aurum

Yeah this is good. I made a similar point earlier in this thread. Sure, I like sexual novelty to a degree. And maybe there’s some biological impulse in me to “spread the seed”. But realistically, I’m now in my 30s and not looking to crank my lay count into the stratosphere. I’m looking for something much deeper than that. And so, it’s not worth it for me to use strategies that maybe will get more women attracted to me if that means sacrificing quality. And by quality I mean quality of partner and of the relationship itself. The strategies I want to implement are the ones that are going to get me the highest quality match. Damn anything else. Who cares if I could potentially attract more women with a Rolls Royce? If that’s why she’s with me, that’s a bad sign to begin with. We’re not going to be compatible. Which is of course not to say women should have no needs in relationships. Or that there’s nothing for you to do as a man to develop. But there’s certainly needs that are more conscious than others. And that’s what I’m screening for. As a large generalization, I feel like the debates that have been having on this subforum can be broken down to two types of guys: 1) Guys who have yet to integrate leadership / assertiveness / dominance 2) Guys who have and are looking for what’s beyond The guys who haven’t integrated these concepts to a sufficient degree want to keep hammering the importance of status / leadership etc because that’s what they feel they lack.

??? MC Hammer

Yes I'd say that was well said. I had deep insecurities related to female validation in my early pickup days, and they're probably still there to some degree. I'd hardly even care if the sex was terrible with the girl I hooked up with. As long as I "got laid", I'd feel good about myself. The more girls wanted to have sex with me, the more I felt like a boss. I'd even fudge my own lay count in my head to make it larger than it was. Oral sex counts as sex right? I'm so cool... Underneath all of that, I basically just wanted to feel desirable. But chasing that through pickup was just a black hole. How many girls was it going to take before I get there? 5? 10? 20? 50? It was never ending. Much like a millionaire who is convinced their next million is going to bring them happiness, I was doing much of the same thing but with women. Now my interactions look much different. They look more like what you described above, although I don't do much cold approach these days. If I do cold approach it's very casual. It's more about being social than anything else, like striking up a conversation with the person sitting next to you on a plane. I'm mostly just focused on my life purpose, my friends, my family, my happiness and just being myself. And sometimes women come into my life, and sometimes they don't. There is an illusion of control that pickup gives over your dating life. But the reality is that when it's time for you to meet someone, you'll meet them. And when it's not, you won't. Ironically though, I had to go through pickup to learn that. So I don't shit on pickup. That would be hypocritical. Any guy reading this who wants to try it, go ahead. It can be a lot of fun. But these same insights are likely awaiting you on the other side of that journey.

Diana Richardson:

More Layla:

Layla Martin is good for this:

But we also need to acknowledge that there are likely degrees to which this is true. For some women, status is way more important than others. Likewise with men and "nice tits", which is already a subjective notion. And that as people raise in consciousness, it's accurate to say these things become less important.

Yes I have no plans to eschew status. But as I'm looking for a committed relationship, my main priority is how to build that properly.

No dude. This is so backwards.

I agree. And I don’t think that contradicts anything I said. You will attract people who want what you’re offering, so be conscious of what that is.

That’s certainly what my years in PUA have taught me. Status, status, status. My point still stands regardless. If my hook is status, I will attract women who are interested in status. And this is potentially not going to be the most conscious women who would make for the best relationship. I am not suggesting men abandon leadership. I do think that’s essential. I am simply pointing out how chasing status could actually backfire.

A corollary to this would be that men who are seeking a good relationship are shooting themselves in the foot by trying so hard to obtain status. If you project all this status as a man, then you are likely only to attract women who appreciate status, and therefore who are in their masculine. Or to put it in spiral dynamics terms, Orange attracts Orange. It does seem to me that a healthy balance exists, and that women do appreciate more objective attraction triggers to a certain degree. But at a certain point you have to let that go.

