a magazine. If she can't walk away, then her staying doesn't mean she loves me.

I don't want to "trick" some girl into an emotional mistake by playing mind-games with sex any more than I want the same thing to happen to me. Because once she IS sexually satisfied, if you don't have the CHARACTER to keep her around, she WILL bail. I don't want a woman to recklessly invest a commitment in me because of sexual tension and then not be able to "walk away" from a guy she really DOES want to "walk away" from because of mistakes. I don't want to be any woman's mistake.

That's what most of this forum doesn't seem to get. They all want to b!tch at women for using dirty tricks to trap men into marriage, but at the same time, all you hypocrites want to do the SAME THING to THEM. Like attracts like, and if you want to play games like this with women, then you will become that which you used to hate. It's OK to take advantage of people, as long as you're the one taking advantage, right?

Sex is DUMB. Sex is a weapon to control the stupid, and I don't want to be in a relationship with any "stupid" girl. If I ever DO get into a "relationship", it's going to be because I genuinely like being around the person, not because 1) she has a nice p*ssy...I've f*cked plenty of nice p*ssies without a relationship and there are always new ones upcoming, or 2) one of us got "trapped", because I have no interest in getting punked like this or being with a girl who gets punked like this.

Again...this is why relationships fail. I know you think you're helping, but you're propagating the same old traditional "relationship advice" that's been flung around carelessly by mainstream society for so long that it's become canon.

As soon as anyone utters the phrase, "This is for an LTR, not hook-ups" (as if the two are mutually exclusive), I can tell right away that they're full of sh!t, and the next thing that they type is going to be some conventional BS they read on askmen.com, written by a woman who, by nature, works completely on feelings and thus has no rational CLUE what it is that turns her "on" or "off".

And for what it's worth...I have NO problem withholding sex on the first date. But I'm always trying for it because that's my JOB. And as I said in my last post, I judge a woman not on WHETHER she resists, but on HOW she resists. If it's in a coquettish or teasing way, thumbs-up. If it's in a prudish or complaining way, thumbs-down.

Here's one for you...try this no-sex thing AFTER you've already f**ked her. Take her out on a date and DON'T invite her back to your place afterward. Don't make a move on her THEN. That's when you'll see what she REALLY thinks of you. You can also tell whether you're really into the girl or whether you're just into her va-jay-jay by your OWN level of satisfaction or disappointment with her in a no-sex date.

This whole article is reverse-psychology-supplication...can you see that? As Rollo said, the idea that the "woman is the prize", so you are going to PANDER to her and give her something, you're going to give her the white-knight hands-off approach so she will like you more.

It's still you being something you're NOT to try to get a woman to like you, the same way guys buy girls drinks when they don't want to, give them cheesy compliments when they don't want to, etc, etc...just to try to either get in her pants or to trap her into an unnatural commitment that as soon as the trap is sprung, she's gonna want out.

When I don't f**k a girl on the first night, it's because I don't want to f**k her on the first night, not because I read an article by a chick on askmen that says I should do it to impress her. I'm impressive anyway.

To preach "psych tricks" to a bunch of guys looking to pick up tail is harmless, because they're never gonna see the girl again. To preach them to people looking for LTRs is devastating, because it's going to end in heartbreak and divorce when one day she says, "You're NOT the man I married".

 

[Noodles]

Jesus...so much squabbling on this thread...it's like listening to women.

When I don't f**k a girl on the first night, it's because I don't want to f**k her on the first night

This I agree with.

I generally break encounters with women into two categories:
1. One night stands - these are women I've slept with on the day I've met them - i.e. no prior meeting or arrangement. They have three things in common - I never see them again, I'm drunk and I always feel a little dirty afterwards.

2. A girl I've arranged to see and gone on a date (I know some of you hate that word) with. I don't expect to sleep with her on the first date, or indeed the second. I do this because it allows me to enjoy her company and I get to evaluate her, without me getting the blinkers on. I call it self control. I want her to show she's good enough to sleep with me - I have (sober) standards, and I've met too many clingy, mental women that think sex means we're an item. I don't want the hassle of 3am phone calls after we'd done it, or trips to the genitourinary medicine clinic. Now...if she comes onto me too hard, then that's a deal breaker for me (hey...only too hard - we all like them to come onto us a little...). I don't need someone that attached or needy.

Full Disclosure: I have broken that rule twice, when I realised I didn't like them, but they were really attractive. Both times I wished I hadn't bothered (text after text, voicemail after voicemail...).

 

[squirrels]

Just for reference...every time I have not been able to bang a girl right away, within the first couple of dates, it HAS played tricks on my mind...I've started to value her higher because I start that thinking, "Well if it's hard to get, it must be worth it, right?"

