low sex drive, shyness
Hugo Drax
meeting women. it seems that the guys who dont seem interested in women
unless it is a special person that could become a long term relationship
seem to have a low sex drive seem to have issues getting a girlfriend.
Normally guys are attracted to most women sexually and are initially
interested in dating and sex VS Lowsexdrive being very picky and looking for
the perfect girl usually ending up with no experience or girlfriend.
pumpkin_head
Well my sex drive is high and I'm a bit shy. It's very frustrating.
Charlie
nervous because I'm horny all the time.
"Hugo Drax" <hugo...@draxindustries.com> wrote in message
news:arhaes$ijiji$1...@ID-155262.news.dfncis.de...
Hugo Drax
"pumpkin_head" <umpkin_h...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:v3XC9.3782$Lq.1...@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...
which is good all you have to do is work on meeting women.
Hugo Drax
"Charlie" <Anon...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:EzYC9.12303$We5....@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
> I wonder if my sex drive being HIGH makes my shyness problems worse. More
> nervous because I'm horny all the time.
>
>
yeah that does not help because women can sense that.
pumpkin_head
> I wonder if my sex drive being HIGH makes my shyness problems worse. More
> nervous because I'm horny all the time.
It's even harder talking to a girl when you've already fantasised about
having sex with her. :o\
Thought
I think this may be partly true in my case. My sex drive is not high
by any standard; I wouldn't want to sleep with every woman I meet (it
always surprises me when other men say the opposite). I'm often
only attracted to people after knowing them for a while, although
not always.
I think I felt differently earlier in life, like around high school. I
was much more interested in sex then, but I was also much more shy;
ergo, nothing happened. And once those years passed and my shyness
improved somewhat, my sex drive has lessened along with it; ergo
still nothing.
Maybe if my sex drive back then had fulfilled itself and gotten me
some experience (and confidence), I could have been successful at
finding a serious relationship at my current age (27), who knows.
- Thoughtcube
excessW
"Hugo Drax" <hugo...@draxindustries.com> wrote in message
news:arhaes$ijiji$1...@ID-155262.news.dfncis.de...
Not long ago, i seemed to have lost all attraction to real life females, and
my brain was making a monogomous commitment to my internet porn. I was
thankful, because i wasn't getting anywhere with girls anyway, and i don't
plan to work on this until exams are over. But now it's back. Damnit.
Elston Gunn
I dunno if it matters. I had a typically high sex drive in high
school and couldn't talk to girls or ask them out, even on those rare
occasions when they showed interest. Now (mid-20s) I have a pretty
low sex drive and I can talk to women, but I have nothing to say to
them. I don't really know if that's progress or not.
Elston
Charlie
mentally slap yourself every few seconds--"don't stare at her tits!"--mental
slap.
"pumpkin_head" <umpkin_h...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9S0D9.235$DS1....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...
Trance909
>mentally slap yourself every few seconds--"don't stare at her tits!"--mental
>slap.
I actually never do that.......believe it or not, I'm pretty good at
maintaining eye contact while talking to a girl, or anyone for that matter.
Never seems to help me, though.
Deuce
I have a low sex drive, and I think it is a barrier to meeting women. I
have to deliberately undress women with my eyes and put them in all
kinds of sexual fantasies in my mind before I have enough drive to
pursue them, no matter how good looking they are. Other guys seem to
jump into action as soon as they see a girl that they are attracted to.
Deuce
Yatgirl theBucket
wrote:
>
>I have a low sex drive, and I think it is a barrier to meeting women. I
>have to deliberately undress women with my eyes and put them in all
>kinds of sexual fantasies in my mind before I have enough drive to
>pursue them, no matter how good looking they are. Other guys seem to
>jump into action as soon as they see a girl that they are attracted to.
>
I always start out with a friendship with potential. My Mister and me
have been together many years now, we started out friends and got to
liking each other differently and we both voiced that.
A bad friend ain't gonna make a good mate.
--
8^)
Yatgirl
cheezy-wheezy
Deuce
Yatgirl theBucket wrote:
>
> I always start out with a friendship with potential. My Mister and me
> have been together many years now, we started out friends and got to
> liking each other differently and we both voiced that.
> A bad friend ain't gonna make a good mate.
But a good friend will not make a good mate either as far as most women
are concerned. I can't be her friend in the beginning because that's
all I'll ever be.
Yatgirl theBucket
Not true. Why do you think peoples relationships suffer? They pick
mates they wouldn't be friends with in the first place and expect them
to meet every other requirement they have. This is the recipe for
disappointment. You gotta have some things in common, beliefs and
stuff. You gotta be friends, first.
If you're interested in a woman and start dating her, tell her you
want to be compatible, you want to find out if you'll have common
interests before you spend emotions. I'm always suspicious of people
that get right to fucking when they meet and skip over the person.
--
8^)
Yatgirl
cheezy-wheezy
Hugo Drax
"Deuce" <skwil...@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:3DE4DD99...@netzero.net...
yes, never take the friendship role. you will end up her emotional support
specialist and she will not risk loosing one by becoming a boyfriend. I
believe in not having female platonic friends, Im old fashioned I only talk
to women I plan on relationships with not yapfests with them
Yatgirl theBucket
<hugo...@draxindustries.com> wrote:
>> But a good friend will not make a good mate either as far as most women
>> are concerned. I can't be her friend in the beginning because that's
>> all I'll ever be.
>
>yes, never take the friendship role. you will end up her emotional support
>specialist and she will not risk loosing one by becoming a boyfriend. I
>believe in not having female platonic friends, Im old fashioned I only talk
>to women I plan on relationships with not yapfests with them
>
And tell me, Rico Suavé....you must have a stable of chix with all
this fantasy land advice?
--
8^)
Yatgirl
cheezy-wheezy
Hugo Drax
"Yatgirl theBucket" <yat...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:kgiauucbsct91khnf...@4ax.com...
Deuce
Yatgirl theBucket wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 14:50:51 GMT, Deuce <skwil...@netzero.net>
> wrote:
> >
> >But a good friend will not make a good mate either as far as most women
> >are concerned. I can't be her friend in the beginning because that's
> >all I'll ever be.
>
> Not true. Why do you think peoples relationships suffer? They pick
> mates they wouldn't be friends with in the first place and expect them
> to meet every other requirement they have. This is the recipe for
> disappointment. You gotta have some things in common, beliefs and
> stuff. You gotta be friends, first.
A guy cannot be friends first because the woman will will never let him
have a relationship with her after that. Ask any of the guys here. I
had to avoid being just friends to get the girl I have now.
> If you're interested in a woman and start dating her, tell her you
> want to be compatible, you want to find out if you'll have common
> interests before you spend emotions. I'm always suspicious of people
> that get right to fucking when they meet and skip over the person.
You don't have to skip over the person to have sex with them in the
beginning. You can be friends who share interests and be lovers, but it
will be a differnet kind of friend. A guy must not act like her best
friend in the beginning or else she will categorize him as ONLY a
freind. He cannot be involved in a platonic relationship in the
beginning.
Yes there are rare occasions when platonic friends make it to
relationship level, and many times those are great relationships. But
that is too rare for most guys to wait. It hasn't worked for me in my
24 years or life, I'm not waiting any longer. It also hasn't worked for
99% of the guys here.
Deuce
Deuce
Hugo Drax wrote:
>
> Im married, I have been passed the casual dating stage for some time.
Ah, no wonder you know so much. Cool. : )
Yatgirl theBucket
wrote:
>>
>> Not true. Why do you think peoples relationships suffer? They pick
>> mates they wouldn't be friends with in the first place and expect them
>> to meet every other requirement they have. This is the recipe for
>> disappointment. You gotta have some things in common, beliefs and
>> stuff. You gotta be friends, first.
>
>A guy cannot be friends first because the woman will will never let him
>have a relationship with her after that. Ask any of the guys here. I
>had to avoid being just friends to get the girl I have now.
I can only answer this by saying that I was friends first in the
relationships that I've had. If I was to do more (like screwing or
making declarations) before realizing that they would never be more
than friends I would have regret it. That's why I have to get to know
them first. I've had girlfriends fuck guys they just met or start
dating right away without knowing the person and they always regret
it. I'm just saying to get to know someone. If you meet a woman and
tell her that you want to get to know more/everything about her then
the right person will respect that.
>
>You don't have to skip over the person to have sex with them in the
>beginning. You can be friends who share interests and be lovers, but it
>will be a differnet kind of friend. A guy must not act like her best
>friend in the beginning or else she will categorize him as ONLY a
>freind. He cannot be involved in a platonic relationship in the
>beginning.
>
Well the men in my history have. I have lifelong men friends as a
result because we didn't hit it off but realized we were better as
friends. That's actually a good thing.
>Yes there are rare occasions when platonic friends make it to
>relationship level, and many times those are great relationships. But
>that is too rare for most guys to wait. It hasn't worked for me in my
>24 years or life, I'm not waiting any longer. It also hasn't worked for
>99% of the guys here.
