To the darwinian sympathizer....(more)

[Craig Reeves]

It seems to me that my name has been in your mouth recently and that you responded extremely rudely to a post that I made earlier about feeling bad about being a DJ. I'm referring to this thread:

http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=84924

I want to say that this post was written a long time ago during a 2 and a half month period that I was feeling depressed and down about my dating life. This is certainly not going on anymore but I did want to comment on some of the stuff that was said.

First of all, if you had read my post earlier a bit more carefully, you would have found that I said "I KNOW THAT I AM A DJ, BUT I JUST DON'T *FEEL* LIKE ONE". Which certainly meant that I lived the life of somebody who was good with women, I was just UNHAPPY. My level of success with women (which is good, mind you, and always has been) has not changed, it's just that my PERCEPTION of what was going around me at the time was in a depressed state.

To begin with, I know for a FACT that what I posted has happened to each and every one of the guys that have ever posted on this forum, including yourself. I know this for a fact. It's just that I was the one who WROTE about it here, and got shunned for "complaining" or being an "AFC".

If you take one careful look at ANY of the posts that I have made PRIOR to that one you will find that I have never come from a "victim" standpoint in any of my posts.

I pretty much knew for a fact that it would be you that would quickly take advantage of that post. I noticed that you never commented or critisized any of the stuff that I had ever written until I posted my topic "The Fall of a DJ...".

I show weakness ONE TIME out of the over 200 posts that I have ever made on this forum and now all of a sudden my credibility is destoryed? I think not, darwinain, I think not.

My dating life is JUST FINE. So what if I was unhappy? Everybody gets that way. Good looking models who have a fortune can often feel frail and ugly. Great atheletes can feel incompetant. Just like DJ's can sometimes feel down and failed.

Where do you think I got my ideas from? They didn't just fall out of the sky.....they came from experience...and that's how I know they work.

Now enough with MY posts, and on to the ones YOU make.....

Every post YOU make, however, is weak and useless. All you preach here is that nothing works, and that we must get "lucky" in order to become successful with women. Why are you even here then? What's the point of you making posts, to tell everybody the "truth" and "reality". You're looking at my ideas as being fueled by "hope and faith" when your entire PRINCIPAL of women and dating is based around the same thing! Not only that, but it takes a LOT more "hope and faith" to believe the stuff that you are spreading around here on this forum.

You say that physical appearance is everything a woman needs in order to feel attraction for a man. It's very nice how you compartmentalize all women into one single cell as if they are all looking for the same things, or are attracted to the same things.

This mantra is only about 10% true. Sure, women are attracted to good looks. If you read any post that I have ever written I have never denied this concept. However, to say that this is the only thing that dictates a woman's feelings for a man is absolute bs.

If this was actually the case, then very very few of us would ever even get the time of day from most women, because let's face it....most women have been hit on by better looking guys than you or me.

You say that showing interest is all that is needed and, if you're lucky, things'll just work out.

Again, this is absolute bull.

I'm not saying that instant interest can't happen, but to say that the reason why guys are not successfull with women is because women just aren't instantly interested in them right off the bat is pushing it way off to the other side. There is no way that you can SUM UP every reason that every woman has for losing or never gaining interest in EVERY GUY in the world.

Your theory isn't COMPLETELY false, but it is about 95% false...

There is no man with any sense about him who would date a random girl right off the bat unless she is UNUSUALLY good looking or has UNUSUALLY attractive qualities - this exact same case goes with women even moreso. Women can have it anytime they want it, if looks was the only determining factor in the equation they would be sleeping with the better looking guy and you would be left with absolutely nothing.

I said your argument was 10% true also because there ARE indeed women who will blow off a guy that they are not instantly physically attracted to. However, these women are not really worth dating or getting involved with. Just like guys who will only talk to women they want to have sex with. Again, the same concept carries over to women.

Believe it or not, but there are such women who are not shallow.



I have news for you......there isn't any such thing as luck.

You'll learn this soon enough, trust me......I did.

 

[darwinian_sympathiser]

well done Craig, total miss understanding again!!!

I never supported mystery woman at all really in her "looks are more important that you think" thread. I was just supporting the view that people have the right to chose whatever it is that turns them on - notice that distinction there. No one can impose their will on how things should be - and they never will be able to . . . Nature is not like that.

I never labelled you an AFC, your intentions are good but you're off base as another poster has said.

