Thursday, September 25, 2014

Alpha Mail: too slow, sport

A reader hasn't learned the Window of Opportunity concept yet:
I got burned by a chick today. Met her a week ago at a well known clothing store.  I had to buy an article of clothing as the one I had was starting to fall apart.  She suggested some articles, we found one that worked.  Then she asked, "Is there anything else your little heart desires?"  She asked the same thing two days later after helping me.  She asked what I was doing afterwards and I told her nothing (I was a bit slow on the uptake).  I asked her and she said she was going to watch some shows on Netflix. 

Fast forward to two days later I go back for another sale they're having and to ask her out.  She formally introduces herself.  I never tell her my name (though she could look it up due to me being a preferred customer).  We joke for a bit and I ask her what her plans are.  She's hanging out with friends afterwards (not going to get into specifics but it was a closed get together).  Should've asked her for a future date out but didn't. 

The following day I go into get some shoes.  Someone else helped me out BUT she made a point to come over and talk to me.  We weren't alone long enough for me to ask her out.

I get a call today, the shoes are in.  I go over there and although someone else greets me at the store, she, basically, jumps in and  asks what I need.  We shoot the breeze again and I ask her out for a beer.  It turns out she has a boyfriend and she doesn't think he'd look too highly on that.  I made a comment to the effect of, "Well, that's a shame."  As I'm leaving, she smiles and says, "Goodbye!" followed by my name. 

Now, I've asked several friends, including two of whom are women, their take on the situation.  One called this chick out for flirting with me even though she has a boyfriend.  The other, disappointingly (as I believed she would've called her out too) said I could've found out she was taken a week ago and then hastily added, "but I'm sorry."

Per the hierarchy, I think I'm a low beta or high delta.  I can tell you that sixteen months ago I wouldn't have ever thought of asking someone out like her or even have known how to joke around.  I credit you, Tomassi, Dalrock, and DG for that.  So thanks one and all.  Also, I'm in my late 20's.  Are there any real generational gaps I should be aware of vis-a-vis women?  What are your and the readers' thoughts on her?  Additionally, did I move too slowly?
First, let's get things straight. You're a delta. Your behavior was about as conventionally delta as it is possible to be. A woman sent you clear signals of interest, with a mild spice of challenging contempt, and you failed the test about as flawlessly as possible. The clear sign of the delta: waiting for permission and encouragement to approach.

Second, she is a flirt and she's seeking dominant men. Her repetitive use of the phrase "little heart" is intentionally belittling. Any time a woman uses a term like that and the first phrase out of your mouth doesn't involve "massive tool" or "giant penis", you've lost. The correct Alpha response would be something on the order of "my little heart is good but my giant penis thinks we should go for drinks when you get off". Never let a woman saddle you with a deprecating term without reframing. It's very simple: whatever term they use, apply the opposite.

Of course, men of sufficiently high socio-sexual status can play the opposite game. I was once in the gym doing shoulder press with two 80-pound dumbbells, thereby inspiring a gym bunny to call out: "Geez, what are you compensating for?" I didn't interrupt the set, but immediately called back "very small penis!" which cracked her and everyone else up.

Third, you're missing the point. She may or may not have a boyfriend, (although if she is pretty she has a few orbiters on the string at the very least), but she was potentially looking to trade up. Hypergamy dictates that girls with boyfriends are often going to flirt with men they think might be a better deal. If you can't deal with that, then go find a woman who is 1 or 2 points below you in attractiveness and content yourself with her being loyal, faithful, and true. Any girlfriend who perceives herself as being at or above your level is going to occasionally flirt with the idea of trading you in. That's not because she's an unfaithful slut unworthy of your protection and manly chivalry, it's because she is a woman and that is what women do.

Fourth, in case it isn't clear by now, yes, you moved far too slowly. Stop looking for "the right moment". The right moment is always NOW. Women have windows of opportunity, and the more attractive she is, the faster that window closes. She might have gone out with you the first time or two. Once you showed that you're just a lowly delta in need of encouragement in order to find the courage to approach, she lost whatever interest she had.

