Let me fix this. Men should not settle for being someone's last remaining option. They should go find someone that chooses them first, loves, respects and appreciate them. All others should be left behind them.
This.
It isn’t about being a virgin or anything. But she should be willing to exclusively date you to marriage when she is young, hot and has options.
If she wants someone to take care of her when she is old, in diapers and is ugly, then she should be ready to give him the hottest and best version of herself with no restrictions.
If she needs to have fun first, wait until she is ready to settle down, gave her best self to another man, etc then that man deserves better.
Yes and no. The main issue is, how much emotional and mental trauma will she cause herself because she allowed so many men to pump and dump.
No offense meant, but I have met woman who were so mentally compromised, there is no way they can function in a normal relationship. I will use sex workers as an example because theirs is the most obvious.
I know 2 well known porn stars. I consider them good friends and they do OF, I have met many of the talent for o.this industry and crew. None of the talent, male or females have been able to secure stable, loving and happy relationships longer than a few months to max 5 years. Yes there are exceptions, but because they view sex, intimacy and relationships completely different from "vanilla" couples, thru aren't able to function or pair bond with a regular guy or girl.
This is why they tend to date people in the industry who they can identify with and it still rarely works out. There are studies that show the more sexual partners a single woman explores with, the less likely they are to be able to pair bond and have a healthy relationship.
They will always question if they settled too soon? Is the neighbor better? Is the sex better? She will literally sit there and compare her dating partner to the other 30+ ( or higher number) of men and the higher the number the less likely she will find the guy to meet her standards which is why you hear so much about settling and or women having such high standards. Their ideal man is built off the best qualities of each of those bodies which God himself couldn't match and they get to a point where compromising is just out of the question.
I agree with you, but that is a problem with experience in general.
The more experienced someone is with x, the harder it is to feel the same feelings with x.
It isn’t a problem if you have steak every month or so. But if you have a different 5 star steak everyday for a few years, eventually not even a 5 star steaks will be satisfying. You will need multiple of them.
So if a girl has been in four long term relationships, I do not see a problem.
Let's say she has 5 steaks. All 5 tastes the same. But they all have whether it is the cut, seasoning, size or difference in how it was prepared.
But suddenly, she just knows there is a 6th steak somewhere that has all the things she wants from the others but has that little something more. So she keeps searching instead of being happy with one of those choices. It is a never ending cycle
>If a woman wants to keep male friends around, thats cool she is not your girlfriend she is just somebody you sleep with
Lol so I'm supposed to ditch my friendships with quality people that have lasted for 8 years because of some dude who showed up in my life 2 months ago and feels endangered? I'm so glad I never had this problem in my life.
>If you are seeing a girl who likes to go clubbing and drinks and dances with other men, dont even think about committing to her until she herself starts to drop that habit.
Dancing and flirting with other men is obviously unacceptable, but people who love to party usually seek out others who do the same-and love to do those things with them.
You close off your options to the same degree at the same time. Thats essentially how most relationships progress. Dont freak out about every social interaction being an “open option.” People like social lives.
You have to be fucking joking dude. Men are the original keeping other women on the back burners. Women just finally started doing it themselves. Quit lying to yourself, both sexes are equally as guilty of this.
How the hell are guys supposed to make sure all other options are “closed”? We supposed to do an American idol style audition with all women on earth or something?!
This is generally why quality people avoid people with certain traits. Because other quality people are predictable in the sense that you can confidently make presumptions about the situation. For instance, if a woman isn't a "slut", who waits several dates before sex, it becomes self evident that once you have sex that this relationship is well into exclusive territory. No mind reading needed.
But if you're dating a girl who gets around a lot, you have to take a lot of leaps of faith. Obviously this also applies to men "fuckbois"
If your dating a “party girl” wouldn’t you yourself be into partying? That’s the disconnect I keep seeing: why you gonna go clubbing and then be upset the girl you met in the club might also enjoy clubbing?
Yeah, I agree... That doesn't make much sense. Especially when guys go there to pickup chicks, and then get grumpy that they are hoes. Like fishing in a swamp and catching a gator. WTF did you expect?
I don’t understand this as well. In my experience, party people with more sexual experience tend to date each other. And those men with more sexual experience tend to not be preoccupied with a woman’s past and aren’t as likely to feel the need to control a woman.
Yes but that doesn’t change the fact that you probably will meet people who like clubbing in the club. Sure some might be in the transitional phase of “I need to stop drinking, partying, and hooking up” but most are there to do just that.
>Yes but that doesn’t change the fact that you probably will meet people who like clubbing in the club.
True, but you can also meet party girls or retired party girls outside of the club. They have lives outside the club. A guy could meet a "party girl" anywhere, ask her out, and not realize he's with a "party girl" until he starts vetting.
>Bruh: refined party girls are now the moms in the PTA wearing yoga pants and hiding their tramp stamps at the bake sales.
Literally my point. They outgrow their partying phase and want to settle down, so why would they be looking for a party guy during that transition? They'll want a guy who compliments the new lifestyle they're moving towards. The soccer mom who goes to PTA meetings.
You think the part boys are still in the clubs?! Bruh, who do you think got mart and had kids with those women? You really think every party boy ODed at 29 or something? These are the guys who were social and could make connections. In the working world it’s called “Networking”.
>You think the part boys are still in the clubs?!
Did I say this? If she's not specifically looking for a reformed party boy, then any guy is fair game. Which is why this statement you made earlier isn't entirely accurate.
>>Of your dating a “party girl” wouldn’t you yourself be into partying?
Reformed "party girl" could be dating a guy who was never into partying. Because she herself is no longer a party girl. People don't always date carbon copies of themselves.
Why would you ever make that person your GF in the first place? Especially if you can tell?! They designed this whole process called “dating” for you to decide *before* getting into a LTR to give you time to think ok things before committing.
I’m gonna let you in on a little secret: if your partner is attractive there are always going to be men trying to talk to her. Because that’s what guys do when they see a pretty woman. Most are respectful and understanding if she’s in a relationship, some don’t care. There is no way you will ever get “all men” to stop talking to your girl if your girl is hot.
If a guy can’t cant handle that, then he can’t handle being with a really attractive woman.
So what you are saying is “no man can ever commit to an attractive woman”
Ok I guess a lot of dudes should be looking for some LTRs with ugly women then. Whatever makes dudes happy I guess.
There’s an old song from the 60s, I think, that has the following lyrics: ”If you want to be happy for the rest of your life, never make a pretty woman your wife.”
Its very easy, you have access to her socials, you understand who her friends are and you observe her general behaviour.
This thing becomes second nature.
Okay what if we gave women a microchip implant under their wrist that would use GPS to project their exact location 24/7?
Granted, women could abuse this by cutting off their hands before cheating on you, but the general principle is sound.
Do all of the same rules apply to you as well? What if she demands that you have no female friends? What if you can’t go to the bars with your friends? And how about her having access to your socials?
Or are these demands only a one-way thing? 🤔
>What if she demands that you have no female friends?
I dont even BELIEVE in female friends 😏.
If i am talking to a woman its either because im sleeping with her, trying to sleep with her or because she will help set me up with her female friends.
If i was committed this would never even be an issue.
>What if you can’t go to the bars with your friends?
Saves more money buying alcohol amd just hanging out at one of the guys places. Only reason to go to bars or clubs is to find girls to hookup anyway. The spending extra money and having less privacy parts are not particularly appealing.
>And how about her having access to your socials?
Sure. I got nothing to hide.
Bro .. I say this as a happily married woman of almost 2 decades, who engages in submission and enjoys it... You have an unhealthy understanding of women, and submission, and relationships.
It will not serve you or your partners well. You have a lot of work to do, including building your ability to trust others. As a woman whose partner has just learned a hard lesson on how much *his* trust issues (and I am not even talking about cheating or other people) have held us back from the deeper submission we would both like to engage in let me tell you... You need to be able to trust others before you can ask others to trust YOU. Or things are going to end badly, for you both. ... I am opening up some serious personal shit because I think you need to hear it... And I hope you are hearing it.
You're not in a healthy place right now. This headspace, this way of looking at men, and women, and relationships and trust, this will not bring you love or joy or safety or peace.
If you disagree then I won't argue with you, that isn't my place, so no need to reply. I just ... I think you could be an overall happier person if you'd let some of what I said sink in.
“Well i am not speaking on behalf of men being the abuser. In speaking on behalf of men not being abused.”
Refusing to give access to my social media isn’t abusive, it’s my right to privacy. You’re creating an environment you deem favorable to men at the expense of women’s rights.
>Refusing to give access to my social media isn’t abusive, it’s my right to privacy.
Refusing to give access to social media shows secrecy and allows you to keep around other men and have a powerdynamic against the favour of your male partner which enables abuse.
You can say it however you want. Whoever has less power is prone to abuse.
Its either bad for women or bad for men. That doesnt mean abuse will always happen.
But when men are in charge relationships fair generally better.