>
I'm sorry that it sounds like you're after fast pussy and that can
always be purchased. Some of the best things in life are worth waiting
for.
--
8^)
Yatgirl
cheezy-wheezy
Yatgirl theBucket
<hugo...@draxindustries.com> wrote:
>>
>> And tell me, Rico Suavé....you must have a stable of chix with all
>> this fantasy land advice?
>> --
>>
>Im married, I have been passed the casual dating stage for some time.
>
And when the Missus is yapping? Are you this sensitive? If you used
your own advice to snag her then it must be happy land indeed over
there. Or is she letting you use the computer today?
--
8^)
Yatgirl
cheezy-wheezy
Deuce
Yatgirl theBucket wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 05:27:39 GMT, Deuce <skwil...@netzero.net>
> wrote:
>
> >A guy cannot be friends first because the woman will will never let him
> >have a relationship with her after that. Ask any of the guys here. I
> >had to avoid being just friends to get the girl I have now.
>
> I can only answer this by saying that I was friends first in the
> relationships that I've had. If I was to do more (like screwing or
Then you are exceptional, but most girls will not risk losing a good
friendship with a guy by letting it go to the relationship level, and he
is stuck in the friend zone.
> making declarations) before realizing that they would never be more
> than friends I would have regret it. That's why I have to get to know
> them first. I've had girlfriends fuck guys they just met or start
> dating right away without knowing the person and they always regret
> it. I'm just saying to get to know someone. If you meet a woman and
> tell her that you want to get to know more/everything about her then
> the right person will respect that.
>
> >
> >You don't have to skip over the person to have sex with them in the
> >beginning. You can be friends who share interests and be lovers, but it
> >will be a differnet kind of friend. A guy must not act like her best
> >friend in the beginning or else she will categorize him as ONLY a
> >freind. He cannot be involved in a platonic relationship in the
> >beginning.
> >
>
> Well the men in my history have. I have lifelong men friends as a
> result because we didn't hit it off but realized we were better as
> friends. That's actually a good thing.
You are an exception.
>
> >Yes there are rare occasions when platonic friends make it to
> >relationship level, and many times those are great relationships. But
> >that is too rare for most guys to wait. It hasn't worked for me in my
> >24 years or life, I'm not waiting any longer. It also hasn't worked for
> >99% of the guys here.
> >
>
> I'm sorry that it sounds like you're after fast pussy and that can
Any so called "respectable", slow pussy that can't show up in 24 years
is just way too long for anyone to wait. Besides a girl that makes a
guy wait and jump through hoops before having sex does not mean that she
is good, nor does a girl who can enjoy sexual pleasure with none of
societies' false hang ups about it makes her a bad girl.
> always be purchased. Some of the best things in life are worth waiting
> for.
Yes, but girls don't have to wait long, guys can wait their whole lives
for nothing. So as a guy I will enjoy girls and sex now and hope that
one of them will end up more.
Deuce
Yatgirl theBucket
wrote:
>>
>> I can only answer this by saying that I was friends first in the
>> relationships that I've had. If I was to do more (like screwing or
>
>Then you are exceptional, but most girls will not risk losing a good
>friendship with a guy by letting it go to the relationship level, and he
>is stuck in the friend zone.
>
No, I'm worth it. I like to think of the guy as exceptional.
>>
>> Well the men in my history have. I have lifelong men friends as a
>> result because we didn't hit it off but realized we were better as
>> friends. That's actually a good thing.
>
>You are an exception.
>
LOL, I've been called worse. 8^)
>>
>> I'm sorry that it sounds like you're after fast pussy and that can
>
>Any so called "respectable", slow pussy that can't show up in 24 years
>is just way too long for anyone to wait. Besides a girl that makes a
>guy wait and jump through hoops before having sex does not mean that she
>is good, nor does a girl who can enjoy sexual pleasure with none of
>societies' false hang ups about it makes her a bad girl.
>
24 years for pussy. Geez! The waiting and jumping through hoops as you
call it is maybe her trying to get to know you. You don't sound
receptable to it if you think you're being dragged along. You just
want to fuck and don't want to get to know her.
And the girl who can enjoy sexual pleasure without societies hangups
is a contradictions to what you posted earlier. The poor girl with the
cold sucking a cough drop you all but called a slut, and in this
thread you're saying how wonderful a loose women is.
MAKE UP YOUR MIND! I think you're too immature for relationships.
>> always be purchased. Some of the best things in life are worth waiting
>> for.
>
>Yes, but girls don't have to wait long, guys can wait their whole lives
>for nothing. So as a guy I will enjoy girls and sex now and hope that
>one of them will end up more.
>
Well, good luck throwing them dice.
--
8^)
Yatgirl
cheezy-wheezy
Deuce
Yatgirl theBucket wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 22:07:26 GMT, Deuce <skwil...@netzero.net>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> I'm sorry that it sounds like you're after fast pussy and that can
> >
> >Any so called "respectable", slow pussy that can't show up in 24 years
> >is just way too long for anyone to wait. Besides a girl that makes a
> >guy wait and jump through hoops before having sex does not mean that she
> >is good, nor does a girl who can enjoy sexual pleasure with none of
> >societies' false hang ups about it makes her a bad girl.
> >
>
> 24 years for pussy. Geez! The waiting and jumping through hoops as you
> call it is maybe her trying to get to know you. You don't sound
> receptable to it if you think you're being dragged along. You just
> want to fuck and don't want to get to know her.
Plenty of girls have gotten to know me and have only kept me on the
shelf as a "buddy". As most guys will attest has happened to them too.
So yes, I was being dragged along for nothing if we consider the goal to
be more than just friends. You seem to think that having sex soon
leaves room for nothing but a one night stand. You hold a very rigid
role of physical pleasure. I wanted to be friends AND fuck girls.
Being their friend made fucking impossible. Just another girlfriend
with balls.
> And the girl who can enjoy sexual pleasure without societies hangups
> is a contradictions to what you posted earlier. The poor girl with the
> cold sucking a cough drop you all but called a slut, and in this
> thread you're saying how wonderful a loose women is.
> MAKE UP YOUR MIND! I think you're too immature for relationships.
There was NO contradiction at all. The girl with the cold didn't lose
value because she is sexually adventurous, she lost value because she
started playing head games in what could have become a fullfilling
sexual and romantic relationship. Not all "loose" women, as you call
them, play these games.
Immature? lol. I can see that you are just speaking from a defensive
position now, defending your gender. However, I think that you are
immature for calling people who don't share your views immature, so
there! <*sticking out my tongue*> :-p
>
> >> always be purchased. Some of the best things in life are worth waiting
> >> for.
> >
> >Yes, but girls don't have to wait long, guys can wait their whole lives
> >for nothing. So as a guy I will enjoy girls and sex now and hope that
> >one of them will end up more.
> >
>
> Well, good luck throwing them dice.
Seven CUM Eleven!!!! Wooooooohooooooooo!!!!!!!
Deuce
Deuce
Why are you being so defensive?
Cepheid Variable
>
>
> Yatgirl theBucket wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 28 Nov 2002 22:07:26 GMT, Deuce <skwil...@netzero.net>
> > wrote:
> > >>
>
> > >>
> > >> I'm sorry that it sounds like you're after fast pussy and that can
> > >
> > >Any so called "respectable", slow pussy that can't show up in 24 years
> > >is just way too long for anyone to wait. Besides a girl that makes a
> > >guy wait and jump through hoops before having sex does not mean that
she
> > >is good, nor does a girl who can enjoy sexual pleasure with none of
> > >societies' false hang ups about it makes her a bad girl.
> > >
> >
> > 24 years for pussy. Geez! The waiting and jumping through hoops as you
> > call it is maybe her trying to get to know you. You don't sound
> > receptable to it if you think you're being dragged along. You just
> > want to fuck and don't want to get to know her.
>
> Plenty of girls have gotten to know me and have only kept me on the
> shelf as a "buddy". As most guys will attest has happened to them too.
> So yes, I was being dragged along for nothing if we consider the goal to
> be more than just friends. You seem to think that having sex soon
> leaves room for nothing but a one night stand. You hold a very rigid
> role of physical pleasure. I wanted to be friends AND fuck girls.
> Being their friend made fucking impossible. Just another girlfriend
> with balls.
There's a middle ground here too. You are absolutely correct that not
showing interest gets you in the friend category. However, the interest can
be shown early in the form of being physically attentive and affectionate in
a non-platonic manner. I'm sure you must see that not every woman would
jump straight into bed with you, but exchanging passionate touches etc. at
least assures that she's thinking of you as a potential lover while she's
getting to know you well enough to actually want to get into bed.
Yatgirl theBucket
wrote:
>> 24 years for pussy. Geez! The waiting and jumping through hoops as you
>> call it is maybe her trying to get to know you. You don't sound
>> receptable to it if you think you're being dragged along. You just
>> want to fuck and don't want to get to know her.
