[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
But I will say that when I began to APPLY what I learned about women, sex, display behavior, courtship, mating ritual, etc… from reading about evolutionary biology/psychology to the social dynamics of attraction, flirting and sexual escalation, I began to get very consistent results - it became downright predictable. Regardless of whether or not these “instincts” were designed or naturally evolved (which one could argue is by design…), they are certainly there and pulling the strings of our collective subconscious. It’s as real as pulling the hair on the nape of a woman’s neck during an intimate moment and watching her pupils dilate, her pulse quicken, her face flush and sploosh… [/quote]
That is the whole point I think some people miss on purpose.
There is the official narrative and then there is what is subsumed under “Game”.
It works.
Shockingly so.
So this whole howling and gnashing of teeth that it could not, should not, must not work says more about the heavy ego investment blue pillers have in their POV and very little of the effectiveness of adopting a different narrative.
[/quote]
Orion, again and again you make the mistake of thinking people are arguing with you about this when they are not. You conflate getting laid with achieving relationship success in these debates.
I have said since the very first time I encountered PUA information (here, in 2007) that I have seen it at work in my own experience of men, and in fact wrote kinos into romantic exchanges between fictional characters without having heard of the PUA movement. There really is nothing new under the sun. I don’t believe all women are turned on by the same things I am, but that’s another debate.
Where you lose the thread of the conversation is the part where women meet men with these skills and shut them down for other reasons. Not because they’re not sexy but because the women are looking for mutual respect and the “red pill guy” does not bring this to the table. I’m sure AC would be extremely sexy to me. I’ve seen his picture and he’s a smart guy, etc etc, but his dating history, were he honest with me, would repel me. Even if he chose not to be honest with me, I would slide away (politely) because he would not be able to speak with credibility about dreams that are a good match for mine.
In the same way that I control my appetite for tasty foods, which I allow and enjoy but under conditions I set with my mind because I value fitness, I control my sexual appetite. I want wild, subordinate sex…but with someone I trust and love.
It isn’t, and never was, about whether this technique or that makes women tingle. It’s about whether success in dating represents sharing fluids with someone who disgusts you or whether it means finding intimacy with someone you like and respect. To many people it means the latter, and they don’t acknowledge what you achieve as being “success.”
[/quote]
Um, no, for several reasons.
“You conflate getting laid with achieving relationship success in these debates.”
No, I dont.
But the underlying dynamic is the same, because women are women. They do not become something else just because you attach a magic word like “relationship” to them.
“Not because they’re not sexy but because the women are looking for mutual respect and the “red pill guy” does not bring this to the table.”
That is not necessarily so, it is just that she has to work for it.
Hard.
I am also a bit sceptical when it comes to women looking for “respect”.
Gets a bit to close to “why cant I meet a nice guy, why do I always meet assholes”.
"
In the same way that I control my appetite for tasty foods, which I allow and enjoy but under conditions I set with my mind because I value fitness, I control my sexual appetite. I want wild, subordinate sex…but with someone I trust and love.
"
Yeah, that is because you have not gone feral, only listening to the call of the wild.
Alas, a lot of women have.
Good for you and for the man you are with I guess, but it misses a major point.
Women like yourself usually are in long term committed relationships and they stay there.
If women completely rules by their instincts are about 30% they are a minority by and large but when it comes to “dating” whatever that may be exactly they are a solid supermajority.
"
It isn’t, and never was, about whether this technique or that makes women tingle. It’s about whether success in dating represents sharing fluids with someone who disgusts you or whether it means finding intimacy with someone you like and respect. To many people it means the latter, and they don’t acknowledge what you achieve as being “success.”
"
Those are a lot of assumptions for such a tiny paragraph.[/quote]
See, the funny thing is I feel like I mostly meet nice guys, rarely an asshole, and don’t generally have to worry that they respect me. Why wouldn’t they? I’m smart and nice and healthy and secure. I’m more concerned about meeting someone equally as smart and nice and healthy and secure, so I can respect him!
As for working HARD for his respect, no. I’m not looking for a guy so fucked up and issued that I have to work HARD to get to what should be a standard starting point. If he’s working too hard for my respect I’ll imagine he’s overcompensating for something.
I answer the call. I relish the experience just as I do the big, greasy burgers and fries I have when I want them. I just maintain these pleasures within my preferred context.
Yes, but we have to get there first. And we do so by meeting men and dating them.
I believe it. It’s probably a good thing I didn’t grow up in small town Idaho. I might be even more rebellious than I already am. And it’s true that some religious people’s entire social life really revolves around their church. That’s something I never wanted. As for my children, I’d hope they turn out to be good people who are happy. I’ll leave it at that.
