What the blackpill gets wrong. Hypergamy isnt as bad as we think.

[member160292]

So would I.

Just tell them you'll take care of it and she picks up the tab on the next venue

 

[member160292]

Then she declines going to the next venue.. "It's getting late, I better get home".

Good, no need to pursue further.

Setup the date to reserve 3-4 hours. My most successful ones are on the weekends. 4PM start.

 

[SW15]

2 strong drinks is not expensive. Foot the bill and don’t even mention it.

Is that 2 drinks per person or 2 drinks total (1 per person)?

Either way, if the first date doesn’t result in sex and there’s no second date, the money is wasted. If you have 10 failed first dates like that without getting laid, that would be problematic. Lots of wasted $ & no sex.

 

[member160292]

It's pay to play dudes.

If you can't afford to pay for her drink, you should prioritize other aspects of your life.

Nothing dries pus more than cheap ass men

 

[SW15]

It's pay to play dudes.

If you can't afford to pay for her drink, you should prioritize other aspects of your life.

I have been doing pay to play. I’ve spent my entire mating career footing bills on dates. I don’t like it but I do it for the notch.

All men pay for sex either directly or indirectly. That’s why men view sex transactionally.

 

[member160292]

@Pan87

You should write up a dating 101 thread and have it stickied
I'd read the sh!t outta it

 

[Zimbabwe]

Movie dates in theaters are a terrible idea in the early stages. I thought every man knew that by now and they were discredited decades ago. Established couples do that shiit.

I'm not entirely opposed to activity dates for a first date or second date. For a first date, I'd have to find a common, enjoyable activity in a 5-10 minute conversation. That answer doesn't typically reveal itself in a conversation on an initial approach. It's much more possible for a second date.

It's very difficult to cut bars out of the seduction process entirely. You'll either need them for the initial approach or as a 1st-2nd date hosting venue.

My mindset is that I have activities that I want to do, and I just invite women along to come with. Two birds with one stone, if you enjoy drinking or having coffee then do that.

I'm going to try a Gym date with this girl next week, I already go to the gym 6 days a week so might as well bring her to my next session. Next I'm thinking of a picnic in the park if rhe weather here in Sydney gets better

Also about movies, I don't see what's so bad about it.

 

[member160292]

Way too many men think they are entitled to pus when a girl actually goes on a date with them that the impression they give is turning her off.
2 drinks = bang

That will work on the unattractive women because they were going to F you anyway.
It fails on attractive women who actually have options. Guys are used to catching bait fish from the bottom barrel and expect those same techniques to work on a marlin.

All the content you need is on this forum. We all can bang hotties if we up our game

 

[BeExcellent]

So what I gain from this comment and your previous comment of "If he doesn't offer to pay, It leaves me unimpressed" translates to is, if a guy doesn't offer to pay, then you lose attraction, because you don't feel like he's interested in bonding to you due to the lack of interest in financial investment. Either way a guy not offering to pay lowers your attraction towards him. Which is what I proposed to pan.

Correct. I'm very open about this. In the initial stages of an interaction bonding is not really going to occur. But investment builds toward and over time creates a bond. Humans are social critters and have need of emotional bonding. Without it they become damaged and sub-par. It's a natural thing to seek as a human being. So this idea that the desire to bond with another human being is somehow bad is a DAMAGED way of thinking. Refer to other people in this thread.

Let me ask you a question. If you are a top tier man with lots of options, would you choose a woman who is non-compliant, flaky, and difficult to pin down? Would you pick a woman who is not responsive to you and who creates barriers to sex? No. No man with options will choose such a woman.

Why?

Two reasons. 1. Why pick her with all her barriers when you can choose someone else of the same attractiveness level who WILL submit, be compliant and reliable and sexually accommodating??? 2. The non-compliant woman does not feel good to be around. The compliant woman feels good to be around. That is a huge factor!!!!

People (both men and women) gravitate to what feels GOOD. Non-compliance doesn't feel good to a man. Especially not when he can choose another woman with whom he can have a pleasant interaction.

In the same way a woman with many good options has the same sort of choices to make. I have been a woman men compete for all my life. That is the way of things for beautiful, pleasant, sane women who are good company. If I have a dozen or so equally successful, good looking, desirable men to choose from...why on Earth would I pick a cheapskate, who, by not acting as a gentleman and picking up the check for an outing that he initiated, and that I agreed to spend my time doing (at the expense of other things I could have been doing with other people), why would I reward that behavior? Answer: I won't. And neither will any other beautiful desirable woman.