It’s interesting because I feel like RSD (one of the biggest PUA companies) taught something similar. They always railed against guys who believed that their success with women came down to object measures like looks, money or even status. They often would push a narrative that attraction with women was way more subjective and based on how she felt, versus an objective resume type of mindset. It was this fluidity and subjectivity in female sexuality that they taught was the reason you could easily pick up women. In other words, because women don’t care how you look or the money you have, you could go out to a bar and find success right now. All those things you thought you needed, you didn’t. That was the core message I took away from them. The reason RSD would always push this narrative was because there were so many insecure guys who refused to believe it. They just could not grasp that women really were not judging their looks that harshly. And they constantly projected onto women how they would get picked up. I know you are not a fan of cold approach. But I do find it fascinating that you seem to be saying something similar in terms of subjectivity. Where you and RSD seem to diverge is about selectivity. You’re arguing that female selectivity is because of women’s ability to perceive men as unique. While a company like RSD would probably argue female selectivity exists because women are biologically driven to seek out alpha males and then to get them to commit. This was also the origin of female subjectivity, as women were looking for subliminal hints of alpha male behavior, like body language or vocal tonality, rather than object measures. Thanks for clarifying. I love this topic so these ideas have been fun to play with.

@AndylizedAAY A lot of people say it’s a sign of a spiritual awakening. You’re more in tune with the flow and you’re getting winks from the universe and / or your guides. I definitely went through a phase where I felt like I was seeing repeating numbers all the time as well.

The right partner is ultimately the one you decide to commit to. There is no perfect partner waiting in the ether. You create one by deciding to go all in. Of course, there are some people with red flags. I’m not suggesting abandoning all boundaries. But at a certain point, you just have to pick someone and commit.

Can you expand on this? How are you defining subjectivity and objectivity? I’m pretty sure I have an idea of what you’re getting at but I’d like to hear it from you.

Unless they’ve learned tantric techniques of transmuting sexual energy, I seriously doubt those guys were really so fine with that. Especially if they got close to the point of no return. If a guy doesn’t cum during sex, it doesn’t mean he couldn’t enjoy the part where he is having sex. But that finishing part is also super important. Otherwise, it’s going to just create a feeling of anxiety, incompleteness or even blue balls. Like if someone teased you really, really badly, but then never delivered the goods.

I’m very pro-therapy if you can find a good therapist. Unfortunately some therapists are very unconscious themselves. I’m surprised you didn’t mention this problem of him not ejaculating in your previous thread. It seems significant.

@Vzdoh Weren’t you breaking it off with this guy?

Of course it is. There is no way you’ll be happy if all you do is consume, consume, consume. But of course, you do have to consume to some degree. Eating is consumption. Breathing in is consumption. You can’t give a formula for the ideal balance between these two forces. That’s why it’s called balance. It’s done in real time, based on your specific situation, just like walking a tight rope. Maybe you need a big adjustment. Maybe you need a small one. Maybe you need more creator, maybe you need more consuming. I will say though, I would be biased towards being a creator. Most of our society is set up for you to just be a mindless consumer, and so it’s a safe bet that you likely need to be more of a creator in your life.

@Onecirrus Good insights. And you put it in your own words which shows that you likely are not just parroting other gurus. The only problem is that if you make it a rule that you will only go out when you’re already feeling “warm”, that is unlikely to ever happen. Most people need to warm up a bit. That’s why people like to pregame before they go party. There’s also valuable lessons to be learned by deliberately going from cold to warm. And you won’t learn those lessons if you avoid the cold phase.

The reason people are touchy-feely is because we are all witnessing the destruction of hyper-competition. That's what a stage Orange society is all about. So you have to swing the pendulum the other way, which may mean that you are against almost any kind of competition for a while (Green). Obviously the ideal is an integration between cooperation and competition, but that will take a long time for society to integrate. We still have many people who vehemently believe in hyper-competition.

This is going to end badly for you.

The best reason for starting a career with RSD would be that you’re walking into a engaged, groomed audience. They’ve already attracted the eyeballs for you. Then you’d have to deliver to keep them. You’d also get a huge social circle of people who are also interested in mastering social dynamics. That said, you certainly do not have to have a career with RSD if you choose to make this your life purpose. And in fact it may be smarter not to. I would only do that if you feel like that’s what you really want and you are seriously committed to that goal. In which case, get started now, because landing one of those instructor positions is not going to be easy. To your point about studying from masters, that is not equivalent to having a career with RSD. A career with them will involve many other variables than just being mentored. You could learn from the masters but make a completely different career choice. Really it is up to you. That’s the blessing and the curse of the life purpose. You are free to blaze your own path, which also includes the challenge of making hard decisions about what the pursue. Especially in our modern culture that suffers from shiny object syndrome. Whatever you choose, just get really good at it.

Glad to hear!