How the internet has amped up AFCism

[Rollo Tomassi]

Lets stear this in another direction a bit here. I was discussing this thread with a friend of mine yesterday and he added a few other buffers against rejection. The Speed Dating fad that's popular now and the high-end "headhunting" services that put professional men and women together within the same socio-economic strata were a couple. Both of these serve a similar fucntion to technological rejection buffers, but don't directly use computers, IMs, whathave you. I think a lot of guys get hung up on the technology side of this debate. As WEST pointed out it's not the mechanics that make the buffer, but the fear of rejection that's being avoided in using it.

We'd like to make a separation between using the technology AND meeting women in the now, as if they were mutually exclusive methods, but most people are lazy. Of course the enlightened members of SoSuave (for the most part) recognize the methods, but the rank AFC most likely wont. Learning to use IMs and electronic commincations is easy; reading body language, understanding subcommunications, taking visual cues and reading voice intonations takes work and a lot of failed attempts to perfect. So, again, we opt for what we perceive as the path of least resistance (or rejection) and seek the insulation that the technology offers. AFCs get offended when you suggest that they put down the keyboard and learn to ride the bike without the training wheels. Look at the reactions of the guys WEST was refering to. One scoffs, the other looks dumbfounded and another wants to cry in desperation.

So here's a question, how popular do you think a life-like female sex robot would sell? Or a virtual reality simulator (a Matrix) that guarantees a sexual and emotional gratification experience with no chance for rejection? Pornography - particularly with the ease and accessibility that the internet provides - is a buffer against rejection, no complaints, no rejection, just gratification. There are plenty of threads in the AE forum decrying the evils of porn and chronic masturbation, but the true danger in them lies in their insulating a man against rejection and self-limitations in the learning process of how to interact with women successfully. You can't learn how to get the real thing if you're perpetually whacking off to the virtual thing.

 

[Vulpine]

Anyone see/remember the movie "Lawnmower Man"?

This whole topic can be fast fowarded if one considers that dude Job.

Job was a dud in realtime. Then he is introduced to virtual reality. He excels in the sterile world, and becomes a genius there. However, his realtime social skills actually decrease and he is essentially psychotic as far as society is concerned. He eventually gives himself entirely to the virtual reality. The end.

Good luck getting a BJ when you're a series of binary electrical impulses.

People have richer virtual realities than they do realities. Their TV time is full, their text inbox is full, their IM's are always pouring in, there are stacks and stacks of video games laying around, e-mails are pouring in, they are gods of the digital realm, but...


... their bed is empty.

It's hillarious how people are "too busy". Many are so busy with their virtual lives that they just don't have any time for real life.
:crazy:

Oh, and the rudeness and "unreal" aspects of people interrupting conversations by checking texts or answering calls and complaining about a lack of cell phone reception in the woods is a whole pack of firecrackers I don't care to light right now.

Let me just say, some folks can't understand facial expressions unless they are typed out: }:^(

Hear someone actually say "LoL" instead of actually laughing, and this whole discussion...

*finishes sentence vocally, computer screen doesn't respond*

 

[azanon]

We'd like to make a separation between using the technology AND meeting women in the now, as if they were mutually exclusive methods, but most people are lazy.

They are mutually exclusive (techniques). The end goal is the same, but you were referring to the methods.

So, again, we opt for what we perceive as the path of least resistance (or rejection) and seek the insulation that the technology offers.

Said it once, i'll say it again. Speak for yourself. I, and many other DJs, use both.

AFCs get offended when you suggest that they put down the keyboard and learn to ride the bike without the training wheels. Look at the reactions of the guys WEST was refering to. One scoffs, the other looks dumbfounded and another wants to cry in desperation.

Familiar with logical fallacies? This is a false dichotomy. You made the same logical fallacy when you said I'm either married or i see other women.

Choice C is actually the applicable choice - we use our keyboards AND we get out in the real world. 16 hours of waking time a day is plenty of time to do both.