Sure, women are attracted to good looks. If you read any post that I have ever written I have never denied this concept. However, to say that this is the only thing that dictates a woman's feelings for a man is absolute bs.

Where exactly did I explicitly say that? You interpretted it as that. Did I gave a criteria what "good looks" is? Are we even talking about the same thing? One person definition of good looks might not agree with another's. Human feelings is an immensely complex subject and I would be shooting myself in the foot if I even hinted at the thought that a woman's feelings for a man in solely dictated by looks - it's never that simple. However good looks might SEAL the deal so to speak. Also, and you are going to be honest with me here, there are women that you know that you find so sexually repulsive that no matter what their personalities and talents you still wouldn't want to f*ck them let alone date them. Note the previous statement DOES NOT imply that looks are the sole dictates of how you choose someone.

Apart from individuals suffering from psychological issues (like low self esteem etc . . . ) there are no AFCs, there are no DJs.

It's getting late so I'll have to finish my reply to you later

 

[Q-Pid]

I love these internet pissing contests.

 

[Craig Reeves]

Also, and you are going to be honest with me here, there are women that you know that you find so sexually repulsive that no matter what their personalities and talents you still wouldn't want to f*ck them let alone date them.

I never said that that was not the case, but I've yet to see a woman so sexually ATTRACTIVE that no matter what her personality and talents were like I would still want to f*ck or date them either. It pretty much works both ways.

Looks and personality have something in common - they're both traits that can make women feel attraction. Women can take you or ditch you based off of either one of these traits (and many other ones as well, or both) but the personality characteristic seems to be the most common reason as to why women reject most men, however.

The young hot stuck up b*tchy woman is just probably more unlikely to make me attracted as the ugly woman with the great personality.

 

[darwinian_sympathiser]

Looks and personality have something in common - they're both traits that can make women feel attraction. Women can take you or ditch you based off of either one of these traits (and many other ones as well, or both) but the personality characteristic seems to be the most common reason as to why women reject most men, however.

I too agree that the personality characteristic seems to be the most common, but there lies the flaw in your argument. You see for the person to assess your personality she has to let you get to know her, if she DOESN'T feel any physical attraction for you, she would most likely NOT want to know you and hence could never assess your personality.

See this thread you had about flirting to see what I mean - I'm using your own words against you, there's nothing better that hanging a man with his own rope.

Craig's Guide to Flirting

I've yet to see a woman so sexually ATTRACTIVE that no matter what her personality and talents were like I would still want to f*ck or date them either. It pretty much works both ways.

You won't get this complaint much simply because the there are more people who you don't find sexually attracted to that ones that you do, usually by a major factor.

The young hot stuck up b*tchy woman is just probably more unlikely to make me attracted as the ugly woman with the great personality.

That's a loser talking and you don't know it. Notice you said "young hot stuck up b*tchy", implying - indirectly anyway - that you see some physical attractive for the person in question but she wouldn't let you get to know her. It's easy to call such people stuck up and b*tchy, but believe me, if you were someone she fancies, she wouldn't be stuck and b*tchy, your assessment of such a person is based on superficially limited encounters and that's not fair. It's more likely that the person in question didn't find you "attractive" enough to let you inside her social circle or to want to know you, hence any assessment of personality in either side will not happen, and is premature at best. I onced asked someone I fancied about what she thought of this person I knew, her reply was that she did not know him - which is a nice, polite way of saying that they either don't share similar interests, similar friends, but most importantly that she has no real interest in wanting to know the person in question.

Take for example Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice: Mr Darcy slights Elizabeth at their first meeting at a ball. From this Elizabeth has no cordial feelings to him, seeing him as stuck up and arrogant and seeming to think that he is above everyone else. In the meantime, Darcy actually realises that dispite her lowly position and other things against her, Elizabeth is actually - ahem - pretty sexy, and that his initial judgement of her was just out of hand and unfair. He then spends the rest of the entire damn novel trying to win her, first of all trying to get to know her and make amends - to which she always rebuffs. It's only when he helps her out and lets Elizabeth see the proper side of him that she reconciles herself to him.

Now it was pretty obvious that Elizabeth had feelings for him but because he slighted her they were overruled. Had Darcy not developed serious sexual attraction for her he would not have done the things that he did, and their first meeting together would be like two people realising that nothing is going to happen between them, even though one of them might want to if just out of curiosity. In short if Darcy didn't realise that he fancies Elizabeth there would have been no novel, there would have been no need for him to get to know Elizabeth better, etc . . . etc. .

