Playing Hard to Get

daisybelle2008

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I read a wide array of material on the subject an come to my own conclusions. I most certainly wouldn't describe a bodybuilder type as an alpha male.

Also you have to keep in mind that we are not in our natural environment. People mate with who they can get in our unnatural environment due to the agricultural revolution. I believe women mated with numerous alpha males during Estrus allowing sperm competition to take place. That is what's natural for us IMO.

You seem to think I think muscle men are alpha males. I never said that.

I believe women generally are sexually attracted to cues for a male which indicate he has plenty of options with attractive women. I would describe these men as the the ones who have women chasing them. They are alpha males IMO. They are generally free of social anxiety.

So basically you are just talking about confident well balanced people? why don't you just call them that then?. Alpha and Beta are just meaningless man made labels, you can't take 3.5 billion people and get everyone to agree who goes into each compartment, those labels limit our thinking, they don't broaden our minds. They encourage us to form judgements and create gender hierarchys or false values in our minds, they encourage us to bully, separate and marginalise. Why do you think the biggest insults we pay to men is that they are 'pussys' and women are 'sluts'. Alpha and Beta are about as helpful and meaningful terms as 'Aryan' and 'non-Aryan'.

We are not in an 'unnatural' environment, the only unnatural environment would be one that could not sustain our lifeform. We adapt and evolve, there is no one way we 'should' live to match perfectly the way we guess at best that cavemen lived. Believing there is one true way we should live, act and behave is the problem.

The prehistoric arguments put forward and settled upon in this thread have been countered time and time over academically. Someone in this thread said that: women like men with muscles because back in prehistoric times they were better hunters back could protect the woman and baby. Well I could suggest an equally plausible 'theory' that women in prehistoric time went for less muscly men as they were less likely to hunt and be killed and stay around to pick berries and help with child rearing. In fact historians argue that prehistoric women provided most of the calories and that men often came back empty handed. Truly we don't truly know the role women played prehistorically, guesses are made from the art we see which is a subjective interpretation. Sleep is a biological urge but scientist don't fully know the why we sleep.

In this thread we seem to have accepted that 'slut shaming' is not only necessary but it is biologically justified. The reason women should fight the biological urge to have sex seems to be because guys won't know if they are the father of a child that has a less that .4% chance of happening (ratio of hetrosexual sexual acts vs live births). This is truly one of the dumbest excuses for repressing women I have heard, in fact it is right up there with anything Sharia law could offer.

Keep reading an array of material Scanlas but don't reach a conclusion, you can't, as fast as you reach your conclusion and new bunch of academics will proffer a new theory on how prehistoric man behaved that will wholly contradict the previous one. I have found that almost every opinion and label I have applied has made me a hypocrite. In fact I know very little, only I have a biological urge to copulate sometimes.

OnTheCouch

Jogathon wrote: »

Well if i really like a guy then I prefer to wait a few weeks because I like it to be meaningful. If I don't care and just want a bit of fun then I'll put out and enjoy.

This entry is quite interesting and has been both the inspiration and the source of frustration of many stories I have heard down the years!

To try and generalise all these anecotes into one I shall do the following:

What usually happened is the man (Y) has been interested in the woman (X). Now, after let's say one to three dates, Y and X have been getting on very well, have kissed, got very close etc, but X continued to withhold sex. Then, out of frustration and/or circumstances, X and Y stop seeing each other.

Next, either through friends/acquaintances/general grapevine, Y finds out that X met up with another man on a night out (Z) and slept with him straight away.

This obviously provokes a gamut of emotions: anger, bewilderment, hurt sadness, confusion, inadequacy (what moves did he use that I didn't).

When Y brings this up with X, she simply states that 'oh, it didn't mean anything with Z and was just for fun - with you I wanted to wait and make it more special.' (Hence even more bewilderment and anguish from Y)

This is a clear example of men and women putting different value on different things and goes against a little bit what the OP states, which may lead me to believe it might be a cultural difference in how different people see different attitudes.

In reality, both Y and Z want the fun. Because X also wants the fun, but also on a more consistent basis, the safety net/emotional security of a long-term relationship, she deprives Y of the instant reward while at the same time giving it to Z.

Ironically enough therefore, even though X has a higher opinion of Y than Z, she succeeds at the same time in alienating and denting the self-confidence of Y whilst boosting that of Z.

