Struggling with Blackpill

[Harlen Kelly]

@Emerald Why did you assume it was referring to you? Do you consider yourself an inhabitant of Fantasyland?

Nothing wrong with living on a Fantasy by the way. 

 

[somegirl]

So if a woman says no to sex after one month of knowing each other, it's okay for a guy to ditch her for expressing her needs and boundaries? Okay, let it be. I would rather be ditched than do something I'm not comfortable with. 

As far as I know, it is even desirable that women doesn't give in to sex too early for the risk of being seen as "too easy" or whatever. 

 

[Harlen Kelly]

19 minutes ago, somegirl said:

So if a woman says no to sex after one month of knowing each other, it's okay for a guy to ditch her for expressing her needs and boundaries? Okay, let it be. I would rather be ditched than do something I'm not comfortable with. 

It's actually very simple to understand, men (and women) who have a high level of attractiveness in the eyes of the opposite sex tend to leverage their attractiveness. 

How would that behavioral  pattern translate to a guy? A guy with a lot of options with women does not have to wait for sex because he has women around him that would be down to have sex with him immediately. It's a fairly simple concept to grasp.

The higher the level of attractiveness and sex appeal of the guy, the more options he will have.

 

Edited July 22, 2021 by Harlen Kelly

[gettoefl]

pick up is kicking the tires, testing the bed springs ... needs to be done sooner rather than later

find the high value person according to the abc's then take them for a test ride to make sure you fit together well

works for everyone, win win

he needs the looks, she needs to make sure he has the net worth to match her looks, then they need some mutual chemistry gotten by charm

easy peasy

Edited July 22, 2021 by gettoefl

[Emerald]

5 minutes ago, somegirl said:

So if a woman says no to sex after one month of knowing each other, it's okay for a guy to ditch her for expressing her needs and boundaries? Okay, let it be. I would rather be ditched than do something I'm not comfortable with. 

As far as I know, it is even desirable that women doesn't give in to sex too early for the risk of being seen as "too easy" or whatever. 

 

Yeah, that's another component of that.

If a man only goes for women who say yes to sex right away, then that can be a sign of low standards and low self-esteem for the woman. 

Women who know their worth and have an abundance mindset, have no need to give into sex with a man who's rushing her if she's not there yet.

She will take her time until her sexual desire for the man feels ripe enough to be satisfying to her on all levels... which takes a few months of getting to know a guy for that to happen.

That's why I recommend the social circle method. If you have that bond first, you won't have to wait as long to reach the boiling point. 

It's also a red flag if a guy ditches out because he wasn't patient enough for me to feel ripe for sex with him. It's also a red flag if a guy requires sex before commitment. 

I'm not a big one for telling women they should wait until commitment for sex. I would say to avoid being arbitrary about sex, because you want the sex to happen when it feels right to you. It should always be intuitively and emotionally catalyzed, otherwise it's just unnatural. 

But it's much better from the woman's POV, to require commitment from a man before the relationship turns sexual. 

[somegirl]

45 minutes ago, Harlen Kelly said:

How would that behavioral  pattern translate to a guy? A guy with a lot of options with women does not have to wait for sex because he has women around him that would be down to have sex with him immediately. It's a fairly simple concept to grasp.

Sure, but you have to think what kind of girls would be willing to have sex that soon? Generally girls who look for fun.

Normally, it's necessary for a girl (who looks for meaningful relationship) to get to know a guy for a while, take time to analyze him to see if he's a serial killer or whatnot and if it's even safe to continue anything else. Then next step happens.

Safety is very important for a women.

 

 

Edited July 22, 2021 by somegirl

[Hulia]

1 hour ago, Harlen Kelly said:

Indeed. The Pragmatists vs the inhabitants of Fantasyland.

haha.. the distinction is clear:

Pragmatists are all men of this forum

inhabitants of Fantasyland are all women of this forum

Because the men will rather listen to another men, what attracts women than to the women themselves. And who of us is from fantasyland?

[Leo Gura]

4 hours ago, Etherial Cat said:

Value is extremely subjective though. Not everyone value the same things.

There are very clear common factors of value for men and women. It's not hard to figure them out.

You are not going to value a homeless hunchback as much as a 6ft tall NFL player with a $10 million home.

You can pretend like your values are all unique and special as a snowflake, but it's super easy to predict what the majority of women value in a guy. You ladies are as predictable as robots in most cases. And that is because a woman's survival needs are pretty consistent for all women.

Same is true of men.

[Hulia]

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

You are not going to value a homeless hunchback as much as a 6ft tall NFL player with a $10 million home.

I can remember that @Preety_India fell in love with a homeless guy, well he was not a hunchback but a charming pragmatic Italian, but still! 

Me too, I tried to love rich guys more (since it makes more sense), but I failed.

It´s not that simple.

[Leo Gura]

3 minutes ago, Hulia said:

...a charming...

Hello!

There's your value.

A charming homeless guy will get more pussy than a nerd doctor.

Because women value emotional stimulation over everything else.

[Emerald]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Hello!

There's your value.

A charming homeless guy will get more pussy than a nerd doctor.

Because all women value is emotional stimulation.

Women do value emotional stimulation on the baseline reptilian brain level.

This is why I recommend being disciplined and unreceptive to a man who doesn't meet your standards of investment. And this isn't hard usually. Just show disinterest and he's usually gone in 30 seconds or less. 

If you're not discerning about who you give your time and energy to, you'll end up with some guy who knows the tricks enough to push the buttons of the initial attraction phase... but is a bad longterm investment in terms of giving you the more satiating loving emotions that can develop in a relationship. 

[Hulia]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Because women value emotional stimulation over everything else.

Bingo! This is what we are telling you, guys, the whole time. We need emotional connection. 

