(05-03-2016 12:28 PM)Delta Wrote:  average face, nearing the wall

Maybe you are just being nice. The girl is a dog. I would hate to have that waking up next to me on a regular basis. Maybe a slump buster.

But I agree with the rest of your post.

(05-03-2016 02:41 PM)General Stalin Wrote:  Generation Y is the first generation where the women completely and willingly let the clock run out - the first generation. Think about that.

This is actually unprecedented. Millennial Women, these 20-somethings to 30-somethings, are the first generation of women to experience trying to find a mate past the prime of their youth en masse. It's likely they are not biologically prepared for that on an instinctual and evolutionary level.

Think about it - for all of recorded human history, women have been having babies and settling down with their mate/husband from mid-teens to early-20's. This is the first time in all of history where women are forgoing that, and on an instinctual level are still trying to hunt for that ideal mate - yet they do not recognize they have little to nothing to offer such a specimen.

A girl gets into her 30's alone and childless. She is looking for "Mr. Right" to settle down with. Problem is, Mr. Right's biological imperative is to get with youthful women who show signs of good child baring. Not out-of-shape, high-risk-pregnancy, and menopause-approaching women of age-worn appearance.

Men of options take advantage of it.
Women of options take advantage of it.
Men of little options settle for whatever they can get.
Women of little options still try to live like they have options.

See the discrepancy?

I strongly agree with most of what you wrote, but let's not misconceive this as an issue specific to ugly women. Girls who legitimately are above average don't typically have standards any more reasonable than this dog's. Tall, built, and accomplished aren't nearly enough for them. Their list of demands includes tall, built, accomplished, facially attractive, stylish, impeccably dressed, socially connected, confident, entertaining, unpredictable, funny, experienced in bed, runs tight game, and of course, he has to be someone just like her who "gets" her.

Essentially, the rule is that no matter what level the woman is at, she'll only settle for someone 3 steps above. This is why you see plenty of fairly cute 30+ year olds with seemingly unlimited options who 'just haven't found Mr. Right'.

(05-03-2016 03:51 PM)Delta Wrote:  

(05-03-2016 02:41 PM)General Stalin Wrote:  Generation Y is the first generation where the women completely and willingly let the clock run out - the first generation. Think about that.

This is actually unprecedented. Millennial Women, these 20-somethings to 30-somethings, are the first generation of women to experience trying to find a mate past the prime of their youth en masse. It's likely they are not biologically prepared for that on an instinctual and evolutionary level.

Think about it - for all of recorded human history, women have been having babies and settling down with their mate/husband from mid-teens to early-20's. This is the first time in all of history where women are forgoing that, and on an instinctual level are still trying to hunt for that ideal mate - yet they do not recognize they have little to nothing to offer such a specimen.

A girl gets into her 30's alone and childless. She is looking for "Mr. Right" to settle down with. Problem is, Mr. Right's biological imperative is to get with youthful women who show signs of good child baring. Not out-of-shape, high-risk-pregnancy, and menopause-approaching women of age-worn appearance.

Men of options take advantage of it.
Women of options take advantage of it.
Men of little options settle for whatever they can get.
Women of little options still try to live like they have options.

See the discrepancy?

I strongly agree with most of what you wrote, but let's not misconceive this as an issue specific to ugly women. Girls who legitimately are above average don't typically have standards any more reasonable than this dog's. Tall, built, and accomplished aren't nearly enough for them. Their list of demands includes tall, built, accomplished, facially attractive, stylish, impeccably dressed, socially connected, confident, entertaining, unpredictable, funny, experienced in bed, runs tight game, and of course, he has to be someone just like her who "gets" her.

Essentially, the rule is that no matter what level the woman is at, she'll only settle for someone 3 steps above. This is why you see plenty of fairly cute 30+ year olds with seemingly unlimited options who 'just haven't found Mr. Right'.

I agree. I find women are only looking to settle for (settle down with) a man who is 2-3 points higher than themselves. Hypergamy ensures the return to polygamy.