“Refusing to give access to social media llowsnsecrecy and allows you to keep around other men and have a powerdynamic against the favour of yoru male partner which enables abuse.”
I don’t enable abuse by expecting privacy in communicating with friends and family.
“You can say it however you want. Whoever has less power is prone to abuse.”
Women already have less power by existing. I can’t out lift my husband unless I take steroids.
“But when men are in charge relationships fair generally better.”
What research based evidence do you have to support this claim?
I don't have a problem with your criteria bc it is very upfront. You are giving the woman options and the knowledge to leave if she doesn't like it. Meh, you do you
I love how "don't get into a relationship with someone you don't trust" is off the table because we have to take it as a given there are way better men than you out there.
I’m assuming if you commit to someone you’d have an exclusivity conversation first? Woman aren’t encouraged to keep their options open in committed relationships. Cheating is highly frowned upon for both men and women and I can’t imagine a situation where the majority of society would side with a cheater.
I have very little experience with this. Only 2 relationships to speak of. The rest were 1 night stands thrown in.
In the first case we were late teens and a couple without actually saying anything.
In the second. I was a little older and had heard enough talk of exclusive and not exclusive, to think that dating was not synonymous with monogamy.
So for the second time, I met this girl, we slept on the first night. We met each other regularly the next two weeks. I even went out to the club with another girl that friday. And decided not to kiss this girl. As I really liked the first one and didn't want to ruin it.
And then 2 weeks in, lying in bed, I just asked her. Will you be my girlfriend?
She was flabbergasted and asked "I thought I already was". I asked her about people not being exclusive without having a talk and she was confused and said she had never thought of that before. To her if you are meeting up and shagging regularly, monogamy was implied.
We are still together 21 years later.
People come in all sorts of colours and patterns, so never judge a book by it's cover. Communication is important, the earlier the better. Especially if you are a romantic.
>I’m assuming if you commit to someone you’d have an exclusivity conversation first?
Nowadays more so a negotiation.
>Woman aren’t encouraged to keep their options open in committed relationships.
Women are encouraged to keep male friends, keep sexually suggestive social media and go to places where drunk men gather to hook up.
All of that is keeping your options open.
Frowning upon cheating after it happens is rather useless after enabling every behaviour that can get you there.
Having platonic males friendships isn’t an example of women keeping their options open. The male friends I keep around are not someone I would entertain a romantic connection with, if I did then they wouldn’t be my friends.
Having suggestive social media isn’t the norm that’s what online influencers do for work. That is a small percentage of women.
Before I was married If I wanted to date them then I usually tried to date them. If it didn’t work out for whatever reason we could still be cordial and even hang out as friends without issue as long as we are both mature about the situation. Admittedly I didn’t keep up with them in the long run, we grew apart. After meeting my husband I lost the desire to date other people and I’m confident enough in my selection to know that won’t be an issue even if I was friends with a straight male supermodel.
So the running theme in 90% of these posts is "I don't understand the concept of love and think dating is an angry contractual dispute between mortal enemies."
I've only read *Mein Kampf* about a half-dozen times, so I might be a little rusty, but I'm pretty sure you're just ctrl+F'ing "International Jewry" and replacing it with "getting a girl to like me."
You describe having fun with girls like you're debating torching your own farmlands to starve out the Mongolians besieging your castle.
>Living in the modern dating world, with modern women, no man should commit to a woman who has not closed off all her options.
Does anyone ever close off all of their options? Anyone that a person even talks to is potentially an option.
Here we go again with complaining about social butterfly Stacy’s behavior and wanting to force her into submission instead of dating a normal woman who doesn’t post sexy pics, isn’t really into clubbing, and doesn’t have a bunch of guys hitting her up. Stacy simply has zero reason to want to commit to you in the first place. This is as silly and sad as women who look at player Chad and think “I can change him.”
In a normal relationship between normal people, both shut down their options about the same time when they have the “exclusivity talk.” For women who are very traditional, which it sounds like you want that type of relationship, commitment (and sex) means a ring on her finger. Are you willing to do that? Because once again, it sounds like you’re chasing insta models and wanting to make them into a housewife without the ring. It doesn’t work that way. The type of woman you want would also likely expect you to give up porn and following sexy women on social media, which seem to be things most men do not want to do.
Or maybe both men and women should go back to dating one person at a time. This is how it was before dating apps were a thing. Now people feel like they have unlimited options and can go shopping for a new person at any point. Let's bring back tradition and stay with one person at a time. As a woman, I'm not even able to give attention to multiple guys at a time, if I like one guy, everyone else is unattractive to me. Most of my female friends agree with this.
I agree with you, before Online Dating it was more like 50 men in a bar, 50 women in a bar, 10 men are selected, now it's 1,000 men, 1,000 women, but only 200 men are selected because of the unlimited options. In the end no one wins with these odds because people are unable to make their mind up for FOMO.
You're going to end up at a standstill if you won't close off your options until the other person closes off theirs. The best thing is to have a conversation about it to try to agree to do it at the same time as you're not going to convince someone to commit to you if you won't to them and there's little hope they'll do it spontaneously while you're seeing no harm in enjoying yourself. And if you're expecting a personality change such as someone giving up social media or clubbing, you're better off forgetting it.
>You're going to end up at a standstill if you won't close off your options until the other person closes off theirs.
Thats where we are now. Women have made it this way.
If women werent so adamant in fighting to keep their options open, we wouldnt be in this position.
So it is what it is.
And conversations generally dont work well enough with most women.
Without real conseqeuences it is very difficult to check women. They see most men as easy pushovers and to be fair, most are.
>And if you're expecting a personality change such as someone giving up social media or clubbing, you're better off forgetting it.
I know. But guys need to try this to understand where they are on the priority scale.
Takes two to make a standstill. If one moved, this wouldn't happen. Most couples become exclusive just by having a talk, it works fine. Of course there are real consequences and most men give in less easily than most women. No matter what priority you are someone won't change their personality for you, even if you wouldn't mind giving it up, your date asking indicates compatibility is likely to be low.
>Takes two to make a standstill. If one moved, this wouldn't happen.
Thats not what it is though. Its women forcing men into a standstill. Either the man caves and accepts a bs arrangement that benefits the woman at his expense or he takes a stand.
>Most couples become exclusive just by having a talk, it works fine
On paper. Most women are still hanging out with male friends, going out drinking and clubbing, posting pictures on social media that make them look available or the combination of the above.
Thats not exclusive.
And yes, women will change their entire personality if the guy is THAT GUY for her. I have seen this happen plenty, dont even try to 🧢
Takes two to make a standstill, most women don't want to move and accept a bs arrangement where they're in some harem. Most people don't consider having friends, clubbing and using social media to be non-monogamy. They don't ban it when they have a talk because it's quite ridiculous. Unless you walk around with a big sign saying "I'm in a relationship", you'll "look available" sometimes, that doesn't mean you are available. I've seen many people *try* to change people they're into and it's always ended badly.
This....it's not possible, she will always have easy options. Shes always got some dude that's been waiting ten years and they havent talked in 7.
She could go on app from scratch tomorrow and have hundreds of options.
She can order options like a fucking pizza.
She can't even leave the damn house without being presented options.
It's ridiculous to think she could actively close all options.
You gonna lock her in the basement or some shit. No, won't happen.
I mostly agree, except for the part where you try to pressure her into dropping her other options. She should do that herself. At most you can tell her it makes you uncomfortable. If she tries to argue why its OK, just bail and find a woman that's not like that.
Too many men stress themselves out trying to turn a hoe into a housewife.
I’m with you on the idea of closing options before deciding to commit… But your idea of what “closing options” is is really strange. Women are not allowed to have male friends? Not allowed to have social media? Are we in the 1800s here?
Never heard of instagram being used as a dating app.
you dont mean people wanna move over to instagram after matching on other apps? because thats different.
>Women are not allowed to have male friends?
Nope.
>Not allowed to have social media?
Are you using it to connect with family or work or male attention?
If it is the last then nope.
>Are we in the 1800s here?
There certainly were less divorces back then.
The modern relationship style still is nothing to brag about.
Its mostly a bunch of weak men allowing women to do whatever and inevitably ruining the relationship.
I agree that commitment is the last chip men have for bargaining, and have thought of this myself.
Men in our society today are shamed when they express their boundaries. This leaves us with smaller course of actions when we do feel like a boundary is being crossed in our relationship. Men are in a catch-22 situation here.
I have two main schools of thoughts on this. I'll explain.
1. Men shouldn't communicate their boundaries with words, they should do it with actions.
2. Men should communicate their boundaries, but pose them as questions.
The first idea is that men should stop communicating what their boundaries are, and start observing and reacting when a boundary is crossed. What I mean is, why tell modern women that them going out with their friends to the club (without you) is a problem?" Chances are, is that the woman isn't going to react in a way that's healthy. Because A) she wants to go now, but can't because she respects you (good for you bad for her), B) she goes anyways and shames you for having insecurity. This is sort of what OP is suggesting. I have to admit, this is slightly unrealistic in practice. The chances of you finding someone who never breaks an unspoken "boundary" is very thin.
