05 Mar No Such Thing As Casual Sex?
I had to beat up a little on my traditional conservative bothers. Today, I’m going to have to beat up a little on my left-wing friends. Good times.
Reader BB had this to say:
While I read pretty much everything you write, the one issue that seems central, and I believe you actually stated this somewhere, to your “system” is that a man must get used to, indeed embrace, the idea of casual sex… that is, sex just for the sake of sex.
-By Caleb Jones
Emotionally I have a big issue w this.
Finally someone articulated my view somewhat in today’s NY Times:
The basic idea is that there is no such thing as “casual” touch (let alone casual sex). And that consent from a woman involves way more than her just saying yes… it requires the man to assess whether this particular interaction would be good for her, especially if she shows signs of reluctance or discomfort.
I’m curious if you really totally reject this view.
Before I address his assertion, I should first address a few points and quotes from the article he linked to. First, it cites a study done back in the 1940’s, one I’m already quite familiar with (since it was one of my mentors, Brian Tracy, who made me aware of it about 25 years ago). Babies in an orphanage were barely touched, and they actually stopped the experiment because so many of the babies actually died. Babies, and therefore humans, clearly need to be touched.
It then goes on to say that sexual abuse is very bad and fucks you up for life. Uh, duh.
It summarizes thusly:
Over the course of each year, people have many kinds of interactions and experience many kinds of mistreatment. But there is something unique about positive or negative touch. Emotional touch alters the heart and soul in ways that are mostly unconscious. It can take a lifetime of analysis to get even a glimpse of understanding.
For this reason, cultures all around the world have treated emotional touching as something apart. The Greeks labeled the drive to touch with the word “eros,” and they meant something vaster and deeper than just sexual pleasure. “Animals have sex and human beings have eros, and no accurate science is possible without making this distinction,” Allan Bloom observed.
Touch is indeed very powerful. I agree completely. The science is very clear on this.
But then it keeps going, and starts going off the rails, discarding hard science for false Societal Programming.
The Abrahamic religions also treat sex as something sacred and beautiful when enveloped in loving and covenantal protections, and as something disordered and potentially peace-destroying when not.
Uh oh. Here we go.
Over the past 100 years or so, advanced thinkers across the West have worked to take the shame out of sex, surely a good thing. But they’ve also disenchanted it. As Elizabeth Bruenig wrote in The Washington Post this week, “One of the principal outcomes of the sexual revolution was to establish that sex is just like any other social interaction — nothing taboo or sacred about it.” Sex is seen as a shallow physical and social thing, not a heart and soul altering thing.
Okay, then here’s the question: If sex is not a purely physical thing, then what, specifically, is it?
If your contention is that sex is something more than physical (or casually social, or whatever), then you need to define exactly what it is. The article never does this. It’s the same with other people who make this point, that sex or physical touch is this “heart or soul altering thing” and “not just physical.” They’re not clear about their argument at all.
I’ve had this discussion many times with people like this. It always, and I mean always, goes something like this:
Person: Sex is NOT just a physical act! It’s so much more than that!
Me: What is it then?
Person: It’s a deeply spiritual act; it’s about connection and emotions and feelings and humanity (or whatever). We’re too casual about it these days! It’s not healthy!
Me: Do you want to go back to the right-wing Christian 1950’s and before then? Where sex was treated as an essentially religious act, and you weren’t allowed to have any sex, with anyone, at any time, except with the person you legally married?
Person: OMG! No, no no! That was terrible! We can’t go back to that! That was oppressive and inhuman and against women and blah blah blah!
Me: Okay, so… you don’t want the 1950’s and you don’t want today where adults can have sex whenever they choose and do so. What specifically do you want then? What’s your answer?
Person: Well, I don’t know, I just don’t like the fact that…
And then they go right back to saying how bad it is we’re having too much sex. Or something. In other words, they know what they emotionally don’t like, but they can’t tell you want they want, or a better system. Which, of course, is bullshit.
As I’ve said to people who attack nonmonogamous relationships, if you don’t like my system, you need to tell me your system. If you can’t articulate a specific alternate system that you’re for, then with all due respect, you need to fuck off. Pointing at something and saying “I don’t like this” is not enough. You need to do what I have done, and instead say, “I don’t like this for reasons X and Y. Instead, here is my detailed, step-by-step solution that is less bad.”
That’s the problem with people who have this view that sex is spiritual or emotional or whatever. They can tell you what they don’t like, but they have no idea what they would like to see instead. This is because they’re not thinking rationally, just emotionally.
The author of the article essentially wraps it up by stating that men need to read women’s minds.
Two writers I greatly admire criticized the woman in the Ansari episode for not exercising more agency. If she was uncomfortable, she could have put on her clothes and hopped in a taxi.
But that’s not how agency works. It’s not a card you pull out of your pocket and lay on the table. Agency is learned, not bred. And one of the things that undermines agency most powerfully is past sexual harm.
The abuse of intimacy erodes all the building blocks of agency: self-worth, resiliency and self-efficacy (the belief that you can control a situation). It is precisely someone who lives within a culture of supposedly zipless encounters who is most likely to be unable to take action when she feels uncomfortable. It’s the partner’s responsibility to be sensitive to this possibility.
I’m not going to comment on that since I already did so here. My point is to show the progression this person makes. He starts out with logic, facts, and science (good), then proceeds to false Societal Programming (bad), then ends up completely insane (very bad). This is the typical progression people follow when they discuss sex. Worse, this applies both to the SJW feminist left and the traditional conservatives. They usually start out great, defining actual, real-world problems using science and facts, but, the more they keep talking (or the more they are challenged by people like me), the more crazy and irrational they become.
Be aware of this. It’s a very, very common pattern with sexual discourse in our society.
Now I will address BB’s original statements:
The basic idea is that there is no such thing as “casual” touch (let alone casual sex).
This is obviously false. Touch is important and powerful, but that doesn’t mean 100% of all touching isn’t casual. That’s black-and-white thinking.
When you meet a new man in a business environment for the first time, and you give him a good, strong handshake and look him in the eye, do you want to have sex with him? Do you want to make an emotional connection with him? Do you want him as a regular presence in your life
Of course not. Just because you’re shaking his hand doesn’t mean shit. Hell, you could even hate the guy. Yet, shaking hands is physical action and a powerful form of touch.
So yes, touch can indeed have zero meaning.
There are also degrees of meaning. If I see an uncle I haven’t seen in 10 years and I hug him, that means one thing. When Pink Firefly comes home from work and I hug her, that means something completely different, so different, in fact, that it’s not even comparable. Let me say that again because it’s important: it’s not even comparable. The two events of hugging my uncle and hugging my OLTR wife are completely different in literally every way, even though they both involve an identical form of touching called a physical embrace.
Let’s move this to sex. If I have sex with Pink Firefly, then a week later I have sex with one of my long-term FB’s, then two weeks after that have sex with a brand new FB for the very first time, all three of these events involve sex, but the sex in these three events are so different to me emotionally, spiritually, and yes, sometimes even physically, that you can’t even compare them.
I’m serious. You can’t. When I have sex with Pink Firefly, I often (not always, but often) experience it on a heightened, spiritual level. It’s so important to me that it’s beyond wonderful, beyond emotional. There are biological, physical differences as well. I actually get hard faster and stronger with Pink Firefly than I do with my FB’s. This started happening about a year and a half ago. It was very surprising.
When I have sex with one of my more distant FB’s, it’s often like going to the bathroom. It’s purely physical, wham-bam, towel off, go back to work, and I literally don’t give it another thought, ever. I hate to be crude, but that’s my point… anyone saying “all sex is the same” or “there is no such thing as casual sex” is stating something that is literally and provably false.
I’m not saying that casual sex has zero power. It can. I actually agree with the more right-wing manosphere guys who say that a woman who has had one night stands (or similar) with over 200 men (or whatever) may indeed manifest problems later in life because of it. Not always, and not with all women, but I agree that happens because I’ve seen it happen. I’ve also seen women (and some men) seek out sex as a refuge from major life problems, or as a sick form of validation, rather than as a thoroughly enjoyable physical experience. But none of this changes a word I’m saying. Just because sex can be abused doesn’t mean all sex is the same, or that there is no such thing as casual sex and meaningful, connected sex. Clearly there is, and I’m one of the best men to describe the difference, since I regularly engage in both types. (And they’re both wonderful; they just serve two different needs.)
And that consent from a woman involves way more than her just saying yes
I disagree completely and utterly. If she says yes, and she’s not drunk, and she’s a legal adult, and she’s not mentally retarded, she’s given consent. Otherwise, you are literally saying that she is a child, or retarded.
The argument of, “well yeah, she’s a functional adult and gave consent, but she was sexually abused eight years ago and hasn’t overcome it yet, so it’s really not consent,” is just so much bullshit. Again, she’s an adult, or she’s not. Pick one, and stick with it.
Trying to organize social sexual behavior around “women are adults sometimes but not others” is never going to work.
…it requires the man to assess whether this particular interaction would be good for her, especially if she shows signs of reluctance or discomfort.
I agree, but as most women-experienced men know, just because a woman shows a little reluctance or discomfort does not mean she doesn’t want to have sex with you. Proof: I have had sex with women who showed reluctance or discomfort the first time they had sex with me, and these women went on to have very happy, long-term sexual (and in some cases, romantic) relationships with me that lasted many years. One of the biggest examples was my last serious relationship before Pink Firefly, HBM. HBM was very scared at the prospect of having sex with me the first time, but we did it, and when it was over, she was very happy with me, and went on to have the longest consistent nonmonogamous relationship of my life to date: 5.5 years. As a matter of fact, the second time we had sex, she orgasmed for the first time in her life (and proceeded to orgasm with me hundreds of times after that).
How can anyone say that reluctance or discomfort on the part of a woman during first time sexual activity always means the man shouldn’t attempt sex? Millions of women would disagree.
Yes, sometimes you shouldn’t have sex if you encounter reluctance. That’s why, as I described in detail here, I use the rule of two or three. Try to sexually escalate, gently, two or three times. If after the third time, she’s still refusing sex, great. Quickly, but politely wrap up the date, get the hell out of there, and go spend some time with a woman who wants to have sex with you. It’s not that complicated. I’ve slept with scores of women and have had hundreds of dates, and I’ve literally never had a problem with any of this.
The concept of “all sex/touch is the same” and “there is no such thing as casual touch/sex” is an extreme form of black-and-white thinking, often embraced by both far right-wing men and far left-wing women (which says something about the right and the left).
The world is a little more nuanced than that.
If you find the content on this blog helpful, you should join the Alpha 2.0 Community where there’s even more. We have over 470 members who help each other with their financial and woman lives and building an Alpha Male 2.0 lifestyle. I also have community-only podcasts there that aren’t available anywhere else. It’s free to join. Just click here.
Want over 35 hours of how-to podcasts on how to improve your woman life and financial life? Want to be able to coach with me twice a month? Want access to hours of technique-based video and audio? The SMIC Program is a monthly podcast and coaching program where you get access to massive amounts of exclusive, members-only Alpha 2.0 content as soon as you sign up, and you can cancel whenever you want. Click here for the details.
FD
Posted at 05:25 am, 5th March 2018What kind of problems?
CSR
Posted at 05:54 am, 5th March 2018Yep, that’s true and very easy to understand… if you are a man. In fact if you are a man and have issues with the concept of totally casual sex, either you have very low T/sex drive or you have a gigantic religious background.
But. If you are a woman, the concept of true, 100% casual sex is usually very difficult to understand. Of course they do it and they try to convince themselves and the rest that it was purely casual, but it’s almost never like that. With a woman, there’s almost always more feelings involved at least to some degree. Sex is final for a guy, but transactional for women. There has to be “something else”, whatever it is, to justify it.
Of course it “does”. We live in a feminine-primary society that takes the responsibility away from women. Men (and of course women) are happily accepting this every single day because you know, women are little angels.
What they “forget” to mention is the subpar man shouldn’t attempt sex. We live, again, in a feminine-primary social order so they try to trick betas to filter themselves out of the sexual market place. If you’re alpha then of course you can attempt and get over her ASD. It’s what she really wanted in the first place. In fact we could change ASD to ABD, Anti Beta Defense.
It’s always the same: hipergamy.
POB
Posted at 08:51 am, 5th March 2018BD, great post!
It’s very strange that even guys who read your stuff for a while still cannot see things for what they are. Also what you said is true…it’s very different to say “I don’t like it” and “I don’t like it, but here is my solution“. The first is just emotional response; the latter implies rational thinking.
Great break down!
Enter chick logic. Both of you know she had sex with you because she was horny and you played your cards right. On the other hand nobody else can, because she’s not a slut.
Then starts the process of backwards rationalization: she creates an imaginary reason to have at least some feelings towards you – even when there’s none, just plain attraction – and boom, sex is now allowed again. This is why it’s so powerful to fuck a new girl two times in a short period of time to achieve lock-in. It creates empathy and the feeling that it’s ok to sleep with you even when there’s no serious relationship going on yet.
What good players do is very simple to understand (but hard to learn for most): lead the interaction from the get go into her believing that that “something else” is already there.
hilsey
Posted at 09:08 am, 5th March 2018Why is “just physical” viewed as negative when we obviously enjoy many other activities for its purely physical aspects? Massages are great. Eating good food is great. A bath is swell. A light jog, good. All mainly physical things viewed as good without the need to imbue some higher plane of experience to it.
There are degrees even to those things. Some see eating as good but mundane. Others see eating as a highly moving experience. And in the same person.. eating a banana is one thing while eating a childhood favorite brings feelings different from eating a chef-made 5 course meal.
Purely physical things are enjoyed in degrees all the time. But sex and logic rarely coexists in our society.
CTV
Posted at 09:39 am, 5th March 2018I look forward to these posts all week LOL
It’s funnier than hell when the Macho Manly Trad Cons and Right Wingers who hate SJW’s end up coming full circle and sounding like the Feminists.
johhnybegood
Posted at 09:56 am, 5th March 2018Clearly casual sex exists. See Tinder. (although there are boyfriend hunters on there for sure).
You can argue that being casual about sex, dating multiple people, etc … opens up the door for a lot more drama and conflict than a “wait til marriage” kinda thing.
On the the other hand, the one person-wait X days-until sex method — although it simplifies things a great deal in terms of jealousy and guarding feelings and defining the relationship — probably comes with its own drama as well.
Human relationships — hell life in general — is messy. You could wake up with cancer or have a hurricane bear down on you out of thin air.
File this complaint (the cons of casual sex) under “complaining about unchangeable reality” — there is going to be elements of hurt feelings in any kind of relationship set up or life in general, even though Blackdragon has tried to perfect a system with the most minimal blow back. We have multitudes of evolutionary impulses and often competing desires/ strategies with ourselves and other humans. We want to eat cheeseburgers, yet don’t want to feel and look like shit. We want to drop loads in women, yet often not get emotionally involved or financially invested. Life is messy. Eh. To be honest, I’ve definitely had women express the “just want a casual fuck” thing with me as well — same story. They wanted a night of pleasure without a month’s worth of baggage and dates and shit and backrubs and commitment. You can say sex might affect a woman more than a man (maybe) but there are definitely casual sex seeking women out there. And they are doing it in private, not trying to impress someone or follow the imperatives of Cosmo magazine.
joelsuf
Posted at 10:13 am, 5th March 2018100% correct. It just seems that because of the many misunderstandings that are encountered in the realm of sex (because we see it as an emotional need and not a physical one) that trad-cons want men and only men to be the projectors of sex and feminists want women and only women to be the projectors of sex.
The reason that even exists is because we see sex as emotional satisfaction. That’s the reason sexual violence exists as well. It has very little to do with physical satisfaction.
Call me crazy, but I just do not see having sex with a chick who is passed out or a chick who is resisting like crazy physically pleasurable. I don’t see chicks who sit on her passed out husband’s dick hoping he puts a kid in her so she can divorce him and get a paycheck for at least 15 years in the form of child support physically pleasurable for them at all. But certain assholes would definitely find these things emotionally pleasurable, which probably also gives them physical pleasure because of pent up emotions that needed to be acted out.
“Rape culture” exists because we see sex as a means to satisfy emotional needs over a means to satisfy physical desires. Only needy people who rely on the opposite sex for happiness commit sexual violence. And since being needy is a major part of our culture…
Take the emotional needs out of pursuing sex (for men, the need to impress other men by bragging about your “laycount” and for women, to make sure a man is “loyal”), and most sexual violence will go away.
This is why I argue that sex should *only* be casual. If its meaningful, then not only have you placed pressure on your partner to make you feel better but you have also decided that your happiness is in their hands. Not good. Catching ANY feelings = One itis.
That’s a good thing. In fact, a very good thing. Its passive eugenics, and I applaud women’s movements for finally saying enough is enough to creepy omegas, needy betas, and controlling alpha 1s. However, the respect ends there because now THEY want to be the main pursuers and want to pressure men by catching feelings for them. Which does nothing but swap the genders with the problem still existing that we use sex as a weapon. I’ve had this conversation with a lot of feminist chicks who I have had sex with. Nearly all of them agree.
Even more accurate, Anti *Boy* Defense. Omegas, Betas, and Alpha 1s are boys, and too needy to deserve sex from chicks who they seek to replace their mommies. Therefore, they should be prevented from having it, or they should have to wait for a chick to come around and approach them the same way guys approach chicks. I for one wouldn’t mind this at all; the less success omegas, betas, and alpha 1s have, the more success alpha 2s like myself and others will have. Again, passive eugenics. Should have started a long time ago.
If women’s movements shaming needy men is wrong, then I do not want to be right.
Its actually quite easy for them to understand, its just that many women know that they can hold sex like a golden carrot above a man’s head and about 85% of all men will do backflips for it. A lot of women I’ve been with enjoy casual sex, but they will only have said casual sex with a man who knows that there is someone better than her. And these are 33+s, a group of chicks who according to BD are the most opposed to casual sex.
Women are just taking advantage of a system. Its men who need to change and become less needy. But that will never happen.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 10:19 am, 5th March 2018This part of BB’s statement offends me the most:
In other words, save her from herself. Assess whether or not her decision, which she made voluntarily, is good for her or not. And if it’s not, go against her wishes “for her own good!”
Translation: Treat her like a child.
Okay, then she should have no right to vote. No right to own property. No right to sign a binding legal contract. No right to work. No right to leave the house without the man’s permission. No right to an abortion, or any other medical or dental procedure without my consent, etc…
Hey BB, are you serious bro?
Well, if she shows those signs, I will kick her out of my house, because I’m not turned on by unenthusiastic sex, however, if some men want to fuck her, despite her showing signs of reluctance or discomfort, good for them. She’s being taught a lesson in free will – if you don’t stand up for yourself, you deserve this. It’s called justice! Now grow up!
Not only do I totally reject this view, but I am viscerally and profoundly sickened by this view!
This “view” is all about women going “wah, waaaaah, waaaaaaaaaaa, I’m a child……waaaaah……make the decision for me……..waaaaaaah.”
By encouraging more women to be like this, you’re encouraging me to become a misogynist. Misogyny is the only rational response to women behaving like this! Fortunately, many don’t.
But here’s the part of the article that really made me vomit:
HAHAHA!!! No! I will not treat you like a precious snowflake, my dear! I will force you to be an adult and I will cut the throat of your female narcissism and “magic pussy syndrome” until, after many, many crying sessions, you realize what us men had to realize at the age of six – no one will worship you; this life will destroy you if you continue seeing yourself as a self-entitled princess.
In the end, my “precious little snowflake with an infinite soul,” you’re not that special!
Gang
Posted at 10:27 am, 5th March 2018Just prior to the very first sexual escalation, I treat each new woman in my life as if she was an extremely retarded person completely disempowered about consent. I dumb it down as much as possible to make sure that she will say something if she needs to pause or stop the interaction:
First I tickle her (some non directly sexual area so not boobs not ass not pussy) until she wants me to stop. Then I say “oh we should have a safe word. The safe word is SAFE WORD. When someone feels uncomfortable or wants to stop, says SAFE WORD and we immediately stop and eventually we can discuss if we want to change something and resume or completely stop. I am going to tickle you again and as soon as you say SAFE WORD, I will immediately stop and back off a bit.”
I tickle her and at the same time I keep repeating. “as soon as you say SAFE WORD, I will immediately stop and back off”. Rarely, she still doesn’t get it even when I explain again, so I order her to say “SAFE WORD”, and as soon as she does I back off.
I repeat several times until I have a very clear feeling that she totally gets it. Sometimes, I then also reverse roles, to really make sure that she completely understands the use of the safe word.
After that, I just propose casually to cuddle or hug. And then sexually escalate. Often, she is the one who sexually escalate actually. I ask here and then “you like when I do this ?” “you feel good ?”.
Later during intercourse, I also say these things here and there, and in addition I repeat again a couple of times “if you feel uncomfortable or need to pause or stop, remember you can also say SAFE WORD and I will immediately back off”. I also ask if she is feeling sore after a while. And propose additional lubrication if it seems appropriate.
Of course, at any moment if she says SAFE WORD or stop or no, or whatever like that, I stop. However, if she says no but it feels really highly incongruent with her body language and physiological response, I stop and I ask “do you want to use the SAFE WORD” 95% of the times, she says something like “no please continue” or “no, fuck me more”. A few women are like that, they keep saying “No” and “Stop” and it’s super confusing, but with the safe word I can clarify super quick if she actually wants to stop or to continue. If she systematically asks me to continue when asked, I loosen up and get that she is one of these wierd types of women and that it’s her twisted way of expressing herself during sex. But I still ask them again now and then a few times “do you mean to use SAFE WORD now? You want me to pause?”.
This is one of my most powerful game tool. The tickling part is asexual and aromantic however it’s touch and playful. It’s a physical bonding. And it’s funny: we actually laugh. It also releases some good chemicals in the brain I guess.
The safe word is a powerful consent tool. I use it as an additional safety net for consent. Moreover, it reduces buyer remorse to almost non existant levels and in my experience it anihilates ASD. I’ve had seemingly extremely stuck up women who I felt were very reluctant to get physical, suddenly completely loosen up through this process and even start the escalation as soon as I offered cuddling. I think it builds a strong trust for the woman, and she does indeed feel empowered and reassured that the interaction will stop whenever she asks. Whereas before that process she might feel she could give it a shot but is affraid that she if ever doesn’t like it, just by pure politeness, convention or whatever reason in her mind, she wouldn’t dare asking to stop and would have to put up with a whole unpleasant sex session until the guy cums.
CSR
Posted at 10:45 am, 5th March 2018@joelsuf
Also true and in fact it complements what I’ve said before. There has to be a reason. Whatever reason.
There you go. She perceives you as alpha so she complies with the alpha fucks/beta bucks (hypergamy). Fortunately for you, you’re on the left side.
Because at that age they are desperate of having kids and/or find a provider. So if sex has to be casual, there has to be (again) a veeeery good reason: an alpha.
Sadly, I also think it’s true.
K
Posted at 10:50 am, 5th March 2018Guys, it’s really not that complicated.
If a woman wants to have casual sex with you, she’ll happily proceed to have casual sex with you. (She may require privacy but she’ll do you without hesitation).
If a woman looks uncomfortable when you’re trying to have sex with her, it is either for reasons that have nothing to do with you (she hasn’t shaved her legs, is feeling unwell, is worried about her mom’s illness etc. etc.) or she doesn’t want to have casual sex with you. She may still want to have sex with you, very much so even, that’s likely why she’s there with you, but she sure doesn’t want the sex to be casual. That doesn’t mean she is already head over heels with you. She possibly just likes you a lot and is afraid she is running the risk of falling for you while you aren’t running the same risk with respect to her.
Of course, then there are those cases where she is reluctant because she expects a sign / promise that you’re going to provide her with something other than your penis and companionship in exchange for her sexual services. I assume it’s easy to tell if it’s the case or not but I may be wrong here.
Note that I’m not saying what you should or shouldn’t do. Such decisions are entirely up to your conscience.
Gang
Posted at 11:15 am, 5th March 2018@K, I think all these reasons you talk about indeed exist. However in my experience, the second most frequent reason why some women seem reluctant to have sex the first time (after the reason of just not wanting to have sex with you) is that she wants to have sex with you, and she hopes it will feel good BUT she is affraid that she won’t enjoy it finally (because bad sexual compatibility or whatever reason), and she is actually unsure how or shy to stop the sexual interaction once it’s started. Perhaps because she is affraid the guy will be upset to stop in the middke, or become violent, or just becaise she doesn’t know how to phrase it in a nice way, or whatever reason. She would like to try a 1 minute tester, but she is not sure if she wants to sign up for the full 1 hour sex session: it might suck actually, or even hurt and at this point she has no idea what it’s goona feel like with that particular guy since she never had sex with him.
Using a safe word (or whatever empowering consent communication too that you may come up with) is basically the equivalent of “lifetime satisfied or money back garantee”. Except the durations atis stake is just the one of the first sex session. It signals her that she can try it, even just one minute, or one second, and at any time she can pause or completely opt out, without any negative consequence. With my little tickle safe word teaching process, I show her in action how to tell me without possible ambiguity, to stop and I prouve her that I want her to tell me to stop if she doesn’t enjoys herself and that I won’t act upset.
We don’t have this step in our decision process as sexually insertive men, becaise physiologically if we don’t enjoy ourselves the penis becomes soft and the intercourse basically stops. For the receptive partner, the hole is still there available and open for penetration, even if it’s not enjoyable anymore, even if it hurts. There is no physiological failsafe for a woman having heterosexual sex. That’s why she may crave having sex with a given man but still act reluctantly at first.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 11:16 am, 5th March 2018Completely false!