This is because men want sex all the time, whether in a relationship or not. If one man can get it without having to put in all the effort then he's likely to be happy, biologically fulfilling his need if you like.

Now if Y had got the sex fairly quickly, perhaps not straight away, but soon after that, there is every chance I believe, again contrary to this thread, that he would have stuck around for the relationship instead of just becoming frustrated and giving up on things.

Going slightly off a tangent, but I believe situations like this can reinforce the thinking of those ever so dodgy 'nice guy/bad boy' stereotypes, where what the man and the woman think are the decent thing to happen do not necessarily match.

It's fair to say I think that women for the most part prefer to be in relationships than have many one night stands, but if they meet someone they think they like I would encourage them not to withhold sex for too long, or they could end up missing out on a good thing!

Gummy Panda

WindSock wrote: »

I always sleep with fellas on a first date if I am attracted to them. But I instantly lose all respect for them after for putting out so soon, with no sense of hypocrisy at all.

Why do you treat them like a piece of meat to be discarded?

I bet you have some analogy about locks and keys to justify it!

Siuin

Jaysus, the amount of PMs I've gotten :S

K-9

Zulu wrote: »

ehh yes they do. A father with his child is the perfect example of an everyday man being an alpha male.

Contrary to media bias and negative stereotypes, alpha males are very good things.

It's as sad that (some aspects of) society considers alpha males bad, as it considers some women "sluts".

Nothing wrong with being a confident, independent alpha male. The problem is the perception of what an alpha male is and the PUA community doesn't help in that regard.

BBDBB

WindSock wrote: »

I always sleep with fellas on a first date if I am attracted to them. But I instantly lose all respect for them after for putting out so soon, with no sense of hypocrisy at all.

I feel so used

otto_26

WindSock wrote: »

I always sleep with fellas on a first date if I am attracted to them. But I instantly lose all respect for them after for putting out so soon, with no sense of hypocrisy at all.

It's not about a guy deciding he has no respect for a girl it's just the way some feel after they sleep with a girl straight away. It's not like you lose respect for a girl to make a point it's just the way some feel.

YFlyer

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

An alpha male in essence is someone who takes charge and leads, he is free to to be himself without being inhibited. When the right cues our in place this personality comes out, it is not an arrogant personality. What an alpha male is biologically and what it is thought to be in western culture are not the same.

You can actually bring out a man's alpha personality without the cues being in place. It's kind of like a loop hole of our modern society. All you do is have the man attempt to chat up women over and over again and push him into a state of deep anxiety again and again but if he chats up countless women when he's afraid eventually his Protective mechanisms realise our society is not a threat like it once was so it gives him access to his alpha chilled out personality. It's a also much healthier state to be in, a lot less stressful as social anxiety disappears.

Mystery Method psychology and human behaviour?

StankyStevie

jeez, glad I'm past all that dating palaver. Sounds too much like hard work nowadays

stoneill

So - what's the story? Are we having a gang bang or what?

Zulu

K-9 wrote: »

Nothing wrong with being a confident, independent alpha male

for sure

The problem is the perception of what an alpha male is

Yeah, that's pretty much my point.

the PUA community doesn't help in that regard.

I don't know what PUA is. :confussed:

K-9

Zulu wrote: »

for sure
Yeah, that's pretty much my point.

I don't know what PUA is. :confussed:

Scanlas THE 2nd would be your man on that stuff tbh.
Pich up artists and American psuedo science.

--LOS--

I think the whole playing hard to get thing is just a myth, I don't think anyone consciously thinks I'm going to withhold sex to keep him/her interested. it's about getting to know the person, instead of making your relationship with them just about sex, it can be a matter of practicing safe sex too, I think the build up is quite nice anyway and one of the high points of starting a new relationship.

daisybelle2008

otto_26 wrote: »

It's not about a guy deciding he has no respect for a girl it's just the way some feel after they sleep with a girl straight away. It's not like you lose respect for a girl to make a point it's just the way some feel.

