High Character Belongs to a Don Juan

[guru1000]

Character

- the inherent complex of attributes that determines a persons moral and ethical actions and reactions

- Moral or ethical strength

-A description of a person's attributes, traits, or abilities

This is not a thread to discuss the importance of morals and ethics. To each, his own.

Whatever personal RULES one holds to be true is his prerogative. The KEY is to ALWAYS practice what you preach.

A Don Juan understands that he will always come first and walks away from a damaged frame. The CONTEXT must be in his favor, ALWAYS. This is his cardinal rule.

A woman will RESPECT your RULES of play if she knows you live by them. In other words, if what you believe is practiced in stone, she has no choice but to surrender to you.

It is when you are in a frame of hypocrisy that RESPECT to your CHARACTER fades away. When respect is gone, the context is damaged and relationship is compromised.

One must make HIGH CHARACTER a precedence in his artillery of attributes.

If one can live by a code of such character, he can overtly/covertly DEMAND likewise behavior from his SO.

A Don Juan can easily DIRECT and LEAD when he is congruent with his CODE and has demonstrated this by example. Whether in an exclusive or non exclusive relationship, a woman will always RESPECT a DJ's wishes.

I have high expectations and make quite a few demands from the women I date. Some demands such as an exclusive/ non-exclusive arrangements (woman is exclusive, I am not) are very common. As anti-character as this may appear, it is quite the opposite. With enough character displayed, a woman will play ball with such an arrangement.

A DJ has no need to lie. He can OVERTLY disclose his arrangements and direct her behavior to his liking. A woman will never deny a MAN's requests for whom she deeply respects. This respect is built on your strength of character.

 

[lookyoung]

Some demands such as an exclusive/ non-exclusive arrangements (woman is exclusive, I am not) are very common. As anti-character as this may appear, it is quite the opposite. With enough character displayed, a woman will play ball with such an arrangement.

Nice thread and I agree with most of what you have to say, but I totally disagree with this. There are very few women that are going to agree to this arrangement (Probably less than 5%). Do you think a girl is going to say OK babe no problem I will be faithful to you, but you could go ahead and fvck anyone you want... It never worked like that with woman. Especially in 2008 were woman to be equal . I am sorry Guru but most woman will not go for that.

 

[guru1000]

There are very few women that are going to agree to this arrangement (Probably less than 5%). Do you think a girl is going to say OK babe no problem I will be faithful to you, but you could go ahead and fvck anyone you want... It never worked like that with woman. Especially in 2008 were woman to be equal .

It appears EXTREME.

I would not OVERTLY disclose it in that capacity. That is borderline disrespectful. After all, how can a MAN of respect not respect.

It is more of an understanding-

- The women wears white at her wedding. This is a symbol of purity.
- I am not interested in women who sleep around
- I am not interested in women who see a few guys at a time
- Anything she displays to me that could damage her INNOCENCE is a deal breaker to me

Yet I am not exclusive. If she RESPECTS me, she will earn that right.

These are not my views. These are events.

 

[jophil28]

It appears EXTREME.

I would not OVERTLY disclose it in that capacity. That is borderline disrespectful. After all, how can a MAN of respect not respect.

It is more of an understanding-

- The women wears white at her wedding. This is a symbol of purity.
- I am not interested in women who sleep around
- I am not interested in women who see a few guys at a time
- Anything she displays to me that could damage her INNOCENCE is a deal breaker to me

Yet I am not exclusive. If she RESPECTS me, she will earn that right.

These are not my views. These are events.

You may have opened a can of worms here .
I am waiting to read some replies from the social scientists who preach that " nothing is black and white " (or ever should be) and that setting your morals and ethics "in stone " is inflexible and rigid and retarded , and you are a dinosaur...blah, blah. "

But then again, perhaps the butt kicking that they took last time from Latino about the INTEGRITY issue is still smarting.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

Every AFC I've ever encountered (including myself at one time) believes in exactly what you've described here. In fact by this definition,

The KEY is to ALWAYS practice what you preach

an AFC is the model of high character.

