If a tree falls in the woods... the ASD destroyer.

[Vulpine]

It's a classic question.

"If a tree falls in the woods, and noone is around to hear it, does it make a sound?"

How many times have you been in an arguement over the answer? Well, it's a trick question. There is only one correct answer, and that answer is: "No."

Perception.

Noun
sound (plural sounds)
1. A sensation perceived by the ear caused by the vibration of air or some other medium. (He turned when he heard the sound of footsteps behind him.)

If noone is there to perceive the vibrations in the air as "sound", there is no sound.

Yeah, thanks for clearing that up, Vulpine. Well, give me a minute...

See, for years I've been all about debauchery. I would rap with stuffy people about society and it's perceptions in attempts to loosen them up. I've even formulated a formula to determine a woman's "sluttiness". It started as a laugh-getter in sex conversations, but evolved into a tension-breaker, and later into an ASD destroyer.

The premise of the "slut factor" (or whatever cutesy name you want to call it) is simple:
A woman's "sluttiness" is directly proportional to the amount of witnesses to the slvtty act.
Also a factor is how radical the behavior in question is/was and could be perceived.

For you math nerds...
Where F = a female, s = sluttiness, W = witnesses, b = behavior:
Fs = Wb

So simple!

Once aware, it is easy to see the "slut factor" function in common, everyday scenarios. To better understand, consider the same woman, with the same behavior, in two different scenarios:

In one, it's Mardi Gras, and she shows her t!tt!es to get some beads. There are hundreds of witnesses, but the behavior isn't radical (in fact it's encouraged), so the 'slut factor' is very low to zero.

In the other scenario, she shows her t!tt!es to some random guy in a bar. There are far fewer witnesses, but the behavior is far more radical in that environment, so the 'slut factor' is fairly high.

Ok, so, it's anti-slut defense time. How does this help? It's the understanding of the problem and the understanding of women's logic that will help you to crush any resistance you should encounter. We know from our studies here that women love sex, but are scared to death of the slut label, right? If you can explain away the label, then the clothes almost remove themselves.

HB: "No, wait, I can't."
V: "You can't? Or, you don't want to me to think you're a slut?"
HB: "Uh... the second part."
V: "There is no such thing as a slut."

Here's where you drop the knowledge.

HB: "What? Explain."
V: "Ok, well, if a tree falls in the woods, and noone is there to hear it, does it make a sound?"

If she answers "Yes", explain how and why she is wrong. If "no", prompt her to explain her answer. If the answer is "perception", proceed to question two...)

V: "So, if a woman has lots of hot, fulfilling, animal sex, and noone is there to hear it, is she a slut?"

If delivered in an authoritative way, yet maintaining the sexual escalation going in the background, you deliver all the assurance she wants, and show yourself to be a "deep thinker" in one smooth little conversation. Once employed, you can adjust the length of explanations to suit the feedback you recieve from the woman.

This could be considered leading, albeit complex. If the explanations are embellished with other vivid imagery, you can surely see how effective a tool this can be. Feel free to call me eccentric, but I get laid. I am batting a thousand with this, so I wanted to share it with you guys.

Happy barrier breaking!

 

[STR8UP]

Sounds a lot like you are trying to use reason with an unreasonable creature, but I suppose if you can pull off the delivery correctly you just might be able to fukk with her mind enough for it to work.

I really like the formula, btw.

 

[MacAvoy]

I think this is the answer I've been looking for. I've never been very good running into the ASD. This is top notch. Kudo's Vulpine.

It's totally DJ. Projects confidence, comes across as suave/mysterious.

 

[Mind_Body_Soul]

Also implied by this is what Gunwitch has been saying all along about isolating a girl to take her home the same day. Fewer witnesses = better chances.

 

[Docs]

*for the subscribtion*
I'll tip it later. This sounds interesting.

 

[Vulpine]

-even though nobody is in the woods, the falling tree still makes a "sound" (still produces sound waves even though nobody is there)

Even after the definition of "sound" is laid out for you, you still want to argue? Sound is a perception. If there is no perceiver, there is no perception, and there is no sound.

The question doesn't ask "does it make sound waves", does it? No.

-and, the woman is concerned that YOU will think of her as a slut, and the argumant that nobody is there to see it, is....well...wrong....because YOU WILL BE THERE TO SEE IT and that's what she cares about - your opinon of her.

I guess it'll work if you date blond bimbos

I guess you can pull the same thing off buy making her feel like its some secret thing between you two, and nobody is going to find out. I don't know.

How you work it is up to you. I just threw down a sample dialogue. Read it again.

V: "You can't? Or, you don't want to me to think you're a slvt?"
HB: "Uh... the second part."
V: "There is no such thing as a slvt."

Handled. Done.

Not getting it yet?

V: "You can't? Or, you don't want spider_007's mom to think you're a slvt?"
HB: "Uh... the second part."
V: "There is no such thing as a slvt."

Get it yet? Sample dialogue. "Sample." Saaaaaaaammmmple.

 

[comote]

The real question for the nerds . . . If a tree falls in a blackbox and no one is there to witness it, did it even fall?

 

[Vulpine]

yea, yea, i get it ......kind of lame if your ask me .....but then again, whatever works for you.

Well, this is the "mature man" forum, so noone asked you.

Good day.

 

[Latinoman]

Having sex does not make a woman a slut. What makes her a slut is how she approaches sex and with whom.

I don't try to rationalize with women. When it comes to sex, I waste no time as I made it very clear to her by my actions that I cannot judge a woman for doing something that I am ALSO doing...especially if we are doing it together.

