Ad

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

criteria

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Cosy, I love the idea of talking to the parts of his personality that I want to encourage.

    I adore the idea of holding his tie or shirt in a way that turns him on. One has seen such things on TV or movies without realizing that one could implement it onesself. One is becoming a vamp. One is also getting in the habit of talking about onesself in the third person. But one is not in scarcity. Does one sound like one isn't getting any?

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Present View Post
      Cosy, I love the idea of talking to the parts of his personality that I want to encourage.

      I adore the idea of holding his tie or shirt in a way that turns him on. One has seen such things on TV or movies without realizing that one could implement it onesself. One is becoming a vamp. One is also getting in the habit of talking about onesself in the third person. But one is not in scarcity. Does one sound like one isn't getting any?
      One tries to keep oneself objective, so that one does not intrude with ones authoritaaa.
      Vampire chicks would do well as FBs.

      You don't want to steel gaze at guys and say "hey, respond to me analytically dammit!", that stuff always goes against the grain, you wanna see through his facade, then when he's warmed up a bit, you wanna get him ready to rock.

      I was about 19 when I had my first belt pull, and wall slam moment. Seriously, it helped get rid of some of my green. The old shirt scrunch, is badass. Use clothing to your advantage, always. Like grazing over the boyshorts etc. Nice stuff.

      Don't wanna be tetris sex girl. Where she cranks herself back.
      You wanna either be cradled (arm hooks around the guy), or arching (hand pushes on guy).
      Kneed the guy a bit more like a cat might, or like dogh. It opens your hips up to swivel right.

      Attraction counts for shit, when a girl doesn't utilise her capacity in the bedroom. Or leading up to it. Sex is so much better when its, push, pull, and tug and tear.
      Who gives a fuck if the dude comes back or not, if you know you are awesome xD.

      At the end of the day, guys that are aware of this stuff really do look for things that make it all more fun. So if they are there, you have a way higher chance of capitalising.

      Vamps are sexy though. For sure. You should role play that at some point.
      I know that I for sure could have made girls BELIEVE I was a vampire at points if had whispered it to them (get it so good they will believe it).

      Having nerve, and staring someone down in a sexy way is certainly one way to seduce.


      Glad I could help you get started on that stuff, its key.
      And yeah, you sound a little scarcity mentality, because otherwise Mltrs would be easier to gain.
      Might not be scarce on sex, but scarce on dudes wanting to mltr it up.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Present View Post
        I can hardly even envision a guy suspecting me of ulterior motives. Weird. Maybe I'm naive, but what could I possibly want from a guy other than fun and sex? I dunno, maybe once a person meets me it becomes obvious that I am not looking for a provider. Is that the ulterior motive you're referring to? Or are there other possibilities? I mean, the idea of propositioning a guy just to say, "gotcha! You're a sucker! You really believed that?" is so far beneath my dignity. . . But maybe it's something that club-going twenty-year-old girls actually do? It's good to have an idea of what some far-off stranger might think. Or of how a twenty-six-year-old man (not you. . . not a potential lover of mine) might think.
        I think the problem is, you are asking questions in general about MEN, but actually you are only interested in the type of men you like. You really need to understand the basic, no frills standard model male brain in order to eventually succeed with the alpha outliers that you desire.

        Journey with me into the mind of your average, frustrated chump:

        A. Her: You know, we could head back to your place for a little fun...

        Frustrated Guy: (inside: "does she mean sex? Oh god, I hope she means sex") Oh yeah? What did you have in mind? <seeks clarification>

        You see how this guy can't believe his luck because he is so used to having to WORK FOR SEX. This knee-jerk skepticism can then serve to undermine everything by forcing the woman to verbalize sex, possibly ruining the mood or making her feel like a slut.

        B. Her:
        You know, we could head back to your place for a little fun...

        Inexperienced Guy: (inside: "This is a sure thing! But what if I fuck it up? What if she laughs at my apartment/cock/performance. Then I'll feel even shittier than when I wasn't getting laid.") Why don't we have another drink and talk a little more...<stalls for time, indecisive>

        Self explanatory.