Oh he 'naturally' feels this lack of respect, it is not something his tiny socially conditioned mind has latched onto like racism or homophobia? A link between 'respect' and how a woman has sex is the fundamental flaw. Disrespecting a woman because she has sex with you 'too soon' is the same logic that forces women to wear burkas and stones them for out of wedlock sex, makes them marry their rapist. It's just adding some punishment into 'sex-respect-woman' mix. You have already justified the need for punishment by agreeeing the woman deserves no respect and is flawed because of how she wants and has sex and taken that dysfunctional logic a little bit further. The judgement is not a natural Phenomenon, it is a man made prejudice. I am not saying it is the exact same thing just an extreme on the same logic spectrum.

otto_26

daisybelle2008 wrote: »

Oh he 'naturally' feels this lack of respect, it is not something his tiny socially conditioned mind has latched onto like racism or homophobia? A link between 'respect' and how a woman has sex is the fundamental flaw. Disrespecting a woman because she has sex with you 'too soon' is the same logic that forces women to wear burkas and stones them for out of wedlock sex, makes them marry their rapist. It's just adding some punishment into 'sex-respect-woman' mix.

Wow I think you might have been hurt in the past.

I have a tiny socially conditioned mind because I don't think the way you do nice!! There are plenty of different types of people all over the world. When I choose a partner I choose someone I know doesn't pick up strangers on a night out and sleep with them... There is nothing wrong with picking up strangers for sex or having sex with people straight after you meet them, I just personally prefer women who have a lot of respect for themselves it makes me feel good that my girlfriend isn't easy.

Why is this so crazy for you to understand?

So anyone who goes on a blind date and are not attracted to the other person.... In your eyes im disrespecting them and should go out with them regardless..

daisybelle2008 wrote: »

You have already justified the need for punishment by agreeeing the woman deserves no respect and is flawed because of how she wants and has sex and taken that dysfunctional logic a little bit further. The judgement is not a natural Phenomenon, it is a man made prejudice. I am not saying it is the exact same thing just an extreme on the same logic spectrum.

I have full respect for all women whether they pick up strangers for sex or not. Your just making stuff up.. Women deserve respect just as much as men and people who have different opinions to you!!

I'm also allowed to know what I like and what I dislike in a girlfriend. I'm proud that my girlfriend isn't easy. I'm proud that she would never sleep with anyone without nothing them really well. I also have friends that are girls that sleep with numerous guys all the time I'm proud that they are my friends and proud that they are good people.

The one thing I love about my friends is that if someone calls them a slut they just look them in the eye and say yes I am not to make a point but because they are comfortable with who they are and don't care. I have male friends who sleep around and when they are called sluts just say the same as my female friends because they are also comfortable with themselves and don't care.

So no I'm not judging anyone I know what I like in a person and those are the people I will go as a girlfriend regardless if it upsets others... As far as having no respect for a women because she's not my type.... get real...

thebaz

I play so hard no one can get me

billybudd

Plenty of women have sex when and how they want with no guilt or emotions attached, what they dont do is start a friggin essay about, they just do it.

Siuin

billybudd wrote: »

Plenty of women have sex when and how they want with no guilt or emotions attached, what they dont do is start a friggin essay about, they just do it.

You obviously didn't read the 'essay' very closely. This thread isn't about meaningless sex, it's about the merits (or lack thereof) of waiting to have sex when you already have a connection with the person in question due to social pressures or feeling that he won't have as much respect for the woman afterwards.

billybudd

Siuin wrote: »

You obviously didn't read the 'essay' very closely. This thread isn't about meaningless sex, it's about the merits (or lack thereof) of waiting to have sex when you already have a connection with the person in question due to social pressures or feeling that he won't have as much respect for the woman afterwards.

So you can have a connection in one date? one that lasts or does it matter?

Siuin

billybudd wrote: »

So you can have a connection in one date? one that lasts or does it matter?

A connection isn't a wedding ring- it's a spark and chemistry.

billybudd

Siuin wrote: »

A connection isn't a wedding ring- it's a spark and chemistry.

Sure like a ons, no emotions formed yet and no guilt just good fun with no expectaions.

Eve_Dublin

otto_26 wrote: »

[/COLOR]
Wow I think you might have been hurt in the past.

I have a tiny socially conditioned mind because I don't think the way you do nice!! There are plenty of different types of people all over the world. When I choose a partner I choose someone I know doesn't pick up strangers on a night out and sleep with them... There is nothing wrong with picking up strangers for sex or having sex with people straight after you meet them, I just personally prefer women who have a lot of respect for themselves it makes me feel good that my girlfriend isn't easy.

