Setting Boundaries is an Agreement.

[Peaks&Valleys]

If you think women know better then I challenge you how do they know better? Basic empathy? Its long been taught here that women have limited empathy when it comes to men. Cultural values? lol. Past boyfriends? Doubtful.

They know better when they CARE to know better. If they don't care whether or not they were to lose you, then you are correct, they will have limited empathy.

 

[zekko]

I am saying that boundary setters in all of our cases ARE getting sex on demand.

Sh!t, my girl will even initiate a lot of the time.

You don't state the price you pay for a car AFTER signing the contract do you?

This seems to be so obvious and such common sense to me that I can't believe that there are people arguing against it.

Yes but aren't you implying a woman doesn't know the difference between right and wrong hence the need for boundaries?

I personally believe that having opposite sex friends is not the best strategy to pursue when in a LTR/exclusive relationship. But I would not go so far to say that it is inherently wrong. That is up to the couple to decide.

As far as people name calling you I don't know why it bothers you so much if you are as secure as you say you are.

No one wants to be called names, but Danger and I have both said that one reason we defend this issue is because of the young kids who read this forum. We don't want them to believe the feminine lie that if you have a problem with a woman seeing male friends, that makes you jealous, insecure, and controlling. That is the usual rationale that women use to shame men into letting them have their way - and it is incredibly effective. So much so that many MEN here are pushing the same message.

As I've said before, my girlfriend actually complains that I never get jealous.

Why does a father set boundaries for his children?

Because he's insecure? :crackup: :moon:

 

[Atom Smasher]

LOL, right. That must be it.

 

[Peaks&Valleys]

LOL, right. That must be it.

Way to ignore the two responses that seemingly opposed your narrative.

LOL

 

[zekko]

Way to ignore the two responses that seemingly opposed your narrative.

If Sooli wrote them, I don't blame him for ignoring them.

 

[Soolaimon]

Looks like the boundary crew keeps reciting their same old fallacies but came up with a new line.

"We're getting sex anytime we want cause we set boundaries" LOL

Boundaries has nothing to do with you getting sex. It's her attraction.

That's the delusion that you guys live in that makes me laugh. :crackup:

And the whole argument about how "a high quality woman doesn't need to be told not to hang out with other men one on one" has been dealt with already.

Women are going to hang out with other men regardless if you say so or not when they really want to. Setting a boundary does nothing for that.

This thread is a perfect example - betas are perfectly happy for their women to run amok and so for many women this is the new normal.

Boundary setters have their women running amok behind their backs pretending to be good girlfriends. What's the difference? Cheating is still going on.

If Sooli wrote them, I don't blame him for ignoring them.

Zekko is still incapable of comprehending common sense.

Zekko feels it's ok for his woman to text male co workers but has no clue they can go out for dinner or drinks together behind his back breaking his boundary when they get cozy from all the texting.

Telling a woman "not to hang out with other men" once verbally before the relationship doesn't mean that she is going to do it.

Same women who had no problem breaking parents and previous boyfriends boundaries.

You still have no idea that it's interest and attraction for the reason you're getting sex. It's not setting a boundary that you say she can do as she chooses.

Funny thing is, half of the "anti-boundary" people now are NOT okay with their girl hanging out with male friends. But (in their opinion), under NO CIRCUMSTANCES are you ever allowed to say that to the girl, because if you do, then you are "insecure". It's a strange world.

Not strange at all when your woman should not want to hang out with other men.

You feel inferior to other men so you need to voice your opinion of setting a boundary.

"Oh please don't hang out with other men." LOL

Why does a father set boundaries for his children?

Questions for you guys: What happens when the children break the father's boundaries without him knowing?

What happens to the man who set boundaries when his woman is still seeing men behind his back?

Social Leper continues to dismantle your arguments with ease as well. He set boundaries and lo and behold, his gf followed them.

Dismantled LOL.