They emphatically believe that they are the Men of "high character" in that they are sticking to their earnest convictions and practicing what they preach. In fact, they are so given to their ego-investments that they believe that they will separate themselves as unique amongst "other guys". The idea is that the AFC can and will be appreciated in a greater degree for his personal convictions and/or his greater ability to identify with women's stated prerequisites of a man by comparing himself to the nebulous Other Guys who are perceived not to.

The AFC fundamentally believes:

• ONEitis – First and foremost.

• Feminine idealizations.

• Supplication as a means to real connection

• The Savior Schema –reciprocation of intimacy for problems solved.

• The Martyr Schema – the more you sacrifice the more it shows devotion.

• The ‘Friends’ Debt – LJBF and the pseudo-friendship method.

• Scarcity above abundance

• ‘Serial Monogamy’

• Women infallibly and consciously recognize what they want, and honestly convey this to them, irrespective of behaviors that contradict this.

• The Identification Myth. The more alike he is, or can make himself, with his idealized female the better able he will be to attract and secure her intimacy.

• LDRs a viable option for prolonged intimacy.

Any and every AFC you will ever meet will tenaciously, and self-righteously cling to a code of ethics and practiced behaviors that will ALWAYS be congruent with these fundamental beliefs. He's internalized and believes that sticking to his convictions make him the better man. This is precisely what makes unplugging an AFC from the Matrix so difficult - it's like changing his religion. Anything that challenges his core convictions is not only counterintuitive, but is akin to blasphemy. So to him, and according to your wisdom offered here, it's the DJ who is of low character because his beliefs and practices seem hypocritical.

So essentially if putting a woman on a pedestal is my ideal for high character, and I practice this faithfully I'm a man of high character. Conversely, if I am a PUA and I've always faithfully maintained that I come first, all women (married or not) are fair game, and my intent is to ƒuck as many as humanly possible before my death, and I hold to my conviction, I'm also a man of "high character". I'm being congruent with my CODE; I say what I mean and I put it into practice.

A woman will RESPECT your RULES of play if she knows you live by them. In other words, if what you believe is practiced in stone, she has no choice but to surrender to you.

Awesome. So as long as I accurately convey that I am an AFC or a PUA and I'm a high character man-of-conviction, and I live by example, she'll have no choice bu to surrender to me.

 

[Colossus]

I think GURU was referring to the CONTEXT of character.

Any of our three models--the DJ, the PUA, or the AFC--can 'live by their code'. The difference lies in the motives and context of their respective ideologies.

The PUA lives by a code of selfishness. It is HE--and only HE--that matters; so much to the point that he will disregard the well-being or basic human decency of others to achieve his means. The PUA is a master MANIPULATOR; and nothing more. His methods serve one purpose, and that is putting his pipe in as many women as humanly possible.

The AFC lives by a code of self-sacrifice. He feels that by sacrificing his time, money, and emotional reserves he will attain (and deserve) the affection and intimacy of his target woman. He is not like those selfish PUA's--he is DIFFERENT. And by golly, women should se that and respect his devotion and depth of character; or so he thinks. He is not enlightened to the truth that sacrifice does not by natural law give the product of loyalty and intimacy.

The DJ lives by a code of enlightened self-interest. The DJ knows himself, first and foremost, and respects himself to the degree that he will neither abuse and manipulate others to serve his own agenda or compromise his own identity and principles to attain a goal. DJ's arent necessarily knights in shining moral armor, but as the great Kenny Rogers penned, they know when to hold em, know when to fold em, know when to walk away, and know when to run. DJ's know how how to recognize and pursue High-IL women--one of the tenets of successful, sustainable game. It is SELF RESPECT that is the crown of a Don Juan.

 

[guru1000]

Now you took my bait.

Every AFC I've ever encountered (including myself at one time) believes in exactly what you've described here. In fact by this definition,

an AFC is the model of high character.

Most AFC believe in religion. Does that mean who ever else shares this directed belief cannot be a Don Juan?

