Post: #26

There's nothing unusual here. Overly religious/traditional blue pill dude comes in with naive, unrealistic views on female sexuality based largely on a conservative upbringing. He puts women on a massive pedestal and is hurt very badly when he finds out that they don't belong and, more importantly, have absolutely no desire to be put there.

The pedestalization is key here, and I know because I had the same issue early in college (and for the entirety of my life prior to that). All of this is so painful because he has these women on such a high pedestal-he had so much emotionally invested in them and in his interactions with them that any failure/breaching of that could cause serious damage. Hearing about/listening to them get run through by other dudes is much harder because he had this view of them in the first place.

To him, these young girls were "princesses", and he their prince. Each was considered a potential wife and mother to his children.

To the other dudes on campus, these girls were mere sex toys, and some were passed around accordingly.

It is one thing to watch any old girl getting treated like a sex toy. It is another thing entirely to watch (or listen to, or even hear about) your "princess" (girl you pedestalize, emotionally invested in, etc) getting treated that way. When you catch feelings like this, you put yourself in a tough position. It results in a lot of pain 99% of the time because the girls usually don't wish to live up to the "princess" standard you set for them, and the amount of emotional investment you put in usually means that anything less than "princess" behavior results in terrible pain and insecurity.

Quote:"That same weekend after getting turned down I got to hear her getting fucked hard and loud in the room next door. The guy who lived there was a super scraggly unattractive heavy drug user covered in tattoos majoring in “music studies”. This girl was young hot thin beautiful in her physical prime. I never said anything. But I felt so hurt she turned me down for casual sex with a guy like that."

The end result is a situation in which the girl has a vastly disproportionate and entirely unwarranted degree of control over an individual guy's mental state, a fact that only further lowers his sexual appeal to her (women have a hard time respecting men they can control like that-they want a man, not a puppy dog). Even the mere hint of her showing interest in other men in the manner most young, liberated western girls typically do can send this guy spiraling into deep depression. Anything more serious (i.e. the sounds of her getting pounded out by another guy, or even the rumor that she had been/is being pounded out by another guy) could totally destroy him.

Now, what exactly were the girls' opinions as to where they stood with men? How did they prefer to be seen? Which role did they prefer to play? Well, that's clear-look at their actions. They responded to the men who didn't put them on a pedestal. In this I am actually reminded of a popular song from my childhood by Train entitled "Meet Virginia".





In the chorus, it is said:

Quote:Well she wants to be the queen
Then she thinks about her scene
Pulls her hair back as she screams
"I don't really wanna be the queen"

Some of these girls will talk about how they want a "nice guy" deep down (they said as much to this dude). To the naive who do not understand the value of female action over female words, it may appear that they want to "be the queen".

When push comes to shove, however, these girls have no desire to stand on the pedestal men like this set up for them, and will usually run when presented with it. They do not want to be his princess. Many don't want to be treated like mere sperm receptacles either, but when given the stark choice between Prince Charming here and the attractive but douchey player down the street who isn't going to worship the ground they walk on, they will usually choose the latter.

Why is this? They're young, well provisioned, and have no need to give a fuck about the benefits a dull beta like himself could offer them, at least not at that point in their lives. They just want guys who can turn them on and show them a good time, and the dull beta can generally do neither.

Now, we must speak about this guy's predicament with respect to the "other dudes". His pedestalization not only makes it difficult to deal with the sexual choices made by his "princesses", but also with the fact that men he perceives to be "less than" him are gaining more sexual access than he is. This group of males would, apparently, include athletes, particularly black ones:

Quote:Hot sorority girls flocked to Football players like a butterfly’s on a beast. It didn’t even matter if the guy was black.

Because it should matter, right?

It is implied here that the fact that their race didn't matter somehow makes the situation he describes more dire, as though these women would and should, in an ideal world, weigh the race of the men they pursue much more heavily and negatively. That they would be less inclined to restrict sexual access to an attractive black guy simply because he is black seems odd to him.

It is here that this poster veers into the unfortunate (but, sadly, not entirely unexpected) morass of racial insecurity that as a black male makes me lose what little sympathy I had for him. It is this type of attitude that makes me wary of traditional conservatism as practiced in this country. I understand the core philosophy quite well (hell, I grew up in it, and have been to some of the places this guy has been emotionally), but this subtle tone of racial insecurity is far too common for my liking.

These guys are too anxious to throw people of color in general under the bus to assuage their own sexual insecurities instead of just genuinely facing and conquering these insecurities.