        C. Her: You know, we could head back to your place for a little fun...

        Conservative Guy: (inside: "Holy shit, this girl is nasty. Should I pump and dump her? What if she's a hooker? Will I get some disease?") Hm. How about we go half on a room instead? <defensive>

        This guy suffers from severe Madonna-Whore complex and does not know how to distinguish healthy, sex-positive intent from sexual looseness. He does not trust, because he has a lot to lose (reputation, self-esteem, financial assets) by taking a chance on the wrong girl.

        $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

        Now, just because YOU do a good job of screening and setting a sex-positive, poly frame that does not mean that the guys you meet--even the experienced ones--do not carry the flicker of these responses lingering in their psyches. These are perfectly stereotypical models of the type of male pain/humiliation which occurs regularly through miscommunication or misapprehension of the woman: a woman sends a signal, the guy acts the way he assumes is most appropriate/pleasing, but is later made to suffer for it by the woman.

        Even your beloved Alphas have simply adopted the strategy of largely IGNORING WHAT THE WOMAN SAYS and merely continuing in the application of their own unswerving behavioral program. Which brings me back to the weakness of your proposed "direct approach." It is likely to be most effective with guys for whom it is also unnecessary (experienced, non-judgmental) and who are likely to either pre-empt your offer with their own initiative (POS), or to be already running a seduction program on you aimed towards the kind of relationship that HE would prefer (TOTH). Either way, you are out of luck in the sense that the Alpha will not swerve to please you just because you make yourself available (though he might of his own will), and the beta may be slightly off-put or undermined by bowing to your wishes.


        Originally posted by Present View Post
        Now this really struck me: "Some subtle, sexy things that girls have done with me, even when I was clueless, were to simply tell me how horny they are, how long they've been without a man. . ." I have never said either of those things because I would NOT have thought that they were subtle at all, plus I would have THOUGHT that they would make me look like a loser. How in heaven's name did a girl manage to say those things to you without lowering her own social value in your eyes? Maybe if she included "I'm so very picky, they keep propositioning me but they're all worthless. . . " But I wouldn't like to say that lots of men are worthless. It's not true or nice. Did she frame it like, "I've been holding out for a man like you?" There, now there's a line I could see myself saying.
        I very much like what Cosy said about subtlety and context, so rather than harp on semantics, I'll just add that your assumptions about the impact or value shift of this kind of sexual explicitness belie a kind of blind spot that could be perceived as judgmentalness or M/W. I think the judgmentalness comes from considering scenarios outside of your experience. Like, YOU would never say that, so it must not work. Now, feel free to ignore the examples that do not lead to the kinds of sex/relationships you would like, but don't make the mistake of ignoring alternate paths to your stated goals.

        Saying you are horny or hard up to an inexperienced or insecure beta may very well be the kiss of death for you.

        But I can assure you no attractive woman would "lose value" for admitting they were horny or hard up on this forum because experienced guys do not judge a woman on the flow or regularity of her sex. We understand that, despite more attention, high-value women often have to be choosier about their partners and that they are not always in control of the supply since they tend to seek similarly elusive, high-value partners. My actress ex-GF, my model/TV announcer wife and my fitness instructor FB all complained to me at various points about their sporadic and unsatisfactory sex lives . This insight was actually critical for me and became a tremendously convenient way to build rapport with models, flight attendants and escorts who are all SURROUNDED by men, and yet cannot seem to find the right FUCKING GUY.