I've grown up a little bit since then. I've learned to recognize when sexual tension is mistaken for "love"...which the author of this article cannot apparently do. (I don't blame her, she's a woman )

It's a good thing, too...because I have later talked to some of the women that I have "been in love with" (i.e. MAJOR one-itis) because of the early denial of sex, after the sexual tension had worn off, and in most cases, they're smokescreening attention-wh0res with not a lot of depth. If I had "conquered the prize", once I HAD conquered it, I would've been miserably bored.

I know my response is harsh, but the suggestion of "tricks and tactics for LTRs" just really riles me up. "Tricks and tactics" are OK if you're trying to get your d!ck wet, because that's all it is and you understand that. "Tricks and tactics" in an LTR are deception, designed to try to make a woman fall in love with your image instead of who you REALLY are, and if you're serious about keeping this woman around, you're not gonna want to do the fan-dance forever.

A good LTR stems from finding a woman you really want to be around. Whether you start out by f**king her, or just by hanging out with her in a platonic sense, if you want to BE with her, eventually you will realize that from being around her.

You and I, rogue 30somethings, don't have a clue what a good LTR should be, and we shouldn't pretend. Talk to people who have been married...HAPPILY married, not "I love her but..." married...for decades. Ask THEM what works.

Could not disagree more. What you are advocating for is the unprincipled slvt.

REPENT, YE SINNERS!! CHRIST RETURNS IN MAY!!

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

What you are advocating for is the unprincipled slut.

To varying degrees women are all unprincipled sluts given the proper incentive and opportunity. Your mother, your wife, sister, daughter and girlfriend all have the potential (proven or otherwise) to be the duplicitous skank we so self-righteously loathe. Hypergamy makes them so.

Now you can go call me a misogynist or complain about how bitter and negative SS has become these days, but before you go off on that, try to understand that this is simply how the debate is being characterized - in binary terms. Women are typified as either "sluts" or "madonnas", as if one could never have been the other. As if the idyllic soccer mom, dutifully attending to her kids and her church's women's group could never have done amateur internet ******* porn in college. Look around you. See that middle aged secretary in your office? See that mid-level manager with pics of herself and the 2 kids on her desk? She ƒucks and she loves it, or at least she did at some point. Now look up any amateur porn site. Just look at the the sheer number of self-shot nudes girls as young as 15 to women in their 40's will take willingly and unprompted of themselves in a bathroom mirror. Look up amateur BJ shots that average, mundane, everyday women will actively participate in AND proudly post for the entire world to see.

Are all these MILLIONS of women "unprincipled sluts"? No, they're women you meet every day, at work, in school, in church, at the mall and picking up your daughter from gymnastics. The average HB5 girl at the coffee shop who gets you your latte in the morning? She's sucking someone's d!ck, and probably on video. Your mom's 65 y.o. best friend who volunteers at the animal shelter? She ƒucked 2 guys in a spit-roast threesome at Woodstock.

So, why elaborate on all this? Because, when you look at a woman on whole, objectively, as an individual with sexual potential, and not as some pigeon-holed archetype of what you'd want a "quality woman" to be, you get a much better picture of the game a woman plays by withholding sex from you. In light of the vast sexuality I described above, how can any intelligent Man not see the frame control agenda behind a woman's postponing sex? It's a useful social convention, a filibuster, used to allow her hypergamously to delay becoming involved with a lesser option when better unrealized option is still a viable potential.

What I find even more ironic is that the same guys arguing over the canard about how women are more sexual than men, are the same guys lamenting the impact of a first night lay. WTF? They love to cling to the hopeful idea that women would crave them sexually if only they weren't so repressed, but let her ƒuck a guy on the first or second night and she's an "unprincipled slut". GTFOH!

 

[teacha]

I know my response is harsh, but the suggestion of "tricks and tactics for LTRs" just really riles me up. "Tricks and tactics" are OK if you're trying to get your d!ck wet, because that's all it is and you understand that. "Tricks and tactics" in an LTR are deception, designed to try to make a woman fall in love with your image instead of who you REALLY are, and if you're serious about keeping this woman around, you're not gonna want to do the fan-dance forever.

A good LTR stems from finding a woman you really want to be around. Whether you start out by f**king her, or just by hanging out with her in a platonic sense, if you want to BE with her, eventually you will realize that from being around her.

the only good quote in this whole thread.

