i leave for 10 mins and this turns into a clusterfuck?
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
Btw, the most prominent female sexual phantasy is what?[/quote]
Key word is fantasy you fucking moron.
Lots of males fantasize about being in war and shit too, doesn’t mean any of them actually want to experience the terrifying reality of such a situation.[/quote]
You are an utter idiot.
You dont even know what their fantasies are about.
Go play in traffic.
[/quote]
Yep
Please tell us more about how a bunch of autistic basement dwellers figured out the inner workings of the human mind that professional sociologists and psychologists haven’t. Oh wait they don’t know because they aren’t unplugged from the matrix of course.
[/quote]
Of course.
They cant get you laid if you dont know how.
We can.
The proof is in the pudding.[/quote]
Sorry unlike you I didn’t need to attend a seminar and put money into the pocket of some douchebag to learn how to interact with women. Guess what, I get laid even when I’m being nice! and I like people who are nice to me too!! I don’t know if that makes me a beta-omega-delta male or maybe I’m just not autistic.
And lmao dude, you are blackmailing a chick into sucking your dick and you’ve just spent the last 3 pages or so trying desperately to convince us that it’s less rape-y than it sounds. Proof is in the pudding? Shieeeeet.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
This is very depressing. Assuming it’s true, which I frankly question (a woman with a master’s degree is this incompetent a human being?), your goal is to degrade her for no particular reason than that you feel you can?
I’m very glad my world is so different from yours. [/quote]
No, her goal is to be degraded because she is used to being put on a pedestal which bores her out of her mind and leaves her as dry as the Sahara desert.
[/quote]
Then she’s profoundly fucked up, Orion. I don’t know how to state it any more clearly. THAT"S MESSED UP. And you’re messed up for believing you’ve somehow escaped the Matrix by engaging with her in this manner. That this woman is cheating on her boyfriend is not to do with alpha and beta, it’s to do with that she is a cheat. She exhibits this trait in multiple areas of her life. She’s weak and cowardly and corrupt.
I’m used to being put on a pedestal, too, but that has little to do with anything. Beyond superficial relationships (work and etc) I avoid men AND women who bore me. If you are not very smart, decently self-assured, and a little edgy, you will not become part of my inner circle. I look for honorable men who challenge me in healthy ways, both sexually and intellectually.
You make a mistake when you imagine a man can’t be both sexually exciting (dominant) and loving, or that women can’t be both emotionally secure and physically attracted.[/quote]
See, your problem is that I am a) writing and b) not standing right before you.
Because the things that are missing are the ones that are the most important to you when it comes to judging these things.
If I said the very same things to you, with the right voice, with the right posture, with the right attitude of amused detachment it would sooooooo make sense to you…
Anyhow, you insisting on that all of this is only true for some women even though the cultural evidence that it is true for A LOT of them is overwhelming is amusing.
Btw, the most prominent female sexual phantasy is what?[/quote]
No, Orion, it is you who lack the ability to imagine something else. You fail to understand that people can negotiate attraction without there needing to be emotional manipulation or dishonesty. My sex partner approaches me with a deep, gravely voice and detached amusement when we are flirting, which I suppose would be a pre-foreplay stage of sex. When we’re out having a drink, say. He’s amused and detached because it’s only sex and because I am extremely manipulable in that context, which amuses him.
However, when he is squeezing me tightly and telling me that I make everything in his world better or covering me up because he worries that I’ll be cold, there is no amusement or detachment, just love. When he talks about a bad day at work or insecurity over family stuff there’s no detachment. When he listens to me talk about that stuff there’s no detachment.
That doesn’t mean that we make tender, tepid love amidst the rose petals. Sex is sex. Sometimes rough and wild (after some of those bad days at work!) other times sweet and slow. Sometimes little of both.
The guy I’m with doesn’t rape anyone. But neither, I assume, do you or any of the other PUAs. He certainly IS capable of surprising me and disturbing my equilibrium. I am able to do that to him, too, though in different ways. This also has nothing to do with the emotional part of things.
Your scope is so limited. It’s like you’re insisting that only chocolate cake exists, and when I tell you that there is a whole world of delicious and nourishing food out there, you decide that I don’t understand about chocolate cake.
lmao no u dumb slut ur just waiting for a dude with more resources to come along!
#unpluggedfromthematrix
The OP wants to fuck this Arash dude.
Seph is ghey. PUA for sausage lovers?
[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
This is very depressing. Assuming it’s true, which I frankly question (a woman with a master’s degree is this incompetent a human being?), your goal is to degrade her for no particular reason than that you feel you can?
