Post: #26

I find it funny on this forum how anything related to feelings is dubbed to be "beta" and being a hard stone cold playa is considere "alpha"

I've come to feel that men are inherently "beta" in that they are very much motivated by their feelings, and how they feel for a girl - much more than most think.

I think the problem with the U.S., or anglo girls in general, is that they are so disconnected from their femininity, they don't respect what we could call "a beta guy" or a guy who operates on the basis of his feelings. (can't or will not see it)

Roosh has mentioned that "beta game" works well in Poland, but when he was in Hvar or back in America, the girls did not respond, they responded much better to being "gamed" and "negged" and so on.

I've come to feel the anglo world is a world where the emotions have been suppressed and repressed so heavily that girls and everyone don't want to you have emotions or "feelings" (despite what fucking hollywood says) It makes them uncomfortable, they, and quite often girls do not know how to deal with "feelings"

What we are witnessing on this forum is largely a whole bunch of guys who are generally quite dissatisfied with anglo girls, and the anglosphere in general.

What we are sold as sex is like a product, the egg of a hyper individualised society, that does not respect the metaphysical aspect of sex, which is relationship. I have been very influenced and inspired by players who truly recognise this metaphysical aspect involved and make "all this" work for them as a straight up spiritual practise.

I do think the manosphere overall, is a between a rock and good place, but that good place must be owned.

I don't think the models of relationship set out for us in society are working, and it is up to us, to find out what works for us.

ONS, LTR, STR and so on perhaps should be all in the diet of all men, and how to make these things work for you is an individual learning I think.

Post: #27

I hate to voice a dissenting opinion to the majority here, but here goes.

If you're just talking sex per se and pull love out or any other feelings out of the equation, then the best sex I ever had was with an 18-year-old I screwed a handful of times when I was 22. She was a part-time model, had asked me out, and I was so knocked out by her looks I kept thinking the whole time "I can't believe I'm fucking her!!" I'd don't remember much of what she did in bed, but I do remember afterwards feeling like I was going to need to sleep for a looooong time.

There were women who were better in bed and there were women who I was in love with. But when I'm just sort of fantasizing about sex, this is what my mind goes back to. I ended up not getting serious with her because she was the least intellectual person I'd ever encountered and once said she couldn't get through a book -- she'd fall asleep. But now I wonder if I'd have been happier going for looks instead of brains. Wait, I'm sure I'd have found a way to be unhappy anyway.

Post: #28

(06-29-2013 07:27 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  I'd don't remember much of what she did in bed, but I do remember afterwards feeling like I was going to need to sleep for a looooong time.

I totally understand that. I would suggest it was a metaphysical thing she did. That is the mystery of woman.

I'm much more with you than guys who say, "to have the best sex you must have feelings for the girl and care for her" etc.

Everyone's mileage is going vary of course, but lets not deny the power of these connections with girls you barely know, may not like or really resonate with or have much in common with at the end of the day.

There can be something really powerful and beautuful in that, and I sometimes feel disappointed in my fellow men, that they often do not really own or accept what women themselves are actually calling them to.

I've had friends pass up sex with gorgeous young girls who were well keen because they say, "nah, it would just be physical anyway... " when they don't really know or accept what she is offering. Clearly, male sexuality is just often as hamsterish/troubled as female sexuality is.

Post: #29

I'm not going to find the quote easily, but it is from Aaron Sleazy, but I'm going to paraphrase, when he says he often finds it is the girls who are left out, waiting for something to happen, because the males have no balls and do not take action. I think most men simply have a shockingly unclear frame.

Post: #30

(06-29-2013 07:39 AM)tiggaling Wrote:  I'm much more with you than guys who say, "to have the best sex you must have feelings for the girl and care for her" etc.

+1. Sometimes sex is just sex (and can still be great). There is no need to blur the boundaries if she doesn't want to.

