Get Free Email Updates!
Join us for FREE to get instant email updates!
The Story of My History with Women – Part 4 – The Adventure Begins!
This is the fourth installment of the book that I never published, regarding my history with women and the lessons I have learned from it. If you haven’t yet, you should read parts one, two, and three before you read the article below, so you can be up to speed on where the story picks up. The story is all 100% true to the best of my memory, but all the names of the people described have been changed.
-By Caleb Jones
Early to mid 2007: FREEEEEDOOOMM!!!!! I was free!!! No longer married (though the legal divorce was still proceeding), now officially single, now completely free to do whatever I wanted, free to manage my money and time any way that I wanted, and fuck whomever I wanted! After living in the bondage of traditional monogamous marriage for so long... it was FUCKING AWESOME!
Once the pain of the divorce was over, which took about two months (I'm a happy INTJ and bounce back fast), I was so happy that I lack the words to describe it. There were days during this time where I would burst out laughing in my car for no reason. As I’ve talked about many times in this blog, once the pain of the divorce is over, most men, post-divorce, experience the greatest, happiest feelings they’ve ever felt, and I was in the middle of it. The joy was intoxicating.
Though I didn’t know it at the time, my testosterone levels were probably at least doubling. I was working hard, having sex with Marci regularly, setting new goals, flirting with women, exercising for the first time in years (and liking it!), spending time with my kids without their there mom to interfere, and was feeling on top of the world. It was then when I executed the next part of my plan: online dating. I knew absolutely nothing about it, other than a few stories I had heard from a few single guy friends and family members.
I knew nothing about real-life dating either. I was ten years out of practice, and the only knowledge I had was some basic generalities I had learned from the Tom Leykis radio show and David DeAngelo’s email newsletter, my only two sources of dating information back then. I didn’t care. I attacked it like I attacked any business problem or financial project: set a specific goal, do the research, make a plan, execute the plan, track the results very carefully, don't get to pissed off about the failures along the way, make modifications as you go, track the results of the modifications, keep doing what works, and stop doing what doesn’t work. I didn’t see any reason why dating and having sex with women couldn’t be a system just like any other complex problem or goal.
I knew my goal: to have steady, long-term, ongoing sexual relationships with at least two or three women who I didn’t have to lie to or promise monogamy to. I didn’t know anyone who had ever done such a thing, but that didn’t stop me. I was so damn excited; I knew I could do it. Now that there was this new thing called online dating, I wouldn’t even have to leave my home to find women! I was pumped! I took a few pictures of myself with my digital camera, and made profiles on Match.com and Yahoo Personals, the two biggest dating sites at the time. Then I scoured the profiles of the women on these sites, always focusing on the blonde ones.
There were tons of women on there! Some of them were actually hot! I was stunned. I couldn’t believe it. I fired off openers left and right, always using spreadsheets to keep careful track of how many and to which types of women I messaged, so as to track my results and improve. I did a lot wrong. My profile was too blunt and contained too much guy-logic.. My pictures weren’t that great. My openers were too long. Sometimes my online dating communication was too needy, other times it was too on the asshole side. I had trouble finding the sweet spot. (If only I had my online dating book back then!)
I had some women insult me, others lie to me, and yet others ghost me. Undaunted, I kept going. Eventually, and it took a while, I actually started scheduling real-life first dates. I kept seeing Marci during this time, about twice a week. However, this time I knew better. Never again would I fall into the prison of monogamy. Never again would I chop off my balls for a woman. Still fresh from both the pain and the high of the divorce, and not yet back to my normal, rational self, I became a rabid, anti-monogamy zealot. Anyone doing monogamy was obviously a weak willed idiot, and I wasn’t going to be one of them.
So, almost as soon as Marci and I started having sex, I sat her down and laid it all out for her. Very stupidly, I over-verbalized everything. I told her we would hang out and have sex, but that we weren’t exclusive. We could both have sex with other people if we wanted. I expected her to get angry, or to call me names. Instead, she reluctantly... agreed. What? She... agreed? She was blonde and hot and had big boobs... why would she agree to something like this? My mind went crazy with the implications. You mean some women will actually agree to this? If you just tell them? WTF?
What else had I not been told about women? What else had society lied to me about regarding females? Could society have been this wrong about them?
My already heightened excitement boosted even higher. I had my first, official, nonmonogamous relationship, on my very first try! More importantly, if Marci was cool with me actually having sex with other women, then certainly I could find some other women who would also be okay with it! I couldn’t wait to schedule more first dates!
However, I had made my first error. I was verbalizing my man-logical relationship framework to a woman. All that does is turn women off to exactly what you are trying to do in the first place. Much later, I learned to just do what you want in a relationship and verbalize nothing. That works much better. Sadly, I wasn’t experienced in the realm of open relationships yet. For about six weeks, Marci and I dated, had sex, traveled together, and soon I started getting feelings for her. She was my rebound relationship, so I forgave myself later. After about six weeks, she just floated away. No big breakup or anything. We just stopped seeing each other regularly. She had just gotten out of a long-term relationship with a married guy (she had a penchant for married men) and was floating back to him once again.
I was a little upset and irritated, but I was no where near as distraught as when Athena left me so many years ago. No, I was a changed man now. I was still a beta, but now I had a new mission, and was determined to be an Alpha. Just as important, I now expected women to act like women instead of acting in lockstep with my expectations. The biggest reason it wasn’t any big deal was that I was already dating other women. I was already going out on many first, second, and third dates. I kept experimenting with different approaches, different wording and photos in my profiles, different types of dates, different words I used when on a first date, and all kinds of other things. I kept careful track of everything, still addressing this like a business.
If something worked, I kept it. If something didn’t work, I stopped doing it and tried something new. On and on this went, for months and months. The first woman I actually got from a dating site and to a real-life first date was Alex. She was a very pretty blonde 39 year-old who looked 30. After our first date at a coffee shop in a bookstore, as we walked to our cars, she practically begged me for a goodbye kiss.
I was confused. This attractive woman wants me to kiss her? It was then I “remembered” that once I “cleaned myself up” and wore some nice clothes, good cologne, and kept my hair short and styled, my confidence would carry me. Women, even very attractive women, would be attracted to me. Like many long-term monogamous men, I had lost connection with how attractive I was (not attractive physically, just attractive in general) to the opposite sex during my nine years of monogamy. What a wonderful experience to reconnect with that again!
I kissed her goodnight. A huge mistake. (NEVER kiss a woman on a first date unless you know for 100% certainty that you're going to have sex on that first date.) Later, I blew it with Alex when I sent her an email that was very assholeish. I figured nice guys never get laid, so I went out of my way to be a total jerk with women. I over did it a few times before I learned the proper balance between nice guy and asshole, and thus had learned my next lesson:
Assholes DO get laid, but it’s a tough road. The best approach is to find the sweet spot between the two, which is about 70% nice guy, 30% asshole. A little later there was Melody. Like Alex, she was very hot for her age. 40 years old, but perfect D-cup tits, beautiful blonde hair, very attractive, a corporate executive with a six figure income, and one of the few women I’ve met who was so smart that she could beat me in logic, knowledge, and reasoning. Little did I know that ASD and woman logic could, and would, trump all of that. Melody was about to teach me a huge lesson in how women over the age of 33 view sex and relationships. I had no idea what I was in for.
We had a first date, had a second date, and had a third date. I didn’t really know how to sexually escalate, so I just kept going on dates hoping that “tonight was the night!” This next part will sound very familiar to those of you who have read my book. On the third date, Melody was sitting on me, facing me, in the front seat of my car in a downtown parking lot. My mouth was on one of her boobs. As I went to pull the other one out, and she said, and I quote, “No. We’re only on the third date. You can suck this boob, but not that one.” I laughed and said, “What?” And she just gave me a look that said, “Yes. Those are the rules.”
I didn’t get any further that night with her. Driving home alone, I was flabbergasted. This was a highly intelligent, rational woman. Why would she possibly make a rule for herself that was that insane? Oh, how little I knew. For the fourth date, I drove out to her place, which was a good 50 minute drive from my house. After about 30 minutes in the car, she sent me a text saying there was some kind of problem with one of her kids, and she had to cancel. Another 30 minute drive back home. An entire hour of my time wasted, along with some gas. I was furious. Another lesson learned.
Lesson Number Six
Be very wary when picking up women at their locations for dates, especially if they live more than 20 minutes away. Have them meet you somewhere close to you instead. Regardless, I was still a beta, so like a needy dumbass, I kept on her. She was hot. I wanted to have sex with her. I wanted her to be the number two woman after Marci. I knew she liked me, so I figured my odds were good. On the fourth date I finally got her back to my place. I was so excited! I was about to have sex with the first woman I met online! And she was so hot!!!
Soon, we were making out on the floor in my home office. My heart beating fast, I moved to undress her. She stopped me and said she was on her period. Hm. Four dates and no sex. The specter of Athena, the woman who dated me for six weeks with no sex back when I was in my early 20s, was there haunting me once again.
However, now things were different. This time, I was ready. I would never let any woman “Athena” me again. Never again would a woman lead me on for weeks with no sex, regardless of what her excuses were. In my mind, I had a “four date limit.” If after four dates and still no sex, I was outta there, and on to the next woman. Hell, the dating sites had plenty. (Much later, as my woman skills improved, I would drop this down to three dates, then two.) I tried a few more times to get her clothes off. She wouldn’t have it. I stopped trying and the rest of the date was very awkward. She eventually went home.
A few days later, she texted me wanting to spend time with me again, or more accurately, she wanted to go out on a date where I spent $80 on dinner and drinks and we didn't have any sex. I told her I was available Sunday. Her idea was to go to fancy restaurant (of course). I sent her a text saying, “Great. Why don’t you come over to my house around 10am, we can hang out here for a bit, then both go to breakfast together?” (Even back then in my beginner stages, I knew you could not just say to a woman, “Come over to my place and we’ll have sex.” That doesn’t work.)
She came back with, “Why? Sex?” My response was something like, “Well, you said it, not me.” (Not a good response.) She replied, “That’s just too planned. I’ll pass then.” It was hard to do, very hard, but I let her go. I had resolved that no woman would ever “Athena” me again, and at four expensive dates then a dump, I considered myself lucky that I got out so cheap. What if I had taken her on another three or four expensive dates with no sex? I shuddered at the thought. Been there, done that, never doing that again, Sweetheart.
What then ensued was one of the craziest, silliest, most ridiculous, and most instructive conversations I’ve ever had with a woman in my entire life. It was a huge crash-course for me regarding ASD and woman logic. The topic was why she wouldn’t have sex with me after four dates. Of course, nowadays I know to never verbalize anything like this and to never discuss anything with a woman like this until you've had sex with her at least twice. Yet, back then I still hadn’t learned.
Melody and I texted back and forth for about 90 minutes. I’ll summarize the gist of it here, with my notes in italics. Again, do not do this with a woman. I’m showing you here what not to do. It’s an illustration of how most over-33 women view dating and sex
Melody: You’re being very immature about this sex stuff. (As I talk about in my book, “immature” is one of the shaming words women use against Alphas to ensure they stay submissive and beta.)
Me: Wanting sex after four dates, on date five, is immature? How so?
Melody: Well, you haven’t been romantic enough.
Me: Define romantic.
Melody: Well, on first date we went to Starbucks and you just bought me a bottled water. (I was forming my fast, cheap first date system.) So that doesn’t count. Then we went to . Then yes, we had two dates that were very nice.
Me: So I haven’t spent enough money on you yet? There’s a monetary figure I have to hit in order to have sex with you? And I’m the one “not being romantic?”
Melody: It’s not about money, it’s about romance.
Me: It’s clearly about money. It’s about the dollar value of the meals I have purchased for you. (See here how I was WAY overdoing it with verbalizing the man-logic. God, I was so stupid.)
Melody: You’re not getting it. It’s about romance.
Me: Look, remember that 25 year-old guy you told me about who you were dating for awhile? Did you make him wait five dates before having sex? I doubt it. I’m sure you fucked him on the second date at the latest.
Melody: Okay. I admit we had sex on the second date. (It took her about five minutes of back-and-forth texting and my prodding to admit that.) But our first date was a very expensive dinner that was $150.
Me: Over the last four dates I’ve spent well over $150 on you, as you are well aware. Plus I’ve spent way more time with you than he did.
Melody: Well, he had six pack abs and let’s face it, you haven’t exactly been to the gym lately.
Me: Okay, so if a man has six pack abs, he is free from this monetary thing you have? So chubbier guys need to spend more money on you than trimmer guys?
Melody: No it’s not that at all. You’re just being immature about all of this. He was too, that’s why he and I didn’t work out. Being immature is very unattractive.
