Not 5 years ago...this stuff used to be fun...

[TheHumanist]

There comes a point of conflict (or revulsion if you want) after a guy has been unplugged from the Matrix long enough where he begins to doubt himself and what he's seeing go on around him. All of the gender dynamics and the complex, but discreet, interplay between the sexes that's been such a mystery for so long starts to become apparent to him. The Neg Hits he never would've dreamed of attempting in his AFC days become so predictably reliable at sparking interest that it becomes depressing. A backhanded compliment shouldn't work; it goes against everything any girl has ever told him will endear him to a woman, but once he musters up the courage to experiment, he finds that they do.

What's depressing isn't that a well delivered neg could actually generates interest, it's the principle behind the neg - the reason why it works - that prompts the conflict. Are women, generally, more like this than not? So he experiments a little more, and tests other theories, and discovers that with some minor variations, yes, for the most part the principles are valid. This then becomes a real tough pill to swallow, especially when you consider ideas like feminine hypergamy. It's very hard to measure oneself up and adjust to a new understanding of how women operate. He can't reconcile what he'd been told and conditioned to believe before (the soul mate myth, pedestalize her, just be yourself, etc.) with this new paradigm. So either he learns to live with this new understanding, benefit from it and grow into a new role for himself, or he rejects it and vilifies it wholesale.

"Women are really not as bad as these misogynists, these bitter, burned men would all have us believe. They're shallow and soulless to think women are all out to get them. They over-analyze everything when they should all just be themselves and let fate or some divine force pair them up with their soul mates. I pity them, really I do."

I've heard all of these regressive rationales from boys as young as 14 to men as old as 75. It's a comfortable ignorance to believe that things are just unknowable and beyond one's control or efforts to really understand. And to make matters worse, there's a long established system of social conventions ready to reinforce and affirm these rationales; ready to reinsert him back into the Matrix and tell him he's unique and special ("not like other guys") and will be rewarded with female intimacy for rejecting it.

Doubt, depressing principles behind certain actions, conflict between upbringing and here, possible choice between using rationales or growing into the role.

That's a nice answer, but it doesn't answer my question and I think the sense of revulsion brought up is looking at a girl, not the sense of doubt. This is not a conflict between a desire to see women as unknowable versus the understanding. Though I can see that it is a possible area of contention also.

I am asking that what does such principles is suppose to implicate to our mindset. The best answer, pulling from memory, is "women are women, you can't fault them as you can fault a dog for his instincts." But, that doesn't really answer it still. Does that mean I should look at a girl no higher than a dog?

Please excuse me for bringing this up, I know you get asked a lot about this in one form or another and no one want to drag personal stuff in, but you don't wake up seeing and then thinking about your wife the same way Squirrels thinks when he sees a pretty chick, do you? Either you have to incorporate it in a way that doesn't make you see every girl as some heartless user or at least given your wife some level of an exception pass against all the other girls. Do you differentiate at all? Or do you see every girl as a normal guy would see in a drunk, slvtty chick in her more worse moments with better behavior as only an insincere facade? Or something a bit better or perhaps assume the worse but reassess if they show a better side?

 

[boomerick]

Honestly, anymore with all women in general.......

Hope for the best ...BUT....

Be prepared for the worst!.......

Over and Out.

 

[zekko]

He can't reconcile what he'd been told and conditioned to believe before (the soul mate myth, pedestalize her, just be yourself, etc.) with this new paradigm.

Those things may be part of social conditioning, but do guys really believe that stuff? I mean some guys do, sure, but do you think a majority of men buy into it?

Do you think guys really believe in the soul mate myth? I mean really, really believe it? I don't think I've ever believed that.

Do you think guys think it's a good idea to put women on pedestals? They may put them there but I'm not so sure they think it's a good idea.

As for "just be yourself", I actually think that's good advice. You just have to be your BEST self. If you're not yourself, who are you gong to be? Mystery? Someone here recently said that if you're putting up these false fronts then you''re not attracting the girl to your real self anyway.

And to make matters worse, there's a long established system of social conventions ready to reinforce and affirm these rationales; ready to reinsert him back into the Matrix and tell him he's unique and special ("not like other guys") and will be rewarded with female intimacy for rejecting it.