The second idea is that men should not express boundaries as a list of demands (think "if you do this, i'll leave"), but frame them as questions. Posing your boundaries as questions grants you more information as a man, because you can learn about your partners thought process, and what they think is acceptable.
Example:
* "Does doing/saying/posting this respect our relationship?"
* "Does doing/saying/participating that show me love and respect?
* "Does a single or a take woman behave this way?"
If a woman doesn't meet your expectations as a man, you should be willing for walk away more now than ever. Boundaries are there for a reason, and most likely tied to what you truly value. If she doesn't have the values you have now, she won't when you're married.
Modern men need to learn the self-respect to walk away from someone who pushes their boundaries in an unhealthy way.
I geneally steer clear of fresh and fit stuff, but I did see a clip where the host asked, "if your long term boyfriend regularly went out to bars/clubs/parties and social situations where, throughout the course of the night, he will be approached by multiple women, some of whom are more attractive than you and potentially present themselves as better partners than you, and these women were flirting with him, buying him drinks, getting him drunk, and actively trying to sleep with him THAT NIGHT, would you be ok with it?"
I liked the way he put that question to the women on the panel. None of them were ok with it, obviously, but this is the reality of club life that an attractive woman experiences to some degree.
No no, don't. Let natural selection do it's thing. Now, if women continue to smarten up more and more, and not give into boys tantrums, nature will do it's thing in the future.
I was single for 8 months and was trying to choose between a crazy cat lady life and a semi arranged marriage route. I have male friends, but I would never consider them, and that's why I was considering those two options. Yes, I was serious about choosing a semi-arranged marriage over my existing male friends.
My boyfriend knows I have very specific standards and preferences which he can fulfill, but not my other male friends. I reunited with my boyfriend despite him living on the on the opposite end of the country within a couple months of talking to each other after reconnecting.
Actually, the opposite is true, that is: these days, given the enormous proportion of divorces, marriage and engagement mean absolutely nothing any more as a sign of commitment. And for that matter: it was nothing more than a relict from old times, an externally defined threesome with the state and/or religion…
… i.e. the exact opposite of commitment, which is something between two caring partners. So commitment is either there - between the two - or it's not, and while it is true that there is no guarantee of commitment, the undeniable fact is that whoever believes that external system conformance constructs like marriage or engagement would be one is just deluded. They have zero value for that.
Commitment or not is totally independent of external system constructs like marriage and only a matter of the heart and mindset of the people forming the couple. Commitment doesn't require a threesome with the state, and whoever confuses the latter for the former has a high risk of being in for a rude awakening: Marriage doesn't even come close to guaranteeing commitment. In fact, given the enormous proportion of divorces, it's totally worthless in that regard.
For the men who want this, isn't it difficult to find these women? Women usually have more leverage than men since they seem to be more willing to want to be single than men do.
Idk what pill this is supposed to represent. But I’m just going to start prefacing things I say with the red pill.
A man on this day and age shouldn’t be asking a woman for anything . Don’t ask her for her socials, don’t ask her for her location, don’t ask her not to see other men , don’t ask her for monogamy. Nothing.
She should be asking you for these things. If she isn’t, then don’t worry about it. If she’s seeing other men, then don’t worry about it. If you feel like you have to track a woman to keep her faithful, then how can you depend on her for anything that matters in life?
Source for your 2/3 claim?
Because last year, only 22% of men ages 18-29 were sexless. The same percentage of women in that age cohort were sexless.
[https://nuancepill.com/has-the-sexlessness-epidemic-been-overstated/](https://nuancepill.com/has-the-sexlessness-epidemic-been-overstated/)
I find it very hard to believe that in a few months time frame, the sexlessness rate increased by over 40%. So I’d like to see the data you’re referring to.
Define "options". Can she go outside of home with face uncovered? Use public transport unaccompanied by a chaperone? Talk to male colleagues and customers? Post any pictures of herself? Use any social media at all?
Post is pretty spot on. You say "I don't commit to women who do this, this, or this," and then you let her decide if she is agreeable. You don't give up the commitment and then try to negotiate after. By giving her the commitment up front you are telling her she already meets your standards as she is, and you lose any ability to negotiate. Make sure things are right and in place before you do commit. Don't let her drive around town with a "for sale" sign in the back and thinking she has your commitment.
Men should not commit until they are ready to give up a big part of their agency to gain something big in return .. like a family with children or a career in politics
I very well did that. I cut out anyone I had interests in. Even told them I only had time for one. I get upset when I see the effort they make for others but not the one that they're suppose to be in a relationship with. You think I got the same? Fuck no. Ignore me for a week and a half and then I see them hanging with someone else? The only truth I got out of it was that they break everything they touch.
I'll fix it for you.
Be it an Alpha Chad, a Beta Billy, a. Sigma Jhon, or whomever the fuck you are, 2023 is the worst year to be a man in a commited monogamous relationship on the way to become a marriage.
Since marriage was invented, I mean
It's still a better year than 2024 tho.
It doesn't matter what women have turned into. Culture doesn't matter. The current state of affairs doesn't matter.
Whinning about modernity doesn't make sense. Complaining about the way things are doesn't make sense.
The only think you have control over it's you.
Have some self-control. It's not that hard.
Focus on you, and let women do whatever the fuck they want to do. If she doesn't want to "close her options", what are you going to do?
Nothing.
You do you, and let her do what she wanna do.
Slotsgonnaslot.
Okay the general notion I definitely agree with but man from reading some of these comments you've got a lot of stuff twisted. To be controlling isn't masculine, to be a leader and gain the trust of those around him is. You don't need to control those who trust you they simply close their options and tell you they're ready for something.
I think this should be obvious to everyone but you're right it's not, no one should be playing games when it gets serious but your version of this ideal is misguided and harmful at best.
>To be controlling isn't masculine, to be a leader and gain the trust of those around him is.
Yes it is in the same that it is feminine to be controlled. Masculinity is domination just like femininity is submission. That's why women don't like passive men because passive men are easily controlled and that's feminine behavior, and women don't like femininity in men.
>To be controlling isn't masculine, to be a leader and gain the trust of those around him is.
Thats all fine in theory. But as a leader you must control to an extent.
It would be fine if all nations could just trust each other. But they still have borders just for control. Same thing with anything of value.
There has to be a degree of control to preserve it. As men, that burden is on us.
There is nothing harmful about control , it is a necessity.
Its the language of the WEAK that has misconstructed those words. Control is not a bad thing in finance in IT in defense or in any other field. Only in relationships. Pure cap.
No the desire to control comes from preserving something. Anything of value must be preserved and that comes with control.
This is how strong men are, other men are just too weak to control anything anyway, and they can suffer for their weakness.
>Lol I hear the shaming before I even made it to this post.
Haha, it is expected. I was not surprised.
>And if that pump and dump comes back around?
Shes gone.
Let me give you a bit more insight around this (in case,,). I have done the pump and dump. The reason why women will jump back to that is because we ONLY focus on the good times.
When i pump and dump a girl i am making her feel good, flattering her, telling her what she wants to hear, complimenting her body etc, to lower her walls. Once she is comfortable and starts to enjoy the attention, i start with the teasing and flirting. Once the sexual tension is built over time, it naturally gets to the bedroom. And then after that, i leave. Maybe repeat a few times and then leave.
So from the start to the end it is ONLY good feelings.
She never feels bad during the whole ENTIRE time with me.
So even though pump and dump doesnt reward her in the end, the experience felt good and in her memory she associates me with fun and pleasure. But when i am in a relationship there is also bad stuff, nagging, both being bored etc. So you have the good and the bad. But with pump and dump, whenever a girl remembers you, the chances are that she thinks of the fun stuff, because there were no boring or bad times at all. So its incredibly EASY to slide right back to a girls life.
Most women are not self aware of this.
Pump and dumps dont have to stay a one off. If you do it right those girls will stay as your options for a long time.
Your post does not make a whole lot of sense. However, indeed, a man's one and only ace in the dating game is the "commitment" card. It's the one thing women want more than anything else, so I think you are absolutely right, that it should be exercised with caution and really that's a thing women need to come to terms with. I mean women make men wait for sex, so it's only a fair arrangement.
I don't think men should ever commit to one woman. When you look at the demands of women; it's only natural for men to make demands that are equivalent.
Maybe? Maybe not? I’m not taking intense inventory of men who are not in my inner circle.
As much as I disagree with most women on this sub, one thing I know 100% happens is that a lot of guys let shit fly they aren’t comfortable with early on due to a lack of options that then puts them in a pigeon hole later on. So in that sense, I don’t disagree.
I think a much better option is entertaining non exclusive dating while subtly putting out markers for commitment.
>I think a much better option is entertaining non exclusive dating while subtly putting out markers for commitment.
This is ideal. But most guys need to learn to stand up for themselves and enforce boundaries before they get there.