 

[darwinian_sympathiser]

give a man a rope to hang himself with (ctd). . .

This mantra is only about 10% true. Sure, women are attracted to good looks. If you read any post that I have ever written I have never denied this concept. However, to say that this is the only thing that dictates a woman's feelings for a man is absolute bs.

If this was actually the case, then very very few of us would ever even get the time of day from most women, because let's face it....most women have been hit on by better looking guys than you or me.

Who said there were better looking people than me? Did they say it? Did you say it? What happens if I don't agree with you or them and was in a narcassitic mood and thought myself better looking than everyone else?
In actual fact women's perception of what is good looking or not is quite variable. I did not say that good looks was the only thing that dictates a woman's feelings for a man. And no, there are some women who rarely get hit on by anyone simple because they're unattractive - if that's being cruel then so be it. Likewise there are guys who are unattractive that women rarely hit on either.

If you were to be honest - and this is my take here and I have much more experience than you - you'll find some in most relationships both parties fall in love and see each other as "the best looking person there is". Who am I to argue otherwise? People go for certain types and they attach a sexual interest to that "type".

What a lot of the important posters here are trying to tell you - in a crude way - is that the woman has to want to find you sexually attractive in order to initiate social contact and move things from there. And the criteria for why she does is - in case you did not get it when it has been mentioned many times to you - something totally beyond your control. You cannot force her attraction to you, and you definitely cannot change it.

Women can have it anytime they want it, if looks was the only determining factor in the equation they would be sleeping with the better looking guy and you would be left with absolutely nothing.

again here you miss a vital point. You see "woman" as generic term. The answer is NO. A woman might not be able to sleep with a better looking guy simply because of the fact that she can't get a better looking guy. And NO, they do not have it anytime they want. They are human just like the rest of us. In a way it's all about league and hierarchy. Have a look at society yourself. There's a silly flaw in your argument in thinking that women hold all the power, they don't. And there's a silly thinking that women complain that men hold all the power when we really don't. Another theme on similar lines is that women choose men, Doc love is especially adamant of that. The answer is NO they don't. What really happens is that you can only choose those that choose you. How that choice came into being is not relavant. It's your life, you live it your way.

I have news for you......there isn't any such thing as luck.

You'll learn this soon enough, trust me......I did.

You were to write a book about flirting techniques and the like, trying to think that you could help people. You can't, but you can't see that. You point of view is, do this and things will improve. Women who are stuck up are not worth knowing etc . . But you fail to realise that these women are just doing what you would do to someone who making moves on you who you don't find at all appealing. In short they're just like me and you but you fail to acknowledge that, because if you did you would be forced to agree to the inevitable: there are no AFCs, there are no DJs.

Exactly what would be the purpose of your book be Craig? Let me see: "How to handle rejection and make way for someone who really does want to be with you". Or are you aiming for the "do these things, think like this, develop this attitude and no woman will be able to resist you!!!", and other such crap . . .

Hasn't it ever occurred to you - nay to everyone else listening in on this thread - that the person you end up with is because she wanted to be with you. Sure, you might had to fight for her, or persuade her in your intial courtship. But the point being is that she LET it happen. That pattern has never changed. And you honestly think that we end up with someone because we acted like a DJ and knew all the right techniques and moves? Don't lie to yourself. And don't lie to her.

 

[tmpgstx]

It is more physical Craig. It really has to do with your 'male' display as opposed to her 'female' display. The more 'male' you are - the more of a female having a 'female' display or 'femaleness' you will attract.

There has to be some natural attraction there to begin with, otherwise - it's like it is for a girl you meet that you know you would never have sex with (ever). The same goes for women also. No matter what she does or says can change it.

 

[Craig Reeves]

Refuting misconceptions about attraction....

For some reason or another my thread was closed....

Why? I don't know....but it's not necessarily fair that I don't get to state my opinion. I never knew there was anything wrong with a debate....

To darwinian...

Some of your points are valid but you are completely misunderstanding me and putting too much context on what I'm talking about...

You see for the person to assess your personality she has to let you get to know her, if she DOESN'T feel any physical attraction for you, she would most likely NOT want to know you and hence could never assess your personality.

