|
Calgary25980 Posts
On February 27 2012 12:08 Sogo Otika wrote:
The point is - everytime I see Chill posting in this thread, it's to laugh at a PUA (whether beginner or expert). He never seems to offer anything of value himself. My suspicion is that he doesn't know about game, came to this thread and finds it interesting so lurks, but occasionally feels the need to attack it just because he missed out on something many others had found out before he did so feels like he has to make up for lost time by bashing it a bit to make himself feel better.
I have never laughed at pickup once. In fact, you can reference ALL my posts in this thread here:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=229041&user=14254
I just post my opinion honestly and point out things that I like or that I don't agree with.
|
I come back from a weekend in LA and what the fuck this thread has gone over 4 pages of useless arguing. My head is exploding reading this. I just quickly skimmed over some stuff.
1. Yes people do get laid without PICK UP. Its been happening over hundreds of years. But think about the circumstances, most ppl meet others through warm social circle or through very good circumstances. Picking up random chicks who dont know you in a club is actually not that ideal place for a pick up. Its just good for learning it. Think about how your parents meet. They probably were awkward as hell but their friends introduced them to each other. Yes, you wait for thinks to align and you get lucky or you can master pick up and make things happen when they aren't in your favor.
2. Everyone talks about natural game. You see the top guys from RSD, Tim, Julian. All those guys making a selling pitch for natural game. Guess what? They all LEARNED STRUCTURED GAME FIRST. Thus they have a core understanding of pick up. Of course after years of going out, they internalized all this shit and it appears "natural". Its really just a selling pitch to lazy fuckers who don't really change. Its like "don't change yourself, just be natural". Its target ting the mass populous who are lazy. For a newbie, they can't learn natural game, they need a template or structure to learn off of. When you learn English, did you learn "Natural English", or did you learn the alphabet and then grammar first?
On to fun things. Picture time! Fuck all this arguing.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/oiqW7.jpg)
If you don't know this guy.....
Not Safe For Work (DO NOT CLICK LOL)
+ Show Spoiler +http://www.bangyoulater.com/ass/75697/alexis-texas-and-erik-everhard/
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/fLeg0.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/I2u98.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/kJ0Hg.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/C5hdj.jpg) + Show Spoiler ++ Show Spoiler +
|
On February 27 2012 20:53 squattincassanova wrote:
I come back from a weekend in LA and what the fuck this thread has gone over 4 pages of useless arguing. My head is exploding reading this. I just quickly skimmed over some stuff.
1. Yes people do get laid without PICK UP. Its been happening over hundreds of years. But think about the circumstances, most ppl meet others through warm social circle or through very good circumstances. Picking up random chicks who dont know you in a club is actually not that ideal place for a pick up. Its just good for learning it. Think about how your parents meet. They probably were awkward as hell but their friends introduced them to each other. Yes, you wait for thinks to align and you get lucky or you can master pick up and make things happen when they aren't in your favor.
2. Everyone talks about natural game. You see the top guys from RSD, Tim, Julian. All those guys making a selling pitch for natural game. Guess what? They all LEARNED STRUCTURED GAME FIRST. Thus they have a core understanding of pick up. Of course after years of going out, they internalized all this shit and it appears "natural". Its really just a selling pitch to lazy fuckers who don't really change. Its like "don't change yourself, just be natural". Its target ting the mass populous who are lazy. For a newbie, they can't learn natural game, they need a template or structure to learn off of. When you learn English, did you learn "Natural English", or did you learn the alphabet and then grammar first?
I think that's a bad analogy because that's not how kids learn english when they first go overseas (and no, I don't disagree with your statement), they just get thrown in school and hope for the best.
As for your statement on natural game, yes. Structured game must come before learning natural game. It provides the essential basics and general experience with females.
However, your statement of "Thus they have a core understanding of pick up. Of course after years of going out, they internalized all this shit and it appears "natural". Its really just a selling pitch to lazy fuckers who don't really change. Its like "don't change yourself, just be natural"." does not sit right with me. Have you even studied a lot of RSD stuff? Honestly, if you have then we have taken away different things away from it. For people who haven't studid structured game, yeah it doesn't mean shit, and it would not do them too much good, but for people who have studied structured game, it makes a huge difference
EDIT: The transition to natural game from structured game is not as hard as people make it out to be
|
Saying that women can get sex easier than men is fundamentally wrong unless all those girls you're talking about only have sex with other women.