Me: Ah, so now we’re back to wanting sex on date number five is “immature.” How many times do you intend on changing the topic every time I challenge you with something for which you have no logical answer?
On, and on, and on we went like that. For 90 painful minutes. Finally it ended with her telling me it was over and it was “my loss.” Somehow, I doubt that. I have a feeling I saved a ton of money and time by never seeing her again. I was pissed, but it was worth it, because I had learned a lot. Lesson Number Seven
Women do not behave logically, including the very intelligent, put-together ones. Women also do not have logical reasons for the rules they impose on themselves in dating and/or sexual scenarios. It’s all based on how they feel emotionally, and their rules will vary wildly from man to man. Melody had been a great teacher. Little did I know that I had many more Melodys to meet before I would truly understand. To be continued...
Want over 35 hours of how-to podcasts on how to improve your woman life and financial life? Want to be able to coach with me twice a month? Want access to hours of technique-based video and audio? The SMIC Program is a monthly podcast and coaching program where you get access to massive amounts of exclusive, members-only Alpha 2.0 content as soon as you sign up, and you can cancel whenever you want. Click here for the details.
Get Free Email Updates!
Join us for FREE to get instant email updates!
Al 2017-01-09 05:08:48
All good lessons. Cheers! 🙂
Replicant 2017-01-09 06:40:13
Oh sir. Reading you I dare to say that I feel the pain you felt (or maybe I can only imagine it) in those 90 minutes of hell to try to convince a woman (or show her the stupidity of her "reasons") JUST TO HAVE SEX. Between 2 adult persons that (supossedly) are attracted to each other enough to do the very primal thing a man and a woman can do when that happens. Clearly it was SP at its finest, and also dealing with irrationality and a (not so) few drops of selfishness. No gentlemen, run away like the plage.
JudoJohn 2017-01-09 07:10:23
OK, a light finally came on....I have been told for years by many women that I am a great communicator. I'm now in a situation where I have to next someone I like because, well, I'm no longer such a great communicator. Why? What's the disconnect?I figured out that I'm a natural when communicating about their needs. When it comes to my needs, I'm a neophyte.....plus my needs are no longer as well aligned as they used to be with any particular woman. I'm consolidating my education, extending my career, am on the edge of superb physical conditioning for my age, and am expanding my social circles both personally and professionally.....plus, after the Go Time push, I'm going to take at least 6 multi day backpacking trips this summer.....anything that gets in the way of any of my goals is expendable, which is not an easy thing to communicate....verbally. Keep a stronger frame might help.
Makeshift 2017-01-09 07:18:47
"On, and on, and on we went like that. For 90 painful minutes." When I was younger I always wondered why my parents had the most stable relationship of all my friends. Other couples would yell and "talk things over" ad nauseum, where as any conversation longer than 30 seconds in which my mother employed woman logic illicited a "shut the fuck up" from my father.
Anonymous 2017-01-09 08:05:23
Now I understand why our Founding Fathers didn't want to give women the vote.
N. M. 2017-01-09 08:16:28
A huge mistake. (NEVER kiss a woman on a first date unless you know for 100% certainty that you’re going to have sex on that first date.)OK. You have said this to readers countless times, have been asked an explanation countless times, and (in so far as my memory...) never given it. I guess this is like the "never send very sexually charged messages to her if you want to have sex next time you meet", and the point is the ASD (she'll feel bad about having not repressed her wish for contact "on a first date!", and punish herself and you on the following dates repressing her harder), but I can't know your thoughts.
70% nice guy, 30% asshole.Perfect as a general formula. Can need tweaks to suit different women. For example, if they look clearly better than you, you should start with 40% or 50% asshole. If she is shy and traditional, 15% asshole is better.
(As I talk about in my book, “immature” is one of the shaming words women use against Alphas to ensure they stay submissive and beta.)If you give them tingles that imperil their ASD, "asshole" is another word they can say (trying to stop the tingles). And than that nicer-than-anything-else: "I hate you".
Women also do not have logical reasons for the rules they impose on themselves in dating and/or sexual scenarios. It’s all based on how they feel emotionally, and their rules will vary wildly from man to man.Well, are they their "rules" 's authors? It's social programming... Then there is their emotions, and it's a battle between what they want and what they want to know they want. The better you are at aiding the right side of their mind, the faster/more likely it will prevail. And an important thing to win is to not verbalize. Not just because logic isn't their cup of tea. Also, verbalizing is a crazy ASD booster... you just make it harder for them to do what they want while being in total denial (we know all taboos are things most members of a society strongly yearn for, and they can't be uttered -> consciously thought-of. Example, the more somebody worships money, the more they'll consciously avoid the thought of it of work to make it appear they don't care about it. You say money is important for you and you want a lot of it, well, that's the exception. People who love money never say it, always say the contrary, and sometimes [if they are women, I am speaking from personal experience, the most money-loving of them can say that YOU are "stingy" if you don't pretend money is nothing to you like they do -- I guess it makes them feel better about their subconscious greed]). And all the most cock-loving & greedy women I have had spent a lot of time to convince themselves and everybody they didn't want sex/didn't care about money. All, except the Filipina/South American, who have a little ASD (I remember this Mexican I met on Yahoo! Games, very talkative, told me she had a bf, I asked how many times a week they had sex, she said 2, I replied "I'd give it you every day" [I was in my early 20s, lol], and that's all what it took her to meet me and take it for some weeks. Just that attitude made her open.). Other things to absolutely never say (if your goal is to lay them/hear no drama) are the moves they did to approach you, the words they said to arouse you and drive you to start sex/making-out, ... women want to live without any responsibility for their action, specially the socially bashed ones.
CrabRangoon 2017-01-09 08:20:47
This is becoming one of the only "manosphere" sites I go to anymore. Some of the best advice for guys like me who are more independent. I'm really done with sites like ROK.com-they're getting way too traditional for my tastes these days. There was just an article today about "putting down the bow and picking up the plow" basically saying be a married and become a typical Patriarch, oh and don't forget to sprinkle in some Christianity. BD, I'd love to see an article in the future addressing the typical shaming language guys like us encounter and how to best deal with it. You mentioned above the one girl using "immature" on you-definitely heard that one a time or 2.
Gil Galad 2017-01-09 09:19:08
I’m really done with sites like ROK.comTo be fair, there's a couple of authors in there who don't give a shit about traditionalism and mostly write about game, fitness, etc. Troy Francis and David del Jefe come to mind; they're part of the reason I still veeeery occasionally visit the site.
an article in the future addressing the typical shaming language guys like us encounter and how to best deal with itThat seems like something to shrug off rather than "deal with". From what I learned on this blog, I think the most appropriate response would be "haha, yep, I'm such an asshole", with a happy ZFG tone. In a sexual context, you're not gonna "refute" the accusation with logic and it won't make the girl change her mind and have sex with you; the best you can do is casually agree and re-escalate a little later. That being said, I too would enjoy an article mopping the floor with those accusations ("you're immature", "you're selfish", "you should man up and go exclusive", etc), but I think the answers are already on the blog, just diluted. As an aside, I generally agree that the 2.0 model actually makes women happier too, not just men. So much for being a "selfish hedonistic asshole".
CrabRangoon 2017-01-09 09:39:33
@Gil I do agree that it's mainly a shrug off and give them a shit eating grin. It can still get to some guys though, depending on the source. My favorite reply to "so why aren't you married?" is "just lucky I guess". I just had some random girl ask over the weekend "when is the wedding?" referring to one of my MLTR's that was present to whom she's acquainted. I just laughed and said "you're funny" and changed the subject. And yes I think the Alpha 2.0 way can also make certain women much happier too, depending on their personality type. I'm guessing a typical "dominant" woman would not be happy with it long term since they like to boss men around. I think the 2.0 lifestyle meshes better with truly independent women and more submissive types.
J 2017-01-09 10:01:02
BD, have you ever heard of the late comic Patrice O'neal? He had a short lived radio show before he died called the Black Philip Show. The episodes are on Youtube. His style was to use logic on women and challenge them on their bullshit. Do you think that works on a woman who you've already had sex with (twice of course) as opposed to someone new? Or is it pretty much futile all the time?
JB 2017-01-09 10:17:38
BD, you're a goddamn pioneer among men. Reading this stuff, I feel so goddamn blessed that you took a hail of bullets for me, and all the (aspiring) alpha 2.0s that venture to your site to become truly free men. You have a natural growth-mindset, one that many of us other guys have had to adapt later in life. As you (may) remember, I've implemented most of your tactics and guidelines with regards to seduction, relationship management and lifestyle design, and to be honest I am so incredibly surprised at how well it's working out. It's a god damn fantasy come true. Many people would never believe that you could go from beta to something beyond traditional alpha in only a couple of years. Sometimes, I forget that the reason it is possible is because of men like you, who takes the hits, does the analysis, then give the reports on what works and what doesn't. What is incredible is that since I realized all the amazing things that were possible (love without monogamy, relationships without drama, 1st or 2nd date sex, long-term consistent happiness, freedom to do whatever the hell you want), I was able to implement them at a surprising pace with only a few mistakes (compared to the thousands of mistakes that you had to make in order to perfect the system). If you ever feel down (And I know that you hardly ever do), remember that you've made thousands of men live a life thought impossible, and that it was only possible because of your sacrifices that many other men wouldn't be able to make without having their confidence shattered. To all you beautiful 2.0's - Let's never forget who made this possible
Gil Galad 2017-01-09 10:20:40
It can still get to some guys thoughYes it's irritating; basically society is making you the bad guy for finally making a rational attempt to ensure *your* long term happiness. OMG, how can you be so selfish and do what *you* like; let me, the unselfish person, teach you to do what will make *me* temporarily happy until I get bored with you. Using logic on folks like that would mostly be for the fun of it or to "convert" a beta, a 1.0 or an open-minded girl; otherwise just use the nonverbal ways to circumvent it without bothering to argue.
I’m guessing a typical “dominant” woman would not be happy with it long termFor a serious relationship, yeah. But a dominant who's "monogamous" with a beta she bosses around while cheating on him with a 2.0 will probably be happy, in her own somewhat twisted way (she will still have highs and lows).
sa 2017-01-09 10:47:30
Any list of behavoiurs asshole jerks do on first date second date ? will be good reminder to review these
epi 2017-01-09 11:26:15
What was lesson four? I must know.
Blackdragon 2017-01-09 11:53:32
OK. You have said this to readers countless times, have been asked an explanation countless times, and (in so far as my memory…) never given it.I have given it many times over the years. The reasons are: - It spikes ASD. - It spikes buyers remorse ("Oh fuck! I don't even know this guy's last name and I make out with him!!!") - It murders most of, if not all, the sexual tension you built on the first date (via sex talk, kino, outcome independence, etc). - The "kiss goodnight" is a little beta and sets the wrong (boyfriendish) frame.
BD, I’d love to see an article in the future addressing the typical shaming language guys like us encounter and how to best deal with it.Ok. I've added it to the topic list.
BD, have you ever heard of the late comic Patrice O’neal?No.
His style was to use logic on women and challenge them on their bullshit.Terrible idea, unless you enjoy drama. I would never do such a thing.
Do you think that works on a woman who you’ve already had sex with (twice of course) as opposed to someone new? Or is it pretty much futile all the time?It's 100% futile 100% of the time unless you like drama or your just doing it to entertain yourself, i.e. just joking around. There are times in a more serious relationship (high end MLTR or OLTR) where you'll have to state your case if she asks why you are doing or not doing a certain thing, and those statements will likely include logic, which of course she'll hate. But spending a bunch of time with her "calling her out" on her irrationality is just a path to drama that will irritate both of you (again, unless you like drama; I know some men do).
BD, you’re a goddamn pioneer among men.Thank you. I know. 🙂
I’ve implemented most of your tactics and guidelines with regards to seduction, relationship management and lifestyle design, and to be honest I am so incredibly surprised at how well it’s working out.Very cool dude. I'm glad I could help. I try very hard to base my advice on real-world human behavior rather than anger or guy-Disney.
What was lesson four? I must know.It was to never get traditionally, monogamously married, since that system doesn't work anymore. I forgot to add it to Part 3 (which I just did).
POB 2017-01-09 11:56:35
Women do not behave logically, including the very intelligent, put-together ones. Women also do not have logical reasons for the rules they impose on themselves in dating and/or sexual scenarios. It’s all based on how they feel emotionally, and their rules will vary wildly from man to man.Took me A LOT of time (and pain) to figure that out, but that's 100% true. Today I just stay paying minimal and cutting dating time the most I can. If they're a bust, I just shrug off and move on to the next one with not much time/money spent.
