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

[Preety_India]

1 minute ago, intotheblack said:

But I think men wanting to impregnate many women is kinda low conscious.  Like men who push women to have sex without using a condom, knowing she can get pregnant, is low conscious chimpery.. 

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

I don't find it low conscious for a man to impregnate many women. He could have divorced one woman or separated from a girlfriend and then impregnated his next girlfriend. Of course impregnating many women at the same time suggests cheating and that's not what I was alluding to. 

It only means that men have the capacity to keep impregnating women due to their horniness which is essential for survival of the species. 

Men pushing women to have sex without condoms is a bad idea and I don't think a woman doesn't have a say in all of this. She is not a statue, she can use birth control or refuse to have sex with him. So when an unwanted pregnancy occurs, unless it's due to rape, it's utterly the lack of responsibility of both the man and the woman, a man alone cannot be blamed for that. 

I think only a low conscious man would not respect a woman's wish to not want a pregnancy. 

I guess in a high conscious society where men do not want children is also due to child support or other reasons and not for some lofty or saintly purpose. It's ok to make the argument of over population but I don't think that's the reason why these men don't want children. My bet is that it's most likely connected with child support payments. 

A man feels proud to have children, it adds to his manhood, it makes him a father, so I'm pretty sure that most men  would want children unless there are reasons to view having children as a detriment, in which case it's perfectly understandable why men wouldn't want children, but not otherwise. 

But women can't become pregnant on their own unless they are looking for some technology like insemination to get pregnant. 

The thing is this is all diverting from the point I'm making. 

I'm not alluding to a situation where men are raping women or forcing women to get pregnant against their will, obviously these are scenarios that are harmful. 

I'm talking about a social structure where women are ready or okay with having children but aren't very proactive about it, aren't desperately seeking a man because their sexual drives or horniness is much lesser than that of men or they just aren't that interested in pursuing men actively, which is usually the case or else you would see women walking on the streets hunting men, we all know that women want an ideal guy, not just a guy and some women wait too long and with this psychology it's very difficult to get maximum women pregnant. If men had this psychology where they wait for the one and only woman all their life, things will get difficult for the human race in terms of survival. Because it means a man will impregnate a woman only once in his lifetime or probably never will if he doesn't find his ideal woman. I guess that's why nature gave a man an inclination to hit as many women as possible or else he got no chance of transferring his Genes. 

I mean imagine a horny man out there wanting to get a woman and trying hard with at least a 100 women and finally lands one woman. Now what if his horniness didn't exist on that level and he didn't care to approach as many women and only approached like 10 women. His chances of getting a woman are now reduced to zero. That means no pregnancy, no child, basically nothing and he dies a Virgin. 

If every man did the same, then most men would die a Virgin and childless. But how would this benefit humanity in terms of survival? 

Because women aren't going to chase a 100 men a day to get pregnant. They would wait or make their move only when they see a man of their dreams. Until then they are virgin and that's no loss to them. Even if they are not virgins, they are at least not pregnant, once again no child as long as the woman doesn't find the man of her dreams to get pregnant with. If the world waited for a woman to get pregnant on her own time, then the world will stop functioning. This does not mean that she should be forced to get pregnant. But if a man puts enough effort in getting her attention, she might fall for his bait and end up having sex with him and getting pregnant(obviously because she was okay with having kids with him) . Had he not put the effort and proactiveness in getting her sexually interested as early as possible, she would have been waiting till eternity to make her move, even past her reproductive age. 

The problem is that women don't proactively seek men or motherhood. They aren't hunting for men. They are passively waiting and sometimes time just runs out. 

If women were actively hunting for men, a man's job of getting a woman would have been way easier if the egg is coming knocking on their door, all they have to do is just wait to impregnate that egg. 

But this doesn't happen. The sperm has to do all the work. It has to run to the egg. The egg doesn't come running to the sperm. 

Women don't come running to men to get pregnant. Or else it would be heaven for men. 

It's men who have to do the hard job of approaching women, thanks to their horniness and its their horniness that arouses the woman enough to be sexually interested in the man and its his horniness in the bedroom that makes her ready for intercourse. 

We don't say "a woman got herself pregnant by him" instead we say "he got her pregnant." 