61 comments:

Michael Maier said...

? I would say he burned himself going "clothes shopping" so often. If I were her, I'd suspect him to be hesitant and clingy just for that alone. Is that even remotely normal for guys?

" The right moment is always NOW. "

Too true.

Robert What? said...

I feel his pain. In my pre-'sphere days I recognize now a number of times where girls were virtually throwing themselves at me. But since they didn't actually come out and say it, I played the "gentleman" who waits for clear instructions / permission.

Vox said...

I would say he burned himself going "clothes shopping" so often

Almost certainly. I noticed that as well. It's fine to visit frequently if you are open about why you are there: I'm here to see you. It's not if you are trying to be clever and hide your true intentions.

If a man ever wonders if a woman sees through those sort of ruses, the answer is: yes.

Vox said...

I played the "gentleman" who waits for clear instructions / permission.

Any man who considers himself to be a "gentleman" these days is delta or below. It stinks of gamma delusion. And if you ever use the phrase "my lady" or talk in what you think passes for a medieval or Renaissance manner, you're gamma.

It makes me cringe every time I see a writer refer to his wife as "milady" or "the fair whatever". You know he's a self-defeating appeaser.

And before the aspees start asking what they should call their wives and girlfriends instead of some faux-romantic title, it's pretty fucking simple. Call her by her name. What else would you call her?

cailcorishev said...

Been there too many times to think about, and waiting for the perfect invitation never, ever works. Now that I know better, I can see that this girl thought she was already shouting her interest at you. And yes, she knew exactly what you were doing by coming back so many times.

One other thing: when a girl says, "My boyfriend won't like that," the only correct response is, "I'm not asking him out." Or something at least that dismissive. Her mentioning a boyfriend is a direct challenge; you have to rise to it. One invaluable thing I learned from Deangelo was that an attractive woman always has a boyfriend, when it comes to situations like this or when she needs a couch moved. There's always some orbiter or sorta-ex she can point to as a guy who wouldn't like her going home with you. It's meaningless, except as a way to see whether you can be scared off that easily.

Bodichi said...

"Any girlfriend who perceives herself as being at or above your level is going to occasionally flirt with the idea of trading you in. That's not because she's an unfaithful slut unworthy of your protection and manly chivalry, it's because she is a woman and that is what women do."


MAT 5:28
But I say unto you, That whosoever looks on a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart.

On this you are wrong. Reverse the gender in the above verse and realize that a woman engaging her hyper gamy is committing adultery (or fornication if she is not married) in her heart. Recognizing hyper gamy is necessary, excusing it is the same as excusing sin.


Remo said...

Thank you for pointing out that verse Bodichi, the bible doesn't carry an exclusion cause for women who want to trade up. I knew something about this 'girls will be girls' thing bothered me and oh yes what was it? Ah... not only is it sinful but you don't get a society greater than sod huts and pointy sticks if you allow women to do this without any restrictions. We don't allow young men to fulfill every lustful desire they have so allowing women to do this is okay because equality? Our host pointed out awhile back that the way to build civilization is to channel the young mens drive for female access into productive pursuits. Make the men work THEN they can have a woman for themselves. That is paraphrased horribly but I do note that this bargain breaks down real fast if the women are free to join alpha super harems and be supported in this decision by society.

sigbouncer said...

"she doesn't think he'd look too highly on that. I made a comment to the effect of, "Well, that's a shame."

You should have come back with I don't give a fuck what your boyfriend thinks, I'm not taking him out. But yeah you blew it long ago with the multiple visits to the store. Her and her friends probably had a good laugh over this. As she pulled your strings and gave them the daily play by play. Remember this the next time you start to dicktuck. An astute worker of the cable company once said he who hesitates, masturbates.

Unknown said...

Oh puleeze, Bodichi! As Twain said of the Bible:

"It is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies."

Jourdan said...

I completely agree that any remark from a girl that is belittling, like the "little heart" comment here has to be immediately responded to, but I don't agree that heading right to the size of one's wang is necessarily the best way to go about it. A better response, one which signals mastery of the sitation, self-confidence and maturity would be:

(With a smirky smile) "There's nothing little about my heart of anything else about me, but since you're interested in my desires, what's your phone number?"

