The Pusssy/Self-Esteem Dichotomy

[backbreaker]

Let's cut through all the counter-sophistry and get to the central theme or idea that OP is driving at,

Do we OWN ourselves or are we slaves to our biological imperatives?

Any argument that even implicitly suggests that we OWN our will, OWN our actions, or OWN ourselves, is impetuously attacked by Rollo. Though, the last time I checked, hard work and perseverance--two traits that many fail to act on as they are biologically averted--are the prerequisites for success in any arduous endeavor. Last week, acting against my biological imperative, I stayed up 48 hours to complete work for my client, as promised. Success ain't easy!

The central--or shall I say implicit--argument, at this point, is frivolous.

what does this have to do with sleeping with party girls?

look you won't find a bigger self will/ business mindset guy here than me, i assure you of that, but sex has nothing to do with morality and should not be tied to self esteem. In fact, it's just that, once a guyy is able to NOT tie his self worth to if he has a GF or not or how many women like him, is when he can really blossom.

but nothing you stated has anything to do with sleeping with "low quality women"

 

[guru1000]

what does this have to do with sleeping with party girls?

look you won't find a bigger self will/ business mindset guy here than me,

The OP built his argument on the following premise:

You don't understand, all this stuff about valuing myself above women is great, but it isn't practical, because my glands are more powerful than my mind.

This premise, however, is the central, implicit (definition: not overtly stated) argument, and has been belabored here at SS for the past 5 years (Where have you been?). Bottom line, to each his own. If the OP creates a new MAN rule, and chooses to tenaciously follow it, more power to him. I can guarantee you the tenacity he employs in which ever rule he creates, will lead him to more wealth than 95 percent of men. Yes, a man's steadfast adherence to any rule, demonstrates his resolve, and this resolve, alone, is all a rational man requires to reasonably guarantee a prosperous life.

BTW, there is a man of a bigger will/business mindset than you -- me.

 

[backbreaker]

The OP built his argument on the following premise:



This premise, however, is the central, implicit (definition: not overtly stated) argument, and has been belabored here at SS for the past 5 years (Where have you been?). Bottom line, to each his own. If the OP, makes a new MAN rule, and chooses to tenaciously follow it, more power to him. I can guarantee you the tenacity he employs in which ever rule he creates, will lead him to more wealth than 95 percent of men.

BTW, there is a man of a bigger will/business mindset than you -- me.

And what RT is saying in return is that there is nothing wrong with taking that high road. The issue is when you try to turn a negative into a virtue. It's no different than a fat woman saying "I only date men who like for me" (lol no **** shurlock) or a broke guy saying "People who strive for riches don't understand how to live life" or a recovering alcoholic saying "people o drink beer don't know how to have a real good time". It's the classic affirmative conclusion from a negative premise. " I don't have sex with low qualtiy women, people who have sex with low quality women have low self esteem, therefore i have high self esteem"


L?ook, unlike most here, I've actually been in that situation. I, as i have stated countless times, went 3 and a half years without sex, without so much as a date. There were two causes behind this. The first and foremost was the business i was starting. It took up all my time and resources. Also, for about a year of that time i "wanted to make sure i was available" for my oneitis in case she came around (i had it bad lol)

IN retrospect, I needed those 3 and a half years to myself to learn who I was and it was one of the best things I have ever done. But I'm not going to sit here and say that I'm a better person because I went 3 years without getting laid than you are. Better yet, I'm not going to sit here and lie and say it's a virtue, knowing good and damn well i would have plowed a fish had it looked at me right by year 3. In fact the last 5 or so months i came quite close to getting some and i would have had no qualms about doing so.

I did not get laid, one becuase i never went out, then i was overweight, i had no wardrobe, i was awkward from locking myself up all the time and i basically had nothing worth value at the time to offer.

Me getting laid or not getting laid, had no ill effects on my business. I knew at the time a LTR was out the question, because i could not decaite the time to a woman. but just getting my **** wet? you are kidding yourself. I would even go so far to say that had i not had a roommate, i would have called an escort and gotten my rocks off. Even the most business minded people, have primal urges and hve basic needs and they will be fulfilled if at all possible under any circumstances. 3 freaking years without doing anything but jacking off to pictures, that's not virtuous in the least bit. It had toe done, and i would do it again if i had to, but there is nothing virtuous about it.