(05-03-2016 12:28 PM)Delta Wrote:  You know, I can get a good laugh out of the Trigglypuff thread, but the latest example in this thread actually makes me feel concerned and a bit hopeless.

Trigglypuff is an outlier. She's like a circus freak. You go in, enjoy the show, and laugh about it later, because you hardly ever see people like that.

The "above average" 32 year old from this thread, on the other hand, is not remotely unique, other than in being articulate enough to get published in a major newspaper. Her piece is a look inside the head of an extremely common American woman archetype; fat-but-not-morbidly-obese, average face, nearing the wall, but believes she's attractive because she's not completely grotesque. Instead of honestly assessing her own value and accordingly seeking out a realistic man (which at this point would be a mid-30's average Joe with a beer gut), she gets her girlfriends to confirm that she's totally cute and should never settle!!!!11 The natural result of which is spending 7 years chasing "tall, built, accomplished" guys with "no luck at all."

And again, the sad part is that it doesn't feel like I'm describing an individual. That description could apply to at least half of the girls I see around OKCupid, with most of the other half falling into the "completely grotesque" category.

Very well stated.

As I said earlier, she's an amalgamation of every woman I've been set up with. She even looks like a woman I was set up with, except my 'date' looked even older. But since we came from 'similar' families and both worked in the same field and were around the same age (she was one year older), that made us a perfect match

Likewise, her body type reminds me of another woman I was set up with. Again, she came from a 'good family' and was 'accomplished', and even though she was five years older than me, we were a good match

Never mind that at the time I was having consistent sex with a very attractive woman in her early 20s (I was mid-30s, 41 now).

But as you said, these weren't circus freaks, rather our society has basically adopted the position that all a woman has to be is NOT a circus freak and have an office job, that makes her a great catch. So as someone who works in finance, which involves networking, people try to set me up fairly often.

Again, since these women weren't circus freaks yet still completely unattractive, I had to be more delicate in how I handled the situation. I've caught some relentless shit in the past, often because some of these women interpreted my politeness as flirting and then of course I'm the dick for supposedly leading them on.

And as I've mentioned previously, it also used to really effect my confidence. "This is who people set me up with?", but thankfully I found this place and you like minded gentlemen. That's why when I was recently out with the current pretty young woman that I am seeing, and a woman in my social circle makes a comment about her being a skank (after all how dare I date a pretty, feminine woman), I don't question my judgment. I just smile and say "that's right" and go about my business.

Bottom line is as has been said, feminists have basically been trying to tell men what they should find attractive in a woman, and unfortunately society (which includes many men) takes them seriously. At least some of us fight back such hypocritical nonsense.

It's been a while since I've posted on of these. My opener, which I have omitted, was my "checklist."

^ women who write messages like that are horrible dates, haha. I recognize the type.

Also that 35 year old goth chick with big tits is a covert narcissist - completely self-centered profile with a bunch of demands, talking about how she's going to write people off as "intellectually defective" and other bullshit. That "personality style" is a dime a dozen among women in "alternative" subcultures and you see profiles that read exactly the same on OKC all the time. It's like that bullshit is all written by the same girl in different bodies. In a sense, it is.

In my experience it seems that girls in the goth/emo/raver/punk scene are to a one either eye-rolling "you're so lame" abusive types, or needy BPD clingers. Guess it often comes with the childhood abuse and broken homes.

^Not to mention she looks ugly as sin.

For New England at least, both goth girl and the girl Bacchus posted are what we call "standard 6." Goth girl's body looks pretty good though. If she had a profile up around here she could pretty much name her price as her mailbox would be close to full.

You can tell by their attitudes they are both "Online Dimes."

Bacchus: without going into the relative attractive of Ms. Liberal there, when you’re dealing with Progressive Girls, you can’t Cavemen Grunt at them. Since they lack traditional femininity and attractiveness, the only reason to dumpster dive with Leftist is Crazy Daddy Issues Sex.

Remember, they’re deeply self-loathing, so transfer their self-hate onto everything else in the world, shaping a Gnostic Reality where they are their own God, and demand all lesser, imperfect creations bend to their will.