Yes, there are some women, like my girlfriend, as well as the types of women I chose to surround myself with, who are indeed like this. Many women, however, are not.
There are women (especially here in America) who declare war against their own desires and their own selves due to guilt over wanting sex. This is called ASD, or “anti-slut defense.” A woman rejecting you, or refusing to have sex with you, because she doesn’t want to is NOT ASD. Rather, ASD is when she’s saying “no” despite wanting you very badly.
The reason she’s saying no is because social conventions, her religion, or some other societal bullshit, has told her that she’s a “cheap” or bad person who “doesn’t value herself” if she has sex with you too quickly!
And also, “My friend Melissa will kill me for this. Her and I made a pact that we’d wait at least five dates before having sex with a new guy because we’re worth it, and now I just violated the terms of our girl power. Meh, I’ll just say he raped me. Girl power!”
Or, she does want to have casual sex with me but doesn’t want to feel “cheap” because she has cultural brainwashing coming out of her freshly waxed ass!
Too bad. All sex starts off as casual. We all begin at the fuck buddy level and then (potentially) upgrade. Get with the program or get the fuck out of my life!
No, I’m not “running the risk of falling for her.” That’s estrogenic crap. And female narcissism. She shouldn’t be “falling for me” before we even had sex yet! What is this? 1953?
Yup. That’s the gold digger, or “generous lesbian,” side of her personality. Utterly disgusting.
It’s easy for me. But not for inexperienced men.
LOL! That’s reassuring. I was worried there.
johhnybegood
Posted at 11:45 am, 5th March 2018Not really. You’re buying into the ridiculous parody of bullshit that is the Modern Era. Someone joked that today you need to have “notarized consent forms in triplicate” — and instead of laughing, you basically just started printing out consent forms. No, that’s not the answer. You’re feeding the ridiculousness.
Luckily I’ve never had an issue with a woman who wanted to “luvey duvey” with me, and after a sweaty night of enjoyable sex, she had “the buyer’s remorse”. But I’m also not a rich celebrity that some woman has built up in her head and bragged about to all her coworkers before our first date.
Maybe I have super powers because I’m not autistic, nor do I have down syndrome. So I can actually tell with about 100% accuracy whether a girl wants to have sex with me, usually after she’s naked in my bed. Yes, LMR happens. That means she goes topless in bed, but doesn’t want to have sex with you (usually this is a young college virgin, key word virgin, nothing else) — in that case it’s also obvious: that she doesn’t want sex. Even though she wants to fool around. Irrational, but logical in the framework that the girl is irrational and wants to save her virginity for Mr. Husband or some shit.
I’m not on the “enthusiastic consent” train. That is complete bullshit.
Yes, of course women want that. I, too, only want extremely hot women who want to bone me, to immediately approach me, know I want them, lay the “fuck me” cards on the table, and then we do everything according to my fantasies. Ha, ha!
I should tell retail or car salesmen “only approach me if I want you to, and don’t apply sales pressure or techniques.” Not exactly how you optimize car sales … battle of the sexes, of sorts.
Look … you know who NEVER asks for consent, let alone enthusiastic consent? WOMEN. I’ve not once had a woman ask if they could kiss me, slap my ass, ride my dick, blow me, etc. This includes in clubs where multiple women have put their hands down my pants on my knob. Not ONCE did they ask for consent. Talk about hypocritical.
Now yes … they read the situation … using physical cues and common sense … usually extremely accurately, I must say. And asking me in “rape allegation terror” mode in most of these situations would have been an awkward, uncool turnoff, to be honest.
Don’t feed into this bullshit. Whether a girl is comfortable or not with your sexual advances is obvious to most non-autistic, generally sober men. If you’re unsure, then go ahead and ask. Most actual rapist men (like that swimmer fuck Brock Turner) — they KNOW they are rapists, 100% guaranteed. It’s not an “accident” that could have been solved with a simple consent form. It’s some sick evil fuck who knows what he’s doing but will obviously lie to the courts once caught.
You’ve missed the point bud. Often a woman won’t know if the sex is casual. She wants to have sex with you to “snag a husband” or boyfriend. Once she realized you just need to blow a wad in her and never want to see her again, she gets pissed. She thought it was Aladdin, the Little Mermaid …. not One Night in Bangkok. So you see, she wanted it. At the time. With the context she thought it was. But then retroactively, she’s pissed about it. See: Aziz Anzari case.
Caleb Jones
Posted at 11:50 am, 5th March 2018Not going there. It would derail the topic in this thread.
Tell that to a hooker.
Then it can be 100% casual if that “something else” isn’t feelings.
If you’re saying a woman who is not a hooker can’t have sex with a man she hates, I agree. None of my FB’s have ever hated me. But the sex was still casual for them. Many of them had/have serious boyfriends they really liked.
If you’re saying there are degrees of casual (100%, 90%, 80%) I agree with that as well.
But none of these things change what I said in the above article.
No it doesn’t, which is why you had to put that word in quotes.
Yup. It’s so easy to point at something and say you don’t like it, but that’s child-level thinking. Adult-level thinking is to say you don’t like something, then come up with a specific, field-tested alternate plan, and at least test it and try it out.
…thanks to outdated Societal Programming, yes.
MGTOW thinking. A better goal is to grow to the point where you can have truly meaningful sex with a woman (or women) without ever getting oneitis, monogamous, and/or without ever getting to the point where she betaizes you and owns your balls. That’s Alpha Male 2.0.
Jack already responded with my answer, in that there is a third reason: ASD. I have had numerous women who clearly wanted to fuck me and clearly were okay with casual sex but couldn’t bring themselves to do so on the second date because of their own bullshit ASD. I’ve described many of these scenarios in my blogs and books.
To be fair though, a type of ASD could be a woman who is literally incapable of casual sex (unless the man is much younger and poor, or she’s already married, i.e. the typical over-33 woman).
Correct, and well said. All sex starts off as casual.
The opposite would be the extreme beta, i.e. the man who waits months and months and 10+ dates before he actually has sex with a woman (and such a relationship is both unlikely to work and unlikely to be a happy one for either party).
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 11:52 am, 5th March 2018Haha! I’m sure both feminists and misogynists are proud of you.
The feminists are saying, “Now, there’s a good man, who understands the value and importance of affirmative consent.”
And the misogynists are saying, “Good boy! You’ve learned that women have no brains and are treating them accordingly. Now if only we could take away their right to vote.”
I, on the other hand, can’t bring myself to treat women like retards. It would just build lots of resentment in me and I’d pretty much turn into a misogynist who holds all women in contempt, and I don’t want to be that guy.
At the same time, however, I’m only turned on by enthusiastic sex, and I certainly don’t want a false rape charge by some mental midget who was too weak and pathetic to say no.
So how do I solve this little conundrum? I have ex-communicated roughly 80 percent of women from my life and have surrounded myself only with the most self-empowered and high sex drive nymphos I could find who constantly have sex on the brain and exhibit very masculine personalities, while displaying a very feminine physical appearance.
These women don’t require being treated like mentally disabled retards before sex and appreciate you treating them like adults. Problem solved!
Caleb Jones
Posted at 12:03 pm, 5th March 2018I want to say one more thing about this. That statement is almost true. For the vast majority of women, you’re right. In addition to the sex they need money (hookers / sugar babies), or validation (cheating wives), or attention (younger girls), or the promise of an upcoming serious relationship or marriage (over-33’s), or stress relief, something else.
However there are some women in the world who are like men, in that they fuck only because it makes their pussies feel good and that’s it. I’ve met a few of these women. I agree, though, that these women are quite rare (perhaps even within the 2% Rule, but I’m not sure).
CSR
Posted at 12:21 pm, 5th March 2018That’s exactly what I think (my mistake for talking about just feelings in my first statement). And I have the same doubt. So question: with 10 times less testosterone, hypergamy as her sexual strategy and discarding any type of psychological problems, how can a woman actually have 100% casual, I don’t give a fuck sex like a guy can naturally do?
No “validation phase”, no cheating on someone, no “she’s having a bad time in her life so she needs an escape” or just plan “she’s lonely”?
K
Posted at 12:31 pm, 5th March 2018I see ASD as one of the possible reasons why she doesn’t want to have casual sex. Only once you have established whether or not she wants to have casual sex you can ponder about why (if you wish).
Oden
Posted at 12:55 pm, 5th March 2018Interesting article! This one makes me think because yes casual sex does happen but there is no way you can compare it to a firm handshake. Getting completely naked, ass out is not even close to a firm handshake or a hug. You must admit that there is something special going on there even with your worst FB ever. If not then you would fuck your next door neighbor or the 80 year old woman at the book store. Come on you even write books on game. That fact alone means that there is some higher value on the act of sex. People don’t write material on how to handshake other people. Sex is the ultimate contract between 2 people please tell me its not
Oden
Posted at 01:21 pm, 5th March 2018sex between 2 humans is different then when the neighbors dog tries to hump my dog. That’s the real definition of casual sex
Caleb Jones
Posted at 01:35 pm, 5th March 2018And I understand that line of thinking but it isn’t always accurate. To repeat, there have been plenty of women who wanted to fuck me and clearly had no problem with casual sex with me, but couldn’t bring themselves to have sex with me because it was “too soon” or whatever.
Incorrect. Just because there is no clothing does not automatically mean there is something special going on. That’s classic Societal Programming, and you’ve fallen for it.
There was no feeling and nothing special with sex with my worst FB ever. Even with my normal FB’s.
Yep, I certainly could. I won’t, because I don’t want the potential drama, but I certainly could.
Nope, because physical attraction is required, and there wouldn’t be any for an 80 year old woman. But physical attraction is a purely biological function, not “something special.”
Because sex is harder to get to than a handshake, not because it’s more “special.”
Wow dude. Amazing. It’s not, and if you believe meaningless condomed sex with a hooker or a FB is “the ultimate contract,” then you will have major problems for the rest of your life. Read this.
My friend, based on your past comments you have a lot of seriously bad Societal Programming you still need to clean out. You even admitted it at one point. The next time you post a comment disagreeing with me, stop for a minute before you type, and think very hard about whether or not what you’re about to say actually matches with objective reality, instead of it matching what you’ve been told should be true, or what you want to be true.
C Lo
Posted at 01:49 pm, 5th March 2018Social Programming. Plus some people get pleasure/validation at being pissed off.
I wish BD would write further on this specific issue.
I had massive feelings for someone a couple of years back (and got blasted into the Stone Age when she dumped me) but even then I was fully aware she was completely replaceable and after my head cooled off I’d be fine.
In addition, I live in a rural area and grew up on an isolated farm. Abundance is the antithesis of what is/was programmed into me. I doubt I’ll ever beat all the SP out of me, but I won’t quit trying either.
This is is the damn truth.
paternity tester
Posted at 02:03 pm, 5th March 2018Not sure if you’re serious with this comment or trolling.
joelsuf
Posted at 02:07 pm, 5th March 2018I suppose. But even still, that’s just good company added to sex. If that’s what you mean by “meaningful sex” then I’ll accept that. I’ve definitely hung out before and after having sex with certain chicks: Had deep conversations, learned about her past and stuff. If that’s what makes sex meaningful then I suppose there’s a misunderstanding.
However, that is NOT what most men (Omegas, Betas, Alpha 1s) think. Their thought process is this:
Alpha 1s may not do this out of the gate, but they do not resist the temptation to do it either.
That is why I preach that until you have mastered the art of being able to provide good company and have sex without catching feelings (which, again, only alpha 2s can do), just have casual sex.
They don’t have to. There’s no direct perceived “danger” for men when they have sex. And if men’s groups come up with one, then they are the hypocrites for denying masculinity. Men are protectors, of both themselves and others. They shouldn’t be the ones begging to be protected, which is the read I get off a statement like this. If a chick gets on top of me and tries to fuck me, I’ll throw her right off of me, even if she weighs over 200 lbs. This kind of stuff has actually happened to me.
If I tried any of that with a chick who I was trying to have sex with, she’d run out of the house lol. I do ask if she likes what I’m doing when fooling around with her and stuff however. And before we actually have sex I go “you good? You ready?” That kind of stuff. That’s only if she isn’t on top and riding my dick already. I’ve only had to do that a couple of times.
And in many cases (at least 85%), it should stay there.
That reason is a combination of OBW and SP: And that is never ending quests for power and control. Women crave power and control more than any man. I do not dislike them for this but I am very aware of it. And one day it will be seen as unjust and it will be punished but that won’t be for another few millennia lol
joelsuf
Posted at 02:15 pm, 5th March 2018Well then if success with chicks is something you are invested in, you gotta move.
Mark
Posted at 02:18 pm, 5th March 2018Hey BD,
How do you manage to get casual sex, i’m a beginner to women and dating etc.
K
Posted at 02:24 pm, 5th March 2018Would they have preferred going on a couple of dates before having meaningless sex with you, although they were physically attracted to you from the start? What for??
I admit this blows my mind. Never heard a similar story and I’m having trouble figuring out the motives driving the behavior – unless maybe the women in question were originally hoping for something more and later accepted casual sex as the best they could get from you..? (I’m not saying this must have been the case; it’s the only explanation I’ve been able to come up with now, but I wasn’t there.)
FD
Posted at 02:24 pm, 5th March 2018For the receptive partner, the hole is still there available and open for penetration, even if it’s not enjoyable anymore, even if it hurts. There is no physiological failsafe for a woman having heterosexual sex.
Well, when a woman is stressed out and contracts her vagina, you clearly feel it as a man. Sure, intercourse is not impossible per se, but you can’t say you don’t know or feel it. You would really have to force your way in, which would be indisputably rape. There is no “potential ambiguity”, to use your own terms.
C Lo
Posted at 02:45 pm, 5th March 2018Does seem to be the case.
I lived in SoCal for a decade and hated it. Adopting one of BDs business models would work, but I just love farming and working with plants. They are totally logical, Won’t argue with you, and if there’s something wrong with them it’s definitely your fault.
I acknowledge that this will be a suboptimal compromise and I’ll never be “free” if I’m going to be location dependent like this, but I’m okay with that.
Maybe I’m low sex drive or something but I’m just not that thirsty for sex to tolerate living in a metro area again.
no excuses.
johhnybegood
Posted at 02:50 pm, 5th March 2018Nope. Once on Tinder a woman visiting in town for a one-day business conference matched me and basically said she wanted to fuck NSA. She was 3 blocks from my highrise apartment, I was buzzed on Bourbon from watching Mad Men on a Sunday, she wanted to meet at her hotel.
I never had sex THAT easy before, so I said at least let’s meet in the hotel lobby in case she turned out to be a catfishing Whale or 40-year-old-dude.
We met, she looked like her photos. She said she just was getting over a breakup and “had never done this before.” Hmm. Whatever. It was a bit odd going from meet to fuck in essentially two minutes, but as a dude, I can’t say I was all that beat up about it. She felt it was weird at first too (the situation in general) but after some wine and some banging, she was pretty enthused. Came a number of times. Said she wouldn’t blow me but did so anyway later of her own volition, I think she preferred giving to receiving.
She walked me out and had a smoke outside as I left.
The interaction was basically this. I don’t really regret it, it was enjoyable. Personally I enjoy meeting for a drink first even if a chick is fairly easy, just to make sure she isn’t a psychopath. But given that there were no hoops to jump through, yeah. No complaints. You can argue the very transactional nature of what is supposed to be the most intimate or vulnerable human act is a bit dehumanizing, but hm. Nature is nature. Animals fuck mindlessly and we are basically animals. I do have very strong emotional sex with women (a select few in my life). It’s a different experience though.
Hell, is every time you rub one out to Porn a highly emotional or transcendental experience? What about the strip club or Thai tug-n-rub? You can separate the two.
Oden
Posted at 03:08 pm, 5th March 2018I do have some SP. Ill atmit that. But you are seriously going to tell me that sex can be meaningless? Maybe I feel more then some people and that is not SP that is what I truly fckn feel inside.
Oden
Posted at 03:10 pm, 5th March 2018Hookers to me is like buying drugs so don’t compare it to feelings. I don’t buy hookers never have. Hookers lack one thing desire. I need that for sex
Caleb Jones
Posted at 04:12 pm, 5th March 2018Incorrect. Read this.
You really need to get out of this crazy MGTOW stuff dude.
I did. Read that link above.
I know. That’s the problem.
Read this book. It shows you step-by-step how to do it.
You’re making the common mistake of expecting rational, logical behavior from women within a dating context. Don’t do that.
(And yes, I realize you’re a woman.)
Not some. A lot.
Like I said, a lot.
Antekirtt
Posted at 04:18 pm, 5th March 2018Details, details please. lol
You gotta be kidding me. So a woman can let me do whatever I want, never once saying no or physically pushing me away, but if I felt that her vagina was tightening and keep going, I’m “undisputably” a rapist? Am I wrong in assuming you’re also a fan of expecting men to be mind readers? Perhaps if I also repeatedly ask her if she’s good, if she’s enjoying this, and she keeps nodding or squeezing me against her, but at the same time her vag was tightening, I’m also undisputably a rapist as well, right?
FD
Posted at 04:51 pm, 5th March 2018[blockquote]You gotta be kidding me. So a woman can let me do whatever I want, never once saying no or physically pushing me away, but if I felt that her vagina was tightening and keep going, I’m “undisputably” a rapist? Am I wrong in assuming you’re also a fan of expecting men to be mind readers? Perhaps if I also repeatedly ask her if she’s good, if she’s enjoying this, and she keeps nodding or squeezing me against her, but at the same time her vag was tightening, I’m also undisputably a rapist as well, right?[/blockquote]
Totally not what I said. It becomes so tight and painful for her that it makes intercourse impossible, unless you physically restrain her and force your way through her. It’s a physical reflex, and seems very painful, so believe me, she *will* be saying no and won’t let you in (or worse, will make you get out). No mind reading involved. It’s like if a woman was asking “is it okay if I keep kicking a man in the balls but he does not push me away and says he enjoys it?” : such a thing does not happen (because we’re not talking about BDSM here).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaginismus is the condition I’m talking about. Look at the list of causes, especially. You could almost copy/paste it in an article about erectile dysfunction’s causes.
Antekirtt
Posted at 05:21 pm, 5th March 2018@FD: then I misunderstood the purpose of your comment. I thought you were suggesting that it’s not enough for a man to get “normal” consent and that he’s a rapist if he doesn’t realize a woman’s stress by feeling a tightening of the vagina.
joelsuf
Posted at 06:13 pm, 5th March 2018Besides reading BD’s materials, I would say invite at 20 chicks per week out on a date. You can do this using whatever “environment” you like whether it is day, night, online, social circle, whatever.
May I ask why, BD? I’m not the MGTOW that many are stereotyped as. I’m not a neckbeard internet tough guy who posts on /pol/ and watches pornhub 4 hours a day. I USED to do that but not anymore. I just prefer having FBs and think that our conventions of relationships is extremely antiquated.
Had an FB who was bisexual and wanted to share a guy with her girl. I was an FB to both. Her gf was a bigger chick which I didn’t mind cuz it was mostly T&A (looked like the porn star Felicia Clover for reference). So we’re hanging out one night, and the gf was really horny I guess. She wanted me to have sex with her raw and I told her I didn’t want to do that. She was on top of me the whole time because she was sucking my dick (and she was STUPID good at it). So she starts jamming my piece into her, gets about 8 strokes in, she started screaming at me to finish and I got uncomfortable so I just threw her off of me, grabbed my clothes and ran out of there.
So men get assaulted by chicks as well. But different than everyone else I don’t use that kind of experience to go on some mad quest for vengeance. Instead I’ll use it to help other people who have went through the same.
paternity tester
Posted at 06:16 pm, 5th March 2018BD, have you looked at this medical term trait, sociosexuality:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociosexual_orientation
It’s not that well described here, but basically it says that it is a trait that is possesed. I believe it is personality-related. Therefore I believe when you say inability to compartmentalize sex is a liability, I don’t think that all personalities can pull it off. I’m thinking myself here, I am more emotional/extraverted guy, think ENFP and that’d be your perfect match if you were a woman, lol. I’ve noticed I don’t get attracted to women that do not have attractive personality. My mind works more like a woman’s mind in this case, huh. I just can’t imagine having sex with someone that doesn’t genuinely enjoy my company and vice versa. All my current and past relationships, plus past friendzones/interests were always purely friendship based and I was always digging the woman in question. All that being said, the sex in such relationship can still be flavours of casual or deep, whatever. I don’t believe that “casual” is “worse”, or that physical is worse. Emotions can be physical.
Again though, I don’t think I’ve ever experienced sex that was not emotional, maybe if it was exceptionally shitty sex… It really makes me wonder when you write that 90-95% of your sex was meaningless and no emotions involved. I’m not saying mine was all meaningful (it’s not a qualifier that should ultimately determine whether something should be done IMO), but I’d say I have exactly the inverse: 90-95% of sex I’ve had was full-on emotional.
I wonder what’s JOTB MBTI type. I find many similarities in his way of thinking to mine, except for being a such a vocal fighter. I give less shits… At least I believe so. Would love to meet you once though, Jack
Marsupial
Posted at 06:35 pm, 5th March 2018First: I am not my brother’s keeper.
Second: you can’t have it both ways: you can’t say it’s wrong to judge people; and then say it’s my job to determine whether someone else should be having sex – with me, with anyone.
Antekirtt
Posted at 06:52 pm, 5th March 2018I’m gonna be honest, I can’t have completely detached sex with a hot girl who has a great face. Plain/cutish girl, yes, fine; great bod but plain face, same. But if the girl is both hot AND has a nice face (by my standards), I can’t just go wham bam thank you ma’am. (Note that I’m not talking about oneitis though) I know I talked about having a “boyfriend drive” on top of sex drive, and that one is under control, but this is a third I guess: I have a desire to really feast my eyes, almost completely separate from just sticking it to a fine ass.
Perhaps I would start to see the drawbacks if I had sex many times with the same girl. But sex with a pretty girl without lots of eye gazing, telling her to take this or that position and let me stare (not limited to staring at her boobs or ass lol), etc? Can’t do that, unless the overall sexual encounter is lousy to begin with. I’m fascinated by subtle aesthetic details of hot women’s faces or other pretty body part and I get…eh, I don’t know, dreamy about it. This does seem to break FB rules in BD’s system and be more suitable for MLTRs, unless I’m misremembering.
prepped
Posted at 07:03 pm, 5th March 2018This is common in most discourse these days. Why?
The longer I live the more I see people stuck in perpetual childish thinking. Kindergarten conclusions are based on very black-and-white premises, suitable for 5 year old’s needing a basic understanding of the world around them, but hardly useful for adults. We are supposed to mature and evolve as humans — especially in our thinking.
Why has this been lost on the last couple of generations? The intellectual laziness is astounding that wants to reduce life to such false dichotomies such as right v. left, conservative v liberal, Democrat v. Republican, etc.
Sex is a physical act. Any other importance attached to it, mentally, emotionally, socially, etc. are mere constructs of the mind and the rules handed to us by others — usually beat into our soft skulls by “leaders” of religion, education, politics and culture at an age when we still reason as children, so as not to be able to question the authorities pushing the programming for their own motivations.
Touch, as BD points out, is so important to human existence that it’s absence can kill. There’s a reason why prolonged solitary confinement for prisoners is a fate worse than sexual assaults and physical violence. Touch is essential to sane human existence. However, no half-rational adult would confuse a handshake with massaging a girl’s clitoris to bring her to orgasm — both of which are acts of touching. And the exact same touching of the clitoris by a creepy pedophile would be construed as sensual, but rather a crime. Context is everything.
50 Shades of Grey? Women eat that shit up. So, where are 50 shades of meaning in something so broad as the sexual act? The limiting of sex to something holy, intimate, and suitable for say, purely procreation (as some profess, and we as a nation punish violators of), is merely a narrowing of meaning by narrow-minded to serve their purpose and justify their choices.
Sex can be casual, very casual. And from my experience, is absolutely fantastic!
Gang
Posted at 08:14 pm, 5th March 2018I completely agree with this statement: it’s feminazism bullcrap. And that is not what I use with this safe word teaching routine.
Last time I spoke about this procedure, it was in a polyamory forum, a whole bunch of feminazis were screaming their head off and calling me a rapist because that is not “enthousiastic consent”. They almost got me banned, thankfully I know one of the moderator (a guy) in person.
I do it right before getting physical. That means I am on the second date in a private setting, I have never kissed or cuddled her yet, I have usually done nothing but touch her hair and/or her leg (that kind of first date kinos), and eventually watched a short movie close to her, sometimes not. Between the first tickle where I haven’t even yet spoken about safe word and my penis inside her ass hole, mouth or vagina it takes about 3 minutes, rarely more than 8 minutes (2 medium length radio songs). I extremely rarely encounter a woman who resists this routine, quite the contrary a lot tend to be the ones doing the escalation. In the past 2 years I encountered none.
I am super serious with this comment, you guys seem to have no idea of how powerful this routine is. Great: more for me 🙂
joelsuf
Posted at 09:15 pm, 5th March 2018As it should be. PUA tards are hung up on this idea that they should ALWAYS be the ones doing the escalation. Not necessary anymore, and that’s how this whole “enthusiastic consent” thing was brought up in the first place to be honest.
Chicks are now “allowed” to make moves, and so they usually do. And very aggressively so at times. If a chick is attracted to you or likes you enough or is just plain horny, she’ll do all the work for you.
joelsuf
Posted at 09:31 pm, 5th March 2018Too many conveniences and information overload. Back in the day you couldn’t just go on the internet to learn about something, you actually had to physically find out yourself by being around stuff to find out. Because the digital being is just as relevant as the physical being nowadays and since humans still crave belonging (which to me is SP as well as OBW), it is way more “convenient” to have the childish thinking because you’ll have droves of other digital beings who will welcome you. Thinking in nuance is just too much effort, not as popular, and therefore doesn’t feel as good.
