"Never push for sex. Let her pursue." - Daniel Schmachtenberger

[WaveInTheOcean]

https://civilizationemerging.com/a-message-for-men-who-want-to-avoid-women-regretting-having-been-sexual-with-them/ - Daniel Schmachtenberger

Just thought I'd post here as I feel like I this sub forum, and Leo sometimes, has too much "stage orange"-focus around dating and sex.

Thoughts about Schmachtenbergers tips? His main point is basically that you should never have sex with a woman unless you are 100% sure she is very willing and has "yes" on all levels of subtle communication, e.g. verbally, non-verbally. If you're the slightest in doubt or if she hesitates or if you had to persuade her... call it off, he says.

Basically: "Never push for sex. Let her pursue."

[Recursoinominado]

 

This is bad advice to 90% of guys.

Those guys need that "stage orange" "get it done" attitude, push for the close.

10% of guys need to tone it down a little in order to make women more comfortable because they lack empathy.

But most guys think waaay to much and are passive.

Women hate passive men.

[Hulia]

"Never push for sex. Let her pursue."

Excellent advice for a game of a new level. It not only does work, it makes you special in her eyes compared to all the other guys wanting only this from her like small nervous dogs.

But of course this tactic should be combined with other erotic moves: a verbal hint, a fluent touch, a meaningful penetrating gaze. Subtle communication. Without expected outcome. It will make her intrigued and interested.

[Chew211]

Meaning is decided retroactively. 

You can only be sure of anything after the fact. 

And of course, the future can hold more interpretations/revisions of a past event. 

Trying to be sure beforehand is the problem a lot of guys who can't get laid have. 

The article only seems to apply for stage green people in the west. 

It's not universal. 

In Japan for example,  it's easier to have sex with a chick than to talk to her about sex. Obviously not EVERYONE, but you get the idea. 

Going for verbal consent can kill the mood.

Sex need not be verbally regulated unless something bad is going to/about to happen.

 

From my experience, girls are rarely 100% sure.

Whatever you need to do to make her feel she made the right decision about sleeping with you is done AFTER didily. 

[karkaore]

This seems to depend on what you want from her and at what stage of relationship are you in.

Imagine doing pickup that way.

Now imagine pushing your significant other for sex all the time.

[Hulia]

I just have a weakness for broken rules, changing roles, mixing up actors...

 

 

Edited April 20, 2021 by Hulia

[WaveInTheOcean]

Of course you should set the stage ready for her to pursue. Do everything that makes her want to pursue. I.e. embody your masculinity in a healthy way, be funny, relaxed, carefree, unattached, lead the way, be confident. Give her subtle hints you would love to tear her pants off and fuck her, but don't actually do"that" until she is begging you for it;) 

Mens sexuality is more explicit, while women's is more implicit. The trick is for the man to make his very explicit sexuality implicit and make the women's implicit sexuality explicit. That's it boys.

I feel women are actually a lot more sexual than men when they first get turned on. Men get turned on easier, yes, but then it's mostly just a quick fuck and you're done/pleased. Women can go on forever, never getting enough.

Make her turned on by your way of being. Then she will pursue the sex with you.

Edited April 20, 2021 by WaveInTheOcean

[Roy]

Between two healthy developed people, this is the ideal yes.

But most guys, especially the ones that need "help" lets say in this category aren't developed enough for this advice. They are still insecure and have an expectation of outcome. The Orange paradigm they have demands that they need to close in order to be a man. Which means pushing past her reservations or hesitation (within reason).

I agree though it's disappointing more advanced and holistic teachings about relationships and sex aren't talked about more commonly here. This sub-forum is definitely stunted on the spiral more than the other ones. That's ok though it is what it is.

Edited April 20, 2021 by Roy

[Hulia]

14 minutes ago, WaveInTheOcean said:

Give her subtle hints you would love to tear her pants off and fuck her

:))))) You call it subtle hints????

Oh guys, you have too much focus on sex and too little on game

[WaveInTheOcean]

1 hour ago, Hulia said:

:))))) You call it subtle hints????

Oh guys, you have too much focus on sex and too little on game

I got zero clue what you are referring to since I didn't say a word about what those hints could be. You got any idea? Care to elaborate? Or did you just misinterpret what I wrote?

[Emerald]

I totally agree with this. I've almost always been the one that's made the first move. Yet again, personality-wise David Schmachtenberger is like the type of guy that I'm usually interested in because he seems fairly reserved and very introspective. So, perhaps it's more of a "this type of man does this to attract this type of woman."

But from my perspective, men who are pursuing me and wearing their interest and sexuality on their sleeves right away and I automatically register as "There's no emotion there. He's doing this with everyone." and I subconsciously auto-filter him as a serious relationship prospect. I just don't resonate with that type of man. It feels boring because attention from men like this feels like getting junk mail that's dressed up to look like real mail. Just not a lot of emotional resonance and intrigue as it's very common. Basically, it feels very blah. 