Krul said...

If you can't deal with that, then go find a woman who is 1 or 2 points below you in attractiveness and content yourself with her being loyal, faithful, and true.

You know, this actually sounds like really good advice for a traditionally minded guy who doesn't want to spend his life putting up with constant shit tests. I imagine marrying a plainer woman who's just grateful to have him would pay off in the long run.

pancakeloach said...

It is indeed time-honored advice.

Corvinus said...

Per the hierarchy, I think I'm a low beta or high delta.

First, let's get things straight. You're a delta. Your behavior was about as conventionally delta as it is possible to be. A woman sent you clear signals of interest, with a mild spice of challenging contempt, and you failed the test about as flawlessly as possible. The clear sign of the delta: waiting for permission and encouragement to approach.

Low Delta: You chicken out and don't get the digits. Or you get the digits after a long time, and she doesn't return the text after your second try, and you give up. Of course, the Gamma strategy is to keep texting and texting.

High Delta: You more or less promptly get the digits, but while she always responds, she also usually turns down whatever date you suggest, and later starts a relationship with a higher-SMV man, or at least one she knows better.

Iowahine said...

For females, does flirting necessarily mean lusting?

Haven't any men here experienced a woman flirting only to have her ice up when given more attention?

I think we females are wired and learn to behave solicitously to men, but that doesn't mean we're lusting after and ready to boink each and every one. But maybe I'm just white-knighting my sex.

I think back on my long-ago behavior and wonder why I DID behave so coyly around certain guys, because once they returned my interest, I knew I wasn't interested. And, I recall my husband - in whom I was greatly interested - calling me on my flirting with him, while I thought I was consciously trying to seem nonchalant.

Geesh. I get why men find us gals so freaking frustrating.

Vox said...

On this you are wrong. Reverse the gender in the above verse and realize that a woman engaging her hyper gamy is committing adultery (or fornication if she is not married) in her heart.

Irrelevant. The Bible also says ALL ARE FALLEN. Good luck looking for that unfallen woman who is fair and pure of heart.

I don't agree that heading right to the size of one's wang is necessarily the best way to go about it. A better response, one which signals mastery of the sitation, self-confidence and maturity would be: (With a smirky smile) "There's nothing little about my heart of anything else about me, but since you're interested in my desires, what's your phone number?"

And that's the difference between the natural and the one who is attempting to simulate it. Two giveaways of the guy emulating Game rather than having it.

1. any reference to (smirk)
2. excessive wordiness.

A girl who is aggressively belittling will eat you up. So, yes, you should go right to the "giant wang" or something equally ridiculous. Because what you are doing is smacking her down and putting her in the place she wants to be, not defensively evading.

But it is true, you could simply go negative. "Little heart? What the fuck, is this My Little Pony?" That will work too; open disdain is normally my automatic go-to. The point is not evading the belittlement, but smacking down her challenge.

Corvinus said...

@Iowahine

I've learned to tell the difference between genuine flirtation, fake flirtation, and friendliness. And while it seems blatantly obvious to me now, it wasn't until fairly recently, and I can fully understand why your average Delta or Gamma would make mistakes to that effect.

And yes, your husband obviously could tell too.

sigbouncer said...

"Geesh. I get why men find us gals so freaking frustrating."

Lol

Vox said...

For females, does flirting necessarily mean lusting?

Yes. You don't flirt with men you don't want to fuck you, on some level.

I think back on my long-ago behavior and wonder why I DID behave so coyly around certain guys, because once they returned my interest, I knew I wasn't interested.

You're wrong. You were at least potentially interested. You were simply lying to yourself. And "solicitous behavior" is not flirtatious behavior.

Robert What? said...

"Any man who considers himself a gentleman these days..."

Vox, you are correct. But I am an older guy and I grew up without the benefit of the 'sphere and sites like yours.

Now I know the score better. I know that the social contract known as "chivalry" has been broken. Now I would treat a woman with no more or less courtesy / assistance than a man of the same age in a similar situation.