Its created a lot of toxic environments that practice dogmatic thinking that hasn’t been seen for probably a millennia. It’s gotten me to make some crazy but fun predictions. Society as a whole will have another dark age where our ruling classes will deal with it (that will begin for the world in probably the 2050s, in the west it will begin probably in the 2030s). We’ll have massive police states complete with curfews and stuff as a result of not accepting nuance. The laws will be ridiculous, citizens will not like it, there will be coups and uprisings all over the place, population will be reduced a LOT, and we’ll have chaotic anarchy for a long time. By the 2100s, we’ll be good again, having realized that nuance is necessary. Take this seriously if you want, its just some fun little prediction of mine.
Gang
Posted at 10:07 pm, 5th March 2018What I am saying is that some (maybe 25%?) women I can’t read if they want to have sex or jot, or they downright act very uptight and their body languages reads as very uncomfortable getting physical with me. I run this teaching safe word with tickle routine, and it’s like I fliped a switch in her mind. Her attitude is immediately reversed in most of the cases (90%), and 3 minutes later I am inside her. There are maybe 9% of these uptight women who take a bit longer because they are of the wierd type who express themselves in a twisted way saying “no” and “stop” and/or pushing me away all the time while they are sexual but when asked if they actually want to say SAFE WORD, they actually tell me to continue and fuck them. I dunno why these specific women, it’s like they need to act sex like it’s some rape fantazy and if it was not for the safe word I would be too confused to fuck them honestly. If you don’t know what kind of women I am talking about here watch this Louis CK: https://youtu.be/NXpFtwYIKew For these type of women, I may need more than 8 minutes to have my penis inside them because of the additional rounds of pausing asking what if her “no, stop” is a “SAFE WORD type no stop” or a “no continue fuck me”, then resuming. And then I guess 1% who really don’t wanna get physical at all, but in the past 2 years I haven’t any women I can think of on the top of my head.
Like I said, I think it’s because she suddenly gets a very concrete evidence that she can test having sex with me, and if she finally doesn’t enjoys herself she can immediately opt out of the experience. Actions speak louder and than words and with this quick routine I am showing her in actions that I will stop any time.
After that, I don’t ask for her consent for anything, not in the way of “Can I do that?”. No, I do whatever I feel like doing, and I check here and then if she’s still feeling good or remind her to use the safe word anytime she wants.
Maybe you have super power and can read a woman’s mind, I dunno. But I am very sure that most men can’t read 100% of the very minute details of a woman’s body language. I agree with BD on this and it’s dumb of people to write such article implying that we have to read a woman’s mind just because she is too dumb to speak for herself like in the retarded allegations of this “Babe”. I don’t, I instead teach her how to tell me to stop and this also removes any possibility for her to backward rationalize that she was being forced in anyways.
C Lo
Posted at 10:07 pm, 5th March 2018Thanks. Never saw that one before.
I have to like them at least a little to have sexual with them. The guy who wrote “Dont develop feelings “ reminds me of those plate spinning chowder heads at various sites.
It’s lije if you catch feelings for someone you are a total puss. More like a sociopath if you don’t.
Gang
Posted at 10:29 pm, 5th March 2018Also what I forgot to mention, because it feels very obvious to me, is that this teaching safe word with tickles routine clearly frames the sexual act as something playful and rather casual.
You can still experience all the romantic or spiritual stuffs later in the relationship if you want and feel appropriate.
Nick
Posted at 11:34 pm, 5th March 2018I just stumbled onto this blog. Great stuff.
“Okay, so… you don’t want the 1950’s and you don’t want today where adults can have sex whenever they choose and do so. What specifically do you want then? What’s your answer?”
That’s a pretty brilliant line of reasoning.
“I have had sex with women who showed reluctance or discomfort the first time they had sex with me, and these women went on to have very happy, long-term sexual (and in some cases, romantic) relationships with me that lasted many years.”
In what aspect of life isn’t it normal feel a bit of fear, discomfort, and hesitancy the first time you do something?
oops britney
Posted at 01:22 am, 6th March 2018Well, what to say.
One can run into the ideal NYT reader (ideal for the NYT) even at a place such as this blog.
oops britney
Posted at 01:31 am, 6th March 2018@FD
Problems of identity. A pointed conflict between what she is, what she is programmed to believr she should be, and what her peace of mind needs she believes she is.
These are, at least, the 3 “parallel” identities your regular female mind runs no-stop, like 3 computer apps.
Denial hypocrisy rationalization and no-stop memory-rewriting are what keeps things going.
A 200 sex partners count makes it to keep things going hard.
marty
Posted at 04:32 am, 6th March 2018I agree. But do you think a lot of this is to do with SP? They have been taught they need to justify why it was ok to have sex.
Having observed a lot of women at swingers parties and in swinging situations now. I’m amazed at how many of them just love getting fucked. And there is very little, if any of the above involved. They just really enjoy the physical pleasure. But this is an environment where pretty much all the SP is taken away. It becomes very much a choice of if they want it or not. If they are enjoying it or not. The women who do go for it and there are those that are not as keen, or don’t want as much and freely decline who they are not interested in. They may fall into the second 2% category you also mentioned. But I don’t think there could be that many of them. These are mostly normal wives, mothers, girlfriends with kids and run of the mill jobs and lives. (Although generally I’ve found there are more professionals and upper middle class type people in swinging circles.) I’ve even seen women line up 5 or 6 deep and wait their turn to get oral from another particularly skillful women at a party.
BB
Posted at 08:21 am, 6th March 2018I am the person who submitted the question to BD and I must admit it’s a little funny to see it published and discussed on this blog.
Perhaps a little additional context (nuance?) is in order (BD did not have this context when responding… and I DO appreciate the thorough and fair response). Pardon the length.
First, I am 57, having been married twice (for a total of 25+ years) with two adult daughters. Being a very religious Christian, I waited until I was married in both cases, and until my divorce 4.5 years ago, those were the only two women I had slept with. In the context of my religious beliefs, this was not difficult or controversial or even a topic of conversation… it was just UNDERSTOOD. We would have been more likely to rob a bank than have sex before marriage. I realize how bizarre this seems to most men on this blog but that is my history.
Having reconsidered and finally rejected my religious beliefs 8 years ago, I then reconsidered what I wanted out of my 18 yr marriage and the rest of my life and decided I wanted to move on which we did amicably.
I enjoy the company of younger women (24-32). Over 40s want exclusive marriage relationship. 30s either have kids or want kids. Under 24 too flaky. Generalizations yes. Exceptions yes. But 24-32 has been my focus.
I am physically fit, attractive, and financially successful. My freedom is my highest priority so for now I shy away from relationships with women who are looking for an exclusive dating relationship. It is usually understood with younger women that there is no “end game” to the relationship so questions of marriage and falling in love are not relevant… having fun is. And of course sex is hopefully a part of that.
So, in the context of what BD calls Very Young Women (VYW), the dynamic for me is different than if I was approaching women closer to my age. There exists a significant power imbalance in terms of life experience, maturity, and money. This imbalance does not make these women children or “retards,” but it does make them vulnerable in a way a female peer would not be. Handled properly, this imbalance can actually be a win-win for both but I feel a greater responsibility to assess “consent.” In addition, I have to deal with the “creep factor” (more than a younger man) which limits how aggressively I can pursue a younger woman and the greater need to confirm mutuality to avoid confusion and being labeled a “creep.” (This is more complicated because many of the women I know also know each other.) Perhaps the term ACD (anti-creep defense) needs to be invented! The downside is of course I get taken advantage of a lot which at this point I accept as the cost of playing with younger women but needs to change. I have not yet pursued Sugar Daddy game formally although many of my relationships are informally such.
Perhaps due to my age and previous religious history, I place a greater value on intimacy over sex. (I’m also living my life somewhat backwards as I did the marriage/kids thing early and now I’m trying to live my 20s!) I define intimacy as the sense of feeling connected to another individual. Some may call this “needy;” I consider it the most satisfying feeling in the world. Sex then just becomes a means to intimacy, not an end in itself. That doesn’t mean there can’t be degrees of intimacy… only that sex is meaningful to me when it is oriented towards intimacy; otherwise, it’s just weirdly empty.
To reduce sex to purely the casual physical means that masturbation should be just as physically satisfying as putting your penis in a vagina. An orgasm is an orgasm, right? If one is better than another, it is ONLY because you have assigned more erotic meaning to one than the other but, if sex is only physical, why should one have any more erotic meaning than the other. Yet, I believe BD and Alpha 2.0s are generally opposed to masturbation and insist that “real” men only have sex with a real woman. As best I can tell, this is mostly for the ego-gratification that comes from having enough game to persuade a woman to have sex with you. I get that; masturbation is lazy and lame. But that ALSO means that sex with a woman is MORE than just physical… it is accomplishing SOME other emotional/personal purpose… even if that purpose is to make you FEEL like an Alpha 2.0 male! Maybe that’s not what BD means when he says sex can be just physical… maybe he means, with respect to his relationship to the woman, it is just physical, not that HE doesn’t also get emotional/personal benefits from sex beyond the physical. Then again he compared it to going to the bathroom so maybe that is what he means.
All physical contact is a form of communication… even shaking hands is not purely physical contact (I mean what purpose would THAT serve… at least sex is pleasurable but shaking hands?)… it MEANS something (which is why you can read articles on HOW to give handshakes and why some friends/groups come up with their own unique handshake rituals!). It is simply not true that “…yes, touch can indeed have zero meaning” — unless it is purely accidental. And it is the nature of the communication that determines the intimacy.
Sex also (usually!) involves visible nakedness and most people consider nudity to be a vulnerable form of personal disclosure… only CERTAIN people get to see you naked. It communicates the status of the person in your life. People who see you naked tend to be more special than people who don’t. Is that really just social programming or is it universal? Doesn’t virtually every culture consider clothing for modesty a value? Doesn’t that point to SOMETHING pre-wired in the human psyche that values disclosure of what is “personal” to only trusted individuals? Are the only two choices that sex is “purely physical” or sex is an “essentially religious act?” Isn’t sex with another inherently interpersonal and to try to convince yourself that it is only physical is really just an attempt to avoid the obvious PERSONAL nature of what you are doing (maybe because of the obligations that might imply)? Is casual sex impersonal sex or just sex with no other interpersonal obligations?
I am not dogmatic on this subject. I’m not even making an argument. I’m just asking the questions I wrestle with. I’m open to persuasion and I wouldn’t be here if I wasn’t. Obviously I have made big changes in my life over the last decade and I’m sorting through my thoughts on this subject because I want the rest of my life to be as happy and satisfying as possible and I recognize that my thinking on this subject to date is inadequate and holding me back so I consider this a dialog, not an argument, and appreciate all responses, even those who found my original question for BD offensive LOL
joelsuf
Posted at 09:35 am, 6th March 2018“Plate Spinning” is another PUA tard term for “look at me, I have a harem, look at how many men are impressed by this!” Why else do PUAs sound like metro homos? They’re trying to impress other men because most PUAs are closet homos. How come virtually NONE of them teach sex techniques, or if they do, they sound like they are 12 when they teach them?
Harems are stupid. Having one “main” girl and 1-2 “side” girls, which is what BD suggests is legit. But having a chick for every day of the week? Not only is that not believable, it is overcompensating.
Catching feelings does indeed mean you are weak. But it also means you are a sociopath. Because now you are relying on someone else to make you happy in nearly all cases. Your happiness is in their hands and it is extremely manipulative. But that’s only 33+ chicks use beta males for marriage, right? Um, nope. Men do the same thing.
Again, I’m talking about one-itis, not just enjoying a chick’s company. There’s a big difference between these two. I can enjoy a chick’s company and stuff and NOT place pressure on her to say and do certain things to make me happy. There is always someone better than the chick you are pursuing. Now tell me: How many people do you know have that kind of philosophy?
C Lo
Posted at 10:42 am, 6th March 2018Hardly anyone, but that’s a given. Pretty sure that is why most of BDs readers are here.
IMO there’s a difference with distinction between enjoying someone else company (which means you have feelings) and having oneitis (being dependent on someone else for your happiness). But there’s is a fair bit of calibration to get yourself balanced and not tip to nihilism or oneitis.
Caleb Jones
Posted at 11:07 am, 6th March 2018Pretty damn close. Never get any feelings for a woman. No man will be able to have sex in five years. And so on. And I’m talking about your thoughts and opinions, not the forums you post on. You are, by far, the most negative guy on this blog. (And that’s saying a lot with Jack in here.)
I agree. But most can, with a little work.
And if that’s true, you’re going to have more drama and up-and-down problems in your woman life than I will.
To be fair, there’s a difference between “emotional” with every woman you fuck vs. “getting hardcore feelings” for ever woman you fuck, but neither is ideal if your goal is long-term consistent happiness.
I’ve never said that. About 40% of the women I’ve had sex with were MLTRs, so I had feelings for them, and a small percentage of my FB’s were long-term friends, so I at least cared about them on that level. So I’d guess the meaningless sex number for me to be around 60-65%, not 90-95%.
90-95% would describe the PUA one night stand Thrill of the Hunt guy, not me.
And again, that means you won’t be as long-term happy as I will be in my woman life, unless you decide to change that.
Historical negative and false (and largely American and right-wing) Societal Programming regarding sex, as I describe in detail in my book.
A lot, if not most.
Caleb Jones
Posted at 11:35 am, 6th March 2018Okay! Get ready for one of the best comments I’ve ever written on this blog…
Problem number one.
Problem number two.
Problem number three.
True. I have to deal with this as well. It’s standard for all older men doing younger woman game.
There’s nothing wrong with that, as long as you don’t consider intimacy as a requirement for 100% of all sex you ever have.
I view intimacy as a wonderful bonus to sex, not a requirement. Thus, I have a much easier and happier time with my dating/relationship/sex life than 90%+ of other men in the world.
Scientifically incorrect. There are clear physiological and biological differences between having sex with another human and jerking off. Read this.
I have never said anything like that and do not believe that. There is nothing wrong with masturbation; I masturbate occasionally because I’m a human being and that’s what humans do. What I have said is never having sex and only masturbating is not as physically and psychological healthy as having real sex… and that’s not my opinion, but proven scientific fact.
Therefore, if you place the barrier of “all sex must mean something or I can’t have it!!!” in front of your ability to have sex, it will be harder for you in the long run to be happy and healthy as a man. Again, not my opinion; fact.
It depends on the woman. Read the article above where I talk about what it’s like for me to have sex with Pink Firefly.
“All women mean X to me” is silly, both to the emotional guys who say “I get emotional a for all women I have sex with” and the hardcore players or MGTOWs who say “I never get emotional for any woman.” Both are dumb, extreme, and not conducive to long-term happiness.
Clearly incorrect.
It can mean something if you mentally assign certain meaning to the act that your society tells you it means. The only reason, and I mean this, the only reason you assign meaning to shaking hands is because your society told you it “means” something. But it doesn’t actually mean anything.
That’s called Societal Programming.
It works the same way with condomed sex. If you assign deep meaning to having condomed sex with the 22 year-old FB you just met, that’s only because your society and/or your psychotic religion has told you it “means” something, not because it actually does. Because it doesn’t.
Societal Programming is false. It’s not real. I know if feels real. But it’s not.
Here’s a demonstration of what I mean:
…because your society told you so.
…because your society told you so.
…because your society told you so.
…because your society told you so.
Go to the desert tribes in Africa, were everyone walks around naked and no one cares, and find out.
No, there are degrees. But those two choices still exist on the edges of those degrees as options.
Of course it is. So is shaking hands.
As long as you’re not lying to anyone, it’s mutually consensual, it’s legal, and you’re wearing a condom, there are no consequences, obligations, or deeper meanings to sex, unless you choose to mentally assign them for whatever irrational reasons you have (or unless the scenario is unusual). It’s only when one of those four things are not true do we run into problems, but those are perfectly preventable logistical issues I’ve been warning men about for years.
Like the commenter Oden above, you are wrestling with deep-seated, negative, false Societal Programming has been boring into your brain for decades, and now that you’re actually seeing reality for what is is, it’s painful for you, and your false SP is fighting back with all its might.
I went through the same thing in my early 30’s. If you stay strong, if you take the time to wash this bullshit out of your mind for good, you will experience happiness like you’ve never known.
Or you can remain the typical Christian, and spend the rest of your life shaking your head and wagging your finger at the world.
The choice is yours.
AnonDude
Posted at 12:06 pm, 6th March 2018God, I would love that to be true in my gym locker room.
Also, forget desert tribes in Africa just go to the nearest nudist beach or something. It really is just SP.
Antekirtt
Posted at 12:06 pm, 6th March 2018This is what I meant:
and here
Should this be avoided on casual hookups? I mean, even James Fucking Bond kinda does that in some scenes. I’ll avoid it with FBs that are regular and long term (not an issue atm), so where’s the harm?
Your description of sex with your FBs as similar to going to the bathroom puzzles me; does that include when you’re going down on them? How do you even get them to cum if that’s your state of mind?
Caleb Jones
Posted at 12:25 pm, 6th March 2018Maybe I misunderstood then. Eye gazing and “feasting your eyes” is not “getting emotional for a woman” during sex as I define it, so it’s perfectly fine if that’s all you’re talking about.
No, that’s a robotic task that must be done to ensure they stick around.
It’s easy to make a woman cum if you don’t care about her. It’s a purely a mechanical act (using tongue, fingers, or vibrators) and I’ve done it literally hundreds of times.
Alex
Posted at 01:36 pm, 6th March 2018This NY Times article is a massive blue pill. Sex is a basic human need, like food. To state that sex should be a “heart and soul altering thing” and not be casual, is like stating that one should only eat Périgord truffle and only drink Dom Pérignon champaign – with candle light and tuxedo. People would die of starvation. And even if you had this “heart and soul altering thing” every day – it wouldn’t be heart and soul altering anymore but just the new normal. You would long for a good, meaningless, casual burger with fries then.
“To deny our own impulses is to deny the very thing that makes us human.”
Roberto
Posted at 02:21 pm, 6th March 2018Except that masturbation patently isn’t as physically satisfying, or as physically enjoyable, as putting your penis in a vagina. The physical sensations leading up to the orgasm are different. This is completely unrelated to any erotic meaning of the one over the other. In fact, I would say that when sex with a woman is purely casual, the erotic charge that accompanies it is often (not always) largely related to these different physical sensations.
And although sex without an orgasm is frustrating, an orgasm without the lead-up to it is less than it can be too.
joelsuf
Posted at 03:40 pm, 6th March 2018Different than JOTB, I don’t get emotional, butthurt, or triggered about stuff. For example, I don’t consider you calling me “the most negative guy on this blog” an insult at all. But many others would, JOTB included. That would make him much more negative than I. I might be cynical, but I have an open mind all the same and am willing to accept criticism. How is that negative?
Take, for example, my “no man will be able to have sex in 5 years” observation. It is true that I argued that in the past. However, at the expense of backpedaling, I have changed it. If you read my past comments on this very post, you’ll see that I’ve adjusted this to “it will be very difficult for any man who isn’t an alpha 2 to enjoy consistent sex in the future because of power structures that are becoming more and more matriarchal in nature.” And that is a good thing because these new developments have pushed me to become a better and more aware individual. These recent developments have said to me: “Alright, Alpha 2 is the only way now.” How is this negative at all? Do you see me complaining, acting like a trad-con and wishing for things to go back to the middle ages? Do you see me acting like an SJDub and going “there is more that needs to be done” or whatever? No. Therefore, I do not believe I’m being negative. Cynical, yes. Tag that on me all day. Edgy? Sure. I’ll take edgy. Fair enough. But cynicism =/= negativity.
Catching feelings for a chick has never once worked for me. Do I think it can work for others? Probably, I don’t know, I certainly wouldn’t recommend it. But live and let live, I’m not trying to be anyone’s father. I do know that seeing it from both sides, catching feelings for someone places unwarranted pressure for everybody involved and that it is a big waste of energy. How is this negative? Just because I think being too emotionally invested in the opposite sex is OBW and SP, and that I’ve noticed a few trends about sexuality which make me a bit worried for the future sex lives of men does not mean I’m the most negative person on this blog. I’ve seen much worse. I know I have been negative in the past, but I am man enough to admit that I was freaking out and it that means I run the risk of facing criticism for backpedaling, so be it.
Antekirtt
Posted at 03:45 pm, 6th March 2018“Unwarranted” based on what? Given a nihilistic premise, then of course it’d be unwarranted, but you’re not gonna convince anybody with a premise where enjoyment in general is already futile.
“Big waste of energy”: define expenditures of energy that you don’t consider a waste. See the problem here? You just prefer to shy away from interpersonal relations above a certain intensity, your mistake is to project and say that this is something everyone should shy away from.
marty
Posted at 03:54 pm, 6th March 2018WTF are you talking about?? “Plate Theory” and spinning plates comes from Rollo Tomassi’s book The Rational Male. He has a whole chapter on it with six parts to it. It’s got NOTHING to do with PUA or having a harem. Tomassi is so far from a PUA its not funny and is widely considered one of the Godfathers and best minds in the Red Pill.
To quote directly from his book.
“but the essence of plate theory is that a man is as confident and valuable as his options. This is the essence of the abundance mindset – confidence is derived from options.”
It’s all about not getting oneitis and having options. It’s 100% consistent with the system BD teaches. Having an OLTR or MLTR’s and FB’s IS Plate Spinning!
“Most PUA’s a closet homos”…….ok…yeah that makes perfect sense. You really expect anyone on here to take you seriously when you say stuff like this?
Antekirtt
Posted at 04:41 pm, 6th March 2018Guys, Joelsuf is gonna continue to say that PUAs are closet homos and 99% of homophobic people are closet homos no matter what. He borrowed it from the feminists and pseudo-freudians: if you strongly hate it, then you secretly like it. It’s unfalsifiable and lazy, it used to irritate me but I say just let it be, I don’t think he really believes it anyway.
“If you strongly, violently dislike the smell and taste of carrion even though there are other species that find it tasty, then you secretly like eating carrion. No, I can’t imagine a scenario where I do dislike carrion but happen to be an emotional, vehement person.” Close enough.
Duke
Posted at 04:58 pm, 6th March 2018Cynicism is generally a negative and undesirable trait, primarily when expressed externally/socially; that’s why most people that are cynical keep this side of them to themselves. My theory is that you, Jack and others are cool/chill/positive people IRL, but there is a part of your personality that you can’t express in meat space so you tend to let this out online. You may not feel negativity internally when you are writing , but the way you come across gives off a certain undeniably negative vibe.
It should also be noted that they way you got all defensive with BD was not very outcome independent of you. (:
For the record I tend to agree with you about catching feelings being a weakness and not advisable, but experiencing those feelings tends to be “worth it” to me, and makes me more happier than not.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 05:09 pm, 6th March 2018Hey BB – here you are at your most ridiculous:
No. There doesn’t. I mean, there really, really doesn’t. Like, not at all.
That’s not a power imbalance! That’s an experience imbalance. No human being is 100 percent equal to another human being. All of us have different talents. Each of us can do things the other can’t, or at least not as well. All of us have slightly more money, or slightly less, than another. All of us are in slightly different places in life than everyone else.
That’s not a “power imbalance.” That’s just called “life.” You’re dangerously close to the feminist notion that all sex is rape because they believe that “all life is rape,” unless we create a Marxist utopia. This is garbage, dude! Pure garbage.
In order to avoid losing your sanity and becoming a full blown Soviet, you must make a distinction between having superior power over someone vs. having superior power adjacent to someone. Here are some examples of the former:
1. You are your lover’s boss.
2. You are your lover’s landlord.
3. You are your lover’s doctor.
4. You are your lover’s lawyer.
5. You are employed by a bank and it is your job to determine whether or not you should take your lover’s car away from her because she is behind on her car payments.
The above are examples of concrete power imbalances between you and your lover which might indeed call the sincerity of her consent into question. If you wish to define that as rape, or at least, sexual coercion, on your part, I won’t argue with you (unless sleeping with you was her idea because she’s a gold digger and wants to influence you to allow her to keep her car, get promoted, etc…).
However, that’s NOT what you’re describing. You’re describing having superior power adjacent to her. Like, for example, having superior life experience because you’re older, or more money in the bank because you’re richer – even though she’s not employed by you, nor is she renting an apartment from you.
That’s NOT a “power imbalance.” That’s…….life. Or do you think a billionaire fucking a woman on welfare should be considered rape? Dude, you’re robbing women of their adulthood and their decision making abilities! You are acting like a condescending misogynist, otherwise known as a feminist!
First of all, she IS a female peer. You’re both adults.
Second of all, the presence or absence of her “increased vulnerability” is……wait for it……………her problem, not yours. Because…………..wait for it……………she’s a fucking adult who should make her own decisions!
Or, as Jesus would say, “Lighten up, my nigga. It’s all good.”
Then you must change how you feel. Because you are infantilizing these women. I know the Bible tells you to condescend to women, but, in case you haven’t figured it out by now, the Bible is horse vomit, and chivalry is for betas!
WHAT???????????
Yeah, no shit!
What do you mean “yet?” Don’t do that at all. Make a woman fuck you because she’s horny, not because she needs rent.
Pathetic! Change this. Don’t give women a single penny, or a single materialistic item. Make them have sex with you based on lust alone, not prostitution, which dilutes the lust, and therefore, your sexual merit as a man.
Anon
Posted at 07:33 pm, 6th March 2018Now Jack, what merit do you have to impose your personal kinks on everyone?