I'm not sure I quite follow you here. But are you suggesting that you will be rewarded with female intimacy if you plug yourself into the matrix? Isn't the idea on this forum that you should UNplug yourself from the matrix, and that's what women will really find attractive?

 

[backbreaker]

I completely agree with you that if you become a man of value the women will come. Being a man of value carries a lot more weight than knowing how to toss out negs. Reading your story though I can't help but notice it sounds like you were being opened by women simply based on your looks.

Which is not a bad thing, don't get me wrong, especially since you worked so hard to get into shape. But I'm just saying.

they got to like you for something right lol?

 

[sharkbeat]

I remember when I first jumped on the seduction bandwagon. C&F, partying, working out, IOI, busting balls, having fun, is all out there. It felt like my eyes just been pried open to see the truth out there. I watched movies that's supposedly show you how an alpha man behaves. James Bond, Fight Club, to name a few. The game was actually fun to play.

Now, I am having this thought why is there a game in the first place? Why do I have to play these mind games. Why do I even bother if the she plays the "hard to get" card. Why do I have to show her how much of a fun guy I am if I don't feel like having fun at that point?

See, it's not women that I despise, it's the game. Back then, I actually look for cues in her words for C&F materials. Now, I don't even bother trying to come up with some C&F unless it comes to me naturally. If she's not interested, it's not for me. But at the same time, I am getting less lays because of this attitude. Maybe I am just tired.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

Either you have to incorporate it in a way that doesn't make you see every girl as some heartless user or at least given your wife some level of an exception pass against all the other girls. Do you differentiate at all? Or do you see every girl as a normal guy would see in a drunk, slvtty chick in her more worse moments with better behavior as only an insincere facade? Or something a bit better or perhaps assume the worse but reassess if they show a better side?

I think the main problem veteran posters at SS have is in dealing with absolutes. Either you see ALL women as conniving, duplicitous bar sluts or you don't. There is no room for questioning, and you really shouldn't make an attempt to anyway because you'll either never understand women, or you wont like what you find. IMO I think the vast majority of SS members would do well to make a concerned effort to rid themselves of binary thinking.

Now, as I've posted in countless other threads, I've enjoyed a great marriage with my wife for almost 14 years. Is she special? Is she unique from all the bar sluts everyone is so concerned with? No. She's a woman like any other and given to the same prompts and motivation, the same hypergamy and security concerns any other woman would be. In fact, had I taken the White Knight AFC advice from all the regretful cynics crying "misogyny" and avoided clubs altogether I never would've met Mrs. Tomassi. That's right, 15 years ago I sarged her in a club, with her girlfriends present, on a GNO.

There's nothing insincere about our relationship, however I do know that it's based on conditionality. Anyone telling you that unconditional love is possible is selling you something. Were I to devolve into an unemployed alcoholic my wife would have every right to leave me. Knowing what I do about female hypergamy, I'd expect it. Now, that's an extreme example for illustration, but think of all the myriad ways in which women respond to prompts and the behaviors that result from them. In marriage the venue changes, but the same principles are at work.

As I stated prior, what frustrates the men crying 'cynic' or 'misogynist' is knowing these dynamics, but get frustrated with their applications. So they throw the baby out with the bath water and say "ƒuck it! you're all misogynists and wrong, this sh!t doesn't work and you'll all end up lonely old men if you keep this up." People by an large are lazy. It takes effort to be educated, so the want of a simple explanation is often the source of many of our mistakes an misunderstandings. The woman who you'd think was a gold-digging bar slut is the soccer mom you married 10 years later. And the precious virginic pastor's daughter you married out of high school can turn into the 32 y.o. single mom cougar as well. Understanding how women ARE; what motivates them, how western society influences them, what there biological imperatives prompt them to, etc. takes effort that most men simply can't (or wont) apply themselves to.

That's why SoSuave and other community forums are so valuable. Resources like this forum simply didn't exist before the advent of the internet. We have a worldwide wealth of experience and observations being shared here in order to help Men make educated, rational decisions about their personal lives that was never available before.

Those things may be part of social conditioning, but do guys really believe that stuff? I mean some guys do, sure, but do you think a majority of men buy into it?