Does every Don Juan not believe in religion?

Are we speaking in absolutes again?

They emphatically believe that they are the Men of "high character" in that they are sticking to their earnest convictions and practicing what they preach. In fact, they are so given to their ego-investments that they believe that they will separate themselves as unique amongst "other guys". The idea is that the AFC can and will be appreciated in a greater degree for his personal convictions and/or his greater ability to identify with women's stated prerequisites of a man by comparing himself to the nebulous Other Guys who are perceived not to.

So by one sticking to his conviction; he is compensating for his lack of success with women?

Could it be, he may be DISCIPLINED? :yes:

The AFC fundamentally believes:

• ONEitis – First and foremost.

• Feminine idealizations.

• Supplication as a means to real connection

• The Savior Schema –reciprocation of intimacy for problems solved.

• The Martyr Schema – the more you sacrifice the more it shows devotion.

• The ‘Friends’ Debt – LJBF and the pseudo-friendship method.

• Scarcity above abundance

• ‘Serial Monogamy’

• Women infallibly and consciously recognize what they want, and honestly convey this to them, irrespective of behaviors that contradict this.

• The Identification Myth. The more alike he is, or can make himself, with his idealized female the better able he will be to attract and secure her intimacy.

• LDRs a viable option for prolonged intimacy.

You might have missed this probably because INTEGRITY blinded you

A Don Juan understands that he will always come first and walks away from a damaged frame. The CONTEXT must be in his favor, ALWAYS. This is his cardinal rule.

Any and every AFC you will ever meet will tenaciously, and self-righteously cling to a code of ethics and practiced behaviors that will ALWAYS be congruent with these fundamental beliefs.

As I stated above, as long as it is within the right CONTEXT, DISCIPLINE is an attribute of a Don Juan.

He's internalized and believes that sticking to his convictions make him the better man. This is precisely what makes unplugging an AFC from the Matrix so difficult - it's like changing his religion. Anything that challenges his core convictions is not only counterintuitive, but is akin to blasphemy.

Not sticking to one's convictions is hypocrisy.

Hypocritical behavior is closely related to the fundamental attribution error: individuals are more likely to explain their own actions by their environment, yet they attribute the actions of others to 'innate characteristics', thus leading towards judging others while justifying ones' own actions.

Justifying one's own actions is AFC. It is therefore the Don Juan who adheres to his CODE.

This will always go back to the Nature vs Conviction debate.

One who cannot accept responsibility and lacks accountability by hypocrisy is the epitome of an AFC.

An AFC cannot control his emotions or action. If a girl dumps him, instead of walking away with self respect; he will often pursue because he has no adherence to his self respect. He will blame NATURE rather than succumb to his convictions.

So to him, and according to your wisdom offered here, it's the DJ who is of low character because his beliefs and practices seem hypocritical.

Quite the opposite Mr. Rollo. Hypocrisy is practiced by one who lacks responsiblity and accountability. The one who can easily be overridden by his biological need rather than his conviction. He lacks self control, discipline and thus lacks High Character which makes him a the working example of an AFC.

So essentially if putting a woman on a pedestal is my ideal for high character, and I practice this faithfully I'm a man of high character. Conversely, if I am a PUA and I've always faithfully maintained that I come first, all women (married or not) are fair game, and my intent is to ƒuck as many as humanly possible before my death, and I hold to my conviction, I'm also a man of "high character". I'm being congruent with my CODE; I say what I mean and I put it into practice.

YES you are a man of INTEGRITY by adhering to your CODE. This does not make you a Don Juan.

High Character belongs to a DJ. This means it is an important attribute.

However as I stated,

A DJ will never lose the CONTEXT of the FRAME. This is the CARDINAL RULE. That being said if one keeps the correct context and is of high character, he has two very important qualities of a DJ.

Awesome. So as long as I accurately convey that I am an AFC or a PUA and I'm a high character man-of-conviction, and I live by example, she'll have no choice bu to surrender to me.

If the correct CONTEXT is in play. This is correct.