......

Bottom line, the two different groups discussing here are either those that ONLY use in-person techniques, or those that use both. I have nothing against someone who just uses "in-person" techniques. It is the most effective method and I don't see a responder yet that disagrees with that, including myself. Every guy needs to be spending time cold approaching.

..........

Comment: I've never tried speed dating (not even sure if AR has that anywhere), but I would think that would be a positive thing, whether it is providing buffers or not (and it does provide buffers no doubt). That'd certainly beat sitting at home and, yes, I would think it is far superior to using the PC (but not as good as cold approaching).

 

[Victory Unlimited]

Troops,


All this talk of buffers, insulation, and what have you is interesting, but...does it seem like to any of you that these technological advances are really moreso "vehicles" that EVENTUALLY bring you face-to-face with a woman anyway?

No man alive who makes ANY kind of advance toward a woman, by ANY means can escape rejection. You know, it can also be argued that men who use the internet to "spam-sarge" women ACTUALLY receive MORE rejection per volume than I, or any other down and dirty, coochie-commando, urban tunnel rat Sosuave Soldier would EVER experience going on cold approach missions.

Remember:

One of the qualities of the AFC mindset is that he over-invests emotionally too soon, and without just cause with MOST women he becomes interested in. And if you agree that the above statement is true, then it would necessarily follow that SOME of these internet-obssessed AFCs COULD actually be experiencing multiple rejection-stab wounds from chicks ALL OVER THE WORLD.

Think about it.

If the overall mission for the man IS to meet face to face with the babe, no matter how many speed bumps (technological buffers) you use, or run INTO, or OVER, wouldn't you ultimately end up "crashing into the flesh and blood chick" at the end of the road anyway?

And if so, even if the Internet IS amping up AFCism, would that make the technology ITSELF guilty of perpetuating the AFC problem---this supposed fear of rejection? Or is it the continuing lack of inner strength inside the man?

 

[( . )( . )]

Bars and clubs are for losers, you can definitely find hot babes to fvck there, but none of them will be much use to you in the longer term.

Ahh retard logic spouted by only the truly and utterly oblivious puppets of society.

Goodluck with finding a NORMAL chick who's never done the club scene. Say hello to the pixies and unicorn's for me.....See if you can spot the glaring fvck up in your post.

And guess what? The " Well I meant the chicks who go out all the time" argument aint gonna cut it.

Psssst hint: the "good" ones who rarely go out get tagged and bagged aswell *GASP* ..I know shocking isnt it?

The point wasn't about finding "worthwhile women", but rather how accustomed we've become as a culture in avoiding direct, personal rejection, as I went into on my Buffers thread.

It would appear azanon has a hard on for you regardless dude, common sense and a wide grasp of understanding the bigger picture is thrown out the window by default when one has sand in ones vagina.

Alright let's stop woman bashing here.

Always one unoriginal and one dimensional bozo has to pipe in with his half assed and more importantly WRONG interpretation of "WOMAN BASHING"

Heres a thought, until you see " all women are evil and must die etc etc" hows about keeping that sh!t in the kiddy forum eh?


To the op. Yes absolutley the internet has definately a snowballing effect for those who suffer from AFCism, which unfortunately is what? 85-90% of the population. But if your in the know there is no point worrying about it.

I really don't have much to add, except that trying to hook up with women on the web is a waste of time in 90% of cases.

In the 10% of cases where you do land a date, the girl is usually fat, severe mental case, etc.

Enough said, thread should have been done and dusted pretty much from there onwards.

 

[azanon]

It would appear azanon has a hard on for you regardless dude, common sense and a wide grasp of understanding the bigger picture is thrown out the window by default when one has sand in ones vagina.

I wouldn't know anything about that, titty boy. Look at your handle, look at mine, who's more likely to have a twa*?

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

All I did was ask a question, for which I'm still awaiting an answer,..