Go spends some time sifting through this site and then see if you can answer some of your own questions:

http://www.loveshack.org/

 

[Kailex]

I think the main problem veteran posters at SS have is in dealing with absolutes. Either you see ALL women as conniving, duplicitous bar sluts or you don't.

Here's the BIGGEST thing I've noticed as of late, and it's not only one form of binary thinking, as it seems to be even more extended lately. Not only are ALL women one way, but the sample size by which any man comes to that conclusion is usually a small one. To most of the forum goers here, that sample size by which they perform this unofficial census can be counted on one hand... before they lump the entire female gender into the same generalization.

There IS middle ground, but I've yet to see ALL women be from ONLY either side of the spectrums.

This is why SoSuave and other community forums are so valuable. Resources like this forum simply didn't exist before the advent of the internet. We have a worldwide wealth of experience and observations being shared here in order to help Men make educated, rational decisions about their personal lives that was never available before.

This is why the threads about "Misogynists Leave" are the ones that slay me. I'd rather see a misogynist post and get his POV and his world's worth of experience than to go into all of this blindly.

When I first came to this forum, it was like my mind exploded.

It took me a good month to read and then PROCESS all of the information presented on the forum.

I'll take anything on this board... the good and the bad.

Go spends some time sifting through this site and then see if you can answer some of your own questions:

http://www.loveshack.org/

I visit LS every once in a while to remind myself what the other side of the quarter looks like... I like this side a WHOLE lot better.

 

[SoldMySoul]

So in essence..... If you leave an unattended steak around your dog, what will happen???? Everyone knows the dog will scavenge it up quickly. Do you hate the dog for this? No, but the dog pisses you off. Do you hate the dog for his true nature? No!!!

Once you understand a woman's true nature, it is hard to accept at first, but reconditioning your mind makes you accept it for what it is.

For me accepting the true nature has been hard. I so wanted to believe that garbage about true love, soul mate and all that crap. But now I have a much better understanding of the nature of a woman and will never believe the myths of true love.

ROLLO, just curious, does your wife know your feelings towards her as you posted above? You said she is not special or unique. It would seem to me that if she knew this it would bother her though.

 

[zekko]

they got to like you for something right lol?

You're absolutely right. I know this guys who swear women only like you for your penis size. There was a study posted awhile back that said generally speaking, women didn't care so much about size. But that the most attractive women very much preferred well endowed men.

 

[sharkbeat]

You're absolutely right. I know this guys who swear women only like you for your penis size. There was a study posted awhile back that said generally speaking, women didn't care so much about size. But that the most attractive women very much preferred well endowed men.

With all the make ups, I don't know if there's any woman that's naturally attractive anymore.

 

[TheHumanist]

I think the main problem veteran posters at SS have is in dealing with absolutes. Either you see ALL women as conniving, duplicitous bar sluts or you don't. There is no room for questioning, and you really shouldn't make an attempt to anyway because you'll either never understand women, or you wont like what you find. IMO I think the vast majority of SS members would do well to make a concerned effort to rid themselves of binary thinking.

*Nods* Fair enough. It is hard to think outside of binary logic which make it hard to discuss.

Now, as I've posted in countless other threads, I've enjoyed a great marriage with my wife for almost 14 years. Is she special? Is she unique from all the bar sluts everyone is so concerned with? No. She's a woman like any other and given to the same prompts and motivation, the same hypergamy and security concerns any other woman would be. In fact, had I taken the White Knight AFC advice from all the regretful cynics crying "misogyny" and avoided clubs altogether I never would've met Mrs. Tomassi. That's right, 15 years ago I sarged her in a club, with her girlfriends present, on a GNO.

There's nothing insincere about our relationship, however I do know that it's based on conditionality. Anyone telling you that unconditional love is possible is selling you something. Were I to devolve into an unemployed alcoholic my wife would have every right to leave me. Knowing what I do about female hypergamy, I'd expect it. Now, that's an extreme example for illustration, but think of all the myriad ways in which women respond to prompts and the behaviors that result from them. In marriage the venue changes, but the same principles are at work.

Again, I apologize for bringing your marriage into the discussion, I know you explain it time and time. It must be tiresome. More below.

