FACEBOOK has been the death of me!

[dsade]

I don't see how you can dissagree ther eare primitive instincts at play, then say there are primitive instincts...

And Im not blaming anything on anything. I do not have anything to cop-out of.
I basicly set a stage when natural human needs/wants/instincs struggle against modern norms and expectations of society

I don't think anyone is disagreeing that there are primitive urges at play...only what we, as supposedly evolved creatures, choose to allow. Again, should a nonviolent child molestor (blah blah NAMBLA blah consent from a 12 year old blah) be allowed to exercise his urges?

Second, there is no such thing as Society...only individuals...and it comes down to what you expect of yourself as an individual, and how you define yourself. Do you truthfully define yourself as a ying, cheating bastard with the excuse that you are just living your urges? Do you admit that your urges control you, and that you completely lack self-control?

It alll comes down to identity, and what you want yourself to become...and the fact that a lot of these people completely LIE to themselves and others in order to put up a front, while being complete scumbags in reality...which means their lives are shams.

 

[ReaperX]

The first part I bolded, means ALL the difference.
When there is SHARRED wealfare, such as a house, kids, money, then you have a reasonable EXPECTATION for her to remain faithfull,.. although, it never is a guarentee against someone sleepin around.

I took the context of modern "relationships" out, leaving it to basicly human interactions (so no marriges, contracts or whatever)

Secondly, don't come off sounding dissapointed that I made people out to be people. We don't resemble cavemen. We (modern man) has 3 parts to our brains, as opposed to just one-ish (reptillian part, primitive responses, communicated into action via emotions). But we still have many of those primitive responses hardwired into our brains , as you so point out as well.
I don't see how you can dissagree ther eare primitive instincts at play, then say there are primitive instincts...

They are primative instincts, and as the same time primative aspects of ourselves. They are just exactly that. The evolution of man has given us a better rational to differentiate between primative instincts and modern day rational. The way you clump the 2 aspects together is very misguided.


Primative instincts are solely in the background of our decision making. The expectation of being in a relationship still holds true that it is to be a faithful one. I gotta ask why anyone would even get in one that they knew might be unfaithful ?

These expectations that you are talking about are actually part of what we have developed in our brains called 'critical reasoning'. Through this 'critical reasoning' if we had the potential expectation that someone would be unfaithful, we'd never date them in the first place.

Primative instincts have a guiding factor towards how we REACT, however they do not determine our actions....at all. This is done intentionally through critical reasoning, not impulses.

 

[xtraflossy]

In addition, if you really want to compare apples to apples, it would be saying that it is ok to kill someone today because of 'hunting instincts'.

I suppose you just did.
Excepting hunting was an instinct used for eating.

look- what I am saying, is that if you take away law, and take away preconceptions, and influence, and everything else, who's to say whats wrong, or right?

I certinly don't think I would feel badly, or say it was wrong if I killed someone who tried to steal my winter's supply of whateverthehell. That is a case where YES, sure, it's OK.

If I walked over to random person X and just blew his head off, then that's "wrong"...

If I take out the leader of Planet A and take over as their ruler, and make possitive changes,.. who's to say what that is really..

Each had the same act, but different contexts.
If you remove the contexts, you have only an action/response

I removed contexts from the relationship post to compare apples to apples.

 

[dsade]

I suppose you just did.
Excepting hunting was an instinct used for eating.

look- what I am saying, is that if you take away law, and take away preconceptions, and influence, and everything else, who's to say whats wrong, or right?

I certinly don't think I would feel badly, or say it was wrong if I killed someone who tried to steal my winter's supply of whateverthehell. That is a case where YES, sure, it's OK.

If I walked over to random person X and just blew his head off, then that's "wrong"...

If I take out the leader of Planet A and take over as their ruler, and make possitive changes,.. who's to say what that is really..

Each had the same act, but different contexts.
If you remove the contexts, you have only an action/response

I removed contexts from the relationship post to compare apples to apples.

Where do you think these laws, preconceptions, etc arose from? A vacuum?

Why do you suppose that infidelity is almost universally frowned upon, just like killing, etc.....it is because as humans EVOLVED we see the damage done and the overall negative consequences of continuing to behave like an immature, idiotic gorilla.

So let me guess....without laws you would go ahead and kill/rape/maim/cannibalize? This would be more of a statement of who YOU are, not a universal of the state of man.

