It's more the bemusement at how convinced a group of neuro-divergent lads are that they have a handle on social dynamics beyond everyone else. Especially because your experiences don't translate to most other people's.
I can imagine some experiences feed your narrative - there are certainly some cruel people around - and so I'm not completely unsympathetic, but you boys need to get off the black-pill videos, and just be thankful you live in a society where you're not inherently beholden to the men with the genetics you so wished you had.
I'm not blackpill or redpill or on any other pills, I'm just high on my own common sense. I choose not to seek out promiscuous women with high body counts, especially for a long term relationships. More sexual partners means higher chance of emotional baggage - either from rejection, infidelity, getting "ghosted," breakups and getting your heartbroken - aside from higher likelihood of cheating. You could say the same about men, although men on average seem to be better at having sex without becoming emotionally attached (this obviously isn't true across the board though).
I don't know why this so controversial, other than it's become socially unacceptable among certain people because women don't like the fact that they are treated differently based on their sexual past. If a woman wants to have a lot of sexual partners, good for them, but I'm (and many other men out there) just not going to take them seriously as a long term partner. Women might also want to think twice about the type of guy who IS going to actively seek out a woman with a high volume of sexual partners, because they probably aren't going to be the types of guys most women aspire to settle down with. If this triggers you, seek therapy.
I don't think what you're saying here, in this particular post, is particularly contentious to most people outside of certain ideological circles. In fact, a British newspaper columnist (and feminist) by the name of 'Louise Perry' has recently written a book about precisely this topic, framing it outside of the usual religious or political viewpoint, and it's been pretty well received across the normal British media (can't speak for twitter).
It's the extent to which you take the point in previous posts that's seeing the push-back. e.g. in #313 you're replying to a poster criticising 'Uncontrolled Hypergamy' saying:
"No, not 20, ideally you're looking for barely legal 18. In those two years from 18 to 20, odds a young woman may have gone from virgin to jaded..."
There's a chasm between what's suggested there and the 'common-sense' perspective.
I'm not blackpill or redpill or on any other pills, I'm just high on my own common sense. I choose not to seek out promiscuous women with high body counts, especially for a long term relationships. More sexual partners means higher chance of emotional baggage - either from rejection, infidelity, getting "ghosted," breakups and getting your heartbroken - aside from higher likelihood of cheating. You could say the same about men, although men on average seem to be better at having sex without becoming emotionally attached (this obviously isn't true across the board though).
I don't know why this so controversial, other than it's become socially unacceptable among certain people because women don't like the fact that they are treated differently based on their sexual past. If a woman wants to have a lot of sexual partners, good for them, but I'm (and many other men out there) just not going to take them seriously as a long term partner. Women might also want to think twice about the type of guy who IS going to actively seek out a woman with a high volume of sexual partners, because they probably aren't going to be the types of guys most women aspire to settle down with. If this triggers you, seek therapy.
Does the same hold true for men with "high body counts?"
In fairness to him, he's addressed that twice in this post.
I don't think what you're saying here, in this particular post, is particularly contentious to most people outside of certain ideological circles. In fact, a British newspaper columnist (and feminist) by the name of 'Louise Perry' has recently written a book about precisely this topic, framing it outside of the usual religious or political viewpoint, and it's been pretty well received across the normal British media (can't speak for twitter).
It's the extent to which you take the point in previous posts that's seeing the push-back. e.g. in #313 you're replying to a poster criticising 'Uncontrolled Hypergamy' saying:
"No, not 20, ideally you're looking for barely legal 18. In those two years from 18 to 20, odds a young woman may have gone from virgin to jaded..."
There's a chasm between what's suggested there and the 'common-sense' perspective.
I don't see any "chasm." I just see practical application of the "common sense" perspective. 18 means the girl is, or until recently was, living with parents, which hopefully limited the promiscuity. At 20 she's probably off on her own and may have a crotch notch count in the fifties or triple digits already.
I don't think what you're saying here, in this particular post, is particularly contentious to most people outside of certain ideological circles. In fact, a British newspaper columnist (and feminist) by the name of 'Louise Perry' has recently written a book about precisely this topic, framing it outside of the usual religious or political viewpoint, and it's been pretty well received across the normal British media (can't speak for twitter).
