Question about Seductress

[Sage_Ninjistic]

@Brandon

Really depends if you’re her dream man or not. Nah just kidding.

I’d assume it works how you said, she’d have to have an intent and take action on that if that was what she wanted out of the sub - but I don’t believe that’s what she’d be doing if she already is happy with you.

For the sake of continuity…

Turns out I am her dream man.

She simply was not the person I thought was my ‘dream’.

[Sage_Ninjistic]

@user9437773791397760

Well u just poured water on a match, could of been a good thread

Subclub was getting close to being denied $35 that day, due to my nearly allowing personal experiences of others to become my personal experience, lmao.

Gotta discern in everything

[Sage_Ninjistic]

@user9437773791397760

, JUST WRITING SINCE BORED

I missed this somehow the first time

But imma reply cuz you hit on some interesting things that I haven’t considered before.

@user9437773791397760

If she has 0 interest in other men, is this implying that she lacks male friends? Wouldn’t this make her vulnerable to some random “Alpha” to make 10 seconds of eye contact, and all of a sudden its the only thing she thinks about.

I would correct how I approached this thread, nowadays, as well as my replies.

Translating my thinking then into something useful…

Theory: if she has 0 interest in other men, then she’s an excellent liar. Not lying in a bad sense, really. Just… Not saying it all. Omission, and maybe not even conscious.

0 interest: that’s not really possible.

Expanding on that. There’s a word that I wonder if will offend some here.

Hypergamy.

Just like my guy Qui-gon said, “There’s always a bigger monster.” The old saying of, there’s someone for everyone, also ties into the point I’m going to make.

There’s someone for everyone.

I laugh nowadays about my thinking as a younger kid. I used to watch a lot of crime shows. Detective stuff, forensic science, Law and Order (SVU religiously, of course), 24, so on and on.

And one thing that never ceased to amaze me as a child was that no matter the crime…

No matter the terrible acts someone had committed, fictionally and in real life…

They had at least one person that wanted to be by their side.

There’s somebody for everybody. But yeah so…

If looked at very neutrally, the concept of hypergamy is not only real but, necessary.

So, me saying then that she has no or zero interest in men was both truth and a denial.

1. If I was financially unstable, emotionally unavailable, mentally unbalanced, and/or confused about who I thought I was and it translated into everything she saw? And this was normal for me, not just a phase?

Why would she want to stay?

Some would call it love. Some would call it being a rider. I used to call it things, other than the way I see it now.

To me, if a reasonably attractive, balanced woman stays with a man beyond what people do generally in relationships nowadays, it’s because she sees something worthy in him beyond the normally, maybe socially accepted standard.

Whatever that standard or criteria might be for a woman. I could and would call that love.

Lust doesn’t see beyond the surface, after all. And most troubles in both men and women are far beneath it.

So, my ex did on far more than several occasions affirm everything that caused me to say, at the time, she has zero interest in other men.

That was my ‘truth’ then, and it was true even looking back now.

BUT.

There was also a denial.

I look back and can remember that though, like I said somewhere on this thread, that she told me about other guys, I also wasn’t considering at the time that I was sometimes made aware of these ‘men’ (wasn’t there, couldn’t confirm) and their interest and how maybe I should yada yada because there’s plenty of men who would take my place and happily do/be/believe/act on this.

I could make other examples, but so could anyone else that’s been in an LTR.

Soooo…

That to me was also a denial of the potential that she could leave me. The denial is to be expected; I was honoring my truth, at the time.

But, it was and always has been me, not her, that has chosen to not be in a relationship with the other. To this day, I could call her and with just a teeny bit of… Not sure, charisma? Affection? Idk.

After aaaall the times women have told me they never want to be with me again or see me, it took a few people quite awhile to really convince me and show me that each and every one of them would be back with me, in a heartbeat. So

I am confusion when I try to logic it but…

So all in all, I don’t know. I don’t think most people can really claim to not have interest in someone. I mean, temptation strikes the purest people. The point is to not act on it.

@user9437773791397760

is this implying that she lacks male friends?

No. I lacked female friends.

@user9437773791397760

Wouldn’t this make her vulnerable to some random “Alpha” to make 10 seconds of eye contact, and all of a sudden its the only thing she thinks about.

Literally how I am so…

Maybe.

@user9437773791397760

There is a big difference between women who gather orbiters, and the ones that have healthy relationships with men.

I long suspected the former.

Not in a bad way, really. I’m territorial in a way but, if I didn’t trust a woman, I wouldn’t be in an LTR with her.

If she got ‘stolen’, it’s because she never belonged to or with me, I daresay.

No…it’s them I watch. Especially if she (was) uncomfortable.

@user9437773791397760

evolution ™

I’m in a great mood, this made me chuckle and I couldn’t say why.

Or is it Sanguine the Elixir, living up to its name and advertised purchase??