I had my "me" time. I would go bowling with what 2 friends i had left every other Friday night (and would look at women all night long while there). I would take myself out to the movies 2-3 times a month. I would home cook me dinner and watch a movie or play a video game before i fell asleep. How is that any different whatsoever than calling up a woman and getting a quickie? It's pleasure. Me and my business partner were in the exact same boat around the time we knew we were about to start making real money we had a real long talk about how we have to "become normal again" which including having sex lives, going on dates. You have to be able to unwind or you will burn out. I've been there.

 

[guru1000]

BB, you are reading too close to the text, and therefore ignore the bigger theme. The OP imposes no rules on you. He thinks aloud. In fact, he shows great resolve, which is an admirable trait. I don't know him, but I can tell you that he will financially succeed. How could I induce such a preposterous statement based on an internet post about self-esteem/low-quality women? He argues for choice; he argues for resolve; this is the bigger message.

I don't agree that our self-esteem ties into the quality of women we bang. However, for the OP to arrive at this conclusion, he holds a premise that most here fail to understand, the dichotomy: Will versus Desire.






I commend a fellow SS for that.


Samspade: Just counterclaims of value, pathos; he is a student of Aristotle.

 

[Stagger Lee]

I don't know how one side can seem to argue that having sex is just a drive like one's appetite for food. And if you have low quality food (females) or high quality food (females) it doesn't affect or include self esteem one way or the other. That might be true for lower order animals. But humans can and do have an esteem factor with sex partners going on. A lot of guys do lower their standards to get laid expediently and can feel an esteem hit, and vice versa feel an esteem increase when they have sex with an attractive female. But that is also in line with my belief that esteem doesn't come completely from inside but is partly based on enviroment or external factors also.

 

[Lexington]

I don't know how one side can seem to argue that having sex is just a drive like one's appetite for food. And if you have low quality food (females) or high quality food (females) it doesn't affect or include self esteem one way or the other. That might be true for lower order animals. But humans can and do have an esteem factor with sex partners going on. A lot of guys do lower their standards to get laid expediently and can feel an esteem hit, and vice versa feel an esteem increase when they have sex with an attractive female. But that is also in line with my belief that esteem doesn't come completely from inside but is partly based on enviroment or external factors also.

Let's go along with your food analogy. Do you suffer from low self esteem every time you eat junk food?

It's possible to have some junk food and still eat an overall healthy diet. I love junk food. It tastes great. But I don't eat it in excess. I have 11% body fat, a 23 BMI and a 110/75 blood pressure.

Sometimes, if a girl is attractive enough and she's available, you just want to fvck. Thrusting one's penis in and out of a sufficiently physically attractive woman's vagina is quite pleasurable. That's true whether she's "LTR material" or not.

I would rather get it on with a less-than-ideal woman than make love to my hand.

 

[Julius_Seizeher]

Let's cut through all the counter-sophistry and get to the central theme or idea that OP is driving at,

Do we OWN ourselves or are we slaves to our biological imperatives?

Any argument that even implicitly suggests that we OWN our will, OWN our actions, or OWN ourselves, is impetuously attacked by Rollo.

I hoped someone else might see what has been so clearly evident to me.

I don't claim to know RT personally, but from his postings it would seem he has a background in psychology/social sciences.

Since the heyday of Sigmund Freud (and culminating with BF Skinner), the premise of nearly every "social scientist", and the community at large, has been to prove that man is a biological robot, programmed by his environment and his glands to a predictable course of behavior. It has been called Determinism, Behaviorism, and other names along the way, but the irreducible primary is the same: that man has fooled himself into believing that he ever possessed a mind in the first place.

I hold that man is a being of volitional consciousness, which means: that in order to continue to exist, man must use his mind to select from a variety of possible alternatives. I do not believe in the existence of any pre-programmed "survival instinct" in man, that we normally see associated with animals and lesser beings; if man had a survival instinct, he would not employ so many ways to kill and destroy himself. It would be impossible for him to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, abuse drugs, eat indiscriminately, etc. A desire to live is not an instinct.

And you have also hit upon the necessary corollary of a volitional consciousness: free will. If a man is to stay alive, he must do so by choice. If a man is to achieve a life worth living, he must do so by choice. The discovery that you possess free will, that your life is yours and yours to fashion in the image of your ideal, is both a stunning revelation and an awesome responsibility.

Especially in these modern times when men of the mind are so eager to deny its existence.

 

[Tazman]

I think this argument boils down to religious faith versus scientific observations, which makes this a very difficult topic to discuss on a fundamental level.