        Again, the point is not that HB10s can get away with anything, but that the context and the mutual chemistry is far more important than the impact of any particular statement. You seem to be on the right track when you mentioned that you were now screening exclusively for guys who are already poly. This is good, but one inherent problem I see is that your self-stated preference for these older, experienced poly guys will tend to conflict with THEIR preference for younger, more receptive/sensitive females. Which brings us back to the Catch-22 of possibly greater sexual opportunity with more traditional, beta guys. While Cosy has given you a lot to digest, I was also interested in digging deeper into this throwaway comment you made a while back:

        I hold my poly frame easily in starting from online, which is where I am at my strength. Meeting for the first time out in the real world, I hit the jackpot less often--less relaxed and confident. Also, in the real world, I believe that I have to come at the poly information from a more oblique angle. I don't announce it in so many words all the time. While holding the attitude of fun, I am more careful to keep the full nature of my practice private until trust has been built, because a woman's social standing is at risk.
        I think there is gold to mine here regarding the question of how you perceive the risk to your social standing and also what we call the "congruency" of your poly frame. Are you really, authentically walking the walk and is that clear to your men?

        Comment


        • #64
          Cosy, you just taught me something. I thought that "vamp, femme fatale" was related to "vamp, repeated phrase of music." I had no idea it was actually related to vampire--http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=vamp. My classic image of a vamp is that of Lucy Riccardo "vamping" her country cousin to scare him away. Of course, he loves it and threatens to stay forever.

          Daigoro, those examples of how a man might feel suspicious and nervous are priceless. Thank you.

          The men I am currently with as partners really, really get it that I am poly and so are they.

          I'm careful about disclosing poly in so many words because of social standing and even more so because of professional life. The two, unfortunately, overlap. I'm comfortable saying, to anybody, "I just date because it's fun! I'm very happy with my life the way it is." But that's about as far as I'll go towards explaining poly to a non-secret-society-member. I mean, nobody has dared say to me, "do you have sex with more than one of the men you date?" They may assume it or guess or hope, (or, if they have a ton of ASD and ascribe same to me, they may assume that I don't have any sex because I'm not in a monogamous relationship) but they don't get to know anything for sure unless they are a valid potential partner.

          I don't think I've experienced being passed over for a younger woman in a blatant way. I really haven't noticed it. I guess, when a guy isn't THAT INTO me, I don't always go banging my head on the wall to decipher a reason. Not everybody is attracted to me, duh. Next.

          I do know one (superficially attractive) guy who chronically chases and temporarily captivates much younger, naive women. We all (men as well as women) laugh behind his back about the fact that he lies about his age. Now he's at an age where HE wants to marry, and he complains that no girls take him seriously! I'm not sure whether he's an alpha or not. I suspect, if you have to lie, it proves you don't believe you're good enough, which means. . . not genuine alpha. Needy alpha? Or maybe I misunderstand the definitions.

          I really DO need to get out there and try some more things out in the field. I can't KJ any more!

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Uncle Walker View Post
            My experience is quite different. I know women who have all kinds of stories about how they got into poly relationships. The most pertinent example is a cute as hell little mid twenties girl, but then I am partial, type 3 you know, she is probably not that hot by big city standards. She has twice in the last year moved into an entirely new city, one in a new country. With social circle and online she quickly fills her time with interesting lovers. She screens for partners who are open or poly. The communities she runs in are often close to the GLBT or friendly to them. She has some eye rolling stories but for the most part it just has not been that tough. She is extremely open about what she is doing.

            She has much less trouble finding and keeping relationships than several of the monogamy hungry women I know. I mean seriously, a woman who is reasonably attractive, articulate, and interesting just meets up, feels the guy out to see if he is open minded at all, lays it out on the line, take it or leave it. There you go. If he gives her drama, well you know the cure for that right?
            That's great news. That's just not what I usually hear. My big question for this young lady is how long the typical guy lasts before he starts bitching or issuing ultimatums when he falls in love with her or gets oneitis, which 95% of these men are going to do in very short order.

            Two months? Three?
            How to have 3 hour meet-to-lays and nonmonogamous relationships with any type of woman:
            The Blackdragon Blog

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Blackdragon View Post
              I didn't say there wasn't. I said lots of women, starting from complete scratch, have lots of trouble creating these relationships in the first place. More so than men when they start from scratch.