Chuck 2017-01-09 16:01:30
No. Terrible idea, unless you enjoy drama. I would never do such a thing.It's worth checking out his show on youtube... only something like 10 episodes. Patrice O'neal: The Black Philip Show If nothing else, he's absolutely hilarious. And in terms of breaking down woman arguments with logic, he does it over and over on the air. He's also got other parallels with your thinking, with maxims like "It's always your fault." It might not be everyone's cup of tea, but after experimenting with the logic-breakdown approach, I'm a convert. If done well from Day 1 (lot's of OI), it has the power to nip drama in the bud. Not the only way... but powerful. If you do listen in... the later episodes are better than the earlier ones, where they're still finding their rhythm.
Jefferson 2017-01-09 16:45:43
BD, for that last long text conversation, is there anything now you would say or do to turn it around? Or is this scenario a lost cause so it's best just to hard next her without any further communication?
James 2017-01-09 17:26:04
Patrice O’neal was infamous for getting in his own way by constantly dogging people for their bullshit. These "history of woman" posts are hilarious to me.
Chuck 2017-01-09 18:07:42
Patrice O’neal was infamous for getting in his own way by constantly dogging people for their bullshit.No doubt about it. Just like soft-nexting, some tools have no place in business relationships.
Blackdragon 2017-01-09 19:29:16
BD, for that last long text conversation, is there anything now you would say or do to turn it around?No. A woman verbally refusing to have sex on date number five is too far gone regardless of your ability (unless you don't mind waiting 5+ dates in order to have sex with a new woman; many betas won't have a problem with that).
Lovergirl 2017-01-09 21:23:49
I'm assuming you have learned since then that women actually do want some kind of romance, to be turned on first, to have the guy inspire some kind of feelings- not just some rote transaction where we agree to fuck after x amount of money is spent.
Leon 2017-01-09 21:33:56
Great article BD, not ground-breaking but useful notes to review and remember, still waiting patiently for the women sex drive post.
Blackdragon 2017-01-09 23:55:50
I’m assuming you have learned since then that women actually do want some kind of romanceThen explain how I have had sex with scores of women in under 3-4 hours with zero romance.
not just some rote transaction where we agree to fuck after x amount of money is spent1. You may not want that, but some women do. 2. I agree that the woman in the story above didn't just want money; she wanted romance and money, not just one or the other. Many women are like this, particularly provider hunters and women over age 33. Not all, but many. In other words, because she wanted both money and romance, if I had provided tons of sincere romance with zero or little money spent, she still would have had the exact same complaint that I wasn't "romantic enough yet."
JB 2017-01-09 23:56:31
I’m assuming you have learned since then that women actually do want some kind of romance, to be turned on first, to have the guy inspire some kind of feelings- not just some rote transaction where we agree to fuck after x amount of money is spent.In my experience, women actually want to be turned on first by display of outcome independence, confidence, frame-control and (subtle) displays of high value, start a sexual relationship, then get "romantic". In my experience, men usually get "romantic" way before women do, and this turns women off like crazy. If they have been "seduced" first and taken you in as a lover, then you can start with the small romantic gestures (If they deserve it) while keeping frame-control. Every single small "romantic" thing I do seems extremely well recieved, likely because the women know that it is a scarce ressource and that they have "earned" it rather than just recieved it for no reason (i.e. when a guy gets romantic on/right after the first date(s))
Anon. 2017-01-10 00:00:37
I’m assuming you have learned since then that women actually do want some kind of romance, to be turned on first, to have the guy inspire some kind of feelings- not just some rote transaction where we agree to fuck after x amount of money is spent.And I'm assuming if Melody said "Sorry, you don't turn me on" or "Sorry, you don't inspire feelings in me", BD would have understood that and would wish her well. (I get that sometimes, and I very much prefer such straightforward answers to "politely" dodging dates.) But instead she claimed lack of romance, and the very first thing she cited in support of that was that bottled water at Starbucks "doesn't count". The other thing I'm assuming is that women know perfectly well whether a guy turns them on and inspires feelings in them within 5 minutes of meeting him, and don't expect that to change on subsequent dates. So Melody's behavior is completely consistent with that of a woman seeking attention and/or free dinners, and not consistent with any other reasonable explanation I can think of.
Minister 2017-01-10 02:24:07
Interesting story! Currently I am trying to develop a system of getting laid on the first date with women online. I have made quite an attractive profile with 6-pack abs (I workout, although I need some more muscularity yet), but still no luck there. I have heard stories of guys that got consistently laid from Instagram without even going on a date (in their car), but I have to admit that their profile is way more attractive than mine and they are break dance instructors or PRs, so they carry A LOT more value. With my profession I can in no way support such a high status. Your 2 dates system does not apply in my country, as I can't get women to talk about sex on the first date, with very few exceptions, and if we don't kiss, more often than not it is an indication that our date went nowhere. Some guys told me that I would have a better chance doing cold approaches, with the improvements I made on my looks, but I seriously don't like it, as I am an INTJ personality on the extreme side of the spectrum and I find it quite exhausting and time-consuming. I have no clue what to do.
Joe K 2017-01-10 06:10:25
Minister Don't cold approach Be charming with everyone in a dominant (self assured) way. With women you might wanna bang, escalate with appropriate touch initially. Invite them back to your place. Or suggest their place. If neither works for her, an exchange of number(s) is ok. When you and she are alone, escalate more physically. Always escalate (when you want to). Realize when you don't, it's a choice. Never react negatively if she's not ready yet or rebuffs you. Shrug or do nothing, but don't get awkward and don't justify. Then try again later. Repeat a few times before nexting. Your unreactiveness to her token resistance is attractive by default. When in doubt, escalate towards sex via whatever tact is most appropriate for your current location. HTH
Minister 2017-01-10 06:38:20
Be charming with everyone in a dominant (self assured) way. With women you might wanna bang, escalate with appropriate touch initially.With whom am I supposed to be charming, if I don't cold approach? If I had a social circle to work on, I wouldn't even think about it.
Onder 2017-01-10 07:41:43
During dating, a woman will constantly try to frame you as the 'potential boyfriend'. Your job is to frame yourself as the player by using innuendo, teasing, challenging and playful physical spikes. As long as you're in this state and remain there, then there's no doubt in her mind what the situation is between you and her. You're either the lover in her life or the provider.
Pink Firefly 2017-01-10 08:21:08
I’m assuming you have learned since then that women actually do want some kind of romanceI think women do need romance, but not in the case of an FB. In the case of an OLTR, absolutely! BD has definitely shown that he does have a romantic side (he probably won't admit that on here lol) but when we first met and I became an FB, there was no romance at all and I still enjoyed myself. I have to admit, I wouldn't have been turned off had he been romantic during the FB stage, however, it wasn't necessary to keep me interested.
hilsey 2017-01-10 10:30:38
I side with Pink -- Romance is OK but if I'm not truly enjoying myself there's no point. And I can enjoy myself without romance if I already like the guy. There's this older man I met at work and I like him. He didn't have to get me a small gift for Christmas because I already like him but I'll let him know with my actions when we're no longer coworkers. I spend no alone time with men I get no ~feels~ for in the first 2-3 meets in non-date public setting--no date required. I only date men I like anyway.
Anon. 2017-01-10 10:43:36
Just to clarify for a non-native speaker of English: the term "romance" refers to prolonged courtship as opposed to being swept off her feet by a charming and alluring man?
POB 2017-01-10 11:08:02
During dating, a woman will constantly try to frame you as the ‘potential boyfriend’. Your job is to frame yourself as the player by using innuendo, teasing, challenging and playful physical spikes. As long as you’re in this state and remain there, then there’s no doubt in her mind what the situation is between you and her. You’re either the lover in her life or the provider.In my experience it's not that black an white. Yes, you've got to convey you're a sexual man since the first interaction BUT the pure player vibe will most likely put her on hold for anything beyond a wild ONS, even if she's very "into" to you. That is of course if you're shooting for women to have lasting relationships with. If just screening for DTF chicks or ONSs then you can do pretty much whatever you want.
POB 2017-01-10 11:23:26
I have to admit, I wouldn’t have been turned off had he been romantic during the FB stage, however, it wasn’t necessary to keep me interested.
And I can enjoy myself without romance if I already like the guy.Are you reading this gents? @Pink and @Hilsey, If I may I'll borrow those two statements as (more) empirical evidence to present my skeptical friends.
hilsey 2017-01-10 11:55:18
Yes, we exist -- girls who not only like the *idea* of dating you but *you*, too! Romance doesn't inspire my feelings for a man. It's a fun side effect of those initial feelings but not the cause.
Joe K 2017-01-10 13:12:09
Minister Go to any bar where you feel reasonably comfortable. Be cool with the bartender, quick order, warm thank you. Turn to the person on your right and say "Hey, how's your night going". Not a cold approach. Super easy if there's any sports on the TV i.e. "You got a favorite here?". If they're frigid, person on your left, same thing. In other venues or everyday type places (stores, post office, library, etc) just get in the habit of saying 'Hi' to people. I am not a proponent of guys - especially guys who are relatively new to "dating"/hooking up - cold approaching more than 1 or 2 women in any given place, in fact that's counterproductive. The benefits from the 'practice' of it are outweighed by the negatives of being seem as creepy approacher guy (when you approach more than 1-2 women in any given place). I don't think you really need to do cold approaching at all, especially if you hate it. Be social with everyone, be charismatic with everyone, and be the same way towards women you find attractive initially. Seriously. Exact same first few words. Then, after she's shown receptivity to chatting with you and you've had a little back and forth, add in some (light, initially) sexual banter and touching her appropriately and what I said above from there. You want to be bold yet tactful. Assertive yet never creepy. Part of getting this balance right is making statements and offering no-pressure invitations (now, i.e. "I'm heading back to my place pretty soon for a night cap, what are you doing) - rather than asking personal questions or angling for an agreement to meet up again (later, i.e. "maybe we could go to x place together sometime"). Part of this is also being unattached / ok with her potentially low interest response. On the social circle thing, if you go to the same couple of bars for at least a few weeks and are cool with everyone, you'll have at minimum the beginnings of a social circle.
Blackdragon 2017-01-10 13:29:49
Your 2 dates system does not apply in my countryMinister, just about every time you post here, you whine about some technique I'm teaching that "doesn't work in your country." Yeah, as if no men in your country are having sex. I always take the time to help you but I'm done with your negativity. I'll be ignoring your comments from now on, though other commenters are certainly welcome to help you.
Joe K 2017-01-10 13:30:34
RE: Calling women out on their bullshit It has never been my style to do this early on with a woman...except I have within the context of past LTRs. I just got so sick of listening to her prattle on about something she knows just north of bupkis about, and it was either set her straight with an actual fact or "you don't know about this topic, come on"...if I didn't do that, I would've gone full "please, shut the fuck up" and that would certainly be worse. What I *have* seen work a few times over the years in bars/clubs is when a guy does some form of calling a woman out on her bullshit, smacks her down with logic, maybe makes his point 2x/3x, and then when she gets really agitated, just shuts it down with a total flip of indifference - "Meh, alright. (smirk) So, how about (topic change)"...the woman then clamors for his validation thereafter and about 10 minutes later I'll see the woman pressing up against him from the side as if to nonverbally say "please, pay attention to me".
Lovergirl 2017-01-10 14:11:49
I don't know how you are having sex with anyone if you truly use "zero" romance in your interactions and interact with women logically, as in the conversation you posted above. No way in hell would I sleep with a man who tried to argue and debate me into it- though I have come across those. I'm not hard to get into bed when a man knows how to flirt and romance me into it. By romance I'm not meaning flowers and presents as some seem to be interpreting. (Gag) I mean, (as I stated above) that he needs to be able to turn me on and inspire some sort of feelings. Otherwise I'm never going to want to get naked with him. That holds true even with fuck buddies. Maybe the women on this thread are some kind of rare exception but most of us need more than "hey let's fuck". Hell, I'm fairly promiscuous as far as women go and even in a swinger context or off Craigslist casual encounters, I am not going to sleep with someone who fails to inspire me to WANT to have sex with them. Your left boob chick may have seemed weird but she clearly wasn't turned on.