As I stated prior, what frustrates the men crying 'cynic' or 'misogynist' is knowing these dynamics, but get frustrated with their applications. So they throw the baby out with the bath water and say "ƒuck it! you're all misogynists and wrong, this sh!t doesn't work and you'll all end up lonely old men if you keep this up." People by an large are lazy. It takes effort to be educated, so the want of a simple explanation is often the source of many of our mistakes an misunderstandings. The woman who you'd think was a gold-digging bar slut is the soccer mom you married 10 years later. And the precious virginic pastor's daughter you married out of high school can turn into the 32 y.o. single mom cougar as well. Understanding how women ARE; what motivates them, how western society influences them, what there biological imperatives prompt them to, etc. takes effort that most men simply can't (or wont) apply themselves to.

That's why SoSuave and other community forums are so valuable. Resources like this forum simply didn't exist before the advent of the internet. We have a worldwide wealth of experience and observations being shared here in order to help Men make educated, rational decisions about their personal lives that was never available before.

It's part of the reason why I haven't just said "fvck it" and done the same. I can see your proof. A man with a 14 year marriage and all the other kick ass stuff in your life mean you're doing something right.

The application of such principles have been troublesome at the least. The principles seems to point so easily as the conclusion that ALL girls are "conniving, duplicitous bar slvts" whatever you meet at the bookstore or at the bar. It's hard to approach a girl with interest and curiosity if you think that her friendly, sweet demeanor is just a front to her duplicitous and inconsiderate core.

This leads to one having to ask if one is misinterpreting the principles (the binary logic as you said) or, for some, the doubt that the principles are wrong.

More below

If you leave an unattended steak around your dog, what will happen???? Everyone knows the dog will scavenge it up quickly. Do you hate the dog for this? No, but the dog pisses you off. Do you hate the dog for his true nature? No!!!

I just mentioned that... That analogy isn't satisfactory. I think most people, or at least here, doesn't have a problem is trying viewing things as a magic carpet ride with some magical invisible forces driving true love, but more along the binary issue. The principles seem to be saying that not just the old school advice of guarding heart or observe behavior rather than words or something like that, but expectation/assumption that she is one without any good qualities or fake, like it cannot exist in her at all. That's alot different than acknowledging capability, to me, that's like acknowledging that we all have the potential to kill a person or something like that.

There's the rub, not loss of the idea of "true love (at least here, probably not LS)," or the understanding that a girl's love is conditional, but in application in the "ALL women" binary thing with women being so amoral, so without real sincerity, that one feels a sense of disgust at the sight. I, would like to put forth that since the observations and statements are true, the problem is misinterpretation of data stemming from thinking in a binary line of thinking. The cliche truth that it is in the middle. At least, that's what I hope is correct, hate to use RT's wife into this again, but while you stated that you view her as nothing special and holds no illusions, I must say that she's not just some duplicitous, heartless woman that you just tamed, right?
---

One other thing that I have to mention separately in address to you talking about how there are soccer mom who were drunken, party girls and innocent pastor daughters who became a single mom cougar. People do change, but there something off by that analogy. It sounds more like exceptions than the generalized norm. Even Roissy have repeatedly expressed "riding the alpha carousel leads to old cougars" meme, actually, it might be one of his tenets. Basically, if a girl has a sh!tty personality at 20, chances are that she'll just reinforces in the future years instead of learning from it and becoming better.

 

[backbreaker]

conditionality. that is the word i'm looking for. i don't even know what it means it just fits.

rollo is spot on on this one guys. we have been sold an idea of what love is, and it's simply not true at least in the sense that we think it is. yes when a woman says i love you she means i love what you bring to the table. i love what you can do for me, i love how you make me feel.

the mistake men make is that they think they got the girl then they go into auto poliot mode and stop doing the things that made her love him int he first place, and then she starts looking for those things, she cheats or leaves.

zarko made a comment about women liking me for my looks. honestly i could care less. i'm a good looking guy, that's part of who i am..I am the guy who spends 2 hours a day in the gym 5-6 days a week. when i was a fat slob, i was the guy who ate pizzas and drank beer all day long, that was apart of who i was. is a woman who has legs to die for not apart of who she is? what's the difference? is a woman not being able to suck a golf ball through a straw not part of who she is? is my financial situation not part of who i am? who you are? is my credit score not apart of who i am? is my worth ethic not apart of who i am?

