This isn’t what is being advocated for here though.
What I am saying is you’re dealing with a limited sample size. With a larger one you’ll likely come to realize that things aren’t so cut and dry, black and white.
By stating things so clearly you may in fact signal lack of experience to the more experienced chicks, potentially putting them off. And present a challenge or even get a more eager less experienced chick to mask up and hide her intentions. You can’t avoid harm in love my friend, just minimize it as we all try to in our own way (if we care to).
Chicks lie all the time greater or lesser to match what they think their crush will value them for. I’ve had chicks act like complete soulless whores in order to get me to keep seeing them only to find out they aren’t really built like that. Experienced chicks will feign innocence to avoid being rejected by a less experienced or more conservative dude. Verbally honest intentions will not protect you or her.
There’s more to the picture is all i’m saying. Clear statement of intention though well meaning is rudimentary and no great protection against harm as you think it is.
Been with a wide range of backgrounds. Including women deep into kink/swinging and many partners. Women who have had <3 partners. Women who have had >50 (they taught me the most). Teachers, professional athletes, epidemiologists.
Everybody appreciates regard, courtesy and a fair shake.
There’s more to the picture is all i’m saying. Clear statement of intention though well meaning is rudimentary and no great protection against harm as you think it is.
Not sure this follows. Just because you see explicit statement in text in response to another person's inquiry doesn't mean I prescribe this to others. Someone wanted a model, so I delivered on a specific front.
My real point is that communication, wisdom, good judgement is almost always the answer to so many of these questions. Not that you should have dense verbal text exchanges with people to avoid harm-- those were just ready examples.
Agree with the 'more to the picture' comment, I'm here with you reading, after all. I wouldn't be reading if some of the posts didn't at least deliver *some* value.
Huh. This is kind of an amusing thought. It's as though you don't believe me. And that's good skepticism. I'm also not here pretending to have any kind of authority. And certainly some of the reported numbers of sexual experiences, and situations, are outside of what I know (ie, I have not had 100 sexual partners).
Take or leave. I also find this dumb.
Bad boundaries and mental masturbation. Some of the more sincere posters have insights that astound me, though, and remind me there's still more to see and feel.
Edit how do i post screenshot of text convo maybe?
Here's a copy and pasted exchange with a woman I had two meetups with (initial drinks, then rollerskating. I almost fell on my ass the whole time). This is from a while back, but the entire exchange happened before we ever had sex. Sorry if it upsets anybody that I actually communicated with a woman and still had sexual experiences, I guess. I know, I know, I didn't zimzam the compliance, and I'm not attractive enough.
Edit edit the context being she seemed way more interested in monogamy than me, apparent from some conversations we had had. She was also younger, had a graduate degree, beautiful girl, etc, etc. For my part, I went on to become a giant ho. I mean, uh, even more promiscuous.
Btw my experience of this event, if I remember correctly, is that she attached *even harder* after this pre-sexual exchange.
Me: That could work. I need to check on something first, though. And also, in thinking about one of our previous comversations, I need to provide you a piece of information.
Her: Foreboding...
Me: I'm down to hang Sunday for sure. But during our conversation about 'dealbreakers' at the roller rink, I had to think lots about what you said.
Me: So I think you should know my thoughts on children. I'm not a 'no' in my life on that. But there's definitely a high degree of ambivalence. And neither children nor marriage are my immediate target, nor in my immediate future. So I thought I'd share that so you can have some information about me.
Me: I think there are guys who date and they more certainly pursue those things. One of my buddies actively seeks a wife. I am not like that, though.
Her: Ok, thanks for sharing. I think it’s very sweet that you are thinking about it so much. I want to respond to this, but I am trying to finish up a project at work so I won’t be able to give it the attention it deserves until I get home. However, know that I am not trying to force anything that isn’t there. Although that is something I am looking for in life, I only want to pursue it when it’s “right”
Her: Hey! Ok, so I want to share some thoughts below, but I also want to preface it by saying thank you for being willing to broach these topics and think about real issues… I would love to continue the conversation. Here are some of my thoughts based on what you’ve shared:
First, I really appreciate the way you think about things. I like the way your mind works and I like that you are forthcoming with your desires/hangups.
Her: As far as the marriage/babies conversation, I want to clarify that I by no means am looking for that in the immediate future. I have a ton of life goals/desires and those two are only a part of them. No doubt, they are a part of me and a part of who I am, but they by no means monopolize who I am or desire to be.