That's because all of the job is done by men. I'm not saying that the woman is passive in bed. She can make her moves sexually if she likes. 

But most women limit their sexuality only to their bedroom. They are not playing the pickup game. They are not using sexuality to get a guy to get them pregnant. In fact most women don't even want pregnancy unless they are married. 

So the initiation of sexual interest usually happens from the man's side. He has to be the seducer because women find it very painful to be the seducer, since it's a lot of hard work and women don't want to put that kind of hard work, so they would rather just sit around than pursue men. Men on the other hand are ready to put in the hard work of pursuing and seducing a woman into having sex with him, and even a family with him if his financial situation is good enough 

What I'm trying to say is both men and women are horny but it's usually the man who uses his horniness to get the stuff done. If he wasn't putting all the effort into getting women, most women would be sitting childless, because women are too damn lazy to do the job themselves or are not too motivated sexually because visualizing being  pregnant doesn't really motivate them in that direction. Whereas men are more proactive because they don't see sex, marriage, children as a bad bargain, it adds to their manhood even more, so they are more motivated than women. 

 

[intotheblack]

@Preety_India ok thnx for explaining, I understand what you mean now.

[Emerald]

3 hours ago, Preety_India said:

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. 

 

I tend to think women don't pursue men more often because a lot of women are out of touch with their emotions and instincts.

When I develop a true attraction to a man, it's deep, intense, and pre-occupying. It's anything but lukewarm. And the only thing I can think of is being close to him sexually and otherwise.

Anything short of that feeling is just not that magnetic. 

Now, I know that I (and most women) are more selective than most men about what is sex-worthy. Men are said to have a higher sex drive because they want sex more often. But I would actually argue that frequency of desiring sex only tells part of the story. I think men want sex more frequently but that women want sex more intensely when they do want it. So, I don't see women as having a lower sex drive than men.

I personally am very libidinally oriented. That said, it's not so easy to push those buttons, so I'm more selective with the expression. But when those feelings arise, it's such an intense instinctual pull towards the person I desire. It begets a deep and electric-feeling longing.

By itself, the idea of a relationship is not attractive to me. But that feeling is the most intoxicating feeling. So, if the feeling is intense enough to make me forget how unattractive the idea of relationship is to me, I know it's a real attraction. Otherwise, it's not anything worth giving attention to. 

So, I would tend to think that when women are in touch with their emotions that they will pursue men more. Whereas a woman who has a more vague relationship to her feelings, won't feel much of a natural magnetism toward anyone. It will be more of an intellectual endeavor of wanting a guy who meets a laundry list of qualities and having an idealized vision of relationship that stands in as a symbol for completion. And that's when the blah feeling exists around sex.

But I don't agree with the abortion thing. I think most women who choose to get abortions do so because they don't feel able to raise a child at a particular time. 

Also, if men are just horny dogs it's actually not good for survival because stable fathers that can devote their time to parenting their children are a strong indicator of how well a child will thrive. So, men going around and impregnating a bunch of women will just lead to lots of children without a father figure in their lives. Also, in nomadic times, that would have meant death to the child and mother alike.

So, I would argue that you get much stronger families and societies when the woman chooses her partner based on her emotions and instincts as opposed to settling for whoever happens to approach. 

[Preety_India]

10 minutes ago, Emerald said:

I tend to think women don't pursue men more often because a lot of women are out of touch with their and instincts.

When I develop a true attraction to a man, it's deep, intense, and pre-occupying. It's anything but lukewarm. And the only thing I can think of is being close to him sexually and otherwise.

Anything short of that feeling is just not that magnetic. 

Now, I know that I (and most women) are more selective than most men about what is sex-worthy. Men are said to have a higher sex drive because they want sex more often. But I would actually argue that frequency of desiring sex only tells part of the story. I think men want sex more frequently but that women want sex more intensely when they do want it. So, I don't see women as having a lower sex drive than men.

I personally am very libidinally oriented. That said, it's not so easy to push those buttons, so I'm more selective with the expression. But when those feelings arise, it's such an intense instinctual pull towards the person I desire. It begets a deep and electric-feeling longing.

