Spinning plates is time consuming

[ketostix]

Yeah, I don't understand the need some of the posters here have to believe that chicks only wanna f*ck one guy. I listen, but I don't understand. I've seen too much to buy into that.

Aliasguy, it's simple common sense and observation. If girls were so willing to indulge in sexual variety even half as much as men are, there would be a lot more guys fvcking more girls. I don't know how many times I've seen a majority of women leaving the clubs at the end of Friday and Saturday night without men despite there were more men than women in the venue. If women were so willing to fvck several guys concurrently there wouldn't be so much difficulty as there is in picking up women. I've known of several men who were virgins into the mid 20's. Think of how many you don't know about. Alias, you make it sound like, Str8up, I et al want what we say to be true. Well I don't and I think you want to believe women are "easier".

Collosus, great take as well. Also I think women were more promiscuios between the late 60's through the early 80's. Then it declined and is back on the rise but it's still much harder to get a girl than in say the late 70's. Now it's like you got to be a superhero.

 

[STR8UP]

As a Man you MUST stay on top of your game, period. Dating, in an LTR or Marriage, you are only as valued as your accomplishments and your ability to respond to adversity. This IS security to a woman and this IS her primary determinant for pairing and staying monogamous with a Man.

This is the biggest mistake most guys make, even guys who are GREAT with women. It's all too easy to become lulled into a false sense of security in a relationship. It's too bad you can't relax a little and enjoy the ride, but the sad fact is that you can't.

Is the emotion a result of the sex or is the emotion the prompt for sex? I'd argue the former. Observing the behavior will universally bear me out on this, the emotion is the result of sex, not a cause for it. Rare is the woman who says "I loved him so much I had to ƒuck him", rather it's "I was drunk, he was cute and well,..things happened,..." Emotion is the fallout of the act, not the prompt for it.

Exactly.

And when she begins the sexual relationship with guy #2, guy #1 is usually going to notice some kind of change, whether it is a decrease in sexual availability, or an INCREASE to compensate for a guilty conscience and avoid suspicion.

I'm not saying women WON'T have sex with more than one man at a time, I am saying that women aren't like men. It's rarely ever just "fukking". There is more of an emotional component, and as such there is generally a shift in behavior when a new sexual relationship is formed.

You're putting far too much importance on her "sexual needs". Remember, a man's sexual needs outweigh a woman's by at least 17 times (testosterone). You're confusing her physical needs with her long term plans. Any reasonably accessible woman can meet her physical needs at a moment's notice, women spin plates to meet long term goals.

Again, I agree. So if a woman needs 17 times LESS in the physical department, would it not make sense that she wouldn't be seeking sexual intimacy from multiple men? She would generally seek it from ONE man, and use OTHER men for "support" and "backup" by implying the prospect of sexual intimacy.

You guys claim that in regard to my theory you "see otherwise". I know Alias has mentioned a specific example, but I am curious how many other guys can say that their experience has led them to the same conclusion?

I mean, unless you are the woman, who really knows? If you are the guy who is being cheated on and you find out it's one thing, but to see a woman cheating on her husband and ASSUME that both men are getting the same level of sexual intimacy at the same time....that's pure speculation, and it goes against what I have heard from friends and personally experienced. I can't remember one time where a guy had a woman cheat on him where he said "I honestly had no idea", but I can recall MANY instances where the guy knew something was up, especially due to a change in his woman's sexual behavior around him.

 

[STR8UP]

STR8, in light of all this would you still apply the 'women only ƒuck one guy at a time' notion to the married woman in your "laugh or cry?" thread who told you,

"You know what you need? You need a husband and a boyfriend".

I really think you and KETOSTIX, should do a bit more in depth behavioral observation.

You ASSUME that the husband is getting as much pu$$y as the boyfriend.

I would be willing to bet she doesn't fukk the hell out of the boyfriend then run home and give the husband a marathon blow job. It generally doesn't work that way.