How this translates: they don’t want seduction, they want to argue, which reads as ‘sexual energy’ to most women. Particularly, they’re seeking out a man who is both stronger and more intelligent than them, who also recognises that she is both strong and intelligent. Of course, one generally cancels out the other, but you know the Leftist love of Doublethink. Of course, since women don’t know want they want, and have no courage in their convictions, hatefucking with a man she can’t put in his place is often good enough.

As such, I can see how your last two comments “You must be fun…” and “Lighten up”, would read as an admission of losing to her.

You simply need to drastically-up your conversation game with these girls. You either go the Playful Daddy route, (‘is my little girl having a tantrum? It’s so cute’) or the Sarcasm / Snark route. You need to talk and get across firm ideas of why you believe what you do.

Whilst I was a big believer in hiding my intelligence with traditional women, Millennial Girls are a different creature entirely, and, particularly on phone services, seem to want stimulation.

PLAYFUL

You’re aiming to reframe a political conversation – where you two will never find common ground – into an emotional one – where you might. These women have already decided that their pussy is political, you need to cast doubt on their assumption.

So, I would have identified a natural pivot point, to get away from Dry Politics into Interpersonal Observations and Emotions, which women enjoy.

As such, when she says:

“Why would you think that doesn’t count?”

Go to work reframing it from political to emotional.

“From my experience, a belief in a shared ideology seems to lead to the sexual and emotional death of any relationship.”

Wait for a response, then write more. You sort of just continue your thought from there, like you’re still working on what you’re trying to say, so it doesn’t sound like evasion.

“Well, I’ve got some Lesbian Friends, and I’ve noticed you’ll never find a couple as Ideologically-Aligned as two lesbians in a relationship are. Yet they joke about this thing called… what was it… ‘Lesbian Bed Death’ maybe? Apparently out of all the forms of relationships Lesbian Couples have the least amount of sex of anyone. Isn't that crazy?”

Let her respond.

“Actually that gets me thinking, perhaps it’s those personal disagreements in a relationship that creates sexual energy. You need to fight and fuck to keep things interesting. Otherwise it just seems… passionless, you know?”

See what she says.

You could go for disarming triteness: “Give me your perspective here: do you think any of your friends has ever masturbated over Dr. Phil?”

Or you could go more story-telling, like this:

“I mean, can you imagine a relationship where two people just politely-agree with each other all the time. It’d be like two Psychologists dating. True story – a friend of mine’s parents were both Psychs – his dad was nationally-syndicated. He’s this polite mess of NPR, sexual inexperience and Hipster Affectations. Even the other Hipsters find him deathly-dull. Is that the sort of partner you imagine having in a relationship?”

Post a pic of Droopy Dog and caption it. “Yes, Dear.”

See how the topic has changed, and I’m asking her to offer her thoughts. You spin on from there.

Hell, I can imagine spinning this into a theory about how Ideological Divisions are really just Signifiers of Sexual Opportunity. Maybe the Cold War was sexually-based: Russia at the height of Strength, America at the height of Beauty, both desperate to fuck each other. “Imagine how much sex was happened in Berlin the night the Wall fell.”

Maybe even this is why Leftist Activism exists: sexual frustration. They’re trying to create sexual passion with anger, which is why women in good, solid relationships with strong men naturally end up more feminine.

See how it’s dialing down the combat to a more conversational tone? I’d steer this towards a “Hey, you hold your own moment” (see my final paragraph), where you go for a meet to ‘keep hashing this out’.

SARCASM / SNARK

Contempt for everyone and everything fails to meet their high standards is Base Leftist. Match them. Going this route: you want to piss them off. This is where you stoke the fire, then get it back under control, and then stoke it into flame again, on and on. In this case, you need to specifically-respond to their statements. Being more generally-dismissive seems evasive and Lefty girls will think you ‘can’t handle a strong woman’.

I've mentioned in other threads how I think Evo-Psych has had its day and doesn't work that well reliably Millennial Girls. The rise of Trump and guys here has made me understand this: I need to embrace my Inner Shitlord more.

Some potential responses to the natural pivot point I see here:

“I have no need to worry about misogyny and how it manifests in the behaviour of people I meet. Glad that’s cleared up.”