Steve 2017-01-10 15:00:53
I wonder how a Woman would react if you told her that she can only have half your D on the first date? 🙂
Blackdragon 2017-01-10 15:28:32
RE: Calling women out on their bullshit It has never been my style to do this early on with a woman…except I have within the context of past LTRs. I just got so sick of listening to her prattle on about something she knows just north of bupkis about, and it was either set her straight with an actual fact or “you don’t know about this topic, come on”…if I didn’t do that, I would’ve gone full “please, shut the fuck up” and that would certainly be worse.And yet again, I will say that doing that won't help the relationship or the drama in the relationship one bit. Women are irrational about certain things; just let them be irrational. You're never going to "set a woman straight." (And if you think you have, she's was just acting.) If you want to do it just for your own entertainment, and don't plan on it actually improving the relationship, then go right ahead. Several guys in this thread seem to think that kind of thing is fun; even I admit doing it few times with women just to entertain myself a little bit when I'm in a playful mood. But if your goal is a low-drama relationship, you're doing the wrong thing.
I don’t know how you are having sex with anyone if you truly use “zero” romance in your interactions and interact with women logically, as in the conversation you posted above.I don't treat women logically. I would never get laid if that's the case. No romance doesn't equal 100% logic. What a dumb assertion, LG.
Maybe the women on this thread are some kind of rare exception but most of us need more than “hey let’s fuck”.Actually, I think you are the exception. And these women aren't fucking guys who just walk up to them and ask for sex. But I think you know that.
Your left boob chick may have seemed weird but she clearly wasn’t turned on.Then, as other commenters have already stated, she should have said to me, "Look Caleb, I think you're a really nice guy, but I'm just not feeling this. Let's part company and just be friends, okay?" I would have been perfectly happy with that; or at least more happy than her trying to force more free dinners out of me for fucking no reason.
I wonder how a Woman would react if you told her that she can only have half your D on the first date?Haha. Feel free to try that as a technique and report back your findings. "Listen sweetie, I'm only going to put half of it in, because you haven't been romantic enough with me yet. After you take me out to dinner a few more times, maybe I'll give you the whole thing..."
Lovergirl 2017-01-10 15:57:15
Oh, okay. I'm clearly a rare exception. Carry on then and keep teaching men to act like clods in order to get laid. Good luck!
alpha omega 2017-01-10 17:51:58
No. A woman verbally refusing to have sex on date number five is too far gone regardless of your ability (unless you don’t mind waiting 5+ dates in order to have sex with a new woman; many betas won’t have a problem with that).Well, you sound over-assertive sometimes. Say the woman is 30 year-old Liz Hurley (or whatever women that inspires you as much)? I can wait 50 dates. To me the point is if the reasons of the waiting time are honest or not. Honesty is subjective, so I follow a personal guideline. I think you know what I mean with no need to elaborate, but for example, sex can be withheld for "power reasons", as part of the woman's battle to be your upper in the couple's pecking order. Restraining sex can come into play in countless dominance games and dominance plays, and I have no tolerance of that. But if she is, say, shy? A virgin? Of course it also depends on the kind of relationship. If it's meant to be a FB relationship and she doesn't allow sex the first 5 times, well, something serious may be wrong with her :)).. ------------------------- Off-topic but maybe not entirely. Regarding the intelligent logical (dreamed of) woman, the type we call "dominant" have a higher chance of being at least relatively intelligent and logical. The problem is they act like bots designed to subdue you, bots with a weirdly human quenchless thirst for power sadly. So it's like the "compliance/attraction/frustration" thing just mirrored. Because what I hate of normal women is their psychological weakness and dread of society's judgment. And those things are much less present in dominant women. But as a fierce independent, the longest time I and a dominant can stay together without her brain going meltdown over my replies is, uhm, 4 minutes. As soon as you don't let them bully you they'll feel bullied (this mechanism applies to bullies of any gender, of course!). They'll lecture you/blame you for doing once (and after being provoked) exactly what they did 2-5-10 times right before (unprovoked), without no sign of any awareness... Independent women? You put that in a chart time ago... but I have never seen one. The self-appointed "independent strong" are all sickly dominant -- which is how we call bullies, due to our wish for politeness.
WolfOfGeorgeStreet 2017-01-10 21:03:14
@BD How is this woman being illogical at all? Her demands were perfectly logical. You just didn't understand what she was actually saying, the subtext. She was older and intelligent and thus wise enough to know her value in the sexual market, she was making it pretty clear what she was saying, but allow me to translate from woman speak (as you often like to do, but seemed to have failed to understand in this instance)
Melody: Well, he had six pack abs and let’s face it, you haven’t exactly been to the gym lately.Translation: he's alot more physically sexually attractive than you because he's a hot, ripped, stud. I can easily get hot, studs to fuck me, I'm old enough and wise enough to know that. So if a guy isn't a hot stud he BETTER BE PAYING ME in some form or another, and he better be paying me alot more than the hot studs are.
Me: Okay, so if a man has six pack abs, he is free from this monetary thing you have? So chubbier guys need to spend more money on you than trimmer guys?What she's thinking after this message: Yes! That's exactly how it works, I will let a hot, stud or famous guy that makes me wet just from existing fuck me more easily (sometimes even for free without ANY dates!) but I will make other guys PAY.
Melody: No it’s not that at all. You’re just being immature about all of this. He was too, that’s why he and I didn’t work out. Being immature is very unattractive.Translation: You are a successful, respectful man, but not that physically attractive and so are my beta bucks, you should be old enough and wise enough to know that I can get way hotter guys than you that I have more raw sexual attraction and lust for to fuck me, the fact that you don't acknowledge this show's your immaturity and your inability to read between the lines of what I'm saying. He was my alpha fucks, I just wanted a hot stud to fuck and use as my personal dildo on demand, but he got needy, and he's too young and not successful enough to fulfill my beta bucks desires. Ideally I want both of these things in ONE man, but unfortunately at age 40 that's impossible for me to find because tall, rich, successful, handsome, studs with six packs can get much younger, tighter, hotter women, so I have to settle for multiple men to fulfill my desires. How is what she said not perfectly logical? Girls want to fuck and lust after tall, ripped, hot guys, they also have emotional and provider needs they want met. It's hard to find this in one guy, so they'll fuck the top 1% studs (which they can easily get for just sex) but charge the rest of us in some form, emotionally or otherwise. Not hard to understand, and perfectly logical. Guys do the same thing, a high value guy might have a ONS with some chubby, plain jane provided she makes her sex very easily obtainable, but they'd never wine and dine her for it! The same guy will probably happily wine and dine a 9+/10 supermodel or even pay her though. How is this illogical? The woman was behaving completely logically in line with the realities of the sexual market.
Blackdragon 2017-01-10 21:57:38
Well, you sound over-assertive sometimes. Say the woman is 30 year-old Liz Hurley (or whatever women that inspires you as much)?I'd dump her the same way. And have.
I can wait 50 dates.Then you're either a beta, have a very low sex drive, are very desperate, or you'd have raging oneitis. No woman on planet Earth is worth 50 dates with zero sex, and if you think there is, I feel sorry for you. During that time you could have found another woman (if not more than one) who was just as hot, if not hotter, and already fucked her.
I think you know what I mean with no need to elaborate, but for example, sex can be withheld for “power reasons”, as part of the woman’s battle to be your upper in the couple’s pecking order. Restraining sex can come into play in countless dominance games and dominance plays, and I have no tolerance of that.Fine, but none of that is relevant to me. I expect sex on the second date (and usually get it), the third date at worst. I don't care why a woman says no... I'm already onto the next woman.
But if she is, say, shy? A virgin?Still don't care. Sex on date 2 (or maybe 3 at worst), or I'm gone.
Of course it also depends on the kind of relationship. If it’s meant to be a FB relationship and she doesn’t allow sex the first 5 times, well, something serious may be wrong with her :))..Nope, still not relevant. FB or MLTR or whatever, I expect sex on the second or third date. Period. Otherwise I politely move on to the next woman on the list.
How is this woman being illogical at all?She wasn't. She was just communicating in an insane fashion to a man who didn't understand woman language, then getting surprised and upset when he didn't understand. Very stupid. When I said it was about money, she said it was about romance. When I started talking about romance, she said it was about money. Or sixpack abs. Of course a guy is going to be confused (unless he's very experienced with women, which I was not back then). Again, she could have just been honest about what she wanted instead of talking like an insane person during that conversation. Not that I'd expect her to of course. 🙂
She was older and intelligent and thus wise enough to know her value in the sexual marketDid you not read that she was 40 years old? Based on your past statements you'd think her SMV was super low, probably to the point of being disgusting. Your statement conflicts with paragraphs of ranting you've made on this blog, including recently. Why on Earth would she be behaving like her SMV is sky-high when you yourself would admit it was horribly low as a 40 year-old woman? Your arguments tend to be very inconsistent.
but allow me to translate from woman speak (as you often like to do, but seemed to have failed to understand in this instance)Of course I failed, this was seven years ago when I was a beginner and I didn't know anything about woman language. This isn't something that happened yesterday; I'm reporting events and thoughts that took place way back in 2007. Today a woman like this wouldn't last past the first one-hour, $15 first date with me. I'd see her ASD coming a mile away.
WolfOfGeorgeStreet 2017-01-10 22:14:32
She wasn’tExactly, yet you said in the article that women do not behave logically and used this as an example.
Again, she could have just been honest about what she wanted instead of talking like an insane person during that conversationYeah, well. Saying "I make guys pay either financially or emotionally unless they are super hot" isn't a socially acceptable thing to say. Her calling you immature was a way of saying 'how do you not understand that?'
Did you not read that she was 40 years old? Based on your past statements you’d think her SMV was super low, probably to the point of being disgusting.Not super low, if she's a super attractive 40yo it would be average. A super hot 40yo is probably on par with a very plain or chubby 21yo in terms of smv, or thereabouts. Either way it's enough to get hot, young, studs to fuck her, but probably not enough to get hot, young, studs to be monogamous with her and wine and dine her, and tend to her emotional needs etc. for long (or at all), unless they are really stupid and have no understanding of their own SMV. She was probably overvaluing her SMV (as most people tend to, especially older, delusional women), but she was correct in knowing that it was high enough to get a hot, young, stud, at least just for sex if she's offering it fairly quickly (but he probably won't be willing to give her much more), and probably still high enough to get at least some chubby 30 something men to wine and dine her and tend to her emotional needs over multiple dates. If not then she will either readjust her sell price, or end up alone. I don't see how any of this contradicts anything I've said in the past.
Blackdragon 2017-01-10 22:42:50
Exactly, yet you said in the article that women do not behave logically and used this as an example.Her motives were logical, of course. Her behavior, communication, and expectations as a 40 year-old woman were highly illogical. You already admitted she was overvaluing her own SMV, and called her delusional.
Yeah, well. Saying “I make guys pay either financially or emotionally unless they are super hot” isn’t a socially acceptable thing to say.That isn't my problem. I was clearly communicating socially unacceptable things to people back then all the time (note in the article what I said to Marci). Again I will repeat that I don't expect her to communicate honestly. I'm saying that if she did, it would be more logical/rational behavior. A hot 21 year-old woman verbally stating to a man, "If you're not hot, I expect you to buy me dinner at least six times or so before we have sex," would be indeed perfectly logical/rational behavior. A hot 40 year-old woman verbally stating to man, "I'm not ready to have sex with you because you haven't been romantic with me enough after four dates," is not logical/rational behavior, regardless of what her (delusional) ulterior motives are.
She was probably overvaluing her SMV (as most people tend to, especially older, delusional women)And there you go. That alone shows she wasn't behaving rationally.
I don’t see how any of this contradicts anything I’ve said in the pastIn your first comment, you clearly implied that a 40 year-old woman had high SMV, yet when I was talking about Pink Firefly, you were flat out horrified that I was dating a hot 37 year-old woman because of, in your words, her low SMV. That's called being inconsistent. But as I've said to you before, I'm arguing with you about SMV, and you're probably now going to say you had no problem with Firefly's age. Great; anyone can go back to that thread and read your comments there. And if you seriously think this 40 year-old woman was behaving perfectly logically and rationally, based on the language she was using and her expectations based on her own SMV, then great, let's agree to disagree.
WolfOfGeorgeStreet 2017-01-11 00:03:57
Her motives were logical, of course. Her behavior, communication, and expectations as a 40 year-old woman were highly illogical. You already admitted she was overvaluing her own SMV, and called her delusional.I said she was PROBABLY overvaluing her SMV. It really depends. If she'd recently gotten other guys around your SMV to take her out on 5+ dates before giving them sex then it's not illogical to think you'd do the same. If no guy around your SMV had done that in the past 10 years, then yes, she was overvaluing her SMV and I would agree that her expectations were illogical. Although in my experience older women do tend to overvalue their SMV, so in this case, you are probably correct in saying that her expectations were illogical. Her communication and behavior was just illogical in the sense that she didn't know how to better word what she was trying to communicate and still remain within the realms of societal acceptable behavior.