I would recommend reading Lord of the Flies.

 

[ReaperX]

I suppose you just did.
Excepting hunting was an instinct used for eating.

look- what I am saying, is that if you take away law, and take away preconceptions, and influence, and everything else, who's to say whats wrong, or right?

I certinly don't think I would feel badly, or say it was wrong if I killed someone who tried to steal my winter's supply of whateverthehell. That is a case where YES, sure, it's OK.

If I walked over to random person X and just blew his head off, then that's "wrong"...

If I take out the leader of Planet A and take over as their ruler, and make possitive changes,.. who's to say what that is really..

Each had the same act, but different contexts.
If you remove the contexts, you have only an action/response

I removed contexts from the relationship post to compare apples to apples.

This is correct and applies to animals other than humans because they do not have the ability to 'think' per se.

I don't disagree in the action/response, because that is correct.

Humans are an exception to this because we have the ability for 'critical reasoning'. I would almost go as far as saying that to a certain degree that the action/response is not valid b/c we have the ability to add 'rational' into that mixture.

 

[xtraflossy]

As women no longer take the role as a 'house wife' and are becoming more and more self-sufficient, I feel that this has had a correlation to the infidelity within relationships as well.

Sorta like a bltch saying to her man 'F.uck you, I can take care of myself.' Anyone agree ?


One of the things that has always been a mystery that I've wanted to know is why women have an attraction towards negative aspects from a man ? Women always say 'I date guys who treat me like shlt.' or when women always go after the guy who is a jerk vs. the guy who is nice.


Personally, I credit this due to a synergistic combination of: lack of rational+immaturity+stupidity

This is TOTALLY the case.
You no longer NEED a man to provide, and it is becomming more common with the rise of single mothers.

Women have attraction towards men who are *******s becasue there are elements that are attractive to the more primitive portions of the brain. Simply the fact you don't need her, significes that you have other choices in females (preselection is HUGE in attraction) and that you are self sufficiant, which insures survivability.

There are more, but I HARDLY ever see a more logical / masculine woman stuck in the "He treats me sh!t but I won't leave him" loop.

It seems to be mostly in the more "feminem" type women, who are guided more on emotions then logical throught in matters of the heart.

 

[ReaperX]

This is TOTALLY the case.
You no longer NEED a man to provide, and it is becomming more common with the rise of single mothers.

Women have attraction towards men who are *******s becasue there are elements that are attractive to the more primitive portions of the brain. Simply the fact you don't need her, significes that you have other choices in females (preselection is HUGE in attraction) and that you are self sufficiant, which insures survivability.

There are more, but I HARDLY ever see a more logical / masculine woman stuck in the "He treats me sh!t but I won't leave him" loop.

It seems to be mostly in the more "feminem" type women, who are guided more on emotions then logical throught in matters of the heart.

I think there is some type of weird 'pleasure' almost gained due to the whole 'chasing' thing. I think this applies to both men and women, but we are inclined to always want the best. For some women this must trigger off some type of rational that a guy who treats her like shlt must be 'better' and because he is so 'hard to obtain' this must mean that he is 'superior' to other men. This is one aspect that I have never understood, but it is very odd how applicable it is to many women today.

 

[crader]

Originally Posted by ReaperX
As women no longer take the role as a 'house wife' and are becoming more and more self-sufficient, I feel that this has had a correlation to the infidelity within relationships as well.

Sorta like a bltch saying to her man 'F.uck you, I can take care of myself.' Anyone agree ?


One of the things that has always been a mystery that I've wanted to know is why women have an attraction towards negative aspects from a man ? Women always say 'I date guys who treat me like shlt.' or when women always go after the guy who is a jerk vs. the guy who is nice.


Personally, I credit this due to a synergistic combination of: lack of rational+immaturity+stupidity


Well then I ask of you how many of you guys ended up dating a woman that was no good for you , yet you stayed. I see it on the boards all the time. Pot calling the kettle black?

We don't all stay, we want a good relationship. Not because we NEED a guy, but because we enjoy our mates company and love. Male or female we all can be blinded by the want and hope that our mate loves us enough for things to get better. So we stay until it is proven that things won't change and the day to day emotional hurt isn't worth it.