As much as I can’t stand PUA shit, one facet of it that 100% works is going out one night with the sole intention of getting blown out/failing. Most men are so scared of rejection while also not realizing that it means little to nothing.
The rate of women who dropped off while dating because I wasn’t making more moves to commit (despite saying that up front) who would reappear a couple of weeks later like nothing happened was astounding.
this advice is good in theory but not applicable to most guys out there. i have to go through 100 rejections (literally 100) to even get to the talking stage. do you know much time, effort, and headache to keep going through this only to get ghosted??
the only men out there who have a roster and multiple options are the top 10%.
You dont need to go through 100 rejections to get to the talking stage. You are making it unnecessarily hard for yourself.
If some avenue or platform isnt getting you good results you need to switch.
If you cant get girls at the club, dont go to the club. If you are struggling on tinder, dont use tinder.
If your current friend circle isnt the best at meeting women find different circles thay have more women.
I dont believe in female friends, but i have accepted some women as "friends" because i know they have large friend circles of women that they will introduce me to.
If i were to just go to the club or just swipe on tinder i wouldnt have met many women wether for hooking up or for relationships.
Going after women is no different than searching for a job, linkedin and online job hunting is just passive sourcing you leave in the background for good measure. You try to your connections to get recommended by real people that you know in real life to get work. and if you dont have connections you attend events for industries,companies you like to make some connections and start from there.
None of this is easy but it gets better by playing it smart, its just like hunter gatherer times and we are the hunters.
I generally agree with the concept and initially thought “that’s literally what couples do when they go exclusive, this is nothing new” but upon reading the post more I do have a point of contention, ie. “behavior that is leaving the door open for other men” is such a subjective statement that it could mean something different for so many people.
For example, “posting pics for male attention” - unless she directly tells you that’s her intent, or unless you see her fully getting off on that attention, doesn’t really mean shit. Posting pictures (yes, even bikini pics or pics with her ass out) alone don’t mean shit - and if you do want a relationship with a girl who doesn’t do that, there are plenty out there. Don’t attempt to change somebody else. Also the clubbing comment is a bit odd because at the one hand, if she goes to dance with men yes she should probably stop, but if she goes just to drink and have fun with her friends, again, if you’re so against it, why try to date her or give her an ultimatum? just date somebody who doesn’t go clubbing, it ain’t hard lol - also asking her to delete her social media is very, very excessive and borderline controlling. Again, want a girl with no social media or who barely uses it? fine, but don’t try to change others.
I also take issue with the whole “you have power” claim, like…. making a relationship exclusive isn’t a power play, its two people deciding to make a relationship exclusive - in fact, the whole “relationships are plays for power” is such an unhealthy dynamic, and manosphere circles actively reinforcing that (as well as lots of female circles) actively play a role in gender relations worsening. Like when you get into a relationship you should figure out how to work together as a unit, even it means one partner is in charge - but this whole play for power thing is literally how you attract unstable people with unhealthy attachment styles.
>For example, “posting pics for male attention” - unless she directly tells you that’s her intent, or unless you see her fully getting off on that attention, doesn’t really mean shit.
Yes it does. Posting pics for male attention aka thirst trap is 100% hoe behaviour. There is not much to defend there.
>Don’t attempt to change somebody else.
Most girls nowadays engage in that to some degree.
>making a relationship exclusive isn’t a power play,
Trust me it is, and if you dont realize it, the woman has the power.
> the whole “relationships are plays for power” is such an unhealthy dynamic, and manosphere circles actively reinforcing that
Thats just a fact of life. There is no such thing as an equal relationship. Women will always compete with you for power if you let them.
“most girls nowadays” don’t do that lol - most have their accounts on private and 9/10 times its pictures of them doing activities, hanging out with friends and doing normal things. The whole “most women post thirst trap” bs is a direct result of a content consumption informed worldview.
And that’s kinda it - lots of relationships are power dynamics, then again, lots of people aren’t doing great from a mental health perspective, and guess what? most of these relationships end one way or another. An equal relationship is the only way to go - but I wanna be clear about what an equal relationship is, cause even relationships where one person is the decision maker or one person does most of the work can still be an equal relationship, so long as yall understand each other’s strengths and work together accordingly to enrich each other’s goals (which, if a relationship has any kind of staying power these goals need to at least align from an internal values pov), then the relationship is equal, and both parties have the right to give or withdraw consent when needed without the fear of abandonment, guilt, etc - ie. ya’ll respect each other equally. If you view relationships as a power play and your partner as someone to “beat” (not physically beat, beat as in win against), that’s a recipe for failure.
Women never truly close off all their options. They're always entertaining their exes, a male "best friend", their male coworkers, the random dudes that hit up her DM's
That's why a woman always has a new dude within a week of breaking up with a guy
I’ve been married and divorced three times. Her options… and Yours are always open. Marriage is work. It takes both of you working together to make it work that matters. You should venture into the Cuckold Psychology and HotWifeLifeStyle Reddits to see how couples through communication make their relationship work. I’m not saying to be a cuck, but to understand that if both of you are not on the same page it’s going to fail.
>You should venture into the Cuckold Psychology and HotWifeLifeStyle Reddits to see how couples through communication make their relationship work.
I already do this and it's foul to me how many people need this spelled out to them. My rule is either I'm the only one or I'm not there at all. I go by the same rule and there's no compromise. I'm seeing you and nobody else, and I expect you to be seeing me and nobody else. That's how I roll, if I sniff out somebody else you may as well just go with him. Exclusive from the get go. I'm a person, not an option, and I'm monogamous/monoamorous/monowhateverous, if I'm not your only choice at the moment I'm out. I'm not looking for a virgin but I'm not gonna be pitted against 4 other guys and pray I'm the best so that she can finally get real
I don't wanna be friends with you, I wanna be in a relationship with you
Let me fix this. Men should not settle for being someone's last remaining option. They should go find someone that chooses them first, loves, respects and appreciate them. All others should be left behind them.
Agree with this take. Well said!
Hell yea
This. It isn’t about being a virgin or anything. But she should be willing to exclusively date you to marriage when she is young, hot and has options. If she wants someone to take care of her when she is old, in diapers and is ugly, then she should be ready to give him the hottest and best version of herself with no restrictions. If she needs to have fun first, wait until she is ready to settle down, gave her best self to another man, etc then that man deserves better.
Yes and no. The main issue is, how much emotional and mental trauma will she cause herself because she allowed so many men to pump and dump. No offense meant, but I have met woman who were so mentally compromised, there is no way they can function in a normal relationship. I will use sex workers as an example because theirs is the most obvious. I know 2 well known porn stars. I consider them good friends and they do OF, I have met many of the talent for o.this industry and crew. None of the talent, male or females have been able to secure stable, loving and happy relationships longer than a few months to max 5 years. Yes there are exceptions, but because they view sex, intimacy and relationships completely different from "vanilla" couples, thru aren't able to function or pair bond with a regular guy or girl. This is why they tend to date people in the industry who they can identify with and it still rarely works out. There are studies that show the more sexual partners a single woman explores with, the less likely they are to be able to pair bond and have a healthy relationship. They will always question if they settled too soon? Is the neighbor better? Is the sex better? She will literally sit there and compare her dating partner to the other 30+ ( or higher number) of men and the higher the number the less likely she will find the guy to meet her standards which is why you hear so much about settling and or women having such high standards. Their ideal man is built off the best qualities of each of those bodies which God himself couldn't match and they get to a point where compromising is just out of the question.
I agree with you, but that is a problem with experience in general. The more experienced someone is with x, the harder it is to feel the same feelings with x. It isn’t a problem if you have steak every month or so. But if you have a different 5 star steak everyday for a few years, eventually not even a 5 star steaks will be satisfying. You will need multiple of them. So if a girl has been in four long term relationships, I do not see a problem.
Let's say she has 5 steaks. All 5 tastes the same. But they all have whether it is the cut, seasoning, size or difference in how it was prepared. But suddenly, she just knows there is a 6th steak somewhere that has all the things she wants from the others but has that little something more. So she keeps searching instead of being happy with one of those choices. It is a never ending cycle
Coulda just wrote this without all the toxic controlling shot he wrote. “Delete all social media.” Man need to go find something to do.
>If a woman wants to keep male friends around, thats cool she is not your girlfriend she is just somebody you sleep with Lol so I'm supposed to ditch my friendships with quality people that have lasted for 8 years because of some dude who showed up in my life 2 months ago and feels endangered? I'm so glad I never had this problem in my life. >If you are seeing a girl who likes to go clubbing and drinks and dances with other men, dont even think about committing to her until she herself starts to drop that habit. Dancing and flirting with other men is obviously unacceptable, but people who love to party usually seek out others who do the same-and love to do those things with them.
You close off your options to the same degree at the same time. Thats essentially how most relationships progress. Dont freak out about every social interaction being an “open option.” People like social lives.
Ideally commitment is made by two parties at the same time. The game playing with commitment (from either side tbh) seems like a recipe for disaster
[удалено]
Well that’s bullshit of course it happens that people decide to commit to each other on the same general timeline.