This is someone who clearly views black men as individuals who should not in any way be competing with him sexually-they're not truly his "equals".

He also has white girls in particular on a very high pedestal, which is problematic because they, more so than just about anyone else, have made it very clear (see the entirety of the feminist movement for evidence) that they do not want to be there.

Quote:One night I had enough. I confronted a room of 8-10 gorgeous white girls. These girls were 18-24 years old. I asked them if they planned to get married. All seemed to say more or less – YES. I asked what their future husband would think about their behavior. I was immediately met with hostility. I was told the future husband would “never know” and “it’s none of his business”. The girls said they knew exactly what they were doing and were planning to “have their fun” (fun= partying, fun=sex, fun=going on spring break etc.) and would “settle down later”. I asked: when are you planning to settle down? They said: “It depends” and “probably around 27, 28” or “maybe sooner it depends”. I really put the girls on the spot. During our exchange they saw I was upset. They told me I should be happy because “nice guys finish first in the end”. I told them you cannot have your cake and eat it to.

They have made it really clear that (after spending hundreds of years atop a pedestal as anointed symbols of American beauty, divinity and morality) they have no desire to adhere to a rigid moral standard of the kind this guy wishes to place them in. They want to fuck who they want, when they want, and how they want.

These dutiful, nice, but dull betas are not appealing to them and they (just like all other women regardless of ethnicity) are voting against them with their feet now because they can. There remains no need nor desire for them to lock themselves into eternal matrimony with these men. Those days are gone, and they are not coming back-the genie will not go back into the bottle and the old "christian" ways will not become a norm again. These women have their freedom, and this is the choice they have made (and will continue to make): They want actual attractive men, not sensitive puppies like this who a) have no clue how to turn them on and b) can be so easily manipulated and destroyed by them emotionally.

When this dude can quit the racially insecure BS, realize/begin fixing his own faults and adapt to this new reality that isn't going away, there will be potential here. Until then, I remain skeptical of any chance for redemption. Scorpion has it right-the guy is just another sensitive loser as of now. Nothing more, nothing less. Adapt or die.

Post: #27

It's not that Micheal pedestalizes women, although there is plenty of that.

It's not that Micheal had unrealistic expectations of women's sexual nature, either. There have been hundreds of millions of women throughout history who have gotten married while young (under 21) and had large families.

A woman's sexual nature is largely dictated by her social circumstances, more so then men. In better times, when women were raised to be pure, women would fall in love easily. In shitty times, such as today, women are raised to be corrupt and use men for their own gratification - often taught by their mothers or feminist professors - women cannot fall in love, and only think of themselves.

The bigger problem, for Micheal, is that he knows his chances of living the life he always wanted to live - a happy family life - is lost and gone forever. American women are nothing more than sex toys, when he wanted a wife and family.

Quote:My parents met and married in college. They have been married for 39 years. And it hurts me to the core to be 32 and unmarried. Alone. Without a loving wife. I feel pain from it every single day.

Thus although he wanted to find a special woman he could pour his devotion into, the problem is that women didn't need men like him, as you said Athlone. Women could use men as they pleased, and still expect to find a husband once they pissed away their youth.

You are wrong that women do not want to be pedestalized. All women love attention and want to be put on a pedestal. Just because they only have sex with the men who do not pedestalize them does not men they do not revel in the attention of beta male orbiters who gladly give them all the attention they want.

In less corrupt times, women did not want to use men in such a mercenary fashion. They sought husbands for both practical and religious reasons. But the women Micheal found were completely entitled:

Quote:“Michael let me tell you something: not only am I going to have my cake eat it and eat it too. I’m going to have it with ice cream and sprinkles”. All of the girls laughed and smiled in agreement.

And thus Micheal found himself at odds with his faith.

Quote:Now at 32 and successful these women are hitting me. In my mind these are the same women who rejected me. I’m not interested. The Bible says something to the effect of “don’t forsake the wife of your youth” or something like “remember your young wife”? Something like that. How am I supposed to remember something I never had? I have no history with these women.

I'll repeat it again: I like this story for it's emotional disillusionment it shares with the reader regarding expectations of living a good, pure, and happy life.

I have no idea why so much hate is being poured on this guy, except for his one slightly bigoted remark about girls sleeping with black guys.

But I'm not going to judge him for that remark, because we don't know the context this post was written in. Until I know the entire context (perhaps he wrote that post for white supremacists, or for black guys whining about not being able to get white girls?), I can't judge him for one remark. No need for the black guys here to get so worked up over a remark without context.