 

[dsade]

I think there is some type of weird 'pleasure' almost gained due to the whole 'chasing' thing. I think this applies to both men and women, but we are inclined to always want the best. For some women this must trigger off some type of rational that a guy who treats her like shlt must be 'better' and because he is so 'hard to obtain' this must mean that he is 'superior' to other men. This is one aspect that I have never understood, but it is very odd how applicable it is to many women today.

There are parts of the brain that are stimulated only through novel experiences, and it triggers the dopaminergic system to crave reward...through release of dopamine, of course.

 

[ReaperX]

This is a slight deviation from the topic, but also what irritates me is how women are still portrayed as 'victims' in relationships. I think MAYBE back in the day when the woman was the uneducated housewife that this may have been applicable, but today women are equally capable to hurting men in the same fashion.

I know that 'society' predisposed view is that men are masculine and mean, and women are kind and emotional, when recently I see an even balance between the 2.

My friend who is a guy called me up about being burned by some girl he was talking to and committed a lot of time to. It sucks too because he is a good and genuine person and just met some wrong girl who screwed him over.

I can admit that there is a even balance between the 2 genders in terms of 'burning' each other, but atleast what I still feel is that the 'man' is essentally the 'bad guy' because he is a 'pimp, player, whatev.'

lol, I also want to add that this is not a self-pity post type of thing that you'd see at bb.com, it is an observation....haha

 

[crader]

This is a slight deviation from the topic, but also what irritates me is how women are still portrayed as 'victims' in relationships. I think MAYBE back in the day when the woman was the uneducated housewife that this may have been applicable, but today women are equally capable to hurting men in the same fashion.

I know that 'society' predisposed view is that men are masculine and mean, and women are kind and emotional, when recently I see an even balance between the 2.

My friend who is a guy called me up about being burned by some girl he was talking to and committed a lot of time to. It sucks too because he is a good and genuine person and just met some wrong girl who screwed him over.

I can admit that there is a even balance between the 2 genders in terms of 'burning' each other, but atleast what I still feel is that the 'man' is essentally the 'bad guy' because he is a 'pimp, player, whatev.'

lol, I also want to add that this is not a self-pity post type of thing that you'd see at bb.com, it is an observation....haha

Well thats because you are seeing it from your personal experience. I myself have been grilled before relationships on my character because of what a woman has done to a guy. So it works both ways equally. You see it most from your own perspective!

 

[ReaperX]

In addition, I still beleive (statistically anyway) that the odds are in the favor of a guy meeting an awesome woman instead of vice versa, due to the predisposed personality/female inclinations.

 

[xtraflossy]

I think there is some type of weird 'pleasure' almost gained due to the whole 'chasing' thing. I think this applies to both men and women, but we are inclined to always want the best. For some women this must trigger off some type of rational that a guy who treats her like shlt must be 'better' and because he is so 'hard to obtain' this must mean that he is 'superior' to other men. This is one aspect that I have never understood, but it is very odd how applicable it is to many women today.

Here's something that I found.. (Its a translation, so some of the wording is off)
Women who were caught by dishonest womanizer often tell the following:"Yes, I understand that he lies to me, that all his nice and tender words are lie but I cannot do anything with me!" This is an example of highly primative behavior. Subconsciousness, realizing instinctive marital ritual, neither can reason by itself nor is interested in opinion of mind. The main thing for it is the match with template. And when it matches the feelings start working with all the cylinders firing! Trusting her mind, low-primative woman will not be caught in this trap - primeval sorcery might not affect her.
http://www.geocities.com/protopop_1999/treatise.html#M5


Its JUST like pheromones in a way.. Certin behaviours resembelibng something trigger a response.
Rational thought plays NO part in the part of the primitive brain, so it can not be reasoned with.
It's hardwired, and like most things dealing with attraction, don't make LOGICAL sense

 

[dsade]

Its JUST like pheromones in a way.. Certin behaviours resembelibng something trigger a response.
Rational thought plays NO part in the part of the primitive brain, so it can not be reasoned with.
It's hardwired, and like most things dealing with attraction, don't make LOGICAL sense

Nobody is arguing that they don't, though I will make the argument that once you progress high enough in the evolutionary pathway, you no longer desire cheap meaningless thrill...however, you keep mistaking urge for action.

 

[xtraflossy]

In addition, I still beleive (statistically anyway) that the odds are in the favor of a guy meeting an awesome woman instead of vice versa, due to the predisposed personality/female inclinations.