Columbo:

“I’m just asking. Are you neurotically-suspicious about the motivations behind all interpersonal behaviour, or do you sit somewhere on the spectrum and simply don’t understand the complexities? I’m not judging you – my nephew is Autistic so I’m used to being patient with him.”

Remember, labelling something as ‘Gaslighting’ is Avoidant Behaviour by the Dysfunctional to avoid Introspection that might create a need to change. The dysfunctional are damn perfect just the way they are and have no need to change anything they’re doing. All their apparent life failures are the fault of external forces beyond their control. It’s why you’ll notice they believe they also possess the sum of all human knowledge and experience in their heads.

Reverse The Accusation of Pathology:

“I’ve just to ask, what happened to you, that you weigh up all human interaction in terms of self-defence? The natural extrapolation of that kind of behaviour is that you’re secretly-racist. I doubt our relationship would work, as I can’t in good conscience overlook that quality in a partner.”

Leftists Pathologise all opponents to dismiss their arguments.

I See You:

“Huh. I would have thought someone who builds such a strong, protective wall around their heart would naturally-sympathise with Trump.”

Amplified Patronisation:

“I grew up on the streets, so, admittedly I have no real world experience with the reality of what I understand is the brutal and savage existence of women in middle-class suburbia. You should be proud of yourself for enduring such a vicious regime built on hatred and oppression of women, forced to live in that unspeakable hell of soccer mom car pools; 7/11 brain freezes; late night Tumblr confessions; parents not understanding just how much Emo revealed the bare truth of your soul; and the pitiable rush of cosmopolitanism you felt when you stumbled across your first pair of Cat Eye Glasses on a local thrifting-expedition. Somehow, you endured. You’re a true hero.”

I learnt that style from a friend’s mother. Remember, there is nothing a Leftist hates more than their Suburban or Privileged Roots. Lay it on thick.

If I was going to go with something vaguely-dismissive, I see Game Potential in this:



They’ll just have to get the last world in.

Doing all this, you should eventually arrive at what I think of as the “You’ve got Moxie, Kid” moment, where you tell her that although she hasn’t changed your mind, you respect her fighting spirit, and that you should hook up and keep the conversation going in person. Remember, Liberal girls are dysfunctional, so want to be praised for their masculinity, not femininity.

Obviously, you can't copy my words exactly. You need to find and hone your own conversational style.

Bosch, that is fucking gold. Sarcasm/snark might be abhorrent to the older guys, but it's one of the best ways to make millennial girls laugh whilst portraying yourself as superior.

This guy Bosch is a freaking legend. That was an amazing post.

Can confirm Bosch's post, snark is king when dealing with the women of my generation. I was gaming this waitress at a local cafe when she decided to poke at me. Fired back, and the debate continued until she couldn't handle it, she left to do her job for a bit, then came back and said,

"You know, I'm not threatened by you, Mr. Know-it-all."

My response: "Which is why you had to come back and tell me, right?"

The look on her face as her brain short-circuited was priceless.

Edit: Maniacal laughter also works whenever they try to jab at you and miss. Catches them way off guard.

Was she cute?

This girl in San Francisco on Okcupid hasn't written anything about herself and only has one picture. Little charmer:

(05-06-2016 02:50 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  This girl in San Francisco hasn't written anything about herself and only has one picture. Little charmer:

Not fair to show her without makeup on, here's a better picture:

I am pretty sure that is what she was going for.

Women who try to be funny

(05-06-2016 01:20 PM)YoungBlade Wrote:  Can confirm Bosch's post, snark is king when dealing with the women of my generation. I was gaming this waitress at a local cafe when she decided to poke at me. Fired back, and the debate continued until she couldn't handle it, she left to do her job for a bit, then came back and said,

"You know, I'm not threatened by you, Mr. Know-it-all."

My response: "Which is why you had to come back and tell me, right?"

The look on her face as her brain short-circuited was priceless.

