A Metaphor for Pick Up in Relation to Female Sexuality

[Etherial Cat]

3 minutes ago, Gesundheit2 said:

 

Absolutely not. Intimacy with another person is synonymous with being needy, since you don't actually need them but only imagine that you do.

If you are going to engage in a relationship with a child, letting them project intimacy onto you is understandable.

 

I'm gonna stop it here. 

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, Gesundheit2 said:

You're right, honey. I see and understand you.

Do you feel fulfilled now? Be honest 

The desire to be understood only applies to men I’m interested in.

[Gesundheit2]

@Emerald 

Classic! 

That's it. I'm cutting my veins.

Life is nothing without your love, babe.

Edited July 20, 2021 by Gesundheit2

[4201]

@Emerald You say it's valuable but you don't say why. Why do I care what's universal about women and what's unique to someone? I fail to see what's the value in talking about the forest when looking to deeply understand a tree. There is perhaps value in "communicating insight" but for the invidivual, imo it's best to just focus on the person and let go of all stereotypes. Especially given how easy it is to misapply a stereotype and just assume a person is like A instead of actually gettting to know them.

Isn't that the issue you have with "pickup men" in the first place anyway? They misapply a stereotype onto women and it leads to poor understanding. You can argue all day that your stereotypes are better, but best is none.

 

I personally think the best way to get free of anger is to actually feel it. You aren't expressing your anger about what's really angering you, you are finding another issue to express "some anger" in which is unrelated from the true source of anger. The true anger is not really felt then.

But then, if the point of this thread is to "spar", of course every answer is seen as an attack and you aren't really open to what people have to say. As long as you find things to reply to validate this fantasy of yours of "winning debates online with your sharp mind". My opinion is simply that this isn't productive. Yet I don't blame you, I too am out here debating about stuff which do not really matter as a way to distract myself from my problems. I would never try to claim it's good for me though.

Did Leo make his video on the limitations of pickup from a place of argument and frustration? Probably not. I'm pretty sure he did it because he felt it would be a good contribution for those who listen to his pickup advice previously and were "stuck in pickup" ready to go to the next level. I'm not criticizing your attempt to do the same here, but only the emotional motivation behind it.

I do quite value your posts, especially replies that are on a specific conversations. You often bring great points to the conversations and I find your ideas very interesting. But here you are creating conversations for the sake of sparring which have a different energy.

Edited July 21, 2021 by 4201

[Iksander]

Why is there so much discussion about 'pickup' when it comes to dating topics on this forum? Pickup is a niche and is inherently designed for beta males to learn some 'tricks' to get to sleep with women. The tricks work when applied well, but I don't understand why all of the dating talk is under the umbrella of pickup. It's repetitive and boring and pickup only covers a small proportion of intergender relations (mostly the attraction phase)

 

Most women are never going to be happy and find a guy they love. Their standards are frankly ridiculous and they want so much when they offer fuck-all, especially in the west. It's no wonder why the 'assholes' shag all the women. Need to be a top 20% guy to get a foot in the door with a toe-rag. Also, what women say they want and what they actually respond to are very different things. Mostly, we don't care about the intimacy crap and why would we. We care about pussy and SOME of us companionship. Once we've fucked you we have leverage, which is why vetting is important for women. That's the game. Ultimately to have abundance with women you don't need to care about knowing them on a deep level. Women gatekeep sex and Men gatekeep commitment.

 

@Emerald We can have tons of sex with hot women without the deep intimacy of true female sexual nature. So basically, why should men care? For us, it's fulfilling to have any kind of sex we like

 

 

Edited July 21, 2021 by Iksander

[Iksander]

On 7/19/2021 at 9:49 PM, Emerald said:

 

And many men find this inaccurate understanding of female sexuality useful for their purposes of having sex and getting dates because it's a numbers game and eventually you'll have some success if you just approach. So, it is a bit of a magic feather and a user friendly distortion... at least user friendly for pick up.

 

 

 

 

It's not inaccurate if it works.

If it works, where is the distortion?

[Iksander]

@Lucas-fgm Yeah dude, read what I said. It's designed FOR beta males, to get them out of the beta mindset and throw them into the lions den. I didn't say pick up is beta.

Edited July 21, 2021 by Iksander

[Emerald]

30 minutes ago, 4201 said:

@Emerald You say it's valuable but you don't say why. Why do I care what's universal about women and what's unique to someone? I fail to see what's the value in talking about the forest when looking to deeply understand a tree.