Post: #28

I agree Samseau. Everybody's missing the mark here, focusing on racism instead of the point of the guy's lamentation. The point is this: if good men have no pussy-incentive for being good, then it's back to the jungle we go, back to stealing, killing, destroying. Don't complain when somebody steals your car or rapes your daughter b/c they simply refused to be constrained by outdated moral ideals.

Post: #29

probably fake.

sounds like it was written by someone who reads roissy regularly, or at least reads some of the other more social commentary leaning game blogs. the usage of terms that are regular in game blogs, and the fact that this story is completely exaggerated and fits *exactly* into the mold that pretty much every game blog has for the hot 20s girl.

Post: #30

(11-26-2012 02:18 PM)Craig Wrote:  Don't complain when somebody steals your car or rapes your daughter b/c they simply refused to be constrained by outdated moral ideals.

Yeah, I love it when "progressives" fail to realize their own logic means the destruction of all morality, and the implications of not having a strong societal moral code.

Post: #31

Religious guy grows up thinking women are special god-like creatures.

Guy finds out women are not special spiritual creatures.. (they like to fuck and have fun) (they like high status guys)

WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD!

This guy grew up in a fantasy world, literally. This is what happens if you shelter your kids to much. When they finally do learn the true nature of the world, it can be hard for them to accept.

Post: #32

1. I don't think it's a fake.
2. I suspect this guy has more problems than just being a Christian Beta Deluxe. If he's caking like he says and actively WANTS to get married to a nice Christian girl he should have been able to do it without too much trouble. Funny looking and/or crazy.
3. He's not the devil for mentioning that there were black ponies in the carousel.

Post: #33

It sounds more like a parable than truth. Parables aren't without value just because they're not true. In any true narrative, there will be qualifications, shades of grey, points that slightly disagree with the thrust of the story. You don't see that here - every single detail is in perfect alignment with the 'moral' of the story. That makes it very suspicious.

As for the race thing, I didn't really notice it. But for those who did, a little awareness is in order. Women who mix with men from other, foreign tribes and nations were often seen as traitorous whores. In their minds, these women are saying that a man of their own group is just not good enough for them. Plenty of white guys do this, and they don't even necessarily hate black men. Men all over the world, from every ethnicity, do this. It's standard tribal dynamics, if only because the threat is real. If bitches sense that their tribe is dying, many won't hesitate to fuck the new victors, as happened with Danish and French women lusting after their Nazi overlords. This protectiveness isn't some weird quirk limited to white Christian American men.

Post: #34

(11-26-2012 03:04 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  Religious guy grows up thinking women are special god-like creatures.

Guy finds out women are just like everyone else.. (they like to fuck and have fun) (they like high status guys)

WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD!

This guy grew up in a fantasy world, literally. This is what happens if you shelter your kids to much. When they finally do learn the true nature of the world, it can be hard for them to accept.

Ironic how the default response of the game community has been to blame the (seemingly hardworking, uncompromising, honest, ambitious) guy, not the slutty coeds. Next time a woman chooses a higher status man than you, applaud her.

Post: #35

(11-26-2012 01:57 PM)Samseau Wrote:  It's not that Micheal pedestalizes women, although there is plenty of that.

His pedestalization is quite clearly a problem. In fact, that's a root cause of the dynamic illustrated in the OP. He is far too emotionally invested in these girls (most of whom he doesn't know nearly well enough to warrant such investment), and from this fact stem the other challenges.

Quote:It's not that Micheal had unrealistic expectations of women's sexual nature, either. There have been hundreds of millions of women throughout history who have gotten married while young (under 21) and had large families.

And? That may be relevant when you speak of societies that adhere to the strict moral infrastructures this guy is relying on to get himself a woman. When those structures are gone and women are free to choose what they actually want (read: what turns them on) without as much fear of major social and economic consequences, we see a much clearer, more realistic picture.

Quote:A woman's sexual nature is largely dictated by her social circumstances, more so then men. In better times, when women were raised to be pure, women would fall in love easily. In shitty times, such as today, women are raised to be corrupt and use men for their own gratification - often taught by their mothers or feminist professors - women cannot fall in love, and only think of themselves.

This sounds like a pretty lie to me.

Female attraction cues, like their male counterparts, cannot be socialized into oblivion. Any variation that exists in malleability is not large enough to impact the context of this discussion. Women are simply not wired to find needy, easily-controlled, spineless, whiny wimps who cannot turn them on at all (and don't seem all that willing to learn, instead choosing to throw others under the bus and then cry about their woes) appealing at a primal level.

