Hello guys, my first post after lurking for God knows how many months...
What I find most amusing are the rather rabid reactions of certain posters who are,
Mr. Mystery and a few others were able to engage her in a mature and smooth dialog. Frankly, still, a good deal of the verbage spewed forth on this thread reads like little boy circle jerk dialogs.
If the lady sounds like a bitter old bird, hell more than half of the
guys posting on this thread sound thrice as bitter, and thrice more
clueless still.
Destini pushes Jung as fact, now Jung's theories have their currency,
academia has NOT passed him by in favor of a "more scientific" social
biology, but his ideas are still theories, in competition with many
others in a marketplace of ideas. People who push many of the theories
and findings within Social Biology as absolute fact are also deluded. We
have a marketplace of ideas and fields of thought in constant churn.
Some of her basic ideas on human interaction, even on polarity, stripped
of any reference to metaphysical or spiritual topics, and stripped of
references to Jungian ideas on archetypes, the animus/anima, and so on,
are rather obvious. At least I find them so.
A woman might finds you attractive as an AFC as well as an experienced
player. The fact that she might not lay you as an AFC may be due to your
AFC'ish tendencies ****ing up what was already a given, that she would
eventually lay you given the chance. A bit of self reflection is
helpful for all of us.
When I honestly look into my life I realize that there were times, MANY
times, during the whole time that I was a bumbling Peter Parker AFC
Nerd, in which truly Hot HB's were into me and would have boinked my
sweet nice guy brains out, I blew such chances either by not recognizing
them (hindsight is a wonderful thing) or by recognizing them but
allowing my social ineptitude blow the situation. Or my lack of
confidence. "Gee is she really sending me signals or is she just toying
with me? She's dry humping me in public and pressing her titties into my
side and gazing at me with a mixed look of frusteration and desire, but
naaw.... can't be...."
(Murid slaps his forehead)
This happened to all of us, you, we. At least once or twice, perhaps
(probably) FAR more often. The missed signals and "indicators of
interest". How many men go through high school utterly dense and
convinced of their lack of worth? And how many rather comely lasses
would have still boinked you given the chance had you allowed her the
chance in?
So we are adults now, and we know a bit better. And many guys are
getting out there, law of averages, its not the patterns working, its
the fact that many of us have been talking to far more women than ever
before, AND the fact that we are cultivating a sensitivity to HER
SIGNALS indicating her interest.
To this degree many of the DJ materials here are helpful in teaching
guys with poor social skills and poor self esteem what are really
somewhat basic but VERY essential social skills. Destini9 and Mr.
Mystery's points on confidence are key, if you KNOW that you know you
are assured. Knowledge is power, knowing how to conduct a conversation
and then GETTING OUT THERE and doing it, enough times, gives experience
and makes theoretical knowledge manifest. Thus we become confident.
NEXT, this site, more than other forums (like fastseduction...) really
has some posters who are INTO conscious self development, people trying
to evolve their innate masculinity. Their posts help many
I wish Destini9 would recognize this. But frankly does it matter? She put it bluntly, a look of things are
really a matter of our growing up.
Marla would have ****ed Ed Norton's character OR Brad Pitt's, she was
fundamentally attracted to the nut ball (and he to her in his twisted
mind) indeed, she DID screw him, she had no idea she was ****ing Tyler.
Remember the Ugly Iranian from Hell story? This happens all the time,
the guy was masculine, he Got out there, law of averages, something
about him was attractive to some of the women he interacted with to the
point that they at least let him in the door. It doesn't matter if you
don't think that ugly dude X is attractive, and he knows no "player
skills" he still manages to get laid, often in some cases. WHY ? Because
we are not inside of a HB's sweet head and we really have no idea what
she finds attractive across the board, or repulsive. And he has guts and
does his thing, reads her signals, sends her his signals, if she finds
him a bit attractive and he piques her interests and the situation is
right BAM, otherwise repeat cycle, Next. He's a man, in touch with his masculinity.
As Destini pointed out, masculinity is what turns women on,
male dominance, the essence of being a Man, being The Man.
Her statements on psychology can be, and should be, separated from her
statements on metaphysics or the Astral plane or whatever. Frankly, a
good deal of what she wrote on attraction is right on the nose. She
keeps referring to this site as an SS site, which its not, but Ross's
crap have some currency here, Ross and the various "seduction" schemes
he spawned are respected, or at least tolerated, here.
Frankly I'd rather throw a few drinks down and argue with Destiny than
Ross, frankly Destiny's a lot more respectable than Ross, or SS. There
are fundamental assumptions shared by SS advocates with people
interested in seduction who (wisely) avoid the whole SS ball of wax. The
assumptions, and not Jefferies theman, deserve critique.
In a marketplace of ideas I need not get my pants in a bundle because
the lady argues like a sailor, hell it shows that she has balls (in a
feminine manner
, at least she's not some frail wallflower. Her ideas
have substance, even the ones I disagree with, and deserve
consideration. Marquez dismisses her as a confused little girl, frankly,
and no offense, Marquez's dismissals were smoother than some of the
other boyish crap floating around in this thread. Still I think that
he's not getting it.
It would HELP if Destini9 took the solid science and solid matters, such
as fundamentals of polarity, the basics of human attraction minus
references to Jungian archetypes, and put this in one category, next if
she took the Jungian psychology that relates to her argument, covered
this separately, and then related the two, and LASTLY for those
interested, if she took her Spiritual or metaphysical ideas, dealt with
them separately but tying them into the previous two categories. She
presents everything as self-evident Fact, when there are self evident
facts mixed with solid theories mixed with more debatable theories mixed
with what really are, to be polite, subjective INNER experiences. Inner
growth is by its nature a subjective experience.
Yeah, all compartmentalized, just like a male