 

[aliasguy]

Aliasguy, it's simple common sense and observation. If girls were so willing to indulge in sexual variety even half as much as men are, there would be a lot more guys fvcking more girls. I don't know how many times I've seen a majority of women leaving the clubs at the end of Friday and Saturday night without men despite there were more men than women in the venue. If women were so willing to fvck several guys concurrently there wouldn't be so much difficulty as there is in picking up women. I've known of several men who were virgins into the mid 20's. Think of how many you don't know about. Alias, you make it sound like, Str8up, I et al want what we say to be true. Well I don't and I think you want to believe women are "easier".

Collosus, great take as well. Also I think women were more promiscuios between the late 60's through the early 80's. Then it declined and is back on the rise but it's still much harder to get a girl than in say the late 70's. Now it's like you got to be a superhero.

I see what you are saying, Keto. I understand your point. I simply don't agree.

What you write makes sense. But you're wrong. Your example of closing time is valid. But that is PUBLIC. A woman seen leaving with a guy is different than one of them calling/texting the other 10 min later and hooking up. A woman out with her friends will meet up with a guy later. A woman will meet a guy during lunch the next Tues.

This stuff HAPPENS. All the time. You don't see it. Some of us DO.

You don't have to be a superhero. You just have to be a MAN.

I don't necessarily WANT them to be easier, but they ARE.

 

[aliasguy]

You ASSUME that the husband is getting as much pu$$y as the boyfriend.

I would be willing to bet she doesn't fukk the hell out of the boyfriend then run home and give the husband a marathon blow job. It generally doesn't work that way.

There's no correlation between home sex and "extra" sex. She's either f*cking BF/husband a lot or not. She's either f*cking around or not. You can't tell.

Trust me on this.

 

[STR8UP]

Rollo, i respect your analyses and I do believe they are backed by behavioral observation, but intuitively i still think that the average woman is not sexually active with more than one man on the regular. ONS' do occur, and transitional 'overlapping' most certainly occurs, but in general feminine plates serve their one cardinal need: attention.

EXACTLY!!!

Even a woman who is only "dating" is usually fukking one guy, receiving "intimacy" from a small group of other men, and has a wider pool of admirers who she will toss scraps to in the form of flirty behavior to keep them interested.

To borrow Rollo's "on deck" example, it's like they have a team. One guy is up at bat, there is one on deck, one in the hole, and the rest of the team is on the bench waiting their turn.

Too many experiences in the "on deck" and "in the hole" position have led me to develop this theory. When you're laying in bed fingering a chick wondering why she's dripping wet but she WON'T FUKK YOU, then finding out that she's banging one of your friends, things become a lot more clear.

From a biological standpoint this is valid, and that's why women cannot maintain a FB relationship for any considerable period of time. Men could probably do it indefinitely, but a sexual investment in more than one man for a woman is too internally strenuous.

I have used this example many times and some people think I'm full of sh!t, but the chick I was dating last year who just got married....to this day she still raves about the sex we had, to me and to her friends. But it's funny, cause there is no doubt in my mind this chick really does think it was the best sex she's ever had in her life, but even though she was getting mind blowing sex, when she started seeing this other guy there was a MARKED change in her sexual behavior toward me, culminating in the WORST sexual experience I have ever had in my life on the night of my birthday when she felt OBLIGATED to give me a courtesy fukk. It absolutely SUCKED, and that was the last time we did anything. that sealed the deal on my theory for me.

Which, you may say, is precisely why they do spin plates--to sail the sea of options with the goal of finding the most suitable seed donor/provider, and this is probably the primary motivator; but again i think their plates are not so much sexually intensive as they are tuned for attention desires and needs of esteem.

yep......a woman's best card is the sex card, but ONLY IF SHE HOLDS ONTO IT. If she plays it, the card is much less effective.

 

[guru1000]

This debate of whether women F*CK more than one guy at a time is old.

MY women only F*ck one man at a time. Even the HO*ARS. I dont know where you guys get your statistics. Im out there in the real world with TONS of women and i can guarantee you 95% of them are only with me even as a non exclusive PLATE.

To those who oppose, you are basing your INFO on a few BAD apples out of the few APPLES you have had.

If you are a MASCULINE MAN and a natural plate spinner than you know WOMEN will do anything to see you again. They would never jeapordize seeing you again by BANGING the gardener.