However an AFC will usually hold the wrong context. So the above example is frivolous. If this AFC learned to hold the right CONTEXT and strangle hold this said context with the ability to walk away, then he would not exactly be an AFC.


What you did Mr. Rollo is take a good thread and make one of your infamous ABSOLUTES idealogy. One must realize CONTEXT mixed with High Character are synergistic components in a Don Juan.

 

[guru1000]

You may have opened a can of worms here .
I am waiting to read some replies from the social scientists who preach that " nothing is black and white " (or ever should be) and that setting your morals and ethics "in stone " is inflexible and rigid and retarded , and you are a dinosaur...blah, blah. "

But then again, perhaps the butt kicking that they took last time from Latino about the INTEGRITY issue is still smarting.

Haha. Yet it seems all the real DJ's on the site share a few CORE beliefs.

Whether one believes in gravity or not, does not change the fact that it exists.

 

[guru1000]

I think GURU was referring to the CONTEXT of character.

Ahh the cardinal rule. He might have missed that.

 

[Colossus]

For illustrative purposes we often speak of thing in absolute terms here. It can be useful to convey a concept or truth, but it rarely translates to real life. It's like the ideal gas law: In theory it is true, and it is very useful in explaining some behaviors of real gases; but it's called an ideal gas law for a reason. Real gases do not have totally standardized behaviors, just like people.

Rarely is a man either 100% Don Juan or 100% AFC. In fact i would hypothesize that 95% of the adult male population (in America) is an unequal mixture of the two. DJ's, AFC's, and PUA's are all idealized models created for teaching purposes, and i think we can forget that.

 

[ketostix]

You may have opened a can of worms here .
I am waiting to read some replies from the social scientists who preach that " nothing is black and white " (or ever should be) and that setting your morals and ethics "in stone " is inflexible and rigid and retarded , and you are a dinosaur...blah, blah. "

But then again, perhaps the butt kicking that they took last time from Latino about the INTEGRITY issue is still smarting.

Yeah but Jophil guru did basically say morals aren't black and white. He's saying they're all dependent on the person's choice. This is the worst form of moral relativism.

 

[ketostix]

Nice thread and I agree with most of what you have to say, but I totally disagree with this. There are very few women that are going to agree to this arrangement (Probably less than 5%). Do you think a girl is going to say OK babe no problem I will be faithful to you, but you could go ahead and fvck anyone you want... It never worked like that with woman. Especially in 2008 were woman to be equal . I am sorry Guru but most woman will not go for that.

I agree with you. Women have their self-interest agenda and a man has his. These two agenda don't always match all the time. Actually they're usually always at odds. It's key for the man to enforce his agenda. Contrary to what guru says, in the real world you sometimes have to be a little phony and use subterfuge to acomplish your agenda.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

OK, got it. CONTEXT, which is essentially the Cardinal Rule of Relationships = High Character. However, how you come by that character and your reasons for wanting to control the frame are what's at issue. If I'm a controlling, domineering personality (for what ever reason) and I control the frame, am I of high character? If I'm a beta male and have been conditioned to relinquish power, but my wife or GF submits of her own accord and I'm in the default of being in control of the frame, am I of high character?

GURU, it's not that I disagree with your interpretation of CONTEXT, just how you come to your definitions. The successful, fulfilled Man is one who's comfortable in control of the frame; Lord knows I've been doing it for going on 13 years now, but in my book it's an overall comfort in positive masculinity that breeds high character, not exclusively control of a frame.

 

[jophil28]

Yeah but Jophil guru did basically say morals aren't black and white. He's saying they're all dependent on the person's choice. This is the worst form of moral relativism.

The difference is this - Guru advocates a carefully constructed moral and ethical code which is designed and constructed from thought, reasoning, experience, consideration and debate and consultation ( mainly with oneself)
HE further demands that such a code be rigidly enforced and uses personal INTEGRITY as the energizing force to hold it all together.
Even further, he says that departure from one's personal giuidelines is HYPOCRISY and his tone suggest that this is unforgiveable.
I agree totally.