>
>Plenty of girls have gotten to know me and have only kept me on the
>shelf as a "buddy". As most guys will attest has happened to them too.
>So yes, I was being dragged along for nothing if we consider the goal to
>be more than just friends. You seem to think that having sex soon
>leaves room for nothing but a one night stand. You hold a very rigid
>role of physical pleasure. I wanted to be friends AND fuck girls.
>Being their friend made fucking impossible. Just another girlfriend
>with balls.
Many's the time I take my 'Just Friends' men friends and hook them up
with girlfriends. How about a friendship with women where what you get
out it is real friendship?
Terrible huh?
--
8^)
Yatgirl
I can't button my pnats!
Yatgirl theBucket
wrote:
>> >>
>> >> And tell me, Rico Suavé....you must have a stable of chix with all
>> >> this fantasy land advice?
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >Im married, I have been passed the casual dating stage for some time.
>> >
>>
>> And when the Missus is yapping? Are you this sensitive? If you used
>> your own advice to snag her then it must be happy land indeed over
>> there. Or is she letting you use the computer today?
>
>Why are you being so defensive?
I'm not defensive. This is my normal tone/attitude.
What bothers me is all the guys who posts this Big Tough Man Shit that
is highly suspect, then all a ya'll guys lapping up all the diarrhea
he spews. There is so much misinformation in this newsgroup. A lot of
people looking for affirmations for their infantile behavior with like
minded dickweeds. This garden is overgrown.
Ya'll are all stuck in some sort of fucked up Gender/Role thing like
it's the 1920 in a speakeasy. Men don't do this this and this, women
do this this and this. Ya'll idealize the club scene, which is known
by people who actually have a life, for it's sad/lonely desperation of
people who drink, shake their ass and try to pretend they have it
going on. If they had it going on, they wouldn't be in a club.
Deuce
Cepheid Variable wrote:
>
> There's a middle ground here too. You are absolutely correct that not
> showing interest gets you in the friend category. However, the interest can
> be shown early in the form of being physically attentive and affectionate in
> a non-platonic manner. I'm sure you must see that not every woman would
> jump straight into bed with you, but exchanging passionate touches etc. at
> least assures that she's thinking of you as a potential lover while she's
> getting to know you well enough to actually want to get into bed.
I never said there was anything wrong with starting out with physical
intimacy that doesn't start out with intercourse. My point was that
most guys will not even reach THAT level of intimacy that you mention if
they try to be her platonic friend first.
Deuce
Deuce
Yatgirl theBucket wrote:
>
>
> Many's the time I take my 'Just Friends' men friends and hook them up
> with girlfriends. How about a friendship with women where what you get
> out it is real friendship?
> Terrible huh?
If you hooked them up with girlfriends, then you probably introduced
those men as potentil dates/boyfriends from the beginning. I've had
many girls as just friends, good friends, so your point isssss what?
Female friends are nice, but I have enough friends. If a guy wants to
be in a sexual or romantic relationship with her he must not be her
friend first or that's all he'll ever be. He may have a string of nice
female friends but he'll be sleeping alone evry night. Even worse,
he'll probably have to listen to her talk about her relationships with
the other guys who went after her aggressively from the beginning, and
listen to her talk about things she has done with her boyfriend. Of
course that isn't bad if the guy only wanted her as a friend in the
first place.
Deuce
Deuce
Yatgirl theBucket wrote:
>
> On Fri, 29 Nov 2002 08:32:48 GMT, Deuce <skwil...@netzero.net>
> wrote:
> >> >>
> >
> >Why are you being so defensive?
>
> I'm not defensive. This is my normal tone/attitude.
>
> What bothers me is all the guys who posts this Big Tough Man Shit that
This appears to be your normal tone...when you are bothered and
defensive. I don't remember anyone talking about fighting, lol, but I
know what you meant.
> is highly suspect, then all a ya'll guys lapping up all the diarrhea
> he spews. There is so much misinformation in this newsgroup. A lot of
> people looking for affirmations for their infantile behavior with like
> minded dickweeds. This garden is overgrown.
By infantile behavior, I guess you are referring to strategies for
dating. Nothing infantile about it, that's just how the dating game
works.
>
> Ya'll are all stuck in some sort of fucked up Gender/Role thing like
> it's the 1920 in a speakeasy. Men don't do this this and this, women
We never said anything about gender roles, but each gender does have its
own specific patterns of behavior, that are common enough among each
individual to make them worth exploring. Keeping a woman barefoot and
pregnant isn't on our agenda.
> do this this and this. Ya'll idealize the club scene, which is known
We do? Clubs are a place where there are a lot of people to meet, and
alot of opportunities to practice meeting people and have fun.
> by people who actually have a life, for it's sad/lonely desperation of
> people who drink, shake their ass and try to pretend they have it
> going on. If they had it going on, they wouldn't be in a club.
If they ACTUALLY, have a life, then why are they so sad and lonely?
Going to a club doesn't make you desperate, nor does not going to a club
make you a loser with "no life".
Deuce
Neon Hugo Drax
>
>
> I can only answer this by saying that I was friends first in the
> relationships that I've had. If I was to do more (like screwing or
> making declarations) before realizing that they would never be more
> than friends I would have regret it. That's why I have to get to know
> them first. I've had girlfriends fuck guys they just met or start
> dating right away without knowing the person and they always regret
> it. I'm just saying to get to know someone. If you meet a woman and
> tell her that you want to get to know more/everything about her then
> the right person will respect that.
but the guy got to cum, he is happy :)
> >You don't have to skip over the person to have sex with them in the
> >beginning. You can be friends who share interests and be lovers, but it
> >will be a differnet kind of friend. A guy must not act like her best
> >friend in the beginning or else she will categorize him as ONLY a
> >freind. He cannot be involved in a platonic relationship in the
> >beginning.
> >
>
> Well the men in my history have. I have lifelong men friends as a
> result because we didn't hit it off but realized we were better as
> friends. That's actually a good thing.
>
> >Yes there are rare occasions when platonic friends make it to
> >relationship level, and many times those are great relationships. But
> >that is too rare for most guys to wait. It hasn't worked for me in my
> >24 years or life, I'm not waiting any longer. It also hasn't worked for
> >99% of the guys here.
> >
>
> I'm sorry that it sounds like you're after fast pussy and that can
> always be purchased. Some of the best things in life are worth waiting
> for.
> --
> 8^)
> Yatgirl
Generally women tend to put men who start out as friends in the "Brother"
catagory, somehow subconciously they do it who knows but Try and prove me
wrong, guys who are straight from the beginning with women about the
relationship being romantic are more succesful in the world of
romance/dating that guys who start out as friends. its a known fact, you
might be the exception but that does not mean all women are like you.
Neon Hugo Drax
happly married 10 years strong. Wooooooooooooooooooooot!
hehehehe your upset.
Neon Hugo Drax
I met mines in a club :)
her posture is very defensive, I suspect she has been hurt by men and seems
to have unresolved issues in that respect. It is reflected in the manner of
her posting and tone. Dont get upset by it, you need to understand her
feelings towards the subject and just forget about it.
Rain Maker
wrote:
>avoid being just friends to get the girl I have now.
sounds like she might be a mental midget. what do you talk about with
her? do you allow her to talk at all?
>but the guy got to cum, he is happy :)
fuck her, right?
>Generally women tend to put men who start out as friends in the "Brother"
>catagory,
Generally men who refer to women generally, know only one kind of
woman and do not have long nor meaningful relationships.
>its a known fact, you
>might be the exception but that does not mean all women are like you.
Its a known fact to whom?
Rain Maker
wrote:
>happly married 10 years strong. Wooooooooooooooooooooot!
Another known fact?
Rain Maker
wrote:
>I met mines in a club :)
How much were the table dances?
>her posture is very defensive, I suspect she has been hurt by men and seems
>to have unresolved issues in that respect.
Probably has. Probably by boys very much like you. You've been
married 10 years, what are you wife's issues? Go ahead and tell me
she doesn't have any.
>It is reflected in the manner of
>her posting and tone. Dont get upset by it, you need to understand her
>feelings towards the subject and just forget about it.
Passive aggressive b/s.
Yatgirl theBucket
Rain Maker, if you're a man you're instilling me with a lot of hope
for this newsgroup. 8^)
Too many sad L00zers talking tough around here.....sore wrists from
more than just typing.
Yatgirl theBucket
wrote:
>I met mines in a club :)
>
And so did a lot of other guys.
>her posture is very defensive, I suspect she has been hurt by men and seems
>to have unresolved issues in that respect. It is reflected in the manner of
>her posting and tone. Dont get upset by it, you need to understand her
>feelings towards the subject and just forget about it.
>
Not even close. Like everything else, you're way off.
It's the attitude that angers me. You and him, both a ya'll are just
steps above Cro-Magnon. Decent women see this, that's why ya'll have
to prowl the nightlife under the cover of darkness, get 'em drunk..LOL
Rain Maker
<yat...@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>Rain Maker, if you're a man you're instilling me with a lot of hope
>for this newsgroup. 8^)
Yes, I am a man. I think you'd be well served to not to measure
manhood and/or healthy relationships against the image of this ng.