A hot 40 year-old woman verbally stating to man, “I’m not ready to have sex with you because you haven’t been romantic with me enough after four dates,” is not logical/rational behavior, regardless of what her (delusional) ulterior motives are.Yeah, but I don't think a man would say to the chubby, plain Jane that approached him in the nightclub and asked for him to buy her a drink after seeing him offer to buy a drink to a hotter girl, "Listen, I'm happy to take you home and fuck you, but you're not hot enough for me to buy you anything or stand around talking to you for too long because you're plain and chubby and that girl I just offered to buy a drink for was way hotter" He'd say something like "oh hey, sorry, I was actually thinking about heading off, how about you join me for a drink at my place instead?". She could stand there and argue about why he's being illogical and how he'd just offered to buy another girl a drink and was intending to stand around and talk to her in the club and perhaps buy her even more drinks... So I don't really see your story as a 'women are illogical' type of scenario because guys do exactly the same thing but in reverse. Out of those 2 options which is the most likely to get the guy what he wants (sex without buying her anything)? Melody was doing the exact same thing to you.
In your first comment, you clearly implied that a 40 year-old woman had high SMV, yet when I was talking about Pink Firefly, you were flat out horrified that I was dating a hot 37 year-old woman because of, in your words, her low SMV. That’s called being inconsistent.Nope, never, ever said that. You can go back through the thread and read it. I said she had diminished SMV for her age and said she had lower SMV than when she was younger, and lower SMV comparable to women of a younger age that are also attractive. Never, ever said she had 'low smv' nor did I imply it. And yes, the thread is there for all to read. My point in that thread was that advice from a man who's in an OLTR with a 37yo, regardless of how hot she is for her age, should be taken with caution if someone is going to apply it to an OLTR with a girl who's a super hot 21yo, or even a super hot 25yo. Because it's a completely different ballgame due to the relative SMV's of the girls within the dating market.
But as I’ve said to you before, I’m arguing with you about SMVYou brought it up this time. I didn't mention SMV at all.
Great; anyone can go back to that thread and read your comments there.They can, and they'll see that I never said nor implied that your OLTR had LOW SMV, just that her SMV was LOWER than the girls alot of the guys you're giving advice to are dating (like guys in their 20's or 30's dating hot girls in their 20's) and trying to keep around in their own OLTR's, or MLTR's etc.
JB 2017-01-11 00:20:15
@Alpha Omega Jesus fucking christ dude. You sound like a beta or a sexually repressed Alpha 1.0. I can't really tell which, since you have lots of elements from both. Putting pussy on a pedestal because she is a Special Girl™ is one of the most counter-productive things you can ever do. If you don't have sex after the 3rd date, your chances of ever sleeping with her are slim at best, and after that they only get worse. I don't care if she has reasons, is a virgin, whatever, you'll most likely never bed her. As for being with dominants, if you can't handle being in a room with her for more than four minutes, you need to learn to control your ego and emotions. You claim to be a "very independent guy" (which is probably, for the most part, true), but it seems that you like to "put women in their place" and "tell them how it is" (which is Needy Alpha behavior). The time where I agree that dominants can be a handful is when you get into discussions with them - which is something that you should NEVER do (unless you like drama. Which it seems you do). Dominants are fantastic to seduce and sleep with, but they are often not MLTR material due to their controlling nature (aquired by having beta boyfriends). I usually expect my relationships with them to last 3-6 months before they LSNFTE. As for independents, they are not some fairytale creature. 2 of my current MLTRs are independents (one is a very high end MLTR and could become OLTR if she still lasts by the end of 2017), and by God, they are fantastic. They don't want to control others (so they hate betas), and they despise being controlled (so they hate 1.0s), and them meeting a 2.0 ensures a long and extremely happy relationship (since they've usually not ever met anyone not getting needy/controlling, attraction is through the stratosphere). No drama, no babysitting, high individual responsibility, and usually you can learn a lot from these gals (they are often very intelligent). I would advise you to get one, but since you have a strong need to be right / in control, she'll be long gone before the relationship even begins. (she might fuck you once or twice, then let you go as soon as you try to impose rules on her). On the journey to become 2.0, I had the same phase (some Oneitis, lots of Needy Alpha behavior), and I can only recommend to let go of those behaviors and focus on living a careless, happy, abundant life. It's a good place to be.
BrianNY 2017-01-11 00:24:47
This series of posts has many beneficial suggestions. If she agrees to you "picking her up" at her place before going out on a "planned date," you could ask to use the bathroom, or show her something inside, etc, and if she says no, then just leave (don't go out on the planned date). If she says yes, then that could "be the date" or "be a good start to the date." Look forward to the next post. Thanks.
Minister 2017-01-11 03:35:15
Minister, just about every time you post here, you whine about some technique I’m teaching that “doesn’t work in your country.” Yeah, as if no men in your country are having sex. I always take the time to help you but I’m done with your negativity. I’ll be ignoring your comments from now on, though other commenters are certainly welcome to help you.Men in my country don't know about you, anyway. Those who get laid here are either high value, or dating a DTF girl, or lucky enough. None of them following your system, though. Sorry to tell you so. In US, where you live, it is super easy to get laid and I doubt if you need any system. Strange thing if you don't get laid in your 20s and 30s like you, not the other way around. 🙂
WolfOfGeorgeStreet 2017-01-11 06:18:10
Men in my countryWhere are you? Exact Country and City. I'll sit one of my Tinder profiles there and see how it compares to other countries/cities out of interest. I can tell pretty quickly how a city compares for online dating (at least for Tinder) pretty quickly on a global scale now.
Anon. 2017-01-11 07:47:28
Tinder is not necessarily representative outside large Western cities. I live in Ukraine, in a city of about 1 million, and I get decent results from online dating. But absolutely none from Tinder, where right swiping everyone for months resulted in under 10 matches and 1 first date. My city just seems to be somehow incompatible with Tinder as I actually got more matches from remote cities than from my own : ) Sometimes I talk to those women and they seem to be real, not bots. Also if Minister's country is not English-speaking, there will be a huge selection bias. But that notwithstanding, Minister should definitely disclose his location so his statements can be objectively substantiated or disproved.
Joe K 2017-01-11 08:05:24
With this back and forth between Wolf and BD, post suggestion: I would like to understand better WHY lower SMV women have delusional expectations, EVEN WHEN they haven't gotten the results they think they're entitled to. I would like to understand better WHY Briffault's Law applies even to aging women who must surely be aware of their gradual demise. While I understand the logic deficit women have, and the hypergamous instinct to date up, I also know how much they crave the status of having a 'quality' boyfriend/husband (read: best possible version of beta bux). So with that, I'd like to better understand why a 'Melody' would hamster herself out of securing that 'quality' potential boyfriend by going to such prudish extents. It sounds like up til the big dumb 'logical' destructive conversation you had, things had been going great with all but the sex. So on some level, is this just self-sabotage based on low self-worth on her part? These 3 questions are obviously closely related and I think they'd make for an interesting post.
Tom 2017-01-11 08:17:59
Again, MGTOW content. Female nature They're solipsistic till the point not acknowledging their responsibility even verbalizing something like above. CAUSE IT'S UGLY. A child will not admit his/her mistake unless have been told by a dad.
Gil Galad 2017-01-11 10:52:21
I would like to understand better WHY lower SMV women have delusional expectationsSince BD has noticed the "delusional empress" syndrome in older women of various cultures, then it could be a built-in biological phenomenon, but here's a "societal" explanation I propose which others can refine or refute (depending on...): Older women, in a certain sense, are *not* delusional, because there are always betas who *will* worship them in spite of their dwindling SMV. They are only delusional in the same sense that a younger woman who is a 6 can be delusional and think herself a 9 because she gets 76 likes on her facebook profile picture. Any woman who still has a "market" is going to think she's still got it, and in a sense, she's right. She's wrong in the sense that she isn't "at her peak", a man who can calm down and dispassionately compare before/after pics will admit that she looked better at 23 than she looks now at 41. Some women also don't realize that many men pursue them not because they're super hot, but for exactly the opposite reason: "okay, she's like a 7 or so, she mustn't be as hard to lay as the stunning ones". They interpret their large pool of thirsty orbiters as sky-high SMV, when the reality is that most men are pretty scared of going after the 9s and 10s. The first few times I used OkCupid, there was a phase where I purposely targeted post-wall women because I thought that as a beginner, a hot 40yo is a better deal than an ugly 20yo "and should probably think of herself as having the same SMV". It's guy logic and it fails because many other guys think the same, causing older women to have a distorted idea of their SMV. I'll make one brief evopsych digression: it's quite possible that *any* woman who passes a certain threshold of "number of orbiters" or "number of likes on her pic" is going to have delusions about her hotness, and here's why: in prehistory, the largest tribes were maybe 200-300 strong, so it makes sense that women would have internalized an instinct of the type "if more than (say) 40 men obviously want you, then you're probably the hottest chick in the tribe". That is no longer true in a humanity of 8 billion people where simply increasing your FB friend list and social circle will allow you to cross that threshold, but the instinct and therefore the delusion remain. One last point: never underestimate a beta's ability to "fall in love" with a woman he knows isn't super hot by just talking himself into it: semi-consciously, he'll be thinking "I'm gameless and not that attractive, I'd better learn to like the plain and semi-hot ones, like this one, see she has really cute hair, blah blah blah". Next thing you know he's head over heels for her. I was a pretty pathetic beta and I had some pretty pathetic beta or betaized friends in my teens and a little past 20, and I can attest to that (one of my friends was even worse than me and spent 2-3 years with a chick at least 2 points below him, in my opinion anyway). Guys like that are doing men a huge disservice by giving women an inflated sense of their attractiveness and of what they can get away with demanding from or doing to men.
Lovergirl 2017-01-11 11:13:29
We don't care about our "SMV" & don't spend time assessing it. Of course we know looks dwindle with age but all we care about are whatever guys are attracted to us NOW, which I can say, honestly, at 40, is plenty! I don't care if 20 yr olds want me because I don't want them anyway and same for 60 yr olds. Mostly, guys our own age still are attracted to us and can't/don't get 20 somethings anyway so it's not even an issue to compare ourselves to someone younger.
Blackdragon 2017-01-11 12:36:35
In US, where you live, it is super easy to get laid and I doubt if you need any system.https://blackdragonblog.com/2015/11/09/is-it-impossible-to-get-laid-in-certain-cities/
JB 2017-01-11 12:44:32
Men in my country don’t know about you, anyway.Because in the Western society, BD is the number one dating Guru due to his very societally acceptable views on dating, relationships, business models and lifestyle. That's why all guys get laid after two dates (and date women 20 years their junior), all relationships are open/poly, everyone is a small business owner and everybody is long-term consistently happy. It's not like BD is in a niche market that will at best only ever apply to 5-10 % of (western) men. Or something.
We don’t care about our “SMV” & don’t spend time assessing it.Right. That's why you don't wear make-up or nice dresses. It's the reason why you wouldn't give a rats ass if your current lover gets hit on by a 20-something at the bar. It's also the reason why you don't even care about your weight, or why you don't get your hair cut regularly, or use anti-aging cream. (Sure, you do it for yourself as well as to stand up against other women. Which is also comparing each others SMV.) You might not call it SMV, but that's exactly what women spend a lot of their time on.
Gil Galad 2017-01-11 13:26:51
We don’t care about our “SMV” & don’t spend time assessing itYou're understanding this as if I was talking about a woman doing some kind of calculation if her mind, which is a common misunderstanding of psychological (and evolutionary) explanations of behavior. A person doesn't even need to consciously have a concept of SMV in order to worry about her SMV, as paradoxical as this may sound. Just like people didn't need to wait until Marx to have "class consciousness" or class resentment etc (not that I am in anyway a marxist, lol).
Replicant 2017-01-11 13:30:13
@Minister I wonder what hell of a country do you live. I usually follow BD techniques (almost all of them) in online dating and it's not hard for me to score with girls 8-10-12 years younger than me (I'm 40 yo) and I live in South America (in a loooong and thin country 😉 ) Obviously I try to be on top of the game (fitness, looks, game, lifestyle, etc) without that everything is way harder. Maybe you should address that.