Because if you only see a forest as a collection of individual trees, you miss a lot of connections. The reality is the the trees form an entire eco-system of root systems and mycelial networds. So, it often isn't enough just to understand an individual tree... you have to understand the forest if you really want to understand the individual tree.

The same is generally true of women and men. In order to make a relationship feel good to a man, you have to understand certain general things about men and about that one man in particular. The same is true for women.

The big difference is that most people know what men generally respond to. Most people are still hazy about what women generally respond to. And if you can't draw any generalities about female sexuality, no woman will be satisfied.

It would be a bit like taking care of a dog without knowing what dogs generally want and need. And then saying, you don't see the value in knowing these stereotypes about dogs because it's about getting to know your dog in particular. Then, you feed it chocolate and it dies because you thought your dog was 100% unique. 

There is perhaps value in "communicating insight" but for the invidivual, imo it's best to just focus on the person and let go of all stereotypes. Especially given how easy it is to misapply a stereotype and just assume a person is like A instead of actually gettting to know them.

Isn't that the issue you have with "pickup men" in the first place anyway? They misapply a stereotype onto women and it leads to poor understanding. You can argue all day that your stereotypes are better, but best is none.

It's not stereotypes. These are insights about certain facets of human nature. It's wise to be able to differentiate between the two. 

I personally think the best way to get free of anger is to actually feel it. You aren't expressing your anger about what's really angering you, you are finding another issue to express "some anger" in which is unrelated from the true source of anger. The true anger is not really felt then.

No, it brings up the specific kind of "feminist" anger in me that allows me to access the deeper wounds underneath it. 

Then I can focus on the anger these conversations bring up until I can actually access the sadness and cry. Otherwise, it's a little hard for me to get to the tears because I have been a bit locked up. I am very good at repressing my feelings unfortunately. So, I tend to have to crack myself open.

I need to bring up the anger first, which cracks me open to where I can feel a bit deeper. The anger is just a can opener for my deeper feelings. But I've always had a hard time feeling angry and expressing anger. So, this is my way of using a written medium to put me in a very quiet version of fight mode.  

But then, if the point of this thread is to "spar", of course every answer is seen as an attack and you aren't really open to what people have to say.

No, I very much am open. A good boxer doesn't run away from their opponent or hit below the belt. I'm willing to give credit where it's due. One of my goals is to help. Another is to write things out to crystalize them better for me. But the other is to win the interaction. 

As long as you find things to reply to validate this fantasy of yours of "winning debates online with your sharp mind". My opinion is simply that this isn't productive. Yet I don't blame you, I too am out here debating about stuff which do not really matter as a way to distract myself from my problems. I would never try to claim it's good for me though.

It must be serving you in some way.

You can say you think it isn't good for you... and you say this because it's a decent sparring move to attempt assert yourself as the voice of reason in your debate with me because you're the one who's A. Equally honest about it to match my sparring prowess, and B. Self-aware enough to know better than me that it's not good for you.

But yet you're here still sparring with me and giving me a hard time about stuff. You don't fool me with your boxing tricks.  

Did Leo make his video on the limitations of pickup from a place of argument and frustration? Probably not. I'm pretty sure he did it because he felt it would be a good contribution for those who listen to his pickup advice previously and were "stuck in pickup" ready to go to the next level. I'm not criticizing your attempt to do the same here, but only the emotional motivation behind it.

I genuinely am trying to help. I don't think you realize that. It's not good form to critique without altruism. And I've still held to that rule in this post. The only difference is that I am processing through some more acute emotions. So, I've definitely been a been snappier with the tone of my debate. 

I do quite value your posts, especially replies that are on a specific conversations. You often bring great points to the conversations and I find your ideas very interesting. But here you are creating conversations for the sake of sparring which have a different energy.

I've always liked interacting here because I like to spar. Anything I've ever written is all about helping and sparring. I'm just more agitated at this juncture in my life. 

 

[Emerald]

55 minutes ago, Iksander said:

It's not inaccurate if it works.

If it works, where is the distortion?

This is the exact point I'm making in the OP.

That which is true and that which is useful are sometimes not one in the same.

For example, if you tell your child that they better brush their teeth every night or the tooth fairy will get mad... it's not true.