The members of the opposing camp mounted some rather feeble attempts at promoting the "pragmatic" philosophy.
In a nutshell this ideology is little more that personal convenience masquerading as liberalism, in the same way that inappropriate immediate gratification is often explained away as "spontaneity ".

 

[ketostix]

The difference is this - Guru advocates a carefully constructed moral and ethical code which is designed and constructed from thought, reasoning, experience, consideration and debate and consultation ( mainly with oneself)

He does? I thought that was what I was doing and a few othewr people. I've never once heard him articualte anything remotely close to that. I just think you are giving him credit for great words and thoughts he never made.

HE further demands that such a code be rigidly enforced and uses personal INTEGRITY as the energizing force to hold it all together.
Even further, he says that departure from one's personal giuidelines is HYPOCRISY and his tone suggest that this is unforgiveable.
I agree totally.

I think we all agree on the definition of hypocrisy, but I would go one step further and say, and no offense to guru, it's hypocritical for him to expect one behavior out of a woman and he himself holds a diferent standard.

The members of the opposing camp mounted some rather feeble attempts at promoting the "pragmatic" philosophy.

But isn't pragmatism necesssary to construct a moral and ethical code which is designed and constructed from thought, reasoning, experience, consideration and debate and consultation ? I do get your point that people can hide behind the claim of pragmatism though.

In a nutshell this ideology is little more that personal convenience masquerading as liberalism, in the same way that inappropriate immediate gratification is often explained away as "spontaneity ".

It can be, but still when someone says xyz is always right just because they believe so (usually for self-centered reasons) and as long as they stay consist in that belief then that makes them moral, I have an issue with that. I just think you're giving credit where it's not necesarily due and placing blame where it's not really at, Jophil. I can't speaqk for anyone else but I'm not the elast bit liberal.

 

[ketostix]

in my book it's an overall comfort in positive masculinity that breeds high character, not exclusively control of a frame.

Totally spot on. Just because you continuously control a frame says nothing about how you arrived at that frame, or if even it's truely the right frame to have in the first place. Anyway, I don't really get guru because he argues simultaneously for and against absolutes. It's like he's on the fence and can't make up his mind.

 

[jophil28]

It can be, but still when someone says xyz is always right just because they believe so (usually for self-centered reasons) and as long as they stay consist in that belief then that makes them moral, I have an issue with that.


.

I do too .

Moralty and ethics are quite often inconvenient.They are restricting and confining many times and applying them is a burden.
The "pragmatic" debate for me is simple. When one is designing a moral code (and refining it ) practical considerations certainly need to be factored in. NO problem there.. The problems start when a life dilemma approaches which calls for some action and reference to the 'operating manual' is indicated.
THis is where the conservatives and the liberals part company .

For those of us on the Right, our choice of action is simple - we act in accordance with our moral and ethical prescription.
I am not really sure what the Left mentality thinks or does in times of crisis or urgency - perhaps they write a report or attend meetings or seek counseling to discuss their feelings.
Nero fiddled while Rome burned - he probably was in self-consultatiom seeking a "pragmatic" solution to the fireworks.

Getting back to "character" ( we really mean "good character") ...Read Rollo's example of the AFC who "believes" that putting women on a pedestal is a behavior of high character and therefor he is assured (in his mind ) of being a noble person. Whaaaat?
This example ( on Rollo's part ) suggests a poor grasp of the commonly held definition of "character" . Supplicating to women or worshipping them from below cannot EVER be included in the common definition of "character" .
Since when did 'fawning' sneek into "good character" ? It is just fawning, and it will never be something else just because someone wants it to be and finds it convenient to believe so .
It is what it is. -

 

[guru1000]

OK, got it. CONTEXT, which is essentially the Cardinal Rule of Relationships = High Character.

Our cardinal rules appear to be the same written in different words. We both agree CONTEXT is key for maintaining the power balance. Although I would not say this is an absolute, it seems to be a truth.