Krul said...

Re: Corvinus High Delta... Low Delta...

All these Greek divisions and sub-divisions are confusing.

I think we should switch to the boxing weight classes. Alpha is Heavyweight or Heavy, Beta is Cruiser, etc. You're talking about the difference between Middle (high delta) and Welter (low delta). Gammas are Light, and Omegas are Feather.

Much more intuitive.

jimmy-jimbo said...

The time to ask a woman out is NOW. "She asked what I was doing afterwards"

Next time, pull out your phone and tell her you'll text her to let her know. It seems like texting is what most people are doing these days for dating. Just do what everyone else is doing. Other than that, going to that store for more than 2 times is not manly behavior especially to see a chick where you missed every opportunity to ask her out. You're signaling your a loser.

LibertyPortraits said...

@ Krul

Create your own highly successful game blog and use those terms. Alpha and Beta seem more natural to me because we all know about the alpha male in the animal kingdom, such as lions, tigers, bears, wolves, gorillas, etc. Vox's hierarchy makes a lot of sense in differentiating the beta shades of grey.

Krul said...

@LibertyPortraits

Your comment is so Cruiser.

cailcorishev said...

You know, this actually sounds like really good advice for a traditionally minded guy who doesn't want to spend his life putting up with constant shit tests.

The problem with that is that women's expectations are so inflated nowadays that you'd probably have to go more than 2 points lower to get one who would be that grateful. Also, unless you're both already pushing 40, your SMV is probably going to rise for a while as hers starts dropping. You could find yourself a decade later married to a woman 4-5 points below you -- and through no fault of her own. If you're willing to give up being attracted to your wife in exchange for the added security of knowing she probably won't stray, go ahead.

Yes, Jourdan's response is too wordy. If you don't want to go full-on lewd -- maybe you're shopping with your grandma or something -- glance down at her body, then back up, then: "Yes, I see some 'little' things I desire."

Feather Blade said...

I think we females are wired and learn to behave solicitously to men, but that doesn't mean we're lusting after and ready to boink each and every one.

Traditionally, women are supposed to be the ones who keep social interactions light and fun for everybody involved, men and women alike. Some people have natural instinct for it, but for most it's a matter of training.

And if, as in our degenerate age, social intercourse is always understood to have a sexual undertone, it is easy to think that a woman is indicating sexual interest when she is just... being a good hostess.

There's really not much to be done about it until we as a society can get past the idea that everything is sexual. (Thanks, Freud!)

ajw308 said...

She was a sales woman. Probably did very well. While all the pertinent points have been hit, whenever a woman has a financial incentive to be nice to you, know that weighs heavily on her behavior.

Bodichi said...

@Feather Blade,

So you are the one who injects backhanded compliments and spiteful remarks and then when the other party takes offense cower behind the shield of "It was just a joke!"

You are the one the brushes their breasts against a man constantly, his arm, his back, etc, and then we he pushes further you act offended.

You are using social violence against men and are a coward that is afraid to admit it.

There is no direct analogy, the closest would be a man not letting you through a hallway in the office you work, and when you got frustrated and threated to call security he said "It was just a joke."

The difference, he would be fired and likely go to jail.

Bodichi said...

@VOX
"Irrelevant. The Bible also says ALL ARE FALLEN. Good luck looking for that unfallen woman who is fair and pure of heart."

More than likely you misunderstand my point. All women are fallen, all are adulterous whores (if only in their heart). None are pure of heart.

ROM 3:10
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

Every flirt is an adultery of the heart.

otherjosh14 said...

I've just now started reading the Alpha Game blog. I've been a reader over at Vox Popoli for quite some time. What I read here interests me, and I find it somewhat amusing because in my younger years I was carrying out aspects of the alpha game without even being aware of it. Now I read these posts and smack myself in the head and say "Oh, that's why girls were acting the way they did".

I am a born-again Christian. I became one at an early age. In junior high, I witnessed all the girl/guy relationships at my school and thought to myself "This is so idiotic and shallow. I'm just gonna avoid this entire scene and skip the drama." I devoted myself entirely to following Christ, pursuing academics, being friendly at school and in my other social circles, and just enjoying life - without a girlfriend. I held this view of life until after I graduated from college. I got married when I was 25.

