The Facebook Audit

[fanatic22]

But how do you find out if she wants to keep them around?

I see you avoid the question. You are in the anger stage of denial.

Time will tell on whether you are able to unplug. Ponder the question and we will see.

Good luck to you.

Keep WHO around? Facebook friends?? I have 1100, do you think I waste my time checking who's on my friend's list to see if I should delete past orbiters? If a potential gf asked me to run down my list of female FB friends and delete girls I've hooked up with, I would NEXT her right then and there. That is not "hypocrisy" on my end. That is getting rid of someone showing early signs of toxic insecurity. The only thing that makes me "angry" here is someone who can barely write coherent sentences attempting to patronize me.

 

[AJ84]

Noticing that there’s an uptick in people accusing each other of being in the ‘feminine imperative’ when they disagree with a view. Guess this is replacing the ‘that’s beta’ come back.
Like a catch all phrase kind of thing.

 

[marmel75]

Many women are too far programmed to see past it like you do.

What most men need to ask themselves is.....Why should he care if he "appears controlling"?

This is the path that leads to a broken frame.

Caring who she has on her social media is already a broken frame.

 

[marmel75]

It depends on the context.

If just plates, who cares. If she is married to you and cavorting with exes she has fvcked, then she is to be removed.

"Caring" would be powerlessly demanding such a thing. LogicalLefty here is demanding nothing.

Instead playing a passive aggressive female game. Much better.

 

[Avocado]

This a forum for chatty patty effeminate males parading around in their "alpha" halloween costumes.

Your single moms have failed you.

 

[Von]

Caring who she has on her social media is already a broken frame.

That's how I feel when I read such post.... it's screaming EGO protection.

You wanna know who she banged on her Social Media? Why? Cause you afraid of something?

A real alpha would be IDAF on the girl Social media life past sexual.

OP just asked ''who'' and the girl when all funny (i laught when reading the post)... either she has ''alot'' of sexual encounters on her page or she felt the ''beta-insecure'' really bad from OP.

When dating a girl, her past shouldnt really matter.... you wanna make sure to own her present and futur

The only past that matters is the one who comes back... and you gotta do something about it.

Anyway... the girl already did a OP facebook audit and did it prevent her from coming to him?

 

[logicallefty]

He did not force her. He merely said they would be on even footing.

.

Exactly. Even footing. She can have 100 guys on her FB that are ex’s, etc. All that means is I’m going to replicate her and carry on. In my case I talk via other means as I don’t have FB.

 

[marmel75]

She asked for commitment.

He set the terms.

Nothing passive aggressive about it. Open your eyes.

Open your eyes. Plenty of other ways for her to contact them off social media. OP is making it more likely by acting insecure about it. OP also knows he isnt committing so what is rhe point of bringing it up other than to protect his ego on one side and stroke it on the other?

 

[AJ84]

It depends on the context.

If just plates, who cares. If she is married to you and cavorting with exes she has fvcked, then she is to be removed.

"Caring" would be powerlessly demanding such a thing. LogicalLefty here is demanding nothing. Amd he certainly is not powerless.

But if he doesn’t care, why the even playing field approach and making a point to let her know that for every 100 guys she keeps in FB, he will have an equal number of female orbiters or whatever?
And if he has no intention of committing to her anyway, why the bother to begin with?
This is what I’m not understanding. If I was with some guy who I didn’t care about losing, why the hell would I give two f**ks about what he does on FB or whatever? I would just think, ‘whatever’ and continuing doing my thing and meeting other guys.
Which is what I think OP should do but I’m not OP and I’m going by the posts, maybe there’s more to the story here.

 

[AJ84]

The feminine imperative is the essence of disadvantaging men for the advantage of women.

Men who enable or outright support this are in the imperative.

They are many, and they have never established proper inner game.

I thought the feminine imperative was to make babies with the strongest, fittest alphas for the good genes and resources. Female survival, that’s what Spaz and Ranger are saying.

How does that apply here? Is there more than one definition of the feminine imperative?

Guess that’s a separate thread. I don’t want to derail this tread but the term is being thrown around so much now it would be interesting to get clarity on this term, without quoting Roosh V or some other idiot.

 

[marmel75]

You assume the point is to prevent her from contacting them.

The point is to set the terms of the commitment. Under what conditions will Logical Lefty consider commitment?

He would have to say the point of bringing it up. Perhaps it is to test the strength of his frame. Perhaps he wants her gone anyways and is finding a way to end it through this.

She made a request and he had the balls to set the terms. His move should be applauded as most men would be too terrified of "looking insecure".

Anyone who thinks they need to set a condition that their GF isnt to be contacting ex's is delusional or insecure.

There are some things that are so obvious that they dont even need to be said. This is one of them. It would be like if you went to a job interview and they stated one of the requirements was for you to show up to work every day. Its obvious, it doesnt need to be stated.