That being said , I am not stating that High Character alone = Cardinal Rule. High Character IMO is adhering to one's conviction. So if the Cardinal Rule is in place, then it is reasonable to believe one will always hold the correct context. So one with High Character will ALWAYS adhere to the Cardinal Rule amongst many others.

The context will always belong to the DJ. Thus, adhering to this rule amongst others is in congruence with a Don Juan. Capiche?

If I'm a controlling, domineering personality (for what ever reason) and I control the frame, am I of high character? If I'm a beta male and have been conditioned to relinquish power, but my wife or GF submits of her own accord and I'm in the default of being in control of the frame, am I of high character?

If you adhere to your CODE, YES.

High Character alone does not make up a GREAT man nor a dj. Our convictions that we adhere to is what makes the difference.

The successful, fulfilled Man is one who's comfortable in control of the frame;

Yes but sometimes successful MEN fall short of CONTEXT. I am sure you and I have both been there at least once. We indirectly always KNEW about the cardinal rule but never really analyzed why it worked. The dynamics and realization of it is what catches my interest.

Lord knows I've been doing it for going on 13 years now, but in my book it's an overall comfort in positive masculinity that breeds high character, not exclusively control of a frame

I agree Positive Masculinity swallows alot of the characterics of a true Don Juan. But what is Positive Masculinity? We all have our interpretations of what and how this is practiced. So High Character or adhering to one's code mixed with the Cardinal Rule is a good start. It is not the END ALL of a Don Juan, but it certainly is an important foundation to build on.

 

[guru1000]

He does? I thought that was what I was doing and a few othewr people. I've never once heard him articualte anything remotely close to that. I just think you are giving him credit for great words and thoughts he never made.

Now you are justifying your inability to think deep.

I think we all agree on the definition of hypocrisy, but I would go one step further and say, and no offense to guru, it's hypocritical for him to expect one behavior out of a woman and he himself holds a different standard.

If all parties are in agreement with the terms , then there is no hypocrisy. I never stated I was a NUN nor do I advocate that.

I made unequivocally clear the importance of adhering to one's code.

I nor anyone has a right to dictate what your CODE entails.

The Feds tax your income and will throw you in jail if you refuse to pay. Is that JUSTICE? But it is FULL DISCLOSURE. Yet you make a CHOICE to stay in this country with this arrangement.

Don't cry WOLF because you WILLINGLY and KNOWINGLY accept the terms.

It can be, but still when someone says xyz is always right just because they believe so (usually for self-centered reasons) and as long as they stay consist in that belief then that makes them moral,

I can see, Interpretation was never truly a strong point for you. No pun intended.

I never said XYZ (a personalized belief) is right or wrong. I stated "To each , his own". Adhering to one's belief is essential so we do not fall into HYPOCRISY, which is anti ACCOUNTABILITY. To go furthur I even suggested a Cardinal Rule one COULD incorporate into their CODE to make them a better Don Juan.

Adhering to your beliefs does not create JUSTICE. It certainly shows Discipline and Strength of Character. This incorporated with CONTEXT awareness as a cardinal rule are important characterics of a DJ.

Do not make this thread a discussion of MORALS and ETHICS. This thread addresses adherence to one's code , the importance of such code as well as the correct context. It as well points out that within the correct context, a Don Juan with High Character has the advantage.

 

[romangod]

Adhering to your beliefs does not create JUSTICE. It certainly shows Discipline and Strength of Character. This incorporated with CONTEXT awareness as a cardinal rule are important characterics of a DJ.

Do not make this thread a discussion of MORALS and ETHICS. This thread addresses adherence to one's code , the importance of such code as well as the correct context. It as well points out that within the correct context, a Don Juan with High Character has the advantage.

Bravo! The only justice that can be created by adhering to your beliefs is the self satisfaction that comes with practising what you preach and avoiding the damage that hypocrisy can inflict.

What is more important? One's actual code of beliefs or the adherence to that code? Personally, I believe they are of equal value because if either one is flawed it will have a negative outcome in the bigger picture of things. IMHO