But all thru high-school and college, I took notice of girls consistently flirting with me and pursuing me in various ways. It was this way in high-school, college, at my church's youth group, and then in the young singles group when I got a little older. I admit, I enjoyed the attention, but since I had no desire to have a girlfriend I remained aloof, distant, and disinterested. I suppose I could have taken advantage if I wanted to, but I just didn't want to. I had other priorities on my mind.

Then, when I turned 25, I decided it was time to get married. At my church, there was a girl I thought was very attractive and seemed to have a very humble relationship with God. She impressed me. I asked her out right before Thanksgiving in 2004. We were engaged 6 weeks later. We were married 3 months after that. I had made up my mind what I wanted, so why wait? We've been married over 9 years now with two kids. Looking back at those earlier years of my life, I have no regrets.

But, it was iteresting... shortly after we were married, alot of those girls who flirted with me in my youth group and young singles group came and asked my wife "What's it like to be married to Josh?" I asked her what that was all about, and she said "Your disinterest drove them crazy. They couldn't figure you out." Go figure. Now that I read these posts from Vox and the corresponding comments, it makes better sense.

archerfisher21 said...

Solid article, the guy dragged things on way too long.

And that is the most valuable lesson I ever learned from the manosphere, or 2nd most.

There's no perfect time to approach/ask a girl out/hit on a girl. There's just "now" and then there's "someday" which is code for "never."

Corvinus said...

You could find yourself a decade later married to a woman 4-5 points below you -- and through no fault of her own. If you're willing to give up being attracted to your wife in exchange for the added security of knowing she probably won't stray, go ahead.
@calicorishev
Yeah, if people didn't insist on marrying their same-age peers (which is primarily done because older women are desperate and most men have weak game), the problem of the wife being on the down-escalator and the man on the up-escalator wouldn't be so much of a problem. If the man is 35 and the woman 23, OTOH, they're both near the top.

All these Greek divisions and sub-divisions are confusing.

I think we should switch to the boxing weight classes. Alpha is Heavyweight or Heavy, Beta is Cruiser, etc. You're talking about the difference between Middle (high delta) and Welter (low delta). Gammas are Light, and Omegas are Feather.

Much more intuitive.

@Krul
That's just another form of Roissy's Alpha-Beta-Omega scale, or the 1-10 scale for women, crafted for those who are into boxing. It still wouldn't capture the difference between an Alpha and a Sigma.

In my own case, if I continue to improve so I'm too good with women to be considered a Delta any more, I wouldn't become a Beta since I'm an introvert and, while I like taking to other men, being a member of a male peer group still bores me. I guess I'd become the Sigma version of a Beta (or a low Sigma, I suppose).

Retrenched said...

Yeah this pretty much describes my romantic life between 15 and 27 or so. Too slow to move, waiting for the "right" moment, wanting to be sure of her interest before taking any risks. The only girlfriends I got were the ones who made their interest so obvious that even a low delta like me couldn't miss it.

*shrug* Ah well, water under the bridge now.

Gunnar von Cowtown said...

"And before the aspees start asking what they should call their wives and girlfriends instead of some faux-romantic title, it's pretty fucking simple. Call her by her name. What else would you call her?"

That's great advice for 'Spergs ("Milady".... seriously?). For the neural-typical, making up a nickname for a girl can be an attractive display of dominance so long as the nickname is "cute", fundamentally un-serious and slightly patronizing. "Kitten", "Cupcake", "Sweet Pea", "Bunny", and "NameOfCity" are good examples.

A good litmus test is watching "Flavor of Love: Season One" and asking yourself "What Would Flavor Flav Do?" He'd probably call her "Peaches", but definitely not "Milady".

liberranter said...

She was a sales woman. Probably did very well. While all the pertinent points have been hit, whenever a woman has a financial incentive to be nice to you, know that weighs heavily on her behavior.

Yep, zackly. Situation and circumstances mean everything.