Setting conditions for things that are obvious simply makes you look clueless. A woman who respects the man she is with WON'T do this. Any guy who feels the need to do this is doing so because the woman doesnt respect you enough to not do this in the first place and that respect level will only deteriorate further by doing this.

 

[logicallefty]

Just to make sure everyone is clear, she and I are already in a committed relationship. The context of the FB friends came when she wouldn't stop hinting about marriage. I have repeatedly said "I don't see myself ever getting married again, why ruin a good thing? But if I were to consider marrying you we would have to have some very tough conversations first". This happened several times and I kept blowing it off. But she kept bring it up. Until last night I finally gave in and had the first tough conversation, which was this. I said "OK, so many guys on your FB who are not fathers of your kids have you fvcked?" And it went exactly like I expected it to. I knew she kept in contact with former guys she fvcked based on little nibblets of things she had said. For me, I really don't care one way or the other. I'm gonna keep an orbit if she keeps one. If she gets rid of the orbit, I will too. I'm gonna keep in a relationship with her as long as I can, while keeping my orbit, knowing that all good things eventually must come to an end. When it does, I will slide right over and grab an orbiter for some sex until I find another more permanent GF. My orbiters are really long term FWBs. Women I can always call for sex anytime without any other hassle. If the girlfriend and I ever do get to the next tough conversation, finances, she ain't gonna like my terms on that either. That's gonna be an even tougher one.

 

[guru1000]

This is not very different than setting the terms of a prenup. She requested or pushed on marriage, and he stated the terms.

I don't think Lefty's terms were unreasonable at all. I'd go even further to state that Lefty's terms should exceed "reasonability" to terms that she would not entirely desire to fulfill. Here's why ...

She wants marriage. He does not. One cannot negotiate desire, that is her desire not to marry. Though you can influence that desire. And "buying time" in relationship status has merit, as it allows her to habituate to the status quo, that is relationship outside the marriage certificate, and in due time her desire to marry may change as she has grown used to, and wishes to keep the comfort of, a great relationship.

 

[fanatic22]

This is not very different than setting the terms of a prenup. She requested or pushed on marriage, and he stated the terms.

I don't think Lefty's terms were unreasonable at all. I'd go even further to state that Lefty's terms should exceed "reasonability" to terms that she would not entirely desire to fulfill. Here's why ...

She wants marriage. He does not. One cannot negotiate desire, that is her desire not to marry. Though you can influence that desire. And "buying time" in relationship status has merit, as it allows her to habituate to the status quo, that is relationship outside the marriage certificate, and in due time her desire to marry may change as she has grown used to, and wishes to keep the comfort of, a great relationship.

Your advice seems to always involve manipulation. I feel sorry for the women you're with.

 

[guru1000]

Your advice seems to always involve manipulation. I feel sorry for the women you're with.

I don't. I'm only interested in giving men winning strategies. Succumbing to the institution of marriage is a losing strategy in most cases.

Further, young buck, you have already been manipulated by believing she wasn't attempting to manipulate him into the institution of marriage where the leverage of power is often vastly in her favor. A man need not be a dunce incapable of striking back with cunningness of his own.

You're welcome.

 

[logicallefty]

Your advice seems to always involve manipulation. I feel sorry for the women you're with.

Yeah, and so what? What's wrong with manipulation? Do women not do it? I sure do, and I ain't ever gonna stop. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

 

[R.U.G.]

@logicallefty, DTB. She's starting become a pain..

 

[ubercat]

The issue is some women build this identikit perfect man. This one was funny. This one had a big d1ck. This one was rich etc. Being reminded of all these guys sets her hypergamy itching.

 

[fanatic22]

I don't. I'm only interested in giving men winning strategies. Succumbing to the institution of marriage is a losing strategy in most cases.

Further, young buck, you have already been manipulated by believing she wasn't attempting to manipulate him into the institution of marriage where the leverage of power is often vastly in her favor. A man need not be a dunce incapable of striking back with cunningness of his own.

You're welcome.

Yeah she has a huge conspiracy theory planned to get his money and future offspring. Hmm lets follow that train of thought for a second. If she WAS manipulating him, would she be so honest to reveal her facebook friends she’s hooked up with? Of course not. She is an innocent chick who likes lefty and wants to spend her life with him. Soo evil.

Yeah, and so what? What's wrong with manipulation? Do women not do it? I sure do, and I ain't ever gonna stop. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Don’t project the entire female gender onto one person.

 

[guru1000]

Yeah she has a huge conspiracy theory planned to get his money and future offspring. Hmm lets follow that train of thought for a second. If she WAS manipulating him, would she be so honest to reveal her facebook friends she’s hooked up with? Of course not. She is an innocent chick who likes lefty and wants to spend her life with him. Soo evil.

The naivety of the young. Early 20ish I assume? That's why I love young chicks, they believe anything, and the mind is so pure and angelic.