If you knew exactly how everything happens, the magic is reuined.

I jsut except everything is chremical. I let chance take over from there.

 

[dsade]

If you knew exactly how everything happens, the magic is reuined.

I jsut except everything is chremical. I let chance take over from there.

Magic is overrated. There is no Santa Claus.

 

[ReaperX]

Here's something that I found.. (Its a translation, so some of the wording is off)
Women who were caught by dishonest womanizer often tell the following:"Yes, I understand that he lies to me, that all his nice and tender words are lie but I cannot do anything with me!" This is an example of highly primative behavior. Subconsciousness, realizing instinctive marital ritual, neither can reason by itself nor is interested in opinion of mind. The main thing for it is the match with template. And when it matches the feelings start working with all the cylinders firing! Trusting her mind, low-primative woman will not be caught in this trap - primeval sorcery might not affect her.
http://www.geocities.com/protopop_1999/treatise.html#M5


Its JUST like pheromones in a way.. Certin behaviours resembelibng something trigger a response.
Rational thought plays NO part in the part of the primitive brain, so it can not be reasoned with.
It's hardwired, and like most things dealing with attraction, don't make LOGICAL sense

Attraction is more of a different area, but what about our actions though ? This is the part that greatly differs from person to person.


If a woman is in a relationship with a man who is abusive what happens ? Some women are so psychologically committed to a guy who is abusive emotionally/physically, but they also are under some type of delusion about what the relationship is. Also too, they probably have a lot of personal issues (i.e. self-esteem, identity crisis, etc).

But, there have been many, many, many women in situtations like these of different magnitudes. On the flip side of the coin some women gather the strength to leave the guy and make it on her own.

The circumstances are very similar, and I'm sure the emotions have a huge overlay as well, but each person determines their own outcome.

 

[Dr Packenwood]

Magic is overrated. There is no Santa Claus.

:jaw: care to tell me who watches me when I sleep then?

I'm thinking its The Flying Spaghetti Monsters cousin, The Invisible Chicken.

 

[dsade]

:jaw: care to tell me who watches me when I sleep then?

Or it could be....ME!!

SCREECH SCREECH SCREECH!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Dr Packenwood]

Or it could be....ME!!

SCREECH SCREECH SCREECH!!!!!!!!!!!!

You're the Invisible Chicken?

 

[dsade]

You're the Invisible Chicken?

You going to try to choke me?

GET BOK TO WHERE YOU ONCE BELONGED....BOK BOK

 

[ReaperX]

Anyways, from my own personal experience, the way the dynamics of 2 people need to be basically exact for a relationship to work out does not really make me optimistic about the whole 'soulmates' thing. This extends past marriage, because as well all know, people cheat in marriage, and people divorce.

It is not that I am 'jaded' by past experience, however, it seems like the statistics are in the odds of relationships not working out.

 

[xtraflossy]

Attraction is more of a different area, but what about our actions though ? This is the part that greatly differs from person to person.


If a woman is in a relationship with a man who is abusive what happens ? Some women are so psychologically committed to a guy who is abusive emotionally/physically, but they also are under some type of delusion about what the relationship is. Also too, they probably have a lot of personal issues (i.e. self-esteem, identity crisis, etc).

But, there have been many, many, many women in situtations like these of different magnitudes. On the flip side of the coin some women gather the strength to leave the guy and make it on her own.

The circumstances are very similar, and I'm sure the emotions have a huge overlay as well, but each person determines their own outcome.

Well, attraction triggers the parts of the brain that arn't capable of thought, and there are MANY ACTIONS that trigger attraction.
Emotion only plays into the equation becasue that is how communication happened before spoken language.

You have to remember though, females are MUCH more perceptive to body language then males are, normally.

Honestly, self esteme DOES play into this to a great extent also.. A low self-esteme woman will be more likey to fall to this trap of staying, while a high self esteme woman will be more likely not to.

A low self esteme woman will have more of a need for validation then the high self esteme woman will have (from external sources) - this applies to males as well.

I beleive it's a deservedness thing too. A HSE will have higher standards for herself, while a LSE will feel in a strange way that they deserve this abuse.
But that doesn't have to do with being more of high primitive mind.