I didn't make the rules but I understand them. I just shake my head at men that expect a high value woman to accept Netflix and chill or a quick drink outing and then expect her to allow you sexual conquest on a first date. That is UNREALITY. Now if she is low self-esteem, just wants a hook up, is a w h o r e, or has few options then understand something. By this set of expectations you guys are screening FOR low value, low quality women! And then you complain about there not being any quality girls out there. Quality girls are like Chads. They do not have to tolerate BS, so they do not. So if you think a quality girl is going to put up with this way of being? Good luck. She's going to pick someone who treats her well and makes her feel special (which a cheapskate does NOT do).

It's honestly very simple. Pick a woman you like who LIKES YOU BACK. If the women you want do not like you back, then you are invisible to them. Figure out why that is or pick a different woman!

 

[BeExcellent]

I like to think I am more red pill than black pill.

This is an accurate representation of my viewpoint. Yes, I believe that romantic relationships have a shelf life. There was family of origin pain. I have resolved those issues through a difficult process.

The best evidence of the shelf life of goodness of romantic relationships is a divorce. Divorce is rampant. The probability of a divorce occurring over a 40 year period (the likely evaluation period for marrying couples 35 and under) in any marriage is quite high.

When a divorce is filed for, the shelf life of goodness ended a long time ago. The divorce is simply the final step of putting a relationship that effectively ended often years earlier out of its misery.

My parents had a subpar romantic relationship that lasted far longer than it should have lasted. I can’t think of 2 more ill fitting people who lasted as long as they did. They lasted 20+ years. Since I am only 39, I don’t know any 20 year long couples yet but I do know some ill fitting couples coming up on 10 years.

In the United States, the norm is to think of married couples & their duration from the time of marriage, discounting their relational time pre-marriage. I think of couples from the very beginning.

There is a lot of evidence that sexual passion dies over time. I don’t want to stick around a relationship long enough for that to occur.

I greatly appreciate the candor of your response and I understand and relate to the family of origin thing. Divorce is indeed rampant. But great marriages are also quite common. There are men here who came from solid families of origin, and men here who are themselves leading solid families of origin right now. So it's not as though solid LTRs are like four-leaf clovers, they are VERY common in fact. I know dozens...DOZENS of very good marriages!! And guess what? Those are well adjusted people similar to me who are experiencing those quality relationships. I see they exist, I prefer to have a situation like that in my own life. I know young people, middle age people, older people who are happily coupled. It's very cool. These are people who live together, play together, raise families togther and once the kids are grown, play together some more and grow old together!

My future mother-in-law is in such a marriage, my children's grandmother was in such a marriage, I know couples my age, my children's age and in between that are experiencing positive marriages and all its benefits. In my own marriage there was plenty of sexual passion throughout the relationship. This is over 20 years and sex nearly every day. So from my own personal experience I know that passion can indeed last. And I'm not unusual in that regard.

My parents had a strained marriage at best. They split when I was 16. I was quite cautious about getting involved with a man because of what I saw in my family of origin. BUT. I also saw many good, solid successful marriages all around me, so I knew they existed and that that my parent's relationship was dysfunctional...but I did not extrapolate that to mean ALL marriages are dysfunctional. I knew my parents (really my mother) were the problem, not that marriage was the problem.

Too many people here think marriage is the problem as an institution. No. Marriage is only ever as good as the two people who got married. You have two sh1tty people in a marriage? It's going to be a bad marriage. You have 1 awful person in the marriage? It's going to be a sub-par marriage.

This is why the choice of a life partner or marriage partner is one of THE single most important choices a person makes in their life! Some here do not believe in marriage, but that is in some ways a cop out. You don't believe in long term as being viable (you do not think it exists at all) and I'd extend that to say you do not trust yourself to pick a partner who can go the distance in life. It gets back to belief system. You don't believe it so FOR YOU it CANNOT exist. See how that belief robs you?

Digest that logic. I agree you do you and live your own life as you please. But your beliefs are keeping you in a state of disappointment and disbelief.

 

[BeExcellent]

I'm not. I'm not a faux "alpha" who's larping on this site. I'm on here as a beginner to game, learning to be a don juan, which means I'm not nuanced enough to know when a woman is pretending to be interested just for the attention and entertainment of doing something. Plenty of men have stated women do this regularly. Also, my lack of game nuance/charm could turn them OFF, and as stated, I don't have the finances to take 20 women on dates with nothing to show for it except sunken costs.