Trance909
>have to deliberately undress women with my eyes and put them in all
>kinds of sexual fantasies in my mind before I have enough drive to
>pursue them, no matter how good looking they are. Other guys seem to
>jump into action as soon as they see a girl that they are attracted to.
I disagree.....I think you are better off for having a lower sex drive. Mine is
ridiculously high.....so much so that if I was to act on it, I'd most likely
get myself into trouble of some sort. It's something that has to be kept under
wraps......and of course then I overcompensate for it and rarely approach
women. And if you have such a high sex drive and you do approach a woman, you
just *desire* her so freaking badly that you can't help but stumble as you try
to hide that fact and just try to act like your ordinary friendly guy......it
just doesn't work.
Having such an intense desire for women while being introverted and shy is
hell, pretty much. It's like I feel the CONSTANT need to be around
women......and then it's disappointing and demoralizing when I'm in their
vicinity and can't do anything about it. You don't know how many times I go
over to the coffee shop to get a coffee I don't even need to be drinking, just
so I can hang out and be around all the cute girls that go in there. I go walk
around on the Beach just so I can be around pretty girls. I go out for lunch
every day so I can walk around and see what sights I may see. I leave my desk
at work constantly and go visit the other area of the office where the few cute
girls are. It's a CONSTANT need, and I start getting antsy when it's not being
fulfilled. I'm somewhat antsy right now. I've been saying this for a while now,
but it bears repeating.......I'm simply obsessed with women. I am mesmerized
and ultimately dumbstruck by them.
Trance909
>want to be compatible, you want to find out if you'll have common
>interests before you spend emotions.
I can't even get to the *start dating* part. I can't even get a simple coffee
date with a woman I have an interest in.
Yatgirl theBucket
<Rain...@Heavensgate.com> wrote:
>>Rain Maker, if you're a man you're instilling me with a lot of hope
>>for this newsgroup. 8^)
>
>Yes, I am a man. I think you'd be well served to not to measure
>manhood and/or healthy relationships against the image of this ng.
>
I don't but considering the "specimens" around here....
hee hee
Rain Maker
>have to deliberately undress women with my eyes and put them in all
>kinds of sexual fantasies in my mind before I have enough drive to
>pursue them, no matter how good looking they are. Other guys seem to
>jump into action as soon as they see a girl that they are attracted to.
If I understand what your saying correctly, you have a serious
problem, not with sex-drive, but rather with seeing women as something
other than a sexual object.
If this is actually the case, then this is a "barrier" that can be
addressed by a sex therapist.
Rain Maker
>ridiculously high.....so much so that if I was to act on it, I'd most likely
>get myself into trouble of some sort.
<snip>
>Having such an intense desire for women while being introverted and shy is
>hell, pretty much.
You also could most likely use the services of a sex therapist.
Somewhere in the middle to the two extremes you address is healthy
normalcy.
Victoria
> >Or talking to a girl WHILE you are fantasizing about her. You have to
> >mentally slap yourself every few seconds--"don't stare at her tits!"--mental
> >slap.
>
The last thing a woman is thinking about is you fantasizing about her
during a conversation. Don't you think that is disrespectful to stare
at a woman's &*^%$@ during a conversation?
Victoria
Trance909
Hey, you're misquoting me......I didn't say that! Those were not my
words.......in fact, I believe I said that I do *not* stare at a woman's chest
while talking to her.....I'm pretty sure that was my contribution to that
thread.
Deuce
Neon Hugo Drax wrote:
>
> I met mines in a club :)
I guess clubs aren't so evil then. lol :)
>
> her posture is very defensive, I suspect she has been hurt by men and seems
> to have unresolved issues in that respect. It is reflected in the manner of
> her posting and tone. Dont get upset by it, you need to understand her
> feelings towards the subject and just forget about it.
Yeah, I've seen this from women no matter what the disagreement is
about, from what color is best for painting a room, to dating, lol.
It's common and predictable.
Deuce
Deuce
Rain Maker wrote:
>
>
> >her posture is very defensive, I suspect she has been hurt by men and seems
> >to have unresolved issues in that respect.
>
> Probably has. Probably by boys very much like you. You've been
> married 10 years, what are you wife's issues? Go ahead and tell me
> she doesn't have any.
If they were men like us, then she probably started playing the games
that led to her getting burned in the first place.
>
> >It is reflected in the manner of
> >her posting and tone. Dont get upset by it, you need to understand her
> >feelings towards the subject and just forget about it.
>
> Passive aggressive b/s.
Yes, on her part.
Trance909
>Somewhere in the middle to the two extremes you address is healthy
>normalcy.
Except I don't feel like I should *need* to limit my desire for a woman. Maybe
just not overcompensate so much to the point where I'm afraid to try to meet a
woman I find attractive. I don't think the problem is the intense desire, the
problem is the overcompensation. And that comes from the intense desire,
steeped with shyness.......that accounts for the feeling of being dumbstruck
that I frequently get.
Deuce
LOL
Deuce
Trance909 wrote:
>
> >I have a low sex drive, and I think it is a barrier to meeting women. I
> >have to deliberately undress women with my eyes and put them in all
> >kinds of sexual fantasies in my mind before I have enough drive to
> >pursue them, no matter how good looking they are. Other guys seem to
> >jump into action as soon as they see a girl that they are attracted to.
>
> I disagree.....I think you are better off for having a lower sex drive. Mine is
> ridiculously high.....so much so that if I was to act on it, I'd most likely
> get myself into trouble of some sort. It's something that has to be kept under
> wraps......and of course then I overcompensate for it and rarely approach
> women. And if you have such a high sex drive and you do approach a woman, you
> just *desire* her so freaking badly that you can't help but stumble as you try
> to hide that fact and just try to act like your ordinary friendly guy......it
> just doesn't work.
You just need practice controling your lust enough to do what you need
to do to get her. You don't WANT to be an ordinary friendly guy with
her, unless you are looking for another girl FRIEND.
>
> Having such an intense desire for women while being introverted and shy is
> hell, pretty much. It's like I feel the CONSTANT need to be around
> women......and then it's disappointing and demoralizing when I'm in their
> vicinity and can't do anything about it. You don't know how many times I go
> over to the coffee shop to get a coffee I don't even need to be drinking, just
> so I can hang out and be around all the cute girls that go in there. I go walk
> around on the Beach just so I can be around pretty girls. I go out for lunch
> every day so I can walk around and see what sights I may see. I leave my desk
> at work constantly and go visit the other area of the office where the few cute
> girls are. It's a CONSTANT need, and I start getting antsy when it's not being
> fulfilled. I'm somewhat antsy right now. I've been saying this for a while now,
> but it bears repeating.......I'm simply obsessed with women. I am mesmerized
> and ultimately dumbstruck by them.
The fact that you are driven to be around women is good. Now you just
need to let that drive push you into practicing how to go the next level
and actually approach them and get them. If you had alow sex drive,
you wouldn't even have the drive to try.
Rain Maker
>Except I don't feel like I should *need* to limit my desire for a woman.
While somewhat extreme, this is the same thought that a sociopath
might have. "Why should I..." Get my point?
>Maybe
>just not overcompensate so much to the point where I'm afraid to try to meet a
>woman I find attractive. I don't think the problem is the intense desire, the
>problem is the overcompensation. And that comes from the intense desire,
>steeped with shyness.......that accounts for the feeling of being dumbstruck
>that I frequently get.
Have you had a frank conversation with doctor? You may have out of
wack testosterone levels. Who knows, there may be a medical solution.
Either way, whether psychological or metaphysical, your "desire" is
getting in the way of a healthy life. Women are people. If you were
able to approach them as an equal, relate to them, talk to them,
everything, virtually everything else would take care of itself.
However, women aren't rocks and are much more adept at reading men
then men are of reading women.
Rain Maker
>>> >Or talking to a girl WHILE you are fantasizing about her. You have to
>>> >mentally slap yourself every few seconds--"don't stare at her
>>tits!"--mental
>>> >slap.
>>>
>>
>>The last thing a woman is thinking about is you fantasizing about her
>>during a conversation. Don't you think that is disrespectful to stare
>>at a woman's &*^%$@ during a conversation?
>>
>>Victoria
>
>Hey, you're misquoting me......I didn't say that! Those were not my
>words.......in fact, I believe I said that I do *not* stare at a woman's chest
>while talking to her.....I'm pretty sure that was my contribution to that
>thread.
I don't she is, I think she just carrying your thoughts forward a
little. Your mental forays are often noticeable and revealing.
Rain Maker
wrote:
>> >her posture is very defensive, I suspect she has been hurt by men and seems
>> >to have unresolved issues in that respect.
>>
>> Probably has. Probably by boys very much like you. You've been
>> married 10 years, what are you wife's issues? Go ahead and tell me
>> she doesn't have any.