However, assuming you are talking about straight sex (you are), it takes two to tango. Every time a woman "gets sex," so does a man. Think before you say stupid things. Thanks.
|
If I throw in what I know from my (non-pickup) coaching experience I'd say that while I consider "Structured game must come before learning natural game." to be true, I also consider what is accepted as "structured game" is completely overblown.
Yes, you need some basics mechanics and a basic understand of how things go. But what for? The goal of this step is in a nutshell to form experiences which include positive feedback from women to the new behaviour.
THAT and ONLY that is what makes or breaks our new-found upcoming PUA in the whole thing. So far in his life he had less positive feedback from women than he wished for. The sudden increase in positive feedback increases his self-esteem and self-worth because the limiting belief of "Wow, I'm a big fucking failure when it comes to women" slowly disappears and that is why he will get even MORE positive feedback from women.
What this means is that intensively learning huge structures, phrases, tricks and a massive amount of approaches is NOT needed for someone who wants to improve himself at this stuff.
Teaching (and integrating) a solid set of believes and mindsets, some basic structure and emergency tricks is way stronger than telling someone a few phrases just to send him approach 1000 sets where he's criticized for each one individually.
Since I'm first and foremost no PUA coach I haven't have had huge experience so far when it comes to applying the above to PUA newcomers (mabye like 10-15 dudes total or so), but so far everyone I had under my wings for a longer time improved quicker than the guys who got their hand held by the more structured guys.
While I do understand that anecdotal and selective experience doesn't exactly make something correct, I also understand it's usually worth giving it a second look about the methods being used. What I'd say I usually do different is that I emphasize concepts, mindsets and state-control over structure, phrases and individual situations. That's basicly the same approach I have come to love when it comes to non-PUA coachings and it works (logically) just the same.
tl;dr:
Every coach who tells you that you have to learn thousands of phrases and situations and have to repeat something thousands of times to get decent (not great) at it is lying to you.
How can I make such a statement?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
The Pareto principle (also known as the 80–20 rule, the law of the vital few, and the principle of factor sparsity) states that, for many events, roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes.
|
On February 28 2012 02:35 r.Evo wrote:
While I do understand that anecdotal and selective experience doesn't exactly make something correct, I also understand it's usually worth giving it a second look about the methods being used. What I'd say I usually do different is that I emphasize concepts, mindsets and state-control over structure, phrases and individual situations. That's basicly the same approach I have come to love when it comes to non-PUA coachings and it works (logically) just the same.
Well put. I only have experience with being taught through concepts, mindsets and state-control AFTER I had been taught structured (lines etc.) way, so that's the only experience I have (which has worked) but based on your evidence I guess learning structured beforehand isn't completely necessary (That's what you are trying to say ya?)
|
On February 28 2012 02:35 r.Evo wrote:Every coach who tells you that you have to learn thousands of phrases and situations and have to repeat something thousands of times to get decent (not great) at it is lying to you.How can I make such a statement? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principleShow nested quote +The Pareto principle (also known as the 80–20 rule, the law of the vital few, and the principle of factor sparsity) states that, for many events, roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes.
That might be true to some extent, perhaps the actual learning is 20% of the time. The other 80% is wasted on things you can already do. For example... you gotta drive your ass to the club, you gotta get in line. You may waste 20 minutes on a set who is just a flirty married woman and nothing comes out of it.
Everyone has sticking points or things they don't do well. But the opportunities aren't always there. For example. if you have problems qualifying. You kinda have to get to the part where you actually get to QUALIFY. I can't just go up to a girl and qualify her right away, it doesn't make any sense. So yes, I agree that less than 20% of the time is actually learning new things. The other 80% is building up or getting to that point. But since you can't control when that 20% is going to happen since pick up is unpredictable, you still have to put in your time overall.
|
Oh definitely the time has to be put in no matter what, whether its going out everynight to clubs or just making small talk in day life that could lead to a good end.
