|
Take into consideration that a lot of our programming is just to get better genes. Women and men have different mating patterns. Simplified, men try to impregnate as many women as possible. If a man impregnates an inferior woman, nothing is lost. If he fails to impregnate any other women, he can care for her and his child, but if he succeeds in impregnating a better woman he can just dump her.
Women cannot follow the same strategy. To get impregnated and give birth, then caring for the child is a much bigger investment for the woman than for the man. If she gets impregnated by a lesser man while she could have had better, she has wasted several years of her life at the minimum. As you know, a woman's sexual market value lowers when she gets older, so to mate with inferior males is a losing strategy.
That is why it is so hard to get laid for men. Women try to hold out until they meet a man that is at the very top of their range. The bigger her ego, the better man she will think she deserves and she will hold out until she meets him. A lot of the time women spend around men is just probing. "Am I high value enough to get him?" Yes -> Find a higher value guy and probe again. No -> Try really hard to make him like her -> succeed -> find a higher value guy and try again. Repeat until she thinks she is at the top of her range.
This mechanism explains why, paradoxically, assholes are more successful with women than nice guys. The asshole triggers her "try really hard to him like her" wiring and the nice guy triggers her "find a higher value guy and probe again" wiring.
So what happens to guys with low social status? Seeing as how women flock around high value guys, low value guys are in danger of not propagating their genes. That's why men developed the strategy "the provider." This strategy is to sacrifice a lot for a woman in the hope that she will reciprocate with sexual favours. This is the one hope for a low value guy to mix his genes with a high value woman.
From the point of view of the woman, keeping a provider around makes sense. He can support her, ease her loneliness, and care for her while she searches for her dream man. In order to reduce the risk of becoming pregnant with a low-value guy, she should only give him as much sex as necessary to keep him around.
If he will care for her with only the occasional flirty smile, under the pretense of being just friends, then she will say "let's just be friends" while flirting just enough to keep him providing. If he is a very good provider, women may offer to sleep with him once a month or so, his large sacrifices for her compensating somewhat for his low social value.
Today, the MAJORITY of men try provider strategies to get women. As fanaticist eloquently describes, provider men have little leverage in the relationship. She will demand very large sacrifices for very small investment on her side, and if you stand up for yourself, you will probably get dumped.
So what happens to high value men? Since women only go for the very top of their range, high value men are quite scarce. As a result, competition is fierce and women have to make very large sacrifices in order to get at his cock. Sexual favours abundant, much less bitching, and she tries to care for him as well as she can. At the extreme, women turn into obedient slaves, eager to please, similar to men's provider strategy.
So how do you tell who is a high-value guy and who is not? How do women tell? If a woman thinks a guy is lower value than her and does not make sufficiently large sacrifices, he will dump her for a woman that does know her place. On the other hand, a woman might be the obedient slave girl while the guy lacks confidence and could even be a provider for her.
One way to tell is to see how other women treat him. If other women seem eager to please him, then it's probably best to make large sacrifices for him. If other women ignore him, then he would probably accept a provider position in the relationship. The most common way, however, doesn't involve anyone else at all. It involves cruelty.
Unpredictable aggression is very successful at keeping those of lower status subservient. Women will, randomly, through no fault of your own, be aggressive or cruel to you. This includes, but is not limited to: withholding sex and/or other affection, especially when you show need for her, ignoring you, not follow through on promises, verbally assault you for something (she thinks) you did wrong at completely unexpected moments, saying hurtful things, refusing small requests for no reason, and just generally being a bitch.
How you respond to it is crucial. Many men assume they did something wrong and try to appease her. The other day I saw a friend, normally a strong confident guy, cry on the phone with hir girlfriend "no baby, I don't want to fight with you *sob* please." He fell in love with her, she waited for a time she needed her emotional support, and then she made outrageous demands of him. When he didn't do as she demanded, she said "you just want to fight with me, don't you?"
The more bullshit you take the more she assumes you belong in the provider role, and act accordingly. If you don't take any bullshit, even when you are in need, she will assume you could easily get what you need from other women. She'll be much less likely to take advantage of your weakness and much more likely to take your cock into her mouth in the hope that you forget other women exist.
That is why fanatacist's advice works. Even if you are not a high-value guy, but you act and talk the part, women will assume you are. They will be eager to please you, other women will notice, and that's how you start the ball rolling. Simply BLUFFING that you don't have to take any bullshit from any woman, can make it true.