I'm sorry AZANON, but unless your marriage situation's changed in the last few months, how are you using either method successfully?

According to my watch you haven't dated in 14 years.

anything beyond that was AZANON's own elaboration.

 

[azanon]

And i said nothing beyond that. You are saying that as if it can only be either/or, and not both. Do you realize both is possible, RT? That's why i called it a false dichotomy (which it is, cause there are other options).

In reality, about the same percentage of people are going to believe I am faithful, as someone who's had 40-50 women prior to marriage. Don't ask me what that figure is, but it will be roughly the same. As you already know, the national statistics for men is some 40% (give or take, see former thread on it).

Oh your question....... I thought it was already apparent I wasn't taking you bait. You've tried 3 times, "by my count".

 

[joekerr31]

So here's a question, how popular do you think a life-like female sex robot would sell? Or a virtual reality simulator (a Matrix) that guarantees a sexual and emotional gratification experience with no chance for rejection? .

provided you could ship it with total annonymity?

you'd make billions. heck, this sounds crazy, but potential youd make trillions.

if you came to market with something TRULY life-like, you'd be the most famous person on the planet.

a HUGE portion of the population would forget about real-life relationships, and simply satisfy themselves with the virtual / sex robot.

they would be in almost every single persons home. actually, go a step further. even couples would get them so they could have threesomes and orgies etc.

thing is though, if such a product were possible it would first be patented by the military to create fighting robots, not sex robots.

i mean, think about it. the sex robot would be perfect. no yeast infections, no pubes getting in between your teeth, always smells perfect, no farting, no queffing, etc.

now, as much as women could enjoy a sex robot also, i think it would actually flip the tables back in mens favor. because a male sex robot can't blow a load - and women get a great deal of pleasure causing a man to climax. so women would still want real men, but real men could take or leave real women given they had the ultimate sex bot at home.

now the major major problem with a sex bot though is that it would create completely unrealistic standards for the human experience. i mean, every guy would be buying the angelina jolie or jenna jemason sex robot. why would they want to screw some 'average' chic?

so i think we'd see depression sore as a result of negative body image issues that the mass populous would adopt.

on the flip side perhaps people would start to value relationships beyond just getting laid and actually develop the personal side more.

but anyway, quick answer to your question is that you could probably sell one of these sex robots for 100k or more and sell millions of them.

but we're probably 200 years away from a 'life like' sex robot (or robot period), so we dont really have to worry about this reality in our life time.

 

[WestCoaster]

Back on topic

The main point here as I was trying to make is the internet has pushed the majority of men onto MySpace, Match.com, etc., thinking these places are the ONLY spots to find women. OK, clubs is considered the only other venue, I'm not against that, at least it's freaking cold approaching. But I rarely see men practicing the art of approaching in other spots, but go to any internet cafe or library, and most men are trolling MySpace or dating services.

In these instances, women have all the power and men still haven't improved their ability to approach in person. It's a coward's way out.

* As for the topic of meeting women in bars, etc. ... you meet quality women wherever they are. Let's put it this way: two so-called "Christian" women I dated were two of the most deceitful ... some of the so-called "wild women" I've met and dated were more honest. Some of the biggest games that have been played against me have been by the so-called "mature" women in their 30's and 40's; some of the most honest interactions I've had of late have been from women in their 20's ... just thought I'd do a little myth bashing.

 

[azanon]

And if i may steer it a bit differently too back towards center, maybe that's a problem in the more metropolitan areas. In AR, men either aren't getting out much at all, or they are. The internet is a little too high tech for most Arkie men. I'd say 20% of men max (and that's probably overestimating it), ........ even the young ones, have an online profile in this state.

 

[Phyzzle]

Azanon never really contradicted himself. He's just as vague as Hell. I found him saying this in some old marriage thread:

i love women and I know from personal experience that I'm capable of "desiring" more than one woman; married or not. I've seen it referred to as having the ability to "compartmentalize". If you think that these kinds of people, by definition, have bad marriages, then i guess you're entitled to feel that way. You must know though that it wouldn't change the fact that i love and desire my wife, and she desires me in kind.