Combine low self esteme, with high primitive mind i na woman, and you usually have one that will treat you well, like gold, when you treat her badly, and will treat you badly when you treat her like a princess (this is to get you treatin her like she feels she deserves to be treated. This is classic "Freak" 101)

These women will also leave you if you DO treat them too good, as bad as it sounds, becasue they will self sabatoge the relationship unconciously (I hope ) until their guilt of "Your too good for me" is gone. I have had this happen.


God, oh the crap that will ensue this post I can hear it now, how Im this and that... lol. I'm not making things up, Im simply reporting observed behaviour. I didn't create it

 

[ReaperX]

Well, attraction triggers the parts of the brain that arn't capable of thought, and there are MANY ACTIONS that trigger attraction.
Emotion only plays into the equation becasue that is how communication happened before spoken language.

You have to remember though, females are MUCH more perceptive to body language then males are, normally.

Honestly, self esteme DOES play into this to a great extent also.. A low self-esteme woman will be more likey to fall to this trap of staying, while a high self esteme woman will be more likely not to.

A low self esteme woman will have more of a need for validation then the high self esteme woman will have (from external sources) - this applies to males as well.

I beleive it's a deservedness thing too. A HSE will have higher standards for herself, while a LSE will feel in a strange way that they deserve this abuse.
But that doesn't have to do with being more of high primitive mind.

Combine low self esteme, with high primitive mind i na woman, and you usually have one that will treat you well, like gold, when you treat her badly, and will treat you badly when you treat her like a princess (this is to get you treatin her like she feels she deserves to be treated. This is classic "Freak" 101)

These women will also leave you if you DO treat them too good, as bad as it sounds, becasue they will self sabatoge the relationship unconciously (I hope ) until their guilt of "Your too good for me" is gone. I have had this happen.


God, oh the crap that will ensue this post I can hear it now, how Im this and that... lol. I'm not making things up, Im simply reporting observed behaviour. I didn't create it

1. If you are a cop and your partner/friend is killed, and later on you confront the guy, the emotion anger is probably overwhelleming you, but at the same time there is a voluntary action not to shoot him per se, due to the legality behind it. This is an example where emotion is supressed (although still there), but self-control is maintained and so are one's actions.

2. When people have emotional and mental problems, the rational and their decision making is 'distorted'. Personally, I would classify these people as 'sick and not well.' You have to understand that just because a woman leaves a relationship does not mean that it was out of primative instinct.

It IS possible that the relationship just wasn't working out and it is over. However, when a woman is essentially confronted with 'temptation' there is a voluntary decision that occurs on what to do.

 

[xtraflossy]

Anyways, from my own personal expierence, the way the dynamics of 2 people need to be basically exact for a relationship to work out does not really make me optimistic about the whole 'soulmates' thing. This extends past marriage, because as well all know, people cheat in marriage, and people divorce.

It is not that I am 'jaded' by past experience, however, it seems like the statistics are in the odds of relationships not working out.

There are to many things to explain here about what keeps relationships intact, but an eaqule 50/50 relationship is rarely one of them.
They can be close though.

I know this goes against what Cosmo preaches about relationships, but in most cases, this is true.
This does not mean you can not have a loving relationship to someone, totally commited and happy.

Soulmates, is an ideal. The problem is, given enough time, it will fade. You need to be lucky enough to have that time, last as long as you live.

I hear ya man,.. I too (as hard as it is to tell) have many of the same hopes. I'm a hopeless romantic at heart..
I want true love, my soalmate, happily ever after...
Call it what you want, but nature DOES create people that if they were put together, would be perfectly happy... its rare, becasue if everyone found their soalmate, all the bennifits from sexual diversity would deminish, and surviva lis a numbers game in large part :frustrate

 

[crader]

2. When people have emotional and mental problems, the rational and their decision making is 'distorted'. Personally, I would classify these people as 'sick and not well.' You have to understand that just because a woman leaves a relationship does not mean that it was out of primative instinct.

It IS possible that the relationship just wasn't working out and it is over. However, when a woman is essentially confronted with 'temptation' there is a voluntary decision that occurs on what to do.

And that is what seperates good people and good partners from the bad. The ability to be honest on where a relationship is heading and your intent in it.

 

[ReaperX]

There are to many things to explain here about what keeps relationships intact, but an eaqule 50/50 relationship is rarely one of them.
They can be close though.