WolfOfGeorgeStreet 2017-01-11 17:39:14
I would like to understand better WHY lower SMV women have delusional expectationsIf you guys want to get a sense of whether a woman's expectations are in line with the current 'market rate' in your city or are delusional, it's simple. Find pictures of a girl that is around the same age/looks level of what you are chasing or want to test the market value of on instagram (or find a girl in another city by spoofing on tinder and download her pics with flamite) or get the pics from other social media and set up a fake (but very real looking, so make sure you reverse image search the images you use on google and they don't appear as this is an easy fake profile give away) profile of her in your city on Tinder, Seekingarrangement and a traditional online dating site and watch the offers roll in. Now try and take an objective view of the guys hitting her up. Look for the ones that are around your looks range or above and that are well spoken. This is hard to do objectively because many guys overrate their own looks, but try and take an objective view of yourself compared to these other guys and be realistic. What are the other guys that are well spoken and around your level of looks offering? This will give you an indication of whether or not YOU are delusional, and undervaluing girls you are approaching online. For example if other guys in your age/looks range are offering her drinks or just sex, and you are offering drinks too, then you're ok. If on the other hand guys are offering her 5* restaurants and you're only offering her drinks, you may be overvaluing your own worth slightly. If guys in your range are offering her 5* restaurants, expensive gifts and a cash allowance (yes, guys are offering this stuff even on non SD dating apps like Tinder or traditional dating sites!), and you're only pitching drinks then you're the one that's delusional. If you're online dating and haven't ever performed this experiment, it's akin to setting up a business without researching and understanding your competitors prices or what they're offering in their product!
Marty 2017-01-11 20:19:50
@Minister As other guys have asked. Which country are you in? It would be interesting to find out. I'm in Australia and have had no trouble getting first date lays from Tinder, POF and direct approach pick up with Women anywhere from 5 to 28 years younger than me (I'm 48). I've never tried any of BD's techniques as I only found his stuff recently when I was already in my own style of OLTR (with the girl who is 28 years younger and was 19 and a virgin the night I picked her up from a local bar and slept with her the first night). But I have worked hard on developing my game from other PUA sites and resources. I can see the value in BD's two date strategy though as some of the first date lays off Tinder and POF can be a bit long and drawn out. I've done a few short first dates followed by a 2nd just by accident that turned out just as BD says. Cold approach in bars is different though. If you can get them moving with you and then coming home then its a done deal. You sound like you are falling into the same "game doesn't work for me, my age, my city, bla bla bla" that lots of guys say. It's just an excuse. You've got to tweak it for your own personality, looks, city, country etc but it works if you get off your ass and put in the hours. Women are women and a lot of this stuff is hard wired from many 1000's of years before we have the current setup of countries and cities.
Lovergirl 2017-01-11 22:56:40
Caring about our looks doesn't mean we are worried about how guys who aren't interested in us view our "SMV". Women aren't generally the pursuers and often don't even notice guys unless they express interest in US first. So guys who aren't interested don't even make it onto the radar. If a guy is hitting on us or sending us messages on a dating site or whatever we are going to assume our SMV is plenty sufficient for him or he wouldn't bother. It's really that simple. I don't care if 20 something women are hitting on a guy I am with any differently than I would care if it were a 40 something woman. I've never used any kind of anti aging cream (Im 40, not 60, lol). It just seems so ridiculous to think that a woman should value herself less because of her age and that is what a lot of men in these threads imply. They are so bothered that older women would feel confident in her own skin. Yet, paradoxically, they seem to way overvalue their own "SMV". It's the stereotypical fat, ugly old man who thinks 20 yr old women are falling all over him and older women are just rolling their eyes because we know it's an overinflated ego.
WolfOfGeorgeStreet 2017-01-11 23:43:23
I’m in Australia and have had no trouble getting first date lays from Tinder, POFWhat city? POF is garbage here imo unless you want really low quality girls. Tinder is another story, heaps of 8+ hotties on there but a big grind unless you are the good looking Aussie ideal. Workable yes, but a grind for most guys yet extremely easy for guys that are very good looking and meet the Aussie ideal. @Lovergirl
If a guy is hitting on us or sending us messages on a dating site or whatever we are going to assume our SMV is plenty sufficient for him or he wouldn’t bother. It’s really that simple.Ahhh yeah, well... Those guys sending you messages or hitting on you might want to FUCK you, so your SMV is high enough to be their pump and dump or ONS at the very least, but that doesn't mean your SMV is high enough to keep them around for anything more, or get them to take you out for dinners, give you romance or for any kind of commitment etc. If all you're looking for is sex then sure, that's a good indication of who is at least willing to fuck you, but you need to base your market value off the level of guy that can give you everything you're looking for. Many women seem to make the mistake of 'I can get a tall, handsome, wealthy, stud to fuck me, so I should be able to get one to take me out on extravagant dates, and eventually commit to me'. Kind of like how there are heaps of young model hot girls that are willing to date me, fuck me or whatever else I want if I'm willing to buy them luxury gifts or pay them an allowance and take them out on romantic, extravagant dates etc. However it's alot tougher if I just want to take them for drinks, a couple times and have sex and not give them anything else, the less attractive the girl the easier this becomes. But a really ugly, old, fat guy would find it very tough even to get an average girl on a date even if he's willing to pay her. He'd probably have to offer alot of money, and even then he'd still find it tough. That's the importance of SMV.
Yet, paradoxically, they seem to way overvalue their own “SMV”. It’s the stereotypical fat, ugly old man who thinks 20 yr old women are falling all over him and older women are just rolling their eyes because we know it’s an overinflated ego.Haha! Yes exactly. Some might say this is even being delusional or illogical! Kind of like a guy that thinks he's going to be in his 70's and able to have sex with girls in their mid to late 20's for FREE. Hahahahaha. For the record, I think many people from BOTH sexes overvalue their SMV.
Marty 2017-01-12 00:14:01
@WolfofGeorgestreet I'm north of you. Both POF and Tinder are still hard work. I find POF a bit easier as you can target hotter girls without having to rely on them matching with you. For an older guy like me though I've found it much easier to get younger and hotter girls with cold approach. Girls online seem to be very age sensitive and will just discount you if your not in there perceived target range. I still haven't read BD's online system yet so I'm interested to see if that has any pearls of wisdom that could increase my strike rate. @Lovergirl I think Wolf said it perfectly. For women, getting sex, even from hotter younger guys is not much different from a guy paying to have a date or sex with a lady. I could have a hot young date every night if I wanted to start throwing money around. Getting a guy you really like to hang around and commit to a longer term relationship and everything that goes with it is a whole different ball game. One of my ex FB's who is 45 still gets hot 25-30yo guys pulling her from bars and also chasing her online. She also gets lame Beta guys her own age trying to tie her down to monogamy. But getting a decent looking successful Alpha guy (which is what she likes) to be interested in anything more than a casual FB is almost impossible for her. They are all fucking much younger hotter girls.
It’s the stereotypical fat, ugly old man who thinks 20 yr old women are falling all over himDo these guys really exist? Even most of the fit, reasonably good looking older guys I know are painfully aware that 20 yr old women are not going to be falling all over them unless they a throwing cash around.
JB 2017-01-12 00:20:10
It just seems so ridiculous to think that a woman should value herself less because of her age and that is what a lot of men in these threads imply. They are so bothered that older women would feel confident in her own skin.While I certainly agree that it's a bit ridiculous, their main point is usually that the (percieved) SMV of a >33 year old woman is so high that they have to advance the courtship a lot more in order to get the "same" reward (i.e. sex). Key word here is percieved; attractive and intelligent Young women with otherwise high SMV lack experience and usually percieve their SMV as a lot lower than it actually is. Most men here would agree that a 40 year old woman indeed can be just as hot (if not more so) as a 20 year old, but why throw stacks of money, time and (unfounded!) commitment at a 40 year old, when a 20 year old doesn't ask for any of that? I'm only 26 years of age, but I already see the big difference in dating a few years down rather than a few years up, even when the women are comparable in beauty. Makes for an easy choice in an abundant world. (Don't get me wrong, there are still hordes of men who are willing to pay for your meals and whatnot, and also Alpha males that will gladly commit, chain you up on rules and then cheat on you. Most of my friends are in either of those categories with women of all ages)
Blackdragon 2017-01-12 00:31:19
Most men here would agree that a 40 year old woman indeed can be just as hot (if not more so) as a 20 year old, but why throw stacks of money, time and (unfounded!) commitment at a 40 year old, when a 20 year old doesn’t ask for any of that?That.
Gil Galad 2017-01-12 01:37:44
Do these guys really exist?Barely. LG's habit of throwing at least 2-3 non sequiturs at every comment (like the other day about BD "falling for Pink Firefly because of ASD", smh) is a bit tiring and I'm giving up on pointing them out or responding to them; I'm gonna let my previous comments stand as they are.
WolfOfGeorgeStreet 2017-01-12 03:40:49
but why throw stacks of money, time and (unfounded!) commitment at a 40 year old, when a 20 year old doesn’t ask for any of that?This is changing. Thanks to things like Instagram which, at it's core, is just a pussy buffet for famous, rich and very good looking guys. Where those guys can pick and choose which girls they want to fuck this week. Young girls are way more aware of their value nowadays than they were 10 years ago.
Minister 2017-01-12 05:20:52
@Minister As other guys have asked. Which country are you in? It would be interesting to find out. I’m in Australia and have had no trouble getting first date lays from Tinder, POF and direct approach pick up with Women anywhere from 5 to 28 years younger than me (I’m 48).Lucky you. I wouldn't like to publish personal details, but anyway I live in Athens, Greece. If I put the numbers, I have no trouble getting a date, either, although in ridiculous conversion rates.
I can see the value in BD’s two date strategy though as some of the first date lays off Tinder and POF can be a bit long and drawn out. I’ve done a few short first dates followed by a 2nd just by accident that turned out just as BD says.Yeah, I am not fond of spending too much time, either. But even if I wanted to, long dates is not a luxury, as most of the time by 11pm the girls will want to get home, because they don't have a car or they work the next day.
You sound like you are falling into the same “game doesn’t work for me, my age, my city, bla bla bla” that lots of guys say. It’s just an excuse. You’ve got to tweak it for your own personality, looks, city, country etc but it works if you get off your ass and put in the hours. Women are women and a lot of this stuff is hard wired from many 1000’s of years before we have the current setup of countries and cities.It is not an excuse, at all. Let me number you some of the techniques that I field tested and got me nowhere. 1. Sex talk: She will avoid it and if I persist, it sounds too set-up. BD's smooth way of introducing it has a result of her changing the subject. 2. Kino: Sometimes she reacts well to it, sometimes you 'd better refrain from it. 3. Not kiss close: I have found no correlation of kiss closing to 2nd date flakes. Usually if we don't kiss, there was no sexual tension between us in the first place and by not kissing it does not build up, either. Besides BD's rules problems here, I am interested in a system of first date lays. If the lay doesn't happen on the first date, a bazillion of different thing can happen that make me lose the girl. So far I have focused my efforts on maximizing my looks and making a super attractive profile, but I can't say I have seen any difference.
azog 2017-01-12 10:12:14
Tinder is not necessarily representative outside large Western cities. I live in Ukraine, in a city of about 1 million, and I get decent results from online dating. But absolutely none from Tinder, where right swiping everyone for months resulted in under 10 matches and 1 first date.Actually I don't think Tinder is representative at all. I live in Canada but I've used online dating successfully in several different countries, but I've NEVER gotten Tinder to work. Tinder is in a category all its own. Anyone who thinks Tinder is representative of anything is wrong.
Kind of like a guy that thinks he’s going to be in his 70’s and able to have sex with girls in their mid to late 20’s for FREE. Hahahahaha.Tsk, tsk, you're quoting BD out of context here. When he said that he also said he was under the assumption (and I agree with him BTW) that 30-40 years from now guys in their 70's will look like guys in their 40's or 50's do today. A guy in his 70's who looks like Gandalf won't be banging chicks in their mid 20's for free, but a guy the same age decades from now who looks like Keanu Reeves or Jeremy Renner because of advances in cosmetic surgery and stem cell research and shit won't have any problem.
Joe K 2017-01-12 14:19:12
Minister I think I see your blind spot here. Let's take 3 of the things you mentioned don't work for you: 1) Sex talk - it has to start with humor, and it has to be humor that amuses yourself. I remember in the late 90s/early 00s there were a whole string of dating shows (like the 5th wheel) in the USA where either dater would just bring up sex, totally matter of fact (EG "So, where's the craziest place you've had sex?"), and right out of the blue. Don't do that. Make it light-hearted initially, you both should (but at LEAST you should) genuinely be laughing at it. 2) "Kino: Sometimes she reacts well to it, sometimes you ‘d better refrain from it." Why 'you'd better refrain from it'? This is just a lack of courage, man. Harsh truth there, you're pussying out. There is no harm in the kind of kino I advised, and if she is repulsed by that kind of touch, NEXT. Let's start with the basics - the first time you touch her (appropriately) - I'll touch everyone including old men this way when I'm talking to them. It's called being charismatic. It just carries extra weight with a woman and introduces sexual tension with chicks, whereas it's perceived more of a social/friendly bonding thing with a dude. Of course you're going to escalate the physical touching with her later on, whereas you're not gonna do that with an old man LOL. 3) I might disagree with BD on this but I say go ahead and kiss her ASAP the first time you're getting a drink with her - just preferably not at the end of the night with that whole cliched 'moment of truth' bullshit context. Kiss her when you can, when you feel like it. If she resists, you don't react, you just try again 15-30 minutes later. But I think you're getting ahead of yourself even mentioning this because if you're not 'kinoing' her effectively, no way in hell are you prepared to kiss her effectively. Start with the kino, focus on that, no excuses.