But it is useful if you're a parent and your agenda is to get your kid to brush their teeth.

Another example, people in an old village bury seeds in the ground to feed to a magical Earth deity. And if the Earth deity enjoys the seeds, it will provide food for the village.

Is it true? Absolutely not. Is it useful? Definitely.

The same thing is true with the narratives around female sexuality in pick up. It's useful because it gets guys to do things more effectively. But the narrative itself is a deep misunderstanding of what female sexuality is actually like.

It is a Stage Orange version of the magical thinking found in Stage Purple. The only difference is that it sounds sciency and rational. So, it's a more convincing fairy tale... especially because it's useful. 

Edited July 21, 2021 by Emerald

[4201]

@Emerald The point you make about dogs is a point about learning anatomy rather than about learning a person (psychology, personality). Those are really different things because the way you work as a person is mainly conceptually based (your thoughts run you) while the way your body works is just hard science.

What is it you think is universal to all women and all men which do not come from their body/anatomy? What is it we would be better off "knowing" about women as a group?

Is it serving me? If I learn something yes (legitimately curious about the question above) but winning an argument over you wouldn't really help me. Perhaps by winning an argument I'd feel "more powerful" but this is quite clearly an attempt to compensate for other weaknesses by the ego. I think this is just more thought identification which is a waste of time.

Certainly the value of this conversation is not purely 0, but this conversation is not the one you were trying to have in the first place.

The analogy you make with the can opener is really a matter of the way you conceptualize yourself in how you can feel. Are you a person who needs to fight to "open up" your emotions? That is an identification, let go of that identification and emotions are accessible immediately. But that's not something that can be argued for or against. What is your proof that you are like that? You can just act like that because you think you are like that, as an attempt to prove it to yourself. The only way to really figure out what you are is to let go of all identifications and see what you really are. This is not something I can argue you into, only point out as a possibility.

My most sincere empathy goes to the emotions you are going through.

[Gesundheit2]

1 hour ago, Lucas-fgm said:

Wtf. You have really weird views on intimacy.

You're not ready for them yet.

44 minutes ago, Lucas-fgm said:

You sounded pretty misogynistic on this one. The fact that women like strong men, there is nothing to do with them being insecure or something.

You didn't understand the post at all. Not ready for it.

[Gesundheit2]

5 minutes ago, Lucas-fgm said:

The truth is that you don't know shit.

Couldn't agree more.

[Iksander]

@Emerald I would argue that the fact that a method works in reality makes it true. Data and trends  > Your opinion on female sexuality

 

Not that your opinion doesn't have any merit, but I think the problem has probably been your choice in sexual partners, not men's understanding of female sexuality. There are plenty of men, including in the pick up world that understand female sexuality well. They are drowned out by a sea of retards though, you'll have to keep your eyes open

 

 

Edited July 21, 2021 by Iksander

[Iksander]

22 hours ago, Emerald said:

 

For example, if you tell your child that they better brush their teeth every night or the tooth fairy will get mad... it's not true.

 

Go and brush your teeth or you don't eat tomorrow. Problem solved 

[Leo Gura]

On 7/20/2021 at 8:15 AM, aurum said:

You cannot compare the experience of a casual hookup versus "making love".

But you can't "make love" if you cannot even get a casual hookup.

[RickyFitts]

11 hours ago, Iksander said:

Go and brush your teeth or you don't eat tomorrow. Problem solved 

Fuck it, I'd be breaking out the Big Book of British Smiles instead, scare the little fuckers straight:

(I'm not a parent, can you tell?)

[AtheisticNonduality]

On 7/20/2021 at 5:51 PM, Gesundheit2 said:

Then how come I am almost there? I rarely (almost never) feel the need for another human being in my life.

Doubtful.

[aurum]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

But you can't "make love" if you cannot even get a casual hookup.

I agree, which is why I feel PUA can serve a role for guys. These are mostly insights I've had coming out of that phase, where I'm challenging whether or not casual hookups is something I really want to continue. Which doesn't mean that phase wasn't necessary.

[Gesundheit2]

2 hours ago, AtheisticNonduality said:

Doubtful.

I also rarely play video games.

[Leo Gura]

3 hours ago, aurum said:

where I'm challenging whether or not casual hookups is something I really want to continue.

I never found them that interesting to begin with. It's just a step towards something deeper.