[WestIndianArchie]

Any takes on this article?

http://www.rooshv.com/the-3-immutable-la...lity-women

Something doesn't sit right with me. Or rather his experience is not my even close to my experience.

WIA

[SydneyD]

I agree with him in general and even more particularly on this point:

"The more I date down, the easier it is to manage the girl in a relationship. She will essentially do whatever I want and treat me like a king"

the above essentially makes this true as well:

"1. Find a beautiful girl who, for some reason, is insecure or unaware of her value (she almost always is under 25).
2. Find a beautiful girl who lives in a city that lacks good men while having a disproportionate amount of other beautiful women.
3. Be a 10 guy who is higher value than just about everyone."

If your value is as a man (or your perceived value) is higher than that of the woman you are dating then it seems only logical that she will consider you to be a "catch" and she will do her best to keep you happy so that you don't walk out on her.

Roosh is basically saying if you want high quality women you have to increase your value "as much as possible through work, effort, and persistence" , learning game or moving to a poosy paradise where your value will be viewed much higher and I have to agree with him.

Can you explain exactly what you disagree with and what your experiences with laying hot women and keeping them around are like.

[TheFinalEpic]

I agree with the points that you need to learn game, and be always working on making yourself a better man. I feel there's an over-analysis when it comes to "when she is a 7.5 I do well, when she's 8.5 the relationship is on a string." When it comes to relationships, you need to hold yourself in the highest regard. You need to have an inner value that regardless of how "attractive" a girl is, she always comes second to you. I would never "date down" anymore, life's too short to settle.

The way that I literally frame this is I don't give a fuck about looks after the initial meeting/after first bang. If I'm in a relationship, she has more to offer than just her looks, therefore I see her for the qualities she brings to the table. I'm of the mind that looks are a dime a dozen, and I can fuck a dozen for that dime. If the girl is relationship material, theres a deeper connection. Now, I treat her as I would any other person, I don't invest in her until months and months into the relationship, and even when investing, I'm never going all in; I'll call her bets, but theres no way I'll up her (what she puts in is what I will match). I could care less about if she sees me as high value/low value/no value. I know what I've been through, I know what I'm worth, and she'll get "nexted" if her perception of me doesn't line up with my own perception of me.

Know your worth, if you care too much about how other's perceive you, you will get too caught up in your perceived value in a social setting. That's not to say don't be outgoing; on the contrary, you need to work the room, build relationships, and be a fun guy, but personally, I wouldn't give two fucks about how others see you. Perceive yourself as a high value individual, and others will see it in your confidence and how you carry yourself, and you'd be damned if they didn't hold you to high regards.

[runsonmagic]

Quote:

By looking into my past, I came up with three possible solutions:

1. Find a beautiful girl who, for some reason, is insecure or unaware of her value (she almost always is under 25).

http://www.returnofkings.com/31586/8-rea...r-fat-girl

Quote:

Because former fat girls still see themselves as a six or lower, they judge your relative value as higher even when they have the body of a nine or ten. If the woman you’re talking to only recently became a nine, you might find it’s as easy to talk to her as it would be to talk to a six.

[WestIndianArchie]

(07-03-2014 07:22 AM)SydneyD Wrote:  

Can you explain exactly what you disagree with and what your experiences with laying hot women and keeping them around are like.

Reads like he's never been in a long term relationship with either.

The 7 becomes bitchy.
The 10 stops inducing boners. (in you at least)

Reversion to the mean.

Whole thing smacks of pedestalization, which is somewhat surprising.

WIA

[Moma]

(07-03-2014 11:07 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 07:22 AM)SydneyD Wrote:  

Can you explain exactly what you disagree with and what your experiences with laying hot women and keeping them around are like.

Reads like he's never been in a long term relationship with either.

The 7 becomes bitchy.
The 10 stops inducing boners. (in you at least)

Reversion to the mean.

Whole thing smacks of pedestalization, which is somewhat surprising.

WIA

Offer your counter to this in terms of your own experience and your breakdown of it, I'd like to read your take.

[MongolianAbroad]

I thought it was a fantastic post, and so was the last one, the one about the chicken. Roosh is brutally honest, and I can deal with brutal honesty.

When you read Roosh's stuff, you've entered the "Hamster-Free Zone," lol. No joke, he puts himself out there in a way that's admirably raw. Those of us that appreciate that kind of honesty in people look forward to his posts/books.

[Travesty]

I think the article is brutally honest if you believe in the objective 1-10 scale and are a realist.

I think the guys that are more she's hot or isn't, won't care for the details of this analysis.