JB 2017-01-12 15:39:29
Lucky you. I wouldn’t like to publish personal details, but anyway I live in Athens, Greece.I know plenty of guys who have gotten quick lays in Greece. The only problem is that the Greek courtship style is usually way too pushy but with extremely beta behaviors (Men agressively buying girls whatever they want, especially older men), thus many women value their SMV higher. If you'd rather like it easier, just move somewhere else.
Yeah, I am not fond of spending too much time, either. But even if I wanted to, long dates is not a luxury, as most of the time by 11pm the girls will want to get home, because they don’t have a car or they work the next day.I don't get this at all. Your first date should last 1-2 hours. Your 2nd date should be at your place or hers, with sexual escalation occuring as fast as possible. I usually am able to do it within 2-4 hours of face-to-face time, and I'm fairly new to online dating.
1. Sex talk: She will avoid it and if I persist, it sounds too set-up. BD’s smooth way of introducing it has a result of her changing the subject. 2. Kino: Sometimes she reacts well to it, sometimes you ‘d better refrain from it.I still think sex talk can be difficult, and I use it sparingly. I've gotten plenty of lays without persisting with sex talk. It just lets her know that you are an open, sexual guy, whether she plunges in to the topic or not. I usually use limited amounts of kino. She just needs enough to know that you're comfortable. Then on your 2nd date, it's a lot easier. So again, I don't see much hold in this. You just kind of seem like an AFC filled with excuses.
WolfOfGeorgeStreet 2017-01-12 16:48:07
Actually I don’t think Tinder is representative at all. I live in Canada but I’ve used online dating successfully in several different countries, but I’ve NEVER gotten Tinder to work. Tinder is in a category all its own. Anyone who thinks Tinder is representative of anything is wrong.Complete and utter denial to protect your own ego. The reason response rates have plummeted on other dating sites and the quality of women on there is deteriorating is because women are flocking to sites like Tinder and sugar dating sites in droves and you are competing against male model looking guys that can now meet and talk to 100's of girls in a night as opposed to the handful they could meet and talk to a night in nightclubs. Likewise you are competing against more and more men that are willing and have found an easier avenue to pay girls for their company. Not representative of anything!? Just because you haven't gotten it to work doesn't mean you aren't competing for women against the guys who have. Create a profile of a male model and see just how well Tinder works. You'll need to hire a PA just to manage all his dates with hot women, hundreds of dates per week if he wanted. Literally hundreds. You don't think these guys are on there sleeping with multiple women a day and running 10 girl fwb harems? More and more the reality of the dating market is, be super good looking or be rich and pay for it, as girls are quickly realizing they can get both. Sure we can still find the girls that haven't figured that out and are looking for 'love' or just a 'connection' or a 'cool guy' to hang out with that makes her feel good or whatever, but more and more of them are waking up to the other possibilities that are available to them.
Tsk, tsk, you’re quoting BD out of context here. When he said that he also said he was under the assumption (and I agree with him BTW) that 30-40 years from now guys in their 70’s will look like guys in their 40’s or 50’s do today.Not at all, as I already explained in that thread. If guys in their 70's have the ability to look like 40yo-50yo guys through surgery or stem cell advancements etc. then it also means YOUNGER guys than them have access to technology and surgeries to make themselves look even better. Like 40yo-50yo guys will look in their 20's, and guys in their 20's will all look like male models, so it will balance out the competition and you'll be in the same situation as a 70yo guy now. It's like if every guy on earth earned 6 figures a year, girls would want guys earning 7 figures a year (inflation). Or if every guy was 6' or over girls would start putting "6'5 and over please" in their dating profiles. How good looking you are doesn't matter, it's relative (just like money or height). It comes down to how good looking you are vs the competition, it's relative not absolute.
Minister 2017-01-12 19:42:51
I don’t get this at all. Your first date should last 1-2 hours. Your 2nd date should be at your place or hers, with sexual escalation occuring as fast as possible. I usually am able to do it within 2-4 hours of face-to-face time, and I’m fairly new to online dating.I replied to the guy I quoted that even if I were an advocate of spending a lot of time on girls, they can't stay till late in the night with me. As I am thinking this over, prolonged first dates leading to sex would be better than 2 quick separate dates, where I may lose the girl in the meantime because of the gazillion of different things that can happen. It is not that I have such a busy lifestyle or 3 businesses to run.
So again, I don’t see much hold in this. You just kind of seem like an AFC filled with excuses.Sure, I am a pussy AFC that has gotten 50 lays from online game and I clearly don't know what I am talking about. Names calling is so easy. Anyway, if someone made an experiment to set his Tinder location to here and told us his findings, I would be grateful.
azog 2017-01-12 20:27:45
Not representative of anything!? Just because you haven’t gotten it to work doesn’t mean you aren’t competing for women against the guys who have. Create a profile of a male model and see just how well Tinder works.You're telling me a male model is gonna get more swipes than me???????? WHAT??????? Genius mate, just genius. So the fuck what? I get laid just fine without Tinder, that was my entire point. I don't see any of this flocking you're screeching about. I just banged a 22 yr old cutie two days ago (I'm 41). Fuck Tinder in its hairy orifice. Who cares about male models or whatnot? Really? Are they preventing you from getting laid? I know, why don't you get hysterical about battalions of hot young studs coming to steal your bitches. Love the place you're focusing on, keep it up.
WolfOfGeorgeStreet 2017-01-12 20:50:44
You’re telling me a male model is gonna get more swipes than me???????? WHAT???????Straw man
I get laid just fine without Tinder, that was my entire point. I don’t see any of this flocking you’re screeching about. I just banged a 22 yr old cutie two days ago (I’m 41). Fuck Tinder in its hairy orifice.Another straw man followed by sour grapes. Your argument was that Tinder isn't a representation of a dating market, when it in fact is, nothing you said in your counter argument refuted that point. It was just a rage filled rant. I fuck hot women too (young ones, old ones, models, strippers, whatever), but day by day, month by month and year by year the time investment it takes to do so (for 'free') gets higher and higher (while I am getting wealthier, better looking etc.). While for a select few men at the very top, it gets easier and easier, and the distribution of the commodity in question (pussy) skews further upward towards them. I care because the tougher the competition gets, and the more they capitalize on a limited commodity, the more it costs me in time and/or money to get what I want. So The less hot women I can sleep with for the same amount of time/money invested, the less sex I can get for the same amount of time/money invested etc. men who can look at things objectively and aren't hell bent on protecting their own ego's (probably very few men to be honest), will be noticing the same thing.
azog 2017-01-12 23:03:10
I fuck hot women too (young ones, old ones, models, strippers, whatever), but day by day, month by month and year by year the time investment it takes to do so (for ‘free’) gets higher and higher (while I am getting wealthier, better looking etc.). While for a select few men at the very top, it gets easier and easier, and the distribution of the commodity in question (pussy) skews further upward towards them.Indeed, indeed, this a cataclysm of Biblical proportions and we should all be as terrified of it as you are.
Lovergirl 2017-01-12 23:09:16
It's not that older women perceive their SMV as any higher than a younger woman. It's that women, as they get older, get a lot smarter about their interactions with men. They learn better how to set boundaries and not be taken advantage of. I work with a wide variety of people. I share an office with a bunch of managers from another dept) all men that are mostly in their late twenties/early 30s. Among the people I have working for me are women of all ages and I'm out in the public a lot. Then there's the older, richer guys from corporate. I also deal with married couples regularly in our target market. Anyhow I hear it from all angles. I get both women and men telling me their stories and about their dating lives. I get to observe a LOT. Young women are super naive about whatever SMV men attribute to them. Most of them really have no clue. Therefore, they get taken advantage of a lot and as they get older tend to become way more careful. By the time they realize what they could do with this "SMV" they are generally past their prime. Now it clicks and before they are too old they want to use it to their advantage. Hence all the mid thirties to mid forty something women that have caught on and are harder for men to manipulate. One of the guys I work with was regaling to the other men in the office about his and his friends younger days of telling preposterous lies to women. He said "20 year old women are dumb. They will believe anything ". A 43 yr old woman I work with has a famous story from her twenties about a guy who told her he was overseas for months in the military when it turns out he hadn't gone anywhere at all.. A 26 year old girl that works for me asks me things like what does it mean when a guy hasn't texted her for 3 weeks- did he lose interest? She is an attractive young girl but is having trouble getting this guy to commit. Yet plenty of older women DO find commitment. It's not all about SMV. Tonight a 47 yr old man asked me out and ended up taking me, and two other people from another company out to eat and paying for us all because of it. Then he ordered and paid for pizza for my kids as well since I agreed to go out with them. He's totally not my type and I had t turn him down afterwards because he was asking to get to know me better/date me. I'm sure there are women that would be attracted to him, he's friendly and very outgoing and makes $400,000 a year. Hes not bad looking but he's a little chubby and he's white and a cowboy and rides a Harley. Totally not for me. I'm sure some people might think he had a higher SMV due to income and all that but I don't care. Personal taste plays a part. The ability to turn a woman on plays a huge part. There are so many variables. I watched a really cute interaction the other day between the 43 yr old woman and a man who turned out to be 43 as well. They really hit it off. They are both witty and decently good looking with a nerdy side. Most people are fine with someone their own age. You just don't see that many couples where there is a huge age difference, outside of Hollywood. Even BD, now that he is settling down, chose a woman closer to his own age- not a 22 yr old. So saying older women can't get commitment on this blog is actually kind of ironic...
JB 2017-01-13 04:50:53
It’s not that older women perceive their SMV as any higher than a younger woman. It’s that women, as they get older, get a lot smarter about their interactions with men. They learn better how to set boundaries and not be taken advantage of. ... Young women are super naive about whatever SMV men attribute to them. Most of them really have no clue. Therefore, they get taken advantage of a lot and as they get older tend to become way more careful. By the time they realize what they could do with this “SMV” they are generally past their prime. Now it clicks and before they are too old they want to use it to their advantage. Hence all the mid thirties to mid forty something women that have caught on and are harder for men to manipulate.This about "taking advantage of women" is something I don't understand, unless you are talking about players (Who lie). I am very open and honest about my intentions and my lifestyle, and thus I am not "taking advantage" or "manipulating" anyone. They are free to fuck me and have a relationship with me if they so choose, knowing exactly what I am and what I am not. You know who is manipulative? Betas and players. Betas are manipulating girls by bribing them with romantic dinners, gifts etc, and players are pretenders who increase their unfounded SMV and make a lot of promises they can't fulfill (monogamy, implied or stated). From your wording, it seems that what you mean is that girls get "taken advantage of" when they are not offered unfounded romantic gestures (such as gifts, dinners) and unfounded promises (such as monogamy). The exact opposite is true. You can't get taken advantage of by someone being honest.
Even BD, now that he is settling down, chose a woman closer to his own age- not a 22 yr old. So saying older women can’t get commitment on this blog is actually kind of ironic…First, BD is not monogamous, and probably won't ever be again. He's "settling down" with an OLTR, which was the end-game goal anyway. Nobody here ever said that older women can't get commitment, rather the contrary: There are plenty of betas of all ages who are willing to go monogamous at any time with women of all ages. What is stated here is that women have three options: monogamy with a beta male who they are (or will become) unattracted to, "monogamy" with a Needy Alpha who will exercise control over them and eventually cheat, or go nonmonogamous with a 2.0. What women really want, however, is the Unicorn Male (The Submissive Alpha) who is badass as fuck, completely independent and cool, but who will obey all their orders without them losing attraction for him. Since this is impossible, it's not really worth discussing. LG, nobody sees women in their 40s as the "enemy". They can be a lot smarter and more beautiful than 20 year olds. The thing is: They used to fuck men who invoked attraction after a short courting phase. Now, because of betas and years of SP, these women think they're entitled to free stuff and promises before sex that they enjoy as much, if not more, than their male suitors. Consider how it would sound if I told you that you would have to pay for sex, or that you would have to pay for at least 5 dinner dates to get me in bed (preferably buy me a nice cologne as well). Sounds reasonable? No? It's exactly the same. Would I be "taken advantage of" if you entertain my date and gift requests? No? Think about how much SP is influencing your judgement. You must clearly be a very intelligent woman to have such an impressive job. If it doesn't make sense, it's SP.