Men who they can easily manipulate, men who are not self-assured enough to ward off their own neediness and desperation, and men who desperately cling to old, outdated social infrastructure in order to cover up their own inadequacies are simply not attractive to women at a primal level. They never were and they never will be-they were weak men then and they're weak men now.

Sure, perhaps in the past when these men had a rigid social infrastructure of protect them, they were better off. I'm sure women then tolerated such men much more often, because in the context of those societies his provider capacity was much more important.

But when you remove that infrastructure and give women a choice absent all the little societal forcings that kept those guys in play before (limited job market for women, no bith control, massive social shaming, etc, etc), those same spineless men who may have been happily married before will lose nine times out of ten. It doesn't matter how the girl is raised-regardless of how traditional her upbringing, he will not know how to turn her on and he still will not have a spine.

She'll manipulate him as easily as she does her household puppy, and promptly lose any strong sexual attraction thereafter. He'll either adapt and lose the pedestalization and other weaknesses that have grown into a part of him, or get used to jacking off and moaning about it the way this guy does.

Quote:The bigger problem, for Micheal, is that he knows his chances of living the life he always wanted to live - a happy family life - is lost and gone forever. American women are nothing more than sex toys, when he wanted a wife and family.

Well, he can join the club and cry us a river while he's at it.

Many of us have come to this realization before: that our views on women and sex were outdated within the context of the society we live in, and that the women we wanted did not want to occupy the pedestals we built for them.

Most of us here after growing up and seeing reality for what it is, accepted this and began to adapt. I went through this exact same experience when I was 18-19, and learned the hard way (harsh rejections, lack of sexual intimacy, etc) that my conservative views were off course. Do you know what I did?

I certainly didn't spend another decade clinging to some outdated social infrastructure that may have helped me 4 decades ago but has long passed us by.

I certainly didn't bother throwing other ethnicities of men (who may or may not seem to have an edge over me in some environments) under the bus as though I had some sort of "right" to those women that they did not.

I certainly didn't continue to try and force a group of women into a box they had long shown themselves dedicated to avoiding.

What did I do (along with many others out here in the manosphere)? I adapted. I acknowledged that the old ways were not coming back, and there was no point in clinging to them. I acknowledged my own need for self improvement in every way in order to become a man woman might actually want to be with (not merely the man I think they should want). I acknowledged that some men who don't look like me might have an edge over me with certain women I find appealing, and resolved to get in where I fit in rather than throw those guys under the bus in a fit of rage ("LOSERS!!!111!!1!").

None of what I did was remarkable-it was simply adaptation. It requires one to merely be self aware and willing to change, both qualities that this man seems to lack. Instead of realizing his own mistakes and faults, he clings to them and attacks those who reject them. He prefers to throw other men under the bus before examining himself for areas in need of change.

Adapt or die-he's selecting the latter. He needs to quit clinging to the past and move forward.

Quote:You are wrong that women do not want to be pedestalized. All women love attention and want to be put on a pedestal. Just because they only have sex with the men who do not pedestalize them does not men they do not revel in the attention of beta male orbiters who gladly give them all the attention they want.

I didn't intend to dispute this. I was speaking purely in the context of the men for whom women actually maintain a sexual attraction. I acknowledged the fact that women benefit from their pedestalization and do make use of it. The reality, however, is that the men who often engage in this behavior are generally not the men they want to be with.

When it comes to finding a mate, women do not wish to be pedestalized. If one is content with occupying the beta-orbiter role then one can continue pedestalizing, but I don't think any of us here are interested in that.

Quote:In less corrupt times, women could not use men in such a mercenary fashion.

Fixed that for you.

Quote:They sought husbands for both practical and religious reasons.

A reality borne from the strong societal moral infrastructures in place at the time and the massive influences they still had on everyone. Those women didn't have a choice.

Women today do (at least in the west).

Quote:But the women Micheal found were completely entitled:

Quote:“Michael let me tell you something: not only am I going to have my cake eat it and eat it too. I’m going to have it with ice cream and sprinkles”. All of the girls laughed and smiled in agreement.

And thus Micheal found himself at odds with his faith.

A reality borne of the demise of the strong societal infrastructures mentioned before.

What you see in female nature today is what you get absent major limiting social forces.

Quote:I have no idea why so much hate is being poured on this guy, except for his one slightly bigoted remark about girls sleeping with black guys.