Her: When I talk about deal breakers, that means it’s a deal breaker if kids are not ever in the cards for that person (naturally or by adoption).
My other thought is, if I wanted to get “wifed up”, I would have been married a long time ago. As is, I value marriage as a commitment you make with a person who you want to share your life with. I believe in a partnership that supports and encourages one another and pushes them to try new things and always be growing. I think that marriage is this commitment to share your life with someone, but is not an endpoint or destination. Rather, it is a commitment of and TO the relationship. It is something I want, but not something I need.
Her: So… that’s heavy and maybe deeper than you bargained for… I think it’s a longer conversation, but wanted to share some thoughts!
Here's one that has the F Word in it from last few weeks. Why are they all texts??? I think I just am busy. I would rather have these conversations in person.
Me: Well, the 'no casual stuff' text had me wondering what you're looking for in the world at this point. I'm a bit of a similiar mind, I don't just casually fuck around, but I'm not really a 'boyfriend' either. And I want to be mindful of that with you, because people have gotten their feelings hurt.
Her: Thank you for clarifying by the way. I'm not looking for a boyfriend right now either, I've just been out of the dating game for so long that I'm not sure how to do anything else and I'm not sure what I want. Being a naturally shy person I don't trust people very easily and in turn that makes super casual things very difficult for me to get into.
What you're doing there is boyfriend disqualification, which is something all good seduction material teaches as a way to set the right frame. But that is a far cry from telling her outright 'this would just be a physical thing'. Disqualifying yourself is still ambiguous as @topcat mentioned, it makes no promises or explicit frames about what is going to happen. And that's important for the sexual fantasy.
I don't have any axe to grind with you but I don't like the way you come in with a vaguely insinuating tone, calling what people say 'troubling' and taking veiled jabs at other comments or the forum in general. It's not the first time you've done it.
It's not a respectful way to discuss things, especially on a topic like seduction where it's very difficult to put into words all the nuances of things. I want this to be a place where people are free to express themselves and learn the right way to do things in an open discussion, and vague insinuations don't help that.
What you're doing there is boyfriend disqualification, which is something all good seduction material teaches as a way to set the right frame. But that is a far cry from telling her outright 'this would just be a physical thing'. Disqualifying yourself is still ambiguous as @topcat mentioned, it makes no promises or explicit frames about what is going to happen. And that's important for the sexual fantasy.
I guess I'm a little light on sufficient evidence that I've ever said to a woman "I'm only interested in physical stuff atm." My mind is also blown. Because this is such an ordinary, acceptable thing to say to a woman.
I don't have any axe to grind with you but I don't like the way you come in with a vaguely insinuating tone, calling what people say 'troubling' and taking veiled jabs at other comments or the forum in general. It's not the first time you've done it.
I want this to be a place where people are free to express themselves and learn the right way to do things in an open discussion, and vague insinuations don't help that.
I guess I'm a little light on sufficient evidence that I've ever said to a woman "I'm only interested in physical stuff atm." My mind is also blown. Because this is such an ordinary, acceptable thing to say to a woman.
In my experience, girls generally don't go for the 'wanna bang' type of seduction, and they like to have that whole thing of plausible deniability so that they don't feel cornered into sex. It's fine and good to disqualify yourself as a boyfriend, which I do by:
- Talking about how I'm not looking for anything serious
- Framing my current point in life as one of exploration and expanding my horizons
- Talking about spontaneous pleasurable experiences that I've had
- Talking about sex (not about sex with her, obviously, but in general) without the frame of commitment
Girls are not that dumb, they have all the experiences of dealing with guys promising them the world in the hope of getting them into bed. It's not hard to get the point across.
Well it's nothing personal with you man, I don't have an opinion about you either way, and it wouldn't be relevant if I did. I'm just trying to keep the place positive and constructive, and I'm calling out a specific thing you've done. And I think you do know what I'm talking about.
If you don't like the way I've done it, feel free to let me know what you think I should do better. Being a mod is not a particularly pleasant job or one where you get much feedback or thankyous, but someone has to do it.
@Beck Bass@TomInHo you mentioned about LTR and asked why wouldn't I want to be in LTR with her.. I'm guessing you meant being monogamous?
I don't know, I just think I'm not designed for it.. I'm bound to stray and I don't want that bad karma of cheating and hurting. Maybe someday I may embrace it but I just can't push myself now.
@Beck Bass@TomInHo you mentioned about LTR and asked why wouldn't I want to be in LTR with her.. I'm guessing you meant being monogamous?