AL 2017-01-13 05:16:12
Taken advantage of???????? There should be one reward for vagina, and one reward only: Penis. Or don't women enjoy the sex to which they consent and take an active part in? It's all just for the male is it??
Joe K 2017-01-13 09:05:48
"...sex that they enjoy as much, if not more, than their male suitors" "Or don’t women enjoy the sex to which they consent and take an active part in? It’s all just for the male is it??" and pair that with https://blackdragonblog.com/2015/04/30/less-people-sex-think/ The dumbest thing that most men do is try to sell women on having sex with them. Women surely see this as a massive DLV because the guy doesn't get how much she loves sex. You offer her the opportunity, you consistently escalate physically, you do NOT try to convince her. I think the tricky part is in seeing how very persistent men, who make a strong play for a woman, do get laid - usually after a considerable amount of time/effort is expended. You can see this happen and think to yourself 'Gee, I should be pushing myself on these women like that guy, 'cause he's getting some'. However true it is, whether it's overstated or not, the BD article I linked above is actually a very healthy mindset because it reminds you that your having sex with a woman, when you are a high SMV male, is a gift to her.
K 2017-01-13 09:40:45
Nobody here ever said that older women can’t get commitment, rather the contrary: There are plenty of betas of all ages who are willing to go monogamous at any time with women of all ages.Why do you identify "commitment" with "monogamy"? I know plenty of people do, just doesn't make any sense to me... Committed = loyal, being there for the other, being an active member of the relationship... monogamy = having sex with just one person for a period of time... No?
Blackdragon 2017-01-13 12:54:13
It’s not that older women perceive their SMV as any higher than a younger woman. It’s that women, as they get older, get a lot smarter about their interactions with men. They learn better how to set boundaries and not be taken advantage of.The fact that over-33 women are more worried about being "taken advantage of" shows the difference in thinking between them and younger women. A 22 year-old doesn't really mind as much if a guy fucks her and the doesn't call her back. She has far less ASD so this isn't as big of a deal. I'm NOT saying younger women LIKE being one-night-stood, because I know that's what you're going to say I said. I'm saying it doesn't bother them nearly as much, because it doesn't. To them, it's just part of the process, even part of the fun. And they one-night-stand men too. A lot. On the other hand, over-33 women have so much god damn ASD that they are utterly terrified of a guy fucking them and then not calling them back, in ways they didn't really care about back when they were in their early 20s. So it's not so much about "being taken advantage of," but more about heightened ASD and fear of sex due to feminine aging.
Even BD, now that he is settling down, chose a woman closer to his own age- not a 22 yr old. So saying older women can’t get commitment on this blog is actually kind of ironic…I don't share that view; I think over-33 women are wonderful and super attractive and always have. I also know that they have way more stupid, useless ASD that makes men's lives a living hell during the first several dates, which is why it's so rare I bother to approach women that age, and why I tell men to stay far away from over-33 women if their goal is to get to sex as fast as possible. (Yes, there are always odd exceptions to the rule.)
Why do you identify “commitment” with “monogamy”? I know plenty of people do, just doesn’t make any sense to me… Committed = loyal, being there for the other, being an active member of the relationship… monogamy = having sex with just one person for a period of time… No?100% correct. Too many people (particularly women) confuse commitment with sexual monogamy. One has literally nothing to do with the other. Literally nothing! I know many men and women who are 100% committed to their spouses or live-in BFs/GFs but who get a little on the side now and again. It has nothing to do with their commitment to their partners. So stupid. More false Societal Programming.
WolfOfGeorgeStreet 2017-01-13 22:31:33
Indeed, indeed, this a cataclysm of Biblical proportions and we should all be as terrified of it as you are.Who said it was or that I was terrified of it? The original argument you made was that I was wrong for thinking Tinder isn't a representation of the larger dating market, I argue that as the largest dating app/site on earth it is a very good indication probably the best tool we have from which empirical data can be drawn in relation to dating. Nothing you said has refuted that point nor supported your own premise, the closest you got was a sad 'I can get laid without Tinder but can't get laid on Tinder, therefor it's not representative of anything' straw man. Now you've resorted to an ad hominem attack, painting me as some kind of loon that thinks the dating apocalypse is coming and is terrified of it. When again, I've never said that, only that it's becoming more time consuming (and thus by extension, more costly as time = money) to get the same results as only 2-3 years ago, and I believe it will continue to become more time consuming for an ever growing proportion of men, while simultaneously becoming easier, less time consuming and cheaper for a shrinking proportion of men.
JB 2017-01-14 04:52:52
Why do you identify “commitment” with “monogamy”? I know plenty of people do, just doesn’t make any sense to me… Committed = loyal, being there for the other, being an active member of the relationship… monogamy = having sex with just one person for a period of time… No?Thank you for the clarification, English is not my first language. I actually thought that commitment and mongamy were synonyms.
100% correct. Too many people (particularly women) confuse commitment with sexual monogamy. One has literally nothing to do with the other. Literally nothing! I know many men and women who are 100% committed to their spouses or live-in BFs/GFs but who get a little on the side now and again. It has nothing to do with their commitment to their partners. So stupid. More false Societal Programming.I whole heartedly agree that it is SP, I just didn't understand that commitment meant being there for each other and so on, I thought it referred specifically to sexual exclusivity. I'm very pair-bonded myself and even have a hard time labeling girls as FBs (which means that they rather become low-end MLTRs and LSNFTE me much quicker than had they been labeled FBs). However, I'm not monogamous (thanks to you). But I most certainly am there for my MLTRs, should they need it (which would be rare, since I usually have independents as high-end MLTRs).
Gil Galad 2017-01-14 05:07:30
@JB: one of BD's podcasts begins with an audio of a scene from Two and a Half Men, where a girl tries to coax "commitment" from Charlie Sheen (while they haven't even slept with each other yet) while equating it with sexual exclusivity. It's pretty hilarious; Charlie correctly concludes "So you want to be sexually exclusive....without the sex ?" Once you're familiar with this blog, the very concept of talking about "commitment" and implying "monogamy" becomes laughable. I'm committed to you, so I'm gonna make myself unhappy and frustrated so that you can be happy and satisfied (temporarily), because that's reciprocal love. Riiiight. Charlie's retort is gold: "Well if I give up on sex with other women...you...give up a kidney !"
To V or not to V 2017-01-14 13:34:11
In this article, BD explores the consequences of over-verbalizing the relationship structure by the man. In another one, he mentions a woman who suggests monogamy from the get-go. Recent experiences have enlightened me on this topic, even though what I encountered could well have been deduced from general principles. So I have two MLTRs now (also looking for a third girl, but I've decided to set a very high bar, so this search might take a while), and both seemed receptive to nonmonogamy. One even said "I know well I'm not the only one" on an early date, maybe even before we had sex, not sure (sex occurred on the 3rd date), another backed off from a BJ stating "hey, you're fooling around with other girls and I'm having unprotected oral sex with you" (after a very short lecture on STDs and a freeze-out, she performed the act, and was compliant since). Note: my former beta self wouldn't even dream of women assuming I were popular with other women! A logical conclusion would have been that I can be completely open. Instead, I kept following BD's rules. That proved wise. Later I found the first one unconscious next to the drawer where the second one keeps some stuff. When she awoke, she was in tears and declared she was contemplating leaving me due to inability to share me with someone else. Careful probing revealed, to my surprise, that this wasn't caused by the drawer, but rather by her accidental discovery of a sex toy elsewhere! (Good thing I made sure not to say anything like "don't be so upset by that drawer".) So the woman who declared support for nonmonogamy herself, faints upon seeing something that's most likely a leftover from an ex! (What would have happened had she seen the drawer, I wonder.) The Talk ensued, which went like this: "Am I not the only one?" "Do you insist I answer this?" "I do." "Well, to begin with, all I said to you is true and all promises I made I intend to keep. Also be sure that I'll take care of you and I won't do or say anything that would hurt you." I paused to contemplate wording. "That's all I want to hear. Don't say anything that would make me upset. I would be really hurt by that." I kissed her and promised to be discreet. Today, someone from her past found her and started making threats. Distraught, she seeked my company, but I was with MLTR2 and politely yet firmly denied the request. She showed up at my doorstep anyway, an act many here would deem a significant offense, though I chose to forgive it given the circumstances. This triggered The Talk with MLTR2, which went exactly according to BD's teachings, with some tears yet eventual acceptance (I seem to have talked more than BD recommends though). About an hour after she got home, she called me to say she wants to be with me, and expressed surprise that she feels drawn to me even stronger than before. My conclusion is that what women say and do is largely dictated by their emotions, which change all the time. And also preselection is definitely a thing. And also while the aforementioned principles are well known, it's so easy to fall into the trap of heeding a woman's words, then acting on those at a later time when the underlying emotions of hers have changed.
Joe K 2017-01-14 15:45:49
I have a solution to this conundrum (and it's how I live): Live a mobile lifestyle, travel a lot, have a hometown but only be there about half the time. Any request for exclusivity, which is unusual if she knows you're only around half the time -or- currently traveling, you just meet with "Well, I travel all the time, so..." Ultimately you have a result of MLTR's all over the globe and when you're back home, women don't see you in potential permanent provider mode. Similar to another commenter, unless the girl is really close to the borderline of being 'just decent enough looking to fuck', I tend to develop connections that are more than just "FB" in nature, wherever I am. I'm more of that archetype personality-wise, which is ok or at least I'm not gonna change that. But don't make the mistake that I've made - when you travel, connect with a girl and have sex with her a few nights, don't then stay in touch with her consistently after you leave the place. I did that twice within the past few months, honestly telling two different chicks (when they questioned me on it) "yeah, I'd like to travel back here sometime soon. Maybe we could reconnect then." That was fine to say, what was a clear mistake was then continuing to stay in touch with them a few times a week over text/mobile apps. Don't do that. When you're there, you're present and it's a hot connection. When you're about to travel there, you give her a heads up 1-2 weeks beforehand. Maybe you wish her happy birthday once a year (I have, even while in LTRs and was honest with ex's about it). But don't allow the beauty, ease and passion of a 'traveler's MLTR' to be ruined with regular communication. BTW, when you do say goodbye to these women you meet traveling, it's sad but in the least worst way possible - no hard feelings, no bitterness, genuine well wishes and all that good stuff.
JB 2017-01-15 09:49:45
@Gil Galad It's actually a really awesome conversation he has, and you're certainly right that it shows the difference between the two concepts (and the absurdity of comparing them). Thanks for a refresher! @To V or not to V The first MLTR relationships you have will involve some mistakes and a lot of emotions, and that's completely okay. It took BD years to learn and perfect this stuff, so even with the system laid out in front of you, you should expect some adjustments. It seems to me that you are VERY close with your MLTRs (which is perfectly fine if you have a strong need for pair-bonding). Have you by any chance broken the "Don't see each other more than once a week" rule? Usually, I wouldn't expect a MLTR to be at my place in case I wasn't home. In any event, if you pair bond a lot and are a fan of somewhat romantic gestures (letting your MLTR have "a drawer" at your place is boyfriend behavior), you'll have to expect a little more drama than usual. But it seems that you have a somewhat strong frame (THEY verbalize their knowledge of you not being monogamous), so maybe you can balance it out. Word of advice: Going for a 3rd MLTR is great, I personally always operate with 3 MLTRs. However, since you clearly already have two high-end MLTRs (I base this on the level they feel they are entitled to your time and comfort), you should probably aim to keep the 3rd one as a "low-end" one, as 3 high-ends take an incredible amount of energy, and most men (me included) do not have the capacity to "love" three people. Don't treat her like she's a high-end if she's not. And of course, congrats on your first nonmonogamous relationship(s)! I remember how amazed I was to see it in action.
Blackdragon 2017-01-15 10:40:10
I kept following BD’s rules. That proved wise.It usually does. 🙂
My conclusion is that what women say and do is largely dictated by their emotions, which change all the time.Yup.
it’s so easy to fall into the trap of heeding a woman’s words, then acting on those at a later time when the underlying emotions of hers have changed.Yup.
September Skye 2017-06-13 18:36:38
No sex even on the fifth date - I'm astounded a woman would go that far. In my experience almost all women stop dating after the first date, or sometimes the second, if they don't want to have sex. Having dated well over a hundred women I can only think of one who kept stringing me along many times with no sex. And another who I saw four times, I think, with no sex. Back then I was still AFC enough to go along with it. But those were exceptions. Do women know a man expects sex if the dating is to go on for more than a few times? I think so. But do they think this expectation is fair?