On the flip side, if you are AFC pretending to be the prize but are really just a LOLLIPOP , women will see that and bang everything in sight because you are NO LOSS TO THEM.

The difference in opinion shows what women will do when you are not a MASCULINE MAN WITH STRONG INTERNAL BOUNDARIES. I am even surprised to hear some MEN get manipulated this way.

 

[aliasguy]

This debate of whether women F*CK more than one guy at a time is old.

MY women only F*ck one man at a time. Even the HO*ARS. I dont know where you guys get your statistics. Im out there in the real world with TONS of women and i can guarantee you 95% of them are only with me even as a non exclusive PLATE.

To those who oppose, you are basing your INFO on a few BAD apples out of the few APPLES you have had.

If you are a MASCULINE MAN and a natural plate spinner than you know WOMEN will do anything to see you again. They would never jeapordize seeing you again by BANGING the gardener.

On the flip side, if you are AFC pretending to be the prize but are really just a LOLLIPOP , women will see that and bang everything in sight because you are NO LOSS TO THEM.

The difference in opinion shows what women will do when you are not a MASCULINE MAN WITH STRONG INTERNAL BOUNDARIES. I am even surprised to hear some MEN get manipulated this way.

Bullsh*t, Guru......

You think your women f*ck only you.

WRONG. One or more of your plates (likely MOST) are getting some on the side.

I'm NOT "THE PRIZE." I don't buy into the "prize" stuff, but I'm a good deal. You might be, too. And you are silly if you think that ALL of your babes are with YOU ALONE.

Women do what they want to do. You do too. All is well. No problem.

I enjoy lots of women, but I don't expect ALL of them to be TOTALLY into me. Some like me more, some less. It's ok.

Your b*tches are just like mine. They are all the same. Some are enraptured, and "locked in," some just f*cking you.

Women are women.

Open your eyes.

 

[MikeYikes122]

Wow this thread has turned into an interesting debate. It's too bad I haven't been able to post in the last couple of days.

I'll start off by giving an update on my situation. I went out last night and had one of those nights where I was in the zone. I'm sure every guy on here knows what I am referring to when I say "the zone". Every girl in the club was giving me looks, and it wasn't hard approaching any of them - if you've read any of my past threads you'll see where I was trying to get a lot better at cold approaching in nightlife settings. When I got a conversation going with a girl, I didn't have to think at all about what I should say or how I should act. I was just on autopilot. It was good to have a night like that, and I think it was enough to get me out of the rut I was in.

As for spinning plates, I'm going to take a couple of weeks away from it then try to get back in the saddle again. That seems to be the best option.

And as for some of the topics touched on in this thread, I've come to find the best way of addressing a girl who brings up exclusivity with me is to tell her that I'm simply not in a position in my life where I can be in a committed relationship. Girls give that excuse all that time and continue to string along AFC guys who've heard it from them. There's a good reason for its popularity among chics - because it works, and it's not so harsh that it's going to scare the AFC guy off. Though, the exclusivity conversation has only come up with me maybe two times in my life. I'm not sure why. I have had plenty of FBs and plates, whatever you want to call them, and the relationship talk never seems to come up for some reason.

I'd agree with the notion that most women are willing to fvck more than one guy at once, but that doesn't necessarily mean many women are actually fvcking multiple guys. I would in fact argue that a small minority of women are actually fvcking more than one guy at once because most women aren't in the kind of situation where multiple quality guys are going to be available for them to shack up with. I don't know about you guys, but out of my entire group of guy friends there is only about three or four of us who aren't AFCs. I think the general lack of quality men is why many women are often leaving bars/nightclubs alone at the end of the night, like keto pointed out. My cousin is pretty attractive (that's weird for me to admit but it's true), and she is pretty honest and upfront about a lot of typical things girls aren't normally willing to admit. She has completely quit going to trendy bars and nightclubs because she is sick of letting all the hot guys get her hopes up. When she was younger and around the age of 21, she used to get excited by having tons of good looking dudes around her at bars, but she says now she usually just assumes most of them are going to say something dumb to her just to try to get her in bed. She hangs out at low-key places now instead.