So, uh, let me dum it down a bit:

He sleeps with women who are not his wife.

Can we stop prodding him now?

 

[azanon]

I don't believe I said that there either, but I would prefer RT leave me alone about it. He's the only one on the witch hunt, and its his third attempt (different threads).

I do find this ironic coming from a guy who's claim to have had 50 women prior to marriage, and now (convienently) claims he is faithful now. Of course, that'd be the smart thing to say given how much time he spends here, including as moderator (true or not). Surely, his wife browses here on occasion just to check up on what he says.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

And i said nothing beyond that. You are saying that as if it can only be either/or, and not both. Do you realize both is possible, RT? That's why i called it a false dichotomy (which it is, cause there are other options).

In reality, about the same percentage of people are going to believe I am faithful, as someone who's had 40-50 women prior to marriage. Don't ask me what that figure is, but it will be roughly the same. As you already know, the national statistics for men is some 40% (give or take, see former thread on it).

All I asked was if you'd like to elaborate on how you're using online dating services, IM's, TXT, email etc. AND personal, face-to-face approaches "successfully" as you mentioned here:

And my point was, you and the OP speak for yourself. I use both methods successfully. Maybe this is a issue for some people, but it isn't for me.

I was only curious to know if your marital status had changed in light of this strong rebuttal of yours, but since you so quickly leapt to vehemently defend your personal life I guess this has been cleared up now. Well, except for how you're successfully using both of these methodologies in the context of this thread,..

 

[Mr.Positive]

provided you could ship it with total annonymity?

you'd make billions. heck, this sounds crazy, but potential youd make trillions.

if you came to market with something TRULY life-like, you'd be the most famous person on the planet.

a HUGE portion of the population would forget about real-life relationships, and simply satisfy themselves with the virtual / sex robot.

they would be in almost every single persons home. actually, go a step further. even couples would get them so they could have threesomes and orgies etc.

thing is though, if such a product were possible it would first be patented by the military to create fighting robots, not sex robots.

i mean, think about it. the sex robot would be perfect. no yeast infections, no pubes getting in between your teeth, always smells perfect, no farting, no queffing, etc.

now, as much as women could enjoy a sex robot also, i think it would actually flip the tables back in mens favor. because a male sex robot can't blow a load - and women get a great deal of pleasure causing a man to climax. so women would still want real men, but real men could take or leave real women given they had the ultimate sex bot at home.

now the major major problem with a sex bot though is that it would create completely unrealistic standards for the human experience. i mean, every guy would be buying the angelina jolie or jenna jemason sex robot. why would they want to screw some 'average' chic?

so i think we'd see depression sore as a result of negative body image issues that the mass populous would adopt.

on the flip side perhaps people would start to value relationships beyond just getting laid and actually develop the personal side more.

but anyway, quick answer to your question is that you could probably sell one of these sex robots for 100k or more and sell millions of them.

but we're probably 200 years away from a 'life like' sex robot (or robot period), so we dont really have to worry about this reality in our life time.

Think of the economic effect of the the sexbot. Guys, instead of buying fancy cars to impress women, would be saving their money to buy the sexbot. So, banking would increase, and the auto industry would collapse. Then of course, the new status thing would be to buy the fancy convertible and cruise around on a Friday evening with your hot sexbot riding shotgun. We'll have to wait for the media to influence that though.

Until our famous movie stars we all know and love go public with the satisfaction from their sexbots, it would be a closet case product though..