Human beings are definitely at the top of the food chain but I don't consider any other life form as "lesser", just different. We may have a much greater capacity to "think" but our very "animalistic" behavior is quite evident to me in everyday life.

 

[Stagger Lee]

Let's go along with your food analogy. Do you suffer from low self esteem every time you eat junk food?

It's possible to have some junk food and still eat an overall healthy diet. I love junk food. It tastes great. But I don't eat it in excess. I have 11% body fat, a 23 BMI and a 110/75 blood pressure.

Sometimes, if a girl is attractive enough and she's available, you just want to fvck. Thrusting one's penis in and out of a sufficiently physically attractive woman's vagina is quite pleasurable. That's true whether she's "LTR material" or not.

I would rather get it on with a less-than-ideal woman than make love to my hand.

But see I don't buy this image that guys online portray that they are banging these hot girls that are low quality or not "LTR material". I know such a thing definitely exists, but the reality or the argument here is more like unattractive girl=low quality, and attractive girl=high quality. Of course no guy is going to take a self esteem hit fuking a hot girl and actually would take a self esteem boost. I wasn't arguing LTR material or not but desirability, attractiveness, SMV level vs not. Different argument.

 

[Lexington]

But see I don't buy this image that guys online portray that they are banging these hot girls that are low quality or not "LTR material". I know such a thing definitely exists, but the reality or the argument here is more like unattractive girl=low quality, and attractive girl=high quality. Of course no guy is going to take a self esteem hit fuking a hot girl and actually would take a self esteem boost. I wasn't arguing LTR material or not but desirability, attractiveness, SMV level vs not. Different argument.

If you are actually fvcking a girl, you must have some level of attraction to her. Maybe you might not brag about it to your friends, but the sensation of it is actually quite enjoyable; that's why you are doing it....you made a CHOICE to enjoy the pleasure.

Sure you can make the choice to deny yourself this pleasure and only hold out for these "high value" women. If you feel that choosing to deny readily available pleasure will somehow make you better, good for you.

Personally, I would rather drive a Benz than a Hyundai. But if the Huyundai is the only thing I have available to me, then I will drive it while trying to work my way up to the Benz.

There is no virtue in denying things that you want so long as these things don't cause significant harm. Indulging in desires is also a choice and it can be a perfectly rational healthy choice.

 

[Lexington]

I hoped someone else might see what has been so clearly evident to me.

I don't claim to know RT personally, but from his postings it would seem he has a background in psychology/social sciences.

Since the heyday of Sigmund Freud (and culminating with BF Skinner), the premise of nearly every "social scientist", and the community at large, has been to prove that man is a biological robot, programmed by his environment and his glands to a predictable course of behavior. It has been called Determinism, Behaviorism, and other names along the way, but the irreducible primary is the same: that man has fooled himself into believing that he ever possessed a mind in the first place.

I hold that man is a being of volitional consciousness, which means: that in order to continue to exist, man must use his mind to select from a variety of possible alternatives. I do not believe in the existence of any pre-programmed "survival instinct" in man, that we normally see associated with animals and lesser beings; if man had a survival instinct, he would not employ so many ways to kill and destroy himself. It would be impossible for him to smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, abuse drugs, eat indiscriminately, etc. A desire to live is not an instinct.

And you have also hit upon the necessary corollary of a volitional consciousness: free will. If a man is to stay alive, he must do so by choice. If a man is to achieve a life worth living, he must do so by choice. The discovery that you possess free will, that your life is yours and yours to fashion in the image of your ideal, is both a stunning revelation and an awesome responsibility.

Especially in these modern times when men of the mind are so eager to deny its existence.

If one has free will, then he has the choice to act or not act on desires. Sometimes men have the desire to bang "low quality" women simply because it is pleasurable. Now he could choose to forego this pleasure. But he could also choose to indulge it. Obviously if the guy had access to a higher quality woman, he would not be making this choice in the first place!

 

[Jitterbug]

I've casually fvcked some low quality girls - both the attractive and dont-show-your-mates kinds. Had no effect on my self-esteem. They were just there, and it was effortless. Feels like a good game of sport - it was good there & then, but in the big picture, it has no significant impact.

However, I felt sh1tty (you could argue that my self-esteem took a hit) the handful of times I put up with crap from women (regardless of quality), or invested in them more emotionally than I should have. In all of those cases, I wasn't after just sex, I was after more.