>
>If they were men like us, then she probably started playing the games
>that led to her getting burned in the first place.
So, what your telling, Deuce, is "no" you don't know your wife's
issues after 10 years in an intimate relationship.
>> >It is reflected in the manner of
>> >her posting and tone. Dont get upset by it, you need to understand her
>> >feelings towards the subject and just forget about it.
>>
>> Passive aggressive b/s.
>
>Yes, on her part.
On your part, sport. However how could anyone expect you to
understand that?
Rain Maker
wrote:
>You just need practice controling your lust enough to do what you need
>to do to get her.
That says a lot about you. I bet your marriage is riddled with
"cracks" and hardly picturesque. When you start as a fraud it not
only grows on you, it becomes you.
>The fact that you are driven to be around women is good.
To be driven about anything in relationships is not good. It is sick.
>Now you just
>need to let that drive push you into practicing how to go the next level
>and actually approach them and get them. If you had alow sex drive,
>you wouldn't even have the drive to try.
This is the mentality of a starving pick-up artist.
Deuce
Rain Maker wrote:
>
> On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 01:22:19 GMT, Deuce <skwil...@netzero.net>
> wrote:
>
> >> >her posture is very defensive, I suspect she has been hurt by men and seems
> >> >to have unresolved issues in that respect.
> >>
> >> Probably has. Probably by boys very much like you. You've been
> >> married 10 years, what are you wife's issues? Go ahead and tell me
> >> she doesn't have any.
> >
> >If they were men like us, then she probably started playing the games
> >that led to her getting burned in the first place.
>
> So, what your telling, Deuce, is "no" you don't know your wife's
> issues after 10 years in an intimate relationship.
Being that they've beenmarried for 10 years, her possible issue's must
not that bad. Not that it has anything to do with this topic anyway.
>
> >> >It is reflected in the manner of
> >> >her posting and tone. Dont get upset by it, you need to understand her
> >> >feelings towards the subject and just forget about it.
> >>
> >> Passive aggressive b/s.
> >
> >Yes, on her part.
>
> On your part, sport. However how could anyone expect you to
> understand that?
She becomes insulting and abusive when discussing a topic that is not
about her. Hmmmm.... that is how she is being passive aggressive, and
so are you... "sport".
Deuce
Rain Maker wrote:
>
> On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 01:31:34 GMT, Deuce <skwil...@netzero.net>
> wrote:
>
> >You just need practice controling your lust enough to do what you need
> >to do to get her.
>
> That says a lot about you. I bet your marriage is riddled with
> "cracks" and hardly picturesque. When you start as a fraud it not
> only grows on you, it becomes you.
LOL. Who ever said I wanted to be married? Your dimestore feminist
psychology has lead you to making wild assumptions.
>
> >The fact that you are driven to be around women is good.
>
> To be driven about anything in relationships is not good. It is sick.
I guess lack luster relationships and passionless marriages is the
ideal, amazing.
>
> >Now you just
> >need to let that drive push you into practicing how to go the next level
> >and actually approach them and get them. If you had alow sex drive,
> >you wouldn't even have the drive to try.
>
> This is the mentality of a starving pick-up artist.
A pick up artist by definition is the complete opposite of the average
starving guy.
Trance909
>little. Your mental forays are often noticeable and revealing.
That's bullshit. Carrying my thoughts forward.....who the fuck are you? Your
snide, insulting, biting little posts remind me of a spruced-up Naturallyweird.
You couldn't be more wrong. Fantasizing about women while carrying on a
conversation......most of my thought while attempting to converse is consumed
by trying to figure out what in the hell I should say. There's no thought
process *available* for fantasizing about a woman while I'm talking to them.
It's basically me trying to maintain eye contact and think of things to say,
which is difficult, because I still find it a scary thing to look women in the
eye while holding this big conversation with them.
I really do not appreciate your comments.
Trance909
>need to let that drive push you into practicing how to go the next level
>and actually approach them and get them. If you had alow sex drive,
>you wouldn't even have the drive to try.
Thank you for a CONSTRUCTIVE, realistic comment that doesn't blow what I said
way out of proportion.......unlike some other people here. These comments
actually help, not some bullshit insulting "this is the same thing a sociopath
would say" nonsense. Man, there's always a new asshole to replace the ones who
leave.......unbelievable.
Deuce
Your welcome, I try. lol. Don't let his comments make you feel guilty
about your attraction to women, as I suspect they were designed to do.
If you've had the pleasure of listening to a bunch of women talk,
believe me, they have a hungry sex drive too, but society generally
discourages them from being honest about it. Either way I think your
sex drive could be channeled into positive outcomes. ASF isn't always
the most popular resource here, but they could probably give you better
specifics on HOW to channel it than I could. I had to build up my sex
drive up to get myself out of the slump where I wasn't even trying to
meet girls anymore.
Rain Maker
>>I don't think she is, I think she just carrying your thoughts forward a
>>little. Your mental forays are often noticeable and revealing.
>
>That's bullshit. Carrying my thoughts forward.....who the fuck are you? Your
>snide, insulting, biting little posts remind me of a spruced-up Naturallyweird.
>You couldn't be more wrong.
Hey, hey. Progress!!! If you willing to suggest that I might be
wrong, then you're also saying I might be right. That you react the
way you do supports the latter more than the former.
>Fantasizing about women while carrying on a
>conversation......most of my thought while attempting to converse is consumed
>by trying to figure out what in the hell I should say.
I'm trying to tell you that woman aren't all shallow, many can sense
what your thinking, especially when they catch you acting out
non-verbal communications of lust.
>There's no thought
>process *available* for fantasizing about a woman while I'm talking to them.
>It's basically me trying to maintain eye contact and think of things to say,
>which is difficult, because I still find it a scary thing to look women in the
>eye while holding this big conversation with them.
The "hang-up" is yours, not theirs. Don't fault them to picking up on
your propensity for fantasizing. This is partly why I suggest a sex
therapist and/or frank talk with your doctor would yield you some
results.
>I really do not appreciate your comments.
Of course you don't. I wouldn't either. However, I'd at least give
suggestions such as mine some serious thought as to their relevance.
Rain Maker
wrote:
>> >> >her posture is very defensive, I suspect she has been hurt by men and seems
>> >> >to have unresolved issues in that respect.
>> >>
>> >> Probably has. Probably by boys very much like you. You've been
>> >> married 10 years, what are you wife's issues? Go ahead and tell me
>> >> she doesn't have any.
>> >
>> >If they were men like us, then she probably started playing the games
>> >that led to her getting burned in the first place.
>>
>> So, what your telling, Deuce, is "no" you don't know your wife's
>> issues after 10 years in an intimate relationship.
>
>Being that they've beenmarried for 10 years, her possible issue's must
>not that bad. Not that it has anything to do with this topic anyway.
How would you know? Do you know what abnormal co-dependency means?
The point is after 10 years, he probably doesn't know. He's too hung
up on getting and not giving.
>> >> >It is reflected in the manner of
>> >> >her posting and tone. Dont get upset by it, you need to understand her
>> >> >feelings towards the subject and just forget about it.
>> >>
>> >> Passive aggressive b/s.
>> >
>> >Yes, on her part.
>>
>> On your part, sport. However how could anyone expect you to
>> understand that?
>
>She becomes insulting and abusive when discussing a topic that is not
>about her. Hmmmm.... that is how she is being passive aggressive, and
>so are you... "sport".
The passive-aggressiveness is not in her acting out, its with you
"just forget[ting] about it". The insensitivity of not listening,
understanding and _talking it out_.
Rain Maker
wrote:
>> >You just need practice controling your lust enough to do what you need
>> >to do to get her.
>>
>> That says a lot about you. I bet your marriage is riddled with
>> "cracks" and hardly picturesque. When you start as a fraud it not
>> only grows on you, it becomes you.
>
>LOL. Who ever said I wanted to be married?
I see. Married because you have to? That speaks loud and clear.
>Your dimestore feminist
>psychology has lead you to making wild assumptions.
So you say. Maybe there not so wild. I suppose I should trust you in
a manner on par with the way you hunt women?
There aren't any dimestores.
>> >The fact that you are driven to be around women is good.
>>
>> To be driven about anything in relationships is not good. It is sick.
>
>I guess lack luster relationships and passionless marriages is the
>ideal, amazing.
Its a wonder that you can guess at all. No, sport, relationships,
good ones, involve luster and passion, however, unlike yourself, they
are not one sided.
>> >Now you just
>> >need to let that drive push you into practicing how to go the next level
>> >and actually approach them and get them. If you had alow sex drive,
>> >you wouldn't even have the drive to try.
>>
>> This is the mentality of a starving pick-up artist.
>
>A pick up artist by definition is the complete opposite of the average
>starving guy.
Maybe you'd find the term "wannabe pick-up artist" more personally
acceptable?
Rain Maker
>>The fact that you are driven to be around women is good. Now you just
>>need to let that drive push you into practicing how to go the next level
>>and actually approach them and get them. If you had alow sex drive,
>>you wouldn't even have the drive to try.