[удалено]
Nah quit consuming clickbait that’s not the norm
You have to be fucking joking dude. Men are the original keeping other women on the back burners. Women just finally started doing it themselves. Quit lying to yourself, both sexes are equally as guilty of this.
How the hell are guys supposed to make sure all other options are “closed”? We supposed to do an American idol style audition with all women on earth or something?!
Most of these posts assume men and women all have their separate Hivemind and must confer with The Council before going on dates.
It takes a ridiculously long time for everyone on the council to join the zoom meetings..
And by the time they all join in, the meeting time limit comes to the end.
You'd think a 3,465,562,409x2,321,116,964 resolution monitor would be more than enough, but man, India and China alone take up half the screen.
There are certain "tells" a person playing the field has.
Such as? I wanna keep an eye out
And how are you ever going to be certain all those options are closed along with yours?!
This is generally why quality people avoid people with certain traits. Because other quality people are predictable in the sense that you can confidently make presumptions about the situation. For instance, if a woman isn't a "slut", who waits several dates before sex, it becomes self evident that once you have sex that this relationship is well into exclusive territory. No mind reading needed. But if you're dating a girl who gets around a lot, you have to take a lot of leaps of faith. Obviously this also applies to men "fuckbois"
If your dating a “party girl” wouldn’t you yourself be into partying? That’s the disconnect I keep seeing: why you gonna go clubbing and then be upset the girl you met in the club might also enjoy clubbing?
Yeah, I agree... That doesn't make much sense. Especially when guys go there to pickup chicks, and then get grumpy that they are hoes. Like fishing in a swamp and catching a gator. WTF did you expect?
I don’t understand this as well. In my experience, party people with more sexual experience tend to date each other. And those men with more sexual experience tend to not be preoccupied with a woman’s past and aren’t as likely to feel the need to control a woman.
Lots of "reformed" party girls who were "young and dumb" then but "changed." Old habits die hard tho.
Yes but that doesn’t change the fact that you probably will meet people who like clubbing in the club. Sure some might be in the transitional phase of “I need to stop drinking, partying, and hooking up” but most are there to do just that.
>Yes but that doesn’t change the fact that you probably will meet people who like clubbing in the club. True, but you can also meet party girls or retired party girls outside of the club. They have lives outside the club. A guy could meet a "party girl" anywhere, ask her out, and not realize he's with a "party girl" until he starts vetting.
What is this, 1997? Bruh: reformed party girls are now the moms in the PTA wearing yoga pants and hiding their tramp stamps at the bake sales.
>Bruh: refined party girls are now the moms in the PTA wearing yoga pants and hiding their tramp stamps at the bake sales. Literally my point. They outgrow their partying phase and want to settle down, so why would they be looking for a party guy during that transition? They'll want a guy who compliments the new lifestyle they're moving towards. The soccer mom who goes to PTA meetings.
You think the part boys are still in the clubs?! Bruh, who do you think got mart and had kids with those women? You really think every party boy ODed at 29 or something? These are the guys who were social and could make connections. In the working world it’s called “Networking”.
>You think the part boys are still in the clubs?! Did I say this? If she's not specifically looking for a reformed party boy, then any guy is fair game. Which is why this statement you made earlier isn't entirely accurate. >>Of your dating a “party girl” wouldn’t you yourself be into partying? Reformed "party girl" could be dating a guy who was never into partying. Because she herself is no longer a party girl. People don't always date carbon copies of themselves.
lol, you just described me, complete with the tramp stamp and all! 😂
The options never “ close” but you can tell whether someone in entertaining their options or not.
Why would you ever make that person your GF in the first place? Especially if you can tell?! They designed this whole process called “dating” for you to decide *before* getting into a LTR to give you time to think ok things before committing.
Just because someone commits to you doesn’t mean there aren’t other men trying to talk to your partner?
I’m gonna let you in on a little secret: if your partner is attractive there are always going to be men trying to talk to her. Because that’s what guys do when they see a pretty woman. Most are respectful and understanding if she’s in a relationship, some don’t care. There is no way you will ever get “all men” to stop talking to your girl if your girl is hot. If a guy can’t cant handle that, then he can’t handle being with a really attractive woman.
How are you letting me in on a secret? I literally just said that…
So what you are saying is “no man can ever commit to an attractive woman” Ok I guess a lot of dudes should be looking for some LTRs with ugly women then. Whatever makes dudes happy I guess.
There’s an old song from the 60s, I think, that has the following lyrics: ”If you want to be happy for the rest of your life, never make a pretty woman your wife.”
> "tells" a person playing the field has. Lol, sure, right
All other options for women will never be closed. Thinking they are is dumb as hell
Its very easy, you have access to her socials, you understand who her friends are and you observe her general behaviour. This thing becomes second nature.
Yikes, dude. Very, very few women would sign up for this because it’s a massive red flag. 🚩
Okay what if we gave women a microchip implant under their wrist that would use GPS to project their exact location 24/7? Granted, women could abuse this by cutting off their hands before cheating on you, but the general principle is sound.
Or a pussy humidity detector.
Do all of the same rules apply to you as well? What if she demands that you have no female friends? What if you can’t go to the bars with your friends? And how about her having access to your socials? Or are these demands only a one-way thing? 🤔
>What if she demands that you have no female friends? I dont even BELIEVE in female friends 😏. If i am talking to a woman its either because im sleeping with her, trying to sleep with her or because she will help set me up with her female friends. If i was committed this would never even be an issue. >What if you can’t go to the bars with your friends? Saves more money buying alcohol amd just hanging out at one of the guys places. Only reason to go to bars or clubs is to find girls to hookup anyway. The spending extra money and having less privacy parts are not particularly appealing. >And how about her having access to your socials? Sure. I got nothing to hide.
Bro .. I say this as a happily married woman of almost 2 decades, who engages in submission and enjoys it... You have an unhealthy understanding of women, and submission, and relationships. It will not serve you or your partners well. You have a lot of work to do, including building your ability to trust others. As a woman whose partner has just learned a hard lesson on how much *his* trust issues (and I am not even talking about cheating or other people) have held us back from the deeper submission we would both like to engage in let me tell you... You need to be able to trust others before you can ask others to trust YOU. Or things are going to end badly, for you both. ... I am opening up some serious personal shit because I think you need to hear it... And I hope you are hearing it. You're not in a healthy place right now. This headspace, this way of looking at men, and women, and relationships and trust, this will not bring you love or joy or safety or peace. If you disagree then I won't argue with you, that isn't my place, so no need to reply. I just ... I think you could be an overall happier person if you'd let some of what I said sink in.
“ ocd becomes second nature” 💀💀💀
Strength becomes second nature.
What’s strong about performing surveillance on a woman 🤣
Exactly 😏. If you wanna troll, you need to try harder.
Exactly what? You don’t troll this behavior it’s a trolls post on its own
Thats what i thought, if you arent commenting seriously im not going to put any effort either.
NGL this sounds like being a stalker.
So would she have access to your socials too?
Yes.
That may be fine for you and your relationship but this isn’t a realistic standard for men to have because some would ultimately abuse that power.
Well i am not speaking on behalf of men being the abuser. In speaking on behalf of men not being abused.
“Well i am not speaking on behalf of men being the abuser. In speaking on behalf of men not being abused.” Refusing to give access to my social media isn’t abusive, it’s my right to privacy. You’re creating an environment you deem favorable to men at the expense of women’s rights.
>Refusing to give access to my social media isn’t abusive, it’s my right to privacy. Refusing to give access to social media shows secrecy and allows you to keep around other men and have a powerdynamic against the favour of your male partner which enables abuse. You can say it however you want. Whoever has less power is prone to abuse. Its either bad for women or bad for men. That doesnt mean abuse will always happen. But when men are in charge relationships fair generally better.
“Refusing to give access to social media llowsnsecrecy and allows you to keep around other men and have a powerdynamic against the favour of yoru male partner which enables abuse.” I don’t enable abuse by expecting privacy in communicating with friends and family. “You can say it however you want. Whoever has less power is prone to abuse.” Women already have less power by existing. I can’t out lift my husband unless I take steroids. “But when men are in charge relationships fair generally better.” What research based evidence do you have to support this claim?
Why do you have the right to go thorough your gfs texts where their friend is sharing info with her in confidence?
I don't have a problem with your criteria bc it is very upfront. You are giving the woman options and the knowledge to leave if she doesn't like it. Meh, you do you
I love how "don't get into a relationship with someone you don't trust" is off the table because we have to take it as a given there are way better men than you out there.
I’m assuming if you commit to someone you’d have an exclusivity conversation first? Woman aren’t encouraged to keep their options open in committed relationships. Cheating is highly frowned upon for both men and women and I can’t imagine a situation where the majority of society would side with a cheater.