              Actually, most women I know who have an open relationship have it with a guy who started out as a mono-BF or mono-husband. Eventually the woman put her foot down and the submissive beta guy (often also a low-sex-drive guy) relented.

              But no, I'm talking about women who right now have no BF and are looking to create some FBs/MTLRs.



              Yeah right.

              A girl says, "I'm going to fuck other guys, but I just won't tell you, okay? And you agree to never ask me, okay?"

              As if a man is going to reply, "Oh, okay."
              If you think women have a hard time fucking multiple guys at once, or getting into fuckbuddy arrangements, you should try talking to more of them. All they have to do is keep having sex with a guy who wants to have sex with them.

              Here's how to have an FB for anyone, regardless of gender:

              1. Have sex with them
              2. Then do it again
              3. Once more with feeling

              There you go.

              And plenty of people have don't-ask-don't-tell arrangements. I'm one of them. Granted the open relationship was obviously my frame and not hers, but that arrangement is pretty awesome. It started off with her wanting to know when I fucked another girl. I told her after the first one. She was cool with it, and said "Yeah I guess I don't really need to know anymore. Do your thing, just don't tell me." Fine. I told her she's also free to do whatever she wants, and said she doesn't need to go out of her way to tell me either.

              Both just assume the other person is getting laid, and it doesn't affect the relationship at all (so far).

              I fail to see how you can't understand that. Plenty of poly people have that arrangement, at least as many as the ones processing every potential new lover.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Blackdragon View Post
                That's great news. That's just not what I usually hear. My big question for this young lady is how long the typical guy lasts before he starts bitching or issuing ultimatums when he falls in love with her or gets oneitis, which 95% of these men are going to do in very short order.

                Two months? Three?
                Unlike CTM I get what you are saying BD. I have a hunch if I asked this particular young lady your question she would give me that quizzical look, like don't you get it? Specifically, words like "ultimatums" equal run the fuck away very fast. So perhaps a variation of the next and keeping guys at a certain distance. Combine that with an occasional guy who already is fucking a couple other girls and it works.

                For other poly women I have witnessed I think there is generally a lot more drama involved, but they still seem to get by. Haven't some of the women you have dated adopted your philosophy and taken it out to the world?

                Comment


                • #68
                  For other poly women I have witnessed I think there is generally a lot more drama involved, but they still seem to get by.
                  The vast majority of nonmonogamous women I know or have met are not "poly" using the usual definition of the word, in that they don't have multiple boyfriends or MLTRs that last beyond a month or two.

                  Instead, nomonogmaous women I've met always seem to fall into one of two types:

                  1. Young girls (age 23 and younger) playing the field, fucking a lot of guys, and having a great time before their ASD starts creeping in at age 24 or so. Rarely do they have any consistent sexual relationships that last past 2-3 months (unless they meet me). Nor do they care.

                  2. Women age 24-55 who are higher-sex-drive, a little more dominant, who have a very serious beta boyfriend or beta husband who they do love and don't want to leave, but to whom they've put their foot down and demanded an open relationship. Beta man eventually cracks under the pressure and agrees, the couple sets some basic ground rules, and the girl goes out one or twice a week to get laid. These women are usually do a decent job at keeping some level of emotional distance (though not always) and are fastidious about condom usage. These women again break out into two types: A) women who have lots of trouble finding men to stay in their lives more than a month or two, because the men get jealous or oneitis or want a more serious relationship or feel "gross" that she's fucking another man, etc, etc, or B) women who eventually find one side-guy and latch onto him for a year or more, almost like a second boyfriend. If/when they break up, then and only then she goes back on the prowl to replace him to get quickly get another "second boyfriend" who "qualifies" for her. (Some of the very few over-33 women I've had sex with via cold approach were women in open marriages like this, recently broken up from side-boyfriend, and looking to replace him.)

                  It's all very interesting to watch.