Yet I have the need for sex and sexual bonding, and I'm not willing to resort to rape. So, why wouldn't I leverage the situation to my benefit financially when I am not charming enough to be a sexual prospect to the woman, but nuanced enough to see that she's not interested. Like you said, women don't need men to pay for them. So why would I be obligated to? When I see it's not going anywhere I'll pay for my drink, and cut the date short. Otherwise I may take loss after loss and it adds up taking me out of the dating game, defeating the purpose. Because you're a woman, you don't experience men's reality of "ONE DATE, NO SECOND DATE, NO SEX" time and time again.

I'm not suggesting you are a faux alpha or something. But I asked the question for you to think about the kind of abundance a Chad has or that a beautiful woman has for you to consider the way a person like that exists. It's comply or BYE Felicia in that world, and it goes two ways.

The way you see whether or not a woman is interested is you watch what she DOES. You pay attention to actions, and disregard words. In doing this you learn to respect your own time, which will build your self respect. Does she fail to communicate or respond? Look for someone else. Does she flake? Look for someone else. Does she make things ridiculously difficult? (some resistance to intimacy is to be expected) If she is over the top difficult look for someone else.

I will tell you men here whose content I HIGHLY recommend: @Glassguy @Serenity @oldmanofthesea @2Rocky @Howiestern @Fruitbat @guru1000 (he's not really active anymore but search and read his posts), @Atom Smasher @Dash Riprock. Each of the men I mentioned are enjoying the fruits of success in their interactions with women. Some are married, some are in LTRs, some are running a rotation.

My own son turns 20 later this month. He is enjoying great satisfaction in his relationship and he understands the red pill as he was raised in a red pill environment. My 18 year old daughter is in a LTR and they are looking long term and planning their lives, quite possibly together for the long haul. And she is still an innocent as far as sex is concerned. I raised my son to lead and my daughters to trust the man they choose to lead them. Read that sentence again.

Pan is correct that the interaction between men and women is indeed learned. Some of us get a better teacher than others and I know you and other men come here to figure those interactions out. The first thing you need to do is be straight with yourself about what your end game is. Once you define your end game, then you can figure out which voices here are best suited to your goals. As Atom Smasher often says, the gold is here if you are willing to look for it.

I wish you every success. Cheers.

 

[BillyPilgrim]

but why would a guy have the right to get laid ?

maybe sex is not for everyone

why ?

the point of mating is for the specie to get better , not for simps to get laid and make the specie to devolve

if you do not get laid it is mainly because of you

Lol, using a prostitute does not involve procreation.

It's a shame so many guys use getting laid as an excuse to put down other men.

 

[BillyPilgrim]

I made it through the first page, but I'm not reading 5 more pages of this phucking garbage.

Prostitution >>>>> thirst control. Sex, at least occasionally, is a biological need for optimal mental health and is listed on Maslow's Hierarchy chart twice.

Prostitution also >>>>> dumpster diving

Just because the women are bad in a country where it's legal doesn't mean those women wouldn't be *worse* without its legality.

It's the world's oldest profession for a reason.

 

[BeExcellent]

I'm not. I'm not a faux "alpha" who's larping on this site. I'm on here as a beginner to game, learning to be a don juan, which means I'm not nuanced enough to know when a woman is pretending to be interested just for the attention and entertainment of doing something. Plenty of men have stated women do this regularly. Also, my lack of game nuance/charm could turn them OFF, and as stated, I don't have the finances to take 20 women on dates with nothing to show for it except sunken costs.

Yet I have the need for sex and sexual bonding, and I'm not willing to resort to rape. So, why wouldn't I leverage the situation to my benefit financially when I am not charming enough to be a sexual prospect to the woman, but nuanced enough to see that she's not interested. Like you said, women don't need men to pay for them. So why would I be obligated to? When I see it's not going anywhere I'll pay for my drink, and cut the date short. Otherwise I may take loss after loss and it adds up taking me out of the dating game, defeating the purpose. Because you're a woman, you don't experience men's reality of "ONE DATE, NO SECOND DATE, NO SEX" time and time again. I'm willing to bet every time you've wanted sex to happen on a date, it happened.

I'm trying to ascertain whether you are ABLE to leverage the situation. That ability, and whether or not you have it require a great deal more detail. I DM'd you with specifics.

True that I could go out an get laid every day if that was something I wanted to do, but it isn't. It's not as though I've never been rejected. That idea is ridiculous. Being sought after means you have choices, lots of choices but you may not have interest in the choices that have interest in you and people I might be interested in are not always interested in me. I don't worry about men who aren't interested in me, rather I choose strictly from the ones that do express interest, and I am fortunate to have the luxury of lots to choose from, but not ALL men are into me. That has always been the deal, and I don't worry about it. I am socially adroit. I read social situations very VERY well. I have been rejected by men that I liked or had a crush on plenty but I do not blunder or embarrass myself because I have already picked up through social cues whether or not a man has interest in me, without speaking a word. That is covert sub-communication, and we all do it, but not everyone reads it well or picks up those cues.