I personally feel and see the stark behavioral differences, the competition for, and male opportunies granted to 7s vs 8+. Same with a girl below, at, or above your attractiveness.

Some guys just see both as bangable or hot and just group the chicks together saying some are down and cool and others aren't.

[game_ethic]

See: Halo effect.

[WestIndianArchie]

(07-03-2014 11:38 AM)Moma Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 11:07 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 07:22 AM)SydneyD Wrote:  

Can you explain exactly what you disagree with and what your experiences with laying hot women and keeping them around are like.

Reads like he's never been in a long term relationship with either.

The 7 becomes bitchy.
The 10 stops inducing boners. (in you at least)

Reversion to the mean.

Whole thing smacks of pedestalization, which is somewhat surprising.

WIA

Offer your counter to this in terms of your own experience and your breakdown of it, I'd like to read your take.

Numbers don't correlate to agreeability.

I've wifed up both dime's and 7's. Met families, vacations together, everything but the ring.

The agreeable 7 turns into a bitch
The ice queen 10 wasn't an ice queen with me, she dug me.
That's why she fucked me and continued to fuck me.

But in both cases, with great fucking comes great responsibility. Now that you're giving her dick on the regular, sharing meals, having little inside jokes, you also have to deal with her insecurities, her problems, her changing nature, her friends, family, and job...

Suddenly the 7 that would wait on you hand and foot to entice you into a relationship now has conflicting agendas. She has you, but now she has to integrate you into the rest of her life. You think she can keep putting you first, and not the rest of her responsibilities?

The ice queen 10 that you managed to crack, is now IN LOVE with you, and is mildly obsessive.

Of course she has her choice in men, but she's always had that. She's had that since 13. It's something you've never had, and you can't imagine what it's like. So you give that experience of hers some supernatural essence.

By the same token, she is in awe of your fearlessness. She can't safely walk around at night in certain places, but you can. You can't imagine a situation like that outside of a war zone. All those things that she wish she could do, YOU DO. It's true that other guys can do it better, but those guys aren't her guy, YOU ARE. She's going to be the one hot girl at your first concert, as horrible as you are.

So now you've got a bitchy 7, and a sweet as pie 10.

18 months out, they're both going to revert to the mean. (no pun intended)

A chick's long term value to you is her behavior.
You don't uncover her true self until you've gotten way past the sex.

The agreeable chick ratchets up, the disagreeable one mellows out. Your physical attraction to both isn't what it was. You can often only see how hot your chick is by the effect she has on others. You're blind to it because you're so accustomed.

That's been my experience.
And I maintain that if you try to have something long term with a chick, that will be the typical experience.

But dating the girl next door cause she's nice to you initially is a poor strategy for long term relationships. She's not going to stay nice, now matter how much your "SMV" is above hers.

WIA

[WestIndianArchie]

(07-03-2014 01:22 PM)game_ethic Wrote:  

See: Halo effect.

Perfect.


WIA

[Moma]

WIA - I like your take on that.

By the way, where do you stand in the grand scheme of things, lizard wise? A hunter for life or have a main beau and still snipe on the sides?

[General Stalin]

I see what OP is getting at, but I think there is a difference of subject matter here.

Roosh is talking about getting with good looking girls and keeping them around, and at the end of the day, isn't that what SMV is all about? Nothing about the longer term effects of a relationship; these happen regardless of value - it comes down to the individual(s) at that point. All relationships get comfortable after the honey moon phase, but it's safe to say that Roosh nver really dates a girl for more than a few months so he never really goes through that these days. He is just talking about keeping a good looking girl coming back to you after the first lay.

If a girl is as good looking or better looking than you, then generally it will be more difficult to keep her interest when she has more options to "date up."

[WestIndianArchie]

(07-03-2014 01:45 PM)Moma Wrote:  

WIA - I like your take on that.

By the way, where do you stand in the grand scheme of things, lizard wise? A hunter for life or have a main beau and still snipe on the sides?

The game takes a toll on me. I want out, but I don't see a way out.
Probably need to change my outlook or something.

WIA

[WestIndianArchie]

(07-03-2014 01:48 PM)General Stalin Wrote:  

I see what OP is getting at, but I think there is a difference of subject matter here.

Roosh is talking about getting with good looking girls and keeping them around, and at the end of the day, isn't that what SMV is all about? Nothing about the longer term effects of a relationship; these happen regardless of value - it comes down to the individual(s) at that point. All relationships get comfortable after the honey moon phase, but it's safe to say that Roosh nver really dates a girl for more than a few months so he never really goes through that these days. He is just talking about keeping a good looking girl coming back to you after the first lay.