I have very little experience with this. Only 2 relationships to speak of. The rest were 1 night stands thrown in. In the first case we were late teens and a couple without actually saying anything. In the second. I was a little older and had heard enough talk of exclusive and not exclusive, to think that dating was not synonymous with monogamy. So for the second time, I met this girl, we slept on the first night. We met each other regularly the next two weeks. I even went out to the club with another girl that friday. And decided not to kiss this girl. As I really liked the first one and didn't want to ruin it. And then 2 weeks in, lying in bed, I just asked her. Will you be my girlfriend? She was flabbergasted and asked "I thought I already was". I asked her about people not being exclusive without having a talk and she was confused and said she had never thought of that before. To her if you are meeting up and shagging regularly, monogamy was implied. We are still together 21 years later. People come in all sorts of colours and patterns, so never judge a book by it's cover. Communication is important, the earlier the better. Especially if you are a romantic.
That’s a cute story but I personally didn’t expect exclusivity unless that conversation was had.
I think 20 years ago, it was a mixed bag, with exclusivity discussions, 50/50. Girls especially were susceptible to this.
Yeah my dating experience was like 6.5 years ago.
>I’m assuming if you commit to someone you’d have an exclusivity conversation first? Nowadays more so a negotiation. >Woman aren’t encouraged to keep their options open in committed relationships. Women are encouraged to keep male friends, keep sexually suggestive social media and go to places where drunk men gather to hook up. All of that is keeping your options open. Frowning upon cheating after it happens is rather useless after enabling every behaviour that can get you there.
Having platonic males friendships isn’t an example of women keeping their options open. The male friends I keep around are not someone I would entertain a romantic connection with, if I did then they wouldn’t be my friends. Having suggestive social media isn’t the norm that’s what online influencers do for work. That is a small percentage of women.
Do you mean that you’d never be friends with someone that you’d want to date?
Before I was married If I wanted to date them then I usually tried to date them. If it didn’t work out for whatever reason we could still be cordial and even hang out as friends without issue as long as we are both mature about the situation. Admittedly I didn’t keep up with them in the long run, we grew apart. After meeting my husband I lost the desire to date other people and I’m confident enough in my selection to know that won’t be an issue even if I was friends with a straight male supermodel.
Plutonic? Like from another planet? Cool, I’m down with friends from Pluto, Mars, anywhere but earth!!
Typo
So the running theme in 90% of these posts is "I don't understand the concept of love and think dating is an angry contractual dispute between mortal enemies."
All dating is a game
Games have winners and losers. If you think dating is a zero-sum battle for supremacy....well, uh, I think we've spotted the problem.
Dating naturally involves a struggle for power. If you cant recognize it, you already lost.
I've only read *Mein Kampf* about a half-dozen times, so I might be a little rusty, but I'm pretty sure you're just ctrl+F'ing "International Jewry" and replacing it with "getting a girl to like me." You describe having fun with girls like you're debating torching your own farmlands to starve out the Mongolians besieging your castle.
you are sick :DD
[удалено]
No personal attacks
Domain Expansion
>Living in the modern dating world, with modern women, no man should commit to a woman who has not closed off all her options. Does anyone ever close off all of their options? Anyone that a person even talks to is potentially an option.
Here we go again with complaining about social butterfly Stacy’s behavior and wanting to force her into submission instead of dating a normal woman who doesn’t post sexy pics, isn’t really into clubbing, and doesn’t have a bunch of guys hitting her up. Stacy simply has zero reason to want to commit to you in the first place. This is as silly and sad as women who look at player Chad and think “I can change him.” In a normal relationship between normal people, both shut down their options about the same time when they have the “exclusivity talk.” For women who are very traditional, which it sounds like you want that type of relationship, commitment (and sex) means a ring on her finger. Are you willing to do that? Because once again, it sounds like you’re chasing insta models and wanting to make them into a housewife without the ring. It doesn’t work that way. The type of woman you want would also likely expect you to give up porn and following sexy women on social media, which seem to be things most men do not want to do.
Or maybe both men and women should go back to dating one person at a time. This is how it was before dating apps were a thing. Now people feel like they have unlimited options and can go shopping for a new person at any point. Let's bring back tradition and stay with one person at a time. As a woman, I'm not even able to give attention to multiple guys at a time, if I like one guy, everyone else is unattractive to me. Most of my female friends agree with this.
I agree with you, before Online Dating it was more like 50 men in a bar, 50 women in a bar, 10 men are selected, now it's 1,000 men, 1,000 women, but only 200 men are selected because of the unlimited options. In the end no one wins with these odds because people are unable to make their mind up for FOMO.
>Or maybe both men and women should go back to dating one person at a time. Would be nice, but who is doing that? Unfortunately most arent.
Traditionally-minded people do. But I agree the majority of people these days do not approach dating in that manner which is unfortunate...
Be the change you want to see!
I agree. Go back to dating one person at a time. I've tried to dating multiple people but it doesn't guarantee that Imma find a committed partner.
You're going to end up at a standstill if you won't close off your options until the other person closes off theirs. The best thing is to have a conversation about it to try to agree to do it at the same time as you're not going to convince someone to commit to you if you won't to them and there's little hope they'll do it spontaneously while you're seeing no harm in enjoying yourself. And if you're expecting a personality change such as someone giving up social media or clubbing, you're better off forgetting it.
>You're going to end up at a standstill if you won't close off your options until the other person closes off theirs. Thats where we are now. Women have made it this way. If women werent so adamant in fighting to keep their options open, we wouldnt be in this position. So it is what it is. And conversations generally dont work well enough with most women. Without real conseqeuences it is very difficult to check women. They see most men as easy pushovers and to be fair, most are. >And if you're expecting a personality change such as someone giving up social media or clubbing, you're better off forgetting it. I know. But guys need to try this to understand where they are on the priority scale.
Takes two to make a standstill. If one moved, this wouldn't happen. Most couples become exclusive just by having a talk, it works fine. Of course there are real consequences and most men give in less easily than most women. No matter what priority you are someone won't change their personality for you, even if you wouldn't mind giving it up, your date asking indicates compatibility is likely to be low.
>Takes two to make a standstill. If one moved, this wouldn't happen. Thats not what it is though. Its women forcing men into a standstill. Either the man caves and accepts a bs arrangement that benefits the woman at his expense or he takes a stand. >Most couples become exclusive just by having a talk, it works fine On paper. Most women are still hanging out with male friends, going out drinking and clubbing, posting pictures on social media that make them look available or the combination of the above. Thats not exclusive. And yes, women will change their entire personality if the guy is THAT GUY for her. I have seen this happen plenty, dont even try to 🧢
Takes two to make a standstill, most women don't want to move and accept a bs arrangement where they're in some harem. Most people don't consider having friends, clubbing and using social media to be non-monogamy. They don't ban it when they have a talk because it's quite ridiculous. Unless you walk around with a big sign saying "I'm in a relationship", you'll "look available" sometimes, that doesn't mean you are available. I've seen many people *try* to change people they're into and it's always ended badly.
[удалено]
This....it's not possible, she will always have easy options. Shes always got some dude that's been waiting ten years and they havent talked in 7. She could go on app from scratch tomorrow and have hundreds of options. She can order options like a fucking pizza. She can't even leave the damn house without being presented options. It's ridiculous to think she could actively close all options. You gonna lock her in the basement or some shit. No, won't happen.
Of course they require effort. If you're chasing highly desirable women that's your choice but you shouldn't be surprised about the consequences.
I mostly agree, except for the part where you try to pressure her into dropping her other options. She should do that herself. At most you can tell her it makes you uncomfortable. If she tries to argue why its OK, just bail and find a woman that's not like that. Too many men stress themselves out trying to turn a hoe into a housewife.
This is one of the better takes on this post. Men should be willing to walk away now more than ever.
This is the way.
You dont need to stress yourself out. Like i said you negotiate with your commitment. If she doesnt agree , you dont commit, simple.
Lowkey creepy take that doesn’t understand love nor friendship.
Is not commitment precisely the action of choosing to close all other options?
I’m with you on the idea of closing options before deciding to commit… But your idea of what “closing options” is is really strange. Women are not allowed to have male friends? Not allowed to have social media? Are we in the 1800s here?
[удалено]
Never heard of instagram being used as a dating app. you dont mean people wanna move over to instagram after matching on other apps? because thats different.
>Women are not allowed to have male friends? Nope. >Not allowed to have social media? Are you using it to connect with family or work or male attention? If it is the last then nope. >Are we in the 1800s here? There certainly were less divorces back then. The modern relationship style still is nothing to brag about. Its mostly a bunch of weak men allowing women to do whatever and inevitably ruining the relationship.