You raise a interesting and valid point, darwinian.

Women almost never decide that quickly about whether or not they would date a guy. You'll be surprised but it can take some time. HOWEVER, your point IS valid in a way because women can VERY QUICKLY decided whether or not they WOULDN'T date a guy. So basically she will place you into two categories: She'd NEVER date you, or she's OPEN TO THE IDEA.

I also agree with you as far as physical stuff goes TO A DEGREE. Just because a woman doesn't want to jump your bones upon sight certainly does not mean that she will close herself off from you.

You can't blame physical apperance for everything. Seriously. Women aren't perfect and always react off of things that make since to US. Sure, it can happen, a woman certainly can blow a guy off because she wouldn't have sex with him, but this is not always the case at all.

And as far as the thread I wrote OVER A YEAR AGO, I don't know what you are meaning as far as using words against me goes. If you could explain to me what you mean by that I would appreciate it.

That's a loser talking and you don't know it. Notice you said "young hot stuck up b*tchy", implying - indirectly anyway - that you see some physical attractive for the person in question but she wouldn't let you get to know her. It's easy to call such people stuck up and b*tchy, but believe me, if you were someone she fancies, she wouldn't be stuck and b*tchy, your assessment of such a person is based on superficially limited encounters and that's not fair. It's more likely that the person in question didn't find you "attractive" enough to let you inside her social circle or to want to know you, hence any assessment of personality in either side will not happen, and is premature at best.

I never said ME. I never mentioned MYSELF in the equation. There is no need simply because I never approach women like this ANYWAY. I simply am speaking based on OBSERVATION. How she is carrying herself, how she is treating other people (this is including her girlfriends). If the woman in question is only nice and a good person to guys she wants to sleep with, this raises a LOT of red flags for me and is certainly an indicator of a woman who I have no business with dealing with.

And I've never read Pride and Prejudace, but that's a book. Not real life.

Who said there were better looking people than me? Did they say it? Did you say it?

I meant better looking to HER.

If you were to be honest - and this is my take here and I have much more experience than you - you'll find some in most relationships both parties fall in love and see each other as "the best looking person there is". Who am I to argue otherwise? People go for certain types and they attach a sexual interest to that "type".

Well firstly you don't know how much experience I have....BUT sexual attraction can be triggered by many other things besides that, though.

What a lot of the important posters here are trying to tell you - in a crude way - is that the woman has to want to find you sexually attractive in order to initiate social contact and move things from there.

Women don't CHOOSE whether or not they get to feel attraction for a guy. That's just not the way it is. Women are "allowed" to feel attraction for a guy when she percieves him to have high status. It's not like she thinks to herself....."hm, he looks like a nice guy so I'm going to TURN MY ATTRACTION ON for him." Sorry, attraction just HAPPENS for her, she can't do anything about it.

I agree with the fact that attraction isn't a choice. I've been preaching that for the longest time. My argument, however, is that attraction is NOT triggered by what a woman PREFERS, but by her EMOTIONS. They have nothing to do with whether or not you're a good guy for her, or whether or not you're what she PREFERS. The truth is, is that women PREFER guys who look like Brad Pitt and have extremely big bank accounts.

You cannot force her attraction to you, and you definitely cannot change it.

I agree. HOWEVER, once the woman DOES get to know you, THAT will determine whether or not you're going to get her or not. Just because a woman thinks you're cute upon the initial approach does not at ALL mean that she will date you. That just means that you passed the "physical". If you continue onward and act toward her in a way that causes her NOT to feel attraction for you, then she will not no matter how cute she thinks you are. I know reality can suck, but you must let go of the belief that you're guarranteed the girl just because she liked the way you look. It just isn't true.

again here you miss a vital point. You see "woman" as generic term. The answer is NO. A woman might not be able to sleep with a better looking guy simply because of the fact that she can't get a better looking guy.

I actually meant attractive women. I should have clarified that.

There's a silly flaw in your argument in thinking that women hold all the power, they don't.

That's not in my argument at all. That's YOURS. You're the one that's saying that just because a woman treats you bad then you just must not be good enough.

Women who are stuck up are not worth knowing etc . . But you fail to realise that these women are just doing what you would do to someone who making moves on you who you don't find at all appealing.

So you mean to tell me that anytime a woman acts stuck up it's YOUR fault??? Since when??? And you say that *I* believe women hold all the power? That's bull.