It's the extent to which you take the point in previous posts that's seeing the push-back. e.g. in #313 you're replying to a poster criticising 'Uncontrolled Hypergamy' saying:
"No, not 20, ideally you're looking for barely legal 18. In those two years from 18 to 20, odds a young woman may have gone from virgin to jaded..."
There's a chasm between what's suggested there and the 'common-sense' perspective.
I don't see any "chasm." I just see practical application of the "common sense" perspective. 18 means the girl is, or until recently was, living with parents, which hopefully limited the promiscuity. At 20 she's probably off on her own and may have a crotch notch count in the fifties or triple digits already.
The 'chasm' is between your definition of promiscuous (to a point of significant fault, at least), and the average person's which would be more in-line with the numbers in bold above. That sentence, btw, is what I was referring to in #316 when I said:
"It's more the bemusement at how convinced a group of neuro-divergent lads are that they have a handle on social dynamics beyond everyone else. Especially because your experiences don't translate to most other people's"
It's an inaccurate world view that could only be made absent real experience - very few women (let alone 20 year olds) are running up 50-100+ 'notch counts'
Yeah, her high school boyfriend. Not some loser trying to marry an 18 year old.
If the HS bfs listen to my thinking, instead of yours, then they wife up those girls themselves and "save" them from the guys in their early/mid 20s.
And as I said, wifing someone up who has never been another notable relationship/breakup is as ridiculously ill-advised as someone who has been through 100.
I don't think what you're saying here, in this particular post, is particularly contentious to most people outside of certain ideological circles. In fact, a British newspaper columnist (and feminist) by the name of 'Louise Perry' has recently written a book about precisely this topic, framing it outside of the usual religious or political viewpoint, and it's been pretty well received across the normal British media (can't speak for twitter).
It's the extent to which you take the point in previous posts that's seeing the push-back. e.g. in #313 you're replying to a poster criticising 'Uncontrolled Hypergamy' saying:
"No, not 20, ideally you're looking for barely legal 18. In those two years from 18 to 20, odds a young woman may have gone from virgin to jaded..."
There's a chasm between what's suggested there and the 'common-sense' perspective.
I don't see any "chasm." I just see practical application of the "common sense" perspective. 18 means the girl is, or until recently was, living with parents, which hopefully limited the promiscuity. At 20 she's probably off on her own and may have a crotch notch count in the fifties or triple digits already.
So, if only 20% of men are having sex with 80% of the women and most unmarried women have a "croch notch count" of 50-100 by age 20, that means a significant minority of men are having mind-boggling amounts of sex. Like 4 different women every day! Amazing! Does anyone here get this much action? It should be roughly 1 in 5 of us.
Here's 5'3 guy trying to put into practice, "Just be confident," "Just put yourself out there," "Just be nice," "Just make them laugh," "Just take a shower," etc.
This guy is a total creep and not at all what is meant when someone says "be confident". Walking up to strange women on the street and immediately telling them they're good looking is not going to work with the vast majority of women. Frankly shocked it worked with anyone at all.
I think the title should be changed from straight men to straight white men.
I was at Denver airport last night waiting for my bag and I saw a black guy approaching a very attractive blond girl. At first it seemed like she’d brush him off but then I heard her ask if he had Instagram and she took his details. I think we all know where this interaction is going.
I always notice when I’m in America that white American women seem to really like black American guys.
I think it’s mostly white straight men who are struggling in America in terms of getting interest from women.
Airports are some of the best damn places to meet women. Prior to everyone having their face buried in a phone, it was even better. You can be whoever you want in an airport and no one is going to call you out on it.
Best airport pickup of mine. I like to make jokes with women while I'm standing in lines. In fact I often wait until a good looking women gets in line before I do, just to make small talk. So one time I slide in behind a really hot woman as we wait to check in. I kicked my bag and said something like "so do you think they search all these bags and look for incriminating evidence on us?" and she smiled and said something like "I hope they don't take out my vibrator, I'm going to need it after this flight."
Jesus. I was caught off guard and had no response and stammered some lame response.
But it got better. I was going to some dumb conference, and at one of the vendor parties, there she was! So I saunter up and say "so, did they steal your vibrator?" and she starts laughing. A few drinks later we're in her room. And every night for the rest of the conference...
Airports are the best. I might just hang out in one even if I'm not going anywhere. So easy to meet women.