All the above aside, men and women don't HAVE to follow their evolutionary impulses. Women feeling the impulse to be obedient slaves will repress it out of feminist beliefs. Women feeling the impulse to be vile and cruel will repress it out of love for their mate. Men bathing in attention from women don't HAVE to treat them like shit. If you can be a nice guy while not taking any bullshit, if you can combine that, then I think you can be the perfect boyfriend. At the end of the day the women will pick the guys that make them the most happy and the men will pick the women that make them the most happy. HonestTea's advice to be the best man you can be is not so bad after all.
|
Interesting.
On October 19 2009 18:39 Phrujbaz wrote:
One way to tell is to see how other women treat him. If other women seem eager to please him, then it's probably best to make large sacrifices for him. If other women ignore him, then he would probably accept a provider position in the relationship.
I have observed this a lot.
Personally I have no problems interacting with girls who I just want to be friends with (i.e. no attraction). But whenever I'm around girls I find really hot I tend to close up and become an 'observer' - i.e., watch them interact with their friends etc. to try and figure out how they tick and what I can do to make them like me. As a result I never really make a move on girls I like or I give a bad first impression (e.g., quiet shy type).
I know this is pretty irrational but it's hard to overcome, I've only done it once through stomach-turning courage. Every other time I chicken out cos it seems like it would be really corny and not who I am to approach them with fake conversation starters and/or act like a douche.
I find it difficult lying to people I don't know.
|
On October 19 2009 13:40 fanatacist wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2009 13:36 AceldamA wrote:
I'm in love with a girl named leela and I was wondering if saying I love you with the stars themselves was a good way to show her that I loved her Only if you want to set yourself up for having your testicles being her footrest for the rest of her life (note how there is no "your" life, because you effectively surrender that to her as soon as you do this for however long she decides to keep your pathetic bumbling neo-Romeo ass around). You don't give them anything until they give you something first. You don't pay for dinner until you get a blowjob/have sex with her. You don't take her on dates that you pay for until you've had sex with her. You don't tell her you love her until you made sure she loves you first. That way when you finally say it she will be on the verge of tears, which is a sensation chronologically closely followed by intimate "love" sex, which is really no more than hormonal response to the instinctual feeling of fulfillment of finding a temporary mate in the woman's mind. Also, the sentence you said simply makes no sense in English, which is all the more reason to abandon such self-demeaning pursuits.
Awesome post! One thing I've learned along time ago hahahaha!
i always tell some of my friends to be "likeable assholes" like the foul words coming out of their mouths are both hilarious and offensive at times and women will just laugh all they want..
|
On October 19 2009 18:39 Phrujbaz wrote:
Women cannot follow the same strategy. To get impregnated and give birth, then caring for the child is a much bigger investment for the woman than for the man. If she gets impregnated by a lesser man while she could have had better, she has wasted several years of her life at the minimum. As you know, a woman's sexual market value lowers when she gets older, so to mate with inferior males is a losing strategy.
That is why it is so hard to get laid for men. Women try to hold out until they meet a man that is at the very top of their range. The bigger her ego, the better man she will think she deserves and she will hold out until she meets him. A lot of the time women spend around men is just probing. "Am I high value enough to get him?" Yes -> Find a higher value guy and probe again. No -> Try really hard to make him like her -> succeed -> find a higher value guy and try again. Repeat until she thinks she is at the top of her range.
What I don't understand is why women haven't adapted to modern society. In today's world, by and large the (economically) successful men have brains not brawn - in contrast to 'caveman' times. So the best investment in terms of successful genes is to mate with someone successful in society, i.e., the "provider type". These men are generally not going to be the douches, instead of brawns they have brains. So why can't women see through the bullshit, adjust their scales, and figure out that the high-value man at the top of the heap is not going to be a douche. Instead he's going to be an intelligent, hard-working man; who may also have desirable qualities such as humour/sensitivity/physically attractive (or whatever the woman's preferences may be).
I know a very few girls that seem to think this way but for the rest: are most women really this clueless?*
I would like to hear a woman's opinion on this? (Where are you lilsusie/unc?)
EDIT: *Interestingly, the girls I have spoken to think exactly this for the above reason.
|
On October 19 2009 13:40 fanatacist wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2009 13:36 AceldamA wrote:
I'm in love with a girl named leela and I was wondering if saying I love you with the stars themselves was a good way to show her that I loved her Only if you want to set yourself up for having your testicles being her footrest for the rest of her life (note how there is no "your" life, because you effectively surrender that to her as soon as you do this for however long she decides to keep your pathetic bumbling neo-Romeo ass around). You don't give them anything until they give you something first. You don't pay for dinner until you get a blowjob/have sex with her. You don't take her on dates that you pay for until you've had sex with her. You don't tell her you love her until you made sure she loves you first. That way when you finally say it she will be on the verge of tears, which is a sensation chronologically closely followed by intimate "love" sex, which is really no more than hormonal response to the instinctual feeling of fulfillment of finding a temporary mate in the woman's mind. Also, the sentence you said simply makes no sense in English, which is all the more reason to abandon such self-demeaning pursuits.
what the fuck...? you're just a fucking sexist, gtfo. what you're saying is not even funny, much less respectable and not worth reading. seriously, just don't talk anymore, we get it, your ex girlfriend castrated you. unfortunetly she didn't kill you...
|
On October 19 2009 19:18 ThunderGod wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2009 18:39 Phrujbaz wrote:
Women cannot follow the same strategy. To get impregnated and give birth, then caring for the child is a much bigger investment for the woman than for the man. If she gets impregnated by a lesser man while she could have had better, she has wasted several years of her life at the minimum. As you know, a woman's sexual market value lowers when she gets older, so to mate with inferior males is a losing strategy.
That is why it is so hard to get laid for men. Women try to hold out until they meet a man that is at the very top of their range. The bigger her ego, the better man she will think she deserves and she will hold out until she meets him. A lot of the time women spend around men is just probing. "Am I high value enough to get him?" Yes -> Find a higher value guy and probe again. No -> Try really hard to make him like her -> succeed -> find a higher value guy and try again. Repeat until she thinks she is at the top of her range.
What I don't understand is why women haven't adapted to modern society. In today's world, by and large the (economically) successful men have brains not brawn - in contrast to 'caveman' times. So the best investment in terms of successful genes is to mate with someone successful in society, i.e., the "provider type". These men are generally not going to be the douches, instead of brawns they have brains. So why can't women see through the bullshit, adjust their scales, and figure out that the high-value man at the top of the heap is not going to be a douche. Instead he's going to be an intelligent, hard-working man; who may also have desirable qualities such as humour/sensitivity/physically attractive (or whatever the woman's preferences may be). I know a very few girls that seem to think this way but for the rest: are most women really this stupid?* I would like to hear a woman's opinion on this? (Where are you lilsusie/unc?) EDIT: *Interestingly, the girls I have spoken to think exactly this for the above reason.
I think the problem with women being "stupid" is that they never interacted with an asshole who provides good advice about what they really do to seduce so many women. (example would be "me", I always tell girls that I'm friends with is to be a bitch at times so that men will have a challenge in the relationship.)
Or I also tell them, withhold sex for the mean time, let's see how long your relationship will last?
Man, I'm betraying our kind my friends.. sorry 
|
On October 19 2009 19:28 Licmyobelisk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2009 19:18 ThunderGod wrote:On October 19 2009 18:39 Phrujbaz wrote:
Women cannot follow the same strategy. To get impregnated and give birth, then caring for the child is a much bigger investment for the woman than for the man. If she gets impregnated by a lesser man while she could have had better, she has wasted several years of her life at the minimum. As you know, a woman's sexual market value lowers when she gets older, so to mate with inferior males is a losing strategy.
That is why it is so hard to get laid for men. Women try to hold out until they meet a man that is at the very top of their range. The bigger her ego, the better man she will think she deserves and she will hold out until she meets him. A lot of the time women spend around men is just probing. "Am I high value enough to get him?" Yes -> Find a higher value guy and probe again. No -> Try really hard to make him like her -> succeed -> find a higher value guy and try again. Repeat until she thinks she is at the top of her range.
What I don't understand is why women haven't adapted to modern society. In today's world, by and large the (economically) successful men have brains not brawn - in contrast to 'caveman' times. So the best investment in terms of successful genes is to mate with someone successful in society, i.e., the "provider type". These men are generally not going to be the douches, instead of brawns they have brains. So why can't women see through the bullshit, adjust their scales, and figure out that the high-value man at the top of the heap is not going to be a douche. Instead he's going to be an intelligent, hard-working man; who may also have desirable qualities such as humour/sensitivity/physically attractive (or whatever the woman's preferences may be). I know a very few girls that seem to think this way but for the rest: are most women really this stupid?* I would like to hear a woman's opinion on this? (Where are you lilsusie/unc?) EDIT: *Interestingly, the girls I have spoken to think exactly this for the above reason. I think the problem with women being "stupid" is that they never interacted with an asshole who provides good advice about what they really do to seduce so many women. (example would be "me", I always tell girls that I'm friends with is to be a bitch at times so that men will have a challenge in the relationship.) Or I also tell them, withhold sex for the mean time, let's see how long your relationship will last? Man, I'm betraying our kind my friends.. sorry
Stupid wasn't really the word I was looking for, more like clueless - like they don't realise what is better in the longrun.
Anyway, don't worry about betraying us. You're only betraying the douches. So I'm actually glad :p
|
On October 19 2009 19:18 ThunderGod wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2009 18:39 Phrujbaz wrote:
Women cannot follow the same strategy. To get impregnated and give birth, then caring for the child is a much bigger investment for the woman than for the man. If she gets impregnated by a lesser man while she could have had better, she has wasted several years of her life at the minimum. As you know, a woman's sexual market value lowers when she gets older, so to mate with inferior males is a losing strategy.
That is why it is so hard to get laid for men. Women try to hold out until they meet a man that is at the very top of their range. The bigger her ego, the better man she will think she deserves and she will hold out until she meets him. A lot of the time women spend around men is just probing. "Am I high value enough to get him?" Yes -> Find a higher value guy and probe again. No -> Try really hard to make him like her -> succeed -> find a higher value guy and try again. Repeat until she thinks she is at the top of her range.
What I don't understand is why women haven't adapted to modern society. In today's world, by and large the (economically) successful men have brains not brawn - in contrast to 'caveman' times. So the best investment in terms of successful genes is to mate with someone successful in society, i.e., the "provider type". These men are generally not going to be the douches, instead of brawns they have brains. So why can't women see through the bullshit, adjust their scales, and figure out that the high-value man at the top of the heap is not going to be a douche. Instead he's going to be an intelligent, hard-working man; who may also have desirable qualities such as humour/sensitivity/physically attractive (or whatever the woman's preferences may be). I know a very few girls that seem to think this way but for the rest: are most women really this clueless?* I would like to hear a woman's opinion on this? (Where are you lilsusie/unc?) EDIT: *Interestingly, the girls I have spoken to think exactly this for the above reason.
ur over analyzing this, and missing the point. being in a relationship is about having fun, clicking, and enjoying each other. its not a business opportunity or a job, stop looking at it like this. the banging hot women u masturbate to dont choose the men u describe because they are boring (in a general sense), not a challenge, routinary, and usually bad lays. and unless a woman is looking into getting married because of her age (30 years old and has nothing serious going on) then she wont be mainly concerned with those things, and to be honest, she shouldnt have to. boringggg.
and please, a girl doesnt think "is this guy cool enough for me to fuck him?" okay? i think some people here lack respect for women. and that means u shouldnt be talking about them at all.
|
On October 19 2009 18:39 Phrujbaz wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Take into consideration that a lot of our programming is just to get better genes. Women and men have different mating patterns. Simplified, men try to impregnate as many women as possible. If a man impregnates an inferior woman, nothing is lost. If he fails to impregnate any other women, he can care for her and his child, but if he succeeds in impregnating a better woman he can just dump her.
Women cannot follow the same strategy. To get impregnated and give birth, then caring for the child is a much bigger investment for the woman than for the man. If she gets impregnated by a lesser man while she could have had better, she has wasted several years of her life at the minimum. As you know, a woman's sexual market value lowers when she gets older, so to mate with inferior males is a losing strategy.
That is why it is so hard to get laid for men. Women try to hold out until they meet a man that is at the very top of their range. The bigger her ego, the better man she will think she deserves and she will hold out until she meets him. A lot of the time women spend around men is just probing. "Am I high value enough to get him?" Yes -> Find a higher value guy and probe again. No -> Try really hard to make him like her -> succeed -> find a higher value guy and try again. Repeat until she thinks she is at the top of her range.
This mechanism explains why, paradoxically, assholes are more successful with women than nice guys. The asshole triggers her "try really hard to him like her" wiring and the nice guy triggers her "find a higher value guy and probe again" wiring.
So what happens to guys with low social status? Seeing as how women flock around high value guys, low value guys are in danger of not propagating their genes. That's why men developed the strategy "the provider." This strategy is to sacrifice a lot for a woman in the hope that she will reciprocate with sexual favours. This is the one hope for a low value guy to mix his genes with a high value woman.
From the point of view of the woman, keeping a provider around makes sense. He can support her, ease her loneliness, and care for her while she searches for her dream man. In order to reduce the risk of becoming pregnant with a low-value guy, she should only give him as much sex as necessary to keep him around.
If he will care for her with only the occasional flirty smile, under the pretense of being just friends, then she will say "let's just be friends" while flirting just enough to keep him providing. If he is a very good provider, women may offer to sleep with him once a month or so, his large sacrifices for her compensating somewhat for his low social value.
Today, the MAJORITY of men try provider strategies to get women. As fanaticist eloquently describes, provider men have little leverage in the relationship. She will demand very large sacrifices for very small investment on her side, and if you stand up for yourself, you will probably get dumped.
So what happens to high value men? Since women only go for the very top of their range, high value men are quite scarce. As a result, competition is fierce and women have to make very large sacrifices in order to get at his cock. Sexual favours abundant, much less bitching, and she tries to care for him as well as she can. At the extreme, women turn into obedient slaves, eager to please, similar to men's provider strategy.
So how do you tell who is a high-value guy and who is not? How do women tell? If a woman thinks a guy is lower value than her and does not make sufficiently large sacrifices, he will dump her for a woman that does know her place. On the other hand, a woman might be the obedient slave girl while the guy lacks confidence and could even be a provider for her.
One way to tell is to see how other women treat him. If other women seem eager to please him, then it's probably best to make large sacrifices for him. If other women ignore him, then he would probably accept a provider position in the relationship. The most common way, however, doesn't involve anyone else at all. It involves cruelty.
Unpredictable aggression is very successful at keeping those of lower status subservient. Women will, randomly, through no fault of your own, be aggressive or cruel to you. This includes, but is not limited to: withholding sex and/or other affection, especially when you show need for her, ignoring you, not follow through on promises, verbally assault you for something (she thinks) you did wrong at completely unexpected moments, saying hurtful things, refusing small requests for no reason, and just generally being a bitch.
How you respond to it is crucial. Many men assume they did something wrong and try to appease her. The other day I saw a friend, normally a strong confident guy, cry on the phone with hir girlfriend "no baby, I don't want to fight with you *sob* please." He fell in love with her, she waited for a time she needed her emotional support, and then she made outrageous demands of him. When he didn't do as she demanded, she said "you just want to fight with me, don't you?"
The more bullshit you take the more she assumes you belong in the provider role, and act accordingly. If you don't take any bullshit, even when you are in need, she will assume you could easily get what you need from other women. She'll be much less likely to take advantage of your weakness and much more likely to take your cock into her mouth in the hope that you forget other women exist.
That is why fanatacist's advice works. Even if you are not a high-value guy, but you act and talk the part, women will assume you are. They will be eager to please you, other women will notice, and that's how you start the ball rolling. Simply BLUFFING that you don't have to take any bullshit from any woman, can make it true.
All the above aside, men and women don't HAVE to follow their evolutionary impulses. Women feeling the impulse to be obedient slaves will repress it out of feminist beliefs. Women feeling the impulse to be vile and cruel will repress it out of love for their mate. Men bathing in attention from women don't HAVE to treat them like shit. If you can be a nice guy while not taking any bullshit, if you can combine that, then I think you can be the perfect boyfriend. At the end of the day the women will pick the guys that make them the most happy and the men will pick the women that make them the most happy. HonestTea's advice to be the best man you can be is not so bad after all.
this is sad. a materialistic quoting a sexist. i hope girls dont read this...
|
On October 19 2009 20:16 UGC4 wrote:
and please, a girl doesnt think "is this guy cool enough for me to fuck him?" okay? i think some people here lack respect for women. and that means u shouldnt be talking about them at all.
It's not individual women that are being talked about. It's what women in general find attractive in men, and what drives them to seek out particular men over others. The 'science' of attraction.
While this may be valid:
On October 19 2009 20:16 UGC4 wrote:
the banging hot women u masturbate to dont choose the men u describe because they are boring (in a general sense), not a challenge, routinary, and usually bad lays. and unless a woman is looking into getting married because of her age (30 years old and has nothing serious going on) then she wont be mainly concerned with those things, and to be honest, she shouldnt have to. boringggg.
. it doesn't explain the alternative satisfactorily, i.e., why women are attracted to men who treat them 'badly'. Of course by badly I mean inferior etc., as Phrujbaz was theorising above. And of course badly is a subjective view from the boring guys point of view, clearly the women in such relationships are by and large happy enough - why?
|
To answer my own question with a cliche I guess it is just that first impressions count. Women will be attracted initially to the 'exciting guy' who can show her a good time. Even though he acts like a douche, it is more fun hanging out with him and his douche buddies for two weeks before he dumps her, so she finds another 'exciting alpha' and repeat. Perhaps it takes a few years and many failed relationships for some women to realise that these men are not good long-term mates.
Or perhaps it is a conscious decision that they don't need to find a stable relationship until they are, as you say UGC4, 30 years old and have nothing serious going on.
Conscious or subconscious I think the previous sentence is a satisfactory enough answer for me, bar interviewing a bunch of women ;p
|
On October 19 2009 19:18 ThunderGod wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2009 18:39 Phrujbaz wrote:
Women cannot follow the same strategy. To get impregnated and give birth, then caring for the child is a much bigger investment for the woman than for the man. If she gets impregnated by a lesser man while she could have had better, she has wasted several years of her life at the minimum. As you know, a woman's sexual market value lowers when she gets older, so to mate with inferior males is a losing strategy.
That is why it is so hard to get laid for men. Women try to hold out until they meet a man that is at the very top of their range. The bigger her ego, the better man she will think she deserves and she will hold out until she meets him. A lot of the time women spend around men is just probing. "Am I high value enough to get him?" Yes -> Find a higher value guy and probe again. No -> Try really hard to make him like her -> succeed -> find a higher value guy and try again. Repeat until she thinks she is at the top of her range.
What I don't understand is why women haven't adapted to modern society. In today's world, by and large the (economically) successful men have brains not brawn - in contrast to 'caveman' times. So the best investment in terms of successful genes is to mate with someone successful in society, i.e., the "provider type". These men are generally not going to be the douches, instead of brawns they have brains. So why can't women see through the bullshit, adjust their scales, and figure out that the high-value man at the top of the heap is not going to be a douche. Instead he's going to be an intelligent, hard-working man; who may also have desirable qualities such as humour/sensitivity/physically attractive (or whatever the woman's preferences may be). I know a very few girls that seem to think this way but for the rest: are most women really this clueless?* I would like to hear a woman's opinion on this? (Where are you lilsusie/unc?) EDIT: *Interestingly, the girls I have spoken to think exactly this for the above reason.
You seem to be confusing intelligence with success. I would say there is a very loose correlation between intelligence and success in todays society.
You want to project success, not intelligence. Girls can find out your intelligence later. So instead of walking around with a calculus book. go out, get a suit and a haircut and walk around like you're the CEO of a major corporation. You'll get far more favourable reactions.
|
On October 17 2009 09:34 larjarse wrote:
Kurtistheturtle: This is more like it!
Okay, you've already made great leaps with this girl. You know she is attracted to you. You are asking me how to get intimate with her.
I would suggest watch a movie with her, not in theaters. At someone's house, with you two alone.
Women know what men want, they want to be intimate right here and now, with no fight to it.
MY ADVICE: Hold back on the sexual intimacy. When you are hanging with her during the movie, don't go in for the kiss immediately. Talk to her a bit, show her your good humor and show her you are comfortable not being intimate with her right in front of you. This will confuse her, she will wonder why you haven't made a move yet.
And right before she is about to give up on you, get closer, maybe a small compliment may help, and move in for the makeout session. After kissing for a little, if you are into it, and you notice she is (even remotely into it) just STOP. Find something else to seemingly occupy your attention for a short while. Go to the bathroom right quick. Talk about something else. Pick up a magizine and read it for a little.
Carefully notice how she responds to this. She is going to be confused, guys do not act like this! And before she actually gets frustrated or loses hope, move in again. She will LOVE the fact that you still want her. Do this in small steps, and she may be more and more into it every time, getting closer and closer to sexual intimacy. Girls LOVE being chased! If you show her that you can restrain yourself and you have other things on your mind besides sex, she will be confused and try to make you WANT HER.
This WORKS.
I thought he was a troll but this post is actually completely true
|
Thank god aegrean can't post in this thread.
|
Honestly, as a girl, I think this thread is helpful.
The things he/she says are true...
|
On October 19 2009 19:26 UGC4 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2009 13:40 fanatacist wrote:On October 19 2009 13:36 AceldamA wrote:
I'm in love with a girl named leela and I was wondering if saying I love you with the stars themselves was a good way to show her that I loved her Only if you want to set yourself up for having your testicles being her footrest for the rest of her life (note how there is no "your" life, because you effectively surrender that to her as soon as you do this for however long she decides to keep your pathetic bumbling neo-Romeo ass around). You don't give them anything until they give you something first. You don't pay for dinner until you get a blowjob/have sex with her. You don't take her on dates that you pay for until you've had sex with her. You don't tell her you love her until you made sure she loves you first. That way when you finally say it she will be on the verge of tears, which is a sensation chronologically closely followed by intimate "love" sex, which is really no more than hormonal response to the instinctual feeling of fulfillment of finding a temporary mate in the woman's mind. Also, the sentence you said simply makes no sense in English, which is all the more reason to abandon such self-demeaning pursuits. what the fuck...? you're just a fucking sexist, gtfo. what you're saying is not even funny, much less respectable and not worth reading. seriously, just don't talk anymore, we get it, your ex girlfriend castrated you. unfortunetly she didn't kill you...
;_; you broke my feelings... Peruvians are so cruel T_T!!!
Someone hold me! I NEED A FRIEND! </3
|
On October 19 2009 17:22 GOB wrote:
The problem with most of the advice in this thread, including LarJarsE's, is that it subscribes to this simplistic notion that there are certain universal truths that can be manipulated in relationships. The reality is that this isn't the case. Dispensing this hackneyed brand of pop-psychology that gives diluted answers to vague questions is the same brand of hucksterism that sells truckloads of inane self-help books to desperate consumers.
There is no simple game plan or gimmick or recipe for getting girls. Anyone who tells you otherwise is selling you something.
If you want to be comfortable getting girls, you need to be comfortable with yourself. Know who you are and what you want, in the large and small senses, and the other stuff just sort of works itself out. This is in no way some small or easy measure, but it's an essential part of growing up.
Here's my honest stance on this:
The problem when asking for/giving advice generally arises when there are ambiguities or details left out that go against the general trends (what you call universal truths) of human social attraction and psychology. On this note, I don't think anyone pretends their methods to be 100% foolproof, regardless of whether they are the best pick-up artist in the world or just some kid on the internet giving "tips." Anyway, there are certainly basic guidelines that can increase your chance with women in general - mentalities, approach techniques, controlled behavior, etc. These things might not help you seduce the wife in a 20 year loving marriage, or turn a nun into a nymphomaniac. Some women are at that level of self-security with their mate (or their sexuality) that they may as well be nuns, even if they are just girls at a club or in your college. However, in my experience, these women are few and far between, and probably have a Y chromosome (or are feminazis). Not really, but that's how rare it seems. A lot of advice that you can get from people WILL help you with women A LOT of the time, because there ARE general patterns in the process of attraction and how it develops in a woman's mind. Think of it like a labyrinth, with 5-6 entrances (different seduction methods), and all of them lead to the center (successful attraction). The paths are slightly different for each woman, but not significantly so (until you get into a real relationship, of course - that is way beyond attraction between 2 adult people), and it just depends what path you know the best or are the best at navigating. Like, let's metaphorically say that down the path of the Asshole there is a map, down the path of the Gentleman there is a compass, down the path of the Seducer there is an angry gnome who throws shit at you... Which path am I more likely to take? The path of the Asshole, because that is the one I can do the best.
In other words, it is definitely about growing up and knowing about yourself, but social interaction and attraction can be HOW you find out about yourself. When I was 13, I figured I would talk to as many girls in my school as possible to figure out how they worked. What ended up happening was I systematically weeded out the ones I don't like, kept the ones I like, and then experimented conversational styles in groups. What I found is that most girls, unless they were drastically different (study-hard Asian vs. white trailer-trash hillbilly, for example), reacted similarly to the same words and intonations. I found what worked best for me, and as I did so I found out a bit about how my mind works and how the minds of others work. No, I didn't simplify women to being some sort of input output machine, but I found that both women and men have these a -> b mental tendencies, a lot of which are subconscious if we don't pay close attention. That was how I started growing up and learning about the world around me beyond books and cookie cutter history classes.
EDIT: awesome timestamp.
|
On October 19 2009 19:28 Licmyobelisk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 19 2009 19:18 ThunderGod wrote:On October 19 2009 18:39 Phrujbaz wrote:
Women cannot follow the same strategy. To get impregnated and give birth, then caring for the child is a much bigger investment for the woman than for the man. If she gets impregnated by a lesser man while she could have had better, she has wasted several years of her life at the minimum. As you know, a woman's sexual market value lowers when she gets older, so to mate with inferior males is a losing strategy.
That is why it is so hard to get laid for men. Women try to hold out until they meet a man that is at the very top of their range. The bigger her ego, the better man she will think she deserves and she will hold out until she meets him. A lot of the time women spend around men is just probing. "Am I high value enough to get him?" Yes -> Find a higher value guy and probe again. No -> Try really hard to make him like her -> succeed -> find a higher value guy and try again. Repeat until she thinks she is at the top of her range.
What I don't understand is why women haven't adapted to modern society. In today's world, by and large the (economically) successful men have brains not brawn - in contrast to 'caveman' times. So the best investment in terms of successful genes is to mate with someone successful in society, i.e., the "provider type". These men are generally not going to be the douches, instead of brawns they have brains. So why can't women see through the bullshit, adjust their scales, and figure out that the high-value man at the top of the heap is not going to be a douche. Instead he's going to be an intelligent, hard-working man; who may also have desirable qualities such as humour/sensitivity/physically attractive (or whatever the woman's preferences may be). I know a very few girls that seem to think this way but for the rest: are most women really this stupid?* I would like to hear a woman's opinion on this? (Where are you lilsusie/unc?) EDIT: *Interestingly, the girls I have spoken to think exactly this for the above reason. I think the problem with women being "stupid" is that they never interacted with an asshole who provides good advice about what they really do to seduce so many women. (example would be "me", I always tell girls that I'm friends with is to be a bitch at times so that men will have a challenge in the relationship.) Or I also tell them, withhold sex for the mean time, let's see how long your relationship will last? Man, I'm betraying our kind my friends.. sorry
Fuck that. Whose interests in this world have we cared about more, the interests of others or yourself? What do you care if your buddy has sex or doesn't because of what you say? Less sex for him is more potential sex for you. You're not betraying your kind - if your friends are weak, then you can't let them have things you don't have. If they are too weak to control it, they don't deserve it. If they are too weak, then you swoop in and take it. It's human nature son, only in the past century or so have we started becoming PC with all this charity and humanitarian shit. Philanthropy is okay, but you have to get your own and protect it, and if you don't then expect to get it taken from you. End of story.
|
On October 19 2009 17:22 GOB wrote:
The problem with most of the advice in this thread, including LarJarsE's, is that it subscribes to this simplistic notion that there are certain universal truths that can be manipulated in relationships. The reality is that this isn't the case. Dispensing this hackneyed brand of pop-psychology that gives diluted answers to vague questions is the same brand of hucksterism that sells truckloads of inane self-help books to desperate consumers.
There is no simple game plan or gimmick or recipe for getting girls. Anyone who tells you otherwise is selling you something.
If you want to be comfortable getting girls, you need to be comfortable with yourself. Know who you are and what you want, in the large and small senses, and the other stuff just sort of works itself out. This is in no way some small or easy measure, but it's an essential part of growing up.
Well written and true, but there are some statistical commonalities, you have to admit.
|
On October 19 2009 22:03 TheAntZ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2009 09:34 larjarse wrote:
Kurtistheturtle: This is more like it!
Okay, you've already made great leaps with this girl. You know she is attracted to you. You are asking me how to get intimate with her.
I would suggest watch a movie with her, not in theaters. At someone's house, with you two alone.
Women know what men want, they want to be intimate right here and now, with no fight to it.
MY ADVICE: Hold back on the sexual intimacy. When you are hanging with her during the movie, don't go in for the kiss immediately. Talk to her a bit, show her your good humor and show her you are comfortable not being intimate with her right in front of you. This will confuse her, she will wonder why you haven't made a move yet.
And right before she is about to give up on you, get closer, maybe a small compliment may help, and move in for the makeout session. After kissing for a little, if you are into it, and you notice she is (even remotely into it) just STOP. Find something else to seemingly occupy your attention for a short while. Go to the bathroom right quick. Talk about something else. Pick up a magizine and read it for a little.
Carefully notice how she responds to this. She is going to be confused, guys do not act like this! And before she actually gets frustrated or loses hope, move in again. She will LOVE the fact that you still want her. Do this in small steps, and she may be more and more into it every time, getting closer and closer to sexual intimacy. Girls LOVE being chased! If you show her that you can restrain yourself and you have other things on your mind besides sex, she will be confused and try to make you WANT HER.
This WORKS. I thought he was a troll but this post is actually completely true
True, i tried it, it works
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