I’m very glad my world is so different from yours. [/quote]
No, her goal is to be degraded because she is used to being put on a pedestal which bores her out of her mind and leaves her as dry as the Sahara desert.
[/quote]
Then she’s profoundly fucked up, Orion. I don’t know how to state it any more clearly. THAT"S MESSED UP. And you’re messed up for believing you’ve somehow escaped the Matrix by engaging with her in this manner. That this woman is cheating on her boyfriend is not to do with alpha and beta, it’s to do with that she is a cheat. She exhibits this trait in multiple areas of her life. She’s weak and cowardly and corrupt.
I’m used to being put on a pedestal, too, but that has little to do with anything. Beyond superficial relationships (work and etc) I avoid men AND women who bore me. If you are not very smart, decently self-assured, and a little edgy, you will not become part of my inner circle. I look for honorable men who challenge me in healthy ways, both sexually and intellectually.
You make a mistake when you imagine a man can’t be both sexually exciting (dominant) and loving, or that women can’t be both emotionally secure and physically attracted.[/quote]
See, your problem is that I am a) writing and b) not standing right before you.
Because the things that are missing are the ones that are the most important to you when it comes to judging these things.
If I said the very same things to you, with the right voice, with the right posture, with the right attitude of amused detachment it would sooooooo make sense to you…
Anyhow, you insisting on that all of this is only true for some women even though the cultural evidence that it is true for A LOT of them is overwhelming is amusing.
Btw, the most prominent female sexual phantasy is what?[/quote]
No, Orion, it is you who lack the ability to imagine something else. You fail to understand that people can negotiate attraction without there needing to be emotional manipulation or dishonesty. My sex partner approaches me with a deep, gravely voice and detached amusement when we are flirting, which I suppose would be a pre-foreplay stage of sex. When we’re out having a drink, say. He’s amused and detached because it’s only sex and because I am extremely manipulable in that context, which amuses him.
However, when he is squeezing me tightly and telling me that I make everything in his world better or covering me up because he worries that I’ll be cold, there is no amusement or detachment, just love. When he talks about a bad day at work or insecurity over family stuff there’s no detachment. When he listens to me talk about that stuff there’s no detachment.
That doesn’t mean that we make tender, tepid love amidst the rose petals. Sex is sex. Sometimes rough and wild (after some of those bad days at work!) other times sweet and slow. Sometimes little of both.
The guy I’m with doesn’t rape anyone. But neither, I assume, do you or any of the other PUAs. He certainly IS capable of surprising me and disturbing my equilibrium. I am able to do that to him, too, though in different ways. This also has nothing to do with the emotional part of things.
Your scope is so limited. It’s like you’re insisting that only chocolate cake exists, and when I tell you that there is a whole world of delicious and nourishing food out there, you decide that I don’t understand about chocolate cake. [/quote]
Jajajaja…
Read what I write or dont.
I wont respond to what you think I write.
[quote]orion wrote:
I wont respond to what you think I write.
[/quote]
You’ve been doing that this entire thread though?
[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
I wont respond to what you think I write.
[/quote]
You’ve been doing that this entire thread though?
[/quote]
Yes, but the eternal sollipsism of the female mind is strong in her and she does not want to be break out but to pigeonhole me.
That is amusing for a while, then it no longer is.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
I wont respond to what you think I write.
[/quote]
You’ve been doing that this entire thread though?
[/quote]
Yes, but the eternal sollipsism of the female mind is strong in her and she does not want to be break out but to pigeonhole me.
That is amusing for a while, then it no longer is.
[/quote]
Pigeonhole you as WHAT, goofy? You tell me my world is narrower than I believe it to be and I just don’t see it or am deluded, while I tell you that your world could be much more expansive than you have recognized to this point. Who is pigeonholing whom?
[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
I wont respond to what you think I write.
[/quote]
You’ve been doing that this entire thread though?
[/quote]
Yes, but the eternal sollipsism of the female mind is strong in her and she does not want to be break out but to pigeonhole me.
That is amusing for a while, then it no longer is.
[/quote]
Pigeonhole you as WHAT, goofy? You tell me my world is narrower than I believe it to be and I just don’t see it or am deluded, while I tell you that your world could be much more expansive than you have recognized to this point. Who is pigeonholing whom?
[/quote]
I did neither.
That is just the way your mind works, men abstract outwards from within, women particularize inwards from the outside.
There is no point going at it from an abstract level because you will insist that you, you, yes, YOU feel differently about it.