|
On February 28 2012 03:27 squattincassanova wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2012 02:35 r.Evo wrote:Every coach who tells you that you have to learn thousands of phrases and situations and have to repeat something thousands of times to get decent (not great) at it is lying to you.How can I make such a statement? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principleThe Pareto principle (also known as the 80–20 rule, the law of the vital few, and the principle of factor sparsity) states that, for many events, roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes. That might be true to some extent, perhaps the actual learning is 20% of the time. The other 80% is wasted on things you can already do. For example... you gotta drive your ass to the club, you gotta get in line. You may waste 20 minutes on a set who is just a flirty married woman and nothing comes out of it. Everyone has sticking points or things they don't do well. But the opportunities aren't always there. For example. if you have problems qualifying. You kinda have to get to the part where you actually get to QUALIFY. I can't just go up to a girl and qualify her right away, it doesn't make any sense. So yes, I agree that less than 20% of the time is actually learning new things. The other 80% is building up or getting to that point. But since you can't control when that 20% is going to happen since pick up is unpredictable, you still have to put in your time overall.
Uh. Wait. Did you understand what I said as if this is about adding the 80% and the 20%?
What I'm trying to say with quoting the Pareto Principle is, that you get 80% of the possible results with 20% of the possible investment.
For pickup this means if we take a (theoretical) uber PUA who is perfect at 100% of the tasks involved then any random person is able to invest 20% of the time he did to hit 80% of what he is able to do.
What this implies is, that if you invest MORE than 20% and get LESS than 80% of the possible best results, you're method of investing is flawed.
|
On February 28 2012 02:34 Revelatus wrote:
Saying that women can get sex easier than men is fundamentally wrong unless all those girls you're talking about only have sex with other women.
However, assuming you are talking about straight sex (you are), it takes two to tango. Every time a woman "gets sex," so does a man. Think before you say stupid things. Thanks.
maybe a minority of men fuck a majority of women?
just saying. i dont really know.
all i know is that i have decent looking and super nice friends that are still virgin, while a woman of the same looks has men lined up for her, even if she's hardcore shy and boring.
just my experience. you can disagree. i dont care.
|
Hahah this thread is hilarious :D Gogo Squattin ^_ ^
Proct seems like such a douche ^_ ^
|
On February 28 2012 04:27 beg wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2012 02:34 Revelatus wrote:
Saying that women can get sex easier than men is fundamentally wrong unless all those girls you're talking about only have sex with other women.
However, assuming you are talking about straight sex (you are), it takes two to tango. Every time a woman "gets sex," so does a man. Think before you say stupid things. Thanks. maybe a minority of men fuck a majority of women? just saying. i dont really know. all i know is that i have decent looking and super nice friends that are still virgin, while a woman of the same looks has men lined up for her, even if she's hardcore shy and boring. just my experience. you can disagree. i dont care.
This was already argued to hell, even with one girl TLer saying "yeah while I have guys lined up on me without even trying, I'm very very selective and almost never care to have sex". And yes, you are right, even girls that don't even try and are disinterested and moreso are shy/boring, have guys line up. It's just the way things work, and I've had this discussion multiple times with multiple closer female friends and it's generally the same responses that yes they get hit on and all they have to do is pick a guy they feel they click with; not to mention what I see on a daily basis.
Let's be realistic, there's tons of guys of same or better looks or whatever hitting on girls, not lesser dudes like some fools in this thread tried to claim, which is just absurd. There were a couple clowns seeming to imply that girls only get hit on by guys way under their league, which was silly. Fact of the matter is, in that "line", there's even going to be guys way above the girl's league, so that argument is just null and void. So this considered, that yes in that line are highly suitable guys for that girl's standards, let's face it, if a girl wants sex, she's going to get it and with someone suited to her standards. The point is they have much easier access to sex, and if people don't see this, then they never go outside or they're in denial, because everyday I see dudes hitting on girls and girls tell me they get hit on, and knowing the general process and whatnot, the girl was just sitting around while the dude made the approach, started and led conversations, and this and that.
I mean, it's a lot easier just standing around, people approaching you, and you playing judge so to speak, than actually having to make the approaches and be the one to make things happen. Yes, your experience is what everyone sees. But unless something radically changes in culture and society where it becomes highly encouraged for girls to do hitting on also, we're not going to have equalization of ease of access to sex lol. Your guy friends better man the heck up and ask one of their female social circle friends on a date, or really go hardcore and meet random girls and work some magic, because girls aren't going to be going to them.
