Nash is a better listener than I am, and has a remarkable ability to learn from others, and synthesize various frames of reference and memes into a cohesive whole, then apply that to his real lived experience to further refine and synthesize, and then write down his ideas. He also comes up with new ideas from his experiences, contemplates and shares them.
This is more than merely scholarly; it’s practical application with skin in the game. It’s not keyboard jockeying.
He also applies his knowledge of game very diligently and cheerfully.
Oh, and he’s remarkably proficient in camaraderie and makes diplomacy seem normal, while at the same time not being Mr. Nice Guy about trying to appease wrong views or to fit in. He’s quite happy to disagree with anyone, no matter their social position.
I might be doing him a disservice to point him out, as power corrupts. If people start to look to him as an authority, that could:
- Give some people false hope to think that there are shortcuts and that all you have to do is listen to and emulate someone who has things more figured out. That can’t work because we all have to do the work of synthesizing other word views into our own, unique, lived experience. Your created embodied worldview will certainly be different than anyone else’s.
- Lead Nash to take on the role of teacher, which unfortunately usually makes people harden and settle into the views that they repeat while teaching. The whole reason people become teachers was by learning new things that were undiscovered, and by being open to change. Unfortunately being a teacher usually has the reverse effect. Possibly why new science discoveries are usually made by the young up and comers, who are not yet in any position of authority.
So some of his comments on other blogs are worth a read. Here is a comment where he disagrees that Blackdragon’s approach to relationships is as universally applicable to men with capability and interest to apply it as Blackragon assumes. Nash says that MOST men could not practically apply BDs system because most of us, and most women, are quite simply too jealous.
I agree with Nash about this, and have mentioned before it’s one reason I could never apply his system. The other reason is that I have no interest (and probably no ability) in limiting bonding with fuck buddies; I don’t think it’s in the least bit psychologically practical for me to DECIDE how much in love I will become with a girl that I really like and am having regular sex with, and who is desperately into me.
Nash says:
“With non-open, covert lovers on the side… With perhaps an “understanding.” What is that understanding? That she might fuck another guy on the side.
— BlackDragonLet’s start at the beginning, where we agree. Do attempts at monogamy *often* lead to “cheating?” Yes, we agree there.
In my experience, an “open” relationship means it’s OVERT. If it’s not OVERT/VERBAL (=pre-approved), then affairs are considered “cheating.” “OPEN” means some kind of verbal agreement that one/both will see other people. That works for some people — and I assume it works 1000% for you (probably less than 1000% for some of the girls you date, but that’s irrelevant).
I argue that JEALOUSY is an unbeatable force for MOST people. YES, we should see the world through rationale analysis. Yes, yes. Agree again. But that doesn’t mean you’ll “feel” good if you have any evidence of your partner fucking someone else. (If you’re in a rel where you don’t feel good… you must have a strong motive to do so.) And it’s a step WORSE if they need to tell you about it… it’s dumb, and/or graceless. I’d argue (since there are more graceful solutions), that it’s insulting.
NEW CONCEPT: If you have some **vague suspicious**, you will suffer less than if you know for certain, and even less than if your partner is talking about it, and even less if you catch them in the act. This might be subtle for some people, but it is not for me. Lance Mason would say “if it’s far away, it has less of an impact.” