Is There a Middle Ground? Rollo Tomassi and other senior DJs needed on this one

[jafyk]

I've been coming to this site for a while and gaining valuable information. My understanding of the theme on here is that this sites to exist to help make men better (DJ) and in the process becoming what a woman desires (Women desire more than sex as we know). Many here seem to shun the idea of monogamy (maybe it's just marriage)Yet it seems that from what i've been reading on here the primary reason of most of the men's transformation on here is to have sex with as many women as possible they find desirable. When issues like the one I'm raising come up,then we switch back to "this site exist for DJ and not merely for PU and sex" It's like we are in denial. At least it's the recurring theme I tend to see here; how can I not believe that this is what is going on under the surface?
While I've learned a lot, yet it seems like most of what is posted here is how to get one over women. Doing what it takes to succesfully to get into her pants while looking good (in the process) and then going to conquer the next one. Yet there are those here who argue that that is just what this site is designed for to give a man advantage over a woman and for her to meet his wishes and desires otherwise she's not good enough for him and next. Which translates to me that it doesn't matter what a woman wants. While some here are advocating getting one over her. There's women sites advocating getting one over him. The only thing both sides may have in common is that they paint over this idea over with the idea that they are trying to make men better (hence a DJ) and women better.
It's ok for men to spin plates and screw more than one woman at the same time. From a man's point of view a woman who does the same is a hoe. Then again this point of view is supported by the fact that if a man isn't seeing many women at once women won't find him attractive (ok this perhaps an exaggeration on my part).
I guess bottom line is that as long as men don't cross the line by committing crime to get with a woman it's ok and vice versa for women even though in both ways both are trying to control each other to get what they want.

1)Is there a middle ground where there's a compromise and both sexes can get what they want without trying to control and manipulate each other? I wanted Rollo on this one because he's married and obviously happy.

2) Are there any fair rules for both the man and women? What are they?


3) Can an intimate relationship exist between a man and woman without the sex? What's your take on people waiting to get married to have sex?
4) Has anyone read the book "What Men Still Don't Know: about women,relationships and love by Herb Goldberg and what did you think of it as it relates to this site?"

 

[Warrior74]

who cares. are you getting what you want? I'm mad that I even read that whole post full of wankery. Make up your own mind about what you believe and go for that. Good luck.

*waits for this to turn into another 10 page "nerd overanalazing thinkfest instead of going out and going for what you want in life" episode of sosuave*

 

[jafyk]

who cares. are you getting what you want? I'm mad that I even read that whole post full of wankery. Make up your own mind about what you believe and go for that. Good luck.

*waits for this to turn into another 10 page "nerd overanalazing thinkfest instead of going out and going for what you want in life" episode of sosuave*

You're making assumptions Warrior. The major thing that prompted me to write this was because of the post by Blue08 and SunnyD.

 

[slaog]

Some people on this site want as much sex as possible while others are looking for a long term relationship with a quality woman. It's up to the individual what his choice is.

While I've learned a lot, yet it seems like most of what is posted here is how to get one over women.

Women have caused hurt to alot of men so sometimes women are seen as the enemy. Anybody who sees women as being the enemy will get more bad experiances with women.

Doing what it takes to succesfully to get into her
I guess bottom line is that as long as men don't cross the line by committing crime to get with a woman it's ok and vice versa for women even though in both ways both are trying to control each other to get what they want.

1)Is there a middle ground where there's a compromise and both sexes can get what they want without trying to control and manipulate each other? I wanted Rollo on this one because he's married and obviously happy.

The best way to get women is not to control them but to attract them. So people who do try to control others do so because they have mental issues that need sorting.

 

[Al Moh.]

Again, the problem here is that most people don't apply the techniques n this site thus they get into an endless cycle trying to get women but they fail because they don't apply and just read.

That's most people and that's why this site seems to be just about getting sex because most of the people didn't learn anything, they are still desperate for a girl.

Then there are the few succesful ones. My experience was that I came here desperate for a girl and sex, then started to learn and apply, learn and apply until now I don't think about women very much anymore because they just happen to appear in my life and it's easy just to seduce them. So I asked myself: What's next? And I think it's what most of the succesful people on this website do. They want more than just sex now, because they get enough sex. That's when they start thinking about their life, their job, their way of treating other people, their approach to general problems.

That's why there are quiet a few deeper topics. But still, the newbs are the majority, which pisses a lot a advanced people of. that's why they often leave this site to look elsewhere for a group where most people are like them and they can advance to the next level.