C Lo
Posted at 08:03 pm, 6th March 2018I disagree that Jack is negative. He simply likes to argue; and likes to act like a sex positive man who’s really a closet TradCon.
(Mostly kidding Jack.)
This is a epic thread BD.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 10:06 pm, 6th March 2018Can you please name me one tradcon belief that I have? Much appreciated!
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 10:20 pm, 6th March 2018Now Anon, remember where you are. This is a self-improvement blog.
If you want to go to a prostitute, or be a sugar daddy, you don’t need self-improvement. You just need money.
I’m going along with the theme of this blog by assuming that everyone here wants to improve themselves with women, and therefore, get women to sleep with them due to seduction, charm, good looks, and by the force of personality alone.
If you want to sleep with hookers, be my guest. But you might want to spew that filth on another site. Over here, if you don’t share my “personal kink” of wanting women to have sex with you because of your sexual merit, this blog is not really for you. Just saying.
What “merit” does BD have to “impose” his own “personal kink” of non-monogamy on the rest of us?
P.S. By using the word “impose” you are projecting a lack of free will and complete disempowerment on the readers here. What right do you have to insult them like that?
I will “impose” any ideas I choose and there is literally nothing you can do about it.
Leon
Posted at 01:02 am, 7th March 2018Good post, your counter-arguments are spot on, so do Jack.
Women ain’t children, but some (if not most) want to be treated with double-standard. They are too used to it.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 02:55 am, 7th March 2018INTJ
Thanks man! Perhaps someday.
I have a blog that I’ll be coming out with around May (ish). Would love to see you there.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 03:06 am, 7th March 2018Because American culture is puritanical.
Because you’re European.
What about ASD do you not understand? What about cultural and religious guilt do you not understand? What about “this woman is not self-empowered and has low self esteem” do you not understand?
Typically, she also wants casual sex, but doesn’t want to be judged for it by the guy the next morning (many men are slut shamers) and doesn’t want to ruin her chances for a potential future relationship with him because he might be a traditional idiot who thinks women who have sex on the first date aren’t “relationship material.”
Your problem is that you’re trying to come up with a rational explanation for her behavior while, at the same time, desperately holding on to the myth that she’s an empowered woman who owns herself and her actions.
Keep trying.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 03:13 am, 7th March 2018Amen!
Mutual lust and passion being the primary, if not sole, motivator from both parties, is where it’s at, even if we’re just talking about a nameless ONS!
C Lo
Posted at 03:32 am, 7th March 2018Okay….Tell us again how you feel about Muslims or Hillary Clinton.
And before you answer, it’s not what you write but your desire to argue that you ARE RIGHT about it, and your desire to be heard and force your views onto others that smacks of outcome dependency. Maybe I’m wrong and you are just a closet Alpha 1.0. Or just a hallmark of being an INTJ. Or the sort of attorney who enjoys pissing of judges. Or your mom didn’t love you enough. Or you just like to argue.
So, I submit that I potentially have misidentified you as a tradcon when the you aren’t but you just argue like one when their SP is challenged. Whatever, doesn’t matter.
My motivation to participate here is to expand my head and learn something about improving my life. I could give a shit if I WAS right, I care about getting it right going forward, or at least more right that what I was doing.
To those ends, you are one of my favorite posters, I value your writings very much, and hope you change absolutely nothing going forward.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 03:41 am, 7th March 2018Oh BD! LOL!
First, I want to save the world. Doesn’t that make me a hopeless optimist? You’re the negative one, Mr. “The West is doomed.” I’m the one who’s busy organizing a cultural counter-offensive against the enemies of the West because I have great hope for America. You’re the doom and gloom guy, not me.
But I do agree that Joelsuf is worse than you, since his belief in internal solutions is way weaker than yours. He literally thinks he’ll be physically forced to go to protests and marches by SJWs in the near future.
Second, every time you say shit like this about me, it really makes me want to meet you in person. We’d really, really get along very well! We could have a drink, watch a movie, have sex with each other’s girlfriends, and so forth. I think you’ll find that I’m way more optimistic than you in many areas.
One of the differences between you and me is that I’m way more passionate about shit. You are the one negatively reframing this as “negative.” I’m just an intellectual fighter by nature, and I enjoy the fight!
But here’s another difference: There are people who get lazy and stop caring about the world the happier they are in their personal lives (the more sex they get, etc…). I’m the opposite. The happier I get in my personal life and the more sex I get, the more fragile and tenuous I see it as being.
This gives me an uncontrollable urge to defend it by declaring war against all the worldly forces who would take my happiness away if they could. If I were a celibate bum, I wouldn’t be angry, because I’d have nothing to lose anyway, so I wouldn’t care about anything!
My success (sexual and otherwise) leads me to an appreciation of its preciousness. This leads to unbearable thoughts about losing it all. That motivates me to become a fighter. The more happy and satisfied I become, the more scared I get that some tyrant will try to take it away. So I must be ever vigilant. But if I were a celibate virgin who never got a taste of happiness, I wouldn’t appreciate happiness, and therefore, wouldn’t give a shit about defending the West from tyrants!
You, however, seem to be the opposite. The happier you are in your personal life, the less you care about the world.
marty
Posted at 04:17 am, 7th March 2018Not liking Muslims or Hillary Clinton is hardly Tradcon! It’s just sensible!
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 04:34 am, 7th March 2018Hey dude, I don’t know if anyone has ever told you this, so get ready to have your mind blown:
Muslims………..ARE TRADCONS!!!!!
That’s why I hate them! Duh!
Many libertarians, anarchists, neo-cons, moderates, liberals, neo-liberals, socialists, Communists, Nazis, mental retards, high IQ geniuses, non-political apathetic people, the vast majority of sane people, and the dog that once pissed on the White House carpet, hate the Bull Dyke.
I also believe in “thou shalt not kill.” Does this belief in the wrongness of murder make me a Christian?
I also believe that psychiatry needs to be criminalized. Does this make me a Scientologist?
Force?
Okay, now you’re just changing the subject. Are we still talking about me being a “closet tradcon?”
If being passionate about my beliefs and wanting to save the world makes me an alpha 1.0, so be it. If believing that what others think will ultimately contribute to either freedom or tyranny in this country makes me an alpha 1.0, fine. Still not a tradcon though.
Probably.
I actually enjoyed pissing off the opposing feminist lawyer. And humiliating the witnesses who were hostile to my agenda. I’ve never had the urge to piss off an actual judge though. That would be stupid.
Shit man! Why did you have to make me cry like that? Was that necessary?
My mommy did love me! My mommy did love me! MY MOMMY DID LOVE ME!!!!
Dammit! [reaches for tissue and blows nose]
Correct!
Okay then.
Good for you.
Holy shit, what a coincidence! I was just thinking to myself that I will change absolutely nothing about myself going forward. It’s like you’re telepathic man!
If you were a woman, I’d consider breaking up with my girlfriend in pursuit of this mysterious soulmate connection we seem to have. Or, I’d just consider the possibility that such thinking may be evidence of an early onset of paranoid schizophrenia on my part. Hmmm.
Thanks for making me think though. And I actually do appreciate the kind words, believe it or not, despite your complete lack of understanding of what a tradcon is! Just educate yourself on that, and we’re cool.
Vincent
Posted at 04:43 am, 7th March 2018About shaking hands:
Oh come on – the same can be said for any “conversation”. This is reductio ad absurdum. “The sounds you make don’t actually mean anything, they were just sounds until society told you that they mean something.”
BB, you wrote some insightful stuff. Thanks!
Magok
Posted at 07:14 am, 7th March 2018Awessome tips @Gang Thanks you, I think I was with a girl like this once, Extremely horny, all green lights, but stopped me all the times, I think that the SAFE WORD routine would had worked wonders whith this girls.
Also, feminist girls would melt with something like this (They may don’t get it when you explain the process in the forums but in real interactions I think it would be different).
Bulma78
Posted at 07:17 am, 7th March 2018I agree with Oden 100% and that’s just my opinion whether it is right or wrong. TEAM ODEN! Got my vote
Gang
Posted at 07:48 am, 7th March 2018Thanks for this clarification, I was always confused about these notions of having power over someone, especially in legal definitions of statutory rape. It all makes much more sense to me now.
Gang
Posted at 08:35 am, 7th March 2018@Joelsuf (and anyone who wants to give his opnion)
Using the rather objective “ugly, average, cute, hot” scale where is Felicia Clover placed?
Using the subjective 1 to 10 scale, how much do you like Felicia Clover personally?
Antekirtt
Posted at 09:13 am, 7th March 2018Without the cellulite, she might get a 5.75 from me, in practice under a 5. My favorite body type is way thinner than her but I’ve found I can tolerate a lot of extra weight if there’s “lucky” fat distribution, and if it doesn’t erase the curves. Cellulite can really disgust me. Generally speaking give me a pretty face, nice skin and the general hourglass body type and I’ll be very horny; as long as you stick to those three conditions and don’t ruin it woth ‘rolls’ and cellulite, even wild size variations won’t matter much to me. At 5’7 a girl can be anywhere from 110 to 200lbs and I’ll still fuck her given the above.
C Lo
Posted at 10:01 am, 7th March 2018Did you not not see my comment:
I was (obtusely) pointing out you are beholden to your choice of orthodoxy. Feminists/Jehadis/Tradcons are exactly the same underneath, save whatever Zone of Concern goals they choose.
https://alphamale20.com/2014/11/09/zone-control/
Caleb Jones
Posted at 11:18 am, 7th March 2018Correct.
That’s absolutely correct. It’s not absurd. It’s fact.
If that fact emotionally bothers you, that’s fine, but that doesn’t make it a non-fact.
Duke
Posted at 12:04 pm, 7th March 2018That woman is pretty much my type or my personal 8 as BD would say, and not surprisingly she looks like my baby momma too. lol I like women that are short, have a round face, pale and pasty skin, and are a little chubby. Fortunately for me American cities are chock full of this type of woman. I have the same view and tolerance for fatness as antekirtt. As long as she is cute and has some type of figure I’m game.
https://i.pinimg.com/236x/ad/55/28/ad5528d7d213f198fd2b66d0fccf60c0–horror-films-felicia.jpg
Chavel
Posted at 12:55 pm, 7th March 2018BD,
I strongly agree with you in particular your two points that it’s just a human function, like shitting, and No, Means No after 3 strikes.
On No Means No after 3 strikes I take it a step forward. No means no to me means No before, during, and after. She says no after 3 attempts I’m gone. She says no during any act after 2 times, we stop and do something else if I decide to continue. She says no, goes ghost/radio silent after sex, oh well, it’s means no to me and I move the fuck on.
No, means No to me not so much for the legal ramifications of trying to force it on her, the social uncoolness of trying to force it on her, but because I want to be happy. And my happiness for me in sex involves a willingly partner. If she can’t submit to me, my desires, our desires, than it doesn’t work for me.
Thanks for the Article,
Chavel
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 12:57 pm, 7th March 2018Laws against statutory rape refer only to an adult having sex with an underage minor (which is always a crime, no matter what, regardless of whether he has power over the minor or not), as well as non-violent sex with a woman who is incapacitated (drunk, high, etc…, which is a crime as well)).
However, there is no criminal law against having sex with someone whom you have directly authority over. The law doesn’t care about power imbalances, direct or indirect, as it pertains to adults.
It is perfectly legal, for example, for a boss to sleep with his employee or a landlord to sleep with his tenant. Sleeping with your employee may be a violation of company rules (precisely because of the power imbalance) which could get you fired, but there is no actual law against it.
The only law against professional superiors sleeping with their professional subordinates concerns “quid pro quo sexual harassment,” in which the boss is threatening her with negative professional consequences if she doesn’t sleep with him, or rewarding her with positive professional consequences if she does. This means he’s blackmailing her. But even this law is only civil (she can sue him), not criminal (she can’t put him in prison).
But if they both say it was consensual and there was no blackmail or harassment, there isn’t even a civil law against it. It violates company policy (which could get him fired), but that’s it.
My point was that if feminists wish to expand the legal definition of rape to include the above direct power imbalances (since a good case can be made that sexual coercion was involved, even if both swear that it was consensual), I won’t argue.
What I will argue against is this Marxist feminist idea that sex is rape even if the man has superior power that is completely adjacent to the woman (he just happens to be richer, etc…). Now that is just anti-capitalist crap which falsely claims that we should all be treated like incompetent children by our economic superiors, even if they have no direct power or influence over us and we are not dependent on them in any way!
K
Posted at 01:26 pm, 7th March 2018Jack, I think here could be the core of my misunderstanding. I was a bit confused by the above-repeated statement that “all sex starts as casual”.
First, I only call sex casual when I want the sex (with that particular guy) but no romantic relationship with him. As long as I see a chance for a future relationship, I won’t consider the sex as casual, even if I am not yet emotionally invested. But if I tweak my definition of casual to involve also the situations where I am physically and intellectually attracted, but not yet emotionally invested, then I can agree with the statement.
Second, perhaps as “a group of exceptions”, there are undeniable cases where people become emotionally invested before they end up having sex with the object of their affections. I assume you think that’s stupid, and it’s of course true that it is more likely to happen to younger, less experienced people. Nevertheless, it happens.
My understanding is that someone with cultural/religious inhibitions feels bad about the whole idea of casual sex, at least before their inhibitions are reduced or eliminated, and therefore does not want to have casual sex (even in spite of being strongly attracted).
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 01:28 pm, 7th March 2018In other words, what concerns me is real power imbalances on the individual scale. That is, a direct power imbalance between an individual, in relation to another individual.
But radical feminists, being Marxists, care about the fiction of “collective power.” In other words, they believe that sex is rape if the woman is in a less powerful class (i.e. working class) and he is in a more powerful collective (i.e. middle class), completely irrespective of whether or not there is a direct power imbalance between them on the individual scale.
In other words, radical feminists glorify the poetic “collective” at the expense of the individual situation (which is the only thing that’s real). And that’s when I tell them – you’re being Marxists and you need to stop that shit because you’re putting the rights of the collective (a poetic verbal expression) over the rights of the individual (the real).
And glorifying the fictional social construct (the group) at the expense of the real (the human individual) is essentially Soviet-style tyranny!
That’s the problem with BB and his logic!
joelsuf
Posted at 03:24 pm, 7th March 2018Actually I borrowed it from Strength By Sonny, but feel free to tell me where I borrowed it from. Also all you have to do is look at ONE RSD video in the past few years and you’ll see where I’m getting this stuff from.
Well under average, probably 4 at best.
A little above average, about 7 or so. T&A for dayzzzz lol
Am I the one who is dedicating thousands of words in responses? Don’t put me in the same boat as JOTB lol. And I am cool/chill/positive, both online and off. Do you see me freaking out like JOTB is doing?
Me calmly asking why he thinks I’m negative and not checking back in for hours makes me outcome dependent? Seems legit.
Oh I had no idea. I always thought it was from Roosh and his ilk. Still it doesn’t sound as legit as Tomassi puts it. In any case I did not mean to insult it that harshly, and I’ll take care to do some research on it.
Antekirtt
Posted at 04:39 pm, 7th March 2018@Joelsuf: look man, go reread the tens of comments you’ve made on this blog about how if you get seriously pissed at the mention of homosexuality you’re automatically a closet homosexual. You know it’s nonsensical, you know it’s an unfalsifiable POV that doesn’t stand to scrutiny. You know it’s ridiculously weak under Occam’s razor, because it’s so much simpler to explain this by the fact that some people happen to be A) not gay, B) have SP against gays, C) are emotional, high drama people who get really pissed when stuff really ingrained into them is questioned. No “secretly gay” needed. Go reread my analogy with carrion. You should realize the lazy shortcuts you’ve been doing like “And they’re all really pissed at gay people, which makes them closet homos” are just stupid. And that yes, this kind of fucked-up logic comes from bastardized feminist and freudian rhetoric, regardless of the specific source that inherited it.
But you’re going to keep repeating something you know is stupid and I’m gonna keep calling it out for what it is.
marty
Posted at 04:58 pm, 7th March 2018So Tomassi has written a book that’s sold a heap of copies on Amazon and is widely considered the Bible of Red Pill thinking and one of the most important books a guy can ever read. He has a chapter on Plate Theory that runs at about 10,000 words. You openly admit you haven’t read it and didn’t even know it existed.
Yet you come on here and say it doesn’t sound “legit” to you after I quote half a sentence from those 10,000 words. Says a lot about what you think you know.
You obviously have a bee in your bonnet about PUA’s and RSD in particular. And you keep making outlandish statements about them and lots of other things. Yet its pretty obvious that you don’t have a very widely read or deep understanding of the Red Pill or PUA.
I can’t believe you quoted that Sonny guy again. I watched his stuff after the last time you quoted it and he knows even less about PUA and Red Pill than you do. :/
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 05:32 pm, 7th March 2018This may be what you want at first, but you have no way of knowing whether or not you will change your mind in the future.
That’s factually incorrect. If you are having sex casually (you’re not in a relationship yet), then the sex is, by definition, casual. It may not be casual in the future, but it is right now. We all begin at the fuck buddy level and then we eventually upgrade, or are ourselves upgraded, or not.
Every woman I sleep with starts out as a fuck buddy. Then, if I choose, I upgrade her to friend with benefits. Then, if I don’t have a girlfriend, I might upgrade her further to MLTR. Then, if I fall in love with her, I’ll upgrade her to OLTR (and then potentially, to live-in OLTR, and then the mother of my children). And, of course, once the OLTR level is reached, my other women may only be FBs or ONSs (tertiaries) or FWBs (secondaries).
But none of this is guaranteed. The only thing that’s guaranteed is FB. You don’t make decisions as to whether or not she will become more than an FB until you’ve been sleeping with her for at least 3 to 6 months.
Too bad. Those people need to grow up. I would never have sex with a woman who has developed any type of strong feelings for me before we even had sex. That’s pathetic and ensures a very needy and sexually inexperienced person, whom I don’t want in my life.
They do want to have casual sex because they are very attracted to the concept, as well as to the person. So they make a decision to do it. But their programming keeps getting in the way, constantly telling them that this is wrong. The woman then declares war against her own decision and desires. This is known as ASD. This requires seduction on the part of the man to overcome.
The problem with dealing with high ASD women who are confused and can’t decide what they really want, unfortunately, is if the man isn’t socially smooth or calibrated, he either will not succeed in puncturing her ASD (despite how much she wants to fuck him), or if he does succeed, it might lead to massive buyer’s remorse on her part (the most extreme manifestation of which is a false rape charge so she can save face and not be ashamed of a “bad decision”).
For us men, there is no difference between being sexually attracted to a woman and having sex with her. If we think she’s hot, we will try to fuck her. If we think she’s not, we won’t.
But, for women, being sexually turned on by a man and actually having sex with him are two different things.
What PUAs call “inner game” (which involves cultivating a confident and charming personality) will only result in the woman becoming very attracted to the man. But who cares if she’s attracted if all that means is that she will look at you with sexual eyes and then run home and masturbate because she’s “too scared” to turn fantasy into reality? That’s why the seducer needs “outer game,” which is the actual, practical seduction, involving logistics, conversation, making her feel comfortable, etc…
There are a few very high sex drive women in this world (like the ones I have chosen to almost exclusively surround myself with) who are like men; that is, there is no difference for them between sexual fantasy and a concrete attempt to turn that fantasy into reality (otherwise, they’d never have the fantasy in the first place).
For high sex drive women like these, all you need is “inner game,” just like all a normal woman needs is “inner game” to turn a man on AND get him to want to fuck her. But, unfortunately, such high sex drive women are rare, unless you make a concerted effort like me to find them and surround yourself with them!
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 05:47 pm, 7th March 2018No! This is wrong. ASD has NOTHING to do with rejecting betas. Women are NOT attracted to betas. That means that if she rejects a beta, it has nothing to do with ASD. In order for a woman to feel ASD, she must be deeply sexually attracted to the man and very much want to fuck him, thus triggering her ASD, which motivates her to declare war against her own desires.
But women reject betas for only one reason: They’re not attracted to them, which means, ASD doesn’t even come into play!
Remember, ASD is when a woman fights against her own sexual impulses, despite being super horny for the guy and wanting him in her bed.
Alphas, and only alphas, have to deal with the plague of ASD. And we deal with it either via seduction (game – which is cultural deprogramming) or finding a woman with low to non-existent ASD (a woman who will only reject men she isn’t attracted to, not men she is attracted to).
marty
Posted at 05:56 pm, 7th March 2018Exactly. In fact many women have the complete opposite reaction to betas. Mainly women who are married to or in a relationship with them. They lose all attraction to the man, don’t have any desire to fuck him. But they still do it out of a SP sense of duty. Then they hate/resent themselves and the beta because of it. Hence the reason so many marriages are a complete disaster in terms of sex and happiness.
Antekirtt
Posted at 07:16 pm, 7th March 2018I don’t think women are universally repulsed by betas. Some are, and nearly all eventually become repulsed by the beta they’re with, but that’s not what I’m reading above.
There was a hot older woman who was crazy about me a few years ago (yes, physically too, I’m not strawmanning this), at a time when I was terribly, bang-your-head-against-the-wall-whenever-you-remember-it beta. True, it was shortly before the beginning of my transition toward being more 2.0, and I always had a few isolated alpha traits here and there, but based on what people are saying above there was enough beta in me to repulse her and erase any ounce of alpha I may have had. Not what happened. I even needed kinda drastic measures to cut the ties when I left her.
Guys, there are nuances. You can cling to the belief that all women automatically feel their vagina dry up at the slightest sign of beta, but you’re gonna keep running into puzzling and – believe me – non-exceptional real life examples if you don’t recognize the nuances.
Besides, if alpha is even slightly heritable – never mind 50% or even 80% nurture – and women only ever wanted alpha seed while getting the beta bucks, we wouldn’t have a majority of betas in the population.
Johnny Clay
Posted at 10:00 pm, 7th March 2018A related topic that might be of interest would be, “Is there such thing as casual sex for beta males?”
If the answer is “no,” then it would be constructive to ask if a beta can become an alpha (though I’m sure that’s been discussed at length on this site.)
doclove
Posted at 10:28 pm, 7th March 2018@ Jack Outside the Box
Yes, you do have Tradcon tendencies whether you realize it or not. Your views on prostitution are the Feminist Supremicist Puritanical Victorian kind because you seek to stigmatize men who have no problems with it or use it. What would be regarded as less tradcon today is to thing that prostitution should be decriminalized and destigmitized like I do. You do not want to talk about this not so much because this is a GAME blog which you say the discussion of prostitution should not be discussed but rather because you logically know you can not defend your prostitution stigmatization well. I give better arguments against engaging in prostitution than you do. I do however recognize that in anything one does that there are tradeoffs and both positives and negatives associated with it. I have said that prostitution can give men frame. I have also said that many men may have different views on sex, women and prostitution in particular than you do. Some men may say prostitution is better than learning GAME. Give them a genuinely good reason not to do so. You have not and I doubt you can. Even I can provide a better reason to not engage in prostitution than you. I love beating you with your tradcon ways. You are about to start a blog so it would behoove you to get good at this and either change your views to the right ones which is better to do like I have or to become a better debater at defending wrong ideas. I will give you a hint. Do not say what is in your best interest for men to avoid prostitution but say what is in their best interest to avoid prostitution. Let’s be honest. It is best to become an Alpha 2. Not everyone can no matter how hard they try and not everyone will want to do so. Although this blog is primarily about becoming an Alpha 2, you should consider what is second, third and so on. Second best in my opinion.is MGTOW with FBs and prostitutes. Third best is Alpha 1s but I could see how someone might say Alpha 1 is better than MGTOW with FBs and prostitutes. Being Beta is definitely third because it is often an abusive relationship for men with little sex. Being Omega( especially with no access to sex or not willing to get sex by any available means necessary even including not engaging in prostitution) is the worst because who wants to be an involuntary celibate. If I am a Tradcon like you once said it is because I do not view promiscuous women as good wife and mother material and there is evidence if I can find it on the web to show why this is true. You are also more of a Tradcon than me because you once stated that your girlfriend was going to move in with you and give birth to your children. Although you may not have a monogamous marriage, it will look partially that way to outsiders. I do not want to live with a woman and do not want children. That makes me less Tradcon than you. At least if I engage in Tradcon ways it is for factual and logical reasons while you seem to engage in Tradcon ways for emotional reasons.
joelsuf
Posted at 10:30 pm, 7th March 2018They are attracted to betas in a different way than alpha 1s and 2s. What many say is “beta” is actually omega. Remember, Betas follow with hopes (and even expectations) of becoming an alpha (specifically alpha 1). Omegas are too weak to follow.
See JOTB, this is why I can’t decisively dislike you. We disagree on a lot of things, but agree on the important stuff 😉
And this is 100% correct. It is needy, it is pathetic, and in this day and age with all the information and materials we have at our disposal about improving our love and sex lives and meeting future partners, it is unacceptable.
At the expense of sounding like JOTB, Monogamy is archaic, antiquated, negative SP, OBW, and just plain manipulative behavior rolled into one. If you want to pursue it be my guest, but its your funeral. Anyone who pursues monogamy has been tricked into believing that other people are responsible for your happiness. If your fragile little ego can’t stand the thought of your partner being intimate with someone else, knowing full well that there is someone better than them for YOU out there at the same time, then you need some serious unwiring to do.
So we’re just gonna ignore studies that show that many gay bashers are homosexual themselves and still in the closet? mmmkay.
And you accuse me of making lazy blanket statements? So because I mentioned something you didn’t like or agree with, it comes from feminist and Freudian rhetoric? Care to explain?