By itself, the idea of a relationship is not attractive to me. But that feeling is the most intoxicating feeling. So, if the feeling is intense enough to make me forget how unattractive the idea of relationship is to me, I know it's a real attraction. Otherwise, it's not anything worth giving attention to. 

So, I would tend to think that when women are in touch with their emotions that they will pursue men more. Whereas a woman who has a more vague relationship to her feelings, won't feel much of a natural magnetism toward anyone. It will be more of an intellectual endeavor of wanting a guy who meets a laundry list of qualities and having an idealized vision of relationship that stands in as a symbol for completion. And that's when the blah feeling exists around sex.

But I don't agree with the abortion thing. I think most women who choose to get abortions do so because they don't feel able to raise a child at a particular time. 

Also, if men are just horny dogs it's actually not good for survival because stable fathers that can devote their time to parenting their children are a strong indicator of how well a child will thrive. So, men going around and impregnating a bunch of women will just lead to lots of children without a father figure in their lives. Also, in nomadic times, that would have meant death to the child and mother alike.

So, I would argue that you get much stronger families and societies when the woman chooses her partner based on her emotions and instincts as opposed to settling for whoever happens to approach. 

You're taking it in a very nomadic sense but that's not what I meant but I understand why it's being interpreted that way because the wording wasn't perfect. 

I don't mean to say men not being good fathers or impregnating several women at once. 

What I mean is a man is capable of impregnating several women over his lifetime through several marriages.  Women on the other hand only have a limited capacity to bear children. She can't have too many. So it's preferable that she sticks with one man, it perfectly suits her survival agenda. 

However men cannot work on women's rules. Women want sex more intensely whereas men want sex more frequently. A man's agenda helps reproductive survival of the species because if a man were to act as moody as women when it came to sex then far fewer women would be pregnant because most women aren't in the mood for sex anyway, since their hormonal structures aren't designed that way, there is a good reason because being pregnant all the time is not a great option for a woman so they have naturally muted their sexual desires, even with birth control is not the most desired option for several women, so it makes perfect sense for a man to pursue as many women as possible and not be hung up on one woman especially if she is not desirable in terms of reproduction(that is infertile), I don't mean to disparage women who aren't fertile, but in order for proper society to exist population wise, men need to have sex with fertile women in order to have sufficient number of children and for this to occur, men can't wait around the way women do, because that wouldn't lead to anything, women hardly ever approach, this is not because women don't feel in touch with their emotions, it's because nature inhibits them from feeling this way, since there's always the fear of unwanted  pregnancy looming in the background. Yes birth control, but it's not a perfect option so most women don't want the whole hassle of constantly being on birth control just to be with a man sexually. Since this is a painful task for a woman, and it's perfectly understandable why, women drop the whole risk of dating random men and choose to wait till someone worthwhile comes along. Because sleeping with too many dudes is also biologically difficult for a woman. It involves more risks for her than the man she is sleeping with.  

But for men this is not so hard. They can sleep with multiple women, not saying that they should. But they will need to hook up with several women before they find at least one woman who wants to be with them and start a family.  

Women on the other hand don't do this. This is not their priority. Their priority is to be with the guy they are attracted to and if they can't bear children, then its their personal failure.  

However for a man there are options. If she is infertile, he can choose another fertile woman to have children with.  He doesn't have to lose his chance of passing off his genes. So in every way, it makes perfect sense for men to continue being horny because that's the only way they can ensure maximum survival of their genes. 

If they stick with one woman, and she turns out to be a failure or rejects him, then he has lost all of his chances.  He has to move on to the next immediately.  The chances for women to be rejected are far less because there is always some horny man ready to get her impregnated. However that's not the case for a man unless he is some celebrity.  Most women are going to reject him anyway if he is not attractive enough. So he has a poor chance of passing of his genes. The only way to get this done is to keep hitting on as many women as possible to get one successful hit where a woman ultimately finds him attractive and he has the chance to have children with her. In order to keep going at this rate, and not end up a Virgin, his horniness has to be up all the time, he can't be moody around sex like women do. He can't afford to do that because he ends up with nothing if he only sits around waiting  for a woman to like him. 

Women deliberately sabotage their fertility for their career or whatever. A good example is Marilyn Monroe who had multiple abortions and never had children. 