TL;DR: Yes, anyone with a pair of eyes, a pair of ears, and a functional brain will see that girls do indeed have far greater ease of access to sex, and in the "line" are guys very suitable to their needs and standards, so coming across someone suitable and choosing to have sex is not a colossal challenge, unless the girl is fat and ugly and does nothing to change that or she's expecting Brad Pitt to come.
squattincassanova wrote
1. Yes people do get laid without PICK UP. Its been happening over hundreds of years. But think about the circumstances, most ppl meet others through warm social circle or through very good circumstances. Picking up random chicks who dont know you in a club is actually not that ideal place for a pick up. Its just good for learning it. Think about how your parents meet. They probably were awkward as hell but their friends introduced them to each other. Yes, you wait for thinks to align and you get lucky or you can master pick up and make things happen when they aren't in your favor.
In the period before I finally have shit to do and being able to meet people without really going out of my way, how do I deal with "cold" social circles? A good number of my pals are kinda not too social and don't always like introducing people in their 'circles' to anyone, me included (not to mention most in those circle have little to no motivation to meet new people who they don't see on a near-daily basis and are comfortable with >_> ). Do I just say "fuck it" and do things my own way, or do I be more assertive than I already am in meeting these people in friends' circles?
Now you're probably asking: "Why do you care about circle game?" Well you see, at least this moment, I'm not totally into pick-up, and in fact I'm more interested in having a very nice relationship. In my experience, 'circle game' allows me to get to know people a lot better than pick-up has.
By the way, how did it go with Proct (assuming you went clubbing to him)?
|
On February 28 2012 05:07 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
I mean, it's a lot easier just standing around, people approaching you, and you playing judge so to speak, than actually having to make the approaches and be the one to make things happen.
So, when was your operation exactly? Sounds like you have a very clear idea about what it's like to be a woman.
|
On February 28 2012 04:27 beg wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2012 02:34 Revelatus wrote:
Saying that women can get sex easier than men is fundamentally wrong unless all those girls you're talking about only have sex with other women.
However, assuming you are talking about straight sex (you are), it takes two to tango. Every time a woman "gets sex," so does a man. Think before you say stupid things. Thanks. maybe a minority of men fuck a majority of women?
I'm under the assumption this is resoundingly true.
|
On February 28 2012 05:27 r.Evo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2012 05:07 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
I mean, it's a lot easier just standing around, people approaching you, and you playing judge so to speak, than actually having to make the approaches and be the one to make things happen. So, when was your operation exactly? Sounds like you have a very clear idea about what it's like to be a woman.
Just going off of what girls tell me. You know, talking to people in order to gain an understanding from their experiences and perspective. You should try it sometime, boy. Maybe you're just the run-of-the-mill fool who just doesn't really care about learning about things and follows the mantra "ignorance is bliss", but me, I like learning about things and how things work. One of the best ways to learn about things you're not acquainted with is to talk to people who are, so that's what I do. For example, as an extreme case, I used to be a terribly indoctrinated Islamophobe before I actually started talking to Muslims and realized they are completely normal people (and I don't mean those burqa-wearing Sharia followers, I mean 'normal' Muslims who don't follow that crap). No, screw that, if you don't see on a daily basis that it's usually guy who do the approaching and whatnot, you are delusional. You're trying to tell me girls are hitting on guys all the time, at least as much as guys hit on girls? lol
You seem to have a problem with accepting the simple fact of the matter that it's guys who hit on girls, rarely the other way around. Why are you so thick as to be in such fervent denial of a simple daily fact you can see any time you go out, and that you've done first hand? And why are you so offended that again you resort to pathetic insults? You gonna rage some more now? XD
Now, I'll try to explain why you have this irrational dilemma since you have no answer for it, and just decide to throw insults for no reason but your ego being hurt. I said nothing offensive at all, and yet you simply insult me. Dafuq? From what it seems like, in your little corner in Germany, I'm guessing girls do a lot of the approaching and hitting on and leading, not just guys. Because there's no other reason you would be in such extreme rejection that it's guys who do the approaching and other things nearly all the time.
|
|
|
Contrary to popular belief, as long as you are a guy, girls won't measure your attractiveness by your looks. Just because we measure their attractiveness by looks, doesn't mean it's the same the other way around. Sure the hot guy may have the 1 or 2% of the female population that just HAVE to have the hot guy, but other than that, it's all about whose game is sharper.
|
Women get approached more than guys, correct and easily verifable.
Women get approached with GUYS THEY WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH ALL THE TIME, your personal opinion with no possible backup.
Assuming you'd be approached by 50 girls you find unattractive as hell and wouldn't want to have sex with if they were the last woman on the planet, would I say you have easy access? No, you don't because you don't see them as potential suitors.
PS: You're the one insulting me in your posts. I point at the fact that you present your personal opinion about how females having it easy as fuck as a verificable and correct fact.
tl;dr: If a girl gets approached by 100 guys in a night "offering her sex" but only one of them would be someone she'd go into bed with she doesn't have it easy.
Edit:
One of the most fundamental principles of evolutionary psychology is that women are much more selective than men in their mate choice. Because women pay far greater reproductive costs by making the wrong choice, women have been designed by evolution to be more cautious and choosier than men in mate selection. Hence the “coy” female, and the sexually aggressive male, in every human society ever found (as well as in most other mammalian species).
Yeah, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Women have to be MORE selective than men. In my world, the one who has to work more to select properly has it harder, even though that wasn't even my original argument. My original argument is that the statement: "Women have it incredibly easy to have a sexual relationship" is not valid.
I get that the article tries to question the above principle with their speed-dating experiment. What's completely left under the table is that by switching who walks around and who doesn't they simply change the perceived value and frame of the persons. Basicly the seated group is always the more desirable than the walking around one. That's one of the main reasons why it's a goal in pickup to be properly locked in and to show a bodylanguage which presents more value than the other person's bodylanguage.
|
On February 28 2012 05:39 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2012 05:27 r.Evo wrote:On February 28 2012 05:07 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
I mean, it's a lot easier just standing around, people approaching you, and you playing judge so to speak, than actually having to make the approaches and be the one to make things happen. So, when was your operation exactly? Sounds like you have a very clear idea about what it's like to be a woman. Just going off of what girls tell me. You know, talking to people in order to gain an understanding from their experiences and perspective. You should try it sometime, boy.
The same women who tell you stuff like this?
![[image loading]](http://glpiggy.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/deserve.jpg?w=630)
EDIT: Of course, its not always like this. But there are some harsh cold truths that the stuff that really bothers girls is what gets you the desirable responses
|
On February 28 2012 05:46 r.Evo wrote:
Women get approached more than guys, correct and easily verifable.
Women get approached with GUYS THEY WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH ALL THE TIME, your personal opinion with no possible backup.
Assuming you'd be approached by 50 girls you find unattractive as hell and wouldn't want to have sex with if they were the last woman on the planet, would I say you have easy access? No, you don't because you don't see them as potential suitors.
PS: You're the one insulting me in your posts. I point at the fact that you present your personal opinion about how females having it easy as fuck as a verificable and correct fact.
tl;dr: If a girl gets approached by 100 guys in a night "offering her sex" but only one of them would be someone she'd go into bed with she doesn't have it easy.
Now, first of all, I will outline what I'm going to say quickly. First of all, access isn't what you think it means. With the second matter, you are both right and wrong, but it's questionable to what degree you are right.
All I said, is among that huge number of guys approaching the girl, there's going to be some frequency of guys they click with.
Now there's 2 points to be made. One is a semantic issue you may be having trouble with. The second is one to do with comparison.
ACCESS means it is available. If I have a liquor store near my house, even if it's a shitty one, it still means I have ACCESS to a liquor store. You don't seem to know what access means, but I'll excuse you for that since English is not your first language. Yes, if 50 girls approached me right now, I would have ease of access to sex, since I would basically have access to have sex with 50 girls. You see the difference? Having access to something doesn't necessarily mean you're going to use it. You're getting these things mixed up. At least we have this issue of semantics cleared now.
Now on to the next point: Making the choice (again, this isn't access). That's the hard thing you're referring to. Like I said, there's always going to be guys in the "line" that are well-suited, so it's just a matter of pick and choose. It isn't entirely easy, don't get me wrong, but how does it compare to the dude doing pick-up?
Being in the role you described me in, if I was just doing my own thing, and girls were hitting on me, and eventually all I had to do was make a choice, you can't say with a straight face that's as challenging as (especially for a person like me who always weighs things against each other on a daily basis and is rather accustomed to doing it fast and well) when compared to approaching, making conversation, and making magic work (especially with asian girls O_O). Umm, if someone is good at making choices, like some of the girls I've known, it's not a huge issue. That's besides the point. Going back to what I was saying, since the frequency of making an affirmative choice will be decently high, the girl not only has ease of access like was discussed earlier, but also has a strong chance of getting someone suitable, whereas the only primary effort needed to be made is making a choice.