I kinda disagree. Alphas must deal with most ASD. But omegas deal with it too. ASD is tied to social value, which is at the core of a woman’s concerns. She doesn’t want people to find out that she had sex with a “man of low value (omega male)” so she makes sure that omega males cannot even touch her. This is why I keep arguing that the affirmative consent thing is passive eugenics. Its to scare omegas into not even attempting to make moves on chicks they like. Alphas and (some) betas won’t care, and chicks will make moves on them. ASD = Alpha 1 and Omega Insurance. That’s all I have ever interpreted it as.
doclove
Posted at 10:32 pm, 7th March 2018@ Johnny Clay
Beta males can have casual sex but it is less likely than Alpha males because Beta males rarely if ever have validational sex like Alpha males do. Nearly all Beta male sex is transactional. If you go to Rollo Tomassi’s site http://www.the rationalmale,com then you will see today;s article discussing just that.
doclove
Posted at 11:01 pm, 7th March 2018@ Johnny Clay
The link above is bad. It is http://www.therationalmale.com I hope this is right.
Antekirtt
Posted at 03:54 am, 8th March 2018Come on Joelsuf, this is an easy one. I’m criticizing your making *direct* implications from “they hate homos” to “they’re closet homos”. That has NOTHING to do with denying that some homophobes are closet homos. Over and above that, believe it or not, some straight people are effeminate. There’s a spectrum of hetero types and a spectrum of homo types – but again, that was over and above what I already said: I *never* denied that sizeable numbers of pua homo haters are closet homos, I attacked your habit of so casually making a direct implication “they hate gays, which makes them closet homos”. You’re aware of both these things.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 04:13 am, 8th March 2018Hey Doc, they’re called “paragraphs” man! Any chance you can get acquainted with them?
Tradcons hate hookers because hookers are the cheap prostitutes which prevent the expensive prostitutes (housewives) from inflating the price of sex. In other words, tradcons are the house wives’ little bitch boys whose job is to assist the house wives in monopolizing and inflating the sexual market for the benefit of these conservative women.
By contrast, I hate all prostitutes – from the expensive house wives, to the medium level gold diggers, all the way down to the lowest level cheapest street walker. Because regardless of whether the prostitute is expensive (house wife) or cheap (street walker), or anything in between (sugar baby), the premise is the same – women are generous and men are the humble receivers. I reject that premise!
As a sex-positive man, I believe that sex should be framed as the woman receiving it, not the man. This tends towards equality. By contrast, the woman being framed as “giving,” tends towards female supremacy and puritanism. So you calling me a female supremacist puritan is rather amusing.
Even the cheapest hooker follows the same philosophy as the expensive house wife, except to a much cheaper degree. So the battle between the house wife and the hooker is an internal quibble between degrees, but following the same despicable K Type premise! I’m an R Type guy who believes in sex in exchange for sex only. So I want to bring the whole K Type system down.
As such, I hate the house wife even more than I hate the hooker! How’s that for being a tradcon?
I just did. Whether you accept my arguments or not is your business. If you think my arguments are lame, that’s your business too.
Going to a prostitute philosophically signifies that your penis is worth less than a woman’s vagina. By contrast, having sex in exchange for sex signifies the equality between the two organs. Prostitution is implicit female supremacy which degrades every man into an inferior position and confers the superiority of “noble generosity” on the part of the woman.
Prostitution is matriarchy, regardless of whether we’re talking about hookers, gold diggers, provider hunters, sugar babies, or house wives. The matriarchal principle is the same!
Every time you call me a tradcon, you lose credibility. Like I said, the house wife (expensive prostitute) is beneath my contempt way more than the hooker. The principle of “generous lesbianism” (or conservative K Type sexuality) is the principle I despise.
The fact that you even believe in government in the bedroom (marriage) tells me that you have tradcon tendencies.
The fact that you stigmatize women with high sex drives, and women who love sex with multiple men (in exchange for sex, of course) as “not good mother material” is explicitly puritanical slut shaming. This solidifies your tradcon credentials. Tradcons love K Type sexuality. I love R Type sexuality only.
That is literally laughable.
She did move in with me. And then she moved out (recently) because living together was too stressful and put too much of a strain on our relationship. We both love our freedom. So, she recently bought a house on an adjacent block (five minutes away, walking distance) and our relationship has experienced a resurgence and has never been better.
When we have kids, we’ll share joint custody and when they get older, they’ll be able to choose which house to sleep in every night. They’ll essentially be raised in two houses and will decide every day which one they want to stay in.
Yeah, and? I want kids. Do only tradcons want kids?
We won’t have any type of marriage at all. Government in the bedroom isn’t for us.
No it won’t, because we’re not even living together anymore.
That’s absurd. Tradcons aren’t the only ones who want kids, or cohabitation with a woman. That’s like saying because I believe in the death penalty, I’m a better Christian than you, when I’m an atheist. And being against psychiatry doesn’t make me a crazy Scientologist.
Right.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 05:14 am, 8th March 2018In order to say that a woman rejected the man because of ASD, you must first conclude decisively that she was sexually attracted to him. Because if she wasn’t, then her rejection of him had nothing to do with ASD.
So, if a woman is indeed sexually attracted to an omega male (which I can’t conceive of) or a beta male, then yes, her rejection of him might have something to do with her fear that her social value might be threatened if she gives in to her own impulses. But if those impulses aren’t even there (because she’s not attracted to him) then it wasn’t an ASD based rejection.
That’s why alphas must deal with the majority of ASD because alphas are the men whom women are most attracted to. That’s why the alpha needs game – to deprogram the woman from her ASD, whereas the beta just needs to become attractive; namely, an alpha (ASD is the least of the beta’s problems).
Historical example: In the 1800s, white women would falsely accuse black slaves of rape because of ASD. How do we know that those FRAs were ASD based? Because these women fucked those slaves! This tells us that they were attracted to them. But their sense of social value kicked in after the fact, thus raising their anti-slut defense, which culminated in a false rape accusation to protect her social value (leading to the slave’s hanging for “rape”).
But if she weren’t attracted to her daddy’s slaves, she’d just reject them without any ASD, FRA, or subsequent lynching. Were those slaves omegas? Maybe in terms of their external social position, yes. But they were probably alpha 1s internally and she sensed that primal alphaness which motivated her to fuck them, only to have massive ASD kick in later!
hey hey
Posted at 05:14 am, 8th March 2018Here is the problem. Browsing through the comments the major issue is SP. Every sex starts and should start as casual. When you see future relationship and you don’t engage and you want something more than attraction to have sex with the man, then it means that man has literally no future with you(and if you get married with him and divorce him after 15 years of miserable relationship then that’s no future at all).
The reality is, as a woman you have future with men you don’t see future with them out of the bat. So the more casual sex you have the better for you. You have all the “freedom” in the world to make your choices without the “Romantic transactional sex” that destroys the relationship from the start.
So by your definition every sex you have that is not casual, is bound to end the relationship mostly on a bad note(And not as a relationship that has real future). And you only have yourself to blame because you put yourself in boundaries that damages your future in terms of relationships(mostly because of SP).
What is real future with a man from a woman’s point of view? The sustained attraction for him(or them) over the years EVEN if you are not with him(or them) at some particular time, for whatever reason. The problem is that these men are rare and as such the chaos you women have with men. If you see a future with a man you barely know or spend time with but took some time to have sex with, RUN.
Unfortunately, you women unknowingly press men hard to show you that they are worthy providers and you don’t realize this is exactly the reason(if they prove to be) that destroys the attraction towards them fast down the road.
K
Posted at 10:54 am, 8th March 2018Hell yes, I can. Stop taking away my agency, Mr Misogynist.
Oops, sorry, I didn’t know there was a binding definition of casual sex in… where exactly?
In other words, the man knows better what the woman wants than she does, right? What were you saying about the agency thing again?
Duke
Posted at 10:56 am, 8th March 2018This is motherfucking awesome. I thought I was insane for being the only one that thought raising kids did not have to involve having both parents live together from the very start. The reason traditional marriage is normalized in society is mostly because of the SP of men wanting to feel manly by providing for his family, and women want to be taken care of and respected in society. Not because they actually think “it’s best for the kids,” like they so adamantly proclaim.
People will slowly start realizing that this is the way to go moving forward. A while ago it was relatively uncommon and shameful to be single mother. And now look at how normal it is. More than forty percent of kids are born to unwed mothers, and it will only keep rising. Some would say that stuff like this marks the end of civilization, but in reality it is not as big a deal as people make it out to be.
ps How long did you actually last living together? Don’t know if you’ve tried it/thought about it already, but I think living part time, with max of three days in a week is the way to go. I find that it just gets tiresome to see the person you love every single day, day after day.
joelsuf
Posted at 12:08 pm, 8th March 2018Oh now I understand. Well tbh I don’t have time to go digging for the specific information to prove any of this so its just some observation of mine. I’m not getting paid to discuss things on here, ya know. lol
That stopped being relevant a few millennia ago, when people started judging others on external social position. So yes, when considering their external social position, they were omegas who were out of line. Sure they had alpha 1 traits (no group of people have alpha 1 traits more than black people lol), but their social value was negative. This is why when women had sex with them, they had to accuse them of rape. It was because the conventions at the time did not think it was possible for white chicks to agree to have sex with nonwhite men. So it was SP that gave them ASD.
This is much MUCH different than now but still very similar. If it gets out that a chick agreed to have sex with a /pol/ posting, PUA worshiping, basement dwelling omega male, current conventions do not believe it is possible for a chick to willingly have sex with him so he must have raped her (even though in most cases, its probably the chick raping him).
External social position and social value is EVERYTHING in this day and age. I do not like it as much as anyone else, but that’s just how it is now. If you have low (perceived) social value, then guess what your sex life is limited until you can increase that value. And if you have too MUCH social value then chicks will make up stories to make sure they can increase their value while decreasing yours as we have seen in the (mostly) false harassment stories we keep hearing about.
Sex has become a deadly game of chess for most men, where women have a constant advantage. Which is fine by me, since I know how to play and what strategies to use. This is what I mean when I say its gonna be difficult for men to procure sex in the coming decades.
Duke
Posted at 02:25 pm, 8th March 2018How long do you wait for a comment to post if it gets stuck in the spam filter? I posted about four hours ago and still nothing. Does it do that when you cuss, because I think I may have cussed.
Caleb Jones
Posted at 02:48 pm, 8th March 201824 hours.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 05:32 pm, 8th March 2018Then you are superior to every human being on the planet. No person, man or woman, can possibly know how they will feel about another person in a year. Two years. Ten years! That is hopelessly naïve and Disney.
No one is taking away your agency, sweetheart. You can do whatever you want. I’m just telling you that what you’re thinking is impossible. And that human minds aren’t immovable rocks. By limiting yourself to only one view of the specific man and vowing never to change it, the only one limiting your agency is you.
Midol. Aisle 9. It will help with the cramps and bloating.
Are you serious? Wow! Well…..at least now you know.
The English dictionary. Commonsense. Sanity. If you’re sleeping with someone outside of a serious or emotional relationship, the sex is, by definition, casual. Duh!
The red pill person usually knows better than the blue pill person.
But the man, in this case, doesn’t know better. The woman knows, just as well as he does, that she wants casual sex. And she also knows, just as well as he does, that only fear of social stigma prevents her from acting upon it. SP is just a fact of life for most people.
A red pill person can see through the SP and be able to tell the difference between a genuine lack of attraction vs. an SP based reaction. Sometimes, the red pill person is the woman and the man is stuck in the matrix. Nothing to do with gender necessarily.
Societal programming – and therefore, the woman herself who is infected by it – is taking away her agency, not the man. The man is trying to restore her agency. If she is genuinely not attracted to him (and therefore, has agency in rejecting him) then no amount of seduction will work on her. But if it works, her initial reluctance was most likely due to her own ASD fucking up her agency.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 05:59 pm, 8th March 2018It still should be.
That’s not good at all. A child needs both a mother and a father. They don’t necessarily have to live in the same house, but the child needs both to be a healthy and well balanced adult.
Do you know what happens to children (especially boys) if they are raised by single mothers? They become easily triggered social justice warriors who want to repeal Free Speech because it hurts their “self esteem.” Fuck single mothers!
Wait, who said anything about “unwed mothers?” I thought we were talking about single mothers! Obviously, everyone should be unwed. Weddings and marriages are for the tribal stone age.
Uhh, being a single parent is terrible. The child needs a father, just as much as it needs a mother.
We have been “unofficially” living together for years, in the sense of her having the keys to my place and vice versa. She didn’t “officially” move in until last April, so yeah, we lasted for just a little less than a year in the official “live in” sense.
That’s “essentially” what we’re doing now.
It’s the mundane shit that kills things, like washing each other’s dirty underwear and doing dishes. Fuck that!
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 07:40 pm, 8th March 2018Strongly disagree! Red pill game theory teaches the exact opposite of what you just said. We are alphas, betas, or omegas, based on our personalities and behaviors, not what society says.
Your belief that “you are what society says you are” is very beta dude (perhaps even a little omega).
But they were alpha 1s in terms of their real personalities, not omegas.
I say Arabs. Then Hispanics. Then blacks. Then whites. Then Asians.
Right. Because they were really alphas. If they were omegas, not just in terms of their matrix-dictated social position, but in terms of their true personalities, these women would have never fucked them.
Correct. They were still alphas though (internally). That’s why their vaginas got wet.
But she would have never fucked him in the first place if he weren’t alpha in personality and behavior!
Pure garbage! Dude, you’re a slave to the matrix if you think that society tells you who you are. See BD’s definition of alpha, beta, etc… His definitions (which I agree with) are based on the man’s personality, not his external social position within the matrix hierarchy.
A man may be a billionaire, but still a hopeless beta when it comes to women, which is why he just hires hookers. Dude, you REALLY need to unplug from this social validation bullshit and stop placing so much importance on what others think of you! It’s beta! And outcome dependent!
You are an alpha if you have the personality of an alpha, even if you’re a janitor renting a basement apartment! Unplug from society’s expectations. See BD’s definitions, which are personality based, not society based!
That depends. Is the woman a status whore? Is she a sheep? Or does she own herself? Is she red pill? If she’s an individualist, or just doesn’t really care what others think, she’ll fuck you if she’s attracted to you, which depends on your alpha personality, game, and seduction skills (and your good looks).
Remember, when I do internet dating, I lie and say that I work as a “janitor’s assistant” in order to weed out the gold diggers, status whores, and matrix sheep who still depend on the approval of the masses for their actions.
My girlfriend thought that I was a “janitor’s assistant” for the first three months that her and I were sleeping together as fuck buddies.
My current fuck buddy (that I replaced my old fuck buddy with just four days ago) and I had this convo on our first meeting (which is a typical convo for me – I usually say the same things about this on multiple first meetings):
Her: So you’re a janitor?
Me: Oh hell no. I wish. I’m his assistant. But one time he called in sick and let me use his mop. I didn’t do so good. But he says, under his patient guidance, I may very well have a future in the custodial arts.
Her: I’ve never seen anyone be so enthused by that.
Me: Well, I was picked on in school and I always looked down on the floor. That’s when I started noticing how dirty it was. Now, when I look at it, I feel a sense of accomplishment, or at least I will when my boss either hands me the keys or dies. Are you gonna eat the rest of those fries?
Her: No, go ahead. My husband thinks that’s “crappy food” anyway.
Me: What does he do?
Her: He’s a cardiologist. But let’s not talk about him.
Me: Okay. I’d love to work at a hospital. Saving a doctor’s life by mopping up the wet spot before he steps on it would be awesome! You’re welcome, heart attack patients! Someday maybe. Someday.
Her: Giggling.
Fast forward 25 minutes later: We’re naked on her bed with my penis inside her. She’s on top of me moaning and thrusting as aggressively as she can.
Why was she attracted to me? Because I’m alpha in my personality, and everything I said above was in a sarcastic, sly, and mischievous tone while giving her an evil smile and leaning back. It was my “I don’t give a shit what you think” pose! Outcome independence baby!
Gold diggers. Status whores!
This matters way, way less if you have game, seduction skills, and an alpha personality. What matters the most is – are you alpha by BD’s definition (personality, behavior)! If you are, then you’ll get women to have sex with you, even if you aren’t a “positional alpha” by the standards of the external matrix.
Although I agree that the two are somewhat correlated, since, you would think, a real alpha male is not going to settle for being a janitor and living in mommy’s basement. So being an alpha does predict an increased likelihood of future success (eventually), but it’s not a perfect correlation.
Again, read BD’s definitions. They are personality based. It’s one thing to be an alpha. It’s another thing for society to tell you you’re an alpha, even if you’re an omega billionaire with zero alpha traits, like Bill Gates, or Mark Zuckerberg. These may be “positional alphas,” but they aren’t real internal alphas. They are omegas taken advantage of by gold diggers.
No woman wanting to have sex for sex would ever fuck Gates or Zuckerberg! Ever!
If you think you are whatever society says you are, then you’re either a beta or an omega, Joelsuf. And massively outcome dependent.
You need to snap out of it and get that societal weight off your shoulders man! That feeling of internal liberation will give you that sparkle in your eye that every woman will notice and be turned on by (because that’s real alpha-ness), regardless of your position in the blue pill hierarchy!
Even black alpha slaves got white pussy dude! Because they were alphas! Unplug from the matrix hierarchy and see what’s possible when you stop the social bullets with your will!
B
Posted at 08:32 pm, 8th March 2018I’m amazed at how many men on here don’t believe casual sex exists! How can this be? Have these men only had sex with a few women?
Before I started on the “alpha 2” path, I was a long-term serial monogamist, having monogamous relationships that lasted 1-4 years, with only 4 different women. Back then I definitely thought sex was special and casual sex didn’t exist. Now that I’ve had much more sex with many more women, I have come to the very clear realization that it is a spectrum, ranging from just physical to an almost spiritual connection as you described you have with PF.
doclove
Posted at 04:16 am, 9th March 2018@ Jack Outside the Box
I am often in a rush and do not write as well as I want or could especially concerning using paragraphs. this has never been intentional. However, I was going to not use paragraphs to irritate you just for shits and giggles until I read your response to Duke. I like your response to Duke. You at least have the sense to know that children especially boys should be raised by their fathers. I do not regard your way of living to have and raise children as an optimal one, but if the optimal one is off the table and you still insist on having and raising children then it is the least bad. Abandoning Children while usually good for men is bad for children and to a lesser extent women.
I will have more later. If there is a sliding scale on who is 100% Tradcon and who is 0% Tradcon then in some respects you are more Tradcon than me and in other respects I am more Tradcon than you. I need to go to work so I will have more before Monday Morning and hopefully more by tomorrow, Have a good day.
Gang
Posted at 05:22 am, 9th March 2018@JOTB
Your arguments for the equality of penis and vagina are seducing. And they would match the realitf if women and men remained available and/or attractive in average during about the same amount of time on the “sexual market”. This isn’t the reality : Women at different levels aren’t sexually available the same amount of time as men. Here again, as for sustainability, your idealistic utopian views are detactched from the material down to hearth physical reality. Women can go months and years without sex, jist becaise they are more focused on something else during a phase of their life, such as a hobby, studies, a mission, children or whatnot. And they don’t suffer in any way not having sex during that time. Whereas men unless they have extremely low sex drive will suffer psycho logical harm abstaining from sex during the same time. And look, even sexually active women dating us Alpha 2.0, as MLTR and FB, as blackdragon says and my experience confirms this, they are vastly more serial monogamist, very few fuck me and also fuck other men in the same week. Meaning they have sex one day per week, while I have sex 3 to 5 days per week in average, while they are dating me. Because except one or 2 exceptions in my roaster, or the women you decide to screen for such as your girlfriend, they don’t have polyamor/polysexuality wired in them, unlike men.
Monogamous relationships end up infamously in years of sexlessness mostly because women refuse sex to their partner out of boredom or whatnot.
Moreover the legal age women that men are attracted to are below 40yo mostly, below 50 if you push the enveloppe. And actually a lot of oldee women just naturally become asexuals. Meanwhile healthy men are sexually active in their 60s (not so much in USA because of the horrible diet causing all kind of cardiovascular problems and thus mature age errectile disfuction).
Moreover you explain yourself that women such as your girlfriend with high sex drive, are also more picky. Menwhike women in average are much more picky than men, they only consider the to 20 or 10% men as intrinsically/physically “fuckable”, the rest of the men they fuck only in some form of a transactional arrangement, for attention, the social status of a relationship, money, providing her babies a fatherly figure, money, or power, etc…
The only way to balance female sexual availability of women and men, is to have “gang bangs” (as in one woman having sex with more than one man in one session, and by extension any group sex astivity where more men are participating in the sessionwthan women) as tte norm of human heterosexuality (or at least, as the majority of heterosexual acts). The duration of the sexual session is indeed the only thing where women are naturally wired to be more available in time than men, making it somewhat natural for them to have sex with more than ine manmin one sex session (some theorise that in early prehistoric human tribes this type of sexuality with male plurality was widespread and allowed for greater bonding of the tribe, children belonging to the whole tribe without a dedignated biological father, but instead many fatherly figures or “uncles” or whatever specific concept, and optimal genetics from all kinds of men sperm competing at once in the uterus of women – I wasn’t born, so I dunno if these theories reflect the reality of that time).
I am world with obsessive and peeverted views on physical modesty (unhealthy rlmental relation to showing/not showing/seeing/touching certain parts of the body), currency and economy, prostitution is the closest widespread thing you get to the logistical configuration of gang bangs with reasonably not too old women.
K
Posted at 11:17 am, 9th March 2018Jack… Do I understand correctly that you are telling also the men on here that there is always a chance that they – including you – will develop romantic feelings for women they had categorized as fuck buddies?
Personally, whenever I wanted casual sex in my life, I specifically chose a guy who was sexually attractive but strongly unattractive to me in some other aspects, precisely in order to avoid the emotional risk. Kinda analogically to the older women & younger, no provider-potential men in BD’s often cited example.
Which might explain some cases where good-looking, smart and kind men have had trouble getting casual sex from women.
Could I meet one of these guys again in 20 years, realize he’s changed and fall in love with him? Can’t exclude the possibility, but what are the odds? In any case the option has zero impact on my current decision whether to have casual sex with him or not.
(3) : done without serious intent or commitment *casual sex
See https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/casual.
Serious intent doesn’t immediately equal to an established serious relationship.
So in your view the woman is just a victim of SP, waiting for the man to rescue her from it?
Duke
Posted at 11:31 am, 9th March 2018I agree with you, especially with fucking single mothers literally and figuratively. Maybe I didn’t explain myself correctly though. What I meant was that eventually it will become normalized just like single mothers is normalized, for people to co-parent while living in separate residences.
Men will realize that maybe instead of getting married, and then getting divorced, there is an alternative route that will save them time and money, with the added bonus that children won’t suffer from divorce because their parents were never living together in the first place. Maybe I’m being overly optimistic though. It’s hard to imagine a beta saying “I think us living together is putting put a strain on our relationship, I should move out” like you did.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 10:37 pm, 9th March 2018Single mothers are only good as fuck buddies, or perhaps a very tentative version of friends with benefits. Any higher level than that and you’re risking exposing your existence to the kid. And you don’t want that.
First, it’s not exactly alpha to raise another man’s child (no offense, BD).
And second, if the child becomes emotionally attached to you, Family Court may pronounce you as the child’s legal father, against your will, and thus force you to pay child support for the next 18 years.
So if you’re sleeping with a single mother, make sure you never see the child! If she tries to introduce you to the child and encourages you to play with the child, or perform some type of “family functions” with her and the child, run immediately. She’s looking for a replacement father figure, which should be unacceptable to you.
Technically, she’s the one who moved out because she originally moved in with me. In any case, the parents should, at the very least, live close to each other if they’re going to have a baby. Like I said, my girl bought a house just five minutes away (walking distance) from mine.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 10:49 pm, 9th March 2018And mothers. I do not support single fatherhood any more than I support single motherhood. All children need both a mother and a father.
Because of your tradcon beliefs.
No one should abandon their children, regardless of gender. Unless they’re giving their children away for adoption. That’s perfectly fine.
The difference is that my beliefs that you call “tradcon” only coincidentally harmonize with tradcon beliefs, while rejecting the tradcon philosophy behind those beliefs. Other people, who aren’t tradcons, may share those beliefs as well. Like I said, believing in “thou shalt not kill” doesn’t make me a Christian.
By contrast, your tradcon beliefs are shared by no one, except tradcons. They are inexplicable, except when viewed in light of the larger tradcon philosophy.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 11:11 pm, 9th March 2018Of course! My girlfriend started out as a fuck buddy. Then I upgraded her to friend with benefits. Afterwards, she was upgraded to MLTR. And now, she’s an OLTR.
I believe every woman whom BD ever slept with started out as a fuck buddy.
All sex partners start out at the fuck buddy level and then, either stay there forever, or are eventually upgraded to a higher level. But no one skips levels. Everyone starts at the bottom (fuck buddy). And there are other levels you must climb to before reaching the girlfriend level (which is the last one).
See, most alpha 2s don’t see it that way. We have to sleep with a woman for months before we (potentially) upgrade her to a higher level. I too have sometimes chosen women to sleep with whom I knew would never progress beyond the fuck buddy level, either because they were unattractive to me in non-sexual areas, or because they were married, or whatever.
But even women who I potentially see having future babies with must start out at the bottom to see how she behaves herself, because each sexual level gives her more responsibilities than the previous.
Nah, I’m pretty sure they’re betas. No alpha has problems getting casual sex.
Okay, fine. Just saying that there is such a thing as “upgrading.” No category is 100 percent exclusive in the permanent sense. Human beings (potentially) change their minds, especially upon getting to know each other while having sex with one another as fuck buddies at the same time.