Women that I'm not physically attracted to approach me but I don't blow them off just because they don't look good in a miniskirt. Don't confuse me with yourself. Just because YOU do that doesn't mean that everyone else does.

Exactly what would be the purpose of your book be Craig? Let me see: "How to handle rejection and make way for someone who really does want to be with you". Or are you aiming for the "do these things, think like this, develop this attitude and no woman will be able to resist you!!!", and other such crap . . .

I know that it hurts your reality that you can actually improve yourself and go from being bad with women to good with them, but that's what this whole thing is about and for some reason you have a hard time believing that.

You seem to find no importance in developing your INNER GAME and this tells me that you don't have much credibility with me.

Your attitude is the basis for EVERYTHING you do in life. Bill Gates didn't get rich because he just lucked out. He got rich because he believed in himself and took the steps to make his life successful.

When I was in high school, I had the self image of a loser. As soon as I started changing my belief system, so did EVERYTHING ELSE.

What goes on on the inside AFFECTS the outside. If I constantly called a woman 10 times a day because I didn't believe that she liked me, that would cause the woman to RUN. If I saw an attractive woman and I did not believe in myself, I would never approach her AT ALL.

Like I said....you just seem to see no importance in devloping yourself and you just rely on getting lucky....which never works.

 

[darwinian_sympathiser]

I agree. HOWEVER, once the woman DOES get to know you, THAT will determine whether or not you're going to get her or not. Just because a woman thinks you're cute upon the initial approach does not at ALL mean that she will date you. That just means that you passed the "physical". If you continue onward and act toward her in a way that causes her NOT to feel attraction for you, then she will not no matter how cute she thinks you are. I know reality can suck, but you must let go of the belief that you're guarranteed the girl just because she liked the way you look. It just isn't true.

I never said it was true. We probably never REALLY know why a woman wants to be with someone. . .

I meant better looking to HER.

People, especially women, always grade people. They may not know it, they may not be able to help it. And this shows in how they treat those around them. Sometimes, most of the time in fact, their behaviour is caused by a "feedback" effect from how others treat them. There's a very interesting thread on how very good looking women get things so easy, and you just can't imagine why can you? (sarcastic laugh). To answer your comment women don't necessarily dump someone just because they found someone else better looking, there are a host of reasons . . we better not go into that there

I agree. HOWEVER, once the woman DOES get to know you, THAT will determine whether or not you're going to get her or not. Just because a woman thinks you're cute upon the initial approach does not at ALL mean that she will date you. That just means that you passed the "physical". If you continue onward and act toward her in a way that causes her NOT to feel attraction for you, then she will not no matter how cute she thinks you are. I know reality can suck, but you must let go of the belief that you're guarranteed the girl just because she liked the way you look. It just isn't true.

so in effect you agree with me also. I myself never had the belief that you are guaranteed a girl by the way you look. You are, however, guaranteed more auditions if they do find you attractive . . .

So you mean to tell me that anytime a woman acts stuck up it's YOUR fault??? Since when??? And you say that *I* believe women hold all the power? That's bull.

Women that I'm not physically attracted to approach me but I don't blow them off just because they don't look good in a miniskirt. Don't confuse me with yourself. Just because YOU do that doesn't mean that everyone else does.

How anyone treats another person who approaches them that they don't fancy is none of anyone else's business. I was merely illustrating the fact that if she blows you off it implies nothing about her character. And I never implied that if she is stuck up to you it is your fault, far from it. You can see the approach as some kind of a sales pitch. If the buyer is not interested nothing will happen, and what follows is awkwardness and embarassment. . .

I know that it hurts your reality that you can actually improve yourself and go from being bad with women to good with them, but that's what this whole thing is about and for some reason you have a hard time believing that.

You seem to find no importance in developing your INNER GAME and this tells me that you don't have much credibility with me.

Your attitude is the basis for EVERYTHING you do in life. Bill Gates didn't get rich because he just lucked out. He got rich because he believed in himself and took the steps to make his life successful.

When I was in high school, I had the self image of a loser. As soon as I started changing my belief system, so did EVERYTHING ELSE.

