Smh - Date for Tonight Attempts Power Play, Throws Tantrum

[_sideways_]

One thing is for sure pal, this thread makes it easy to differentiate between closers and settlers.

Keep telling yourself that you need not apply game and then recommend "game" to others. LOL. It's your fiction bud.

Bro you're a closing machine.
Would love to have that drive to always close for the sake of closing.

 

[Dealler]

One thing is pretty sure. This thread makes it easy to differentiate between closers, settlers and bull****ers.

 

[l_e_g_e_n_d]

Guru, I doubt several of the posters here are successful in their personal and business pursuits, if at the first sign of resistance, they fold. Like minds think alike. Successful people win and supersede their "challenges," while others makes self-serving excuses as to their failings disguised by the machination of virtue. Ha, it's quite laughable to say the least.

Good commentary Guru

 

[guru1000]

The larger question is what constitutes disrespectful behavior? Sure, if a girl exhibits poor behavior, drop her. No one in this thread disagrees with or is attempting to qualify a justified NEXT. But the subject matter is whether this girl--who met the OP online, exchanged a couple texts for an insta-date, hasn’t met and knows nothing about the OP--exhibited disrespectful or poor behavior by opening a convo with him before the date because she needed greater comfort or rapport? Or, alternatively, if an online girl does not exhibit super high-IL before the first meet, should she be immediately NEXTed?

Important to understand the FULL context of an interaction before rashly designating an interaction as disrespectful and NEXT.

 

[guru1000]

Each of us draw a line in the sand as to what we consider disrespect. Did she ask this question in an appropriate time? No. But, does it merit an instant NEXT? If so, that's up to the individual. However, it would follow then, that IF the OP considered that a disrespectful act, then why did he fail to Next her at that point?

It's binary: Either it's disrespectful (from the individual's perspective) or it's not. If it is, then Next. But the OP didn't, which means either (a) he didn't consider it disrespectful enough to Next but yet still failed to close; or (b) he did consider it a disrespectful act, but failed to Next. And if on the fence as to whether it was disrespectful or not, then he should have qualified her further. But he didn't.

 

[guru1000]

Yup. No one thinks she was an angel. I've met worse woman than this who are among my most loyal and avid fans today. I have also met better women than this who I have NEXTed. Having been through close to a thousand or so dates and hundreds of women, and as I grow older, I also grow bored and appreciate a little resistance.

 

[Ratiocinative]

I agree with the people saying OP shouldn't have been so quick to tell her he's busy and came off as rude.

OP didn't give any timestamps, but if you're busy then you don't respond. Why respond to someone's text if you're too busy to write one sentence? It looks fake and you need to be congruent with your words. If you're busy, then be busy working and don't respond. Once you do have a few minutes then respond to her.

Women need emotional validation. Some more than others, but expect to have to take a few minutes out of your day to validate her if you want to feel comfortable around you. Pretending to be busy for an entire day just makes you look like a fake and a loser.

At my job I literally do more than twice as much work as anyone else, and as much as 5-6x as much work as some of the lower performing people who barely keep from getting fired. Sometimes I take a three hour lunch just because I can. If my boss asks me about it and I just tell him it must be a mistake because there's no way I could have done more work than anyone else if I was gone for three hours. I'm pretty sure he can tell I'm lying, but if I still do more work for the company than anyone else what is he going to say?

But anyway, my point is that you just look like a jackass if you tell a woman you don't even have 2 minutes to give her some validation because you're "busy". I do way more at work than anyone else but yet I still have time for a 5 minute conversation with a coworker, or a 10 minute coffee break to relax and refresh myself, or to send a date a few text messages.

Also, I would avoid using the word 'busy'. Women respond emotionally, not logically, so they can often infer it as blowing her off even if you really aren't because it is such a commonly used excuse. OP should have not said he was busy when asked about his day (should be inferred by his delayed responses), he should have asked her how day is going instead of blowing off the conversation, and he should have gave a playful responses about where he worked and followed it up saying that he needs to get back to work but he's looking forward to tonight and will tell her all about it. If she's still upset and cancels after that, then yeah, perhaps she is a bit too needy.