If her rejection of him is ASD based, yes. If her rejection of him is due to a genuine lack of attraction for him on her part, no. A red pill person can tell the difference. And sometimes, the genders are reversed, with the red pill person being the woman and the man being a victim of SP (e.g. a woman trying to seduce a man coming out of a prudish religious cult, etc…).
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 12:31 am, 10th March 2018An alpha male will, at the very least, strive for this ideal. Alternatives, like prostitution, housewifery, gold digging, female provider hunting, stripping, porn, and so forth, are predicated upon the philosophy of women being the givers and men the receivers. In other words, female supremacy. Only betas would just accept this lying down.
Your job, as an alpha, is to, at the very least, mitigate the “eggs are expensive, sperm is cheap” fundamental premise by any means necessary. And the most effective means of mitigation is finding women with sex drives as high as possible.
Please, don’t bring up your hippie eco-terrorist views on this thread. The only one who’s detached from reality on that subject is you. No one is going to stop driving cars, flying planes, using electricity, or eating meat! No one! That’s reality (that you are detached from)!
Plus, there is such a thing as “free energy,” which is currently being suppressed by the elites, but let’s not have that debate here, please!
That’s why you have to niche yourself. For maximum happiness and maximum avoidance of the “women care less about sex, so they control it” principle of nature, you must surround yourself with very, very high sex drove women like I have done. The polyamory community, pagan groups, sex clubs, and other avenues are good bets.
Plus, promoting a sex-positive culture and giving every teenager a sex-positive education will help somewhat as well. Even if the ideal will never catch on with all women, we can at least do our best to promote it and mitigate the opposite.
Not if they have high sex drives, or identify as sex-positive feminists. My girlfriend can’t even go a week without sex without getting fidgety.
I realize that. But what I’m saying is that a certain type of culture, or sub-culture, can mitigate this, or influence it in a direction that is more desirable for us. Again, even if the ideal (sexual equality) is not fully achieved on a wide scale, moving society at least a little closer in the direction of that ideal should be our goal, even if we never reach utopia (except for private utopias within our own social niches, which I have certainly achieved)!
I’ve often wondered how realistic it would be to start promoting the concept of clitoral enlargement surgery in the same way that breast augmentation is promoted today. It would be voluntary, of course, and could be sold to women in a “double your pleasure, double your fun” type of way. Rich and famous women would have to get the ball rolling on that, and then others might start trying it. That would at least bring us men closer to equality and sexual utopia.
Which is why monogamy should be abandoned.
See above, re: clitoral enlargement. Just an idea I toy with from time to time.
The higher a woman’s sex drive, the less tolerant she is of unattractive men. Because the more important sex is to you, the less you tolerate bad sex. That’s where game and the seduction community comes in. Instead of prostitutes (sexual welfare), I propose self-improvement so the betas won’t hate the “sex creators.”
See above, re: Self-improvement.
That’s one way, but not the only way. Like I said, other things can be done as well if only we, as a society, were open minded enough to them. Sex-positive education, clitoral enlargement surgery, self-improvement (to create more alphas), etc… And on the individual level, niche yourself to a certain high sex drive female community so you can achieve for yourself the private utopia that most men won’t.
Even if you’re right, we shouldn’t just settle.
Like I conceded to Doclove, even if I were persuaded that these lower forms of sexuality (like prostitution, monogamy, housewifery, etc…) are absolutely necessary for the beta workers to be placated and not start breaking shit or murdering us, my (public) promotion of prostitution and monogamy would only be a matter of cold pragmatism, combined with my private disgust for these things, while sleeping with the beta’s wives behind their backs.
If that’s what it takes to maintain an orderly society, then fine. We should indeed prevent the betas from dropping their tools and waging a revolution against us, even if it means deceiving them with beautiful lies (Disney monogamy) and providing prostitution for the omegas.
In that sense, me and you (and Doclove) may have talked our way unto the same page. But, our emphasis is still different. I emphasize preventing the betas from rising up and slitting our throats. Whereas, you guys seem to emphasize genuine compassion for the unclean masses.
My more pragmatic approach may grudgingly allow things like prostitution, monogamy, housewifery, transactional sex, strip clubs, pornography and so forth as a method of self-defense against the betas, but no more than that.
This means, the betas need to receive just enough of that to prevent a revolution. At the same time, however, we should be promoting an expanded utopia for ourselves (sex-positive culture) and greater self-improvement for the betas so that beta forms of sex can be mitigated as much as possible.
And I certainly don’t encourage prostitution or transactional sex on a blog of aspiring alphas.
Other than those difference in emphasis, we may actually agree on everything.
Gang
Posted at 01:28 am, 10th March 2018Which is why I often start things playing dumber, and my extremely minimalist lifestyle showcases a huge understatement of my net worth, which I don’t disclose to women.
Gang
Posted at 01:36 am, 10th March 2018@Blackdragon and whoever wants to answer
According to you, how different does sex feel to you between a pay for play sex session (with a prostitute or a sugar babe) who services you with a performance highly sexually compatible with you, and a low end irregular Fuck Buddy or one night stands (when they rarely occur, I know you don’t like ONS)?
Answer for me: I feel very little to no difference: in both cases, worst case scenario it feels a bit mechanical, best case scenario it feels very sensual. The only difference is before and after the sex, mostly game vs. money.
Gang
Posted at 02:04 am, 10th March 2018Here are few positions held by JOTB that I am aware of and consider anachronic:
-seemingly in favor of the abolition of prostitution: in favour of criminalizing both providing sexual service in exchange for money AND paying to get the sexual services.
-in denial of the environmental unsustainability of his own lifestyle, I am not even talking about climate change, already just in term of natural resources.
-in favour or arming teachers in schools. (this one is a gem)
Progressive/seducing views/experiences:
+experienced polyamorous with FB and FwB difference.
+and swinging/orgies experiences
+wiccan and bisexual OLTR girlfriend who has sex with other women and men.
Puzzling statements for me:
-likes “feminine women” but has “low physical and binary fuckable/not fuckable” standards. I have been in many polyamorous circles both IRL and online, and I find women in these circles statistically way less physically attractive than the general corresponding local population at large. In the swinger’s community however tend to be statistically as attractive or more than in the local population in general. Of course that’s all subjective. Therefore I am super curious to know what the women in your life look like (I mean there can you show some pictures or if not, can you give some names of lookalikes that I can find on google such as our friend Joelsuf did here – whatever kind of example, doesn’t have to be famous nor porn), and if I also fancy that style of women, show me how you do it.
I am looking forward to read your blog, I am sure you’ll come up with some very interesting articles 🙂
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 03:22 am, 10th March 2018FALSE!!!
I’m a libertarian, not a tyrant. I oppose all laws prohibiting, restricting, or regulating any and all forms of consensual sex between consenting adults. I have NEVER called for the abolition of prostitution by means of physical or legal force! I’m only in favor of changing the rules of conversation.
If I stigmatize heroin, are you going to accuse me of wanting government agents to arrest you for it? Seriously, where are you getting this?
Sigh. This feminine tree hugging trash again? I’m not having this debate here, but google cornucopians vs. malthusians. You’re definitely a Malthusian, whereas I am a Cornucopian. Everything you think you know about your precious environment is wrong.
There is also free energy that is being suppressed by the elites. This planet could truly sustain up to a trillion people easily, especially with geothermal energy and the like.
My “gem” is being implemented at the suggestion of the President of the United States!!!!
Go back to Caleb’s other blog and into that guns blogpost. I responded to you there AND I have linked to the CNN news story which declares that teachers will now be armed in some schools. It’s happening baby!!!!
Oh, and don’t forget, I also wish to criminalize psychiatry.
Correction: The women I sleep with must be feminine only in terms of their physical appearance. In terms of their personality, I prefer them masculine, with a high sex drive.
Physically, she can never be mistaken for a lesbian, or a man. But personality-wise, I want her thinking like a man about sex.
Correct. Or at least lower than the majority of men. I still have physical standards (must not be fat, for example). But whether I will have sex with a woman or not depends mostly on her personality and attitude towards sexuality.
Mostly correct!
Meh. Okay.
Absolutely not! Under no circumstances!
Let me think about that!
Do what?
Uh huh.
Gang
Posted at 09:54 am, 10th March 2018Thanks for clarifying that you only stigmatize prostitution, and are not in favour of criminalizing it. I assumed wrongly indeed.
Surround youself only with these bisexual orgy/swinging/poly feminine (appearance) women with masculine personalities : these are clearly my favourite type of women too, but I need to find them at least really cute. And tiny.
A trillion people on earth?!? What is this free energy that the elites are hiding from us?? Please enlighten me.
Antekirtt
Posted at 01:46 pm, 10th March 2018Take all your time but do try to watch them all. They turned me from a moderate malthusian to a moderate-to-strong cornucopian in a matter of weeks:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqKQ94DtS54
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAJeYe-abUA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Pmgr6FtYcY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0ZMk0785kI
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 04:09 am, 11th March 2018Free energy (originally discovered by Nikola Tesla) allows us to tap into the electricity of the surrounding oxygen by exploiting the covalent bonds of air molecules. We’re talking about free, wireless energy out of thin air (literally) which would render oil, fossil fuels, nuclear fusion, and the like completely unnecessary.
Free energy, combined with geothermal energy, would solve the population “problem” and allow us to expand our human populations safely into the trillions.
Please watch this (geothermal energy):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIy2Edh9Q54
And this (free energy):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EI5Jq_h-qyU
Beyond that, just google “Cornucopians vs. Malthusians.”
The elites are Malthusians who want to literally reduce the human population to 500 million and herd them all like cattle into “mega cities” while they (the elites) inherit the remaining 98 percent of the planet for them (the 1 percent) for the purposes of their own peace of mind and breathing room.
In order to accomplish this, they tell the people Malthusian lies which they themselves know are lies, because the Cornucopian truth would cause them to lose trillions of dollars (oil companies, etc…) and it would leave their private utopian plan via genocide and population reduction without even the semblance of justification.
Robert Malthus was wrong when he said that 6 billion people by the year 2000 will cause everyone in America to eat nothing but dead rats while all the world’s children starve. Malthus was a fool and a genocidal monster!
The more people we have, the more comfortable we all are (because of technology and new ideas). Our 7 billion people live more comfortably today than any human being has ever lived in any other time in history.
But if the Malthusians are ever exposed as panicky fools, the elites will lose their power, their peace of mind, their money, and their own private utopia at the expense of everyone else.
But I’m not debating this here anymore. I’m done with this subject! Watch the videos I linked to.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 05:28 am, 11th March 2018Hold on! We must recognize that there are two separate types of stigma – public and private.
I absolutely and wholeheartedly support the private stigmatization of prostitution within red pill and alpha male (and female) circles. The so called “sexual secret society” should be laughing at, and ridiculing, the prostitution concept (having sex for non-sexual, or gender neutral, reasons).
And we should definitely not be encouraging or de-stigmatizing prostitution on a red pill blog designed for self-improvement and the promotion of an alpha lifestyle.
All of us within the “red pill secret society” should be on the same page that prostitution is for betas and omegas.
However, what about the public stigmatization of prostitution within the blue pill world? Well, Doclove makes a compelling case that the betas need their own type of tension relief so that they can be kept under control, be none the wiser, and satisfied enough so that they continue working instead of organizing an uprising against us.
So I’m undecided about the public stigma question. On the one hand, I want to promote as much sex-positivism in our culture as possible. On the other hand, I don’t want the unwashed masses slitting my throat or breaking shit. A balance may need to be struck (at least in public) between a culture that encourages sexual liberation vs. a culture that keeps unattractive betas satisfied enough that they don’t drop their tools.
In point of fact, we already have these two cultures today – one public (for the betas) and one private (for red pill men and women). The only point of debate is how to tweak the balance!
But we should all be united on the premise that prostitution (sex for non-sexual reasons, implying female generosity, and therefore, supremacy) should NOT be promoted, encouraged, or even really talked about in self-improvement red pill spaces, like this blog.
No shit! If I were in favor of criminalizing prostitution, I’d have to criminalize the house wife, the status whore, the sugar baby, the over 33 provider hunter, the Russian gold digger, the common escort, brothel hooker, and streetwalker; not to mention all professional pornography and strip clubs, as well as private businesses using sexy women to sell toothpaste!
Jesus Christ, how would such a task of criminalization even be possible? LOL! We’d need a hyper-totalitarian police state which would make even Stalin blush!
I met my girlfriend six years ago who was already plugged in to that scene. We met on okcupid. I arranged a coffee date at Starbucks. I was 28 and she was 19. We talked and flirted for about an hour, while talking about relationships and sexuality. She wanted to make clear to me that she is anti-monogamy and will never be monogamous with any man again, as she is incapable of it (the nature of the conversation and my general sex-positive vibe made it possible for her to confide in me about this).
This was music to my ears because I had gotten out of my last mono relationship and realized that monogamy is not for me either and that there is no way I can’t cheat. Her and I ended up going to her place and fucking like rabbits for the next 4 hours (she originally initiated and invited me into her bed).
She became my regular fuck buddy. After a few months, I upgraded her to friend with benefits. Then MLTR. The more emotionally intimate her and I became, the more she introduced me to her circle of friends. It turned out that she’s not just a Wiccan (which I knew from her dating profile), but also a member of a polyamory circle. All her friends are poly.
Her and I began having threesomes with her friends, which eventually evolved into partner switching with other couples. After our first (and last) swingers party (at least together, since she still goes by herself), I upgraded her to OLTR.
As my official girlfriend, she considers me to now be a part of her poly circle (which overlaps with her Wiccan circle). So we regularly have group sex with her friends, as well as secondaries and tertiaries separately from each other. I mentioned before that she has a lesbian secondary (who used to be a tertiary).
She also occasionally hooks me up with girls who are either within (or on the outskirts of) her poly group, or married or taken women within the mainstream who want to cheat on their husbands/boyfriends.
If you want more info, you’ll have to ask me more specific questions.
I don’t know about “tiny,” but they’re certainly not fat or anything. Some of these poly couples are rather nerdy. Whereas we refer to each other as “primary” (whereas the mainstream world would use the word “boyfriend” or “girlfriend” respectively), other, way nerdier, couples whom we have had sex with in her circle refer to each other as “king” and “queen.” LOL! That was too “dungeons and dragons dork shit” for me though.
Objectively speaking, many of these poly girls are decently cute. Others range from average to below average, but certainly nowhere near ugly.
Like I said though, it s predominantly a woman’s personality which turns me on. I do have physical standards (she can’t be fat or hideous, etc…) but a woman’s body really is either “fuckable” or “unfuckable” to me. No 1-10 bullshit. As long as she’s decently thin, cute, and physically feminine, she’s fuckable (assuming she’s sex-positive and not crazy in terms of personality).
Gang
Posted at 09:21 pm, 11th March 2018@JOTBThe things you pointed as “Free energy” is crackpot pop culture mythology. So this option isn’t really available. I believe it’s pretty clear to anyone with some scientific knowledge. I don’t know what your scientific background is, but I have a degree in general engineering (meaning I had advanced courses in a wide variety of engineering fields, including mechanical, electrical and energy, 5 years of university), in computer science (research master degree, again 5th year of university) and I also studied theoretical and mathematical physics (General Relativity, Quantum Field Theory, Cosmology, particle physics, etc..) also at research master level.Geothermal production of energy (electricity, heating and cooling) is currently estimated to have the potential to ultimately be able to harness a maximum power of 2TW on the 15TW that we currently consume. Anything beyond this estimate is not cost effective unless huge breakthrough is done in drilling technology. So I have very very big doubts of it having the potential to become the major source of energy.Solar panels and batteries cost energy and mineral resources, and it is unclear at this stage if they can become a major source of energy (it’s not clear if there is enough minerals to produce the necessary amounts of solar panels). And if so, it’s most probably much more expensive energy than oil. There is also thermosolar turbines plants. I am a big proponent to expand as much as possible renewables, but I don’t think it means cheap energy source.This leaves us, like I said before and as the futurist guy videos talks mostly about, with nuclear energy. Nuclear energy is a particular fascination of mine. I worked at AREVA a company which builds nuclear fission plants. I visited IRL https://www.iter.org as part of my curriculum, I am from France, the most nuclear energy bullish country in the world : guess who decided to go full on nuclear power, the elites. Guess who is against nuclear power – the people. I am pretty bullish myself on Nuclear power and especially fusion. But Nuclear fission produces radioactive wastes that have to be handled properly. In France we had Superphénix or SPX 1976-1998 an experimental fission reactor producing energy out of normal fission wastes (plutonium) and it was shut down to please the population. Funding is not exactly ramping up for nuclear power generation, even for fusion. Fusion itself while it doesn’t produces radioactive byproducts of the reaction itself, still produces radioactive pieces of equipment from the constant exposure to emitted gamma rays (free neutrons). Pieces of the walls of the tokamak itself become radioactive and have to be handled ultimately. France is not ramping up its nuclear production program, quite the contrary it’s regrettably headed towards the path of diminishing it in favour mostly of fossil non renewable energies since renewables are nowhere near able to replace nuclear yet. That’s what Germany already did.Another gloomy prospect of nuclear energy is nuclear weaponry…
Generally speaking, it doesn’t look like the majority of the population is in favour of nuclear energy at all.Even with widespread nuclear fusion, while I agree that we would then sit on colossal resources of energy to the point where it wouldn’t be the bottleneck. I am not sure if the exploitation costs would be cheap enough to make artificial lighted agriculture economically viable, my guess is : most probably not. And so, while it’s some very entertaining piece of hopeful science fiction, those Arcologies seem really far fetched. But hey, I would like my bedroom without window please in the Arcology, better sleep quality without the sunlight waking me up ;)However 12 billions stabilised population on earth (I am not counting other planets population through space colonisation) widespread nuclear fusion, combined with widespread 10-20 passenger autonomous electric vehicles, and hyperloop type of intercontinental maglev trains in void tubes. And mostly plant based diets (once in a blue moon – not anymore tax government founded animal products, thus more expensive as price would be related to real production cost – are still Okay). Ok, then we can keep similar comfort, and intercontinental nomadic lifestyle or perhaps even frequent travelling possibly sustainable. But we are still far from a network of intercontinental Maglev trains and widespread nuclear fusion.
doclove
Posted at 02:11 am, 12th March 2018@ Jack Outside the Box
I love your projection behavior. You accuse others of things that you have done. You are the one who has lost all credibility because your commentary on how the sexual market place works is an idiot loser mentality that has no basis in reality for the overwhelming majority of men. It is not these men’s fault but sadly it is their responsibility to deal with it. It is women’s fault that the sexual market place is the way it is and not men’s fault. The sooner you come to this realization the better your comments will be. Now with that being said, I do think men should try to improve themselves in all areas of their life and that includes seducing women. However if some men want to drop out to become MGTOWs and only use porn and prostitutes then I respect their choice even though I disagree with it if they are between the ages of 18 and 60. After that, I have no criticism of it. To be honest, I will criticize little or not at all if these men are between the ages of 40 and 50. I think pre-teen and teenage boys should try to improve themselves too and that incudes with women or girls. I have similar ideas to Black Dragon on this as he wrote an article on this about what men should do to improve their lives depending on how well they are doing in life in each aspect of their lives and what age they are. I can not remember the name of it though, Did you notice that even Black Dragon was sensible enough not to debate me on this topic of how prostitution can give men better frame when dealing with the seduction of women because he did not disagree with men enough to debate me?
If you do marriage like things then yes you are acting more like a Tradcon than me, Nice to know that you “divorced” when she moved out of your home. Now you get to act like a happily “divorced” couple and have children together because both of you insist on that. You do realize that the laws and the way they are enforced are anti-man and anti-father even concerning child support. She could lie about you for example by saying you are a child molester, get a judge to agree, send you to prison and still collect all child support payments from you after you get out otherwise you will be sent back to “debter”prison for not paying your child support. Even though you are a lawyer and specialized in this field and are less likely than others to have this happen, it is still possible. For others without your background, I would recommend that they live like me and say no to children, living with a woman and marriage or any other marriage like behavior. Some but not all marriage like behaviors include living with a woman who is not your relative(mother, grandmother, sister, daughter, granddaughter, niece or cousin) and having babies with them even if they are your relatives which I am sure some of your perverted ancestors did more extensively than mine and even liked more than mine,
As far as slut shaming goes, I am much better about not doing it than most men even if I am not as good about it as you are mainly because I do not possess the self destructive tendencies that you do. To be honest if I watched you on let us say on an internet site called prison-tube commit give a speech about how you were child-support raped and unjustly lied about being a child molester and/or sexual harrasser by your girlfriend just so she could have the children all to herself without your interference as well as get all your money garnished from your bank accounts, selling your house etc. which left you penniless plus literally raped by your Muslim Boko-Haram Terrorist cell inmates while your girlfriend volunteered to have sex with your fellow prison cellmates’ brothers and cousins, then I would laugh and experience Shadenfreude (pleasure at your sorrow) because out of the men who write on this blog including the owner, Blackdragon, you should know better being a former divorce and family law lawyer in the West particularly in the USA. You should know better than anyone here including me at what soulless sociopaths women can be when they fall out of love, especially when the culture encourages them to that way as it does in the West backed by the legal system saying that they are pure angels and you as a man a demon fit for destruction when clearly the truth of the matter is this is seldom the case. There are a higher percentage of women who will act like soulless sociopath when the relationship end than men in the West particularly the USA even though the narrative of lies that most people believe is different from the truth. There are statistics out there saying that women who have a higher Cock count are more likely to divorce. I will try to provide these later. What makes you think that your girlfriend won’t hit you up with at least court ordered minimum child support payments or worse?
I agree with you that if you want to be an Alpha that you should try to limit or best of all not use prostitution. However that is not always possible in reality. You can have your discussion about philosophy and stick your head up your anus as well as eat your own manure up in the clouds standing on the mountaintop, but if it has nothing to do with the reality on the ground in the valley below then your philosophy is at best useless or even worse destructive to those who are fighting on the ground in the valley below. The simple fact of the matter is that Gang is correct in that on average women can go without sex for much longer than men. I do not care what your girlfriend and her friends do. Most women are not like your girlfriend and her friends and pass out lots of sex to men. Even your girlfriend is extremely hypergamous, and I dare say more than most other women, and does not give sex to beta men and only gives sex to alpha men. Well, that makes prostitutes better than your girlfriend because while your girlfriend may go through anywhere between 100-500 penises in a lifetime as a slut, a prostitute will go through 1000 to 5000 penises in a lifetime and even give it up even again and again to a beta unlike your girlfriend for a fee for her services. The fact of the matter is that Gang is right in that while he is having sex with multiple women, they are usually not having sex with multiple men and that women fuck equals and betters while men fuck equals and lesser and because of this there are a higher percentage of men who are involuntary celibates. Prostitution is the only guaranteed alleviator of involuntary celibacy among men.
By the way, I never called you a beta like you said in the 14 Types of Monogamy article on this site. I did accuse you of acting like a White Knight Mangina, Just because your life is going well does not mean other men’s lives will or even can. The only thing a sensible man should feel for men who engage in prostitution is sorrow and compassion for them that they must do this in order to have sex at all or at least sex with better looking women or the kinds of sex they want or drama free sex with women who won’t cause them more trouble than they are worth. Any one of these men could chop off your genitals and rape your girlfriend right before you, and thankfully that is unlikely. For that matter any one of these men could say that the accused who did this to you and your girlfriend could say not guilty in a criminal court of law and again thankfully that is unlikely. At least you are waking up to the fact that an involunatary celibate man could potentially be the most destructive person on earth as he has little to nothing to lose and it is a good idea to placate him with prostitution availability. Please don’t provoke him with your ridicule because as the saying goes, but for the grace of sheer dumb luck, there go I. And yes, their is at least some luck no matter how of a small percentage that is in one’s success or failure at life. Let him not awaken because you were stupid enough to unnecessarily provoke him.
When you mention the life of Jenna Jameson on 14 Types of Monagamy article on this blog, that her pussy became numb after doing so much porn. See, that is so adorable about you and your White Knight Mangina ways. You never mentioned about how as her Alpha badboy adult boyfriend had hot consensual statutory rape sex with her while she was a high-school teenager than one day had actual violent real rape sex against her will with her with his best friend who was bigger and stronger than him. Maybe that made her pussy numb, not all the beta-boys who kind enough to pay her money to perform as a sex worker via certainly stripping, certainly porn acting and maybe prostitution. Did you ever think that the narrative you are telling about sex work especially prostitution and how the sexual market place works is a lie and that on that one you conform to an evil ruling elite’s agenda? No of course not, because you would rather hear the gentle lies and repeat them rather than the harsh truth like I do. For most prostitutes, it is just a job which they find ok just like most other people in other kinds of jobs. The nest highest group is sex workers who hate their jobs just like other people in other jobs not even remotely related to sex work, Then the smallest number of people love their jobs whether sex workers or not.
I shall return.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 02:13 am, 12th March 2018Right. That’s why all those scientists were murdered. Did you even watch the whole video?
Spoken like a smug credentialist who has been taught nothing but orthodoxy officially pre-approved by the elites who are funding and controlling the very educational facilities that gave you your fancy degrees.
I rest my case.
You have my deepest sympathies.
Unalterable Reality: You will never persuade people to stop eating meat or go back to the 1400s in terms of science, technology, and lifestyle. Period!
No. That’s not “gloomy.” That’s a wonderful prospect. Every country must be given nuclear weapons (atomic bombs, hydrogen bombs, neutron bombs). No nuclear country will ever attack another. All 198 countries in this world having nuclear bombs = permanent world peace!