                  Haven't some of the women you have dated adopted your philosophy and taken it out to the world?
                  Some, yes. Most, no. Just like male players, most free/poly/open women eventually surrender to Societal Programming and succumb to the siren song of monogamy and suffer all the usual horrible consequences.

                  But some have seen the light, yes. With mixed results. Some successful, some not. Many build bisexual poly relationships, again with mixed results.

                  Women newly-building MLTR/FB relationships have two disadvantages men don't need to worry about (as much):

                  1. Women tend to be less methodical than men, especially in relationships, and are much more likely than men to break the rules they establish for themselves. For example, picture me lecturing a woman on the MLTR rules (only see them once a week, don't initiate contact, always make them cum, etc). How likely is she going to follow these rules to the letter? Adhering to a logical framework within a sexual relationship is more difficult for women than it is for men (it's difficult for men too; just more so for women).

                  2. As I stated earlier in the thread, men tend to be more jealous, needy, and territorial than women, so women often have a very hard time finding men to keep in stable open relationships beyond 2-3 months.
                  How to have 3 hour meet-to-lays and nonmonogamous relationships with any type of woman:
                  The Blackdragon Blog

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by ChitownMaverick View Post
                    What the anti-slut shaming brigade is crying about is guys refusing to be monogamous with promiscuous women. We live in a mono-normative world where people say "serious committed relationship" and mean "sexually exclusive." You know that.
                    So you were just using the language of the sheep in order to be better understood by her? Okay, I get that. It just threw me off because we have our own language here which means different things.

                    They aren't talking about poly arrangements, which is the minority (superficially). Most people are not monogamous but call it that anyway, as you also know.

                    Hence, by encouraging guys not to mono-up promiscuous women, you are doing exactly what the anti-slut shamers are complaining about.

                    Let's just be honest about it.
                    But it's not because they're promiscuous. It's because monogamy isn't good for anyone, and I wouldn't recommend getting monogamous (i.e. enslaved) to a virgin prude either. So that kind of weakens the argument that I'm in favor of slut shaming because I'm against "mono-ing up" a Type III, unless I were in favor of mono-ing up a Type I, which I'm not.

                    We're not actually shaming anyone, but we are definitely doing something they would see reason to call slut shaming. We all are.
                    Maybe, but I wouldn't recommend a woman to get mono with a man either. I guess that's "male-slut shaming," but only if you proceed from the proposition that monogamy is a good thing. If you come from the place where monogamy is a bad thing, then it completely ceases to be slut shaming, except for spoiled Feminists who want to have their cake and eat it too.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Present View Post
                      In my observation, a few, a verrrrrrrrry few people are suited for monogamy. Like maybe 1%.
                      I totally agree with this. And those 1 percent are boring as fuck/bordering on asexual.

                      Then the next question after that is, when a woman is nonmonogamous, is she honest about it?
                      To whom? To the men she is with? I would say if she is new to this non-mono world, and the men wouldn't tolerate it, she cheats. Which is fine, for a beginner. I've had married fuck buddies in the past who were cheating on their husbands with me and the husbands had no idea. It was because the women didn't want to lose the men they loved, so cheating was their only option, since the men were not open-minded about polyamory.

                      Again, I think that's a valid lifestyle. But as you evolve, you eventually learn how to form open relationships (with intermediate don't ask, don't tell arrangements) where you won't lie to anyone. Eventually, you join the polyamorous community and you two may even have sex with other people together in a truly evolved relationship. I'm in one of those right now, but it was only after I got passed my monogamy/cheating phase.