if i started dabbing in coke again, that would chage effiefcitly who i am. right now i am a guy who does not do hard drugs. if i started, i am a guy who does hard drugs. that is apart ofw ho youare

when we think of "who you are" we have been sold these hallmark ass things like "funny, witty, intelligent, makes me smile" these are great and i have my quickrs, i'm very funny when i want to be, i'm half ass intelligent, but that's apart of who you are. you can't neglet the rest of the package and use these things as your battle cry.

my very first real GF, somewhat similar to this situation, i met her when i was sarging, and she just widdled her ass down to where she was the only one i was dating. i knew after a while it wouldn't' work but more so than anything, i had put on alot of weight. when she cheated on me, even then, when it happened, i was not mad at her. i broke up with her instantly but i never was mad. when she met me i was about 10% body fat and 170, by the time that happened i was like 230. what the **** was supposed to happen.


in that movie flannel pajamas, the guy was a genius at what he did, and he made a very good living at it. he got the start up business bug and his wife was gung ho about it. until the reality of the situation hit that things were going to get tight and she did not like it and left. her love was conditional as is all love.

theres is a reason, money, not adultery, is the reason for the vast majority of divorces. financial situations change and people fall in and out of love.


the avg woman, rather she will admit it or not, will forgive you for ****ing your secretary before she forgive you for losing your job.

 

[Kailex]

the mistake men make is that they think they got the girl then they go into auto poliot mode and stop doing the things that made her love him int he first place, and then she starts looking for those things, she cheats or leaves.

And yet, squirrels was the author of one of my favorite posts ever here, in accordance to the Active Test:

http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=134995



I will have to say this, I have noticed a darker trend from squirrels' as of late. This might be the 2nd or 3rd similar post when it comes towards the game in general which is almost sad to see, albeit, understandable.

As Rollo said, it pretty much comes down to seeing all of the signs and seeing all of the common responses even though it's different people. Who WASN'T excited to see SoSuave in the beginning and then USE everything you learned and then.. IT WORKED.

Of course in the beginning it's cool and you get to see all the situations from teh front row, but eventually, the novelty DOES wear off and it comes to the point where if the next woman responds the SAME way as a woman did 5 years ago, you can't help but feel disappointed.

Neo was ecstatic that he knew Kung-Fu, but given enough time, you'd think that would have worn off. The initial discovery and eventual field test always deliver a rush, but after 5 years... it definitely loses its luster.

 

[SoldMySoul]

And yet, squirrels was the author of one of my favorite posts ever here, in accordance to the Active Test:




Of course in the beginning it's cool and you get to see all the situations from teh front row, but eventually, the novelty DOES wear off and it comes to the point where if the next woman responds the SAME way as a woman did 5 years ago, you can't help but feel disappointed.

That is is a good point you have. When I found this site several years ago, I lurked for a long while before joining and I do not have a record number of posts because I was busy dating and whatnot.

It comes to a point that you start analyzing "your game" too much and stop enjoying the game itself. I mean you would be on a date and trying to mentally play and watch for IOIs to determine where you stood with her. While doing so YOU stopped having fun!

This site because of that has become a double edged sword for me. The good being hearing what other fellows are doing and going through along what is the norm from women. The bad being OVER analyzing the fairer species. It was more fun and seemed to be more productive just doing what I felt was natural.

I will agree that the AFC syndrome is real and I never want to be in that zone again.

 

[The Message Boy]

The Neg Hits he never would've dreamed of attempting in his AFC days become so predictably reliable at sparking interest that it becomes depressing. A backhanded compliment shouldn't work; it goes against everything any girl has ever told him will endear him to a woman, but once he musters up the courage to experiment, he finds that they do.

Neg Hits don't work on every girl. Some girls actually take offense to them. What I find is that when I go too hard on them, the girl takes offense. Most girls say I am already ****y out of the gate lol, so the over-usage of Neg hits starts to piss them off.

I do "crack" on them alot but it's in a flirty fashion, not in a fashion where it's just out of the blue and out of nowhere LIKE YOU GUYS PREACH on here.

Furtheremore, what I'm finding from the field is that it's not WHAT YOU SAY it's WHO'S saying it.

If unattractive guy across the room starts throwing neg hits but she's not interested in him at all, none of that **** is going to catch her attention. But if attractive guy (Message Boy) wants to walk up to her and compliments her on her saddles or her body lol, she won't have a problem with it and will flirt back with me.