Feather Blade said...

@ Bodichi:

... none of what you described remotely approaches what I sketched out. You are describing a catty cock-tease.
I was referring to a woman's role in social conversations in general, as a response to iowahine's comment about general solicitousness displayed by women toward men in whom they are not interested.

Also point of grammar: You are the one that brushes her breasts against a man.
If you're going to cast aspersions on a random woman's character, at least get the sentence structure right.

Bodichi said...

@Featherblade

You just attempted to reframe. You have now asserted that any woman who does those things is a "Catty cock-tease". The burden of proof is now on you to prove that. Obviously you cannot. Plenty of women use those techniques all the time and you know it, and it frightens you that it has been called out.

To squelch the truth you resort to reframing those most common of female behaviors to some ill defined term that almost no woman would ever voluntarily admit to.

Then you bring up a trivial grammar detail tangential to the point.

Your reframe attempt has failed.

Vox said...

For the neural-typical, making up a nickname for a girl can be an attractive display of dominance so long as the nickname is "cute", fundamentally un-serious and slightly patronizing.

My best friend's wife once complained, in public, that he didn't have any cute names for her. To which he immediately replied: "but that's not true, my little Snortlecuff!"

Feather Blade said...

@Bodichi

Well done! Excellent analysis of my post!

I'm not sure I understand your rebuttal, however.
Are you asserting that a woman who (by your own description) deliberately presses her breasts against a man, then gets offended when the man "pushes further" is not a cock-tease?
Are you asserting that a woman who (by your own description) fills her conversation with spite and backbiting is not catty?

If so, then what would you call her?

Conscientia Republicae said...

I call my wife "sugar britches" sometimes, which she hates. She told her mother if anyone ever stabbed me cheese would come out. I told her mother her daughter threatened to stab me and cheese would come out.

Jordan, dude you talk too much. Just say something short and snappy. Brevity is the soul of wit.

"This one's got spirit! "

"You're a spirited filly"

"Do I smell sassy?"

Asshole grin required of course.

Bodichi said...

@Feathblade

Again, nice attempt to reframe.

"If so, then what would you call her?"

A woman

Feather Blade said...

@Bodichi

Calling a woman a woman is certainly... tautological.

It really doesn't answer the question though.

Conscientia Republicae said...

Bodichi,

You sound like a catty bitch. Clean out your mangina.

Krul said...

Corvinus - That's just another form of Roissy's Alpha-Beta-Omega scale, or the 1-10 scale for women, crafted for those who are into boxing.

Heh. The weight class thing wasn't intended to be taken seriously.

Now I what I really think is that we should switch to computer metaphors:

Alpha = Control Unit
Beta = ALU
Delta = Bus
Gamma = RAM
Omega = Hard drive
Lambda = flash drive
Sigma = moth

There you have it. If that doesn't say "Sexy Beast", I don't know what does.

Michael Maier said...

For nicknames, Mel Gibson hit it right the Hell out of the park with "Sugar Tits".

Brad Andrews said...

> If the man is 35 and the woman 23, OTOH, they're both near the top.

Who wants to wait until 35 to marry that has a strong faith and related convictions? Pushing off sex that long means you may as well just stay celibate in many ways.

I can't remember where, but someone had an interesting post that the "marrying down" idea has the flaw that the lower female will tend to view herself higher and not have the level of respect and appreciation you might expect, often valuing herself more because she married so far up the scale.

Akulkis said...

PArt 1 of 2:

My initial impression:

I got burned by a chick today. Maybe.. or maybe you burned yourself.

Met her a week ago at a well known clothing store. I had to buy an article of clothing ......She asked the same thing two days later after helping me.....Fast forward to two days later I go back for another sale .... The following day I go into get some shoes....


Dude... you shop for clothes more than any woman I've ever met..
And, you only go to the SAME PLACE over and over and over, as if there is no other clothing stores to be found in town, AT THE MALL...