I know this goes against what Cosmo preaches about relationships, but in most cases, this is true.
This does not mean you can not have a loving relationship to someone, totally commited and happy.

Soulmates, is an ideal. The problem is, given enough time, it will fade. You need to be lucky enough to have that time, last as long as you live.

I hear ya man,.. I too (as hard as it is to tell) have many of the same hopes. I'm a hopeless romantic at heart..
I want true love, my soalmate, happily ever after...
Call it what you want, but nature DOES create people that if they were put together, would be perfectly happy... its rare, becasue if everyone found their soalmate, all the bennifits from sexual diversity would deminish, and surviva lis a numbers game in large part :frustrate

This is what I tell other people who have came across the same scenario above:

Even if you are single/alone, it is better to be single/alone than it is to be with someone who is not right for you.

I can admit that I might have an 'overly ideal' distorted view of what relationships are supposed to be like, but at the same time they are still my expectations, and unfortunately the 'real world examples' greatly imply otherwise.

 

[xtraflossy]

1. If you are a cop and your partner/friend is killed, and later on you confront the guy, the emotion anger is probably overwhelleming you, but at the same time there is a voluntary action not to shoot him per se, due to the legality behind it. This is an example where emotion is supressed (although still there), but self-control is maintained and so are one's actions.

2. When people have emotional and mental problems, the rational and their decision making is 'distorted'. Personally, I would classify these people as 'sick and not well.' You have to understand that just because a woman leaves a relationship does not mean that it was out of primative instinct.

It IS possible that the relationship just wasn't working out and it is over. However, when a woman is essentially confronted with 'temptation' there is a voluntary decision that occurs on what to do.

First, you don't have it hardwired to kill someone. you DO have it to reproduce.
It's hardwired to compete though.

Leagaly, we have a thing called "in the heat of the moment" where thinking is distorted.. like you say.
I am not suggesting that it is uncontrollable by any means, but we acknowlage the power of emotions, and we have done so within out own law. To say that everyone can controll their actions, at all times, regardles sof the time we have to expirence them is rediculas, except for Dsade, casue he's the man :afro:


Both sexes will expirence the temptation
Take X level of temptation, and apply it to a field of people. Each person has a different level of "tolerence" to it. Some handel it better then others, for some, that level is too much to resist. It varies with everything to setting, hormone levels at the time, direction of the wind, what I had for breakfast, how Washington is playing this year...

 

[ReaperX]

First, you don't have it hardwired to kill someone. you DO have it to reproduce.
It's hardwired to compete though.

Leagaly, we have a thing called "in the heat of the moment" where thinking is distorted.. like you say.
I am not suggesting that it is uncontrollable by any means, but we acknowlage the power of emotions, and we have done so within out own law. To say that everyone can controll their actions, at all times, regardles sof the time we have to expirence them is rediculas, except for Dsade, casue he's the man :afro:


Both sexes will expirence the temptation
Take X level of temptation, and apply it to a field of people. Each person has a different level of "tolerence" to it. Some handel it better then others, for some, that level is too much to resist. It varies with everything to setting, hormone levels at the time, direction of the wind, what I had for breakfast, how Washington is playing this year...

This is correct and that's what makes each person unique.

The cop killing thing is probably a bad analogy b/c the pure voluntary action is intentional but also too backed by legalities as well.

 

[xtraflossy]

And that is what seperates good people and good partners from the bad. The ability to be honest on where a relationship is heading and your intent in it.

It is VERY important to screen the kind of partner you are with when considering a long term realationship.

It's also important to know yourself, what keeps you interested, how much of whatever can you handle so that you don't get "bored" but not be taken for a total mindphuck.

This is why we don't marry the first thing that comes along.

Oddly enough (at least to me), I tend to attract mostly the good girl type. Or at least, the ones that have proven to me through their actions that they can handle - ... lol, the ones I REALLy fall for, and the ones that completely fall for me I shall say, for a lack of a more polite way to say it.
Are extreamly feminem, respond well to my leadership, are are not High-primitive, but low to mid primitive range I guess.
That's great, becasue that's what I like

Knowing yourself, and screening well, or knowing what to look for, makes for the chances of having something really special. .....I suppose, ideally, so special I would refer to her as my soalmate. ...

 

[xtraflossy]

This is what I tell other people who have came across the same scenario above:

Even if you are single/alone, it is better to be single/alone than it is to be with someone who is not right for you.