Bill Gates is wonderfully successful. He so wonderfully successful that he screwed (and I mean screwed) the entire computer industry many times over with his crap operating systems and aggressive sales drive. He did get lucky - in a way I'll explain later - but the rest of sheer hard work for him to get to where he is now. Apple is probably the most innovative computer company on the planet, Steve Jobs simply believes in deliverying a better product. Microsoft - on the other hand - simply want to get as much market share as possible, they have a very dedicated and aggressively intelligent sales force. Which is why Apple makes a pitance compares to Microsoft in terms of revenue. Don't get me wrong, some stuff from Microsoft is awesome, and they have some very intelligent people working for them, but you get the point . . .

Bill Gates needed a bit of luck, and a lot of bloody hard work. He's a very clever man, no doubt about it. Most, if given his situation, would have faltered and he didn't. Whether you think he made his life successful I'll leave to you.

I never advocated relying on luck all the time. Luck gives you an edge sometimes, luck can be the catayst for the turning piont in your life. If I remember correctly Microsoft were in competition with Digital Research in forwarding an operating system for the newly standardised IBM PC, Bill Gates did some dirty trick in which he managed to persuade IBM to use his company's MSDOS - the rest they say is history. There was definitely foul playing going on but we only learnt that later. The landscape of operating systems now would be different if Digitial Research had won the contract.

It's your fault that you had an image of a LOSER in high school. In certain ways I can sympathize with why you put forward the posts that you do, but I'm of the view that all this self help rubbish (most of it is rubbish) can only get you so far.

 

[tmpgstx]

I think we all agree that attraction is not a choice and that the more attractive women are indeed different in the way they socialize and date. They rarely go for guys that chase them, and really go for a guy who they are passionate for and pursue.

Bill Gates worked as a programmer for IBM early on. He was one of the programmers for 'IBM DOS'. Bill took 7 weeks off from classes and he and his buddy Paul (also a programmer) took the existing IBM DOS code and revamped it - made it better and called it Microsoft.

Most PC vendors chose Microsoft's revamped version of IBM DOS as their choice to place on the their PCs as the primary OS instead of IBM's DOS. Since then, IBM has filed lawsuites and tried to oust Microsoft in the major markets but with little success.

Apple came on the scene with a point click graphical OS using icons. Bill again played the same game as he did with IBM. Because of the copyright and patent loopholes (which have since been revised), - this time Microsoft modeled Apples OS but made it more feature rich. Apple tried to say Microsoft stole it, but with no luck.

Microsoft then did it with Netscape - 3 for 3 now. Microsoft went to Netscape and asked how they did this and that - got the info and had some of it incorperated into IE. Next, they made it part of the OS so everyone got a free browser, thus pushing Netscape off the market.

Bill has been so successful because he is as good a businessman as he is a programmer.

When Bill was the CEO of Microsoft .. their growth was a 40% sustained average. Since Bill stepped down to become the chief software engineer and made Steve Ballmer the new CEO - growth as decreased from 40% to only 8% over the last 5 years (since Bill stepped down).

 

[Craig Reeves]

It's your fault that you had an image of a LOSER in high school. In certain ways I can sympathize with why you put forward the posts that you do, but I'm of the view that all this self help rubbish (most of it is rubbish) can only get you so far.

It worked for ME, so I'm pretty sure that it could work for somebody else, too....just so long as they try.

 

[darwinian_sympathiser]

Women don't CHOOSE whether or not they get to feel attraction for a guy. That's just not the way it is. Women are "allowed" to feel attraction for a guy when she percieves him to have high status. It's not like she thinks to herself....."hm, he looks like a nice guy so I'm going to TURN MY ATTRACTION ON for him." Sorry, attraction just HAPPENS for her, she can't do anything about it.

I agree with the fact that attraction isn't a choice. I've been preaching that for the longest time. My argument, however, is that attraction is NOT triggered by what a woman PREFERS, but by her EMOTIONS. They have nothing to do with whether or not you're a good guy for her, or whether or not you're what she PREFERS. The truth is, is that women PREFER guys who look like Brad Pitt and have extremely big bank accounts.

See your wonderful thread:

Craig's talking about flirting

Now I'll quote what TheRisingSon said just for those of you who are oblivious to what is happening here:

Delusions and Sematics

First, I would like to discuss semantics. Craig, you have "attraction" and "interest" reversed. Seriously consider the definition of these words. Every single woman that I've been interested in, I was attracted to. Else, I wouldn't have been interested in listening to them go on and on about womanly things... You know, "Then that b!tch said this, and then did that!" Would I really care if I wasn't looking to get some? Of course, even looking to get some, I was interested in that, but interested in her.