The FIRST day, you were new and mysterious. By the 4TH VISIT IN ONE WEEK -- YOU'RE A DESPERATELY PATHETIC who cant even recognize the CLOTHING STORE options around you -- and even if she DID think you were interested in her... by the 4th visit in one week, she likely thinks that you're attracted to her by default, because you have simply failed to even notice the other women around you....which in her mind translates into "He needs me"... women want to be wanted, women utterly ABHOR being needed (except for by infants), and most of all by a man. Why? Because they are the neediest creatures on earth...and they would rather be alone than with a needy man.


Now, I've asked several friends, including two of whom are women, their take on the situation. One called this chick out for flirting with me even though she has a boyfriend.

1. Your female friend went to the store and told the salesgirl she shouldn't be flirting if she already has a boyfriend? Anything less, and it's not calling the chick out.

2. It's your friend SAYING that the chick shouldn't flirt if she has a boyfriend. Of course, we all know that ALL women flirty even when they have a boyfriend...including your friend. She wants you to think badly of the salesgirl, becaue your friend views the salesgirl as competition (EVEN IF YOUR FREIND HAS NO INTEREST IN YOU! -- it's just bog-standard knee-jerk female hating female behavior)


The other, disappointingly (as I believed she would've called her out too) said I could've found out she was taken a week ago and then hastily added, "but I'm sorry."

I'll bet that if Brad Pitt walked in the door, pointed at her, and said, "You, get in my car -- we're going to dinner." she not only wouldn't have NOT made any "But, but, but I have a boyyyyyyyyyyfriennnnnnnd" noises (and yes, it is just noise), she would also, if asked, deny that her job mattered to her in the slightest.


Per the hierarchy, I think I'm a low beta or high delta. I can tell you that sixteen months ago I wouldn't have ever thought of asking someone out

First mistake... ASKING a woman's permission for anything. That immediately invites her to respond with a shit-test "no.... for [meaningless reason blah-blah-blah]" (unstated completion of the thought: "So, guy, what are YOU going to to about that?"

The better way to approach it is like this:
"Hey, this Thursday after work, I'm going to be [doing something that YOU want to do.....for it's own sake...having absolutely NOTHING to do with whether she will be there or not] -" now pause.... and pause so long that it feels uncomfortable to you ... wait for the expression on her face to change..."maybe I could find a way to fit you in" (or whatever sounds appropriate for including someone who you originally didn't plan to be there."

The point is... asking a woman (who even with an inflated ego, still probably harbors deep insecurities) puts you below her... and if you're below her... that means that rejecting you is the smart option, because you're supplicating, and people supplicate ONLY to those who they perceive to have a higher status.

Akulkis said...

Part 2 of 2:


Now...having said that... realize this:

She works in a clothing store --> probably part of her pay is commissioned based. Flirting with guys ==> more says ==> more commission. In other words, she's not just a prostitute, she's a prostitute who doesn't actually deliver. If you think that's putting it too kindly... ok, we'll call her an actress...she's ACTING like she's interested in you, but really, what she's interested in is you buying more stuff so that she gets a bigger commission check at the end of the month.




like her or even have known how to joke around. I credit you, Tomassi, Dalrock, and DG for that. So thanks one and all. Also, I'm in my late 20's. Are there any real generational gaps I should be aware of vis-a-vis women? What are your and the readers' thoughts on her?

See above: she's hired to flirt with male customers.



Additionally, did I move too slowly?

Yes and no. for YOU, yes, too slowly... maybe.

But, if you don't make a move, then 100% of the time, you're going to be alone. So keep that in mind, always.

Corvinus said...

@Krul
Clever.

@Brad Andrews

> If the man is 35 and the woman 23, OTOH, they're both near the top.

Who wants to wait until 35 to marry that has a strong faith and related convictions? Pushing off sex that long means you may as well just stay celibate in many ways.


If the man is a BETA, like most men, then he doesn't really have a choice. It's either work up the hierarchy, or settle for a fat cow / single mom / plain jane / Asian who settled / latched onto him because biological clock. And working up the hierarchy can take a while. A Beta at 35 will be in better shape to get a great woman than the same man would be as a low Delta or even Gamma at 25.

But if you're an Alpha or Beta frat bro at 21 who's already on top of the world, then more power to ya.