And as I said, wifing someone up who has never been another notable relationship/breakup is as ridiculously ill-advised as someone who has been through 100.
Ok, just consider "ill-advised" what has worked for the majority of mankind, for the majority of known history. What could go wrong, amirite?
People who are most successful at relationships will tend to be successful right from their first, if not then their 2nd, if not then 3rd. By the time people get to an age and dating experience you'd consider "wise," they're damaged goods trying to pick from among the other left overs.
Here's 5'3 guy trying to put into practice, "Just be confident," "Just put yourself out there," "Just be nice," "Just make them laugh," "Just take a shower," etc.
This guy is a total creep and not at all what is meant when someone says "be confident". Walking up to strange women on the street and immediately telling them they're good looking is not going to work with the vast majority of women. Frankly shocked it worked with anyone at all.
Then what is going to work with cold approach?
Most everyone here does nothing but criticize normies who are having trouble with getting women. But yet they're not giving any helpful advice or understanding other than passing judgment & acting all cynical.
Honestly, I think there's a bunch of simps here in undesirable relationships (afraid of being single) & also probably a fair number of closet incels that aren't man enough to admit it.
This guy is a total creep and not at all what is meant when someone says "be confident". Walking up to strange women on the street and immediately telling them they're good looking is not going to work with the vast majority of women. Frankly shocked it worked with anyone at all.
Then what is going to work with cold approach?
Most everyone here does nothing but criticize normies who are having trouble with getting women. But yet they're not giving any helpful advice or understanding other than passing judgment & acting all cynical.
Honestly, I think there's a bunch of simps here in undesirable relationships (afraid of being single) & also probably a fair number of closet incels that aren't man enough to admit it.
That dude in the video looks and sounds like he's trying super hard, and he comes off as a butthurt weirdo when it doesn't work out. That tells you he's still desperate for those good reactions and that he still cares a lot about the outcome, and the women intuitively sense that desperation by his behavior. This is a normal phase of learning how to flirt with women as this guy is probably still working out the nerves when it comes to approaching.
Good game doesn't look like "game," it just looks like normal people interacting but in a more fun way. Look up PlayingWithFire and ToddVdating on Youtube for better examples.
That dude in the video looks and sounds like he's trying super hard, and he comes off as a butthurt weirdo when it doesn't work out. That tells you he's still desperate for those good reactions and that he still cares a lot about the outcome, and the women intuitively sense that desperation by his behavior. This is a normal phase of learning how to flirt with women as this guy is probably still working out the nerves when it comes to approaching.
Good game doesn't look like "game," it just looks like normal people interacting but in a more fun way. Look up PlayingWithFire and ToddVdating on Youtube for better examples.
Game only helps men who are borderline with a woman to begin with. On the other hand, if a man looks good enough, the women make everything easy, send so many indications of interest, that they'll do everything short of pretending to trip and somehow manage to fall on your penis.
Most everyone here does nothing but criticize normies who are having trouble with getting women. But yet they're not giving any helpful advice or understanding other than passing judgment & acting all cynical.
Honestly, I think there's a bunch of simps here in undesirable relationships (afraid of being single) & also probably a fair number of closet incels that aren't man enough to admit it.
That dude in the video looks and sounds like he's trying super hard, and he comes off as a butthurt weirdo when it doesn't work out. That tells you he's still desperate for those good reactions and that he still cares a lot about the outcome, and the women intuitively sense that desperation by his behavior. This is a normal phase of learning how to flirt with women as this guy is probably still working out the nerves when it comes to approaching.
Good game doesn't look like "game," it just looks like normal people interacting but in a more fun way. Look up PlayingWithFire and ToddVdating on Youtube for better examples.
Alex from "PWF?" Are you kidding? Lol. Those dating coaches have been exposed as phonies. He & Kevin Wilder debated hardcore blackpillers MD ("Smash TV" & author of "48 laws of dating") & his buddy "Scribe." They exposed those two guys & made a mockery of them. Lol. I bet they"ll never debate MD & Scribe again. You can't pull anything over MD - he has too much knowledge & experience in today's dating world - the guy's amazing. Check it out for yourself - the good stuff starts at 8 mins in:
==============================================================="Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the copyright act 1976, allowance is made for fair ...