His last gf broke up with him and he caved in on his boundaries. She can always not follow them when he isn't around just like yours and your crew.

he reality still exists that we have successfully set boundaries, we get laid whenever we wish, while the anti-boundary crew has their women dating other men and doling out sex.

Another lie. Who in the anti boundary crew is that happening to besides the same person you always name?

The challenge today is that beta men are too afraid to have an expectation, and thus women are never trained on the proper way to conduct themselves when in a relationship.

One of the major purposes of the boundary is to reset that training so she behaves in the proper manner of respect towards said relationship. Without the verbal communication at the onset of her exclusivity request, she quite simply does not know any better.

Insecure men feel the need to tell women cause they are afraid of her cheating.

I guess all women are stupid to you that they don't know what an exclusive relationship is. They need you to plead with them not to hang out with other men so they can "get it".

If you had any value in the first place all of this would be unnecessary.

As other men with value might expect, that also means we get sex whenever we want, unlike the approach the anti-boundary crew takes, using Exception as an example with his gf doling out sex to him.

One person and you claim that as your false evidence. Any man in a healthy relationship gets sex when he wants. You have a de fact marriage so you should be getting sex.

if you don't tolerate her dating other men, you are insecure.

You are insecure cause you fear her dating other men. Not that she actually wants to.

If you are worth your salt she shouldn't be dating other men cause you should have value.

That's the point we are making.

You fear her dating other men so you have to set your insecure boundary. And then you frame that as being a secure man training her to feed your delusional mind for security.

I am with Zekko in saying that I will not stand by and let these people insult men and call them insecure for not wanting to commit to women who want to date other men.

Nobody is saying that. We say you shouldn't commit to those women who want to date other men.

You try to put boundaries on those women. You also fear her dating other men. That's why you are insecure.

Must be true when you guys get so terribly upset over it.

But again, a pattern is forming in that men with our mindset ARE getting sex when we want.

Is this your new line to repeat now? All men in healthy relationships get sex when they want. That is nothing new.

You don't need to set a boundary for that.

My statement of "we" refers to Zekko, Atom, Myself, and Social, having set boundaries at the onset, stuck with them, and have not been cheated on. This is not a fallacy, unless you can prove otherwise. Your rebuttal is fundamentally flawed because you are addressing a statement I did not make.

Boundaries have nothing to do with not being cheated on. It's the attraction coming from the women.

When they lose their attraction you will get cheated on even though you set boundaries.

You guys can't understand that for the one millionth time.

Again, I am not stating that only men who set boundaries get sex whenever they wish. I am saying that boundary setters in all of our cases ARE getting sex on demand

You all should get sex since you're living with your women for several years in de facto marriages.

It's a far safer bet for us than it is for the crew who has their gf's dating other men. I have been those other men many times, and I have fvked many taken girls under that situation.

Sure you have LOL.

If you actually knew anything about taken women fvcking around they do it behind their insecure boyfriends backs breaking boundaries.

Somehow you and the crew don't believe that can happen.

You need the "safer bet" cause you are insecure

If you had value you wouldn't worry about a "safe bet".

How is it safer when women who had boundaries placed still cheated anyway?

How is it safer when a girl says she is going out with "friends" and is fvcking another man instead with boundaries?

That's your own delusion that makes you think it's safer cause that's what you want to believe in your own mind for your own security.

All delusion. That's why you can't understand common sense and you provide the same failed argument of no substance over and over.

 

[Konada]

For boundaries to work:

1. She must be attracted to you.
2. You must be willing to kick her to the curb if she breaks it.

Of course, its a given that boundaries will not work if the girl is losing attraction for you. What boundaries actually do is set a mutual level of respect for both parties and neither can use the 'oh I didn't know doing xxxx is off limits in an exclusive relationship.' BS. When a woman breaks a boundary, you give her a warning or if serious enough dump her. Essentially, boundaries help guys remain objective when it comes to their standards which I feel many will compromise when they are totally smitten with a girl.