Some women take it so far that they lose their fertility altogether. Feminists have planted the idea in the heads of women that career and money are more important than motherhood and so a lot of women are completely ditching motherhood for a career. Of course they get horny and that's when they need a man only for sex, not for children, and so they take birth control or do abortions. So they need the man only for the horniness. This is not very beneficial to the whole survival agenda of the species. Because if all women thought this way, the species would stop surviving and men would turn into sex machines for women. 

Now coming to the other points. I didn't mean a nomadic society where men simply go around impregnating several women without performing father duties. What I meant is that men use their advantage of being able to impregnate several women over their lifetime which is good for the human species, because women can't achieve that since they have a very limited reproductive capacity, whereas men can be with several women over their lifetime and achieve this goal. However a woman can't do that because after having a certain number of children, she cannot afford to have more, she is already tired but the man is not. 

This does not mean that he is fathering many children without being a dad. Absolutely not. By the time his kids from the first marriage are grown up he can start having kids in the second marriage. He can be a great father to all of his children. So I'm not talking about men running around impregnating women and fatherless children. That would be tribal and nomadic and obviously unhealthy. 

Also I'm not saying that a woman doesn't have the right to choose the man. She does. Its not about imposing on her. I'm talking about how women are not very energetic in their pursuit of men, and I have stated the biological reasons above and how it doesn't really fit into her survival agenda because her agenda is not getting pregnant all the time but being pregnant with a certain man. 

Also you have the wrong idea that if a man approaches a woman, then somehow she is making a wrong choice.  That she has to go out of her way to choose a man and only then she is creating a healthy society? Well you can choose to look at it this way. She is being approached by several men. She is attracted to  the best man out of the several men, so she is making a good choice for herself and still creating a healthy society.  So in this sense, she is not settling for any random man approaching her, she is settling for the man she is attracted to out of the many men approaching her. 

There is nothing wrong in a man approaching a woman just as there is nothing wrong in a woman approaching a man.. 

But there is a glaring difference that women need to either accept or look into rather than denying, dismissing or covering up with idealistic platitudes. 

The reality is that women approach men far less, you can come up with any sort of a justification for that, like women are not in touch with their emotions or whatever,  but that doesn't change the reality that women don't approach men. They don't pursue men very strongly, not as strongly as men pursue women. The statistical difference is astronomical between men approaching women and women approaching men.. So if men decided to sit with their hands tied and act the way women do, humanity will cease to exist. Because nobody will approach.  That's what I was pointing to. Most women are mothers in this world not because they approached the father first but because the father approached them first. It's only when a man tries hard and he has to try really hard to get the attention of a woman that she finally gives him some attention and thinks of him as a potential partner. Women who approach men are a rarity.  So if men don't do the gaming and sit around, there will be fewer families and so fewer children. 

 

So men being horny dogs is actually a good thing, unless you're thinking of it in animalistic terms where he is simply impregnating without being a father or having a family and that wasn't my point. 

 

 

[Lyubov]

yes and no... a lot of guys will read this advice and think it means they don't have to make conscious choices, lead, facilitate or anything. nah... that is not what letting her pursue means. all it means is giving her a little room to chase you as well. not so much that you seem aloof and the experience is wishy washy but also don't be so tight that your frame starts to cut off part of her artwork. I actually think depending on the girl some will prefer a more dominating/pursing man than others. For newbies I think they should be practicing pursuing since they are likely already too meek and don't know how to suavely get a girl to chase them. I think 70%-30% is a decent number to shoot for where sometimes you might go 60% and other times you need to ramp it up to 100%. it's dynamic, don't overthink it, just stick your your principles and embodied positive masculine emotions. Most men today should be practicing how to pursue healthy though. 

 

EDIT: after reflecting on this for a bit, this is pretty awful advice for 90% of men, like what another poster said in here. MOST men need to be practicing how to lead and pursue especially in late stage orange / green cities in the US. you're shooting your odds in the foot if you play passive like this and hold out for the one in a thousand chance for the girl that wants a passive man. 