At the very least, in any possible way you can twist and turn it, here's the GREAT thing about it. The opportunity is given to the girl. Do you even realize how much of an advantage a person is at in anything when they're given an opportunity? It makes things a lot easier. Yes, it would be a lot easier if I could play bigwig judge and make a decision on people coming to ME, rather than playing special operations commando and overcoming tough odds to make things happen. I do realize a lot of girls (people overall) have trouble making decisions and choices SO YOU ARE RIGHT IN THIS WAY, but for someone who's good at it and knows how to take advantage of opportunity, this sort of thing is a dream come true. For the girls who are decent at decision-making, you're more wrong than not. On top of the great opportunity provided to them, it is a ton easier for a girl to have sex since all they would have to do is employ their half-decent decision-making skills to make a decent choice, and as already discussed, since the "line" of guys will always include some that are very suitable for her.
Now, here's why it is questionable of how correct you are: Even for those girls who are in the extremities of queasiness and inability to make decisions, is that still harder than for a guy to man up, make an approach no matter how embarrassing or awkward the outcome may be, start and make conversation non-stop, and other things?
If Intel, Microsoft, HP, Google, Apple, and many others randomly came up to me and said "We'd love for you to intern this summer", it's a huge opportunity, rather than going through the rigorous application and interview process. All I'd have to do is make a decision, and I'm good at that. Obviously, the analogy isn't quite the same as choosing who to date or fuck, but it has its similarities in regards to being given a huge range of opportunities, which in itself is a colossal advantage in any part of life.
On February 28 2012 05:53 Elegance wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2012 05:39 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:On February 28 2012 05:27 r.Evo wrote:On February 28 2012 05:07 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
I mean, it's a lot easier just standing around, people approaching you, and you playing judge so to speak, than actually having to make the approaches and be the one to make things happen. So, when was your operation exactly? Sounds like you have a very clear idea about what it's like to be a woman. Just going off of what girls tell me. You know, talking to people in order to gain an understanding from their experiences and perspective. You should try it sometime, boy. The same women who tell you stuff like this? EDIT: Of course, its not always like this. But there are some harsh cold truths that the stuff that really bothers girls is what gets you the desirable responses
Actually, I think you have it the other way around. It's usually the girls who have some weird mental block that always makes them have the attitude of "omg it's so hard to find a decent guy" when they meet guys who are well suited or even way above their level all the time, or the type that basically want a guy to be their bitch that say things like in the picture. I'm sorry, but while I'm a decent lover, I'm not anyone's dog. I have my own things and responsibilities too. That kind of girl though that wants you to be her bitch doesn't even take into consideration the fact when you spend all your free time with them.
The women I was referring to are more realistic and more "fair" so to speak, and pretty much the opposite of that picture. In addition to not having the mental block described in that picture, I noted that they can make good choices in regards to all the approaches, so the whole process isn't a big, big challenge. So, when you're just sitting around and getting the approaches, and on top of that you're able to make good decisions, that's rather harder than the "gotta be a super awesome baller and man up and make an approach with the right moves, words, and grooves to make shit happen" imo. They're down when they come across a guy who they feel they really click with, and don't think they're Queen Sheba and deserve the world like people who believe what's stated in that picture.
Ya know, call me dick see if I care, but I think putting maybe at least 70% of the total input into a relationship is enough. And while a relationship in which the guy is basically the girl's bitch tends to be relatively stable, you honestly think I'd ever, ever humiliate myself like that? ROFL. You'd find me dead before I'd ever do something like that XD. Seriously, I know tons of dudes in these kinds of relationships, and they're basically the girl's pet. lol. While the girl does whatever the hell she wants, and I can't tell you what's been done involving myself for fear of losing a few of my good buddies, the dude is basically on a leash doing everything told to do O-o. AVOID THESE GIRLS if you have any dignity. But, in my paragraphs, I was more referring to getting girls in general, rather than long-term relationships (like is implied in that picture). Now, to reiterate, it's good to do those things for the girl, but that picture seems to imply that you MUST be the girl's bitch, and that's not something that sits well with me at all.
I'm not going to be her bitch, and she's not going to be my bitch. That's what I stand by.
But there are some harsh cold truths that the stuff that really bothers girls is what gets you the desirable responses
What are some of these harsh cold truths you refer to?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