Post: #31

I'm with Days of Broken Arrows. I'm not a young guy, and aside from my first girlfriend I have yet to have good sex with a woman I've really cared for. In fact I barely wanted to be physical with the two loves of my life, ten years apart--I loved them to death and wondered if I had some kind if complex where I couldn't get into women (sexually) who I had a deep connection with. I decided that they just didn't press my buttons. I still wonder if there is any causal reason for it: are the women I will connect with smart in a way that is masculine and precludes certain feminine personality traits (including manner in bed) that I love? Or is it simply hard to find hot, smart cool girls because there aren't that many to begin with, and they get tied down early and stay off the market, considering how many men are going to want them for keeps?

Agree with Nomad that you usually need to bang a woman a few times before you see her best performance. Not always though.

Post: #32

(06-29-2013 05:39 AM)soup Wrote:  Love is a powerful biological force.

Think about it- love is what makes people take care of babies.

So, like alcohol, love has a very strong/dominant effect.

If you are a woman, you are controlled by this. If you are man's man (player), you realize the reality of this biomechanical situation and see love for what it is, and can take advantage of it.

Love works for the same reasons that sugar tastes sweet. But, we know that sugar isn't so healthy.

Same thing with oneitis.

It would be cool if psychiatrists acknowledged oneitis.

"Depressed? Sounds like a mild case of oneitis. Prescription: go bang 10 other girls"

That's the therapist that'd I'd trust for me.

A female therapist... either you are banging her, or she's too old to pass the boner test. If the latter is true, she's almost certainly not worthy of your trust.

Are there any NYC players getting with Med school chicks who have you as their patient?

This is the red pill on love:

http://xenlogic.blogspot.com/2011/06/llove-is-drug.html

Post: #33

This has to be one of the best threads on this forum. For real.

Post: #34

(06-29-2013 07:27 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  There were women who were better in bed and there were women who I was in love with. But when I'm just sort of fantasizing about sex, this is what my mind goes back to. I ended up not getting serious with her because she was the least intellectual person I'd ever encountered and once said she couldn't get through a book -- she'd fall asleep. But now I wonder if I'd have been happier going for looks instead of brains. Wait, I'm sure I'd have found a way to be unhappy anyway.

Ha! (on your last sentence). I'm going through this painful decision process right now, at an age where I *know* that all things considered, I'm never going to get a better package (physical looks / sexual performance) than my current. It's mostly her looks that I'm confident about not being able to duplicate--with game I managed to bat way out of my range with this one--but her sexual performance is also top tier. And she's not demanding in the slightest. But I have zero intellectual connection with her. I'd have to model my life after an exaggerated version of the 1950's marriage. I don't think I can do it.

Post: #35

(06-29-2013 06:45 PM)Tim9000 Wrote:  But I have zero intellectual connection with her. I'd have to model my life after an exaggerated version of the 1950's marriage. I don't think I can do it.

Sometimes I wonder if this kind of thought process is the result of all the feminism shit in the air. Before feminism, did men really worry if the wife was able to debate Thoreau with them? Unlikely. They were probably more concerned that she would stay faithful to them and had enough smarts to manage the household and raise the kids right.

On the other hand, you feel what you feel and where that may have come from is a moot point. I'm of a similar bent, in that I start to look down on a chick if I feel that she's not the sharpest knife in the drawer and subconsciously think she's less of a good LTR mate.

Post: #36

(06-29-2013 06:45 PM)Tim9000 Wrote:  But I have zero intellectual connection with her. I'd have to model my life after an exaggerated version of the 1950's marriage. I don't think I can do it.

Not the worst thing to model. Seek intellectual stimulation outside of the marriage.

Another plus is she'll always look up to you because you're sooo smart. LOL Seems funny but simple women dig that shit and it helps you maintain chemistry and overall keep them in check. Makes it easier to be a leader. And since you're not sharing every single thing together, you have your own lives and retain yet more chemistry.

One problem, however, is if she ends up with a couple more "intellectual" girlfriends putting ideas in her head - and that can lead to unnecessary fighting as her social circle meddles. Airheaded women tend to be a bit impressionable and easily manipulated (though not all of them).

I had an airheaded girlfriend for a long time and her whole family was super manipulative. One of her cousins would try to convince her I was fucking around all the time, and I actually wasn't at the time. Smile right to your face but as soon as you stepped out of the room she's starts blabbing about what a piece of shit you are and that you're cheating, this and that.

The good ones report it back to you.