Edited April 20, 2021 by Lyubov

[Preety_India]

16 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

EDIT: after reflecting on this for a bit, this is pretty awful advice for 90% of men, like what another poster said in here. MOST men need to be practicing how to lead and pursue especially in late stage orange / green cities in the US. you're shooting your odds in the foot if you play passive like this and hold out for the one in a thousand chance for the girl that wants a passive man. 

Yes that's what I meant. 

Shooting straight into your foot if guys take that advice because women don't do the approaching and that's not a man's job to fix. 

 

[Lyubov]

5 hours ago, Emerald said:

I totally agree with this. I've almost always been the one that's made the first move. 

What do you mean made the first move? Like, actually did you make the first move or did you just give him to go ahead to make the move on you?

Quote

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. 

You are just coming across the 99% of guys that aren't a match for you & are not interested in. Some guys are maybe doing it more boldly than others which you are put off by more, but you are giving a green light to those you like and overlooking the rest which many of the other men you don't like likely share with the ones you do. Every man is doing it with every woman he is attracted or interested in. A man can not read a woman's mind right away and uniquely tailor their approach specifically for every woman they meet. It's a waste of time trying to even think doing that is possible. A man won't be able to really start bespoke tailoring their approach till they are well into a first date with a woman and even then it's still tricky. 

Quote

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.

Yes to a degree... I think men don't realize that a woman has actually made up her mind a bit before giving the green light for a lot of what's going on. For most men all the results they are gonna get are from women that were into them from the beginning and they were either smart enough to pick up on the signs or dumb enough to just keep doing till something stuck with the right woman. I think this is different from actually pursuing though which is essentially leading. from my experience women fall into three categories, green light, yellow light, red light. Green is they are showing signs of interest and showing they wanna be pursued by you (can be a bit coy sometimes), yellow is signs that are mixed (men should just proceed like it's green), and red light is they aren't interested and it's a no which is basically a waste of time to pursue. 

Quote

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. 

Yeah this is common for women to take longer time and I think that is fine. I don't mind waiting if I see she is a green or yellow light and is showing signs that she is interested. comes down to not being too attached and keeping the field open as a guy. don't count your chicks before they hatch. I've been hurt before thinking I had a green waiting for a girl for 2-3 months for her to turn red. don't expect a guy not to play the field in this time as well and not seem so devoted cause 3 months is a long time to wait and anything can happen. 

[intotheblack]

The way I  understood it was pursuing... not approaching.  The man can still approach and do his manly things, but the point was not forcing sex to happen..if you first approach and then the woman likes you she will start pursuing you.  It she doesn’t then don’t force it... 

 

[Lyubov]

11 minutes ago, intotheblack said:

The way I  understood it was pursuing... not approaching.  The man can still approach and do his manly things, but the point was not forcing sex to happen..if you first approach and then the woman likes you she will start pursuing you.  It she doesn’t then don’t force it... 

 

women don't pursue. they just give the green light (sometimes super bright) for a guy to. the most I've even been pursued is a girl starting a conversation with me at a bar. that is basically a super green light so I took the reigns and saddle and brought her back for some bashing season. she did not pursue or lead after the first couple minutes we met, she just gave me the brightest in your face green light for me to and I could read the subtext and I didn't mess it up before things went down (not uncommon for guys to do this). I've missed out on plenty of sex in my early 20s cause I didn't know a girl was basically holding a 20volt green flashlight in my face or I got nervous or passive after taking the reigns. green lights can sometimes be intimidating or confusing for guys if they don't know what it is or it may turn a little yellow as a test sometimes cause girls love that feeling of a man being steady like a rock like he knows what he is doing. 

Edited April 20, 2021 by Lyubov

[intotheblack]

@Lyubov 

what I’m saying is If the woman is attracted to the man, she naturally gravitates towards him and will begin pursue (follow) him 

but of course it might take approaching/dating many women until you meet one who will pursue you in return..

I’m not talking about women walking up to men and asking them for their number or sex

never heard the phrase that girls are always ‘chasing after’ guys who they like ? 

They just don’t chase any guy.. only if he is special in her eyes..  

 

 

Edited April 20, 2021 by intotheblack

[WaveInTheOcean]

16 hours ago, Roy said:

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.

QFT

In general to Lyobuv, Emerald and others (thx for participating and giving ur thoughts):

Of course the man should approach a woman he is attracted to. That's obvious, cos men get turned on easier while women's attraction takes time (and effort) to ramp up.