Seen in this light it is beyond hilarious that I have a “narrow” point of view.
I dont care whether something does not “feel” right to you because you have never experienced it, I tell you that concepts like hypergamy, female solipsism and stuff like “shittesting” have incredible explanatory power and that they work incredibly well as a guide to dealing with women and if you have an incredibly hard time wrapping your head around it, no shit, they are not part of your personal experiences, they cannot be.
It is a tragic comedy, but perhaps inevitable that a whole set of human beings relates to the world mainly in the way of analyzing how it affects them, them, THEM and yet they are unable to turn their attention to their psychologcal make up which arguably affects them, them, THEM the most.
Yes me, me, me, me…
Meh.
LMFAO the irony
Yes, I see, now that I have read the blog you linked. http://dalrock.wordpress.com/...male-solipsism/
Because this part:
[quote]I see two areas where female solipsism is most obvious. The first is the tendency of women to think anything being discussed is about them personally. This can be truly ridiculous, as occurred in an exchange between my wife and another woman a few years ago at a gathering of Christian mothers. My wife mentioned reading about a school assigning inappropriate books to middle schoolers, and the other mother was very concerned about this until my wife mentioned one of the titles. It was The Electric Koolaid Acid Test, and when my wife mentioned the title the woman became very upset and said:
But I read that in college!
The woman responded emotionally as if my wife was judging her for having read the book years ago (how could my wife even have known?), and physically recoiled away from my wife. She simply couldnâ??t process that it wasnâ??t about what she personally had read 20 years ago in college and was about what schools were assigning to Jr High students today.[/quote]
Sounds exactly like me! Why, what else COULD I do if someone mentioned banning a book but feel attacked for having read it 20 years ago! That sounds like me from what you know of me, right orion?
And please, I am not the only one saying the things I am saying. People who do NOT suffer from Female Solipsism are reporting the same experience from the other side. Actual men! So there’s that, too.
Also, I don’t deny your experience, which you seem to think I do. I acknowledge that there are shallow, avaricious women and the men who match them. I’ve met them. I’m simply offering that I have experience, my own and observed, that says there are other, better, ways for people capable of BEING better. As Jay-Z says, “I drove by the fork in the road and went straight.” Why you insist that these shitty, circuitous paths to nowhere are the only valid experience is beyond my ability to understand. Not because I’m incapable of seeing others’ points of view (I see yours) but because it’s so fucking grim that I would be gnawing off my own arm to escape it and yet you are clinging to it with all you’re worth.
but he’s TELLING you emily!
I can only hear myself!
How does one find time to write lengthy essays on the female mind if they supposed to be drowning in pussy because they are unplugged from the Matrix?
[quote]Makavali wrote:
How does one find time to write lengthy essays on the female mind if they supposed to be drowning in pussy because they are unplugged from the Matrix?[/quote]
no tv
[quote]Chushin wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Aussie Davo wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
I wont respond to what you think I write.
[/quote]
You’ve been doing that this entire thread though?
[/quote]
Yes, but the eternal sollipsism of the female mind is strong in her and she does not want to be break out but to pigeonhole me.
That is amusing for a while, then it no longer is.
[/quote]
Pigeonhole you as WHAT, goofy? You tell me my world is narrower than I believe it to be and I just don’t see it or am deluded, while I tell you that your world could be much more expansive than you have recognized to this point. Who is pigeonholing whom?
[/quote]
I did neither.
That is just the way your mind works, men abstract outwards from within, women particularize inwards from the outside.
There is no point going at it from an abstract level because you will insist that you, you, yes, YOU feel differently about it.
Seen in this light it is beyond hilarious that I have a “narrow” point of view.
I dont care whether something does not “feel” right to you because you have never experienced it, I tell you that concepts like hypergamy, female solipsism and stuff like “shittesting” have incredible explanatory power and that they work incredibly well as a guide to dealing with women and if you have an incredibly hard time wrapping your head around it, no shit, they are not part of your personal experiences, they cannot be.
It is a tragic comedy, but perhaps inevitable that a whole set of human beings relates to the world mainly in the way of analyzing how it affects them, them, THEM and yet they are unable to turn their attention to their psychologcal make up which arguably affects them, them, THEM the most.
Yes me, me, me, me…
Meh.[/quote]
Holding tight to the trunk, he stomps his feet and screams, “Elephants are long and narrow, damn it!”[/quote]
That is actually a perfectly accurate description of what I just described.
[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
I can only hear myself![/quote]
No, you can only hear what you can relate to through personal experience.