A nuclear world is a polite world. Just like a gun for a school teacher, a nuclear bomb is a gun for an entire nation. We should do everything we can to arm all nations with nuclear weapons. If we succeed, there will never be another war. Don’t you want world peace?
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 02:57 am, 12th March 2018I’m preaching an idiot loser mentality??? Really? I thought I was preaching the exact opposite.
So…..wanting to have sex with women exclusively in exchange for sex is…..a loser mentality?
Saying that men should improve themselves as much as they can, become as alpha as they can, become as attractive to women as they can, and have sex with as many women as they desire in mutually physically gratifying sexual arrangements is…..a loser mentality?
Dude, you’ve lost it!
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 04:52 am, 12th March 2018By their own choosing.
Yes it is. Everything in your life is your fault (credit: Blackdragon).
Disagreeing is precisely the loser mentality! Your entire mentality is filled with pessimism, determinism, fatalism, and nihilism, and it is really starting to make me sick. I don’t want this disempowered garbage in my life!
Now that’s just misogynistic nonsense. You actually blame women for refusing to have sex with people whom they are not attracted to? I’m sorry, but if I were a woman, I wouldn’t want to fuck an unattractive loser either!
Blaming women for a man’s celibacy? Now that’s Elliot Rodger territory. Instead of blaming women for refusing to sleep with unattractive losers, maybe these men should just….stop being unattractive losers.
Stop being such a bleeding heart sexual socialist. Prostitution (sexual welfare without sexual merit or attractiveness on the man’s part) will cripple his incentive to self improve. The only reason for us to be for it is in our self-defense (against the potentially unstable beta or omega male).
You’re welcome to your opinion. I’m just glad that they’re being distracted from vandalizing my house. If giving them porn and hookers is what it takes to keep me safe from them, so be it.
So, I guess if I refuse to slit the throat of a baby, I’m acting like a Christian because I’m faithfully following the commandment “Thou shalt not kill?” LMAO!
We’re not “divorced” nor did we break up in any way. She’s still my serious girlfriend. We just decided not to live together. We both need our space.
Holy shit, really??? Oh my god!!!! I was only a family attorney for nine years! I had no idea!!!!
Wrong! In order to send someone to prison, you need to find him guilty in criminal court, NOT family court. And criminal court has Constitutional standards which family court does not – such as, innocent until proven guilty by a jury of your peers beyond a reasonable doubt.
The only thing that family court, or any other civil court, can send you to actual prison for is “contempt of court,” which means, disobeying a court order, which does include not paying your child support in full and on time.
Yeah, no shit Sherlock! Do you know how many of those cases I’ve been involved with (on the man’s side)?
Do you actually think I would have upgraded her to OLTR from MLTR (or to MLTR from FWB) if I didn’t trust her? Most men make a woman their serious girlfriend after only sleeping with her for one or two weeks! Because most men are stupid.
It took me two years of sleeping with her in increasingly serious capacities before I upgraded her to OLTR girlfriend! I’m not retarded dude!
LOL! Great, so depopulate the West and let the savages from the third world take over! Great plan!
The problem is that you seem to define “marriage like behavior” as anything above casual sex. Sorry, but most men need love and pair bonding in their lives too (even if it’s not monogamous).
What?
[blank stare……..blink……..blink……….blink……….]
You know the sexual habits of my ancestors? Based on what?
Hey Doc, are you okay? I think you need a nice long nap. You’ve been working too hard.
May I ask what “self-destructive tendencies” I possess? You mean, wanting kids? Wanting a girlfriend? Wanting pair bonding in my life?
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Again, Family Court has no legal authority to send anyone to prison for child molestation, or any other crime, except “contempt of court.” For me to be thrown in prison for child molestation, the accuser would have to prove in criminal court, beyond a reasonable doubt, in front of a jury, that I’m guilty. I would have my own attorney and my accuser would be required to allow him to cross examine her (as per my 6th Amendment right to face my accuser in criminal court).
This increasingly hypothetical scenario of yours is getting more retarded by the minute. My girlfriend is ethnically Jewish (religiously Wiccan). She doesn’t fuck Muslims! She’s not a complete idiot!
Thanks, I had no idea what shadenfreude was. LMFAO!
Yeah, that’s why I’m not stupid enough to make a woman my serious girlfriend after just one week of sleeping with her, unlike most men!
I know exactly the types of women who are the soulless sociopaths you speak of. I’ve faced them in court on a regular basis as an attorney. I know exactly the psychological profile of the gold digging scum that you’re mentioning. Low sex provider hunters, gold digging mercenaries, alpha fucks, beta bucks women who married the beta, etc…
I know way more than you about the psychological profile of a woman like that. And I also know the psychological profile of the man who sleeps with such gold digging filth!
I am not a beta. And my girlfriend has the exact opposite psychological profile. She is not a gold digger or a provider hunter. She doesn’t sleep with betas. And she’s not a status whore or a social trend follower. She’s actually quite the independent thinker who sneers at people who bow down to social pressure or follow society’s “trends”
Sorry dude, but you have no clue what the fuck you’re talking about as far as my girlfriend is concerned. Zero clue. And this is coming from a guy who once defended a man in court because his ex-wife falsely claimed he raped her on their first date 20 years ago (because she was tipsy) and tried to argue that their whole 15 year marriage was a 15 year kidnapping that she went along with because of “Stockholm Syndrome,” and that he should be imprisoned for rape, kidnapping, and the 15 year criminal imprisonment of his wife! Spoiler: She lost!
Trust me, I’ve seen it all. I know all the red flags and warning signs, as well as the personality type of a woman who would do such a thing. They are either gold digging provider hunters with low sex drives (even asexuals or closet lesbians), or “alpha fucks, beta bucks” women who marry the betas.
My girl is none of those things. The three best things you can do to avoid all that trash (besides never getting married, of course) are
1. Be the alpha (lover, not provider),
2. Stick to very high sex drive women only (high sex drive women who only fuck alphas love men and male energy more than any other type of woman and are the safest women to be around)
3. And sleep with her for years before making her your girlfriend.
All three of the above, most men never do.
Like I said, I have more knowledge about this in my little pinky finger nail than you have in your entire head. My girlfriend has the exact opposite profile. That’s why I chose her. Most gold diggers who screw their men over in family court have contempt for those men. They don’t exactly have regular group sex with them like my girlfriend does with me! And they aren’t exactly millionaires like my girlfriend is.
Yeah, and I gave you the psychological profile of such a woman above!
Good! The more divorces, the better! Marriage is slavery! That’s another reason I chose my girlfriend. And another reason I’m very attracted to women who have slept with a lot of partners. They’re more likely to divorce those betas and go on a giant fuck marathon with me (even though I was discreetly fucking them when they were married as well)!
No need. I already know that monogamy doesn’t work, but it works even less for high sex drive people! Duh!
It may have something to do with the fact that she inherited 12 million dollars on her 21st birthday! But what do I know!
Yes it is. Everything in your life is your fault (credit: Blackdragon).
LOL! You mad bro?
I’m not here to cry for wilful losers. I’m here to help alphas and aspiring alphas who precisely want to improve themselves so they no longer have to use prostitutes. The goal is to lift them up!
They don’t “pass out” sex. You’re talking like a tradcon again who’s under the impression that only men are straight and women are “generous asexuals.” That’s part of your problem.
So….she doesn’t have sex with men she’s not attracted to???? Oh no, what a monster!!! LOCK HER UP!!!
No! She doesn’t “give” sex to alphas or anyone! She takes! For herself! See? There you go again, Mr. Tradcon who talks as if women are generous for having sex and selfish for withholding it. With my girlfriend, it’s the exact opposite! You’re implicitly denying the existence of female sexuality….like a tradcon who respects the hooker more than the slut because “at least the hooker gets paid.” Pathetic!
So….a prostitute is better because she degrades herself by fucking men she’s not attracted to as a generous service to losers? Um, okay! LMAO!
Fine, so let the unattractive masses fuck prostitutes. What do I care? But I’ll continue laughing at them until they make the decision to improve.
Right, because manginas are…..alphas?
That’s up to them. Blame is empowering because it implies they have control, which you want to take away from them and take their hope away with your liberal “compassion,” thus implying total defeat! I actually care about those men more than you do, in that sense!
Yeah, I’ll get right on that. Thanks.
Sure. While encouraging him to improve.
Like I said, my mocking is mostly private while hanging out with actual winners. In public, I have more social intelligence than to mock a man to his face like that.
This is your Catholic garbage leaking out. Yet another fundamental disagreement we have. You’re obviously a determinist and/or a pessimistic nihilist.
A real man makes his own luck. To take away their blame is to take away my credit. Which is exactly what you have done here. You think we are all the victims of luck and circumstance, thus taking away my pride and self esteem, and their shame. Fuck that!
That’s a defeatist working class view which should have no place on a red pill, or self-improvement blog.
Like I said, I don’t walk up to stranger’s face and point and laugh. What the fuck are you imagining? I’m not a moron, dude.
I was white knighting? No. I was just pointing out how sick it is to have sex with someone you’re not attracted to. Eventually, that’s not a switch you can just turn on and off. A woman’s vagina might eventually go permanently numb. Sex with people you’re not turned on by is gross and unnatural.
That’s not what she said. She said that while she’s doing porn, she feels no sexual gratification, and neither does her partner. They are just actors. Which I find pretty sick.
No.
I know exactly what the elite’s agenda is when it comes to sex. Read Orwell’s 1984:
“Do you see now what type of society we are creating, Winston? It is the exact opposite of those stupid hedonistic utopias dreamed of by the early reformers…. ….once we destroy the orgasm. Our scientists are working on it right now. Once that’s gone, there will be no more love, except love of Big Brother. No more loyalty, except loyalty to the Party. No more laughter, except laughter at the thrill of a defeated enemy. All competing pleasures we shall destroy. If you want a picture of the future Winston, picture a boot stamping on a human face forever!”
The elites want to destroy the sexual and emotional bond between men and women. That’s why they’re using social justice to make sex mechanical, by prefacing it with autistic verbal procedures and redefining everything else as rape. I want the opposite!
Oh goodie!
joelsuf
Posted at 09:44 am, 12th March 2018That isn’t what MGTOW is. Save for prostitutes (and even that is an arguable case), if you “drop out” of the sexual marketplace and do nothing but jerk off to pr0n then I really believe that makes you a closet homosexual or at the very least an asexual. It must be true because if you are getting aroused by pixels on a screen but not with an actual chick then what does that make you? I agree with what Victor Pride of Bold And Determined (my second favorite blog besides this one) says about it.
Using pr0n as your only source of sexual release is weak, bordering on inhumane. I would even argue that its even weaker than what most gay men do. At least gay men actually go out and have sex. I’m gonna defend this to the damn grave because its as simple as putting 2 and 2 together. Don’t desire sex with chicks? Then you either don’t desire sex at all, or you want sex with men. As my stepdad says: It’s simple like dat. I’m cool with all three just at least have the balls to say which one you want. Hell there’s a reason why The Birdcage is one of my favorite movies. No one in that movie hides who they are.
With that being said, Imma kick back and watch doc and JOTB bicker at each other like a married couple some more. *grabs popcorn*
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 03:36 am, 13th March 2018Gay porn? Or straight porn? Refusing to fuck women and jerking off to straight porn makes you a closet homosexual?
So what about a gay man who refuses to fuck other men, but only jerks off to gay porn? A closet straight guy? Hmmm, you think? Mind blown?
Joelsuf, I’m starting to think that you have some homosexual issues yourself, since you think about gays and gayness more often than anyone else here. And you keep accusing many self-identified straights of being gay. Hidden desire, perhaps? Just saying.
So….let’s see if I got this right: If you drop out of the straight market and refuse to fuck women, but only jerk off to straight porn, you’re a closet homosexual……..despite the fact that you’ve dropped out of the gay market as well…..
By your logic, since the dude is also refusing to fuck other men, would jerking off to gay porn then make him……a closet heterosexual???
You’re giving me a headache Joelsuf. And that’s saying a lot, since I’m indulging Doclove’s psychotically long posts and his pathological phobia of paragraphs.
If I were a Catholic, I’d email the Pope and demand sainthood for this. Although….I doubt he’d answer me, since I’ve been trying my best to contact the Vatican for years and demanding they excommunicate my atheist ass and not count me as one of them, despite my certificate of baptism which counts me as one of the fictional “1 billion Catholics,” but I digress.
Dude, asexuals don’t jerk off to porn. They don’t jerk off, period!
They do get aroused with actual chicks. They’re just pussies who think it’s more trouble than it’s worth. They don’t get aroused by men though. Otherwise, by your logic, they’d be fucking those men, or they’re closet straights! LOL! You are a funny man. Thank you at least for that.
Agreed (although it’s porn, not pron – I have no knowledge of this “pron” of which you speak).
I would say that all porn and masturbation is weak. If you have a successful sex life, you don’t need to masturbate or watch porn (or “pron” as you call it), unless you and your woman are watching porn together so you can reenact the scenes or try some new positions (which my girlfriend and I have done).
But porn and masturbation (especially when you don’t have a sex life) takes away your motivation to get a sex life. Masturbation also steals your masculine energy and natural testosterone and replaces it with anxiety and all things unattractive to women.
But…..you just said that if they refuse to have sex, but only jerk off to straight porn, they’re gay…..because they’re refusing to fuck women…….even though they’re also refusing to fuck men…..so….if a gay guy refused to fuck gay men but jerked off only to gay porn…..he’s a closet straight….
Jesus god, I need Excedrin Migraine.
Despite jerking off to porn.
Despite not having sex with any men either, or watching any gay porn.
Hmmm…..seems legit.
Joelsuf, dude, just…..go to a gay bar and see what happens. You might liberate a part of yourself you didn’t even know you had. Just saying.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 03:44 am, 13th March 2018Level I MGTOW: Only casual sex with women and never anything else.
Level II MGTOW: Celibacy and platonic friendship with men and women only.
Level III MGTOW: Celibacy and platonic friendship with men only.
Level IV MGTOW: Celibacy and the life of a hermit.
I reject all four, but you seem to embrace the first.
doclove
Posted at 04:08 am, 13th March 2018@ Joelsuf
This is more like a pimp and whore marriage where I am the pimp and he is the whore. Watch this uppity whore get pimp slapped. I’ll have some now and more by tomorrow.
doclove
Posted at 04:13 am, 13th March 2018@ Jack Outside the Box
I have been busy and will have more tomorrow. You need to wake up. You really do not aknowledge what the Sexual Market Place is like for men. I applaud you encouraging men and I do too, but at least I tell them of what realistic expectations for changing their life is and you do not. You also have a tendency to not tell the whole truth where I do, or failing that at Least I try to tell the whole truth where you do not. Tell your girlfriend that you have been a good boy and deserve an excellent doggie treat. Please wake up. I have awoken to the reality of life where you have not.
paternity tester
Posted at 05:38 am, 13th March 2018I can’t hold myself; what MBTI type is your GF, JOTB?
Gang
Posted at 10:58 am, 13th March 2018@JOtB
Thanks for clarifying you stance on prostitution. while we diverge on the private part and mini tilt on the alpha 2.0 part (I agree with BD view on paid for sex), we don’t really disagree on the public stigmatization part and we agree on the law part… So I don’t see any point in arguing about this topic with you. I just had major misunderstandings about your point of view.
About your women life it all sounds really great! Yeah if you find lookalikes that’d be great.
I’ll try to do the excercise myself:Some women of my type are (I give porn example because it’s easy to see both face and body, for those who had boob jobs I prefer before surgery, however I do like fake asses, the vast majority of women in my life never had surgery) – these examples are regardless of the “tiny” criteria where I mean small seated height, which makes me very picky. Measurement of the best size for me: seated height to shoulder 53cm/21.9”, bottom neck 57cm/22.5”, total (top of the head) 81cm/31.9”. I don’t care the total height meaning she can have long legs, it’s nice. The subjectively hottest girl I ever fucked is 38kg/83lbs 143cm/4’8” with these same seated measurements, but she could easily be 148cm 4’10” just with longer legs and she’d look even hotter for me.
Most of the women in my life are asians, then caucasians (mostly black haired but I tried brown hair and couple of real red hair and blondes, I have a big issue with their smell), then some blacks. No persian/arabic/indians. I have very low tolerance for fat women on the waist/belly and for pregnancy stretch marks. Also long nose and down turned shape of eyes are big turn off for me.
My favourite type of women are blasians, meaning a certain blend of black and asian. I like the most up turned and slanted shapes of eyes, small nose, negroid shape is cute, big mouth with juicy lips. I am much more focused on the low waist to hips ratio and round ass, I even like fake asses than big boobs. I prefer small to flat breast with nice little perky nipples than saggy boobs, or too big falling boobs, or too fake looking boobs, or boobs with baby strech marks.
Maybe she’s blasian but more asian:
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/harley-dean
Asians:https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/priva (great face great body, before and after surgery)
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/charmane-star (mostly for the face, body is good but could have more shapes)
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/candy-vivian (I really like her face, it feels extremely asian/siberian/mongolian, and her ass is great)
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/cindy-starfall (mostly her face, very filipina, which I like)
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/lana-croft
Black:
I like many mainstream famous black women, including Nicki Minaj, Amerie 2005 (blasian), Cassie 2006 – I hate when she shaved half her head, Zoë Kravitz is stunning in movie “Girls Night”, Aïssa Maïga…
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/osa-lovely (face after dentistry and ass are great, and her very dark skin color is very attractive for me)https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/ebony-banks-1 (all is very good)
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/aurora-jolie (best natural thickest body for me, it’s very juicy while remaining very acceptable on the stomach and waist, but I don’t like her face so much)
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/harley-dean (one of the best faces, great ass and body in general, boobs could be bigger but I like hers how they are and most probably better than if she had fake looking ones)
Caucasian (I dislike red hair or very white people who can’t get tanned but just get red skinned with the sun. Something about their smell, I can’t. And visually just a turn off for me to see very white skin, so wost are black haired, even Jessa Rhodes I am not sure she’s a real blonde):
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/megan-rain (good size, great face, all is good)
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/rebeca-linares (all is good)
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/apolonia-lapiedra (great face)
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/nikitabellucci (all is good)
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/jessa-rhodes (great face and boobs and body, if I really nitpick ass could use some workout or surgery augmentation)
https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/madison-parker (great face, nice ass)
The example of joelsuf, I really don’t like both the shape, the too big boobs and the face and the skin color. I would have to be extremely hungry to fuck someone like that, and even then it wouldn’t be a pleasant experience, the smell would probably be gross. I find her very ugly, I would feel gross about myself and it would hurt my self esteem. She’s just really not my type at all subjectively. But I recognize that she can be subjectively attractive for others, who like big front bumpers. And objectively, I can’t say that she is hideous.https://www.xvideos.com/profiles/felicia-clover
More specific questions:
-did you both read “the ethical slut” prior to meeting in OkCupid? Or what other material on polyamory?
-if for unfortunate reasons this relationship was terminated, how long you think is needed before you pass 80% of chances to meet a woman who you like as much as your girlfriend physically and sexually, and who would be as actively poly and bisexual as her? And how would you do this besides following BD’s advices, is there something specific you would do in addition or different?
-how many women your girlfriend is sexually involved with (excluding one night stands)? And among these women, how many do you enjoy having sex with (meaning vaginal or anal intercourse, oral only doesn’t count as sex in this question) either one on one or in group sexuality (3somes or more)?
-how many women do you have sex with (same definition – still not counting one night stands), who have no connection whatsoever with your girlfriend? Or only a connection which emerged because you know both of them.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 04:24 pm, 13th March 2018How about you let others decide who’s winning or losing here.
In all seriousness Doc, I was once the celibate and sexually frustrated beta whom your heart bleeds for (especially when I was in college), and let me tell you something: If I would have met you back then, I would have either committed suicide (I’m serious), or I would have hated you with every fiber of my being!
Back then, you would have filled me with despair and a sense of absolute hopelessness (implied by your “compassion” and disempowered beliefs).
By contrast, the PUAs (god bless them) very much encouraged me (even if much of their specific advice was absolute horse trash).
Sad, desperate men (like I was) don’t need you to tell them what their limits are, or what they can’t do, or what’s absolutely impossible for them to achieve. Their limitations are theirs to define, not yours. Encouraging slavery to “external circumstances” or “institutional barriers” (like some Marxist Gender Studies professor) will do nothing but cultivate despair, suicide, and mass shootings.
Look at Blackdragon: He was a beta male in his 30s. He was one of those betas whom your heart bleeds for. Back then, you would point to him and tell me that my lifestyle is impossible for the “overwhelming majority of men like him.” But he rejected the philosophy of those like you, and look what he accomplished!
Indeed, look what I accomplished because I refused to believe in my own limitations as a sexless beta in college whom every girl referred to as a “creep” and “probably the next school shooter.”
Sexually starving men like I used to be don’t need your pessimism, Doc. They don’t need your talk of “sheer dumb luck” and “societal limitations based on structural, systemic, institutional, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword.” What they need is the exact opposite. They need to be encouraged to reach for the stars. And they need men like me and BD (who were once one of them) to show them that it’s possible, instead of telling them that giving up, fucking prostitutes, or “going MGTOW” is somehow a legitimate or respectable choice.
LOL! Okay, will do.
The “reality” of the “sheer impossibility of happiness for the overwhelming majority of men?” I don’t think so.
P.S. And no, back when I was involuntarily celibate, I would never, under any circumstances, go to a prostitute. Just that very thought filled me with pure hate and white hot fury!
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 05:04 pm, 13th March 2018I don’t have the first clue.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 05:55 pm, 13th March 2018Give me a few days. I’ll see what I can come up with. The problem is that the pictures I show you will probably be grossly inaccurate and will give you a false impression of what my girlfriend looks like. But we’ll see what I can find. My girlfriend does look a little bit like Mila Kunis though.
Fuck dude! You are picky as hell when it comes to looks! I don’t have your mathematical/scientific measurements of height, weight, neck size (are you serious?), hair color, skin color, straightness of eyebrows, integrity of eyelashes, nose shape, symmetry, etc… LOL!
I don’t give a flying fuck about any of that crap!
In order for me to consider a woman physically fuckable, she just has to look feminine (can’t ever be mistaken for a man), must have hair that’s “female length,” breasts that are noticeable and not too small, be not too fat and not too skinny (it’s fine if she’s a little chunky), must not have excessive piercings, or piercings in unacceptable areas (like the tongue, lip, or her genital region), must have a healthy and clear complexion, and must practice good hygiene! That’s it!
If she meets all of the above requirements, she is fuckable (oh yeah, and her hair can’t be dyed an unnatural color, since that screams social justice). Then, the only thing which will decide whether or not I will fuck her is her personality and attitude towards sex and sexuality (which is easily 85 percent of my decision).
Sure, I may have some additional physical preferences on top of the above requirements, but those preferences aren’t deal breakers.
For example, I prefer my women to be white, Hispanic with light brown complexions, or Asian. But, like I said, those aren’t deal breakers. I have fucked two black women in the past (both immigrants from Nigeria). I also prefer breasts that are bigger rather than smaller, as well as brunettes with slightly curly hair, like my girlfriend has (I don’t know why). Although I’m totally cool with blondes and red heads as well. No problem!
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 07:14 pm, 13th March 2018HAHA! Actually, I saw that book in her bedroom when I came over to fuck her on our first date! I haven’t read it then, but I have read it subsequently, yes.
I’ve since read “Pagan Polyamory,” which was way too feminine and preachy for me. But no, I haven’t felt the need to read polyamory materials. I just learn by doing. And she was, more or less, born into this community so she pretty much learned from friends and family.
Well, I’m now connected to the poly community through her. So, if her and I were to break up, I’d still be tapped in to that scene. My past (although not current) fuck buddies and friends with benefits, since I met her, have been from that group (introduced to me by her at least 60 percent of the time). I have phone numbers and contacts from their poly circles. So I imagine that would make things easier to find an equally poly and bisexual replacement.
Not really. If she were already poly, she’d probably give me the anti-monogamy speech on the first date, like my girl did (or I’d give it to her). If she’s not in a poly circle, I’d just follow BD’s step by step advice in his non-monogamy book.
Currently? She has one regular lesbian friend with benefits.
Other women she occasionally has sex with during our group sex and partner switching activities (8 in total). But during such friendly hang outs, all the women make out with, and perform oral sex on, each other, while some have actual sex with one another using double headed dildos (my girl is one of them). A lot of times, these are just foursomes though, with one other woman and man. Occasionally, we do have orgies though (six or more).
All of them (except the lesbian, obviously). Every time we partner switched, had a foursome, a foursome with one spare, or an orgy, I had sex with all the girls she had sex with, even if we had to take turns. She also had sex with all the men.
For foursomes or threesomes we use the bedroom. For foursomes with one spare or orgies, we use the living room (with blankets and pillows) or sometimes the huge sofa she has in her basement. We also had two inflatable air mattresses for such things, but they both broke. Now that she has moved in to her new place, she plans on having one bed in her bedroom and two beds in every room in the house (except the kitchen and bathroom). This includes the basement. Her new home is very spacious (more than mine), so this will definitely work.
I’ve never had sex with any of her women one on one. They were always threesomes or more. At the very least, she was in the room when I banged a girl she is sleeping with, or used to.
Currently? I have one married fuck buddy and one friend with benefits who now has a boyfriend (both cheating – although the FWB has more like a “don’t ask, don’t tell” arrangement with her man). They’re not in my and my girl’s poly circle.