 

[RickTheToad]

If you want advice about dating females, last type of person you should ask is a female... Just sayin...

 

[thelambofdeth]

If you want advice about dating females, last type of person you should ask is a female... Just sayin...

This. Like this isn't even rule #1, it's rule 0 lols

 

[kavi]

Are most guys getting sex without somehow paying for it? I dont think so.

As men I think we really need to understand that us valueing (overvaluing) sex is a big problem that women are using as a form of manipulation and power play.

In Nature, few animals do it as often as humans do. A female would do it a few times a year enough to get pregnant but no more.

As men we have become fixated and dependant on sex and we need to relook at this.

-It is not the best guys getting laid. It is nothing to brag about.
-Mostly for a guy to have high notch count he is gonna have to do lots of Beta, questionable things ie lie, pursue really hard, pay, put up with crap, simp, mass approach etc etc
-Women are not being responsible for who they have sex with, for them it is something that they expect men to 'try and get' or want. Men are too weak to question women on this and hold them to account. In Nature a woman can only **** the best guy cos she is doing it to get pregnant, in humans we have contraception so women are not being as selective. It really is a mess out there.

This isnt 1990, **** has moved on.

Now this is the most important point. Sex is something for men to aspire to, to be chosen, as the best guy, the worthy one. So it should be a bonus when it happens, not something to be taken for granted, unless one is an Alpha Male (10% of guys, lets say). So why do so many men need sex and validation from women? Its because we live in a cold and broken social and economic system. I really believe the coldness and harshness with which modern society treats young men causes them to need sex and validation from women. When I hear men saying they need sex and women I believe this is a result of being stressed from society.

What is needed is a complete over-haul of our socio-economic system away from traditional patriarchal values moving closer to a communal system.

 

[kavi]

Too many people here think marriage is the problem as an institution. No. Marriage is only ever as good as the two people who got married. You have two sh1tty people in a marriage? It's going to be a bad marriage. You have 1 awful person in the marriage? It's going to be a sub-par marriage.

Digest that logic. I agree you do you and live your own life as you please. But your beliefs are keeping you in a state of disappointment and disbelief.

I have to disagree. I believe marriage is a terrible thing and would seriously ask any man of value to reconsider. A communal system (though they dont really exist currently) would be far superior imo.

Marriage is simply something invented to keep beta males happy and working, to strip power away from real alpha men, to give that power to leaders and hence the patriarchy. Marriage cannot and will not survive in the modern world, with all its freedoms and especially gender-mixing.

Marriage was likely invented in ancient Iran, it is associated with Jamshed (Yama) who is a mythical figure cognate with Ymir, Remus and his name is associated variously with Death, Hell and twins. In ancient Iranian myth Jamshed created a Vara (an enclosure) where he put people in twos. This most likely refers to early farming settlements in West Asia (most people were nomads then so the enclosure denotes both protection and also control) and Neolithic state formation. Later on this myth was borrowed by others and became the Ark and flood myth, but in most other parrallels its the Iranian which is closest to the original.

The oldest (or most archaic) literature we have is the Rigveda which was composed around the Pakistan, NW India and Afg region. In earlier parts of this text there is this reference to "wives".

"What time our wives draw near to us, may he, left-handed Tvastar, give us hero sons"

Note the interesting words being used, OUR wives, meaning, wives and sons as a collective of the tribe, not individual man and wife, and secondly DRAW NEAR TO US, the concept of women initiating sex when they are ready to procreate (as is the case in nature), rather than a typical traditional marriage where the woman is expected to provide sex to the man for his own personal sacrifice and work, which is where the concept of paying for sex, as a transaction, exchange, or duty probably comes from.

If any guy wishes to advance in Game he has to move beyond the marriage system and monogamy. Game, in its purest form, simply leads to a guy becoming the leader of a communal system, as is the case in Nature, and Game is of the most natural things, which we discover, not invent.

Our generation now (its ok for you, as you are bit older) is in a difficult and transitionary period. The faster the transition can occur the better. I dont wanna be in a lost generation because I am sure a golden period of happiness and freedom is just a few generations away.

 

[lost_blackbird]

maybe sex is not for everyone

I can certainly agree with this.

 

[member160292]

@kavi
Why so much thought over something so simple as mating?