I don't know, I just think I'm not designed for it.. I'm bound to stray and I don't want that bad karma of cheating and hurting. Maybe someday I may embrace it but I just can't push myself now.
If you're fucking other girls on the side it ain't cheating if she's aware of it but stays anyways. Plus you don't know if when things get "serious" you'll still want other girls either
I've seen it happen tons... a dude will say I will never settle down, I'll never get married, I'll never be monogamous then fast forward 3 years later and he's all the above and happy with it
Life ain't so black and white and IMO it's wise to be open minded to the ebbs and flows of life because the only thing constant is change
Also I understand the hesitation and worrying about "hurting" a girl because I went through that phase too. You try your best to honest and transparent to set proper expectations but sex and romance ain't logical
The girls can know you are logically not a good bf or husband but her pussy still reacts crazy when around you. And for a lot of women those urges are hard to come by, so they will bend to you and show you what you want to see so they can be with you
So you can say "Oh don't take her on, if you can't give her what she wants"... but honestly who the hell are you to tell the heart what it should want. Even if you guys never get married you can teach that girl a lot and give her an experience to remember for the rest of her life.
Sure she may get hurt but you don't know that for sure... in fact you may be the one crying your eyes out at the end, when she realizes shit ain't going nowhere with you and dumps you to be with a more serious guy lol
Being mindful about the effects our actions have or could have on others isn't a phase.
And we're a little hung up on the sex/commitment split, which seems to have touched a nerve, but isn't exactly what the matter is about (and indeed is probably a specialized and nuanced case, as in my original reply so identified).
The question isn't even necessarily about expectations. It's about the wellbeing of the other person, and being a 'team player,' champ, rather than 'omg pussy at all costs!!!"
Also the point about how women change and adapt is very true. With a really, really unfortunate implication about the nature of pain and trauma. A three legged dog still runs around and wags its tail just fine... life, uh, finds a way. Everyone sure would like if the dog still had all its legs, though.
But my point is established. My final potshot shall be my controversial list of Marxist statements that upsets the committee--
1. Communicate with people.
2. Respect boundaries.
3. Be honest.
4. Empathize.
5. Show consideration for your partners.
6. Try not to live with mama (I get crucified for this one, so let's sneak it onto the end. At this age, only I should be sleeping at ur mom's house).
Collectively, I feel a nerve was touched, as though some tangential readers may be feeling like they've been put on trial. Good, though, those feelings are informative and valid and lord knows I've felt that way. But what if there's a way to still get what you want, and not feel that way? See items 1-6 above.
@Beck Bass @TomInHo you mentioned about LTR and asked why wouldn't I want to be in LTR with her.. I'm guessing you meant being monogamous?
I don't know, I just think I'm not designed for it.. I'm bound to stray and I don't want that bad karma of cheating and hurting. Maybe someday I may embrace it but I just can't push myself now.
Fair enough, just tell her you're a free spirit looking for some fun!
Despite what some people say out there (or even here, on seduction forums!), most women can take care of themselves eventually, and won't expect anything too much unless you really mislead them.
I myself never mention anything about relationships (like if I want or I'm in one) because of a fundamental law of sexual thermodynamics (sexualdynamics?):
Men chase sex, women chase relationships!
Not your job to be all "well, I'm a player, I just use girls, I just want sex, yadayadayada".
That said, back when I had an IG and was single, my bio was "fuckboi with a heart", the heart thing in Portuguese, so not a 1 to 1 translation but roughly this.
As far as I know, I only address those things when girls ask me, and I'm very to the point and have a strong frame, just like anything else
Most of that is of course true (and I've also had women lie to me about experience, it's an important lesson).
But uh oh. There's also a big silly in there:
Being mindful about the effects our actions have or could have on others isn't a phase.
And we're a little hung up on the sex/commitment split, which seems to have touched a nerve, but isn't exactly what the matter is about (and indeed is probably a specialized and nuanced case, as in my original reply so identified).
The question isn't even necessarily about expectations. It's about the wellbeing of the other person, and being a 'team player,' champ, rather than 'omg pussy at all costs!!!"
Also the point about how women change and adapt is very true. With a really, really unfortunate implication about the nature of pain and trauma. A three legged dog still runs around and wags its tail just fine... life, uh, finds a way. Everyone sure would like if the dog still had all its legs, though.
But my point is established. My final potshot shall be my controversial list of Marxist statements that upsets the committee--
1. Communicate with people.
2. Respect boundaries.
3. Be honest.
4. Empathize.
5. Show consideration for your partners.
6. Try not to live with mama (I get crucified for this one, so let's sneak it onto the end. At this age, only I should be sleeping at ur mom's house).