Second, I have long been a supporter of the "self improvement" movement around here. Sorry, but you are deluding yourself if you think you can talk someone into being attracted to you. Either the attraction was there all along, or it never will be. All you are doing is putting in enough time to make it obvious. Seriously, could an ugly, fat, 50 year old woman talk you into being attracted to her? She might get you to fvck her, but you still would not find her hot. I've slept with women because they had money and bought me nice things. No matter what, I couldn't ever be in a relationship with them. I didn't even want to be in public with them! (And couldn't even orgasm during sex... Yes, men do fake it!)

As to flirting, my stance is along the lines of Anti-Dump (and thus Deep Dish, Pook, etc.). Flirting is NOT needed. It might even hurt. One of the most common themes here is "Why does the one I want not want me, but the ones I don't want think I am God?!?" Maybe it goes back to "Mystery" and being a "Challenge?" Dunno. You are writing the book. Point is, flirting is part of treating those "special" women you find attractive different than the others.

I am with Deep Dish. Some might consider what I do with women technique. They are the ones who don't want to be "themselves" and follow a guru's advice. Fact of the matter is, though, that I treat women no differently than I treat anyone else. I use "****y and Funny," not because it is a trick, but because that is who I am. I use it with both men and women. No real difference. Both respond the same way, they laugh, smile, and think I am "cool." Of course, not all feel that way, but who cares? I've been told many times I am "cool" because I do what I want and don't care what other's think about me.

So, I don't flirt. Women must not be attracted or interested in me since I don't create that emotion, right? I used to work in an environment where I was one of 7 or 8 guys with 30 or so women. They ridiculed most of the men or simply ignored them. Me? They litterally used to talk about having me in "sandwiches," told me how great I looked (I love your shirt, shoes, hair, cologne, etc.). Did I "flirt" with any of them? I barely even talked to any of them. Yet they would come up and touch me any chance they got... "Oh, you had something on your chest."

What's the point? Don't fool yourself, face reality and realize you can't make someone want to fvck you. Either they do, or they don't. Sure, confidence and attitude help. After all, peronality is an important part of attraction, but is is only part. It will help you carry yourself in a way that makes others notice, but once they notice there better be something they see that they like.

Where does all this leave the "average" guy? In the same place as the "average" woman. If she has a decent personality, dresses well, is slim, and has big boobs she will get dates. I've known enough women to tell you that if you take care of yourself, dress well, have a nice chest, six pack, and big d!ck (though she won't know until too late, but her friends will) you will get dates. After all, women are men with vaginas when it comes to lust.

I've Risen

I don't mean to be rude to you Craig, but you seem to me to be, to be quite honest, dellusionally retarded. You are what I call an over optimist who wants the to will the world into his own image, never for a minute realising that the world and his wife does not care about your will. Let me quote you again:

My argument, however, is that attraction is NOT triggered by what a woman PREFERS, but by her EMOTIONS

I don't care what a woman prefers, what a woman says and what a woman does is usually two different things. That's not the piont. The point is that if she has no attraction for you (or in your speak FEELS no attraction for you) nothing is going to happen. You seem to be of the opinion that we can manipulate this feeling to our advantage and MAKE them feel something for us, hence your positive thinking, hence the "I'm going to write a book about this to help people" mentality.

Craig,

You mean well but you're off base. I'll hit on everything you said later. You seem to be in a stage that many have us have been a long time ago. Still reaching for that hope in the wrong place. Indeed it's not all about being what is considered 'attractive', but rather be comfortable and being in touch with who you are as a man, and radiating that naturally. Women will notice and perceive your maleness based off of a visual. It's why a$$holes get laid, and so do nice guys, and so do abusers, yet so do mamma's boys, and so do DJs, and so do guys who never read this site before. We are ALL capable of getting laid, it is just people like us, on this board, that let our insecurities get in the way and make US fvck up the whole thing because we don't even recongize something when it was handed to us.

Your stuff is nice and inspiring but it's not new. Everybody has heard it and we notice it's not quite flying. You'll notice it too, in time. In the beginning you will get a HUGE ego boost and feel you have something up on everybody ("people are brainwashed by the media!"). After awhile you'll realize that the technique, mindframe, tricks, confidence have NOTHING to do with why you got laid. But you can't figure out the true reason but you just attribute it to 'must be the new confidence', since that feels like you have some type of control. Trust me. Just wait it out before you start throwing a bunch of cliche DJ theory that we've all heard a million times before.

