Challenging Leo on women

[AION]

2 hours ago, LordFall said:

Where are you from? Are you on dating apps? Do you practice social circle game? Are you building a personal brand? 

There are always options to build more leverage and value. Don't resort to lying to get your wants met; that's low value behaviour. 

I only do cold approaches, dancing or social game. Dating apps aren’t working for me. I don’t have personal brand. I had a business though. 

[Alexop]

18 hours ago, BlessedLion said:

Now that i am seeing this from a female persepctive the whole idea of sleeping with women for casual sex, studying pick-up, or leading women on seems more and more disgusting and unethical, even if there is a strong male desire to have sexual success, novelty and quantity. I think deep down hardly any women truly want casual sex that will lead to nothing long term

Bingo! We have to think with our brains, not with our dicks. And best sex you can have is in a relationship with a woman you care for. A few relationships can scratch you itch for sexual diversity I think. You don't need to sleep with the whole city for that. 

Body count is like personal wealth. 5-10 body count sounds ok. 500.000 - 2 million in personal wealth is ok. But wtf dude? 100+ body count? Billions in personal wealth? Are you sure you are not running away from yourself??

[BlessedLion]

16 hours ago, Emerald said:

But I've known plenty of 2s and 3s with a ton of options. Of course, it's with guys who (looks-wise) are equal to their level of attractiveness. But it doesn't mean those guys are bad partners.

True, because what men find attractive and what women find attractive are different so this might work in "worse looking" women's favor. Because women typically find personality, status, presence, energy more attractive than looks. Men highly value looks. This makes sense evolution-wise. 

 

16 hours ago, Emerald said:

Also, there's an assumption here that being approached 1000 times on the street makes a woman more likely to find a good partner. 

But those approaches are going to be mostly spam attention... like junk mail.

Seems like an assumption here that quality guys can't meet a woman on the street. Why do they have to be limited to her social circle? I agree most will probably be junk mail but i don't think it's fair to say public approach = low quality guy. That limits her a lot, plenty of beautiful couples meet at a subway, cafe, bar, park, gym, whatever. Plenty of toxic horrible relationships come from people in the social circle, work environment, same yoga school, whatever. But I can understand the sentiment that it helps to act as a filter in general. Also, if a guy is approaching in public it's not likely his first time ever doing so, meaning he does it a lot. 

 

16 hours ago, Emerald said:

The thing that's important to realize is that many inexperienced women will believe their attractiveness (and not their selectiveness) is the key to getting a great partner. But they usually learn that the attractiveness factor isn't the determining factor of how satisfying their relationship will be or how great their partner is.

There are tons of plain women with amazing men.

And there are tons of an attractive women with Peter Pans who will just replace them with the younger model.

So, I'm not saying that attractiveness doesn't matter at all. It does turn heads. And if a man isn't attracted, he just isn't.

But 'turning heads' isn't something that women tend to have scarcity with. So, attraction isn't the bottleneck.

The problem is more about the majority of that attention being low-quality attention from a man who will drag down the quality of her life.

Fair enough, I understand what you are saying. 

 

I will say that learning "pick-up" or let's just say learning "attraction/dating skills" is essential for most men and will not automatically stunt their growth. That only happens if they become unethical and lost in that world. But for many it's an essential part of stepping into masculinity and being ready for a life partner. So many men commit too young and end up regretting it because they never went out there and tasted different flavors of ice cream. 

 

Similar to how you said women are not low on options/ attractiveness,-men have 0 if they don't take action and learn how to be attractive. And make no mistake women can be absolutely brutal with their filtering, labeling a guy as "ick", etc.

 

Lastly, I think the discernment is important, but can go too far. Similar to a guy going too far with his pick-up and becoming Peter Pan, a woman going too far with her red flags and list of requirements can become what I'll call a "Deluded Goddess" this is a woman who has placed such a high ideal on her potential partner that no man let alone human can fulfill, leaving no room for human imperfection, that she just ends up alone.

 

I can think of countless women who do this, and guess what, they are all alone and single and have been for years. Cute women too. 