There are also a ton of factors that would involve a woman fvcking more than one guy at once. Women don't have nearly as high of a sex drive as men, so it's not like they are actively seeking multiple sexual partners. There's a big difference between willing to do something and desiring something. For a woman to be fvcking multiple dudes, there has to be a plethora of quality men around her, and she has to be growing unhappy with the guy she is with (monogamously maybe?). Like STR8UP said, guys have to be on their game at all time when it comes to women or they risk losing them just as easily as they got them.

Anyway, that was just my two cents. Thanks to all those who responded on here.

 

[MikeYikes122]

There's also that classic chapter in Tucker Max's book I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell, where he realizes that the women he is sleeping with are fvcking more guys than him. He comes to the conclusion that if a woman is slutty enough to be your FB and show up at your apartment at 4 a.m. to fvck you, then chances are she is slutty enough to be fvcking other guys on the side.

I'd say he has probably come to a fair conclusion.

After coming to that realization, Tucker goes through a phase where he starts to see that women are using him just as much as he uses them.

 

[MikeYikes122]

Mike -

I believe what you are experiencing here is a bit of cognitive dissonance.

Let me explain.

Being a long-time member of SoSuave and a self-proclaimed former AFC, it is clear at one point in your past - likely around the time you joined SoSuave - you had a bit of inner-conflict that re-shaped your priorities toward life.

Of course that conflict was the societal pressure and uneasy feeling of not measuring up to your peers when it came to attracting women. You possibly felt other men had one-upped you in this department. And you possibly also felt that maybe you weren't giving women as much priority as you should have been given your perceived under-performance - which was possibly compounded to a great degree by hanging around other people who regularly talk about women or who go to great measure to improve their performance with women.

That was your first moment of cognitive dissonance.

You chose to confront that conflict head-on, shift your priorities and 'solve' the problem once and for all. You adjusted your reality.

Now that you feel successful about your ability to attract women as you have said, what you are doing is re-evaluating - once again - actually how important it is for you now to exert the same amount of energy toward women as you had in the past.

The reason you are actually experiencing conflict is because your increased priority placed toward women in the past significantly helped you, and you fear that reversing their priority back a little may possibly hurt you.

It won't. If you don't want to fvck a woman, then don't fvck her. If you don't want to date a woman, don't date her.

You already know what it takes to attract the girl you want. You may want to brush up on those skills once in awhile, but until a woman comes along that excites you to your core, you do not have to date women who bore you to death.

Of course that is difficult to do when you are continually surrounded by people who are re-framing your reality to make you believe that you should always have a woman around - no matter how boring she is.

My suggestion: Try to ease the burden of work and get excited about something in life again. You sound as if you've lost a lot of passion and need something to light your fire again.

This was a really good post and I'm sorry I looked it over the first time I scanned over this thread earlier today.

You described me pretty well. I was an AFC back in high school, but I wasn't unpopular or anything like that. I went to parties and stuff and had a ton of friends. I played sports and girls were physically attracted to me. All my friends, however, were not like me in that they got girls and all got dates to formals. I went to my prom and other dances senior year of high school, but I went with girls who would only consider me a friend when, needless to say, I wanted to be more with them. I had one LTR, but we went to different colleges and all she did was cheat on me the entire first semester.

All my close buddies had girlfriends and I just wanted the same thing. I had one friend in particular who was a complete a$$hole and he used to make fun of me for my lack of game.

I spearheaded the problem as you say when I was a freshman in college. A web engine search turned up this site from when it was on a different server and at another URL. From that point on it wasn't a race, it was a marathon that I kept gradually completing over the course of four or five years. I really turned the corner my fourth year of college and just felt insanely great about myself. I finally became a DJ.

I used to get thrills and the biggest highs off going out on dates with girls, having sex and having multiple girls like me at the same time, but recently the thrill has just been lost for me. I had two decent plates spinning, and I literally did not give a sh!t about them at all. I didn't care that I was hooking up with them, and I didn't get off on the fact that both of them were fighting for my attention. Three or four years ago those two plates would have made me the happiest man on earth for an entire month.