 

[jafyk]

Again, the problem here is that most people don't apply the techniques n this site thus they get into an endless cycle trying to get women but they fail because they don't apply and just read.

That's most people and that's why this site seems to be just about getting sex because most of the people didn't learn anything, they are still desperate for a girl.

Then there are the few succesful ones. My experience was that I came here desperate for a girl and sex, then started to learn and apply, learn and apply until now I don't think about women very much anymore because they just happen to appear in my life and it's easy just to seduce them. So I asked myself: What's next? And I think it's what most of the succesful people on this website do. They want more than just sex now, because they get enough sex. That's when they start thinking about their life, their job, their way of treating other people, their approach to general problems.

That's why there are quiet a few deeper topics. But still, the newbs are the majority, which pisses a lot a advanced people of. that's why they often leave this site to look elsewhere for a group where most people are like them and they can advance to the next level.

I appreciate your response and I do share your view on some of these issues. It just seems strange that one's purpose in this life is to F one female after another. It gets old and you eventually want more. I grew up thinking guys were the bad ones and now I see things differently. I feel there's no good or bad just two opposites trying to get what they want. It has started to seem like a war (being dramatic here) of who can strategically outwit the other while trying to make them feel good about it in the process and in the end strolling off with held high (I've conquered him/her) and I could care less how he/she feels "afterall that's just the nature of the game" it what led me to ponder on if there's a middle ground.

 

[Al Moh.]

The key here is in how you think. I could treat seducing chicks like waging a war against them and I would certainly find proof that it is a war. But I don't take things so seriously.

I do what's natural and what is more natural than sexuality? In fact, the dating and mating game is a little bit like a fight, you against her, she against you and this is testing each other to see if the other one is worthy. But I think you don't necessarily have to think about this, one's you get some experience it'll happen naturally.

 

[jafyk]

The key here is in how you think. I could treat seducing chicks like waging a war against them and I would certainly find proof that it is a war. But I don't take things so seriously.

I do what's natural and what is more natural than sexuality? In fact, the dating and mating game is a little bit like a fight, you against her, she against you and this is testing each other to see if the other one is worthy. But I think you don't necessarily have to think about this, one's you get some experience it'll happen naturally.

I see what you mean but there was this recent post by this person called blue08 (who's a female) and she lamented on what her bF put her through etc. I'm not saying she's right or wrong but it just got me thinking how heartless it all seems.

 

[C-quenced]

1)Is there a middle ground where there's a compromise and both sexes can get what they want without trying to control and manipulate each other? I wanted Rollo on this one because he's married and obviously happy.

No. I think people's emotions and their ego is what gets them to be controlling.

2) Are there any fair rules for both the man and women? What are they?

If there were any I don't think anybody would follow them. Especially women. To a woman "fair rules" would mean everything that works to her advantage and against everyone else.

3) Can an intimate relationship exist between a man and woman without the sex? What's your take on people waiting to get married to have sex?

Yes and no. From my personal experience several years back I was in a 2.5 year relationship. I genuinely loved my ex girlfriend to death and wanted to marry her. I didn't want to "touch" her in that way until we got married. I kept my vow and she ended up betraying me. Now I'm 23 years old, still a virgin and can't really seem to have any luck anywhere... not even a 6 or a 7 would give me the time of day. I could write an entire book on the psychological anguish I been through but it would make me hate myself even more.

4) Has anyone read the book "What Men Still Don't Know: about women,relationships and love by Herb Goldberg and what did you think of it as it relates to this site?"

No. How come they haven't written a book called "What women still Don't know: about.... by..."

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

Many here seem to shun the idea of monogamy (maybe it's just marriage)Yet it seems that from what i've been reading on here the primary reason of most of the men's transformation on here is to have sex with as many women as possible they find desirable.

If this is the main thing you're coming away with I would encourage you to read the entire Plate Theory thread in the Archive. And I mean really read it, all 4 pages. You're making a common error in the purpose of being non-exclusive. Non-exclusivity is a mindset and practice that is meant to encourage a Man to realize confidence by developing and maintaining options, and then acknowledging those options as a source of confidence. As this applies to women (Plate Theory can be used in many aspects) confidence is derived from a Man knowing his own commodity. It is not a license to ƒuck as many women as humanly possible. What you're stating here is a binary response; you haven't given it enough critical thought.