And I mean it too.

If a woman gets involved with a quality AND masculine man and it happens sooner than later, how can I judge her for that? Especially when today's society has scarce numbers for such men.

 

[bigjohnson]

Sound [noun] 1 a: a particular auditory impression : tone b: the sensation perceived by the sense of hearing c: mechanical radiant energy that is transmitted by longitudinal pressure waves in a material medium (as air) and is the objective cause of hearing

And by your definition, female equals witnesses times behavior divided by sluttiness, or F=(wb)/s - which makes no sense either.

Were you drunk when you posted this?

 

[MacAvoy]

You guys are just jealous that you don't understand his crazy gorrilla math.

 

[comote]

And by your definition, female equals witnesses times behavior divided by sluttiness, or F=(wb)/s - which makes no sense either.

Were you drunk when you posted this?

you're right, really he should have said a female's sluttiness factor F_s = W*b
where F_s is the female's sluttiness factor, W is witnesses to the event and B is the acceptance of said behavior within that context.

 

[Vulpine]

And by your definition, female equals witnesses times behavior divided by sluttiness, or F=(wb)/s - which makes no sense either.

Were you drunk when you posted this?

No, F is a constant. What makes no sense is that you would try to figure F when F equals a woman. One woman.

You can't figure out women anyway, so the expression is like "pi".

 

[realsmoothie]

No, F is a constant. What makes no sense is that you would try to figure F when F equals a woman. One woman.

You can't figure out women anyway, so the expression is like "pi".

That would make this fuzzy math, at best.

 

[Vulpine]

Math nerds. It's no wonder you guys are on this site.

F = 1

What's the hangup?

"If a tree falls in the forest, would you see the forest through all the other trees still standing in the way?"

 

[wayword]

Sounds a lot like you are trying to use reason with an unreasonable creature, but I suppose if you can pull off the delivery correctly you just might be able to fukk with her mind enough for it to work.

Well, the girl has 2 choices at this point:

1) Injure her brain trying to logically comprehend all this philosophical masturbation.

2) Just accept the excuse he is offering her, shake her pretty lil' head, pretend like she understands and say "uh-huh."

 

[bigjohnson]

Math nerds. It's no wonder you guys are on this site.

Pot, kettle, black? lol.

Have a good one dude.

 

[Vulpine]

Pot, kettle, black? lol.

lol.

Touche'.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

I'm not convinced that ASD is anything more than another female social contrivance. For a woman, the concept of ASD amounts to a convenient fillibuster tactic with the latent purpose of forestalling sex with a guy she hasn't got an IL in or one who needs to keep a guy(s) "warming up in the bullpen" while she determines if another prospective guy who she places a higher priority on will turn out for her.

ASD is simply a social mechanism based on the feminine prerogative contrivance. In other words, a woman reserves the right to "change her mind" as her whim sees fit and rarely is expected to be held socially accountable for doing so. In fact, legally speaking, if a woman were to tell you to stop mid-way through sexual intercourse she is no longer a willing participant and a man can be found guilty of rape if he doesn't pull out and leave her be. As backwards as that sounds, this is the extreme end of the feminine prerogative.

All that said, a woman will do what her conditions dictate in any given environment. You could, for example, have a woman in perfect isolation and work her up to sex only to have her play the ASD card and this same girl will eagerly volunteer to have a 3 way with 2 guys at a frat party while being shot on video with any number of people looking on. People laugh when I say this, but the same hot coed having sex with the cute guy she met half an hour earlier in the foam cannon party in Cancun on spring break is the same girl who'll tell you she's "just not comfortable with you yet" as you try to plead your case to get after it with her. Every girl is virtuous and pure, and every girl is a dirty slvt, you just have to be the right guy to bring it out in them. Personally, I'd prefer to knock it out with a woman who's unquestionably ready to go over a woman who'd only begrudgingly fukk me after I'd negotiated my way into her vagina.

 

[RedPill]

I'm not convinced that ASD is anything more than another female social contrivance.

Not to hijack the thread or anything, but one rule that I've instituted in my life over the last year is the three strikes rule - and it applies to ALL INTER-PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS, not just women and sexual relationships. This rule is quite simple, and based on the whole premise of contrivances:

If you try to put me at a disadvantage three times through employment of a social contrivance, deliberately or unconsciously, I am done doing business with you.

This goes for chicks who won't put out because they don't want to offend Jesus. (or any other bogus form of ASD where her sacred pvssy is a delicate flower that must be reserved).

This goes for people who want to get in the door with me to facillitate my business needs.

This goes for prospective clients I'm working with.

And unlike the traditional '3 strikes' rule, I don't just blow off the first two as innocent coincidence. Ever hear the phrase "The first time it's an accident, the second time it's a coincidence, the third time it's your own damn fault."? Here's how relationships run on my ship:

The first strike I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but you've immediately lost any sort of priority status.
The second strike and you've just flagged yourself as someone to keep at arm's length.
The third strike I am done communicating with you.

This new rule of mine has paid huge dividends. It has saved me countless wasted hours trying to chase down opportunity with people who think they can run the show with their silly little contrivances. It's saved me several evenings of bar bills and blue balls. It's kept me from getting into dealings with time-wasters, energy-leachers, drama-magnets, free-loaders, headache-causers, and any other hyphenated problem-creators you can think of.

I'm trying to run a domain of quality, and one unescapable phenomenon of life that I've come to understand is that people who rely on social contrivances to 'have their cake' generally aren't surrounded by a life of quality or people of substance.