What I'm and Daniel is reffering to is simply that after you have approached her (let's say she doesn't reject you, which is already a good sign) and have lead the way: eg. you end up on a date at your place, ate dinner, had good talks, and are watching a movie in the sofa..., then of course yes, you have to initiate with touch. And then see how she reacts to you touching her (can be as simple as crossing fingers and letting your fingers tease hers/her thumb, like playing around, being slightly dominating. If she's accepting playful touch, she's 99% ready for a kiss. So when the movie ends (it's a good movie and you want to finish it!) you naturally go for the kiss. Now, while kissing it should be very easy for you to feel whether or whether not she's in for more (sex). Is she moaning while kissing, like really enjoying it, letting you touch her all over the body and even touching you back? Well, then she has basically pursued you for sex and you go ahead.

You approached, lead the way, initiated, but SHE gave the final "let's have sex NOW!" signal TO YOU, by virtue of her not hiding that she's enjoying the kissing/making out and obviously signaling to you she's ready for more.

That's what Daniel means by letting "her pursue."

If you don't let her pursue but instead do it yourself, that would be like kissing her before touching her, or kissing her even if she didn't seem to enjoy getting touched.

Or worse: you kissed her/are kissing her, but she is giving you zero signals she's enjoying it -- perhaps even the opposite! -- but you don't give a damn, and start taking off her clothes...: don't do that! That's basically the advice given here, and it should really apply to all stages of development.

Don't be a fucking selfish dick, in other words:-) That's the lesson.

It's a very big thing - often - for a woman to have sex with a new guy and let him penetrate her. Emotionally, physically. On all levels. (Makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, she could get pregnant!). Therefore it's vital -- if you care about her -- that she give you the full go-to signal before you aggressively pursue sex with her (taking of her panties, touching her down there etc.) It doesn't have to be verbally of course, -- my original post was slightly misleading.

Edited April 21, 2021 by WaveInTheOcean

[Chew211]

17 minutes ago, WaveInTheOcean said:

QFT

In general to Lyobuv, Emerald and others (thx for participating and giving ur thoughts):

Of course the man should approach a woman he is attracted to. That's obvious, cos men get turned on easier while women's attraction takes time (and effort) to ramp up.

What I'm and Daniel is reffering to is simply that after you have approached her (let's say she doesn't reject you, which is already a good sign) and have lead the way: eg. you end up on a date at your place, ate dinner, had good talks, and are watching a movie in the sofa..., then of course yes, you have to initiate with touch. And then see how she reacts to you touching her (can be as simple as crossing fingers and letting your fingers tease hers/her thumb, like playing around, being slightly dominating. If she's accepting playful touch, she's 99% ready for a kiss. So when the movie ends (it's a good movie and you want to finish it!) you naturally go for the kiss. Now, while kissing it should be very easy for you to feel whether or whether not she's in for more (sex). Is she moaning while kissing, like really enjoying it, letting you touch her all over the body and even touching you back? Well, then she has basically pursued you for sex and you go ahead.

You approached, lead the way, initiated, but SHE gave the final "let's have sex NOW!" signal TO YOU, by virtue of her not hiding that she's enjoying the kissing/making out and obviously signaling to you she's ready for more.

That's what Daniel means by letting "her pursue."

If you don't let her pursue but instead do it yourself, that would be like kissing her before touching her, or kissing her even if she didn't seem to enjoy getting touched.

Or worse: you kissed her/are kissing her, but she is giving you zero signals she's enjoying it -- perhaps even the opposite! -- but you don't give a damn, and start taking off her clothes...: don't do that! That's basically the advice given here, and it should really apply to all stages of development.

Don't be a fucking selfish dick, in other words:-) That's the lesson.

It's a very big thing - often - for a woman to have sex with a new guy and let him penetrate her. Emotionally, physically. On all levels. (Makes sense from an evolutionary perspective, she could get pregnant!). Therefore it's vital -- if you care about her -- that she give you the full go-to signal before you aggressively pursue sex with her (taking of her panties, touching her down there etc.) It doesn't have to be verbally of course, -- my original post was slightly misleading.