He's an insecure, whiny wimp and a bit of a bigot to boot. Not much there to like, frankly, and it looks like he can't even learn the hard way.

Post: #36

(11-26-2012 02:18 PM)Craig Wrote:  I agree Samseau. Everybody's missing the mark here, focusing on racism instead of the point of the guy's lamentation. The point is this: if good men have no pussy-incentive for being good, then it's back to the jungle we go, back to stealing, killing, destroying. Don't complain when somebody steals your car or rapes your daughter b/c they simply refused to be constrained by outdated moral ideals.

So what, we need some sort of special societal imperative to cater to the "nice guys" who don't know how (or aren't willing to learn) to turn women on?

Women are not entitled to find these guys attractive and fuck them. In the absence of said attraction, the result is not some sort of societal armageddon. It is those "nice guys" learning how to grow a spine, get in where they fit in and be less unappealing.

These outdated moral ideals are precisely that-outdated. They aren't coming back. They do not have the power to hold society hostage the way you imply, and society does not owe men who don't know how to be attractive a "pussy incentive". Those guys simply need to learn how to take their women off of pedestals and treat them like real people, not little disney princesses.

(11-26-2012 02:48 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Yeah, I love it when "progressives" fail to realize their own logic means the destruction of all morality, and the implications of not having a strong societal moral code.

Again, the destruction of society does not at all hinge on the sexual success (or lack thereof) of some whiny, naive traditionalist betas who cannot accept that the genie isn't going back into the bottle. Society is not going to come unhinged because it forgot it owed these guys some pussy that they'd have no clue what do with anyway.

(11-26-2012 03:14 PM)basilransom Wrote:  As for the race thing, I didn't really notice it. But for those who did, a little awareness is in order. Women who mix with men from other, foreign tribes and nations were often seen as traitorous whores. In their minds, these women are saying that a man of their own group is just not good enough for them. Plenty of white guys do this, and they don't even necessarily hate black men. Men all over the world, from every ethnicity, do this. It's standard tribal dynamics, if only because the threat is real. If bitches sense that their tribe is dying, many won't hesitate to fuck the new victors, as happened with Danish and French women lusting after their Nazi overlords. This protectiveness isn't some weird quirk limited to white Christian American men.

It isn't an issue I've had, so I can't really sympathize. I do not think this is universal and can be so easily excused, especially when it is used in the manner that this guy did (to shift the focus away from his own failures and onto other "lesser" men in his mind).

Post: #37

(11-26-2012 03:28 PM)Craig Wrote:  Ironic how the default response of the game community has been to blame the (seemingly hardworking, uncompromising, honest, ambitious) guy, not the slutty coeds. Next time a woman chooses a higher status man than you, applaud her.

Hardworking? I'm sure he is. Uncompromising? Yes, to a fault. He should have compromised the false teachings of his parents and sought out a more accurate perspective of the world. Honest? Absolutely not, his whole concept of human nature was false. And, he refused to believe that he could be wrong. He was living a lie. Ambitious? Maybe in his career but not in his perspective. He did not seek out the true nature of reality. He simple accepted the version given to him by his parents.

But, I don't blame the guy. I blame his parents. They presented him with a worldview that was inaccurate. They led him to believe that women were logical creatures who will give sex to boring men. They sold him a lie.

If you know the true nature of mankind, you will be successful with slutty co-eds.

Post: #38

Athlone,

The only thing outdated is your constant use of the term.
Writing lengthy responses doesn't add weight to your argument.
You're assuming the guy is weak when he might just be more committed to his principles than you. He stuck to them til 32 believing that goodness would pay off. Now he's realizing that in a society full of people that think like you, it just isn't worth it. Let the savagery begin.

You see that? I was rude just now b/c I abandoned the principle of politeness. It doesn't make for a very civilized discussion does it? Abandoning ideals might be practical for you, but that doesn't mean it's right. Now, perhaps you're willing to say "there's no right or wrong in society." Well, at least you're striving for consistency. But you can't live as though there is no right or wrong. And if you can't live it, it's not practical. Therefore your argument collapses in on itself.

Update: In short, my argument is that women should strive to be more than chimps.

Post: #39

Quote:Again, the destruction of society does not at all hinge on the sexual success (or lack thereof) of some whiny, naive traditionalist betas who cannot accept that the genie isn't going back into the bottle.

How can you be so sure about this? The success of society probably does rest on the bulk of men (betas) in order to be successful.


