Joshe

We agree there, lol

Most don't 😂 Yes, I agree with that. But I thought we were talking about something else. You said something like men who don't pursue are rationalizing out of some fear or less than ideal conditioning. Like if a man is going about his life, seeing attractive women on the street and just walks by them, he's operating on some bad psychology if he doesn't approach them. And I was saying, no, it's normal to walk past 1000 things you would take if you could get them for free, but since they aren't free, you just keep walking, no sour grapes. It's abnormal to waltz about on that street as if every attractive woman is something to desire for more than a few seconds, as well as it is to be looking for approach missions you're either accepting or chickening out of. To turn talking to attractive women into a challenge seems neurotic. Guys seem to get more of a rush from having successful interactions with hot girls than they do actually having sex with them, lol. If that's true, and I think it is (been there), that gives the entire game away: external validation. But of course, this neuroticism isn't recognized as such. It's recognized as a man living up to his fullest potential because I'm a man, I like sex, I like beautiful women, and I want more of both. Which is the perfect cover story for organizing his life around acquiring them. Appetite promoted to virtue. That said, I get it. Men need solutions to get sex, and your approach does work. It's just not my cup of tea. Pros and cons.

It seems there's an underlying frame that if something is desirable, there must be some sort of conquest mission to attain it. It's a basic form of reasoning where people can look at something desirable and ask themselves how much they truly want it, then ask how much work goes into getting it, and then decide the desirable thing is better off not pursued, and to walk away without "sour grapes". So if I see a desirable woman who I would most certainly consider having sex with, I think of all that entails and almost always decide that it would be nice to have but I don't want it enough. I don't walk away from that with "sour grapes" or any negative emotion at all. @enchanted was talking about the benefit, not the cost. He was saying the stories that men tell themselves about the benefits are often bullshit, which is correct and a basic understanding of how the mind works. And those stories of status, conquest, accomplishment, etc, are scripts running on base instincts that are easy to understand upon observation. Can you see how having a "conquest" frame increases the benefit, thus justifying the cost of the mission? Obviously, the reward is higher for the conquest-focused person because they're getting a bonus on top of the thing (increased self-worth, status, high score, etc). The conquest-oriented person is running a ledger, and that ledger tallies their self-worth - that's why they do it - for the proof on the scoreboard. If one doesn't need self-worth from the scoreboard, the cost-benefit comes out differently. It would be like if you were a runner and completing a marathon gave you a great sense of accomplishment, and you told all non-runners that the only reason they aren't actualizing themselves is because they're rationalizing their laziness, but they can have the grand prize of accomplishment and conquest if they simply get off their lazy, rationalizing asses and run the marathon. The runner assumes that because the marathon fills a hole in him, that everyone has that hole. If you deem the cost worth it, then by all means, do you. But if others don't see it as worth it, don't project inferiority or a hurt/broken psychology onto them, at least not as universally as you seem to. Everyone wants the candy bar bro. Some are more bothered by not being able to have it than others. Conquest is one way to make the pursuit mean something. It's not the only way. Conquest is obsessed with the scoreboard. Appetite gets fed and goes quiet. When I see a badass mansion or super yacht and think of how nice it would be to have such an easy and plush lifestyle, I don't have "sour grapes". I see something that would be nice to have, dream about having it, consider what it would take to get it, and then get back to life. A question to reflect on if you want: "Abundance" and "options". For what? What is the motive for abundance and options? "When a general takes a province, the province's qualities don't matter to him as qualities. Its rivers, its people, what it's like to live there — irrelevant. What matters is that it's his now, and what taking it says about him and his position relative to rivals. The territory is valued entirely for its function in the score."

Soul-sucking, bad decision, waste of time, living hell. Never again!

Yeah, he’s fucking brilliant. I bought as much of his stuff that I could find several years back.

💯 Also highly recommend exploring all of Alain de Botton.

If you woke up tomorrow and every human except you was gone from the earth, what might your psychology look like 2 years from then?

Thanks! I'll definitely check it out.

Ain't no pussy like new pussy

swing dick like no other, 😂

Saying a guy is responsible for what he knowingly does to someone isn't a hero complex. It's just pointing out the obvious. If anyone thinks the guy in my story was justified in continuing to use this girl for sex for 2 years, all the while knowing what she wanted, and all the while knowing he was never going to give it to her, you've got some work to do. Or I guess because she didn't have her shit together, that makes her fair game and him the adult.

Haha. I was just thinking "this pattern exists everywhere, you can even observe it in TV shows and movies". Like, it's not something hidden. The nature of women is right there!