Of course, you ultimately have to decide what you do and don't want in a woman. If you want a woman who is completely self-sufficient and doesnt need your validation during the day then I guess that's your choice, but it will be difficult to find a woman who is that confident while remaining in her feminine.

 

[Yewki]

One thing is for sure pal, this thread makes it easy to differentiate between closers and settlers.

Keep telling yourself that you need not apply game and then recommend "game" to others. LOL. It's your fiction bud.

Let me help you out here as you seem to be struggling,

Only those who are thirsty for sex, and who pedestalize women for it, will concern themselves with "closing" a girl who is disrespectful and low interest.

 

[guru1000]

Let me help you out here as you seem to be struggling,

Only those who are thirsty for sex, and who pedestalize women for it, will concern themselves with "closing" a girl who is disrespectful and low interest.

As you seem to be struggling on your lost position and belabored point, let me help you with your reading comprehension deficiencies. She was neither disrespectful nor low interest until OP directed the exchange in that manner.

Now do you wish to continue getting abused my sensitive flower?

 

[kenpiffyjr]

Cat clearly taking alpha shots to the head and not sipping it like the whiskey it is.

Entertaining broads is a game of patience and experience. To text back you're busy immediately is a buzzkill and shows a lack of playing the game that women WANT to play. females want a guy to have a life outside of them but one who has a life/job/hobby and can actually take the time out the day to sip a lil Jack for example and flirt with them. If you can't, you come off as a try hard to way too serious.

This example is like a man saying "I get laid all the time!" to a female. If you get laid all the time, she will know and pick up on it. No need to say it just like its no need to immediately say you're busy to ride the "do not text between dates" wave read upon here.

 

[Yewki]

As you seem to be struggling on your lost position and belabored point, let me help you with your reading comprehension deficiencies. She was neither disrespectful nor low interest until OP directed the exchange in that manner.

Now do you wish to continue getting abused my sensitive flower?

You side stepped your original point and ignored my rebuttal to it. Would you like to try again? I can quote the discussion if you need help.

As for the OP's case, if you think it's all on the OP and the girl was not low interest or disrespectful... that says a lot. Also I'm sorry but I can't let this go, the fact you think this was a better alternative to what the OP did is honestly laughable,

Her: Hey
You: Who is this?
Her: Are you serious?

< Three hours later>

You: Gotcha! lol. I' m heading to a meeting, see you at 8 =)

 

[guru1000]

Low IL and disrespect were referenced in and to your diverting post in Post 78. If you have a direct, relevant point, state it. But you can't as you have no logical points, as you appear quite lost in your circular, nonsensical drivel.

Further, diverting the subject matter shows the weakness in your position. It's OK snowflake, you won't be missed.

 

[fastlife]

Personally, I could care less about a girl's IL (or her ability to successfully convey it). Literally doesn't enter in the equation for me. But I think it's a bit presumptive to assume that the girl's question was a sign of low interest or predatory or a frame grab or whatever--looks to me like a girl who just wants to engage a little but is lacking in conversational originality. Hence a stock question like, "Where do you work?"

Unless a girl's part of your social circle or you work with her or go to school with her, you really don't even exist to her until you've slept with her. How can she possibly 'disrespect' you? LOL--you're literally no one to her. The younger she is or the hotter she is, the more likely this'll be the case. At this point, I'd rather meet girls with a bit of healthy skepticism (means they have more going on in their lives) than ones that are hot to trot out the gate.

 

[MrWiggles]

The way OP handled it doesnt make him alpha and if he were to soften up a bit with his response it wouldnt make him beta either. If he was to answer, it wouldnt make him thirsty either. We can assume all we want but we dont know what she was thinking/doing although it seemed harmless to many. if he is truly that busy and has a harem then it shouldnt concern him and it looks like it doesnt.

