This is good! :yes:KarmaSutra said:Mine's 16.
Gorgeous. Brilliant.
She's in Orlando this week for a robotics competition (she writes binary code for robots). She's in Atlanta next week for the same reason.
My kid is hip to Game. I taught her everything I could about "Players" and "Seductionists". She's caused guys to weep openly because they don't know how to Game her.
We were out at dinner and she pointed out dudes were "Peacocking". Pathetically peacocking.
Makes a Dad proud.
You essentially upped your VALUE in her eyes by showing her that, if she wants you, she has to at times do things that you like to do. You are SOMETHING after all. You are NOT FREE. If she wants to hang with you, it's going to cost her something — time, effort, money.
Quote taken from The SoSuave Guide to Women and Dating, which you can read for FREE.
I think KarmaSutra just wants her to be informed so she doesn't get manipulated.Chronocidal said:Just out of curiosity, how would you want or expect boys/men who are interested in her to attempt to connect with her romantosexually, if "peacocking" (i.e. differentiating oneself visually from the crowd) is considered "pathetic" and "game" (i.e. social skills for men) is something considered problematic?
There isn't much "romance" in romantosexual from a "game" standpoint. Romance is pretty much a dirty word on the DJ forum.Chronocidal said:Is making someone who is interested in romantosexual activity weep openly considered a good thing?
Zekko this is a paradox that I can certainly relate to.zekko said:Most of the guys on here are always railing against feminism. Does that mean they would raise their daughter to be a housewife? Somehow I doubt it. Guys here want sex from a girl the first night they meet them. Does that mean they would raise their daughter to give it out so freely?
She's interested in guys who are interested in, and passionate about, their future and other things than getting into her pants.Chronocidal said:Just out of curiosity, how would you want or expect boys/men who are interested in her to attempt to connect with her romantosexually, if "peacocking" (i.e. differentiating oneself visually from the crowd) is considered "pathetic" and "game" (i.e. social skills for men) is something considered problematic?
It's a good thing from a Paternal perspective. Like here, it separates the men from he-b!tches.Is making someone who is interested in romantosexual activity weep openly considered a good thing?