mr_engineer

It's not complaining, it's a call-out to everyone telling me to 'not be logical'. You gotta know why you're so against logical thinking, right?! I really love this excuse, that 'you're just complaining, you're just whining, you can't possibly know what works, cuz you're logical. You have to be illogical to know what works!!' Please make some sense, instead of scapegoating me as 'complaining because you don't understand'. You're the one selling this to me, I'm not buying it. To say that women are illogical and that logic cannot be used to make sense to them is kinda misogynistic, to be honest. And also not true. There are smart women out there, women with brains. You just gotta know how to filter out the morons. And a final point - the point of having a smart woman is to be able to communicate well and to be able to make a relationship work as a team-effort. You want a teammate, a partner who is smart, not stupid! This shit matters in the real world.

It's a reflection of what they have been and still are, to this day. The wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle cost 30 million pounds. If they'd donated that money to the homeless or something, instead of kicking them off the streets to preserve 'royal honor', people would be saying much better things about them.

Do you see that you're being logical when you say this? When you draw a cause-and-effect relationship between 'logic' and 'women's attraction' or 'intuitiveness and emotionality' with 'women's attraction', that's logical thinking!! Why are you being too logical?!

I have a theory on why people say 'don't be logical about this'. The reality is that people don't have their shit together. Most people's minds are a mess. So, when you're being logical with them, they'll be scared that you'll see through them. Because they're insecure. Do I have to tell you how ridiculous it sounds, when you say 'don't be logical in your choice of woman to date, have sex with or marry'?! Cuz women are very logical about this stuff. If you aren't logical for yourself, no one will be.

Thank you. On the one hand, you say that it's not a high-yield technique. On the other hand, you say that 'this is what you can work on to be attractive to lots of women'. ???

Until the day the Brits have enough of it. And they say 'We don't want these tyrants on our payroll anymore, we will not stand for it or fund it'.

...if you're okay with getting beheaded for it...

On the one hand, you say that there is no 'magic pill'. On the other hand, you're saying 'don't be logical'. As if that's the magic pill. ??? Very enlightening, I must say.

And one final point about why I went on this spiel, so that all of you can understand - when I'm trying to get good with women, if I'm given ten things to focus on, I get confused. I want one thing to focus on. One 'high-yield technique', as Leo talks about in his video on the 3-step formula. For that, I need to know what women's priorities are! That's how I verify my idea of what that high-yield technique is going to be when I improve my game.

Thank you. A word on getting this - Your best shot at getting this is to look for guys who are intimate with you in a platonic way. If they're emotionally closed-off, that situation stands literally no chance of improvement. Cuz they're fine with who they are, they're 'alpha enough to not care', but you're not. So, if you need a stepping-stone towards this kind of relationship, I'd choose a guy who isn't quite there yet but is willing to be emotionally intimate, over an 'alpha' who is emotionally closed-off. Yes, your girlfriends will warn you against it, you won't be able to make them jealous, but it's a better investment long-term. It's very relevant to the thread. And, your answer is not unique to you. So, don't worry about your privacy! A lot of women share your priorities. When I push other women to give a clear-cut answer on what they want like I pushed you, they give the exact same answer! Suit yourself. Have a good one!

There can be sex without intimacy. It's called 'mutual masturbation'. Would you be fine with that? Or, does intimacy have to be a part of your sexual experience? What's more important?! Sex or intimacy?!

Nope. You can have intimacy with a best friend too. You can be vulnerable with them, be open with them and have them be with you. And that can be fully platonic, with sexual boundaries.

Sex, domination or intimacy?

What's the priority out of all of these for you specifically? It's unrealistic to find someone who's a 10 on all of these scales.

I didn't call you a moron. I said that I see being logical with women as important to filter out morons. And I'm pointing out contradictions in what you're saying. That's different from calling you a moron!! It's okay to take the L sometimes. Just saying.

This was a reply to a point I was making, calling BS on the point of 'sense of humor'. And, what I was saying there, was that the pick-up community emphasizes the importance of 'sense of humor' to get laid. Then, when I talk about sense of humor, you bring up sex! That's why I assumed you were making a connection there.

Amen. I already won. What she's saying is full of contradictions. I swear, that is the easy way out. How do you filter out the morons, though?! You need someone with a brain to commit to. Cuz you need to know you can trust her.

If I ask you to describe an 'alpha man', you will 100% come up with some fantastical definition that doesn't match with reality. I challenge you to define 'alpha man' in realistic terms.

What does 'having a sense of humor', 'sharing a laugh' and 'not whining and complaining' have to do with 'taking responsibility'? How is vulnerability antithetical to 'taking responsibility'?! I'm not justifying what he did. I'm trying to understand your reasons for breaking it. And, you talked about 'making matters easier'. Is that what you want? For things to be 'easy'? Cuz that's not reality. If you want a caveman who lives in a fantasy in which 'everything's easy', feel free to go for them. 'Taking responsibility' will be an easy choice for them! Until shit hits the fan. Then you'll feel betrayed by the moron you chose, who didn't think it through, cuz he was so simple-minded.

@Tyler Robinson I'm talking about 'cavemen', men who are meatheads who don't have the brains that a software-guy would. And brains are pretty much everything in this complex world. That's what it takes to 'take care of things'! I'm not saying that others can't survive. I'm saying that if you want the strongest men, they are the software-developers. Technology is what separates humans from animals, at the end of the day. These are the actual alphas in the real world. And, cavemen have no brains, no impulse-control. These are not your 'protective alphas'. And, because they have physical strength, they will be abusive. That is a guarantee.

Who told you that a caveman will know how to take care of stuff in this modern world?! When you nag your caveman for screwing something up, the beatings come for free!!

You can't say that 'sex is important to you' and that 'sex is a part of humor' in one sentence. Cuz you've also said that strength is more important to you than humor!

@Tyler Robinson What does 'sense of humor' have to do with sex?! I thought that women were into men who have 'strength'!! And, in this technocratic world, software-developers are the strongest men. Do you see sex as a way to be intimate and connect, or is it something trivial and 'light'?!

@Tyler Robinson Okay. So, your answer to my question is 'strength', right? That's what I'm gathering from your answer. So much BS about 'sense of humor' this and that. There are people here saying that software-developers can't get women cuz they're 'boring' or something. I swear, I've never seen anything like the pick-up community when it comes to spreading limiting-beliefs about dating. And, to answer your question, why one would exclude the other,