 

[Yewki]

Low IL and disrespect were referenced in and to your diverting post in Post 78. If you have a direct, relevant point, state it. But you can't as you have no logical points, as you appear quite lost in your circular, nonsensical drivel.

Further, diverting the subject matter shows the weakness in your position. It's OK snowflake, you won't be missed.

Stop being mad for a sec, it's not helping anyone. You see, the key to getting someone to acknowledge their mistake, is really quite simple. You just don't let them change the subject. Let's go back, before it started getting personal for you,

guru1000 said:
One thing is for sure pal, this thread makes it easy to differentiate between closers and settlers.

Keep telling yourself that you need not apply game and then recommend "game" to others. LOL. It's your fiction bud.

Yewki said:
Let me help you out here as you seem to be struggling,

Only those who are thirsty for sex, and who pedestalize women for it, will concern themselves with "closing" a girl who is disrespectful and low interest

I'll walk you through this. You can start by quoting where I said not to apply game

 

[guru1000]

You can start by quoting where I said not to apply game

Your quoted tangential request deals not with the subject matter, which is:

1) Could OP have handled this girl better and scheduled the date; if so, how?;

2) Did the girl exhibit poor behavior initially which merited the OP's walking away; or, alternatively, should OP have gamed her.

I will be more than happy to entertain your tangential request along with several tangential requests of my own (incited by your straw posts 63 & 78), but first, you must accede that your position:

1) Agrees that OP could have handled the girl better.

2) That the girl did not exhibit behavior--at least initially--that merited an instantaneous NEXT.

If we can agree on these two central points--which is the subject matter of the past five pages--then we can move to the tangential points, yours and my own. If you do not agree on either of these two central points, then we will continue to counter until the subject matter is either resolved or exhausted; and then, we can proceed to the tangentials.

Game? O ya, I forgot no game after "disrespect." LOL.

 

[marmel75]

Personally, I could care less about a girl's IL (or her ability to successfully convey it). Literally doesn't enter in the equation for me. But I think it's a bit presumptive to assume that the girl's question was a sign of low interest or predatory or a frame grab or whatever--looks to me like a girl who just wants to engage a little but is lacking in conversational originality. Hence a stock question like, "Where do you work?"

You'd be surprised how many women are just terrible at conversations. They cry about guys texting or messaging one line or boring things but honestly they are just as bad or worse in many cases.

 

[LiveYourDream]

@guru, with all due respect, to me it seems you are at the stage where the game you play is, how quickly can you game a girl, to give you her pvssy. It seems to me that you consider it a skill, based on your level of perception/reading her and choosing the right tactic, including manipulation and straight up deceit, if that's deemed most effective. To me it seems your high, your goal post, is getting a woman to give up her pvssy to you (for the first time), or how quickly you can take it, if you prefer. My perception is, getting a woman's pvssy, is your game focus/goal line. Once you do, it seems you feel successful, accomplished, and as if you have achieved. (Perhaps, I am wrong in my understanding of you. If I am, please kindly share what it is.)

I perceive that, you imply that the standards of your game and your goal posts should be the standards of game and "the goal post" for all men at SS. While it certainly is for many, many, many men, there are some men who have actually outgrown that particular game and goal post. You may wish to consider that in your on-going insistence and judgment, according to your standard, as if it is the implied standard for all here, (with all due respect to you) does not reflect as well, on your own level of game, as you may think, desire, or wish to believe.

In my view, another level of DJ knows he can have almost any pvssy, just about anywhere, anytime. He has no need to ever settle for, or engage the pursuit of pvssy that is not desirable to him (or no longer desirable to him). If he's lost interest in one or even vice versa, he has no attachment, he'll find a desirable one, just as quickly as he is inclined. He lives in the abundance of pvssy. As such, he's beyond pursuing and collecting conquests. He enjoys a woman, because she is a woman he wants to enjoy. While the distinction may be subtle to grasp, to the men who live it, it's a whole different world. Each serves a purpose.