I can't remember where, but someone had an interesting post that the "marrying down" idea has the flaw that the lower female will tend to view herself higher and not have the level of respect and appreciation you might expect, often valuing herself more because she married so far up the scale.

If the man has weak game, then yes, I imagine that would indeed be a problem. OTOH, you have lowlives with strong game who "overkick their coverage"... go figure.

1sexistpig2another said...

The way I see it, the guy accidentally dodged a bullet. Good for him.

1sexistpig2another said...

If she'll do it to him, she'll do it to you.

1sexistpig2another said...

...the bible doesn't carry an exclusion cause for women who want to trade up.

Exactly!!!

Many bad things are hardwired into the sin nature, but isn't that what we strive to overcome?

Markku said...

Bodichi is obviously in the Bitter Gamma -stage of digesting the Red Pill. It'll pass, probably.

One always seeks the simplest explanation first. Initially, women are just pure goodness. When that model fails to explain what we observe in the world, the next hypothesis is that they are pure, darkest evil. That turns out to be too simplistic also. And the reality turns out to be one of those annoying cases where it's too complicated and variable to be put in a slogan.

1sexistpig2another said...

Was Mr Twain able to demonstrate that the Bible was full of lies, or was it just another unfounded opinion?

Beau said...

Any man who considers himself to be a "gentleman" these days is delta or below.

I am not a "gentleman," I am a gentleman, in the old stamp.

Retrenched said...

OT: Columnist suggests that women be held responsible for their behavior and then gets fired from Forbes Magazine.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/forbes-columnist-sacked-piece-drunk-female-guests-grave-threat-frats-writer-responds-article-1.1951124

This is why the manosphere exists -- because is no place in the mainstream for anyone who might dare to tell the truth about women's behavior or the inherent self-contradictions of feminism.

Duke of Earl said...

I can't use the "I'm compensating..." line.

It's my usual response when asked why a carry a 5.5" folding knife.

I'll have to come up with something else.

Markku said...

I am a gentleman, in the old stamp.

You have a coat of arms?

Gunnar von Cowtown said...

To which he immediately replied: "but that's not true, my little Snortlecuff!"

lolz! That must have sounded absolutely hilarious with Markku's Finnish accent.

Markku said...

lolz! That must have sounded absolutely hilarious with Markku's Finnish accent.

Not me. It was probably The Perfect Aryan Male.

Beau said...

You have a coat of arms?

Even better, an inherited perpetual indulgence to eat red meat during fast days for services rendered during the Crusades.

Pussy-ManiaGirls: http://goo.gl/w9Oepq said...

watching my collection, we have upload more video at here:

Collection Part 1:

Doggy Style and In Missionary Position

Hot Sex Anal With Amazing Girl Friend

Sex Under Hot Lights Bad Girls

Give Me The Cum

Cum In My Panties

Nude Amateur Teen Girls

Sexy Brunette Girls

Young Kinky Sluts

Busty Tattoo Chick On Car

Young Asian fucked anal

Latina Havana Ginger gets

Teen Threesome Porn

Hot Blowjob

Amateur Pulls Down Tanga

Sweet girl amazing hot

Sexy japanese babes getting their tight

TEEN BLONDE ANAL SEX ORGY




Collection Part 2:


Hot asian blowjob and pussy creampie

Sucking dick, Audrey put vegetables in all holes

Blonde love fuck

Naomi Russell And Her Royal Ass

Sexy blonde gives blowjob in the car

ASIAN XXX PORN VIDEO

JAPANESE XXX PORN VIDEO

ARABIC XXX PORN VIDEO

HARDCORE PORN VIDEO

GAY XXX PORN VIDEO

WATCH STREAMING PORN VIDEO

USA CELEBS XXX PORN

LATINA XXX PORN

LESBIAN XXX PORN

Hardcore Porn Celebrity

HOT TURKEY PORN MOVIE

INDIAN NUDES CELEBRITIES VIDEOS

UZBEKS Fuck PORN VIDEOS

HOT RASTA GIRL


100% MAKE you satisfy......








































Reply Delete

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.