If a girl is as good looking or better looking than you, then generally it will be more difficult to keep her interest when she has more options to "date up."

That's the problem right there

"What keeps her coming back"

No my friend © Louis Farrakhan

   

What keeps *YOU* coming back?

Who has the value here?

The girl that every man wants, even though every man wants pretty much ever girl.

Or the guy that this 10 wants?

If it takes a 10 to fuck a 10, and you find yourself getting dome from a dime piece - guess what homey, you're a 10.

You're probably an 11, by this logic, cause she only submits to those that are greater than her.

WIA

[Moma]

(07-03-2014 02:34 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

(07-03-2014 01:45 PM)Moma Wrote:  

WIA - I like your take on that.

By the way, where do you stand in the grand scheme of things, lizard wise? A hunter for life or have a main beau and still snipe on the sides?

The game takes a toll on me. I want out, but I don't see a way out.
Probably need to change my outlook or something.

WIA

Do you think you have the mindset for monogamy..if that is a way out?

[Travesty]

^
Curious WIA did you meet the dime that became slightly obessed with you through close friends, family, or cold approach?

[Giovonny]

Over the past 3 years, I have upgraded the quality of girls that I fuck..

I used to get a lot of 6.5s, then, I started getting 7s, then, I started getting 7.5s..

Now, I am getting 8s..

How did I do it?

I did what Roosh said in that article:

1. Learn game.
2. Increase your value as much as possible through work, effort, and persistence.
3. Be as location independent as possible (have penis, will uproot).

I improved my game.

I increased my value.

I increased my location independence.

It makes sense to me..

If you want to increase your quality, I think those rules are a good way to do it.

[Noir]

What if we consider that woman live their realities through men?

Their attraction and investment causes them to ping off you as your opinion of them becomes increasingly important to them (aftermath see: girls after guys dump them). You can control this easily.

I believe this.

It comes down to how much you value her in your eyes. The higher you think she is e.g 9 the more your behaviour will alter. The same is for her, if she sees you as a 9 but in comparison to the 7 she views herself is, automatically she will become more amicable and agreeable/romantic/thought/wtvr.

I reckon this is where 'judge a woman by her behaviour not her looks' comes in to play.

Here, status/game/+1 traits matter and you league up to score hotties who will consider you above them.

This is macro behaviour/prequisities.

Allow me to simplify and say it comes down to how you treat them and essentially, your alternative options. Woman want what other women want and when they have it they will try anything they can to keep it. If she treats you well and takes care of you, you should 'reward' her lest her actions become malicious and cause bullshit drama.

This is micro-behaviour moulding the macro-prerequisites.

Also,

re: Original article: "when I’m out with her on my arm and see many girls more beautiful than her, I feel like a failure."

This will affect most social savvy guys I think who aren't thirsty. Once you are tuned in to this frequency, you already know what up in a room when you walk in with a girl who is below your league. Sure, she may be cool, great in bed or even rich but you already know whats up.

This comes back to Krauser's "you are more invested in others opinion of you than yourself" and it is difficult to overcome given the context. You know you can do better and it's the subtle reminder. I know this because I see so many guys every day who could do better and I can't help but judge. 80/20.

[Lizard King]

(07-02-2014 06:37 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

Any takes on this article?

http://www.rooshv.com/the-3-immutable-la...lity-women

Something doesn't sit right with me. Or rather his experience is not my even close to my experience.

WIA

You raise a good question, and the article is definitely worth discussion.

I have only read the piece once, and I consider myself a newcomer to both Game, and this esteemed forum, so correct my comments if they show a lack of understanding.

Men can be hypergamous? Why bang down?

Inner Game is a driving force.

The old maxim of: less attractive girls try harder, is true.

Roissy's Dark Triad approach to socio-sexual(sic?) interaction will hold on to 9s,10s.

(07-03-2014 03:26 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

Over the past 3 years, I have upgraded the quality of girls that I fuck..

I used to get a lot of 6.5s, then, I started getting 7s, then, I started getting 7.5s..

Now, I am getting 8s..

How did I do it?

I did what Roosh said in that article:

1. Learn game.
2. Increase your value as much as possible through work, effort, and persistence.
3. Be as location independent as possible (have penis, will uproot).

I improved my game.

I increased my value.

I increased my location independence.

It makes sense to me..

If you want to increase your quality, I think those rules are a good way to do it.

There is a subliminal, yet delicious, contradiction in the article.

He wants higher value girls, but recognises an inherent cost.

He has noticed an error in his game(dis-satisfaction with bangs), yet the solution to this is not directly stated('just learn Game').