 

[guru1000]

LYD, don't "with all due respect me," lol. Just be straight forward. I'm a big boy, and I reciprocate the level of respect that I get/don't get. You made your point respectfully, and that's enough.

This thread is not about Guru or Guru's "game," nor about whether Guru's game should be another's or contrariwise, nor about whose "game" is the epitome of DJism. The subject matter as delineated in Post 86 is:

1) Could OP have handled this girl better and scheduled the date; if so, how?;

2) Did the girl exhibit poor behavior initially which merited the OP's walking away; or, alternatively, should OP have gamed her.

As I stated to Yewki, I prefer not to get into tangential points (although you can feel free to create an alternate thread to discuss them and I will participate), and out of respect for this thread (which IMO is great) and OP, keep the discussion revolved around the subject matter.

 

[fastlife]

In my view, another level of DJ knows he can have almost any pvssy, just about anywhere, anytime. He has no need to ever settle for, or engage the pursuit of pvssy that is not desirable to him (or no longer desirable to him).

Bold is where we run into issues; whether or not Nexting a girl results in cognitive dissonance (bad) or peace of mind (good) is dependent on the basis of that desire. Abundance is one thing and avoidance is another. 'Self-respect' is one thing and ego-based defense mechanisms are another. Though in practice they appear the same, they come from different places.

So, let's agree that you should next a girl for 'bad behavior.' Well, there's objective 'bad behavior'--in that it results in a net negative to your life/health/freedom: drug-use, promiscuity, manipulation, controlling behavior, clingy behavior, low ROI (but to know that, you have to invest to an extent). Then there's 'bad behavior' that's really only 'bad' because it threatens the ego--taking a long time to respond to texts, "low interest," a b1tch shield, socially uncalibrated text messages, a busy work schedule, etc.

When you Next a girl for the first category, it's pretty easy. Even if she was beautiful and the sex was good and you really liked her, you have objective reasons to weigh against those factors to affirm your decision. When you next a girl for the second category, you end up with threads like, "Did I do the right thing?," "Was this girl trying to play me?," etc., etc. And when people try to answer that question it comes down to nebulous concepts like an extreme definition of 'Self-respect,' or writing her off as 'Low interest,' etc., etc. Which all sounds nice and lets your ego rationalize its decision to avoid potential rejection.

The truth is, unless objective bad behavior shows itself early, you really won't know who a girl is or what she's about until you've known her for at least a month (sometimes more). The whole point of dating is to see what happens. Sometimes the 'bad girl' turns out to be a virgin who's putting on an act (it's happened). Sometimes the girl who texts you back in seconds and is oh, so excited to see you is an attention wh0re flake (it's happened). Sometimes the super b1tch is sweet as pie and uber-submissive as soon as you sleep with her, and she puts up a facade because she's self aware and needs to know she's dealing with a strong, confident man (it's happened). Sometimes flakes are flakes for cultural reasons (date a couple South Americans and get back to me). Sometimes the shy, church-going, 'good girl' is/was a total wh0re, but you seem like a good mark to fulfill her church girl narrative (it's happened).

And you can learn things about yourself from spinning tires with all these girls--but if you listen to that ego-alarm in your head saying, "Danger. Low interest. I might get rejected. Oh, well I just respect myself; I have other girls; if a girl likes you she should behave like X, Y, and Z; of course I should just stay home tonight," then you will never gain that knowledge. Will some of those lessons be painful? Hell yeah. And you should have boundaries in place on the back end to protect yourself and your life/health/freedom. But as an inveterate Nexter who's changed my ways and tried a different approach, life's a lot funner and more fulfilling when you roll the dice and play to win instead of playing not to lose.

I'll be the first to admit that when I first joined here 8 months ago, @guru1000's posts always rubbed me the wrong way--I had ego-investments that were threatened by his approach and perspective. And while it's up to every guy here to find his own balance and his own frame and his own approach based on what he wants for himself (which can only be gained by experience and self-honesty), a lot of guys would do well to step outside the echo chamber and consider (especially consider) the viewpoints of the posters they least identify with.