But in the end it was her family who wrecked our relationship. She was a solid, old-fashioned girl and possibly a keeper, but her family chases guys away from her with their ignorant behavior - which they get away with because she's not bright enough or confident enough to put her foot down.

In the end, working around that depends on having a stronger frame and/or sabotaging her relationships with toxic women before they have a chance to affect you. Obviously the second option wasn't open to me, it being her family and all. She wanted to have my kids and I said not a chance will my kids be related to the same people as you. And off to Europe I went.

Beyond All Seas

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling

Post: #37

(06-29-2013 06:45 PM)Tim9000 Wrote:  

(06-29-2013 07:27 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  There were women who were better in bed and there were women who I was in love with. But when I'm just sort of fantasizing about sex, this is what my mind goes back to. I ended up not getting serious with her because she was the least intellectual person I'd ever encountered and once said she couldn't get through a book -- she'd fall asleep. But now I wonder if I'd have been happier going for looks instead of brains. Wait, I'm sure I'd have found a way to be unhappy anyway.

Ha! (on your last sentence). I'm going through this painful decision process right now, at an age where I *know* that all things considered, I'm never going to get a better package (physical looks / sexual performance) than my current. It's mostly her looks that I'm confident about not being able to duplicate--with game I managed to bat way out of my range with this one--but her sexual performance is also top tier. And she's not demanding in the slightest. But I have zero intellectual connection with her. I'd have to model my life after an exaggerated version of the 1950's marriage. I don't think I can do it.

I second what the other two commenters on here told you. So read what they have to say. But for me there are two other factors:

1). How does her mother look? That's a good way to determine how she'll age. If mom looks bad, think twice because someday when her looks fade you'll be stuck with just her personality and lack of intellectual curiosity.

2). Is she reflective of benign female anti-intellectualism or evil female anti-intellectualism? (I coined those myself just now.) The benign type can be seen in a woman like Stacy Keibler, who is not known for being well-read but seems pleasant, happy, and a lot of fun. The evil type of anti-intellectual female is shown every week on reality shows and exemplified by Kim Kardashian. This type of woman will bankrupt you and you definitely won't get a '50 marriage...you'll get a 2013 marriage, where you lose everything.

Post: #38

lol of late, I've been pretty turned off by carousel ridden slores, innocence is pretty nice.

Post: #39

Western society screws us up in a lot of different ways by the philosophies that is handed down to us as part of the cultural wisdom. This wisdom goes unquestioned from generation to generation. The problem is it just doesn't work in most cases. Let's look at some examples of this:

1. You need to find one woman that will be everything to you. If businesses were run on this mentally there would be no Apple or Google today. Businesses grow because the work is divided and handed off to specialists. Without specialization there would be no industrial revolution. While it may be possible to find one woman that can meet all of your needs it's would amount to winning the lottery. This is also the main reason the concept of marriage is inherently flawed along with ALL long-term relationships. Personally, I need about 3 - 4 different women to meet all of my needs. Women are slowly coming to this realization themselves and with it we are seeing a rise in polyamory.

2. There is some special kind of love that is reserved for only your lover and that when we lose this love we are somehow suppose to be broken hearted and depressed. Just because you are having sex with someone does not mean your love for them is somehow different than your love for your brother, friend, mother, or anyone else. There is only one kind of love. How we chose to express it can and does vary from person to person. Who said you have to stop loving someone because you are no longer seeing them? If you girlfriend or wife or whoever went somewhere for a few months would you stop loving them? What if they just died? Love is a product of our own creation and as such we have complete control over it. Western society would like you to believe exactly the opposite and in doing so we screw ourselves over by submitting to something we think we have no control over.

3. Do you know why Brasilian whores are so famous? It's not because they are good at sex, though they are. It's because they see no reason why they should not enjoy it with a customer the same way they would with a boyfriend. Western society make women believe that it's ok to give your body as long as you don't have any feelings. When it comes to feelings and relationship Western society has attached so much mental BS to relationship that we no longer have a clue as to what is right anymore. Relationships in the US are as convoluted as our tax codes because we make them inherently and needlessly complicated. Most people cannot find love today because to them it's this complicated thing with all kinds of conditions attached. This is the reason there is so much drunk sex here. We drink to shut down our minds from thinking about all of this crap. A Brasilian girl do not need to drink to have sex. For her, sex and love, are a natural part of life, like breathing.