                      After that, we ask, is she discreet about her nonmonogamy? A lot of us prefer if she's discreet. For whatever reason. Maybe the guy who doesn't like girls "throwing themselves at men" is making a statement about the fact that those girls perhaps are failing to use their social intelligence, their common sense. ???
                      Discreet from her partners? I'd prefer she be open about it with me, and with the other men she's sleeping with. As for in front of society? Well then that makes more sense to be discreet. We don't want shit from society, so women do have to screen for sexual open-mindedness in the man before "throwing themselves at him." That's why my girlfriend (whom I'm in an open relationship with) now only "throws herself" at guys in her poly group, and when she goes to a swingers party. She was slut shamed recently by a couple of guys outside her circle, so she's now sticking to the poly in group.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Present View Post
                        I can hardly even envision a guy suspecting me of ulterior motives. Weird. Maybe I'm naive, but what could I possibly want from a guy other than fun and sex?
                        Money? Social status? Rides in a nice car? Fixing your leaky faucet? Killing a mouse in your living room? Paying your college loans? Getting pregnant by lying to him about being on birth control and then owning his wallet for the next 18 years? Accusing him of rape after a night of consensual sex in order to blackmail him into monogamy, or satisfy your slut shaming social circle?

                        You really are na´ve for your age. Are you not aware of the brutality women inflict upon men in this matriarchy, which is fully backed by an anti-male legal system?

                        Now this really struck me: "Some subtle, sexy things that girls have done with me, even when I was clueless, were to simply tell me how horny they are, how long they've been without a man. . ." I have never said either of those things because I would NOT have thought that they were subtle at all, plus I would have THOUGHT that they would make me look like a loser. How in heaven's name did a girl manage to say those things to you without lowering her own social value in your eyes?
                        Ha ha! This makes you sound very snobbish. The reason that girl would seem like she is a total loser with no value in your eyes is because women get sex as easily as breathing. This is not true for most men. Thus, her saying that she has not had sex in a while might humanize her to the man who understands that getting sex (for the average man) is not easy. This may bring her down to his level and proceed from a position of equality. Men don't have such high expectations as women to the point where a woman confessing sexual frustration would lower her value. Men understand sexual frustration and can empathize - even if they are strong seducers through hard work. Only a snobbish woman who has always taken sex for granted will see that comment as value-lowering, which is most women. Therefore, most men shouldn't say that to women, but women can because men don't take sex for granted and are not snobs about it like women are.

                        Maybe if she included "I'm so very picky, they keep propositioning me but they're all worthless. . . "
                        Such snobbery would have instantly turned me off. Just like if a woman would say that she has been saving her virginity for me. I'd totally explode on her and say that if she thinks her pussy is made of gold, she needs to give it to someone else, since arrogant cunts like her make me puke!

                        Did she frame it like, "I've been holding out for a man like you?" There, now there's a line I could see myself saying.
                        That would be the worst line to say to me. It has all the markings of a provider-hunting prude who will drop me as soon as her "high standards" demand someone else. A woman either loves men or she does not. Those who do not, I have no time for.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Present View Post
                          I'm careful about disclosing poly in so many words because of social standing and even more so because of professional life. The two, unfortunately, overlap. I'm comfortable saying, to anybody, "I just date because it's fun! I'm very happy with my life the way it is." But that's about as far as I'll go towards explaining poly to a non-secret-society-member. I mean, nobody has dared say to me, "do you have sex with more than one of the men you date?" They may assume it or guess or hope, (or, if they have a ton of ASD and ascribe same to me, they may assume that I don't have any sex because I'm not in a monogamous relationship) but they don't get to know anything for sure unless they are a valid potential partner.
                          Wow! You really are over 33. We're living in the hook up culture where it is normal for girls in their 20s to be fucking all kinds of dudes, especially in college, and yet, you have people in your life who assume you are celibate because you're not monogamous? Damn. I'm so glad I was born when I was.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            NWP, this is all very helpful.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Present couple of questions, and i promise will not say who you are if i think you are who you are i promise...

                              1.- Do you live in South Florida?

                              2.- Are you teacher?

                              Thanks in advance.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Skills360 View Post
                                Present couple of questions, and i promise will not say who you are if i think you are who you are i promise...

                                1.- Do you live in South Florida?

                                2.- Are you teacher?

                                Thanks in advance.
                                Dude, just PM OP. Maybe she doesn't want her info out there.

                                No harm, no foul.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X