I just don't feel a sense of success or satisfaction from dating or from relations involving women anymore, whereas I remember two or three years ago I would go out on dates with girls or hook up with them, and I'd be so pumped up afterwards that I'd go to the gym and lift weights or play basketball for hours. There was one girl who I worked with in college. She was gorgeous and all the guys used to drool over her. But she was considered off limits because she was shy and was the religious type. Still, I managed one night to meet up with her for drinks and I hooked up with her. I was so fired up about it that after she drove me home the next morning I ran like five miles on a hungover and empty stomach. I just don't get anything close to that kind of a rush anymore.

I guess the original gist of my post was that I'm not feeling like a sense of success or satisfaction from spinning plates and stuff anymore, so why waste my limited amount of time on it?

This is probably the cognitive dissonance you brought up.

Though, I'm still going to try to get back in the saddle in a couple of weeks. I think STR8UP made a great point when he said that guys always have to be on their game. We don't have the luxury of sitting back and letting things happen. Following his advice, I'll get a couple more plates spinning around the end of the month. Your advice is still very well-taken.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

I think the disconnect here is assuming that plate spinning must always equate to sex. Women will still spin plates that they never intend to have sex with - or at least not while a better option is her first priority. It's a mistake to think that sex is the operative for spinning plates. While sex can (and probably should) be a benefit of being non-exclusive, it's the foreknowledge and confidence that result from having viable options, and/or the ability to generate new options that come from a plate spinning mindset that is of primary importance. For example, if you know there are 2 other women vying for your attention and a 3rd one you're occupied with begins playing games, is unappreciative or otherwise makes the effort unworthy of your attentions, you're far less likely to tolerate behavior that's not acceptable. Thus your confidence in dealing with the plate of focus reflects in your attitude with her. You'll pass the sh!t test because you know there are 2 other women ready to fill that slot - it makes no difference if the other 2 plates have ƒucked you even once or they're reliable FBs, the strength comes from the available options. Knowing that you have them gives you a confidence that is expressed with the 3rd one and puts her into a position of respecting you while allowing you to set the frame of your relationship with her.

I don't think the question of whether or not a woman will bang more than one guy at a time is really relevant to plate theory when it's the potential option that the confidence is derived from. When a woman knows she's got a bullpen of guys ready to give her attention (she already knows they want to ƒuck her) and she's dealing with a guy who's option-less she will ALWAYS set the frame of the relationship. This is one reason particularly beautiful women intimidate average guys. Just her physical presence, as evidenced by her beauty is enough to make a guy presume she's in high demand. Men will happily be plates for her with absolutely no reciprocation of intimacy on her part.

 

[Colossus]

Well written and thoughtful...... BUT........

Your "intuitive" feelings about what women will or won't do (f*ck just one, or two or three, or one on the side with one "main" dude) don't count. What we men see as reality doesn't COUNT. They do what they DO. And I've seen TOO many women with multiple partners to accept the "one favored f*ck" premise.


I know it SEEMS like they want that. And I know that many/most of us WANT them to want that, but get REAL. You admit above that "women are more likely to sleep around than ever before." A LOT went on before!! And now it's MORE!!


Head in the sand never helps. I'm not saying women are "bad." I'm saying they f*ck around. That's ok with me. I'm not invested in them NOT doing it.

Open your eyes. They DO this (So do we.... I'm not judging.)

ALIASGUY-

I understand that intuition has no 'official' place in science, but we are not dealing with true science here. Psychology and sociology are all about patterns, observations, and predictions based off recurring patterns. Some may say that is what constitutes science; and they are right to a point, but there is rarely anything that is 100% reproducable in terms of human behavior.

That being said, I think much of this thread comes down to personal experience and perception. Your own observations and experience have led you to believe the way you do, and that is fine. There is no way i can negate that. I also understand you and Rollo are older and have had much more exposure to women and relationships in general, so again i cant really invalidate what you are saying. All i can do is make jugements and form hypotheses based off my OWN experience and observations. "Intuition" is really just the subconcious mind making connections and jugements based off of the experience, beliefs, and memories of an individual. So my own intuitive sense tells me that women generally are sexually active with one man at a time. This could change as i get older, or it may not.