 

Example- today i was talking to my female friend at a cafe and asked her what her requirements are for a partner, she went off about an ideal man who can hold "pure perfect presence, guard her from any penetrative looks in public with a simple glance, hold her through all her chaos and emotion no matter what, etc" I then said "have you ever found a man like this?" and she said "No, never. We're talking about the DIVINE MASCULINE here"

 

Yeah...Good luck with that one

[BlessedLion]

16 hours ago, Xonas Pitfall said:

And now consider that the red-pill/pickup world specifically targets exactly these types of women. It teaches men to look for women who are young, innocent, inexperienced, trusting, agreeable, and emotionally open. It doesn’t just teach them how to pursue these women, either. It also gives them a framework for rationalizing what they’re doing, so that they can convince themselves that what they are fundamentally doing is perfectly okay.

Yeah exactly. This reminds me of a book im reading now "The Value of Others" by Orion Tarabahn. I'm mostly reading it just as part of my research on these topics, but it fits almost perfectly with what you are describing. 

 

16 hours ago, Xonas Pitfall said:

• And then if those girls say, “Hey, I don’t want to have sex. I’m saving myself for the guy I eventually marry,” the guy might get frustrated, resent her, or even cheat on her with another girl who is more promiscuous. So either way, she can’t win.
• If those girls instead say, “We don’t want to date men. We’re going to stay single because all of this has made us confused, distrustful, and resentful,” then you have men complaining about male loneliness, saying women are selfish and ungrateful, arguing that women shouldn’t have been given rights in the first place because “look how they turned out.” Feminism, grrrh!
• If the girl is somehow smart enough to see through his bullshit, he can get annoyed by that too. Suddenly she’s “too masculine,” “too intelligent,” “too argumentative,” “too suspicious,” or “attacking him” simply because she questions what he says instead of blindly trusting him.
• If she has her own career and doesn’t need a man financially, she’s “too independent” and supposedly incapable of submitting to a man. Not girly enough.
• If she wants to take things slowly and actually get to know him, she’s “playing games” or making him “wait.” Shit testing.
• If she has sexual boundaries, she’s boring. If she is sexually open, she’s apparently “used up” or no longer worthy of commitment.
• If she doesn’t ask enough questions and trusts him, then she’s supposedly responsible for choosing a bad man.
• If she stays and tries to work through the problems, then her staying can simply be interpreted as proof that the man's behavior wasn't really that bad.
• If she wants a relationship but also wants to maintain her own identity, she’s selfish. If she completely devotes herself to the relationship, then that devotion can be taken for granted. That is just what women should do; they are "naturally" submissive.

• If she chooses to commit to a man when she’s young, say at 18-25, and he eventually cheats on her or leaves her when she’s 40, then apparently she “chose wrong” when she was young, so it’s her fault.

• If she goes through that experience and becomes more guarded or less trusting afterward, while she is older, then apparently she’s “used up,” undesirable, old, ugly.

• If the man leaves her and she becomes a single mother, then that’s also her fault. She chose wrong. Now she’s supposedly an “old hag” or a “used-up single mother” who no longer has the same value or desirability.

I understand the sentiment here, but also, look at how much of a victim mentality this gives to women and power this gives to men. You could make a similar list for men and how complex, contradictory and bullshit it is to deal with women and dating. I definitely agree that it isn't fair and women are told way too many conflicting messages that is likely confusing as fuck. But also, on some level, can they not stand on their own feet and not be subjected to whatever labels are being thrown at them? 

[BlessedLion]

16 hours ago, Xonas Pitfall said:

That's what makes the whole framework feel so fundamentally rigged. Almost any response the woman has can be interpreted in a way that confirms the ideology. If she trusts him, she's naive. If she questions him, she's too masculine or combative. If she stays, she's accepting his behavior. If she leaves, she's selfish or incapable of commitment. If she dates men, she's choosing badly. If she stops dating men, she's selfish for contributing to male loneliness.

The whole framework basically ends up teaching women to be the perfect victims while teaching men how to become the perfect predators and exploiters.

You can rationalize anything in this world. Life is life, and people will do whatever they want to get whatever they want.

But this ideology is especially poisonous because it actually convinces you that what you’re doing is fundamentally good or justified, when it absolutely isn’t.

Ah my mistake, i realize that in these examples you were just showing how the Red Pill justifies what it does and how it basically gaslights the shit out of anyone critiquing their models. 