Why is this so crazy for you to understand?

So anyone who goes on a blind date and are not attracted to the other person.... In your eyes im disrespecting them and should go out with them regardless..



I have full respect for all women whether they pick up strangers for sex or not. Your just making stuff up.. Women deserve respect just as much as men and people who have different opinions to you!!

I'm also allowed to know what I like and what I dislike in a girlfriend. I'm proud that my girlfriend isn't easy. I'm proud that she would never sleep with anyone without nothing them really well. I also have friends that are girls that sleep with numerous guys all the time I'm proud that they are my friends and proud that they are good people.

The one thing I love about my friends is that if someone calls them a slut they just look them in the eye and say yes I am not to make a point but because they are comfortable with who they are and don't care. I have male friends who sleep around and when they are called sluts just say the same as my female friends because they are also comfortable with themselves and don't care.

So no I'm not judging anyone I know what I like in a person and those are the people I will go as a girlfriend regardless if it upsets others... As far as having no respect for a women because she's not my type.... get real...

Sorry man, you can deny it all you want but that comment is judgemental. You're entitled to make judgements on people (we're all guilty of it) but please don't pretend you're not when it's so blatant.

ToddyDoody

Might be because the very essence of desire is lack. Satisfy the lack, desire decreases, I'm sure they don't do this deliberately

Siuin

billybudd wrote: »

Sure like a ons, no emotions formed yet and no guilt just good fun with no expectaions.

You obviously don't understand the OP, but whatever.

billybudd

Siuin wrote: »

You obviously don't understand the OP, but whatever.

So explain it to me please

Siuin

billybudd wrote: »

So explain it to me please

We are not talking about the morality of women having a one night stand or no strings attached sex. We are talking about the pressure placed on many women by wider society into playing games with men, misleading them and refusing to have sex with them not because they do not desire sex themselves but because a woman who withholds sex is viewed by some as being of greater worth.

billybudd

Siuin wrote: »

We are not talking about the morality of women having a one night stand or no strings attached sex. We are talking about the pressure placed on many women by wider society into playing games with men, misleading them and refusing to have sex with them not because they do not desire sex themselves but because a woman who withholds sex is viewed by some as being of greater worth.

Hey man, just have sex and dont worry about it.

Siuin

billybudd wrote: »

Hey man, just have sex and dont worry about it.

That's what I've been saying!

Scanlas The 2nd

Siuin wrote: »

We are not talking about the morality of women having a one night stand or no strings attached sex. We are talking about the pressure placed on many women by wider society into playing games with men, misleading them and refusing to have sex with them not because they do not desire sex themselves but because a woman who withholds sex is viewed by some as being of greater worth.

Generally speaking women must be careful not to be perceived as "easy" as it is a threat to the cartel. Also a lot of men have insecurities about women's sexuality.

Generally speaking women have power due to the exclusive access to their sexuality. It is the reason men so often put up with nagging etc. it is the reason many marketing departments target wives and not husbands as the wives are usually the one's in control.

Imagine what gold brokers would think if a source of good became available for free. They wouldn't be too pleased. A similar reaction takes place in women when they hear of the sexual activities of "easy" women. They often despise these openly "easy" women despite the fact they may even be "easy" themselves but they don't harm the market for sex by not being discrete about their "easyness".

Bottom line is that the more "easy" women there are the less power all women have over men.

Siuin

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Generally speaking women must be careful not to be perceived as "easy" as it is a threat to the cartel. Also a lot of men have insecurities about women's sexuality.

Generally speaking women have power due to the exclusive access to their sexuality. It is the reason men so often put up with nagging etc. it is the reason many marketing departments target wives and not husbands as the wives are usually the one's in control.

Imagine what gold brokers would think if a source of good became available for free. They wouldn't be too pleased. A similar reaction takes place in women when they hear of the sexual activities of "easy" women. They often despise these openly "easy" women despite the fact they may even be "easy" themselves but they don't harm the market for sex by not being discrete about their "easyness".

Bottom line is that the more "easy" women there are the less power all women have over men.

So basically, if women are to have any power in this world they need to use their sexuality as a commodity instead of taking pleasure in the fact that they, like men, are also sexual beings?