The entire alteraction becomes like an entire flirt session going back and forth, and I FIND from my experience, that too much on the Neg Hits actually distract the engagement and the "flow" of the initial attraction.

I'm sharing my experiences.

What's depressing isn't that a well delivered neg could actually generates interest, it's the principle behind the neg - the reason why it works - that prompts the conflict. Are women, generally, more like this than not? So he experiments a little more, and tests other theories, and discovers that with some minor variations, yes, for the most part the principles are valid.

See, and this is where we differ Rollo, because most of the principles on the "theory" side of Sosuave I find DO NOT WORK. and I've experimented with all of them. Maybe it's the type of girls we are approaching? I am a black guy, so majority of the women I approach are black, maybe that's the difference? Now I also talk to alot of white and asian girls to, but here's some of the main "theories" of Sosuave that I find DO NOT WORK:

> The 3 second rule - Makes me come off like a "thirsty" idiot. I mean come on, I just walked in the club and I'm already on some girl lol, are you serious? How "thirsty" could I be lol? How about come in and survey the area, say wat up to a few folks, and just start doing some casual "chillin" before we get all thirsty?

> The Wait 3-4 Days before you call - When I do that, she doesn't even remember me half of the time, then the other half of the time, she's pissed because I took all week to call and thinks I've been screwing other women in that timeframe lol.

> The Neg Hits - Explained earlier, I crack on women though, but I find when I go a little overboard with it or just out of the blue start doing it like you guys preach on here, I get my a.ss beat lol.

> The Belief That Women Will Fvck The Jerk, But Marry The Well-off guy - Or other variations of this, but you know what I'm talking about. The entire theory that most women only want jerks. What I found that was my REAL problem back in the day when I was literally rejected by EVERYBODY, was that my "looks" were off and my "personality/charm" were off. When I worked on my looks (my looks in general, my clothes, my car, my apartment, my overall appearance) and my personality (my charm, the way I come off to a chick, the way I talk to her, flirt with her, touch her, etc.)...my ENTIRE world changed. In other words, I didn't start getting laid because I "discovered the answer to women," instead, I discovered myself.

I can list more. Now, what does work is the self-improvement focus on here. The quality posters that talked more about uniting dream and day, seeing yourself as the prize, keeping the focus on you, etc. That right there allowed me to develop and find the answer from WITHIN, which is what I did.

This then becomes a real tough pill to swallow, especially when you consider ideas like feminine hypergamy. It's very hard to measure oneself up and adjust to a new understanding of how women operate. He can't reconcile what he'd been told and conditioned to believe before (the soul mate myth, pedestalize her, just be yourself, etc.) with this new paradigm.


I've heard all of these regressive rationales from boys as young as 14 to men as old as 75. It's a comfortable ignorance to believe that things are just unknowable and beyond one's control or efforts to really understand. And to make matters worse, there's a long established system of social conventions ready to reinforce and affirm these rationales; ready to reinsert him back into the Matrix and tell him he's unique and special ("not like other guys") and will be rewarded with female intimacy for rejecting it.

Rollo, I don't know ANY GUY that acts like that. No guy that I know puts some random chick on a pedestal, or walks around singing immature love songs to chicks, etc. lol. I know guys that don't have enough confidence and are insecure when they approach women. Which means they should work on the things I talked about earlier. But what I'm saying is, this **** is not broad and universal, it's local and individualized.

It would be like putting business into a box and saying that you can ONLY sell a product/service in this fashion and if you don't, you are doomed to fail. That "theory" is actually what would make you fail because you wouldn't stand out from the competition. With business sure, there's regulations and general rules that you must adhere to, but how you RUN the company should be individualized and creative, not carbon copy. True or False?

It's also similar to how a religion works, if you don't follow all of these concepts and principles about God, you are denying the truth and bound for hell. If you don't believe it the way (insert religion here) says, you are not saved! There's what, over 1,000 religions out there? How in the hell could a person possibly believe all of them? Or even matter of fact, pick any one religion, how in the hell can a person with a life reasonably learn everything there is to know about that ONE religion?