Only you can know for sure, and to do that, YOU MUST drink the Elixir for yourself!

10/10, highly recommend

Available exclusively in a store, now

Not sponsored

@user9437773791397760

There is something that men developed during evolution ™, that women influence their image to appear as a Madonna, to fulfill the fantasy that many men have. This is actually straining for some women to do, as well as shows that there is some underlying layer of “manipulation” happening, but not really an issue since it happens everywhere, it is simply one of the low cost tools of changing power dynamics. Would an average person be sneaky enough to tell the difference?

I’m a big fan of plain face (no/light or accentuating make-up). I blame Alicia Keys, tbh.

I’m not a fan of BBL’s or other bodily enhancements.

Not because I think it’s wrong, really. It’s not my body or problem/concern.

It’s just not right, for me. And I can almost always tell, without thinking about it.

I do prefer certain body types. But, they’re in a range lol. I like what I like and just don’t pay what I don’t too much mind. And, it works for me.

I also like any person that is around me to have a personality. Otherwise, I get bored and want to be somewhere else. I’m polite usually, and don’t mind listening even if it irritates me. To a point.

Which, admittedly, is waay lower now than it used to be.

A suhweet body is amazing. Until, it’s not.

A personality that makes me think of a woman outside of and even before sex?

Thooose are the ones I let myself get distracted by, at least briefly.

To me, the standard that is unspoken but tangible if you’re paying attention to the majority of locker room type of conversations, being a grown man who’s had his tremendously fair share of them himself…

The majority are not sustainable for any sort of an LTR.

I love that I found this thread randomly

Sustainable meaning, it can and won’t have any substance.

@user9437773791397760

This is actually straining for some women to do, as well as shows that there is some underlying layer of “manipulation” happening, but not really an issue since it happens everywhere, it is simply one of the low cost tools of changing power dynamics. Would an average person be sneaky enough to tell the difference?

Which brings me to, I agree with the sentiment.

To me, if I as a physically viable and very much biologically desirable man with plenty of things going on for him that no one knows about - to a decent amount of women I encounter - feel like I have to in any way change the woman that I’m with or wanting to be, I daresay that I’m not foundationally desirable.

1. Looks: have nothing to do with raising a family, taking care of home, providing or nurturing, and other domestic needs. Sex can and does happen without any physical attraction whatsoever; clearly, looks and desires * based from* looks are not a prerequisite to making babies.

2. Legacy of the Spartan says it well in the beginning of the meat of the sales page:

“Form follows function.”

Hips, serve a function. In several ways.

As do breasts/mammary glands.

As do other things on both the male and female body.

A function. Maybe more. But, they’re there for a reason.

Not necessarily the ones we like to see them as and for.

Not a feminist btw

But, objectification, if you look at it objectively, is kinda actually…

Subjectification? That’s a word, cool.

The subject (person) sees a thing (person) and has ideas about whether they like/dislike, want/don’t want, on/and so on… In everything.

In my own logic, objectification properly used would be being able to look at a woman and see her.

Couldn’t explain it if I wanted to.

Wow that was a tangent but anyways, if I feel like I’ve gotta manipulate or persuade or even convince a girl to be something for me, I think about that as I then talk away from that same girl.

Because I’ve got work to do on myself, then.

I change myself. There’s nothing else I really can change that’ll last.

@user9437773791397760

Would an average person be sneaky enough to tell the difference?

Are Instagram models still a thing?

@user9437773791397760

As for the body count meme from rollo tomassis book, being “alpha widowed” is not even the core issue, the inability to discern which women were “properly” raised, as he does point in his book.

Seems interesting. I’ve been noticing a shift in my own thinking in a very similar line.

@user9437773791397760

Although his solution does not solve the dynamic that a weaker woman raised by a (economically/relational) dominating father figure (typical american family).

I don’t understand what this means.

@user9437773791397760

As well, his whole book is centered on a mentally ill women most likely (borderline personality disorder).

My personal theory is that the majority of people have a certain level of mental illness.

@user9437773791397760

Don’t see much else in the thread to comment on, so ill leave it there.

I had fun, thanks.

[Sage_Ninjistic]

@user9437773791397760

There is something that men developed during evolution ™, that women influence their image to appear as a Madonna, to fulfill the fantasy that many men have.

And so yeah no.

Women are pretty shrewd.

That’s only a compliment.

Women…man. Okay, so no.

Men are how we are. Women are how they have learned to be. Which, goes in hand with what I quoted and the rest. Societal programming. Which everyone gets caught in. It’s inevitable and partly biological. Hunter-gather, tribal, blaaah blah blah.

Women observe before they do. A lot of us men do before we think.

Granted, while I have plenty of praise for the feminine, I only wear my rose-tinted googles for sunsets. Some have followed the trend. Others, plenty of others, have turned/twisted (depending on who I’m talk to, I’ve noticed) it to their own advantage.