The moment you realize that the only person that can break your heart is you, love becomes very simple.

Post: #40

Nomad77,

A lot of the time, when people talk about "feelings" and "love" it isn't truly authentic, it is just a headfuck. I agree with you, a lot of the time, people's broken heart is just their own ego and vision of the world crumbling.

I honestly do not buy the lingo, not that I disbelieve or not experience feelings or love, it is just that how these things are supposed to work in western culture, I find pretty silly. The language is *so* imprecise, and the cultural models, of why and how we are supposed to be in relationship is just pitiful.

These models are often just based on attachment, the idea that you love someone, you will love them forever; but even Tiny Tim must realise that these feelings come and go.

You can totally love a stranger, someone you can have not talked to. You can have more amazing sex, with a deeper connection, with a complete stranger, than with someone you were in a LTR for many years. As far as I am concerned, this is a kind of red pill thinking which society is uncomfortable with, because it subverts the kind of glue which keeps nuclear society working in an orderly manner.

In blue pill thinking, everything leads back to this "love as glue", fake beta feelings, so you will get the woman, get the job, get the mortage and get straightjacketed into the system. "do the right thing" - that is the sheep thinking, which is clearly beta.

But love is free, and as men who think for ourselves, and are alpha, as alpha is the dominant one in the pack, who leads the herd, goes his own way - we get to make this go how we want it to go.

Post: #41

(06-30-2013 09:28 PM)tiggaling Wrote:  Nomad77,

A lot of the time, when people talk about "feelings" and "love" it isn't truly authentic, it is just a headfuck. I agree with you, a lot of the time, people's broken heart is just their own ego and vision of the world crumbling.

I honestly do not buy the lingo, not that I disbelieve or not experience feelings or love, it is just that how these things are supposed to work in western culture, I find pretty silly. The language is *so* imprecise, and the cultural models, of why and how we are supposed to be in relationship is just pitiful.

These models are often just based on attachment, the idea that you love someone, you will love them forever; but even Tiny Tim must realise that these feelings come and go.

You can totally love a stranger, someone you can have not talked to. You can have more amazing sex, with a deeper connection, with a complete stranger, than with someone you were in a LTR for many years. As far as I am concerned, this is a kind of red pill thinking which society is uncomfortable with, because it subverts the kind of glue which keeps nuclear society working in an orderly manner.

In blue pill thinking, everything leads back to this "love as glue", fake beta feelings, so you will get the woman, get the job, get the mortage and get straightjacketed into the system. "do the right thing" - that is the sheep thinking, which is clearly beta.

But love is free, and as men who think for ourselves, and are alpha, as alpha is the dominant one in the pack, who leads the herd, goes his own way - we get to make this go how we want it to go.

Doesnt have to be an LTR or a long time. Some people you are able to have GREAT chemistry faster, very natural, same RHYTHMS..
It just works.

Others, you can keep trying and not enjoyable.

I'd rather have QUALITY EXPERIENCE (not girl rating) than QUANTITY that is not enjoyable.

Again, doesnt mean you have to be in LOVE but some certain CHEMISTRY .. whether physical, mental, emotional, sexual, humor etc.. a MIX of these things that works well with some and not with others.

Post: #42

I was married for 10 years, and have had long term relationships with 4 women. I am in my late 30's. In between I can go out and approach, get ONS's, do online, etc. The best, and I will say, BEST, sex I have is when I am with a woman for at least 20 lays. Once we get a groove for each other, it gets really good, throw love in the mix and it gets better, but I often find it skews my good judgement. On the flip side my ONS's and short tally partners are often not nearly as good, and I always dump the ones who are bad at sex or have some flaw I didnt see until I take off their clothes. So early sex for me is still a vetting process, until I find the one I want to fuck 100's of times. I have to actually fight the urge to want to stay with one who is that good.