I can admit that I might have an 'overly ideal' distorted view of what relationships are supposed to be like, but at the same time they are still my expectations, and unfortunately the 'real world examples' greatly imply otherwise.

It's a lonley feeling to realize the world doesn't owe you sh!t.
There is no "the way it should be", just the way it is, unless you change it yourself.

As humans, we don't want to be alone. It's fine to hold on to ideals. But when the ideals begin to shape your world in a negative way, it's time to rethink exactly what those ideals are, and why.

lol- Ive hijacked long enough.
ReaperX, I must spread the love, before I can luv up on you again

 

[Nabisco]

Any of you gentlemen ever read "The Game"? I'm just curious because a lot of the stuff you are debating is addressed throughout the book.

 

[ReaperX]

It's a lonley feeling to realize the world doesn't owe you sh!t.
There is no "the way it should be", just the way it is, unless you change it yourself.

As humans, we don't want to be alone. It's fine to hold on to ideals. But when the ideals begin to shape your world in a negative way, it's time to rethink exactly what those ideals are, and why.

lol- Ive hijacked long enough.
ReaperX, I must spread the love, before I can luv up on you again

This is kind of along those lines, but more of 'There are no guarantees in life'. Meaning 'finding the one', or something even as simple as 'living to see tommorow'.

 

[Australian made]

i leave work, go to the gym, come home and discover my rant about Facebook has turned into 5 pages of relationship philosophy............i think i agree with ReaperX on most things here. It kinda seems like we've both been burnt similarly by women in the past.

There's no right or wrong. answer but Flossy you do have some far out ideas here i must say

 

[xtraflossy]

Any of you gentlemen ever read "The Game"? I'm just curious because a lot of the stuff you are debating is addressed throughout the book.

A couple years ago..

You have to realize that its mainly entertainment, not to be used as a guide for pick up really.

There are much better for reads for that. But I enjoyed reading it. It's definately interesting

 

[xtraflossy]

i leave work, go to the gym, come home and discover my rant about Facebook has turned into 5 pages of relationship philosophy............i think i agree with ReaperX on most things here. It kinda seems like we've both been burnt similarly by women in the past.

There's no right or wrong. answer but Flossy you do have some far out ideas here i must say

Interesting point though, MUCH of what I say, is backed by scientific (well, hard AND soft sciences) research, pieced together.

I spent over a year actually testing these things myself.
Females happen to be a hobby of mine (social dynamics n such)ose:

But I agree. It IS far out. And it was not too long ago I didn't beleive a word of it. It didnt make any logival sense then.

I don't expect it to be taken to.
But Ive discoved much about my real self in the process.

 

[ReaperX]

Any of you gentlemen ever read "The Game"? I'm just curious because a lot of the stuff you are debating is addressed throughout the book.

I have never heard of it before.


I used to be a councelor awhile back through a group and I dealt a lot with relationships and the mechanisms. I believe it is more important to understand them than to try and 'control' them per se.

 

[Nabisco]

I agree xtraflossy, it was a good read and nothing more. And yes there is much better material out there if you want to become more in control of situations with the opposite sex, I just noticed that in some of your arguements I've seen material utilizing the same theories. Just a thought.

ReaperX its a book about the author joining an underground movement across the web teaching guys to become Pick Up Artists. A worthwhile read, and some pretty wild stories.

 

[dsade]

ReaperX its a book about the author joining an underground movement across the web teaching guys to become Pick Up Artists. A worthwhile read, and some pretty wild stories.

Hence why this country is going to ****, and the reason Americans are considered idiots by most of the world.

Hey, don't worry about trying to solve society's problems, don't worry about making society better...just spend your time and effort learning how to scumbagishly manipulate women in order to use them.

 

[MashedPotato]

Hence why this country is going to ****, and the reason Americans are considered idiots by most of the world.

Hey, don't worry about trying to solve society's problems, don't worry about making society better...just spend your time and effort learning how to scumbagishly manipulate women in order to use them.

Couldnt agree more,....:hammer: couldnt agree more....

 

[MashedPotato]

Yeah, I hate scumbags. I have respect for women.

Says it all really:

Personally I dont see how anyone can "justify" using women or cheating. Its like justifying someone looking a kiddie porn...."ughh its my biological instinct to reproduce. Just cus its illegal now, it wasnt before we became a "civilized"* society, so that means its ok"....