 

[Interceptor]

I think by an dlarge, Victory Unlimited has had the most logical, and common sense view on this issue.
Basically, it's like a tool, you either know how to use it....or not.
If you have at the very least decent "Game", you will have a "Start Point" , basically a frame of reference to use in your dialogue with your target.
But an Internet DJ whom doesn't even have (the poor Lad) the balls to approach, and can't demonstrate body language, eye contact, and understand women's reactions to them is at a serious disadvantage.
I also agree that IMing, Emailing has a subtle undertone that can actually improve your rapport and connection. But you must use it wisely. You must know how to use emotion in your texting, and know the woman well enough to have an idea on what she will or won't respond well to.

But.....sh*t, this really all goes back to that Starting Point we're all advocating.
You must be able to handle yourself in real life.
You don't HAVE to be PERFECT.
But damn, man....know eye contact, physical contact, IOIs, body language and some topics. You get this by ..........guess HOW?
Man, actual live in the flesh experience.
Guys, there are few things as sweetengly victorious as progressing your seduction, and recognizing (BIngo! There's another one!) her IOIs and body language.
YOU WILL NEVER GET THAT THROUGH CYBERSPACE.

Here's something else everyone HAS to learn, and as good willing, mature men, must seek to pass on to the young'uns....

WOMEN WANT YOU TO APPROACH.

WOMAN ARE PISSED WHEN YOU DON'T APPROACH.

WOMEN WANT TO BE SEDUCED.

WOMEN WANT YOU TO SUCCEED.

WOMEN WANT YOU TO RECOGNIZE YOUR MASCULINITY.

WOMEN ARE DYING TO MEET THE "REAL" MEN.

WOMEN WANT YOU TO BANG THE SH*T OUT OF THEM. BUT YOU HAVE TO LEARN THE ROPES OF SEDUCTION.


WOMEN GET DOWNRIGHT NAST AND ANGRY WHEN THEY SEE A MALE, NOT ACT LIKE A "MAN". THEY CANNOT UNDERSTAND IT. IT PERPLEXES THEM AND ANNOYS THEM.
Lots of times this comes from an envy from women whom wish they had the Real "power" of men. So they get annoyed when they see a man not embrace his masculinity. It's true. It hurts, man. But it's true. I've seen it plenty of times. The average Latina female will use the first derogatory word to her emasculated male (but not Manly) mate....what's that word??
You guessed it.
MARICON.
Fag.

DO you wnat to live your life considered a Fag by women?
Why? Because you're afraid to fail?
WOmen HATE THAT!
Women know YOU have the BALLS on the Planet!
They know they cannot do what WE do!
We're the MEN.
WE LEAD.
They know this so it aggravates them to no end whn they see an emasculated male who gave in to the beatings and social conditionings.
And what will the women say?
"Grow some balls and be a man! Don't be a p*ssy over some chick!"
Time and time again.


Amen.
Preach on Brother Pook, and Victory, et al.
So let it be written, let it be done.

 

[Victory Unlimited]

Preach on Brother Pook, and Victory, et al.
So let it be written, let it be done.

Yo Interceptor...


Naw you didn't just quote Yul Brynner as "Pharoah" in the Ten Commandments movie, did you...?



LOL.

 

[WestCoaster]

I'm back at my cybercafe and honest to God, this is going on right now. A nerd next to me -- perhaps 50 years old -- is chatting with a gal. This guy is textbook nerd.

I see what he's writing and it says, "Hey girl, looks like you could use some wild love."

No way in a million years this guy says that face to face or even has the nads to approach a woman. This is comical!

 

[MatureDJ]

I'm back at my cybercafe and honest to God, this is going on right now. A nerd next to me -- perhaps 50 years old -- is chatting with a gal. This guy is textbook nerd.

This reminds of the time where I was blown off by a woman online (no response to my message.) And one day while at the cyber cafe, I saw her walk in with her friend. After doing a quick check online to make sure that it was her, I approached her and asked if she was *** and had a profile on ***. She said yes, and I got her number right then and there. When we went out, she pulled the "my cousin's in town this weekend", but since I was leaving her town for a long time, I agreed to having her cousin tag along. It was a good thing, because I got to see her somewaht poor behavior at that time so that I could next her right there.