>
>Thank you for a CONSTRUCTIVE, realistic comment that doesn't blow what I said
>way out of proportion.......unlike some other people here. These comments
>actually help, not some bullshit insulting "this is the same thing a sociopath
>would say" nonsense.
Yeah, sure. You're on the right track. You don't need to do
anything. I'd bet you dollars to donuts that a sociopath would say
things like this. That you think it nonsense could speak to your
denial.
>Man, there's always a new asshole to replace the ones who
>leave.......unbelievable.
I suggest to you that maybe its the a.s.s.holes who stayed.
Deuce
Rain Maker wrote:
>
> On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 02:59:58 GMT, Deuce <skwil...@netzero.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Being that they've beenmarried for 10 years, her possible issue's must
> >not that bad. Not that it has anything to do with this topic anyway.
>
> How would you know? Do you know what abnormal co-dependency means?
> The point is after 10 years, he probably doesn't know. He's too hung
> up on getting and not giving.
How would you know? Just because you don't agree with his ideas on
being successful with women makes his marriage a failure, or his wife
inadequate? lol. But I guess debating issues instead of tossing out
personal attacks on whoever disagrees with you was never your thing.
>
> >> >> >It is reflected in the manner of
> >> >> >her posting and tone. Dont get upset by it, you need to understand her
> >> >> >feelings towards the subject and just forget about it.
> >> >>
> >> >> Passive aggressive b/s.
> >> >
> >> >Yes, on her part.
> >>
> >> On your part, sport. However how could anyone expect you to
> >> understand that?
> >
> >She becomes insulting and abusive when discussing a topic that is not
> >about her. Hmmmm.... that is how she is being passive aggressive, and
> >so are you... "sport".
>
> The passive-aggressiveness is not in her acting out, its with you
> "just forget[ting] about it". The insensitivity of not listening,
> understanding and _talking it out_.
The passive aggressiveness IS with her personal attacks on someone she
doesn't know. Since when did I become obligated to be understanding to
a venom spewing stranger? Insensitivity? I think not.
Deuce
Rain Maker wrote:
>
> On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 03:06:41 GMT, Deuce <skwil...@netzero.net>
> wrote:
>
> >> >You just need practice controling your lust enough to do what you need
> >> >to do to get her.
> >>
> >> That says a lot about you. I bet your marriage is riddled with
> >> "cracks" and hardly picturesque. When you start as a fraud it not
> >> only grows on you, it becomes you.
> >
> >LOL. Who ever said I wanted to be married?
>
> I see. Married because you have to? That speaks loud and clear.
I hope it does. It says that I don't want to be married.
>
> >Your dimestore feminist
> >psychology has lead you to making wild assumptions.
>
> So you say. Maybe there not so wild. I suppose I should trust you in
> a manner on par with the way you hunt women?
>
> There aren't any dimestores.
Yes there are, D & K for one. ;)
>
> >> >The fact that you are driven to be around women is good.
> >>
> >> To be driven about anything in relationships is not good. It is sick.
> >
> >I guess lack luster relationships and passionless marriages is the
> >ideal, amazing.
>
> Its a wonder that you can guess at all. No, sport, relationships,
> good ones, involve luster and passion, however, unlike yourself, they
Luster and passion, the same qualities that give members of a couple the
"drive" to be the best that they can for each other. But then again
being driven about anything, in a relationship is bad according to you.
Oooh, another personal shot at me. This speaks volumes as your advice
is probably as poor as your ability to be objective, or debate issues.
> are not one sided.
>
> >> >Now you just
> >> >need to let that drive push you into practicing how to go the next level
> >> >and actually approach them and get them. If you had alow sex drive,
> >> >you wouldn't even have the drive to try.
> >>
> >> This is the mentality of a starving pick-up artist.
> >
> >A pick up artist by definition is the complete opposite of the average
> >starving guy.
>
> Maybe you'd find the term "wannabe pick-up artist" more personally
> acceptable?
Successful pick up artists turn their sex drive into an advantage, so
using your sex drive in a positive direction with getting women would
not reduce you to a wannabe.
Deuce
Rain Maker
wrote:
>> >Being that they've beenmarried for 10 years, her possible issue's must
>> >not that bad. Not that it has anything to do with this topic anyway.
>>
>> How would you know? Do you know what abnormal co-dependency means?
>> The point is after 10 years, he probably doesn't know. He's too hung
>> up on getting and not giving.
>
>How would you know?
Observation of the written word and lack of echoed comprehension for
starters.
>Just because you don't agree with his ideas on
>being successful with women makes his marriage a failure, or his wife
>inadequate? lol.
I said nothing of his wife being inadequate. Is that what you think
issues are -- inadequacy?
>But I guess debating issues instead of tossing out
>personal attacks on whoever disagrees with you was never your thing.
There's been no debate here. Just talk about hunting women. How to
get laid. I suggest to you that problems with disagreement is your
hang-up, not mine.
>> >> >> >It is reflected in the manner of
>> >> >> >her posting and tone. Dont get upset by it, you need to understand her
>> >> >> >feelings towards the subject and just forget about it.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Passive aggressive b/s.
>> >> >
>> >> >Yes, on her part.
>> >>
>> >> On your part, sport. However how could anyone expect you to
>> >> understand that?
>> >
>> >She becomes insulting and abusive when discussing a topic that is not
>> >about her. Hmmmm.... that is how she is being passive aggressive, and
>> >so are you... "sport".
>>
>> The passive-aggressiveness is not in her acting out, its with you
>> "just forget[ting] about it". The insensitivity of not listening,
>> understanding and _talking it out_.
>
>
>The passive aggressiveness IS with her personal attacks on someone she
>doesn't know.
You don't have a clue what passive aggressive is. Try looking it up
and thinking about it. Maybe it will come to you.
>Since when did I become obligated to be understanding to
>a venom spewing stranger? Insensitivity? I think not.
If the "venom spewing stranger" is acting out because or about you,
I'd say you have a lot of responsibility to them as well as yourself,
unless of course having a perpetual shallow personality is your bag.
Deuce
Rain Maker wrote:
>
> On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 04:45:17 GMT, Deuce <skwil...@netzero.net>
> wrote:
>
> >> >Being that they've beenmarried for 10 years, her possible issue's must
> >> >not that bad. Not that it has anything to do with this topic anyway.
> >>
> >> How would you know? Do you know what abnormal co-dependency means?
> >> The point is after 10 years, he probably doesn't know. He's too hung
> >> up on getting and not giving.
> >
> >How would you know?
>
> Observation of the written word and lack of echoed comprehension for
> starters.
Someone not agreeing with you doesn't mean that they do not comprehend.
>
> >Just because you don't agree with his ideas on
> >being successful with women makes his marriage a failure, or his wife
> >inadequate? lol.
>
> I said nothing of his wife being inadequate. Is that what you think
> issues are -- inadequacy?
No but your assumption that his wife has "issues" because you do not
like him or his ideas is an implication from you that she is inadequate.
>
> >But I guess debating issues instead of tossing out
> >personal attacks on whoever disagrees with you was never your thing.
>
> There's been no debate here. Just talk about hunting women. How to
> get laid. I suggest to you that problems with disagreement is your
> hang-up, not mine.
Actually you are are right, there has only been an attempt at debate.
But you can't keep your personal attacks out of it, so it wasn't really
a debate. Al of your "arguments" are fueled by personal hatred, that is
your hang up.
>
> >> >> >> >It is reflected in the manner of
> >> >> >> >her posting and tone. Dont get upset by it, you need to understand her
> >> >> >> >feelings towards the subject and just forget about it.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Passive aggressive b/s.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Yes, on her part.
> >> >>
> >> >> On your part, sport. However how could anyone expect you to
> >> >> understand that?
> >> >
> >> >She becomes insulting and abusive when discussing a topic that is not
> >> >about her. Hmmmm.... that is how she is being passive aggressive, and
> >> >so are you... "sport".
> >>
> >> The passive-aggressiveness is not in her acting out, its with you
> >> "just forget[ting] about it". The insensitivity of not listening,
> >> understanding and _talking it out_.
> >
> >
> >The passive aggressiveness IS with her personal attacks on someone she
> >doesn't know.
>
> You don't have a clue what passive aggressive is. Try looking it up
> and thinking about it. Maybe it will come to you.
Again, not agreeing with you does not mean not comprehending.
>
> >Since when did I become obligated to be understanding to
> >a venom spewing stranger? Insensitivity? I think not.
>
> If the "venom spewing stranger" is acting out because or about you,
> I'd say you have a lot of responsibility to them as well as yourself,
> unless of course having a perpetual shallow personality is your bag.
No, it is not my responsibility that she has no control over her
emotions. You don't know me well enough to determine how deep or
shallow my personality is. But if making negative assumptions about me
because you don't like my ideas makes you feel better, so be it. :)
Deuce
Rain Maker
wrote:
>Someone not agreeing with you doesn't mean that they do not comprehend.