Having HSE or LSE and getting pussies are not related. I know LSE guys who get laid a lot by attractive girls, and HSE guys who don't get anywhere near as much. No prize for guessing which group have a better life overall though.

 

[Pandora]

I am actually surprised at all the hostility to the OP's post. I thought it was a great post.

Maybe you might not brag about it to your friends, but the sensation of it is actually quite enjoyable;

If you are not willing to tell your friends, then you probably are ashamed of it. After you blow your lo*d, your higher order thinking comes back to you and you immediately regret what you did.

Im pretty sure by low quality the OP was primarily referring to very externally unattractive chicks (fat chicks) or very very easy/ trashy unattractive chicks. We can all relate to hooking up with a nasty chick just to crack a slump. I can def relate to the fact that it does take a toll on how you feel about yourself. The OP is just saying that its better to have the discipline to work towards what you really want, than to take what you can get in the fear that you are inadequate.

Sex is not just sex. It comes with alot of baggage. Both for your partner and for yourself. Your sexual habits do have emotional consequences but they may not always be immediately apparent.

 

[Pandora]

I've casually fvcked some low quality girls - both the attractive and dont-show-your-mates kinds. Had no effect on my self-esteem.

Jitterbug, the reason it did not effect your self esteem is becuz you were probably concurrently fvcking a hot girl. Or you had recently fvcked a hot chick. You didnt need a self esteem boost becuz you knew hooking up with the ugly chick didnt reflect on your overall attractiveness to women. You had already validated yourself with the recent hot chick.

Imagine if you hadnt gotten any in 2 years or so and the first lay was a really really fat chick. Imagine having really tried hard to get a hot girl in that year, but all you got was a whale. I think if would effect your self esteem in this case. The OP is saying to disconnect that link between sex and self esteem. It would avoid nasty slump busters.

 

[Jitterbug]

If you are not willing to tell your friends, then you probably are ashamed of it. After you blow your lo*d, your higher order thinking comes back to you and you immediately regret what you did.

....

I can def relate to the fact that it does take a toll on how you feel about yourself.

Funny, that's not how it happens to me. I don't regret any of the casual scratch an itch pieces of sex I've had, nor do I feel any worse or better about them. And the "don't tell your mates" thing is mostly a metaphor. I don't tell all of them, cos some bastards will keep joking about it (hey I'd do the same, it's funny), or tell other girls and ruin my rep, but I have no problem sharing it as part of male bonding humour between my really close mates.

It's a very American thing to link self worth to sexual encounters.

 

[Jitterbug]

Jitterbug, the reason it did not effect your self esteem is becuz you were probably concurrently fvcking a hot girl. Or you had recently fvcked a hot chick. You didnt need a self esteem boost becuz you knew hooking up with the ugly chick didnt reflect on your overall attractiveness to women. You had already validated yourself with the recent hot chick.

Imagine if you hadnt gotten any in 2 years or so and the first lay was a really really fat chick. Imagine having really tried hard to get a hot girl in that year, but all you got was a whale. I think if would effect your self esteem in this case. The OP is saying to disconnect that link between sex and self esteem. It would avoid nasty slump busters.

I don't think I misread the OP - here's what he said:

When a man of self-esteem sleeps with a woman he doesn't value, it is not a victory; it leaves him with a feeling of depression and self-abasement, as though he has sold himself short. Which he has. I speak from experience on this, for when I have slept with women I did not value, it left me feeling worse than when I was in a dry spell.

See, I feel none of that when I sleep with some chick I don't value. He's still linking self esteem and sex.

Those chicks I banged were at various times. Sometimes it's like you said, I'm fvcking or just fvcked some hot girl shortly before that, sometimes it's in a middle of a dry spell.

Although to be fair, I never go dumpster dive to the level that some guys do. I can't get it up for that! My normal level is girls around 7, and I may dive down to a plain 5, or a fattie with a pretty face (4?), but not any further below.

I don't derive my self worth from something as fickle as women! I understand your point, but I never really try so hard to get a hot woman in a year. That sounds like a poor use of time & effort. Maybe the guys who have that mentality - always trying very hard to land a hot woman - are the same ones who have this self-esteem vs ***** problem.

Improving yourself to fvck more attractive pussies so you'll feel better about yourself is a fool's game, even the ancients knew & warned us about this. King Solomon was a guy with more money than Bill Gates, more power than every man in his time and 100 times more hot women than Warren Buffet, and he still had plenty of issues, including self-esteem related ones.