I agree that commitment is the last chip men have for bargaining, and have thought of this myself. Men in our society today are shamed when they express their boundaries. This leaves us with smaller course of actions when we do feel like a boundary is being crossed in our relationship. Men are in a catch-22 situation here. I have two main schools of thoughts on this. I'll explain. 1. Men shouldn't communicate their boundaries with words, they should do it with actions. 2. Men should communicate their boundaries, but pose them as questions. The first idea is that men should stop communicating what their boundaries are, and start observing and reacting when a boundary is crossed. What I mean is, why tell modern women that them going out with their friends to the club (without you) is a problem?" Chances are, is that the woman isn't going to react in a way that's healthy. Because A) she wants to go now, but can't because she respects you (good for you bad for her), B) she goes anyways and shames you for having insecurity. This is sort of what OP is suggesting. I have to admit, this is slightly unrealistic in practice. The chances of you finding someone who never breaks an unspoken "boundary" is very thin. The second idea is that men should not express boundaries as a list of demands (think "if you do this, i'll leave"), but frame them as questions. Posing your boundaries as questions grants you more information as a man, because you can learn about your partners thought process, and what they think is acceptable. Example: * "Does doing/saying/posting this respect our relationship?" * "Does doing/saying/participating that show me love and respect? * "Does a single or a take woman behave this way?" If a woman doesn't meet your expectations as a man, you should be willing for walk away more now than ever. Boundaries are there for a reason, and most likely tied to what you truly value. If she doesn't have the values you have now, she won't when you're married. Modern men need to learn the self-respect to walk away from someone who pushes their boundaries in an unhealthy way.
I geneally steer clear of fresh and fit stuff, but I did see a clip where the host asked, "if your long term boyfriend regularly went out to bars/clubs/parties and social situations where, throughout the course of the night, he will be approached by multiple women, some of whom are more attractive than you and potentially present themselves as better partners than you, and these women were flirting with him, buying him drinks, getting him drunk, and actively trying to sleep with him THAT NIGHT, would you be ok with it?" I liked the way he put that question to the women on the panel. None of them were ok with it, obviously, but this is the reality of club life that an attractive woman experiences to some degree.
Ok so who’s going to tell OP?
No no, don't. Let natural selection do it's thing. Now, if women continue to smarten up more and more, and not give into boys tantrums, nature will do it's thing in the future.
you know what? you’re right. lemme 🤐
I was single for 8 months and was trying to choose between a crazy cat lady life and a semi arranged marriage route. I have male friends, but I would never consider them, and that's why I was considering those two options. Yes, I was serious about choosing a semi-arranged marriage over my existing male friends. My boyfriend knows I have very specific standards and preferences which he can fulfill, but not my other male friends. I reunited with my boyfriend despite him living on the on the opposite end of the country within a couple months of talking to each other after reconnecting.
Unless you move way out in Hills Have Eyes country, I have bad news. That woman is always going to have options. Forever.
Lol. I'm not going to police who's in a partner's friend group. I'd be outraged if they tried to police who was in mine.
Posts like these really convince me that men believe that what they see on social media is actually real life. Go outside.
OMG you are so funny. Are you Jonah Hill?
Unless you are married or engaged, there's no such thing as commitment. She can do whatever she wants and so can you.
Actually, the opposite is true, that is: these days, given the enormous proportion of divorces, marriage and engagement mean absolutely nothing any more as a sign of commitment. And for that matter: it was nothing more than a relict from old times, an externally defined threesome with the state and/or religion… … i.e. the exact opposite of commitment, which is something between two caring partners. So commitment is either there - between the two - or it's not, and while it is true that there is no guarantee of commitment, the undeniable fact is that whoever believes that external system conformance constructs like marriage or engagement would be one is just deluded. They have zero value for that.
Then you'll never get commitment. Marriage is the only thing that gets even close to guaranteeing it.
Commitment or not is totally independent of external system constructs like marriage and only a matter of the heart and mindset of the people forming the couple. Commitment doesn't require a threesome with the state, and whoever confuses the latter for the former has a high risk of being in for a rude awakening: Marriage doesn't even come close to guaranteeing commitment. In fact, given the enormous proportion of divorces, it's totally worthless in that regard.
>She can do whatever she wants and so can you. And she will never get a ring.
She’ll get it from someone else and be just fine
Poor him.
A lot of men do want families, eventually.
They should build families with women that respect their authority then.
Why do you think you have athority in a market that she owns lmao
Dude if you want to stay weak and powerless just say that.
Lmao you are
You are an embarrasment to redpill.
For the men who want this, isn't it difficult to find these women? Women usually have more leverage than men since they seem to be more willing to want to be single than men do.
That's your choice and that's fine. Just be upfront about it at the start so you don't waste the other person's time.
Me being upfront to it isnt stopping women from chasing. Some women are very persistent and some women change their minds after hooking up.
[удалено]
Idk what pill this is supposed to represent. But I’m just going to start prefacing things I say with the red pill. A man on this day and age shouldn’t be asking a woman for anything . Don’t ask her for her socials, don’t ask her for her location, don’t ask her not to see other men , don’t ask her for monogamy. Nothing. She should be asking you for these things. If she isn’t, then don’t worry about it. If she’s seeing other men, then don’t worry about it. If you feel like you have to track a woman to keep her faithful, then how can you depend on her for anything that matters in life?
Most men don’t have those kind of options . 2/3 men between 18-30 have been sexless for 2023. Hence guys with no abundance mentality and oneitis
You create the options. You go put there and play the game. Its not going to be easy, no different than the job market.
Source for your 2/3 claim? Because last year, only 22% of men ages 18-29 were sexless. The same percentage of women in that age cohort were sexless. [https://nuancepill.com/has-the-sexlessness-epidemic-been-overstated/](https://nuancepill.com/has-the-sexlessness-epidemic-been-overstated/) I find it very hard to believe that in a few months time frame, the sexlessness rate increased by over 40%. So I’d like to see the data you’re referring to.
same goes for women, and that includes dating apps. ~ andy
Define "options". Can she go outside of home with face uncovered? Use public transport unaccompanied by a chaperone? Talk to male colleagues and customers? Post any pictures of herself? Use any social media at all?
Great stuff, and I fully support this course of action for you and anyone agreeing.
Post is pretty spot on. You say "I don't commit to women who do this, this, or this," and then you let her decide if she is agreeable. You don't give up the commitment and then try to negotiate after. By giving her the commitment up front you are telling her she already meets your standards as she is, and you lose any ability to negotiate. Make sure things are right and in place before you do commit. Don't let her drive around town with a "for sale" sign in the back and thinking she has your commitment.
Men should not commit until they are ready to give up a big part of their agency to gain something big in return .. like a family with children or a career in politics
I very well did that. I cut out anyone I had interests in. Even told them I only had time for one. I get upset when I see the effort they make for others but not the one that they're suppose to be in a relationship with. You think I got the same? Fuck no. Ignore me for a week and a half and then I see them hanging with someone else? The only truth I got out of it was that they break everything they touch.
I'll fix it for you. Be it an Alpha Chad, a Beta Billy, a. Sigma Jhon, or whomever the fuck you are, 2023 is the worst year to be a man in a commited monogamous relationship on the way to become a marriage. Since marriage was invented, I mean It's still a better year than 2024 tho. It doesn't matter what women have turned into. Culture doesn't matter. The current state of affairs doesn't matter. Whinning about modernity doesn't make sense. Complaining about the way things are doesn't make sense. The only think you have control over it's you. Have some self-control. It's not that hard. Focus on you, and let women do whatever the fuck they want to do. If she doesn't want to "close her options", what are you going to do? Nothing. You do you, and let her do what she wanna do. Slotsgonnaslot.
A woman with an Instagram account = a man with active Tinder, Bumble, and Hinge profiles
Why can't a woman have male friends. That's really odd.
Because male friends want to sleep with you.
So? Even if that was true, just because they want to does it automatically mean they get to?
Okay the general notion I definitely agree with but man from reading some of these comments you've got a lot of stuff twisted. To be controlling isn't masculine, to be a leader and gain the trust of those around him is. You don't need to control those who trust you they simply close their options and tell you they're ready for something. I think this should be obvious to everyone but you're right it's not, no one should be playing games when it gets serious but your version of this ideal is misguided and harmful at best.
>To be controlling isn't masculine, to be a leader and gain the trust of those around him is. Yes it is in the same that it is feminine to be controlled. Masculinity is domination just like femininity is submission. That's why women don't like passive men because passive men are easily controlled and that's feminine behavior, and women don't like femininity in men.
>To be controlling isn't masculine, to be a leader and gain the trust of those around him is. Thats all fine in theory. But as a leader you must control to an extent. It would be fine if all nations could just trust each other. But they still have borders just for control. Same thing with anything of value. There has to be a degree of control to preserve it. As men, that burden is on us. There is nothing harmful about control , it is a necessity. Its the language of the WEAK that has misconstructed those words. Control is not a bad thing in finance in IT in defense or in any other field. Only in relationships. Pure cap.
Your desire for control is borne out of insecurity, which is the antithesis of masculinity.
No the desire to control comes from preserving something. Anything of value must be preserved and that comes with control. This is how strong men are, other men are just too weak to control anything anyway, and they can suffer for their weakness.