 

This was a great read, thank you for sharing. I definitely feel for women in this sense, which is why wayyyy back (lol) in my intial post i said the truth of the matter is that it is kinda just is bullshit for women and i understand why they think it's bullshit

[BlessedLion]

15 hours ago, LordFall said:

@Xonas Pitfall

What both of you said leads to casual sex being good for women though. How else are you supposed to get to know yourself and what you like in a partner? Surely you're not implying that marrying the first guy they date is the right option? Finding cool guys to have FWB situations and explore what they like in a relationship and sexually seems like the best option.

One of my FWBs basically broke up with me a few months into us seeing each other because she got a boyfriend and wanted to see how things go. I think they dated long term and are perhaps still together. About 1 week before this happened she came to my place, brought me a bubble tea, blew me until I came in her mouth and then went to her graphic design class. 

You see how both of your perspectives are sex negative and lack an abundance mindset? I think I probably helped this girl a bit find her boyfriend by hanging out with her for months so she could tell which characteristics she liked in a man and when she found one that more closely aligned with her she went for it. We were not compatible people for a long term relationship but we could hangout casually and have a good time. I was also happy for her, I can find women to date pretty easily so I wasn't butthurt over her leaving. Both parties were enriched by the experience. 

I think if a woman is on board with that and the boundaries/expectations are clear there is no issue. What i have a problem with is leading women on, being deceptive, especially when for the most part they don't want casual sex. Most of the women i talk to don't seem interested in that as they have already experienced it, like a phase. Sometimes they do, but i think that needs to discussed and clear before moving forward. Otherwise, there's no problem there at all. 

[BlessedLion]

15 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Whenever something feels off in the logic, the conclusion is usually embedded in the premise, or there is no way to falsify. Those types of arguements usually sound coherent on the surface.

Yeah, and you can't quite put your finger on it but something is off. I feel that way when i listen to Orion Tarabhn , he's selling a whole paradigm that is pretty powerful and a framework that is hard to break down- but fundamentally lacks heart

[BlessedLion]

14 hours ago, Joshe said:

So then, you have to be blunt as fuck, which basically means, as a man, you're ending your own fun.

It's the cost of having ethics and growing a spine as a man. You get less sex, but you can look at yourself in the mirror. That said, sometimes there are women who genuinely are in a phase of being open to casual sex and you can go about that with a playful, respectful, kind attitude. No reason there can't be love there either. 

[LordFall]

7 hours ago, AION said:

I only do cold approaches, dancing or social game. Dating apps aren’t working for me. I don’t have personal brand. I had a business though. 

I would recommend to hire a photographer or go out with a buddy if one of you has a good phone and getting great pictures done for dating apps. Dating apps don't work for most men until they get the right pictures. They didn't work for me until I did properly. I remember I used Tinder for like 2 years and had 14 matches and 0 dates. I became a photographer in 2020 and did constant photoshoots for myself and others and got up to 750 matches and slept with like 15 women on it in 2 years.

This is a good video on the type of pictures to take

The angle you want is especially the badass shots, shots at trendy spots in your city, shots working out/martial arts if you're fit and one that's sleeper OP the having fun wide smile picture.

You will find the most DTF women on dating apps and the process to bed them is the most simple. You meet them at a spot near your house, get 1 drink then ask if they want to come over. That worked in about 75% of cases for me. 

Having a personal brand is the evolution to that. Your dating strategy(life/business as well but that's another topic) should rely on being able to meet people globally and building status. Who gets laid the most in society? Musicians, athletes, celebrities and overall dudes that have a global audience. Why is that? Both because they reach millions of women so even if only a few % want to fuck them that's still thousands. It also elevates them above the masses of random dudes.

Most women look for value but also for novelty when picking men. Most dudes are cardboard copies of each other if not in appearance in how they interact with the world and the value they provide. What type of bad boy is popular with women? Club promoters, drug dealers, starving artist archetype, etc in all those cases there is a unique emotional experience linked with the man.

If you do all this you will not need to lie to women to get laid, you will find plenty of women down to fuck you and date you. It's also quite fun to level up in this manner, I haven't found it to be a chore at all. To me it feels like getting laid with my brain which is more rewarding than just hammering out approaches pretending to be an extrovert.