You don't HAVE to be sexual with every one of the plates you're spinning. It's the potential in knowing that you could be, or that there are women who will value your attention that prompts a competitive anxiety in women - often when you don't even know you're doing it. If you are sexual with some of the plates you're spinning, so much the better since you know that they're proven commodities and if one isn't performing as you'd like, you have the unconscious knowledge that others will.

One of the biggest hurdles guys have with Plate Theory is breaking themselves of this 'LTR-as-Goal' mentality. Monogamy should never be a goal, it should be a by-product of Plate Theory, but only when you've properly filtered through enough plates and even into monogamy itself. If a woman is unwilling to be non-exclusive with you (i.e. "she'll leave me if I see other girls" fear) she isn't a plate to spin. This seems counterintuitive to a guy with a LTR-As-Goal mentality. Most guys (AFCs in particular) are deathly afraid of losing that ONE perfect girl and so never even attempt to spin more than one plate, much less have any others to compare her 'perfection' to in the first place.

I've seen mPUA do exactly this. They're so impressed with the success of newly perfected techniques that they settle for the ONE 'dream girl' and find that their attentions become valueless to her because she perceives she is his only option for intimacy and he gets marginalized. It's not a failure in technique, but rather a failure in his mindset.

Guys don't search out the 'community' because they're getting too much pussie. If anything compromises self-respect (assuming an AFC even has a concept of that) it's a Scarcity/Sniper mentality. Worry less about the meaningfulness of sex of the guys tapping their "harems" and more about the chump crucifying himself to be a martyr for his singular "dream girl". He's far more common.

Very few men - and particularly those seeking advice on SS - really have the depth of experience they truly need, yet all claim to have, that's necessary to make informed decisions with regard to monogamy. A lot of guys want to reassure themselves of their choice to become monogamous with a woman by claiming that they've seen it all, have had so much opportunity, and are tired of the game that they know a good thing when they see it. They don't, you don't and I don't. I can only laugh when I read a post from a 26 y.o. guy who's only been single for 6 months tell me how tired he is of the "club scene" after having been exclusive with a GF since he was 20. It's necessary to ask ourselves questions and be honest with ourselves' and this is often painful and takes effort we'd rather not exert.

1)Is there a middle ground where there's a compromise and both sexes can get what they want without trying to control and manipulate each other? I wanted Rollo on this one because he's married and obviously happy.
2) Are there any fair rules for both the man and women? What are they?

Traditional gender roles used to be based on a complimentary ideology, meaning that each sex followed different, though complimentary, models. A man was respected as the decision maker of the home and the woman was responsible for nurturing and wellbeing of that household. No one role was above the other, but both were separate and respected. Today however, due to the pervasive influence of feminization (not to be confused with feminism), a new gender model has become accepted and this is called the egalitarian model. This model is one of total equitability in gender roles without the differentiation of male or female roles. This is a flat-line equality which ignores the inherent strengths and weaknesses of each gender in favor of presuming both can be equally effective in problem solving and meeting relational challenges based on individual personal qualities.

Egalitarianism is defeating; it leaves a vaccuum of power or responsibilities to be filled by either sex in the wrong instances; for instance, expecting a man to possess the equitable feminine qualities he's lacking yet still holding him accountable for them. In other words, if a wife feels her husband is incapable of providing for her and the kids with the decisive, confident security of leadership she will feel compelled to assume the role of the husband and he will be relegated to the role of being the passive, submissive wife. In the egalitarian model this is acceptable, socially reinforced and passed on as learned behavior to their children. And in this generation (and perhaps the one prior) it's not a stretch to assume that contemporary male submissiveness was in fact taught to them by their own parents.

That's the problem - now how do you change it? The first step is to develop the ownership of your role as a husband and the authority you are entitled to (and is expected of you) because of it. You need to own the respect that is afforded to you as the primary. The hardest lesson to learn is to change your own mind about yourself. Most men never had the occasion to develop an understanding of positive masculinity.

Secondly, you need to get in touch with your inner A-Hole and stop falling back on compassion and your 'feminine' side. There is merit in being empathetic, but far too many men default to it as a method for keeping the peace in spite of what would serve both himself and his spouse better. Time to ditch this horsesh!t altogether, it only places you in passive, submissive guilt driven obedience. YOU ARE THE MAN and the PRIZE to be had, express it in your voice, your mannerisms, your confidence in dealing with other men worthy of your respect, with women and especially children. Listen to what your wife has to say, but decide what you will all do according to how you interpret things and NEVER in response to her emotional blackmail.