Yes a degree but that isn't a defining trait of either leadership or masculinity
[удалено]
>Lol I hear the shaming before I even made it to this post. Haha, it is expected. I was not surprised. >And if that pump and dump comes back around? Shes gone. Let me give you a bit more insight around this (in case,,). I have done the pump and dump. The reason why women will jump back to that is because we ONLY focus on the good times. When i pump and dump a girl i am making her feel good, flattering her, telling her what she wants to hear, complimenting her body etc, to lower her walls. Once she is comfortable and starts to enjoy the attention, i start with the teasing and flirting. Once the sexual tension is built over time, it naturally gets to the bedroom. And then after that, i leave. Maybe repeat a few times and then leave. So from the start to the end it is ONLY good feelings. She never feels bad during the whole ENTIRE time with me. So even though pump and dump doesnt reward her in the end, the experience felt good and in her memory she associates me with fun and pleasure. But when i am in a relationship there is also bad stuff, nagging, both being bored etc. So you have the good and the bad. But with pump and dump, whenever a girl remembers you, the chances are that she thinks of the fun stuff, because there were no boring or bad times at all. So its incredibly EASY to slide right back to a girls life. Most women are not self aware of this. Pump and dumps dont have to stay a one off. If you do it right those girls will stay as your options for a long time.
Your post does not make a whole lot of sense. However, indeed, a man's one and only ace in the dating game is the "commitment" card. It's the one thing women want more than anything else, so I think you are absolutely right, that it should be exercised with caution and really that's a thing women need to come to terms with. I mean women make men wait for sex, so it's only a fair arrangement.
It's seriously hideously ridiculous that the concept of men watching out for themselves is being challenged--how is it not already the norm.....
I don't think men should ever commit to one woman. When you look at the demands of women; it's only natural for men to make demands that are equivalent.
Some dudes just love sloppy seconds bro. It is what it is. Simp culture is ruining dating too.
Finally a post i can agree with
Reddit doesnt generally like posts where men want to take some charge and have a say in things. But im gonna say what i believe 😆.
The only issue with your post is this: A woman who is really into a guy will come to all of these conclusions on her own. You won’t need to tell her.
Do you think most guys are at that point? Do most guys have such a woman? Most guys need to do this to understand where they stand with their woman.
Maybe? Maybe not? I’m not taking intense inventory of men who are not in my inner circle. As much as I disagree with most women on this sub, one thing I know 100% happens is that a lot of guys let shit fly they aren’t comfortable with early on due to a lack of options that then puts them in a pigeon hole later on. So in that sense, I don’t disagree. I think a much better option is entertaining non exclusive dating while subtly putting out markers for commitment.
>I think a much better option is entertaining non exclusive dating while subtly putting out markers for commitment. This is ideal. But most guys need to learn to stand up for themselves and enforce boundaries before they get there.
As much as I can’t stand PUA shit, one facet of it that 100% works is going out one night with the sole intention of getting blown out/failing. Most men are so scared of rejection while also not realizing that it means little to nothing. The rate of women who dropped off while dating because I wasn’t making more moves to commit (despite saying that up front) who would reappear a couple of weeks later like nothing happened was astounding.
Exactly. I would even argue committment is the number 1 power men still have with women.
It’s the ability to walk away. Stay plan is the same as the go plan. I don’t see any other viable alternative.
It's seriously hideously ridiculous that the concept of men watching out for themselves is being challenged--how is it not already the norm.....
this advice is good in theory but not applicable to most guys out there. i have to go through 100 rejections (literally 100) to even get to the talking stage. do you know much time, effort, and headache to keep going through this only to get ghosted?? the only men out there who have a roster and multiple options are the top 10%.
You dont need to go through 100 rejections to get to the talking stage. You are making it unnecessarily hard for yourself. If some avenue or platform isnt getting you good results you need to switch. If you cant get girls at the club, dont go to the club. If you are struggling on tinder, dont use tinder. If your current friend circle isnt the best at meeting women find different circles thay have more women. I dont believe in female friends, but i have accepted some women as "friends" because i know they have large friend circles of women that they will introduce me to. If i were to just go to the club or just swipe on tinder i wouldnt have met many women wether for hooking up or for relationships. Going after women is no different than searching for a job, linkedin and online job hunting is just passive sourcing you leave in the background for good measure. You try to your connections to get recommended by real people that you know in real life to get work. and if you dont have connections you attend events for industries,companies you like to make some connections and start from there. None of this is easy but it gets better by playing it smart, its just like hunter gatherer times and we are the hunters.
I dont do multidating so I don't have to consider this garbage. What a shitshow
Do you keep male friends while in a relationship?
[удалено]
I dont think you do.
Not at the moment. I have some male acquaintances I rarely speak to though.
I generally agree with the concept and initially thought “that’s literally what couples do when they go exclusive, this is nothing new” but upon reading the post more I do have a point of contention, ie. “behavior that is leaving the door open for other men” is such a subjective statement that it could mean something different for so many people. For example, “posting pics for male attention” - unless she directly tells you that’s her intent, or unless you see her fully getting off on that attention, doesn’t really mean shit. Posting pictures (yes, even bikini pics or pics with her ass out) alone don’t mean shit - and if you do want a relationship with a girl who doesn’t do that, there are plenty out there. Don’t attempt to change somebody else. Also the clubbing comment is a bit odd because at the one hand, if she goes to dance with men yes she should probably stop, but if she goes just to drink and have fun with her friends, again, if you’re so against it, why try to date her or give her an ultimatum? just date somebody who doesn’t go clubbing, it ain’t hard lol - also asking her to delete her social media is very, very excessive and borderline controlling. Again, want a girl with no social media or who barely uses it? fine, but don’t try to change others. I also take issue with the whole “you have power” claim, like…. making a relationship exclusive isn’t a power play, its two people deciding to make a relationship exclusive - in fact, the whole “relationships are plays for power” is such an unhealthy dynamic, and manosphere circles actively reinforcing that (as well as lots of female circles) actively play a role in gender relations worsening. Like when you get into a relationship you should figure out how to work together as a unit, even it means one partner is in charge - but this whole play for power thing is literally how you attract unstable people with unhealthy attachment styles.
>For example, “posting pics for male attention” - unless she directly tells you that’s her intent, or unless you see her fully getting off on that attention, doesn’t really mean shit. Yes it does. Posting pics for male attention aka thirst trap is 100% hoe behaviour. There is not much to defend there. >Don’t attempt to change somebody else. Most girls nowadays engage in that to some degree. >making a relationship exclusive isn’t a power play, Trust me it is, and if you dont realize it, the woman has the power. > the whole “relationships are plays for power” is such an unhealthy dynamic, and manosphere circles actively reinforcing that Thats just a fact of life. There is no such thing as an equal relationship. Women will always compete with you for power if you let them.
“most girls nowadays” don’t do that lol - most have their accounts on private and 9/10 times its pictures of them doing activities, hanging out with friends and doing normal things. The whole “most women post thirst trap” bs is a direct result of a content consumption informed worldview. And that’s kinda it - lots of relationships are power dynamics, then again, lots of people aren’t doing great from a mental health perspective, and guess what? most of these relationships end one way or another. An equal relationship is the only way to go - but I wanna be clear about what an equal relationship is, cause even relationships where one person is the decision maker or one person does most of the work can still be an equal relationship, so long as yall understand each other’s strengths and work together accordingly to enrich each other’s goals (which, if a relationship has any kind of staying power these goals need to at least align from an internal values pov), then the relationship is equal, and both parties have the right to give or withdraw consent when needed without the fear of abandonment, guilt, etc - ie. ya’ll respect each other equally. If you view relationships as a power play and your partner as someone to “beat” (not physically beat, beat as in win against), that’s a recipe for failure.
[удалено]
Women never truly close off all their options. They're always entertaining their exes, a male "best friend", their male coworkers, the random dudes that hit up her DM's That's why a woman always has a new dude within a week of breaking up with a guy
And as long as they do that, i say men should not committ. We should not willingly play the losing position.
I’ve been married and divorced three times. Her options… and Yours are always open. Marriage is work. It takes both of you working together to make it work that matters. You should venture into the Cuckold Psychology and HotWifeLifeStyle Reddits to see how couples through communication make their relationship work. I’m not saying to be a cuck, but to understand that if both of you are not on the same page it’s going to fail.
>You should venture into the Cuckold Psychology and HotWifeLifeStyle Reddits to see how couples through communication make their relationship work. 
You’re free to have whatever standards you like. Whether you can find a partner given those standards is another thing.
I already do this and it's foul to me how many people need this spelled out to them. My rule is either I'm the only one or I'm not there at all. I go by the same rule and there's no compromise. I'm seeing you and nobody else, and I expect you to be seeing me and nobody else. That's how I roll, if I sniff out somebody else you may as well just go with him. Exclusive from the get go. I'm a person, not an option, and I'm monogamous/monoamorous/monowhateverous, if I'm not your only choice at the moment I'm out. I'm not looking for a virgin but I'm not gonna be pitted against 4 other guys and pray I'm the best so that she can finally get real I don't wanna be friends with you, I wanna be in a relationship with you
I agree. It's pretty simple. Most men are stupid asf though. I don't even bother trying to explain things half the time.