"Mystery Woman, you're just too snotty to admit that men can affect a woman's initial decisions about him with his personality, charm, and wit. You're just too snotty to admit that an average looking guy could sweep a hot woman off of her feet."

And you are just too insecure to comprehend and ACCEPT the truth because it would take you back to the starting block again. Stick you with a "what now?" face and make you figure out what's REALLY goin on. And that scares the shyt out of you. She's a threat. A threat to your perceived power that will stop you from falling into that very person that you were ashamed of, that made you feel like you NEEDED sosuave.com to begin with.

I'd need say no more. But seriously, could an ugly fat old woman (UFO to Deep Dish) sweep you off your feet and make you fall in love with her just by her personality, how she carries herself, her amazing wit, and her awesome sense of humour? And how exactly would you FEEL about her? Because according to you would be swept off your feet?

Yes of course!!! Silly me, it's all about character and improving yourself, and knowing how to have fun, and socialising and having high self esteem, and acting like the Alpha male. We can all treat women like the Stepford Wives, mould them to suit our own interests and bend them to our own wills!

 

[Porky]

aw, it's a girl fight.

 

[darwinian_sympathiser]

time for the nail in the coffin . . .

I didn't mean to continue this but I decided to make this into a decent thread instead of an all out fight. . .

Not meaning to be disrespectful to all those reading this, but if we were all to be honest we are all here because we've been, and dare I say it, hurt.

You're here Craig because you said that in High School you felt like a loser. I'm here because I thought this site could help me with an oneitis that lingered for so long, but I slowly realise that it was not the case. Some people are here simply because because they want to get laid as much as possible - which unfortunately this site does not really help with. Still a vast majority are probably here because they can't get laid.

The advice you spout, Craig, and the similar posters like you, neither help nor make a difference for the simple reason that you neglect reality. Other posters have been trying to tell you that but you simply don't realise it.

Deep Dish put it in a devastating way:

"Women are a reflection of you, not of your gaming skills"

"Always bear in mind there are guys who persistently try to get laid, yet rarely do, while there are guys who do jack squat of effort, yet have the honies chasing after him."

these statements are not frivilious, spur of the moment observations, but reality laid bare. This is real life.

On the other hand the sad losers will be buying your book in vain hope that they can attract anyone they want, just like the multitude of crap that Deangelo spouts along with Ross Jeffries. There's a reason as to why there is so much self help books in this world, because they SELL, and people WANT to be duped. They just don't want to go through the pain of realisation that the world is just not the world that they want it to be.

These people hit sites like this hoping that it can work the impossible and help them get that girl who is clearly showing no interest in them at all, hoping somehow they can turn that disinterest to interest. Some are probably hanging onto your flawed logic that attraction is not a choice, hence if they knew what triggered it they could use it to their advantage, never for a second thinking that that choice is independent of anyone's actions.

For all these rest of you reading this thread who fall into the above camp, read bondjamesbond, deepdish etc . . Bondjamesbond knows exactly what he's talking about, he knows exactly how it is.

Think about it, Craig: Think about the women you've known and the ones that rejected you or had no interest in you. The women who you got to know wanted you, and the ones who didn't, didn't. They didn't let you get to know them - for whatever reason. Could be your looks, could be your dress sense, could be a host of factors - reasons are irrelevant, results are what mattered. Do you honestly think that you ended up with them because you had "positive thinking" or that you read a book and it helped you win them? Please don't insult their intelligence, because women have a much higher social IQ that us men.

Women, following bondjamesbond, love sex. So do we. The only reason why a woman has no interest in wanting to know you is because of one thing, and it's usually sexual.

Look around you in society, you'll notice that couples are remarkably similar in terms of looks, intelligence, etc . . . That tells you something about us, to ignore it is folly. Also you'll find that we all have rather distinct tastes even though we don't admit it to ourselves.

An exceptionally attractive women may have a lot of offers and a lot of guys hitting on her, but she is human too, and likes a certain type. That's the human bonding process at work. Same goes for everyone else. And of all the people we see around in our everyday life they either don't interest us or we are interested in them but they are not in us. Like I said, you can only choose those that choose you.