And your PU tactics are as anti-emotional as fuck. They are rational, they aim directly into pussies, avoiding our emotions. And then you wonder, why they dont work. If you ask me 1 success out of 20, it´s a miserable rate, showing that they don´t work either. 

[Etherial Cat]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

There are very clear common factors of value for men and women. It's not hard to figure them out.

You are not going to value a homeless hunchback as much as a 6ft tall NFL player with a $10 million home.

You can pretend like your values are all unique and special as a snowflake, but it's super easy to predict what the majority of women value in a guy. You ladies are as predictable as robots in most cases. And that is because a woman's survival needs are pretty consistent for all women.

Same is true of men.

A 6th tall player with a 10 million home can still be of low relationship material.

Successful athletes like Tristan Thompson, or O.J Simpson are great illustration for that. It doesn't take much to see how these were premium quality mate for their female partners... Absolute trash!

Anyway, I feel like you're missing the point here Leo. Of course, a wealthy, physically attractive man is much more appealing than its opposite. But it is not the sole criteria for value. These factors are great but not enough to guarentee a successful relationship. And the missing elements are what I am mostly interested in.

 

[Leo Gura]

27 minutes ago, Emerald said:

Women do value emotional stimulation on the baseline reptilian brain level.

This is why I recommend being disciplined and unreceptive to a man who doesn't meet your standards of investment. And this isn't hard usually. Just show disinterest and he's usually gone in 30 seconds or less. 

If you're not discerning about who you give your time and energy to, you'll end up with some guy who knows the tricks enough to push the buttons of the initial attraction phase... but is a bad longterm investment in terms of giving you the more satiating loving emotions that can develop in a relationship. 

Of course you should screen guys so they aren't just charming scrubs.

25 minutes ago, Hulia said:

Bingo! This is what we are telling you, guys, the whole time. We need emotional connection. 

You're not telling me anything new.

And guys need a blowjob. So what? The world doesn't revolve around your needs.

How would you feel if I kept telling you I need a blowjob? You'd rightly call me selfish.

Quote

And your PU tactics are as anti-emotional as fuck. They are rational, they aim directly into pussies, avoiding our emotions. And then you wonder, why they dont work.

They work more than you dare admit.

It's not about tactics, it's about becoming an genuinely more attractive, higher value guy.

You keep framing this as fakery, but I'm talking about honest signals, not fakery. Transforming oneself into a high value man.

20 minutes ago, Etherial Cat said:

A 6th tall player with a 10 million home can still be of low relationship material.

Of course.

But all else being equal, you will go for the juiciest looking peace of meat.

You absolutely will judge a book by its cover.

A homeless hunchback can also be low relationship material, and you know that. You are not going to give a homeless hunchback the benefit of the doubt. Because you aren't stupid.

[gettoefl]

11 minutes ago, Hulia said:

Bingo! This is what we are telling you, guys, the whole time. We need emotional connection. 

And your PU tactics are as anti-emotional as fuck. They are rational, they aim directly into pussies, avoiding our emotions. And then you wonder, why they dont work. If you ask me 1 success out of 20, it´s a miserable rate, showing that they don´t work either. 

problem boils down to this kind of female does not want to give up the goods too fast

think of how it looks in other people's eyes! think how guilty i am going to feel for jumping right into bed!

my goal is to weed out low consciousness females finding her sense of worth in what other people think of her

if the right person is there you have one chance to make it work

if not, it was nice meeting you

[Peter Miklis]

13 minutes ago, Hulia said:

If you ask me 1 success out of 20, it´s a miserable rate, showing that they don´t work either. 

And what success rate do you expect, fucking 20 out of 20??

Of course being a fuck boy has low general success rate, since all you want is get laid. But then, wanting relationships has also low "success rate", since you're not going for the volume, but for quality. So what's the point in even talking about success rate? Either way, we're not going to fuck hundreds of women, so who cares. Lol

[Harlen Kelly]

 

20 minutes ago, Hulia said:

And your PU tactics are as anti-emotional as fuck. They are rational, they aim directly into pussies, avoiding our emotions. And then you wonder, why they dont work. If you ask me 1 success out of 20, it´s a miserable rate, showing that they don´t work either. 

Lol. Think of the last time you fell crazy in love with a guy, think how easily he was able to captivate your emotions and satisfy you in the bed and the emotional rollercoaster you felt when you were with him. 

Have anybody in mind? well, that guy understood and embodied the main principles of ''PU tactics'' as you call them.

''How would you feel if I kept telling you I need a blowjob? You'd rightly call me selfish.''

This is a very important point for the inhabitants of Fantasyland.

Edited July 22, 2021 by Harlen Kelly

[gettoefl]

2 minutes ago, Harlen Kelly said:

 

Lol. Think of the last time you fell crazy in love with a guy, think how easily he was able to captivate your emotions and satisfy you in the bed and the emotional rollercoaster you felt when you were with him. 

Have anybody in mind? well, that guy understood and embodied the main principles of ''PU tactics'' as you call them. 

that guy spent a year wooing her though

she needs time to feel "respected" and "comfortable"

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, gettoefl said:

that guy spent a year wooing her though

Pathetic

If a guy needs a year to woo a girl he's less attractive then a homeless hunchback.

1-2 weeks of wooing max, and that's assuming a bunch of logistical obstacles.

[Hulia]

4 minutes ago, Harlen Kelly said:

 

Lol. Think of the last time you fell crazy in love with a guy, think how easily he was able to captivate your emotions and satisfy you in the bed and the emotional rollercoaster you felt when you were with him. 

Have anybody in mind? well, that guy understood and embodied the main principles of ''PU tactics'' as you call them. 

Are you kidding? I don´t fall in love because of "main principles of ''PU tactics''". Seriously? But it turns me on, yes.. when applied by someone I love.