Without strong family ties a nation will experience depopulation (already happening) and a loss of sense of community. Once that goes, so goes morality. Men won't feel guilty over crimes they commit because they have no more ties to the people they harm.

After that happens...





Clockwork orange is one of my favorite movies of all time. It is the only one that ties together the elements of social decay. Kubrick was a brilliant social conservative.

In the above scene Alex murders a cat lady. But notice the interior of the cat lady's home. Full of sex adornments. This woman was a sexually liberated woman in her youth.

As she grew old, she never had any children or family of her own because she lived a corrupt life, just like most of the women in colleges do today.

The resulting societal decay destroyed any sense of community left, and the next generation of men to grow up were utterly lawless. And why shouldn't they be? There are no rules, morality is bullshit, and the people they were told to respect never did anything for them. They owed them nothing.

The result is that, the next generation of men, represented by Alex, have nothing to live for except their own amusement and gratification. They take want they want, fuck who they want, and even kill who they want.


This process of social decay has happened literally thousands of times throughout history, and it already has started to come to America. It will only get worse.

Post: #40

The thing about this guy is that what he has understood or discovered is something that you would never be able to see in his persona or how he deals with people on a daily basis. I am 100% convinced that this guy is your average nice dude who is friendly to everybody and not at all a sexist asshole to women, though he has all the impetus and reason to be so. He's got to read himself a copy of No More Mister Nice Guy or something.

Post: #41

(11-26-2012 04:02 PM)Craig Wrote:  Update: In short, my argument is that women should strive to be more than chimps.

I understand what you're saying, but here's the thing: the world doesn't give a damn what you think "should" happen.

And you can either sit around and bemoan that fact (like the guy who wrote this piece) or you can become proactive and adapt yourself to the reality you're facing, even though you may think it's far from ideal.

If you refuse to adapt yourself because doing so would conflict with your ideals, that's fine. In a way, I can actually respect that decision. You believe in something very strongly and are willing to take a stand for it.

But again, nature doesn't give a fuck about your ideals. Nature is about who can best adapt to the prevailing environment. Morality is a human construct, and your particular brand of morality is looking a little long in the tooth these days.

I'm not saying that's a good thing. I'm not saying it's what I would choose as my ideal environment. But it's reality.

Harboring antiquated, romantic notions in this current sexual climate will get you nowhere. If you feel that strongly about traditional morality, you might as well become a monk, because if you're going to get no pussy due to your beliefs you might as well have a good reason.

Post: #42

Minus the religious upbringing with an addition of hatred toward women I was this guy up until recently...For all practical intent and purposes I wanted to say "FUCK YOU MOM & DAD" for not telling it LIKE IT REALLY IS... But I now know in my heart they just didn't have a clue what the world would become.

Post: #43

The world is not the way my parents said it was...



We are all going to hell!

Post: #44

(11-26-2012 05:10 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  The world is not the way my parents said it was...



We are all going to hell!

That's way too funny!!!

Post: #45

Giovonny nailed it. The world punishes those who don't understand reality, and rewards those who do. It's hard to put it any simpler than that.

Post: #46

(11-26-2012 04:58 PM)scorpion Wrote:  I'm not saying that's a good thing. I'm not saying it's what I would choose as my ideal environment. But it's reality.

Harboring antiquated, romantic notions in this current sexual climate will get you nowhere.
If you feel that strongly about traditional morality, you might as well become a monk, because if you're going to get no pussy due to your beliefs you might as well have a good reason.

Post: #47

adapt, migrate, or die

Post: #48

Just for the record:

I think religion is a good thing. It gives people a moral compass. It gives them a positive philosophy to follow. It gives people hope. It gives people relief. It makes people believe that they are accountable for everything they do. These are good things.

I respect and admire religious people.

I know some religious guys with strong game.

I thought game was ammoral? I don't know?

I think game is all chemistry. Getting her brain to pump the right chemicals. Thats everything.

Post: #49

(11-26-2012 06:02 PM)iknowexactly Wrote:  adapt, migrate, or die

Yep, and there will be a lot of early deaths in the future.

Giovonny Wrote:I know some religious guys with strong game.

I thought game was ammoral? I don't know?

Let me clear that up for you. Matthew 5:28:

Quote:27 “You have heard that it was said to those of old,[c] ‘You shall not commit adultery.’[d] 28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.

They aren't very religious if they are gaming.

Post: #50

Samseau,

Did you choose game over religion?

How do you reconcile the two?