Yo... what you described as "her pursuing" is the normal courtship procedure. 

What you described as not getting the signal is bordering on rape. 

[WaveInTheOcean]

32 minutes ago, Chew211 said:

Yo... what you described as "her pursuing" is the normal courtship procedure. 

What you described as not getting the signal is bordering on rape. 

Exactly

[Preety_India]

16 minutes ago, WaveInTheOcean said:

Exactly

I think the post isn't worded properly when you use the word pursue. It should simply be out sex and consent and when not to push. 

The word pursue is misleading 

 

[Chew211]

2 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

The word pursue is misleading 

Yes.

And also the content is irrelevant to the guys here, because either they follow that normal courtship procedure or don't get laid to begin with. 

No one here forces sex.

And if they did, they wouldn't care to change their ways because of this post. 

I know there's some cringe here, but we all ain't THAT bad.

[intotheblack]

What i don’t understand is, isn’t it better that the woman is pursuing the man... doesn’t that mean he is leading... if she is following/going after/chasing? 
but I guess this doesn’t count for pickup, only a relationship? 
If a woman wants a man to be her boyfriend/husband she will pursue him? 

[Preety_India]

6 minutes ago, Chew211 said:

Yes.

And also the content is irrelevant to the guys here, because either they follow that normal courtship procedure or don't get laid to begin with. 

No one here forces sex.

And if they did, they wouldn't care to change their ways because of this post. 

I know there's some cringe here, but we all ain't THAT bad.

I really don't think that any guy forces for sex.  Because deep down he is equally scared that he might lose the girl he met. 

 

[WaveInTheOcean]

18 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

The word pursue is misleading 

 

1 hour ago, Chew211 said:

 

Perhaps ?

[universe]

On 20.4.2021 at 9:29 AM, WaveInTheOcean said:

Thoughts about Schmachtenbergers tips?

I agree with many of his points, very obvious stuff (safe sex, trust etc.).

They main point about reducing suffering is abit short-sighted. 

If you truly care about reducing suffering you have to go deep into Self-Love, Acceptance and Truth.

Self-Love: Learn to love yourself no matter the sex you have or don't have. Love yourself for having sex with strangers or for failing at sex despite the fact that society wants to shame you for it. Love everyone who desires to make you feel ashamed.

Acceptance: Accept that you sometimes make bad decisions. Fully feel all your emotions and don't resist them, shame, lust, turn on, desire, feeling good, feeling bad. Accept how personal they feel. Accept yourself for who you are with all your flaws and strengths.

Truth: There are no bad decisions. Everything is 100% perfect the way it is. You are the person that likes to have sex and you are the person who doesn't like to have sex. You are your partner. You are everything. There is no seperation and you are not fragmented, neither in your psyche nor in your physical form. You are whole. You are Love.

 

This is something people have to do on their own.

Triggers are not to be avoided but to be transcendet and grown out of. Going around treating everyone with velvet gloves or like children will hurt them more than anything in the long run.

I trust strong and powerful woman to make their own decisions for them and not relying on me to do it. Doing this 3d chess game in my head where I manouver her experience as smooth as possile to avoid any ego backlash sounds exhausting.

[Leo Gura]

On 4/20/2021 at 0:29 AM, WaveInTheOcean said:

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.

Obviously yes. Nothing I say goes against that.

The point is to make yourself so attractive that she is begging to have sex with you.

BUT, this does not mean you don't lead her proactively into it. Leading is still very important.

Quote

If you're the slightest in doubt or if she hesitates or if you had to persuade her... call it off, he says.

You're not going to logically persuade a girl to have sex with you anyways.

But sometimes she can be hesitant. You gotta make her comfortable.

Lead, lead, lead. Then if she says No, you of course back off.

Most weak guys give up way too soon. So for such guys it is good advice to burn every set to the ground. Make her tell you NO! Push it to see what you can get away with. This does not mean forcing yourself on her, but be persistent. This is not really necessary in normal dating situations, but if you are hitting the bars and clubs and doing cold approach and SNLs, then you gotta get good at dealing with all the BS obstacles and logistics. If you are doing casual dating from your social circle then such things are not necessary. But in a place like Vegas you gotta burn every set to the ground and push the envelope.