The married FB (who is new in my life) was introduced to me by the sister of my former fuck buddy who was the girlfriend of a man who my girlfriend was sleeping with. Her boyfriend was cheating on her with my girlfriend, so my girlfriend thought it would be fun if she could get his girlfriend (who was loosely acquainted with my girlfriend) to cheat on him by sleeping with me (to keep things “in balance with karma”). Neither of them ever found out about the other cheating.
So that’s how I started sleeping with my former fuck buddy. But then my former fuck buddy moved away to Massachusetts (her boyfriend got a job there), so I started hanging out with her sister. Her sister is married with three kids and didn’t want to have actual sex with me. She felt too guilty. But she did end up making out with me on two separate occasions, but refused to take it further. As if to compensate me though, she ended up introducing me to her married friend who is now going to be my regular fuck buddy (her newlywed husband is a cardiologist who’s never home and they have no kids yet).
As for my current friend with benefits, I met her on okcupid when she was still single. We became fuck buddies. She wanted me as her boyfriend, so I had to tell her that I already have a girlfriend. She quickly realized that this meant that she had to get her own boyfriend, so she did. Shortly thereafter, I upgraded her to friends with benefits. And she still has the boyfriend who has no idea about her extra-curricular activities, although she claims that it’s sort of “don’t ask, don’t tell.”
My FWB has met my girlfriend and, so far, we had three threesomes together. Yes, the FWB is bi. I’m not sure about my married FB though (yet). The FB hasn’t met my girl (yet).
Gang
Posted at 01:39 am, 14th March 2018I am indeed quite picky, especially in term of seated height. And this is where I believe the abundance number argument of BD tend to collapse for a guy like me, especially when you combine with an important kink such as anal sex for me. Then comes the shapes of the eyes, nose, mouth and lips. Then overal silhouette. Then ass. Boobs are last.
Mila Cunis is really cute in clothes, I like her, although I have never seen her nude. The one detail I am not super fan of is the shape of her eyes.
I do realize though that I wasn’t perfectly clear about the examples I gave: theses are women I consider hot, meaning they are 8 to 10, for instance Priva is a 10 for me. Ariana Jolie’s body is a 10 for me but her face is a 5 so ocerall she’s a 8. However points drop fast if their seated size deviates too much from my preference. 5cm/2″ deviation is still Okay, but 10cm/4″ is probably very uncomfortable and while objecrively she is super hot, subjectively it’s one to 2 points less for me. This is by far the strongest criteria for me as it feels different during sex. I fucked all kind of women of all kinds of height and weight in the past, I even had 3 long relationships with women my height 5’9″/174cm or bit taller. So having tried all, I am now very sure of what I like more. Myself I tend to have a bit long legs/short seated body, and I am just worldwide average meaning on the short side for western world in total height. Now, if it’s just for swinging, I am not as picky in term of height, I even really enjoyed fucking a 188cm/6’2″ woman in a 4some once, her seated height being much taller than mine (93cm). But for one on one sex where I like to be very close sometimes and spooning with french kissing, seated height is pretty damned important to me. I rarely actually measure their height, but when I am in a first date sitting with her in the coffee shop, I have a pretty obvious idea of her seated height.
All of that to say that the women in my life, mostly asians, some caucasians and few blacks (I’d like much more), are all variations of the kind of women I listed in term of facial features and body, and they very rarely deviate much in term of how fat they are. They tend to not have as much booty as I’d like (the asians). Mostly in their 20s. 1 of them is currently LSNFTE, but she is subjectively a 10, on par or better for me than Priva and better size.
Variations that I am easy going with:
-hair color and shape. I didn’t fuck blue haired women but I wouldn’t care, though I have strong preference for her natural color no die at all.
-she could have one crooked tooth, if it’s not a total mayhem and the rest is great, I can go along wiith that.
-I don’t mind her being a bit short legged.
-she can be really skinny (BMI 17) and flat and even facially bland if she is of my favourite seated height and veey sexually in thinl, which includes loving to receive anal sex, meaning objectively average. Or more fat, but I virtually never go over BMI 23.5. My favourite though (depending how much ass and breast, is between 18.5 and 21 BMI).
-after 3 to 6 months in a new city, I usually fuck only women who are quite objectively cute to hot. So they may not be as hot as the women I listed in average, but they tend to look somehow like that with one or 2 points less on the 1-10 scale. Some though do indeed look as hot. And n assitionare they somewhere close to my favourite measurements (whereas many of the women I listed deviate more for the seated height). However in the west these measurements, particularly seated height, are extremely rare. And noses tend to be longer in western women (including former USSR) in average. Thus there are mostly asians in my current women life.
-personality is one of the last thing I care about, as long as it doesn’t cause drama. I am naturally *drama tolerator* transitioning to *drama rejector* (almost there). The one thing I like the most is a woman who is actively poly and/or bisexual and/or swinger. But these are extremely rare in my life (I think I still have only 3 out of 34 in my roaster and 0 out of 7 in my current rotation in this city, maybe the grand total women I fucked, not counting one night stand swinging, one on one one night stands or prostitution, is 75 and I think only 5 were active poly, I think all of them were average and one or 2 ugly, the best I consider average bordeline cute). Your woman’s life with all these poly women and group sexuality sounds like my dream women life.
Then I like if a woman make me laugh a lot. Then I enjoy if she is economically independant. Finally the last thing I ever give a fuck about is how intellectually smart she is. But these are all great bonuses when they occur in a woman.
Gang
Posted at 01:53 am, 14th March 2018I am Ok with piercings and tatoos, I could even get along with eyebrow piercing, the most masculine for me, if she is really hot. Some piercings and tatoos are actually a turn on for me.
Gang
Posted at 02:06 am, 14th March 2018I prefer very long all the way down to her butt, hair natural color no die straight hair with narrow bang just under the eybrows. Here is what I mean with narrow bang, her hair are not as long as I prefer though, plus they seem fake colour.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-w1_SGkQKIgM/T48LwfQUpHI/AAAAAAAAFPE/1wKzNH37Kss/s1600/127297126936899135_4nUSUt2x_f.jpg
But even some women with very short or completely shaved hair can turn me on. Example the one shaved woman of the 2 in this video:
https://www.xvideos.com/video2608110/rocco_siffredi_ass_fucks_a_shaved_britney_spears_
Gang
Posted at 02:36 am, 14th March 2018That has never been my point, quite the contrary, I want more automation, more computer power, more science, etc… This can all be done while living a sustainable lifestyle at the individual level. These things aren’t mutually exclusive, quite the contrary indeed. And do I have to reapeat that I am pro nuclear energy preferably fusion but also fission. If i was a tyran ruling this world I woukd multiply by 10 or 100 folds the financing of nuclear fusion, and I would meanwhile replace all fossile electricity with nuclear fission power plants.
Meat is unrelated to science and comfort of lifestyle, it’s mostly deeply rooted social programing and nowadays big business. If all stores and restaurants were to remove all meat options, combined with the stop of meat propaganda, the vast majority of people after a short phase of aclimatation would barely notice a difference. Only a minority of hardcore retrograde meat eaters would complain. Mest esting is mostly scientific ignorance and propaganda. Stopping eating meat is a huge improvement in sustainability and health. And by meat I mean all animal flesh including fish shells and insects. These should be special treats for special occasion, such as recreative drugs, including alcool should be.
I watched all the videos entirely. The one on free energy didn’t explain anything on how it works just some extremely vage comments and were mostly focusing on how there is a conspiracy against it. It all felt really crakpot straight from the begining. But hey I give the benefit of the doubt, alright, so I then researched multiple sources about this topic, some talked about the ones of the videos, and explain how it doesn’t work. And the explanations were not vague unlike the video you linked they were specific. So, unless you can show me some specific explanations on how these work, or clear experiment that were reproduced, my conclusion is this doesn’t work.
Your view on science and engineering seem to beleve that it works like human science, politics or laws. Hard science doesn’t work at all like that. If someone came up with an experiment which produces “free energy” and it’s reproducible, believe me there is no way to censor such a discovery: multiple labs would quickly reproduce the experiment and also come to the same conclusion that it works, and soon this would be developped for commercial usage. It’s called peer reviewing. Hard science uses fscts, measurement, and mathematics… Not rethorics, influence or lobbying.
doclove
Posted at 04:15 am, 14th March 2018@ Jack Outside the Box
I really do not understand how you could move from getting sex from your then girlfriend at age 15 as you said in a comment from a comment from a previous article here on this site to becoming an involuntary celibate in university who is regarded as a creep especially since you mentioned that the girls in high+school liked to friend zone you and talk about all of their sexual exploits when they would not do so for most any other boy/man. There are some good reasons why this may be valid and legitimate. I want to see why that is. Please state this. Since Neil Strausss’s idea of “Fool’s Mate”(you did not have a relationship and did not game her but just got lucky) looks like it is off the table, it might be better to come up with a better reason. I would never say everything is your fault unless it was extremely true ot this person would not except responsibility for himself/herself. I would say that everything is your responsibility. It doesn’t matter who is at fault, as you and only you are responsible. Very seldom is everything someone’s complete fault like in the 2% rule. People are at least 98% rule as a corrallary to the Blackdragon 2% rule are completely responsible for their lives. So if someone punches you in the face for saying everything in his life is his fault then it is your 100% fault for not recognizing that you are the prey and he is the predator, correct? It would just be your rule and Blackdragon’s rule ruthlessly applied to you in the most logical manner. I will have more by tomorrow.
Antekirtt
Posted at 07:27 am, 14th March 2018No. We’ve inherited a taste for meat for the past 2+ million years. Obviously you’ll have an unequal distribution of that tendency in the population, and nurture can also radically change that, but the point stands. Meat is not SP.
That doesn’t mean I completely reject ethical arguments though. I look forward to the day lab-grown meat is competitive with normal meat; that day I will have my cake and eat it too, I will stop eating animals and continue to eat real, but vat-grown meat/fish.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 09:28 pm, 14th March 2018I agree. With your absolutely absurd level of physical nitpicking, I genuinely believe you are completely doomed to living a life of tremendous sexual scarcity.
Lots of militant environmentalists love anal (especially receiving). LOL! Okay, that was a cheap shot, but I couldn’t resist!
I like anal too. Luckily, so does my girlfriend. She insists we do anal every time she’s on her period because I refuse to have vaginal sex with any woman during her menstruation, as I find that completely disgusting.
I just had anal sex for the first time with my married fuck buddy three hours ago, and it looks like that’s something she enjoys as well. My FWB, not so much. She allows it only on rare occasions (and with lots of lubricant).
Oh. My. God.
Dude…..I can’t……..I just can’t. Please let’s end this physical looks discussion. It’s driving me insane!
I would care, because blue hair usually means she’s a social justice fascist who thinks everything is rape! I stay away from all women with unnatural hair colors.
Then you and I are total opposites.
A woman’s attitude towards sex and sexuality is very important to me. I can’t tolerate prudes with no sex drive. I believe it was the comedian Chris Rock who said that while many women can’t “go backwards financially” men can’t “go backwards sexually.” This is more true for me than most other men I’ve met.
Just like when you lose your virginity, you can’t go back to just kissing with your next girlfriend, if I have a threesome with two women, I can’t then start dating a girl who, upon hearing from her friend that a guy had a threesome, says “he’s a pig.” I can’t regress sexually. I just can’t stand that regressive vibe. And sex-positive women have REALLY spoiled me, so I can’t go back to all that “I’m not that kind of girl, I actually respect myself” nonsense. She must be sexually liberated and have a high sex drive, or I’m out.
Me too.
No they’re not. You’ve just rejected most of them before getting to know them, probably because you thought that their eyes were “too close together” or some nonsense.
But your chances of achieving it are almost exactly zero unless you lighten up on the looks stuff. It’s fine if a woman’s right eyelashes are slightly more unruly than her left eyelashes!
Agreed.
For me, that’s a requirement, because I don’t tolerate gold diggers.
For me, intellectual intelligence is a requirement in a serious girlfriend, but certainly not a fuck buddy, or even a friend with benefits. I start to prefer intellectual girls around the MLTR level.
I love tattoos. They are a major turn on for me (although certainly not a requirement). As long as the tattoos aren’t excessive, they are mostly super hot!
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 10:04 pm, 14th March 2018Complete garbage! Tell that to the lion eating the zebra! We’re not herbivores. We are omnivores, like most mammals. Nothing to do with culture. Everything to do with our nature as animals.
Like me. I’d go out into the forest to kill my own animals and dare you to arrest me!
Hard science requires money. Money comes from the elites. The money that they give comes with strings attached. Those strings are their political influence over the scientists. If you come to scientific conclusions which the elites don’t like (such as that climate change is a myth), they will simply cut your funding and replace you with a more compliant scientist.
If you continue to complain, they will pay other scientists to speak out against you and call you a heretic or crackpot, thus ruining your career in exchange for the bribed scientists purchasing a Lexus convertible. If that doesn’t work, the elites will have you killed.
Science is what they say it is, not what the truth says it is. Your owner is your sponsor, or financial benefactor.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 10:48 pm, 14th March 2018It wasn’t that hard. I fail to understand your confusion. Are you under the impression that I went to college with the same people I went to high school with?
Right. I’m talking about the girls I met in college.
Yes. Most girls in high school friend zoned me. Although I managed to have sex with 8 of them by the time I got my high school diploma (although all were below average in looks). The first was my girlfriend who I lost my virginity to at age 15. Next was my second girlfriend at age 16. I also had my first threesome at age 16 with her and her sister (who was 13 AND fucking her 7th grade math teacher for good grades). My 4th girl was a girl I cheated on my second girlfriend with.
My fifth girl was my third girlfriend (age 17) in my junior year of high school (the second and last girl I never cheated on – the first was the girl I lost my virginity to). My sixth girl was my fourth mono girlfriend during my senior year. My seventh was the girl I cheated on her with. After she found out, she dumped me, which lead to a one night stand two weeks before graduation with the eighth girl I ever fucked (only one time).
So yeah, I had sex with 8 (below average looking) girls by the time I graduated high school.
Oh yeah! In high school, I knew everyone who was cheating on everyone else, who was having sex with whom, which jocks were cheating, or getting cheated on, and many other naughty things that the alpha jocks had no clue about because I was the beta no one would ever talk to or suspect.
And, like I keep saying, the girls I had sex with weren’t exactly prom queen material, if you know what I mean (although not obese or anything).
Um….again, are you under the impression that I went to college with the same people I went to high school with? That’s not the case.
I attended a very liberal and sexually open minded upper middle class high school. It was like a small town, compared to the “big city” that was university. At university, I was introduced to a much more sexually conservative environment, or perhaps the girls (or “women” as they liked to be called) just had way higher standards than high school kids.
But I couldn’t recreate the rapport and bond that I had in high school with the college girls, who were extremely snobby and didn’t like skinny guys (the high school girls didn’t mind because everyone was skinny, except the jocks and the fat boys).
I’m sure you can imagine the shock I experienced by going from such a liberal and sexually friendly environment to a university campus in which I was demonized for not having the right politics, not supporting the correct Democrat, and essentially being considered a skinny dork who had no game, or at least no way to establish a connection with these snobbish girls who seemed to be turned off by anyone who wasn’t a muscle bound jock or who was to the right of Karl Marx!
Also, while in college I tried going after the hotter girls (hotter than what I was used to), so that’s a factor as well.
With the girls in high school, I had roots and childhood experience (even as far back as pre-pubescence). At college, for the first time ever, I knew nobody, everyone already seemed to have an establish clique, and seemed extremely closed up. I also didn’t partake in any extracurricular activities, took more classes at once than I could handle, and generally became very depressed.
I didn’t have sex again until close to the end of my senior year in college with a girl who probably saved me from suicide (she was the hottest girl I ever fucked to that date). She became my monogamous girlfriend for three years whom I cheated on with two regular discreet fuck buddies (who were both hotter than her) while in law school.
At the end of law school, I dumped her after learning that she was cheating on me with her ex-boyfriend and his brother.
I hope that clears things up.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 12:45 am, 15th March 2018Now you’re talking about a human rights violation. Yes, it’s my fault for failing to recognize that I’m talking to an unhinged psychotic who thinks it’s okay to punch people in the face. And if I didn’t teach him a lesson by putting him in jail, that would be my fault too.
Jack Outside the Box
Posted at 01:07 am, 15th March 2018Gang – I was watching a youtube video of an ex-Muslim woman, Sarah Haider. and she looks almost exactly like my girlfriend, except my girlfriend is shorter with a noticeably lighter skin tone.
Still, I think this is as close as I will get to showing you what my girlfriend looks like without actually showing you a picture of the real her (ignore the video, unless you want to listen to it):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WG_N3QltrWY&list=PL66Fcv81-kaq6Jaa5oNWEOmNj-7SirBIL
doclove
Posted at 04:15 am, 15th March 2018@ Jack in the Box
That does clear things up. You must admit that you have had an unusual sex history in comparison to most people for both much better now and much worse in your college days. I believe you, but your story does have a tendency to create doubts because of how unusual it is. People usually get the same or more sex in college than high-school rather than the other way around. None the less, it does happen to some people like you.
For the record, I have a lot of horror stories about the sexual market place myself as I was in the American Army for 8 years and almost 3 months. I have been deployed to South Korea for 3 years, Iraq for 15 months and Afghanistan for 12 months. I have seen how the sexual market place and misandry of today have produced abused children and even one dead 2 year old daughter who was murdered of a fellow divorced soldier whose former wife lived with Mr. Thug Life who beat the little girl to death a week before her 3rd birthday while we deployed to Afghanistan, The former wife just used this soldier as a child support paycheck.
I apologize for not putting more out here as I have been busy and very exhausted this week. I will have more tomorrow. I will have at least a little more and maybe a lot more. Thanks for being patient.
joelsuf
Posted at 07:10 am, 15th March 2018Yeah I live out the level 1 MGTOW lifestyle but I go cycle through level 1 and 2 whenever necessary. To me level one is fun and no one is pressured. If I want to take time off chicks, I go to level 2 for a bit, then go back to level 1. Levels 3 and especially 4 to me are unacceptable for a man but they are the levels that men are being *forced* into by “hypergamy,” a word that L3 and L4 MGTOW have a boner for despite them having very little experience. I’m arguing that levels 3 and 4 are confused about their own sexuality at best and in the closet at worst.
I’ve been to a few. Fun places, most LGBTs are not as bleeding heart progressive as many believe. Homo guys know what they want and go get it. And they get straight to the point lol. But they LOVE drama haha.
Admittedly, I likely do. I’ve had some pretty bad experiences with it in the past, experiences I choose not to disclose at the moment. Use your imagination. Its something I’ve dealt with since childhood. But I have gay and bisexual buddies so its not that dislike them. I do tend to shy away from that stuff since it reminds me of my what happened to me in my childhood and teen years so much. But other times I openly joke about it. So who knows? I do feel like in arguing about it, I’m trying to make sense of it all. But if this upsets others, I will stop.
I’ll conclude my closet homosexuality arguments with this: I believe everyone is born bisexual, and comes to a solid decision to be gay, straight, or bisexual from the stuff around them. This makes it a choice in the end. If one is, say, 25 or so and still in the closet, it would behoove that person to finally make a decision about who they exclusively want to have sex with. And we live in an era where that is more difficult to do. I suppose that is what I was getting at. Sorry if it was muddled. I’ll quit bringing it up unless someone else wants to continue the debate.
but my main point is this which JOTB very eloquently stated:
And this:
I agree 100% and That’s very much what I was getting at. And “pr0n” is just what they use on message boards, its an inside joke meme thing haha.
Its because of porn that people are being less solid about making the decision about their sexuality. So that was the connection I was trying to make. Again, I did not mean to muddle it up so much.
Gang
Posted at 09:23 am, 15th March 2018I am talking about humans, not other animal species, in your case carnivorous.
Go ahead, I have no problem with that as you’d be a minority of hunters. Like I said I am in favour of plant based nutrition at the global scale, mostly, I have no problem with meat being consumed as a special treat occasionally, or by a tiny minority of hardcore meat lovers. But this is still as wishfull utopia as hoping for widespread polyamory : the social programming is very strong. Mostly the core mythology about muat is that the hunter gets the strengh of the animal he killed, then it evolved with ages, and nowadays there is the pervasive idea that plants based nutrition can’t provide enough nutrients, such as protein, iron, you name it. It’s deffinitely incorrect, totally possible to eat mostly plants. Look up vegan bodybuilders and athetes, look up populations who have a diet over 90% vegan, look at our closest animal species jin term of genetics, apes, what do they eat ? Yes, like us they are omnivorous : their diet is 90% or more plant based, the rest is animal products. That’s what I am talking about. It’s not the 50% or more animal products based western diet. It’s not all black and white JOTB, it’s all a question of proportions, which are out of whack for health and the environement in our diet right now.
You’re gonna tell me that plant based diet can’t grow muscles and makes you low in test : go pick a fight bare hands with your 98~99% DNA cousin the gorrila then, over 95% plant based muscle brute. Tell me who wins…
Gang
Posted at 09:56 am, 15th March 2018@JOTB
I watched Sarah Haider’s videos and looked up her pictures. First I like her eyes shape much better than Mila Cunis, as their more up turned. Yes I really like her eyes.
I didn’t see much of her body, but her face is a solid cute for me. If I really want to nitpick I’d say I am not a big fan of her chin, you know in the middle (i dunno the word), and her nose a tad thick. But that’s really minor details, she’s really high end cute facially.
Even if your girlfriend is lighter, her skin, she’s probably not the type who can’t get a tan, so I still like it. And Shorter is better for me… So, damned! I envy you 🙂 Yeah, I like Mila Kunis and I like Sarah Heider even more. So I would be surprised if I don’t find your girlfriend cute at least facially.
My sex life isn’t scarce, it’s plentyful of one on one sex. What is really scarce is group sexuality. I did some in France where there is a fairly large swingers community, but in asia I only know one poly, bi, group sex interested, woman. She’s visually decent, but very flat, I don’t mind so much no boobs, but flat ass isn’t sexy for me, I rank her high end average/low end cute. I’ll spend one month in her city soon and she was looking for bi women to have 3 some with, she found one and she already had sex and 3some with her, but I already saw that she isn’t so much my type either physically… We’ll see about that, but I am possibly top pick on looks. Like you said we can’t move backwards in sex, for me it’s the sensuality of act in itself combined with the plastique of the partners.
doclove
Posted at 04:11 am, 16th March 2018@ Jack Outside the Box
I am winning because I am more often right than you are in describing how the Sexual Market Place(SMP) works for most men. Men are usually the sellers of sex and women are the buyers. This means that the customer, the women, control the market because there are too many men and not enough women, It is almost one seller to one buyer in the SMP. Then you add Hypergamy which means that women are at best only attracted to the top 20% of men at most. On top of that men from certainly the age of 25-44 have double the sex drive of women age 25-44 and that men have quadruple the sex drive of women who are both aged 45 and older. Then add the misandrist culture and laws and enforcement of those laws which includes hiring preferences for women, the Duluth model of must arrest the men in domestic violence cases, PROSTITUTION PROHIBITION, etc. Men having the upper hand in coercion against women gives men an upper hand in the SMP. Women and men having the same amount of coercion against each-other in the SMP give women a slight upper hand in the SMP. Once coercion can be used more against the men in the SMP than the women, then women have a lot of the upper hand like they do now in the West especially the USA. Did you know that even before American women wanted the right to vote that they wanted to pass alcohol and prostitution prohibition laws? It’s true that they did, and delayed their right to vote from becoming law. These things make the SMP a buyer’s, women’s, market. I hate these things I mentioned above, but I aknowledge reality unlike you seem to do. I will have more tomorrow.
Alex
Posted at 05:23 am, 29th March 2018You know one thing I love about Anglo America? That all responsibilities are on men. They have to approach and entertain and pay for the dates and make the move and pay almost all the taxes and defend the country AND if the woman was slightly dissatisfied (like in the case of Ansari) bear the consequences. Now we have ” consent from a woman involves way more than her just saying yes… it requires the man to assess whether this particular interaction would be good for her” and guess what, men and women are indeed equal! Isn’t this like magic?
I remember in title 9 “training” the instructor kept saying what consent was not and never talked about what consent actually was. It wasn’t difficult to grasp the meaning of this: consent doesn’t really exist. If the woman does not go to police or to twitter in the next several decades after the act that’s effective consent but there is no such a thing as “giving consent” anymore.
It’s important to realize that in the end things go back where they started. Scandinavians used to be very religious till not very long ago but now only 30% of them believe in god. Why? because they didn’t convert to Christianity till 10th century and before that they lived like savages. (I’m not using savage in a negative sense.) Denmark was the most sexually permissive society I ever lived in. Now Americans talk about freedom all the time but the majority of them are deeply prudish and puritanical when it comes to sex.
I grew up in an Islamic society under the Sharia law and I thought moving to the west I’ll have more personal freedom. Now I see this guy writes about “Abrahamic religions”, in the place I work flirting is forbidden and Craigslist just closed down its personals section. This is just the sharia law, whether you like it or not.
Donald G.
Posted at 05:14 am, 22nd January 2019If there is something like casual sex, why the hell do you need all those rules for your Fuck Buddies? You could meet them more than 1 times a week. But we know that this is wrong, because eventually in 95% of the time one of the two will develop feelings. So to make “casual” sex work you need to artificially cripple your emotions, because if you don’t do the chance is high that you develop feelings.
Because every touch by a human you like triggers oxytocin release in the brain. And this will lead to bonding in the long term. That’s also why a lot of guys fall in love with prostitutes. And the only way to avoid this is by lowering the amount of exposure to that person.
So if you don’t watch out for those things in that kind of relationships you are always on the edge to turn from “casual” to “serious” – and that by definition destroyes the concept of “casual sex”.