And it only makes sense for women to pursue because women's sexuality is very pointed towards a particular guy usually. So, it makes sense that she'd be the one pursuing him as opposed to a man pursuing a bunch of women. Like peacocks and peahens, the male fans the feathers and the female approaches.

Also, the way I get attractions is gradually over time, and I need a long platonic period (usually 2 or 3 months) to tell whether or no an attraction will arise. But once it does, there is a strong desire to pursue. And the emotional resonance is through the roof. At that point, it feels like the best drug ever. 

[Roy]

13 minutes ago, Emerald said:

and I subconsciously auto-filter him as a serious relationship prospect. I just don't resonate with that type of man. It feels boring because attention from men like this feels like getting junk mail that's dressed up to look like real mail.

 

[Preety_India]

18 minutes ago, Emerald said:

. I just don't resonate with that type of man. It feels boring because attention from men like this feels like getting junk mail that's dressed up to look like real mail.

Omg I laughed so hard. All I did was replace "mail" with "male", happened subconsciously and here I'm rolling in laughter. 

 

[intotheblack]

True! And I’ve said this before on another thread... If a girl in interested in you, she will naturally gravitate towards you.... no pushing through boundaries required!

this is how it’s always been with me! The guys I liked I pursued them.  

the times when guys pursued me I got bored and lost interest! 

 

 

Edited April 20, 2021 by intotheblack

[Preety_India]

25 minutes ago, Emerald said:

And it only makes sense for women to pursue because women's sexuality is very pointed towards a particular guy usually. So, it makes sense that she'd be the one pursuing him as opposed to a man pursuing a bunch of women. Like peacocks and peahens, the male fans the feathers and the female approaches.

But usually women do not pursue. Society is not designed that way. Very few women do if it at all. 

Also the desire for sex is far less in women than in men. For example, a woman could go about with her job get busy through the day, do a bunch of errands and retire to her bedroom as a single woman and fall asleep without even thinking about a man. 

Whereas a man, no matter how busy he is, he is going to be looking around if he sees a woman, if his female neighbor parked her car in the night and he is watching TV, he is going to think about it or want to look through the  window. 

Men's natural drive to get sex is very high. And that ultimately is necessary for pregnancy and motherhood. 

If we talk about motherhood  (which is the basis of human existence), it's women who have sabotaged their own ability to have children by abortions. Most abortions are carried out by women for their own reasons. It's not like men don't want children. It's usually the money issue that holds them back. They don't have money to pay for child support or alimony. In a free society where the government provides all the child support men would have no problem fucking as many women as they want.. Also I get it that motherhood is a woman's burden and children are raised by women and much of the work is on her shoulders, so she is more likely to be against it. Yet men don't tend to back off from the idea of children. 

Basically it means men tend to contribute more to fertility and reproduction because in the age of feminism (ironically) women are trying to kill it. But fertility in itself is the main virtue of a woman, I mean that's how a mother goddess is represented, as a fertility goddess. 

So men being hornier than women and chasing them makes perfect sense survival wise because women damn sure are not going to do the chasing. In that case the reproduction rate will drop very rapidly. 

I mean we can say that such men are horny dogs but horny dogs are what is required for sex to happen on a larger scale, because more horny men means more pregnant women and therefore more children. 

So i guess sometimes we have to thank horny men for the planet's survival. 

 

[intotheblack]

5 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

It's not like men don't want children. It's usually the money issue that holds them back.

A lot of fatherless children would say otherwise! 

[Preety_India]

Just now, intotheblack said:

A lot of fatherless children would say otherwise! 

Yea I get that. But the proportion of children with fathers is much higher. 

 

[intotheblack]

4 hours ago, Preety_India said:

Yea I get that. But the proportion of children with fathers is much higher. 

 

I think if men were more in touch with their natural fatherly desires they would be.  But most of them are suppressing those natural instincts.  They ones who leave weren’t mature enough to take care of children.  
 

There is also men who force women to have abortions, because they aren’t ready for it or because of cheating etc. .and women choose abortion because they also aren’t ready for a child. Luckily we have birth control so there is more choice in the matter.  

Edited April 20, 2021 by intotheblack

[Preety_India]

18 minutes ago, intotheblack said:

I think if men were more in touch with their natural fatherly desires they would be.  But most of them are suppressing those natural instincts.  They ones who leave weren’t mature enough to take care of children.  
 

There is also men who force women to have abortions.  Luckily we have birth control. 
 

But these are all exceptions not the rule. 

[intotheblack]

3 hours ago, Preety_India said:

But these are all exceptions not the rule

I don’t know.  But I think men wanting to impregnate many women is kinda low conscious.  Or for example men who push women to have sex without using a condom, knowing she can get pregnant, is low conscious chimpery..  

of course this was the norm before birth control and abortions... when society was at a lower level on the spiral.  So naturally more children were born.  

most men today in a conscious society want to have sex but they don’t want children to come out of it.. 

so it’s actually all happening at the right time since the population is sky high. 

By 2100 it’s predicted the population will naturally start to stagnate/decline, because by that point everyone around the world will be at a higher state of consciousness and will be choosing not to have children 

Edited April 20, 2021 by intotheblack