That's very true. Know anyone like this?
>> I said nothing of his wife being inadequate. Is that what you think
>> issues are -- inadequacy?
>
>No but your assumption that his wife has "issues" because you do not
>like him or his ideas is an implication from you that she is inadequate.
It was not an _assumption_ that his wife has issues. It was his
statement about the manifestations of her issues. I'm being lead to
believe that you don't spend much time comprehending what you read.
>> >But I guess debating issues instead of tossing out
>> >personal attacks on whoever disagrees with you was never your thing.
>>
>> There's been no debate here. Just talk about hunting women. How to
>> get laid. I suggest to you that problems with disagreement is your
>> hang-up, not mine.
>
>Actually you are are right, there has only been an attempt at debate.
>But you can't keep your personal attacks out of it, so it wasn't really
>a debate. Al of your "arguments" are fueled by personal hatred, that is
>your hang up.
Just because you don't like what a person says, doesn't make it a
personal attack. If you don't comprehend a post, that's not my
responsibility. If you act out in denial, neither is that. If I hold
those who prey upon others in disdain, that is a feeling not a hatred.
>Again, not agreeing with you does not mean not comprehending.
Like your comment about my attacking someone's wife's issues? That's
pure neglect. Nothing personal mind you, maybe that's just the way you
are.
>> >Since when did I become obligated to be understanding to
>> >a venom spewing stranger? Insensitivity? I think not.
>>
>> If the "venom spewing stranger" is acting out because or about you,
>> I'd say you have a lot of responsibility to them as well as yourself,
>> unless of course having a perpetual shallow personality is your bag.
>
>No, it is not my responsibility that she has no control over her
>emotions. You don't know me well enough to determine how deep or
>shallow my personality is.
Are you trying to suggest that this "venom spewing stranger" is acting
out on you for no reasons (unlikely -- typically acting out involves
the target of disaffection)? It is precisely your lack of acceptance
of responsibility that is telling.
>But if making negative assumptions about me
>because you don't like my ideas makes you feel better, so be it. :)
Now here's an example of true passive-aggressness. You provide the
fodder, sport.
Rain Maker
wrote:
>> >Your dimestore feminist
>> >psychology has lead you to making wild assumptions.
>>
>> So you say. Maybe there not so wild. I suppose I should trust you in
>> a manner on par with the way you hunt women?
>>
>> There aren't any dimestores.
>
>Yes there are, D & K for one. ;)
I stand corrected, a dime store misogynist supply store.
>> Its a wonder that you can guess at all. No, sport, relationships,
>> good ones, involve luster and passion, however, unlike yourself, they
>
>Luster and passion, the same qualities that give members of a couple the
>"drive" to be the best that they can for each other. But then again
>being driven about anything, in a relationship is bad according to you.
I get the impression that drive=driven to you. One implies a lack of
control or obsession. Care to take a guess which one?
>Oooh, another personal shot at me. This speaks volumes as your advice
>is probably as poor as your ability to be objective, or debate issues.
Its more frustration on my part. You're a pretty obtuse fella. Many
people, when in denial, criticize the messenger.
>> Maybe you'd find the term "wannabe pick-up artist" more personally
>> acceptable?
>
>Successful pick up artists turn their sex drive into an advantage, [you
>mean weapon, don't you?] so using your sex drive in a positive direction
>with getting women [what? getting women to do what? fuck?] would not
>reduce you to a wannabe.
You're being obtuse again. Wannabe's don't do real well in any
endeavor. There are no successful wannabe's.
Deuce
Rain Maker wrote:
>
> On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 05:07:29 GMT, Deuce <skwil...@netzero.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Someone not agreeing with you doesn't mean that they do not comprehend.
>
> That's very true. Know anyone like this?
You like to assume people don't comprehend when they disagree with you.
>
> >> I said nothing of his wife being inadequate. Is that what you think
> >> issues are -- inadequacy?
> >
> >No but your assumption that his wife has "issues" because you do not
> >like him or his ideas is an implication from you that she is inadequate.
>
> It was not an _assumption_ that his wife has issues. It was his
> statement about the manifestations of her issues. I'm being lead to
He never said said anything that would suggest there were issues let
alone manifestations of issues. You are trying to project something
that you would like to believe instead of what is really there again.
> believe that you don't spend much time comprehending what you read.
This coming from the guy that said I was married.
>
> >> >But I guess debating issues instead of tossing out
> >> >personal attacks on whoever disagrees with you was never your thing.
> >>
> >> There's been no debate here. Just talk about hunting women. How to
> >> get laid. I suggest to you that problems with disagreement is your
> >> hang-up, not mine.
> >
> >Actually you are are right, there has only been an attempt at debate.
> >But you can't keep your personal attacks out of it, so it wasn't really
> >a debate. Al of your "arguments" are fueled by personal hatred, that is
> >your hang up.
>
> Just because you don't like what a person says, doesn't make it a
> personal attack. If you don't comprehend a post, that's not my
> responsibility. If you act out in denial, neither is that. If I hold
> those who prey upon others in disdain, that is a feeling not a hatred.
But saying something negative about a person you don't know and which
has nothing to do with the topic is a personal attack. It's interesting
how you make statements which make no sense, have nothing to do with the
topic, and are personal attacks, then you accuse the person of not
comprehending when they point out what you are doing. I haven't "acted
out" the entire time, I believe "acting out" is what your personal
attacks are.
"Those who prey on others." LOL. You are trying to prey on me with
personal attacks, I guess you hold yourself in disdain. As for me
playing the dating game with girls is not preying on them, especially
when it is them who start playing it.
>
> >Again, not agreeing with you does not mean not comprehending.
>
> Like your comment about my attacking someone's wife's issues? That's
> pure neglect. Nothing personal mind you, maybe that's just the way you
> are.
The fact that you tried to bring his personal life into a discussuion
which had nothing to do with it is an attack on him, along with your
assumption that she has issues. Maybe that's just the way you are.
>
> >> >Since when did I become obligated to be understanding to
> >> >a venom spewing stranger? Insensitivity? I think not.
> >>
> >> If the "venom spewing stranger" is acting out because or about you,
> >> I'd say you have a lot of responsibility to them as well as yourself,
> >> unless of course having a perpetual shallow personality is your bag.
> >
> >No, it is not my responsibility that she has no control over her
> >emotions. You don't know me well enough to determine how deep or
> >shallow my personality is.
>
> Are you trying to suggest that this "venom spewing stranger" is acting
> out on you for no reasons (unlikely -- typically acting out involves
> the target of disaffection)? It is precisely your lack of acceptance
> of responsibility that is telling.
>
> >But if making negative assumptions about me
> >because you don't like my ideas makes you feel better, so be it. :)
>
> Now here's an example of true passive-aggressness. You provide the
> fodder, sport.
First you try to label a woman that you know nothing about as a person
with "issues" because you don't like her husband. Now you try to label
me, another person you know nothing about as preying on women, and
passive-aggressive, because you don't like my ideas. Now that's an
example of a true passive-aggressive man, with issues....sport. LOL
This has been fun. But I hope that some interesting ideas about women
and dating will be exchanged again, as they were before the two folks
brought this thread down with personal attacks. cb, hugo drax, ci+,
Trance909, and anyone else interested in this topic. I'll keep you
posted on my progress as I hope that you will keep me posted on yours.
have fun,
Deuce
Hugo Drax
"Rain Maker" <Rain...@Heavensgate.com> wrote in message
news:7aakuugd3o57cj05o...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 1 Dec 2002 01:26:40 -0500, "Neon Hugo Drax" <hugo...@nsa.gov>
> wrote:
>
> >avoid being just friends to get the girl I have now.
>
> sounds like she might be a mental midget. what do you talk about with
> her? do you allow her to talk at all?
>
> >but the guy got to cum, he is happy :)
>
> fuck her, right?
>
> >Generally women tend to put men who start out as friends in the "Brother"
> >catagory,
>
> Generally men who refer to women generally, know only one kind of
> woman and do not have long nor meaningful relationships.
Why is it you always hear about this LJBF stuff all the time, obviously its
a phenomena of sorts.
> >its a known fact, you
> >might be the exception but that does not mean all women are like you.
>
> Its a known fact to whom?
to me.
Hugo Drax
"Rain Maker" <Rain...@Heavensgate.com> wrote in message
> On Sun, 1 Dec 2002 01:37:29 -0500, "Neon Hugo Drax" <hugo...@nsa.gov>
> wrote:
>
> >I met mines in a club :)
>
> How much were the table dances?
>
> >her posture is very defensive, I suspect she has been hurt by men and
seems
> >to have unresolved issues in that respect.
>
> Probably has. Probably by boys very much like you. You've been
> married 10 years, what are you wife's issues? Go ahead and tell me
> she doesn't have any.
>
> >her posting and tone. Dont get upset by it, you need to understand her
> >feelings towards the subject and just forget about it.
>
> Passive aggressive b/s.
you seem real angry, so what scars do you wear proudly. I do suspect you
have had some real bad experiences with men.
