Why "The Dating Market" Sucks

[Poon King]

Personally, I'm not going to keep going on and on about ltr's or whatever. As Poon rightly pointed out, if everyone were doing what I am, it would be chaos.

Which is why society frowns on it.

Society needs to promote what is good for society. Empowering men with an "abundance" mindset does not serve society's agenda.

I just find it very hard to understand that men with a decent amount of experience, and having taken the red-pill, decide to double down on investing in a very serious monogamous relationship. That baffles me.

I find it hard to understand how some people go on diets and get into amazing physical shape.. then flush it down the toilet by eating entire pizza's every meal and letting themselves go months later.

You can take the clown out of the circus but you can't take the circus out of the clown. This applies to most things. You can give a beta abundance and he will still choose co-dependence. We see this all the time among rich men like Brad Pitt, Michael Douglas and Mel Gibson. We also see how it works out for them.

What the fvck am I missing here?

You are "missing" the purposeful suspension of critical thinking.

Also known as "faith".

 

[BeExcellent]

You've went to great effort to delineate how "low-value" plate-spinning, and abundance, is.

Show me where I have ever said plate spinning was de facto low value. Cut and paste the quote in here.

On the contrary I've said numerous times that if what you are doing is working for you, by all means keep doing it.

Your problem is you think you need to SAVE all the other men here and that your way is the ONLY way. You are shrill about it in fact.

Some do need saving and would do well to spin plates and follow your advice. Others do NOT need saving and have in fact greater tenure in life and experience with women and are in my observation wiser than you are.

But you cannot accept that possibility in your arrogance. I had a friend of mine who I've known well for 25 years tell me just recently he can get sex constantly with hot fresh 20 somethings in a Miami type market...his sex life is great but his love life sucks. He's got so much pvssy at his beck and call he's bored with it. Seriously. All at least HB8 but usually 9+...But he's 48 so he's got more than a decade more life under his belt than you do. Be a player all your life if it suits you, it doesn't affect me or my belief system at all. More power to you.

I just find it very hard to understand that men with a decent amount of experience, and having taken the red-pill, decide to double down on investing in a very serious monogamous relationship. That baffles me.

I also find it interesting that the men doing this all say the same thing: "I've spun plates all my life. Now I want something more committed". I find that really strange.

These men are at a different place than you or @Poon King & value different things. I love how y'all spout all the Rollo stuff. He's a married dude himself. Heretics.

I have no idea how a man spins plates, eventually takes the red-pill, and then decides to go from 'player' to becoming a monogamous committed husband.

Ask the married red pill guys. They have a whole forum on reddit. I can't speak to that but the married red pill guys can.

Our discussion will never really make sense to you. Because we are operating from a masculine frame, and you are operating from a standard woman's frame of entitlement.

Due to my own success in life I operate in complete freedom from any such entitlement mentality. I understand the discussion better than you can hope to. You underestimate me but this is not surprising.

I fundamentally disagree with your premise, which seems to be that exclusivity has no merit for a man under any circumstances.

Everything has been stated in post #161. Quite rationally. Yet you guys keep assigning emotion to my words (in other words projecting your own emotion). I mean why in the world would anything I say threaten either of you? But apparently it does.

 

[zekko]

I also find it interesting that the men doing this all say the same thing: "I've spun plates all my life. Now I want something more committed". I find that really strange.

When I was growing up (in a somewhat more masculine world), this is the exact path the vast majority of men traveled on. Casual dating around, followed by finding someone they wanted to be with regularly. I can understand that you want no part of it, but I don't see how it's so puzzling.

Personally, I think this entire argument is stupid. Men should do what they want to do. Period. Your insistence that if someone doesn't follow your philosophy they are somehow less of a man is arrogant, divisive, narrow minded, and does the manosphere no service. It's possible for someone to want things that you don't want without being fearful, lazy, brainwashed, or feminine. It's a sign of maturity to recognize that.

 

[BeExcellent]

Personally, I think this entire argument is stupid. Men should do what they want to do. Period. Your insistence that if someone doesn't follow your philosophy they are somehow less of a man is arrogant, divisive, narrow minded, and does the manosphere no service. It's possible for someone to want things that you don't want without being fearful, lazy, brainwashed, or feminine. It's a sign of maturity to recognize that.

Agree. This thread really should be toast. It isn't going anywhere else worthwhile.

 

[TheFixer14]

I do think what it comes down to ultimately is dependency, laziness, and fear. I don't see how anyone can argue otherwise.

I'm also completely unconvinced that it comes from any sort of positive place.

If you like someone's company, spend time with them. If not, don't.

But this kind of monogamy is a big compromise that comes from a regressive place IMO.

I agree with this.

I've been having thoughts on if I should get a girlfriend out of the blue. I haven't even seriously gone after a girlfriend since I was 19.

Then I realized that none of those thoughts were coming from a good place and that it would do me no good.

 

[TheFixer14]

Agree. This thread really should be toast. It isn't going anywhere else worthwhile.