Lastly, break some eggs and stand firm. All the confrontation and power reclamation in the world wont hold an ounce of water if you spinelessly fall back on resolve. Stick to it. It's going to be rough at first, but short term intimacy is never worth long term disrespect. When you begin to establish yourself as the primary she will blackmail you with her intimacy, hold out on you and pitch fits like a child, but your life will be worse if you act decisively and then backslide to "get some." She knows this is her only agency to make you behave the way she thinks she wants you to, but once you begin to establish that it holds no power over you she will relent. Certainly not at first because what you'll do will represent the power she assumed in order to have her security needs met will be transfering back to the guy she felt she had to take it from. This is going to make her crazy in the beginning since those feeling of insecurity will come up again, but stay strong.

Who's more dominant? On average I think women are, but only because of a socialized, ready willingness from most men to abdicate. Women are more dominant, but they have a natural desire to want you to be.

One thing I can tell you after 12 years of marriage is that the moment I go AFC on my wife I fail the sh!t test. We have a complimentary marriage by design, but it took a few years before I was able to recognize that I needed to be at the rudder of my family's ship. Trust me, a wife wants you there too, but through egalitarianism she's been taught to fear your decisions more, no matter how recklesss her own are. Egalitarianism means each individual is setting their own coursse, whereas complimentarianism encourages both partners to cooperate to follow a shared course.

I don't know if you've ever played mixed doubles tennis before, but that's how I see marriage. you have to cooperatively play together in order to hit the ball back over the net to win. You can't do this if you're hitting the ball at each other all the time. You have to play on the same team or you lose the game. The sexes were meant to be complimentary to each other not adversarial.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

3) Can an intimate relationship exist between a man and woman without the sex?

Sex is the deal breaker, but in my pointing it out I run the risk of coming across as "shallow" or "superficial." It's important, but it shouldn't be that important, right? Wrong. It is THAT important. Sex is the glue that holds relationships together.

If you encountered a woman (or man) who fit every ideal you ever had for a relationship - best friend, loving, 100% loyal, excellent mother/father, came from a great family, perfect HB 10, healthy both mentally and physically, emotionally available, intellectually stimulating, shared all your beliefs - who loved you unconditionally and wanted to marry you, but with one caveat; he/she would NEVER have sex with you under any circumstances, would you marry this person? You could have children together through insemination and they would always be platonically affectionate with you; knowing full well before you did, and pledging to be completely faithful yourself, would you spend the rest of your life in a completely sexless marriage with an otherwise ideal person?

Remember this sexless state doesn't come after having had sex before (due to an injury or disability), it's a pre-condition.

This is how important sex is. People tend to think of love as coming in different varieties and colors - platonic, fraternal, familial, erotic, agape, etc. All of this is nonsense. Love is love, it's how it's expressed that's different. I love my Mom, my brother, my best friend and my daughter, but I only ƒuck my wife - that's what makes us husband and wife. Sex can be an expression of love or it can be an act (recreation) - I happen to have enjoyed both versions in my lifetime - but it is a prerequisite for an intersexual relationship. It's time we all stopped deemphasizing the importance of sex and accept it for what it is. Every time we think we're taking some moral high-road by saying it's superficial or shallow to place such importance on sex, we only do a disservice to ourselves and our lovers. We're only screwing ourselves by thinking that we're in some way above sexuality in some lame self-delusion that stating so will make us more desirable and apart from the rest of the herd (who are also claiming to be above sex anyway) It IS that important, so start giving it the respect it deserves. You do yourself no favors by desexualizing yourself.

3) What's your take on people waiting to get married to have sex?

Many an AFC believes that having held onto his virginity for so long is a great selling point for himself. In other words "I'm not like those other guys, I held onto my virginity this long and you are so special a girl that I'll forego this conviction to bang YOU." The assumption is that she'll be so flattered by such an offer she'll reciprocate with all her unbridled lust. Of course the more likely scenario is she'll use this confession as a convenient out of the situation by saying how she could never live up to his expectations. She's not the girl he's looking for. By admitting this, he's essentially saying "I was saving my virginity for the woman who'll be my wife." The covert message is a marriage proposal. Needless to say, this will be overwhelming for the girl.