I was experimenting more with this the last couple of days on phone apps because I'm stuck in one place for work, but also completely-uninvested in physically-banging women in this ugly, ugly (undisclosed) country, so I figure I can talk to some Progressive Messes I'd never want to bang, without caring if I don't close.

What I'm noticing - even amongst the Would-be Intellectuals and Self-Confessed Sapiosexuals - is this: there's a clear limit to the level of intelligent debate and discussion they really want to engage in, even if their profile states that is what they want. No surprise there, women don't know what they want.

I'm seeing a lot of demands for intense, intelligent conversation rather than 'chat up lines', but the women demanding it are simply unable to measure up in return. They try - I think they have fantasies of winning an argument by spouting academia buzzwords and putting a traditional man in his place - for about three messages. Then they fatigue and lose interest if they're not winning. You'll know if you push too far, they'll declare themselves the winner and block you.

As such, I suspect Nuclear Snark needs to be coupled with Moments of De-escalation to be really successful, which probably means interspersing playful messages to give her breathing room, and to keep her unsure of your motivations.

Taking fatigue into account, I've being conducting bombing runs of swapping four or five messages with a girl, followed up with "Gotta run. We can get into this properly later," or "I'm needed. We'll continue this another time."

This has gotten a couple of blocks, but also some great "Who the fuck do you think you are?" messages. More interestingly, I've also noticed these girls seem to end up messaging a couple of hours later when they've had time to think up what they obviously-think is a Killer Retort. They've chosen reenagement rather than outright blocking me.

I think this is related to what I said about playing co-ed sports with girls in another thread: you have to idle your engine with them although your instinct is to redline it.

I'll keep running experiments.

(05-06-2016 02:50 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  This girl in San Francisco on Okcupid hasn't written anything about herself and only has one picture. Little charmer:

Go for the block, mate:

"What's up, Cuntface?"

or

"Just curious: are you trying to make your face look like a cunt in the hope that someone will fuck it?"

The thirst just makes girls think they can do whatever the fuck they want. To say it is annoying is an understatement.

(05-07-2016 12:45 AM)samsamsam Wrote:  The thirst just makes girls think they can do whatever the fuck they want. To say it is annoying is an understatement.

They don't "think" they can do whatever they want, they can. You think that girl overplayed her hand and is now hurting for attention because of it? Not a chance. I guarantee she's still drowning in thirsty dicks just like every other girl on there.

My observations tell me that a girl on a dating site can't prevent the torrent of thirst from coming at her even if she tries. Hell I could make sure I'm clean shaven, throw on a wig, snap a quick selfie, and have more offers on there as a "girl" than any regular guy could imagine receiving. It's impossible to understate the male-female thirst gap in modern America. It is truly awe-inspiring.

(05-07-2016 12:21 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(05-06-2016 02:50 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  This girl in San Francisco on Okcupid hasn't written anything about herself and only has one picture. Little charmer:

Go for the block, mate:

"What's up, Cuntface?"

or

"Just curious: are you trying to make your face look like a cunt in the hope that someone will fuck it?"

Tinder in the UK -this phrase "she already has an awesome dad, not looking for a replacement" seems a commonly used line for single mothers. Of course, how can the dad already be "awesome"? He left his wife and daughter to fend for themselves or she divorced him thus proving she thinks he's anything close to being awesome. The wheel doth spin...

   

And that second picture reveals it all - a cool, calm, collected mum who just "loves adventure"... (perhaps a little too much?) - yeah, she's still young and hip! She's just like Miley Cyrus with her poking-out tongue! Crazy, wild and fun! But those eyes... those desperate eyes, cloaked in crows feet...

"Time and tide wait for no man."

   

^^^

28 my arse. More like 38. And 'Open University' = 'unemployed'.

Left swipe so hard it would create a tornado.

^^

+1 on she's lying about her age. Her profile says 28, those crows feet say at least mid 30s. I can understanding bending the truth a little, but is anyone really going to believe that she's 28? It's just so obvious that it's not true.

The "she/he already has a dad" is common in Australia too. As is the women who write "men who don't want to be with a woman who have kids are superficial". The anger and entitlement in those profiles is a bigger turnoff than the fact they have another man's kid.