You only say that because a decent amount of people disagree with you.

 

[BeExcellent]

You only say that because a decent amount of people disagree with you.

Wrong. People always disagree with me here. Others agree. That's OK. I don't need to be "right". My point is simply to point out a different perspective just as @zekko and @l_e_g_e_n_d and others have. I'm a chick so I'm more of a lightning rod. Some would rather attack a chick than debate the dudes.

 

[Poon King]

Agree. This thread really should be toast. It isn't going anywhere else worthwhile.

Who decides what is "worthwhile"? You?

I'm always suspicious of people who want to sensor others or shut down a discussion. What are you afraid of honey dip?

 

[AttackFormation]

I think its quite funny watching women "infiltrate" (citation marks because its not like were fighting a real war or something) mens' discussion place and mediate their experiences, when they have fundamentally neither understanding nor appreciation for what a man goes through both to become and be a "man". How many cold approaches on lukewarm women have they had to make in the last year?

 

[highSpeed]

I honestly think the hardest part for me to realize, albeit too late, was that I am simply a resource. A resource to be gained and once it is gained, the nice features in the relationship largely disappeared. I feel stupid and used as a result, totally emasculated. However, do I want to walk away from half of my resources and day-to-day access to my kids to start over? No not really. So that leaves me in some form of limbo, a stasis if you will. Do I want some other guy being called daddy by my kids? Hell no, that would be like a dagger to my heart. I truly wish I had stumbled on this site before I was stupid enough to get married.

 

[BeTheChange]

I think its quite funny watching women "infiltrate" (citation marks because its not like were fighting a real war or something) mens' discussion place and mediate their experiences, when they have fundamentally neither understanding nor appreciation for what a man goes through both to become and be a "man". How many cold approaches on lukewarm women have they had to make in the last year?

Indeed. The arrogance of some of the women on this forum is astounding.

LYD was ok, but she never tried to dictate what a man "should be" based on what benefited her.

 

[ChristopherColumbus]

I think its quite funny watching women "infiltrate" (citation marks because its not like were fighting a real war or something) mens' discussion place and mediate their experiences, when they have fundamentally neither understanding nor appreciation for what a man goes through both to become and be a "man". How many cold approaches on lukewarm women have they had to make in the last year?

Why would you even bother doing that?? Why not just wait for those natural situations that arise from time to time, when you are in a sociable mood, and you notice a woman signalling a sign of interest. THEN, jump up to the 'plate'.

 

[mrgoodstuff]

Why would you even bother doing that?? Why not just wait for those natural situations that arise from time to time, when you are in a sociable mood, and you notice a woman signalling a sign of interest. THEN, jump up to the 'plate'.

Getting stuck on a woman who is uninterested in you is a great way to bleed down your confidence and mojo and turn women away who actually ARE interested in you.

 

[ChristopherColumbus]

Because that exponentially reduces the quantity and quality of your options as a man? Obvious.

Not necessarily. If I am the 'alpha male' then I am not going to be running around thinking about women 24/7 - cold approaching. I'll just be doing my thing, and will only respond to a women who signals attraction if I should in turn find her attractive. This seems to be the most effortless way to do it, where you also retain your manly dignity.

It seems to me the 'alpha' shouldn't be worrying himself too much about 'maximizing' his chances of getting laid. That would just be the pimply teenager with hormones raging. The 'alpha' is hardly going to make all this his central concern. You guys are spending way too much time here... ha ha.

 

[ChristopherColumbus]

Just a load of redefined terms and strawmen, total keyboard jockeying.

Here's a suggestion. Go back and read my previous two posts, and see whether they are not saying the same thing. There is no subtle redefinition of terms at play here... I am not trying to 'win an argument' with you. I'm simply stating that an 'alpha' is going to be a lot more relaxed about meeting women.

 

[ChristopherColumbus]

And an "alpha" whatever that means goes after what he wants...By your statements an alpha never cold approaches. That's absurd, you've clearly never been around a natural.

Yes, an alpha is not someone learning game in order to mimic an alpha. An authentic alpha does not have to game a girl. He is not going to waste his time chasing some party girl who loves playing games with guys. He's aloof, he has his own thing going on, he may then notice a woman showing interest in him, and he then chooses whether to respond or not.

 

[ChristopherColumbus]

Is it though? Wasn't the game always based on the mimicry of the alpha?

What I think has happened is that people have been stuck in this discourse for so long they have confused mimicry of alpha with alpha.

 

[zekko]

I suppose it is arguable that alphas do not NEED to cold approach.

And I would wager that most real "alphas" did not learn to be alphas on a pickup forum.

 

[TheFixer14]

I suppose it is arguable that alphas do not NEED to cold approach.

And I would wager that most real "alphas" did not learn to be alphas on a pickup forum.

Teddy Roosevelt wasn't on TRP?

 

[Poon King]

I suppose it is arguable that alphas do not NEED to cold approach.

And I would wager that most real "alphas" did not learn to be alphas on a pickup forum.

Where is this information coming from? Your own brain?