*debatable.

 

[MashedPotato]

Haha wow that billboard is classic!

I know lol. Shame she didnt include his number and we could give him a call..

 

[xtraflossy]

Hence why this country is going to ****, and the reason Americans are considered idiots by most of the world.

Hey, don't worry about trying to solve society's problems, don't worry about making society better...just spend your time and effort learning how to scumbagishly manipulate women in order to use them.

Like everything else, you can abuse and missuse information.

There is a lot of information to be obtained. Personally, none of the stuff I have come accross is used tocontroll women in a negative mannor. It's used to build attraction, based fundamentally on an understanding of how sexuality has evolved/ biology and becomming a better person.

I'm also sure you see no problem in advertising either, as that is the CORE of it,.. understanding what makes people tick, and minipulating them to buy your product. ...Same as in learning how to become a sucessfull salesman, and negoiations, ...

I have told only a few women about this, and they all share my views and wish more men would take such in interest in making a woman happy.
Always leave her better off then when you found her.. I don't think that philosophy is damaging to society.

If you choose to only focous on the negative aspects of everything, the world does start to look like sh!t

Of course, you can use it strictly to get laid, quiet effectivly, but that intention is strictly based on the person using it.

 

[xtraflossy]

Yeah, I hate scumbags. I have respect for women.

lol- I look up and I see "Trips momma isa good lay" beside your pic

I know its in fun though :dance:

 

[MashedPotato]

lol- I look up and I see "Trips momma isa good lay" beside your pic

QUOTE]

lol that is pretty funny though

 

[Nabisco]

Dsade, I think you completely misunderstand what "The Game" is about and completely misunderstood my post. They don't learn how to manipulate women, they learn what makes them tick so that normal frustrated GOOD guys can get past all the bull**** women throw up and actually meet girls. There will always be people who abuse it, Power corrupts. But the benefits for the socially inept are definitely worth it. Think of Will Smith in the movie Hitch...as sappy as it got, thats what learning about women and situations does. Allows you to get past the societal (sp?) barriers and MEET women. Not how to fvck whoever you can. Perhaps take the time to read the book, you'd be surprised.

 

[Australian made]

sounds like a good read.....amazon :type:

I had a friend tell me about a book he'd read on picking up women. I thought it sounded kinda sleazy. I always thought i'd rather just meet a women the old fashioned way without and tricks, just being myself. But i see your point. I'm looking it up now.

 

[ReaperX]

I wonder why the integrity and respect is so low ? Does everyone agree with me on this ?

I was driving to work this morning and there was this common story of a guy doing his wife and some other girl at the same time. I was astounded though because the wife found out about the other girl, and sorta became friends in a really weird way.

Then they both got together and called the husband while he was at work. The wife started bltching him out and since the other girl was in the same room as her started going off on him at the same time.

The thing was this was all broadcasted. I was listening to this relationship dilemma on my morning drive to work.

 

[natedogg]

lol. When I lived in SC I used to listen to a show called The Rise Guys Morning Show. The setup was a man or woman would call in to the station with suspicions that their significant other was cheating on them. So what these guys would do is call this person’s bf/gf/spouse posing as a florist. They would offer to send a dozen red roses to a person of their choice for free. Sometimes they would have the roses sent to their bf/gf/spouse. But things really got interesting when they sent it to their bf/gf on the side. That’s when sh!t really hit the fan. I don’t know how many times I listened to couples going back and forth over the radio. I thought it was the funniest thing, albeit a bit fvcked up.

 

[ReaperX]

lol. When I lived in SC I used to listen to a show called The Rise Guys Morning Show. The setup was a man or woman would call in to the station with suspicions that their significant other was cheating on them. So what these guys would do is call this person’s bf/gf/spouse posing as a florist. They would offer to send a dozen red roses to a person of their choice for free. Sometimes they would have the roses sent to their bf/gf/spouse. But things really got interesting when they sent it to their bf/gf on the side. That’s when sh!t really hit the fan. I don’t know how many times I listened to couples going back and forth over the radio. I thought it was the funniest thing, albeit a bit fvcked up.

Yeah actually that was it right there. The Rise Guys Morning Show. I don't live in SC, but I listen to it in the morning along with the Russ Par ? something like that.