Hugo Drax
"Victoria" <vikt...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:96ecc749.02120...@posting.google.com...
> tran...@aol.com (Trance909) wrote in message
news:<20021123184154...@mb-mt.aol.com>...
> > >Or talking to a girl WHILE you are fantasizing about her. You have to
> > >mentally slap yourself every few seconds--"don't stare at her
tits!"--mental
> > >slap.
> >
>
> The last thing a woman is thinking about is you fantasizing about her
> during a conversation. Don't you think that is disrespectful to stare
> at a woman's &*^%$@ during a conversation?
>
> Victoria
It depends, if she spent 4000 on a pair of breasts she would be disappointed
if no one bothered.
mickey
>>I have a low sex drive, and I think it is a barrier to meeting women. I
>>have to deliberately undress women with my eyes and put them in all
>>kinds of sexual fantasies in my mind before I have enough drive to
>>pursue them, no matter how good looking they are. Other guys seem to
>>jump into action as soon as they see a girl that they are attracted to.
>
>
> I disagree.....I think you are better off for having a lower sex drive. Mine is
> ridiculously high.....so much so that if I was to act on it, I'd most likely
> get myself into trouble of some sort. It's something that has to be kept under
> wraps......and of course then I overcompensate for it and rarely approach
> women. And if you have such a high sex drive and you do approach a woman, you
> just *desire* her so freaking badly that you can't help but stumble as you try
> to hide that fact and just try to act like your ordinary friendly guy......it
> just doesn't work.
>
I understand this perfectly.
> Having such an intense desire for women while being introverted and shy is
> hell, pretty much. It's like I feel the CONSTANT need to be around
> women......and then it's disappointing and demoralizing when I'm in their
> vicinity and can't do anything about it. You don't know how many times I go
> over to the coffee shop to get a coffee I don't even need to be drinking, just
> so I can hang out and be around all the cute girls that go in there. I go walk
> around on the Beach just so I can be around pretty girls. I go out for lunch
> every day so I can walk around and see what sights I may see. I leave my desk
> at work constantly and go visit the other area of the office where the few cute
> girls are. It's a CONSTANT need, and I start getting antsy when it's not being
> fulfilled. I'm somewhat antsy right now. I've been saying this for a while now,
> but it bears repeating.......I'm simply obsessed with women. I am mesmerized
> and ultimately dumbstruck by them.
I understand this too :).
Victoria
Yes, that's true. But how would you know if they are augmented or not?
Victoria
Rain Maker
wrote:
>> >its a known fact, you
>> >might be the exception but that does not mean all women are like you.
>>
>> Its a known fact to whom?
>
>to me.
I'm not a woman. So much for the credibility of your _known facts_.
Rain Maker
wrote:
>> >It is reflected in the manner of
>> >her posting and tone. Dont get upset by it, you need to understand her
>> >feelings towards the subject and just forget about it.
>>
>> Passive aggressive b/s.
>
>you seem real angry,
That's your perception. Don't worry, it's probably a defensive
mechanism of yours.
>so what scars do you wear proudly.
If your referring to bad experiences in my life, none of them would I
wear, proudly or otherwise. Then again, I've never been a miogynst
either.
>I do suspect you have had some real bad experiences with men.
You do? Imagine that. If you must know, I perfer women.
Rain Maker
wrote:
>> >Someone not agreeing with you doesn't mean that they do not comprehend.
>>
>> That's very true. Know anyone like this?
>
>You like to assume people don't comprehend when they disagree with you.
You have to admit that possibility does exist, that you don't
comprehend, agreement notwithstanding.
>> >> I said nothing of his wife being inadequate. Is that what you think
>> >> issues are -- inadequacy?
>> >
>> >No but your assumption that his wife has "issues" because you do not
>> >like him or his ideas is an implication from you that she is inadequate.
>>
>> It was not an _assumption_ that his wife has issues. It was his
>> statement about the manifestations of her issues. I'm being lead to
>
>He never said said anything that would suggest there were issues let
>alone manifestations of issues. You are trying to project something
>that you would like to believe instead of what is really there again.
Here we go with my assertion concerning your comprehension. A
specific statement was made concerning his wife having poor
self-esteem regarding her appearance. That, sport, is an issue driven
manifestation. Now, about your use of the phase "He never said..."
and comprehension -- here's a perfect example of your selectiveness.
>> believe that you don't spend much time comprehending what you read.
>
>This coming from the guy that said I was married.
Yes, I big enough to admit that I had you confused with another person
who stated he'd been married for ten years and whom commented as
above. Instead, we have you, who doesn't want to be married. On one
case, we have a guy you apparently doesn't even know the issues of his
wife of ten years; on the other hand we have you, a man who professes
no desire to be married, a departure from normalcy that being to
procreate and have a family. Certainly your issues led to this
decision.
>> >> >But I guess debating issues instead of tossing out
>> >> >personal attacks on whoever disagrees with you was never your thing.
>> >>
>> >> There's been no debate here. Just talk about hunting women. How to
>> >> get laid. I suggest to you that problems with disagreement is your
>> >> hang-up, not mine.
>> >
>> >Actually you are are right, there has only been an attempt at debate.
>> >But you can't keep your personal attacks out of it, so it wasn't really
>> >a debate. Al of your "arguments" are fueled by personal hatred, that is
>> >your hang up.
>>
>> Just because you don't like what a person says, doesn't make it a
>> personal attack. If you don't comprehend a post, that's not my
>> responsibility. If you act out in denial, neither is that. If I hold
>> those who prey upon others in disdain, that is a feeling not a hatred.
>
>But saying something negative about a person you don't know and which
>has nothing to do with the topic is a personal attack.
Only is your take is personally. Your choice.
>It's interesting
>how you make statements which make no sense, have nothing to do with the
>topic, and are personal attacks, then you accuse the person of not
>comprehending when they point out what you are doing.
I've just clearly documented one such instance of your lacking
comprehension. The rest of this is just a distraction on your part.
>I haven't "acted
>out" the entire time, I believe "acting out" is what your personal
>attacks are.
You can believe anything you what.
>"Those who prey on others." LOL. You are trying to prey on me with
>personal attacks, I guess you hold yourself in disdain.
Look at the distraction you're offering, shifting the focus away from
my assertion of you prey upon women, to my preying on you. You're
attempting to make yourself the victim, rather than the true victim,
womanhood. Nice try.
>As for me
>playing the dating game with girls is not preying on them, especially
>when it is them who start playing it.
There you go again. Justify your actions as a counter for theirs.
I'm sure they sit around talking about how to get laid. This is a not
so good try.
>> >Again, not agreeing with you does not mean not comprehending.
>>
>> Like your comment about my attacking someone's wife's issues? That's
>> pure neglect. Nothing personal mind you, maybe that's just the way you
>> are.
>
>The fact that you tried to bring his personal life into a discussuion
>which had nothing to do with it is an attack on him,
He offered it, in black and white. I used the language I did you
illustrate the fallacy in his reasoning, just like I've done with you.
Apparently you both are mentally challenged though in your selective
comprehension. Look, there's nothing wrong with being fucked up, you
have a lot of company in the world. It is this fucked up gene pool
that stands you the best chance of accomplishing your sexual desires.
>along with your
>assumption that she has issues. Maybe that's just the way you are.
There is no question that she has issues. You don't have problems
with self-image without them. He mentioned OA (do you know what that
is?) and compulsive overeating among others. Now, realizing that you
made a huge mistake, what would be the right thing to do?
>> >But if making negative assumptions about me
>> >because you don't like my ideas makes you feel better, so be it. :)
>>
>> Now here's an example of true passive-aggressness. You provide the
>> fodder, sport.
>
>First you try to label a woman that you know nothing about as a person
>with "issues" because you don't like her husband.
So you accept your passive-aggressness?
Again, her husband referenced her the manifestations of her issues.
Do you think that people just acquire things like addiction, phobia,
and/or abnormal behavior for no reason?
>Now you try to label
>me, another person you know nothing about as preying on women, and
>passive-aggressive, because you don't like my ideas. Now that's an
>example of a true passive-aggressive man, with issues....sport. LOL
Boo hoo. Here you go again trying to make yourself out to be a victim
instead of a victimizer.
>This has been fun.
So, that means that you didn't learn anything about yourself.
>But I hope that some interesting ideas about women
>and dating will be exchanged again,
Guess the focus of this ng isn't about shyness. Your sick pal. You
can deny it if you want, but your ideas and motivation are lower than
pond scum.
>as they were before the two folks
>brought this thread down with personal attacks.
This tread wasn't brought down. You just didn't like the discussion,
thinking there is nothing wrong with you. Well, there is and some day
when you wise up, you'll think back to this conversation and realize
and comprehend some of what I've had to say.
>cb, hugo drax, ci+,
>Trance909, and anyone else interested in this topic. I'll keep you
>posted on my progress as I hope that you will keep me posted on yours.
This must be the misogyny cliche of this ng.