 

[Razor Sharp]

Interesting thread

This may sound strange to guys here who worship easy p*ssy, but I really enjoy breaking down resistance - it makes the game interesting for me. If I REALLY like a girl, then I will secretly hope that she resists my attempts to bed her. I want her to value her sexuality enough not to give it up to some dude she just met (no matter how handsome and charming he is )

Thing is, she needs to resist with the right motives. Once I get the slightest inkling that she is using the poon as leverage or has some kind of twisted sexual hangup, she's pretty much disqualified. I want a gal with high-self esteem, not a high propensity for headgames and bullsh*t.

My best LTRs all resisted in the beginning, but with each meetup/date, they let themselves go a little more. Usually by the third or fourth time we are fooling around I smash it.

At the other end of the spectrum, unless you happen to be super religious yourself, there is no reason to let your love life hinge on someone who wont let you hit it after weeks or even months of courtship. I made that mistake once with a girl - she wouldn't let me hit it for almost a month. Turned out to be a basket case. For me it's become as red a flag as the girl who puts out in the parking lot.

That said, it's also worth noting that I don't adhere to any concrete set of rules. There are always exceptions and it pays to be open-minded. This is because the game is highly circumstantial and subject to a myriad of factors (mood, environment, logistics, personal preferences) Using empirical formulas will often result in you c*ck-blocking yourself because the essence of seduction is INSTINCTUAL, not intellectual.

Seriously, half of this sh*t is just knowing how to go with the flow, pushing it in directions you like, but not FORCING it. As soon as that happens you are not in sync with the situation and your game falls apart.

I've found that it all comes down to your own expectations:

If you are looking for no-strings sex, then by all means hit it right away (just make sure you wrap your sh*t!). If you find a girl who has potential for something more long-term, there is no need to rush things along. Enjoy the ride and let nature take its course.

 

[zekko]

Whatever happened to "don't make a ho a housewife"? You guys act like if you're not fvcking in the first five minutes, the girl is worthless, when the opposite is in fact more likely the case.
L O frigging L.

That's what most of this forum doesn't seem to get. They all want to b!tch at women for using dirty tricks to trap men into marriage, but at the same time, all you hypocrites want to do the SAME THING to THEM. Like attracts like, and if you want to play games like this with women, then you will become that which you used to hate. It's OK to take advantage of people, as long as you're the one taking advantage, right?

Let's face it, this whole forum is largely about trying to trick a girl into wanting you, for whatever reason. That's what 90% of the pickup community is based on. But I agree it's hypocritical in many ways, and one of the reasons I often get a bad taste from this forum.

To me, the idea espoused by the OP isn't about tricking the girl, it's about slowing down and enjoying things - for both of you. And as the male, you set the pace.
You can't put the genie back in the bottle. Why rush down on Christmas morning and tear all the packages open in two minutes when you can take your time and enjoy the process?

As soon as anyone utters the phrase, "This is for an LTR, not hook-ups" (as if the two are mutually exclusive), I can tell right away that they're full of sh!t

Well, I will tell you that I am NOT full of ****, and IMO they are not the same.
They may not be mutually exclusive (a hookup can turn into a LTR), but they're not necessarily the same either.
Sometimes you can tell going in that a relationship with a girl is going to work.

It's still you being something you're NOT to try to get a woman to like you

Sounds like Mystery Method. I'm saying slow it down to make it more enjoyable, for both of you.
Ever hear of foreplay? It's the same principle.
Do it because you want to, not to manipulate the girl.

So, why elaborate on all this? Because, when you look at a woman on whole, objectively, as an individual with sexual potential, and not as some pigeon-holed archetype of what you'd want a "quality woman" to be, you get a much better picture of the game a woman plays by withholding sex from you.

You seem to be writing about women withholding sex from men, but that's not what the OP is talking about. It's about slowing down when you can tell there's a real connection there, instead of treating her like a ONS that you had better fvck now or you may never have the chance.

 

[Nkognito]

I am not a seasoned veteran of these forums. I am in no way a DJ. I did not read the article at all. I read what people put in this thread (every post) because each angle or view point I soak up like a sponge. There is a bit of gained knowledge from every post in this thread. But the general idea of what I think the article is getting at (even though I did not read it), is that if you find a strong enough mental attraction i.e. she likes comic books, wants to play call of duty and tea bag you when you get owned by her then yea you got a good connection. If you bang her right away then she will have lowered expectations because you will get labeled and her IL will plumet.

But if you find some girl you barely have things in common and both of you want to bang then don't get your hopes up. She might be a serial dater or one of those 3 month relationship rush chasers waiting to swing to her other branch.

The quote below I think is pretty close to what I said above if not the exact same.

You seem to be writing about women withholding sex from men, but that's not what the OP is talking about. It's about slowing down when you can tell there's a real connection there, instead of treating her like a ONS that you had better fvck now or you may never have the chance.