You state how his imperatives have helped you, yet his narrative is opposite to yours.






just my two cent, so apologies if wildly incorrect.

[Nomad77]

First, we would need define exactly what he means by a "High Quality" woman. Does he mean a woman that's just beautiful or does he mean a woman that hits high marks in all the four categories that we usually judge people on: beauty, personality, character, and intelligence. There is a huge difference between a girl that is just beautiful and one that also has great personality, character, and intelligence. If we are talking about just beautiful girls then it's very easy to be of greater value than her. You could be smarter, have a vibrant personality, or a cool character. Add some combination of those to your average looks and you can easily exceed a girls whose only asset is her looks and she will know this. All beautiful girls are very much aware of how much of those other traits they don't have.

The second thing is the concept of internal vs external value. Our internal value is our value of ourselves. Our external value is how others value us. We may value a beautiful girl as a 10 but she may only value herself as a 7. It is her internal value that is important NOT what we value her at. This is how you can see many beautiful girls with guys you would consider beneath them in value. You don't know the girls internal value. If a beautiful girl is dumb she may value herself much lower than you would. He talks about finding a girl like in this: "Find a beautiful girl who, for some reason, is insecure or unaware of her value..."

If we are talking about high quality girls rated on all four traits: beauty, personality, character, and intelligence then you are talking about a completely different animal. While his three laws do apply in getting to these girls, I don't think there are enough. There are other factors at play. I have been thinking about this for awhile actually based on two of my friends complaining about it. Will post something when I feel I have something more concrete.

And yes, there is a big difference between get a high quality girl to have sex with you once or twice and getting her to commit to a relationship with you. Alcohol/drugs and circumstances plays a big part in getting some casual sex BUT a relationship is not a one night stand and requires a different level/type of game.

[WestIndianArchie]

(07-03-2014 03:06 PM)Moma Wrote:  

Do you think you have the mindset for monogamy..if that is a way out?

I've tried, and i'm not sure I know what it requires.

The guys I know in "successful" relationships don't have that fairy tale partnership.

I want one chick that I can build with. All the chicks ever want to do is destroy. But I'm sure you already know the math.

WIA

[Nomad77]

(07-03-2014 04:40 PM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

I want one chick that I can build with. All the chicks ever want to do is destroy. But I'm sure you already know the math.

WIA

This has not been my personal experience. I was always the "destroyer" in my relationships.

[WestIndianArchie]

(07-03-2014 03:26 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

Over the past 3 years, I have upgraded the quality of girls that I fuck..

I used to get a lot of 6.5s, then, I started getting 7s, then, I started getting 7.5s..

Now, I am getting 8s..

How did I do it?

I did what Roosh said in that article:

1. Learn game.
2. Increase your value as much as possible through work, effort, and persistence.
3. Be as location independent as possible (have penis, will uproot).

I improved my game.

I increased my value.

I increased my location independence.

It makes sense to me..

If you want to increase your quality, I think those rules are a good way to do it.

Here's the offending paragraph that leads to those rules

", but maintaining a relationship with her is quite different that fornicating with her one or twice. It’s almost as if the work is just beginning once you bang such a high value girl, but with the girl whose quality is lower, it’s smooth sailing after the initial penetration. In the latter case, you just have to show up and she’ll worship you."

No, is what i'm saying.

It's never smooth sailing. 7,2,5,10, actress, cheerleader, waffle house waitress, lawyer, kindergarten teacher - NEVER

For anyone that's been in a LTR with both, it's evident. At best, the 7 tests your Alpha a little later than the 10, but even then I don't think that's the case.

One's flawed assessment of a chick's value CANNOT determine her viability in a relationship, PERIOD.

What you see is not what you get.
Past performance is no indication of future results.

And upping your game, changing your location, being of higher value doesn't change that fact.

The short game isn't the long game.

The short game barely even references the long game.

The long game requires a different skill set, and your opponent is much more difficult, imo.

WIA

[Nomad77]

That's correct. Aside from a girl's character and personality there are external factors that can impact a relationship that cannot be predicted. If a girl loses her job for example or has some kind of family related problem. This can have a significant impact on how she behaves in the relationship.

The most important factor I believe that is necessary for a successful long-term relationship is chemistry: a deep bond with the other person. When the chemistry is there then you both become highly motivated to work out problems. When it's not there then the incentive to do so is much less and the relationship suffers.

Our behavior also influences how the girl behaves. A relationship is a dynamic/reactive interaction where both people are reacting to both real and imaginary actions of each other. Most of us are not aware of our behavior enough to realize how we are acting at any given moment. We can see how the other person behaves but we cannot see how our initial behavior could have triggered hers.