Could possibly the REAL TRUTH be, that you can't put God, Nature, Man, nor Woman into a box (theory, religion, principle), and they actually can present themselves in total different ways, formats, etc. depending upon the environment, area, influences, etc.? In other words, could there be no UNIVERSAL TRUTH, just general rules of the road but everybody's life is different?

I'm not stating my own theory, I'm just asking questions.

So let me get this right, some guy named Rollo in Florida can tell me way over in Detroit, Michigan, how women in Detroit are in 5 paragraphs? Have you been to Detroit recently? Have you encountered the women in Detroit?

So women in Detroit and Florida are all the same? Let me break it down further, you are in Florida, do you know every girl in Florida? Or do you come to your conclusions using a random sample or something similar to the scientific method as if women are lab rats and do not have individual perspectives, influences, thought processes, etc.?

You can run scientific trials on the human body, animals, the environment, because those things are more constant and predictable. How can you do the same to people all over the country considering the upbringing, background, financial, educational, moral, etc. situations of these people are ALL DIFFERENT and which makes them DIFFERENT people?

Rollo, so a girl in Beverly Hills is the same as a girl in the unemployment line in Detroit? The same "principles" will work on either girl? The same "principles" apply to both girls?

A 29 year old woman making $200,000 a year as a small business owner with an MBA, is the same as a 29 year old woman living off food stamps, still shacking with her parents, and didn't graduate high school? The same "principles" will work on either girl? The same "principles" apply to both girls?

 

[Warrior74]

LOL@ Message Boy again caught up in the details, not seeing the forest for trees. You could have summed all that up in once sentence. All Game Is Local. Which is true. All of this stuff won't work the same on every girl in every situation. But I think you understand the point Rollo is making and either are being intentionally obtuse or taking a personal issue and muddying the water with it.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

A 29 year old woman making $200,000 a year as a small business owner with an MBA, is the same as a 29 year old woman living off food stamps, still shacking with her parents, and didn't graduate high school? The same "principles" will work on either girl? The same "principles" apply to both girls?

Yes.

The same motivators, the same impulses, the same prompts that make both of their vaginas tingle when they are confronted with a confident Alpha male displaying higher value work on both women. The only difference is the context under which those principles are applied. Both the drug dealing gang leader in the ghetto and the powerful, wealthy executive in Manhattan tap into the same dynamic, just under different contexts. You can drive a Rolls Royce or you can drive a Dodge Neon, but the same principles that make a car go are all under the hood if you're only willing to have a look at what makes an engine tick.


Here's a cold hard truth; Everyone has Game. A lot of guys get uncomfortable with the idea of Game as it's defined in the community - PUA Game, Direct Game, Natural Game, etc. etc., but really every guy has A Game. Every guy has some idea, some inner, internalized concept of how best to approach, relate to and eventually arrive at sexual intercourse with a female they find attractive. Unanalyzed, unlearned and/or unconsidered this Game is subject to the varying forces of a man's socialization and acculturation. Beta Game is almost universally the result of this. Due to men's generally more linear, deductive natures, we tend to develop our Game based on the data available to us - what women TELL us they want.

So the equation goes something like this: I need sex + women have the sex I want + women do not unconditionally give me sex + I must discover what women require in order to give me sex + I will poll them on what they require + I will adjust my behaviors to best fit these requirements = I will get sex. This is the basic formula that leads to an AFC, supplicative, beta game mindset.

Again, everyone has a Game in some respect. We don't live in a vacuum, our ideas about seduction (in whatever form) is influenced and / or learned externally. The validity of that Game may be more or less effective, but at some point a man is going to adapt to a methodology of seduction as per his conditions and environment warrant. Even mPUAs still need to adapt their Game for differing environments - different clubs, types of women, socio-economic levels, countries, etc. - there needs to be adaptation and improvisation. The same applies for Betas, but the disparity is that the Beta tends to think of a one size fits all approach. He adopts a script and is less likely to variate.

 

[backbreaker]

i stole this off another forum i visit in my spare time

This isn't a politcal thread.

Mortgage Guys,

I was looking for advice on a condo that i own and currently live in. I owe 173,000 on this condo but the value of the condo is at 135,000 due to the bad economy and the mortgage bubble that got popped.

My question is what can i do to get out of this thing without killing my credit. Honest to god i wouldn't mind staying if they could write off some of the loan value which they seem to do with certian cases. I guess the problem is i make my payments every month on time and from what i hear they won't talk to me about it until i am at least 60 days late.

Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated.

this guy is married. 25 years old.

now, let me ask you this. first of all he's ****ed. he did it to himself but he's ****ed.

anyway, do you honestly thinkt hat the wify is going to sit around utnil she's 33-34 to wait for him to get out of debt so they can maybe move into the house they want. that's not what she signed up for (according to her). she signed up for a college educated guy who had great credit who had money in the bank. she got a guy who made a bad investments nd now she is stuck in a ****hole she doesn't want to live in until they can get right side up.

what will happen.. you guys know the deal already. SHE can get out of it by just leaving him. he's ****ed.


this is conditional love.

 

[Jitterbug]

From 2007 to 2009, when I was more naive about women and only had Game knowledge in my head & was eager to use them, I went on a lot of dates and got laid regularly. It was fun back then... but I was constantly stressed out, never had time to do anything for myself, was always planning logistics & going on dates or "hanging out", wasn't going anywhere in my career and was in poor shape & poor health.

Now I have a healthy cynicism about women and I'm a lot clearer about what I want from them, I've become more discerning about whom I'd spend time with. The result is significantly fewer dates and fewer notches but I'm doing much better with my life: career is going up & up, I'm in the best shape of my life, stronger & fitter than ever, and I always walk with a smile & a spring in my steps.

Women are like poison to a man - just like alcohol!

Btw I don't buy the old school wisdom that if you focus on something other than women, you'll somehow end up with so many that you have to beat them off with a stick. Not in my case. I got the most women when I was actively out sarging, and the fewest when I'm focusing on other things (career, fitness, hobbies). In saying that, I've never got checked out & had more IOIs thrown at me as I do now. I just don't have time or spare energy to go get them.

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

Women are attracted to behavior, because behavior is an indication of what the man will provide: Security.

Men are attracted to looks, the younger the better (so long as they are north of puberty). The Yamomano tribe in Brazil have a word for the ideal women:
"Moke Dude" which means between puberty and first child.

When a man's behavior changes, her interest does as well. When a woman's body changes, a man's interest does as well.

The problem is that women are far more dependent on a man's behavior than men are on her looks.

Here is the matrix:

A man is conditioned from birth to expect "free" unconditional love from his mom.
When he hooks up with his wife, that is what unconsciously expects. That the unconditional love is not based on his behavior, but who he is.

Up until recently, this view worked, as women were fairly dependent on men (and men on women) as their was a fair division of labor.

But recently this paradigm has started to crumble. Women "need" men less and less, as they are able to get their security on their own.

The "matrix" is when a man thinks that all he has to do is get married, or even get into a relationship, and he gets access to undivided affection, like he got with mommy.

"unplugging" from the "matrix" is simply a realization that women respond to behavior, and are not a source of unconditional love and affection.

Two camps emerge:

Not a problem, if you know what the right behavior is.

Big problem if you whine and rage against the world and some imagined feminine collective, and wish that it wasn't the way it is, and think a woman should love you and sex you and give you affection because she "should" or that's the way it's "supposed" to be.

This board seems to spend a lot of time discussing the second camp (big problem part), e.g. what the true nature of reality is and how fukked it must be to be an AFC who is still "plugged in," how horrible it is that women are so evil and calculating and conspiratorial, and not the first camp, regarding the right behavior, given these revelations.

What is the right behavior?

Well, I thought you'd never ask. Here they are: ( in order)

1) Be as successful as you can, make as much money as you can.

2) Learn to sarge, improve your social skills, communication skills, qualification skills

3) Never ever commit to a woman unless she has proven to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that she is worth your commitment.

Of course, you can practice number (2) while your on your way to number (1), but just keep in mind they are all "practice," until you get to where you want to be life.

It is possible to find a woman that will help you get there, but keep in mind she's buying a penny stock she hopes will be high on the big board some day.

So you say it's not fair? Well, history is filled with societies where a small few men got all the women.

Deal with it.

Once you "unplug" from the "matrix" you can do two things:

1) Whaaaa! This isn't they told us! O My God! I can't believe this! All the feminine brainwashing! Ahhhhh!

or

2) Huh. Different rules. Lets play.

Up to you.