I have been with girls for a few months that I had absolutely nothing in common with yet they talked to me and we related. I was with my ex-wife for 10 years and we went out for like 4 months before having sex (I was young and this forum was not open at the time). She was a virgin at the time (supposedly) and we had nothing in common we just built on things. But she eventually became watered down and once I got into the marriage it ended up exactly like everyone fears. Sex was few and far between and it was more of a emotional bond for her. I got tired of it and split.

The point of taking your time is finding out if that chick that you do want to bang is willing to work at keeping the relationship fresh. You can hit it the first night or 3rd week but unless you bond with her mentally to know this then only being chemically connected you won't workout in the long run.

 

[Colossus]

This may sound strange to guys here who worship easy p*ssy, but I really enjoy breaking down resistance - it makes the game interesting for me. If I REALLY like a girl, then I will secretly hope that she resists my attempts to bed her. I want her to value her sexuality enough not to give it up to some dude she just met (no matter how handsome and charming he is )

Thing is, she needs to resist with the right motives. Once I get the slightest inkling that she is using the poon as leverage or has some kind of twisted sexual hangup, she's pretty much disqualified. I want a gal with high-self esteem, not a high propensity for headgames and bullsh*t.

My best LTRs all resisted in the beginning, but with each meetup/date, they let themselves go a little more. Usually by the third or fourth time we are fooling around I smash it.

At the other end of the spectrum, unless you happen to be super religious yourself, there is no reason to let your love life hinge on someone who wont let you hit it after weeks or even months of courtship. I made that mistake once with a girl - she wouldn't let me hit it for almost a month. Turned out to be a basket case. For me it's become as red a flag as the girl who puts out in the parking lot.

That said, it's also worth noting that I don't adhere to any concrete set of rules. There are always exceptions and it pays to be open-minded. This is because the game is highly circumstantial and subject to a myriad of factors (mood, environment, logistics, personal preferences) Using empirical formulas will often result in you c*ck-blocking yourself because the essence of seduction is INSTINCTUAL, not intellectual.

Seriously, half of this sh*t is just knowing how to go with the flow, pushing it in directions you like, but not FORCING it. As soon as that happens you are not in sync with the situation and your game falls apart.

I've found that it all comes down to your own expectations:

If you are looking for no-strings sex, then by all means hit it right away (just make sure you wrap your sh*t!). If you find a girl who has potential for something more long-term, there is no need to rush things along. Enjoy the ride and let nature take its course.

+1. Such extremes on this topic. Nice to see a reasonable view. The bolded part is really the key---use good judgment. Everyone is thinking we are advocating accommodating some women's leverage games....that's not the point at all. If you want an LTR, and there's a good connection there, slow the fvck down.

 

[Falcon25]

This Rolo guy has completely missed the point and has no idea what I'm talking about. Same with squirrels guy. It goes to show you how important it is to read and listen. Just because you are a good writer doesn't mean you are a good listener. These guys are talking about something completely different then I am. And only Zekko, Collosus and I seem to be noticing it. Very frustrating when people hijack the thread to their own agendas. Nothing in Rolos or Squirells posts have anything to do with what I'm talking about. Absolutely nothing.

 

[goodfoot]

Isn't she basically just advocating the push/pull method? It's not talking about women withholding sex; it's talking about taking the frame and not necessarily jumping at the first chance you get.

 

[yuppaz]

I've come to realize either one of to things with this. Either
1. I'm no good in bed
or
2. Waiting for sex (making HER wait, or just having the situation work out like that...meet her and she has to leave for something etc.) hooks women in like there is no tomorrow.

This has nothing to do with prizing, actually maybe it does... if you are the one who isn't JUST about sex in her eyes you create mystery (what's it going to be like when it happens?), you show you don't NEED her (ALPHA bebe) and you really stand out as someone different from the other guys. It get's her very much psychologically hooked.

I can manipulate the girl's lizard mind into wanting to f*ck me quick, if I want to, but then her social programming kicks in and makes her feel like a slut (conscious mind overrules) and it's never again (why I think I might be bad in bed...). Seriously if you want to live the big pimpin player life, get a bunch of girls that you could care either way if you f*ck em and be physical with them, but have something that holds you back from f*cking them they will be vastly more interested then if you bang them fast. This is probably best for relationship - type game and not good for just wanna get laid game.

 

[quatroburn]

I am a goodlooking guy and for me it has never worked, playing games are bad for your ego to be honest. They will drain you emotionally. The girls that give themselves too easy are not good for LTR in my opinion. Usually those that withhold they are somewhat smarter and have a higher self worth also. I thinks it's more fun also and if you show that you don't need her, it will make her fantasize about you even more. Just keep things light push her a bit then back off, then go back and do it again until she gives herself.