Collectively, I feel a nerve was touched, as though some tangential readers may be feeling like they've been put on trial. Good, though, those feelings are informative and valid and lord knows I've felt that way. But what if there's a way to still get what you want, and not feel that way? See items 1-6 above.
Interesting thread. Lots of good perspectives here.
The tactic @HoofHearted is using is called a 'statement of intent' in seduction community parlance.
You could also say he is setting relationship expectations, just simply doing so prior to intimacy, rather than after intimacy as is more the norm.
Looks like the difference of opinion here is a guy having fewer, longer-lasting affairs (HoofHearted) vs. guys having one-night stands. It takes a little more finesse figuring out how to tell a girl "I'd be interested in banging you, but I probably won't care to see you again after tonight" and have her not take that the wrong way. Not to say it can't be done...!
Anyway, I agree @Gladiator that you're going to have a hard time making open heart-to-heart communication work congruently with a fuckboy vibe. If she's into you and you have a fuckboy persona, it means she likes you the way you are (fuckboy and everything). Her qualifying heavily suggests she had/has doubts that YOU would go for a girl like her.
There's plenty of flirtatious stuff you can do to imply you're not planning on sticking around. There's the old seduction community favorite of disqualifying her, e.g.: "You're too much of a good girl for me. We'd never get along." You can do the old fashioned, "I'm bad news for you, baby. I'm a rebel. I'm not the type to get tied down." You can warn her off in a flirtatious way: "You're only gonna get hurt with me. If you know what's good for you, you'll forget you ever knew me and find some nice guy who wants to take good care of you." Any of these will be more in keeping with the kind of vibe you have.
In at least two cases. This thread devolved from an examination of ideas/concepts into an examination of me, which I indulged this once because I'm so good natured, and affable, and frankly the precious darling of these boards.
In a practical sense, most women I meet are just fine. They have fine context about sexuality. I think this is because they have such access to it (I learned early on I could never keep pace with a certain threshold of girl that wanted to have sex and sought it). They tend to value it differently? I'm no sexphilosopher. But I noticed when I was young, it tended to be *me* who assigned relatively meaning and value to sex than the women.
Some women would figure out if I was 'cool' and relate stories and situations I couldn't even imagine... and some I still can't (multi-generational bondage threeway on ecstasy).
Which leads me back to a term on here I actually really do agree with, though I may not really know what it means: calibrate. Right move in right context.
I have discussed general principles, true, but also shown a very specific tool I use when the situation deems necessary. Not always do I detect what I perceive as such a diverse sexual power imbalance (as I've gotten older, it happens more frequently. When I was younger, I was on the flipside of the coin so often I'm surprised I wasn't ripped to shreds by cougars. Tbh I'm still trying to leave that way...)
I was happy with some of the responses which showed at parts applied critical thinking, even if I didn't agree. And it was interesting to note the shape of engaged human discourse (assuming you all aren't ChatGPT), including those who actually contributed nothing, and those that revealed the human tendency toward herd.
Oh boy! this again..... Anyways i already said a million times how this qualifying women is silly (my take/ my opinion), I mentioned how is also not really ideal as a seducer or even worth it..... Yes you will run into the "i don't sleep around" " i only sleep with the dude i am dating" "for me to sleep with a dude it has to mean something cause i give myself and my all to them" etc women conservative crew...
Main problem with dudes is that they tend to not to calibrate with the women and situation, or just screen them out, this was cool back in 2010 and popular.... going for the greens..... Those conservative type girls can also be green, but a lot of the seducers get paranoid when they give push back to their approach and sub: - we have to fuck tonight or wont see you again frame - i do not get mono frame if you don't accept you can walk bd wanna be - i don't do 2 encounters/dates i rather move on... - I am a fuckboy and scumbag take it or leave it - i am tate/fresh and fit wanna be with redpill speeches and logic...
^ some of that crew i know and argue with them how silly that approach was, and how many lays they are losing due to that rigid game style/ideology and lack of patience... A lot of them don't care cause they had plenty of leads....
I do care and i do enjoy those perceived "conservative girls" or "time machine girls" or "Tradcum girls" i have seduce them and fuck them, again these girls are cool due to the level of attachment and devotion but they are also a huge pain in the ass for the same reasons.... But i know a lot of you won't understand me, and won't even understand what i am saying with "that women are women", but anyways....