All that said, and as odd as it sounds, I can appreciate the conviction of saving oneself for marriage. As impractical as it's become, the latent purposes for doing so do make sense. Unfortunately the idea has been subjected to the modern insecurities and inconsistencies of the overly religious. Without turning this into a theology thread, the idea of maintaining virginity has become a hinderance to full maturityin modern times, and this is then exacerbated by confused and inconsistent understanding of gender definitions from the past 50 or so years of feminization. The church is no shelter from the Matrix, and if anything, feminization thrives there.

Simply put there are experiences and opportunities for personal growth that only embracing our sexuality can offer. One point I regularly make with respect to AFCs is that at some stage in their maturation they become retarded. I use "retarded" in the clinical sense here; their social maturing becomes held up by their lack of access to new experiences. Most of the time this is due to an inability to see past old conventions they learned in adolescence which halts them from passing to the next level so to speak. The problem with saving oneself for marriage becomes apparent in this. I'm not saying there is no merit in it, just that most people subscribing to it do so without understanding it.

From my experience in the church, most men I know are either so entirely unprepared for the responsibilities of marriage they tend to hook up with single mothers, or they see marriage as an obstacle to their getting to ƒuck and marry at 19 in order to be "legitimately having sex" with no caution or condition whatsoever to whom they marry. Add to this the predominance of weak-masculine, asexual fathers and dominant masculinized mothers insisting on the feminine as priority and the religious AFC cycle continues.

One last conflict that "late term virgins" have to resolve is that in order to get to a point of intimacy with a woman - in order to marry them and thus have sex - is that there is a necessary sexual desire for both people. The conflict is this; in order to get to that pure, acceptable sexuality there is a needed sexual desire that has to preexist. It's exactly this lusty taboo (sin) about sex that is necessary to prompt a person to marriage (holy).

4) Has anyone read the book "What Men Still Don't Know: about women,relationships and love by Herb Goldberg and what did you think of it as it relates to this site?"

No, but I'll suggest you read "Why Men Are The Way They Are" by Dr. Warren P. Farrell. I'll guarantee you it's a better place to start.

 

[jafyk]

Rollo, I want to thank you so much for you spending time to respond to my post. I was a little concerned you might passed up on this considering the first poster had written it off as an unecessary post. I've often thought about some of the things you touched upon here in the past.
Especially after I moved over to US of A I started to see more women becoming like men and it really disgusted me. I always shared the view that men weren't necessarily better than women but that they both had their functions which were equally important. I just love the way you explained the complimentary and egaliterian aspect of things.
I lost my virginity at 24 I was trying to save it for marriage, lol. It never stopped me from having all sorts of nasty thoughts and reading any book I could lay my hands on that was sexual. I basically knew all I could without the deed. Then I thought about it even if I met a girl who was virgin (which would be rare) that doesn't necessaryily mean she would be a good wife material in the long run and it won't stop her from necessarily having other vices that are worse than not being a virgin.
I also feel what you're saying about men not being ready to marry but do it just so they can F legally. At the same time for people who don't share that belief for marriage before sex, what incentive do they have since they can have the milk without paying for the cow. I will reread this post again in other to properly absorb it.
As far as the intimacy and sex. I've thought about it. I don't think no matter how good a woman was in other ways, without the sex I don't think I'd be wanting to spend the rest of my life in a sexless marriage, lol. I see your point.
As for the book, don't be fooled by the title. It starts of by talking about how men are disconnected from themselves and so can't even relate with others. Then it goes to talk about men and women relationships. It basically states things as they are. I guess it's just to help people see things as they are. For example it says men tend to feel guilty even when there's no reason to. So, when a man realizes this he can stick by his decision and not feel guilty. I'd encourage you to read it and share your thoughts on what you make of it and how some of the ideas in the book may compliments the DJ doctrine on here on sosuave. Oh one more thing are you a Christian? if this is too personal a question to ask on here please send me a PM. Once again Rollo thanks a lot for your invaluable insight. One thing I'd like to expand on more as far dating goes what's a realistic middle ground and are there any rules that would be fair to both sexes to operate under? If I missed out on where you touched on that my apologies.

 

[jafyk]

One more thing. How much of the DJ and sosuave ideals are universal and how much of it deals with the western culture? I am African and over there it's normal for women to play really hard to get and over here in US I noticed it isn't so much so. According to sosuave we guys should be the prize right? How much room does that leave for women to play hard to get lol? I'm trying to reconcile what I'm learning on here.