I think it's basically what @Apparition of Jack said, with an addition. She was living in a hell and wanted out, and had some strange belief that her kids should go with her, then was successful at taking the kids out but not herself, then woke up traumatized in a whole new world that wasn't her typical hellhole, and had to come up with some reasonable thing she could believe to be true, so she deceived herself that that's actually what happened. Just think about what the first 2-4 weeks would have been like afterwards. The average human mind in that situation would be so malleable/suggestible that it could buy any culturally acceptable story. I'd wager she was actually largely talked into believing it from those around her trying to make sense of it, while sympathizing with her.

Lol, that's an interesting interpretation. See where others have already labored to articulate how the ego justifies it's bullshit in this domain.

perfect analogy

Yeah, I've seen that a lot as well. This one girl was head over hills for one of my friends and she kept having sex with him anytime he'd call, which was once or twice a month. She acted like she wasn't interested in a relationship because she didn't want to scare him off. Of course, she got tired of him calling just to come have sex, leave, and ignore her the rest of the time. So when she finally started complaining about it, my buddy would tell her "I don't want a relationship and if you don't want to have sex, then I won't call you anymore". So she continued having "casual" sex with him and he thought he was in the clear because he stated his intentions. And he told himself that if her feelings got fucked, it's not on him. Exactly. It's rarely an emotionally detached transaction like it often is with guys. If she keeps coming back to have sex, unless she's a nympho or something, she wants something more from you, or is seeing if there's anything worth pursuing, and you're bullshitting yourself with all this talk of clearly stated boundaries and healthy casual sex.

To me, what seems like casual sex with no strings attached is mostly an unconscious evaluation phase to see if you're someone worth pursuing. And when they figure you don't make the cut, they "casually" part with "I wasn't looking for anything serious, it was just casual fun, no hard feelings". To me, it's a weird idea for two people to be mutually attracted, repeatedly have sex, spend time together, joke around, become comfortable with each other, anticipate seeing each other multiple times, and that just remains "casual". Strong immediate sexual attraction + little further interest → one-night stand / brief fling. Sexual attraction + continued interest, but discovers disqualifying characteristics → casual arrangement may persist, but he's effectively excluded from the serious-partner category. Sexual attraction + continued positive discoveries → increasing intimacy and attachment → relationship becomes increasingly desirable. So, if it truly is just casual sex for her, then FWB is basically: "I like having sex with you, but I've already determined that you aren't my ideal"

Not quite full-circle but getting close. I don't need full and total control over reality. Not because I'm "passive", but because I'm not neurotic about controlling reality. Here's something to consider far into the future: right now, you're operating on an unconscious script that is driving you. When you accomplish your goals, you will realize they will not do for you what you're telling yourself they will. Then you will realize the purpose of the script, and will relinquish the reins on reality. In the meantime, don't assume your approach is superior, because you might find out otherwise.

Oh yeah, I totally see the importance of it if you're out in the world actually trying to herd people toward a cause. But that's the main reason I don't do that. Because it necessitates being in environments and around people I dislike. I can find other ways to be impactful, around the types of people I actually like. I don't necessarily want high quality connections, but I enjoy them when they happen. I'm not chasing after them, the same way I'm not chasing after women. If it happens, it happens. I don't want to prove anything to the world at large.

😂 Fuckin great!

@LordFall I gotcha. That makes sense if that's how you prefer to live. I myself don't enjoy seeing people based on their value to me. Not that there's anything wrong at all with wanting to cultivate a high-value network. I just don't get into it. I can spot a transactional motherfucker from a mile away and I get that "ick". I like connection as an end in itself. Maybe there's a bit of naivety in that sentiment regarding worldly success, but it's just my natural preference. Always has been.

Yeah, that's worth thinking about: toxic fuel is better than no fuel, lol.

I think you could have gotten the same thing without pickup. I slept with over 50 women and have had around 10 girlfriends, IIRC. I stopped playing the game because it was no longer worth it. I could be out here getting a girl a week if I wanted, but I don't wanna live that life because I've already done it and the thrill is gone. I've had sex probably 5k times. That tends to burn the candle out, lol. At least for me. So, if you're implying I'm speaking from scarcity, it's not the case. Your dick would get hard looking at the trophy collection I deleted years ago, lol.

I suppose for me, if I attract a woman or not, I'm fine with that, even if I wished I could have pulled one that night. I don't go home and think "man, I really gotta step my shit up because I want to be a man who gets what he wants when he wants it." For me, I either get attraction or I don't, and that's that. So that could be a factor. When I consider the cost-benefit of spending thousands of hours in trying to minimize those instances where I don't pull a girl, the reality of those instances is not so painful that I'm willing to put in the thousands of hours to minimize them. It mattered in my 20s but attraction wasn't so sparse that I needed frameworks and tactics.