I think due to the nature of the subject matter on this forum we need to be careful about proclaiming our own individual views as absolutely right. Of course they are going to be absolute truth to us as individuals, because we have shaped those views based off our own personal experiences. You can never negate someone else's experience...only your own.

 

[aliasguy]

ALIASGUY-

I understand that intuition has no 'official' place in science, but we are not dealing with true science here. Psychology and sociology are all about patterns, observations, and predictions based off recurring patterns. Some may say that is what constitutes science; and they are right to a point, but there is rarely anything that is 100% reproducable in terms of human behavior.

That being said, I think much of this thread comes down to personal experience and perception. Your own observations and experience have led you to believe the way you do, and that is fine. There is no way i can negate that. I also understand you and Rollo are older and have had much more exposure to women and relationships in general, so again i cant really invalidate what you are saying. All i can do is make jugements and form hypotheses based off my OWN experience and observations. "Intuition" is really just the subconcious mind making connections and jugements based off of the experience, beliefs, and memories of an individual. So my own intuitive sense tells me that women generally are sexually active with one man at a time. This could change as i get older, or it may not.

I think due to the nature of the subject matter on this forum we need to be careful about proclaiming our own individual views as absolutely right. Of course they are going to be absolute truth to us as individuals, because we have shaped those views based off our own personal experiences. You can never negate someone else's experience...only your own.

Ok.

 

[DavenJuan]

ALIASGUY-

I understand that intuition has no 'official' place in science, but we are not dealing with true science here. Psychology and sociology are all about patterns, observations, and predictions based off recurring patterns. Some may say that is what constitutes science; and they are right to a point, but there is rarely anything that is 100% reproducable in terms of human behavior.

That being said, I think much of this thread comes down to personal experience and perception. Your own observations and experience have led you to believe the way you do, and that is fine. There is no way i can negate that. I also understand you and Rollo are older and have had much more exposure to women and relationships in general, so again i cant really invalidate what you are saying. All i can do is make jugements and form hypotheses based off my OWN experience and observations. "Intuition" is really just the subconcious mind making connections and jugements based off of the experience, beliefs, and memories of an individual. So my own intuitive sense tells me that women generally are sexually active with one man at a time. This could change as i get older, or it may not.

I think due to the nature of the subject matter on this forum we need to be careful about proclaiming our own individual views as absolutely right. Of course they are going to be absolute truth to us as individuals, because we have shaped those views based off our own personal experiences. You can never negate someone else's experience...only your own.

good post...

couple things however.

i think you hit it right on the head when you said we all need to be careful about taking our own indiviudal views and making them the absolute right answer. based on our experiences we form our opinions and share them on this forum. sometimes even to "open the eyes" of fellow brothers.

now your right about negating others experiences, we still should express our own views if we feel those our absolute truths. the question of "if women sleep with one man or several men" is more of a generalization.

my OWN experiences tell me that women PREFER to sleep with ONE man IF THEY are satisfied. even when they are sleeping with several men, in THEIR mind they feel that its only ONE man at a time.

if a women sleeps with johnny on tuesday of this week. and then sleeps with mark on thursday. in HER mind, she was more into johnny one tuesday then mark. Came thursday, she was more into mark then johnny. though it was more than one guy that week, she has convinced herself that she only is sleeping with one guy at a time.

now obviously this is a very simplified version, but i think you get the jidst.

other than that difference, i think women are just like men. i have had women cheat on me. i have had women sleep with me and still actively sleeping with other men.

now we can say women "PREFER' to sleep with ONE man, but i think that notion is completely irrelevant if they ARENT sleeping with just one man

Another big issue with this is due to social conditioning. it is frawned upon for women to be catorgorized as sleeping around. maybe not so much today, but overall, women sleeping "around" are considered slvts and nasty. her peers look down on her and talk behind her back.

a MAN that sleeps "around" is looked as a "lucky guy" . his peers pats him on his back and looks up to him.

now i am not saying "because" of these classifications that women DONT sleep or prefer to sleep with one man. what i am trying to get across is that "despite" these classifications women are still controlled by emotion.