Post: #43

I just finished reading Roosh first book A Dead Bat in Paraguay. After traveling all over South America and banging different girls he ends up writing about only one: Mariana. This was the only girl he had strong feelings for. It wasn't the sex it was how HE felt about her that made her different and better. We project what we feel for someone into our interaction with them, whether it's sex, walking in the park, watching TV, whatever. In the end we are all egotistical - our primary concern being our own feelings.

Post: #44

(06-28-2013 12:16 PM)Gator_McKlusky Wrote:  Yep, I learned that ONS's are highly overrated a long time ago and I have only a fraction of your notches. While you still have to pull them occasionally to keep your mojo up, the best sex is one where there is built up comfort and attraction and the broad fully gives herself to you, both physically and emotionally.

+1000

Post: #45

soup: I never said that I have better game than you.

I've never had foursomes or fivesomes or whatever you claimed to have in that recent post.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That had nothing to do with game. It had everything to do with being in the right social circle and knowing the right people. I knew a rich guy that would have sex parties with cocaine, champagne, food, etc. You didn't have to do anything if you didn't want to but you could go off into rooms or stay in the public areas and do whatever you wanted. This was how I experiences the foursomes, fivesomes, orgies, gangbangs, etc.

Actually that's not entirely true. You still need some game to get the girls to do stuff but it's a lot easier in that atmosphere. Once the women saw how you are with one girl it's a lot easier to get them to join in. Also this guy only had to suggest that the girls do something and they would just to please him.

When it comes to picking up girls and getting ONS you and Roosh would run rings around me.

---------------------------------------------------------------

soup: Sounds like fun.. and I'd say that's still game.

---------------------------------------------------------------

I learned some interesting things from these parties:

1. A lot of older men prefer to watch their young wives and girlfriends get it on rather than join in. For them, the pleasure was in the watching rather than the doing. Could be their are self-conscious about their bodies - not in the best of shape.

2. A lot of men are not comfortable doing stuff in public or even with more than one girl at a time. It's a lot easier to fantasize about it than to actually do it. I won't lie, it was intimidating to have 4-5 women on you and I didn't plan this. It just happened. Women just kept coming on to the bed and I couldn't exactly stop them.

3. Women are more turned on by real sex than porn. When they see real sexual passion it's a big turn on for them. I watched women that I thought would do nothing become really hot and bother watching real stuff. Next thing I know, I turn around, and they are in the middle of it.

4. Women are very competitive with each other. You get one girl to do something and you can bet there will be another one that wants to top her.

-----------------------------------------------------------

soup: Nice so you had 4-5 girls on you at once? How did that work?

-----------------------------------------------------------

What happens is that you are on a bed with one girl and women will watch how you are with that girl. If they like what they see and get turned on then they want some too and join in. I never actually tried to get the women to join in they would do it by themselves. I preferred just being with one girl at a time. But once you get like 4-5 women on a bed with you, you don't know anything anymore. You can't tell who is doing what and who is who. There are hands, tits, ass, pussy, and feet everywhere. The women also get competitive with each other and whatever you do with one they want you to do it with them too. To be honest, it wasn't an enjoyable experience for me. It's like dancing with 5 girls in the dark.

-----------------------------------------------------------

soup: This sounds like heaven to me. How many did you get to suck your dick at once?

Were they fighting over your dick?

Did you line them up and fuck then like an assembly line?

I can imagine having two or three girls sucking my dick while I'm fucking another girl. and then I'm also eating the pussy of one and fingering two different girls at the same time.

Then we can all chill on my bed, and they can cook us a meal or we can pass out. Maybe watch a movie later, or I can kick them out and practice guitar.

-------------------------------------------------------------

You are funny. Ye, someone with your sex drive and personality would. I don't have a big dick so it would be kinda hard for more than two girls do anything with it at once. So I would to say two. The others would wait for their turn while doing other stuff. Some didn't suck my dick at all.

Nope, they didn't fight over my dick. They would just kind of sulk if they felt I was giving one girl too much attention.

Nope, I didn't line them up and banged them. I just sorted of did whatever came naturally. Some women got on top of me
others I got on top of and others doggy style and others just on their side.

One thing to remember here not all of these girls are hot. Usually only one or two are good looking, another one or two that are ok and one chubby or ugly one. And you can't kick the ones you are less attractive to out of the bed you have to pretend you like all of them.