 

[zekko]

Seems to be some pretty strong feelings about this.
I think it's just a matter of personal preference. If you don't want to bang low quality women, there's no shame in that.
And if you do want to, I'm not going to chastise you for it.

By the way, it may be wrong to link your self esteem to sex, but a lot of guys do it. A whole lot of guys get validation from being able to get attractive women. A whole lot of guys.

 

[backbreaker]

Seems to be some pretty strong feelings about this.
I think it's just a matter of personal preference. If you don't want to bang low quality women, there's no shame in that.
And if you do want to, I'm not going to chastise you for it.

By the way, it may be wrong to link your self esteem to sex, but a lot of guys do it. A whole lot of guys get validation from being able to get attractive women. A whole lot of guys.

this is where JS misses the boat

anyone who is hitching his self esteem wagon to the quality fo women he is screwing, HAS LOW SELF ESTEEM REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE QUALITY OF WOMAN IS. It's really that simple. self esteem has nothing to do with sex or the quality of sex or the quality of the sex with the partner.

That's the point I and others are trying to make.

Simply put, sleeping with low quality women, isn't going to make you have lower self esteem no more than sleeping with a "high quality woman" is going to make you have higher self esteem. You might enjoy it more, but what happens when she doesn't call you back the next day or flakes out? your self esteem is low, which means your self esteem never came from your SELF in the first place.

chasing a low quality or low interest woman and putting up with her crap, can on the other hand, damage a guy's self esteem, I've been there.

Also step back and take a look at who is in the post. NOt a bunch of PUA's who go around just screwing random women for the hell of it. I and a few others are married. Some here in LTR's./ it's not like we don't value good women. We just understand that, this is not where our self esteem is derived from.

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

Every sexual competitor seeks to disqualify their rivals from breeding opportunities. Most animals fight for territory or harem rights. Humans generally do the same combat in the psychological. We seek to disqualify sexual competitors by calling into doubt the sexual legitimacy of a rival. "Yeah, he's really good looking, but that means he's probably gay" from a man, or "You think that blonde with the big boobs is hot? Girls who dress like that are usually sluts" from a woman are both psychological, sexually disqualifying forms of combat. So are esoteric pleas to higher self morality.

This also applies to the observably, provably, sexually successful male capable of OVERTLY flaunting his high sexual value with 2 or more concurrent women. He must be of low moral character to so flagrantly manipulate his multiple women, right? His success, as a sexual competitor, conflicts with what a self-righteous beta believes should constitute a beta-defined definition of Alpha-ness as it characterizes him personally. Thus, a polygamist must either be disqualified as a sexual competitor based on subjective (moral) grounds, or the beta is forced to alter his own definition of Alphaness and therefore his own self-estimate.

As an interesting aside, I should also add here that women NEVER doubt themselves on moral grounds for outshining their own competition in the sexual market place - they just do so covertly and with a polite smile, unburdened by ethical doubts. Only men attempt to disqualify other men from the sexual marketplace with assaults another's honor, integrity or aspirations of moral virtue.

 

[Lexington]

I am actually surprised at all the hostility to the OP's post. I thought it was a great post.

If you are not willing to tell your friends, then you probably are ashamed of it. After you blow your lo*d, your higher order thinking comes back to you and you immediately regret what you did.

Im pretty sure by low quality the OP was primarily referring to very externally unattractive chicks (fat chicks) or very very easy/ trashy unattractive chicks. We can all relate to hooking up with a nasty chick just to crack a slump. I can def relate to the fact that it does take a toll on how you feel about yourself. The OP is just saying that its better to have the discipline to work towards what you really want, than to take what you can get in the fear that you are inadequate.

Sex is not just sex. It comes with alot of baggage. Both for your partner and for yourself. Your sexual habits do have emotional consequences but they may not always be immediately apparent.

I said I wouldn't brag about it to my friends. That doesn't mean I'm ashamed. Some things are just not worth bragging about. I don't know what the OP was referring to but obviously if you are banging a chick you must find her sufficiently attractive to arouse you sexually.

That raises an interesting question. Why do you have sex? Do you do it because you enjoy sex? Or is it because you want to show off to your friends? If you are so concerned with what they think, then doesn't that show that you have low self-esteem?

I'm not so concerned with a girl's perceived value. If she makes me horny, that's good enough for me. That doesn't mean I don't ever bang girls with high perceived value. Just because I'd prefer to own a Mercedes doesn't meant I wouldn't drive a Hyundai rental car.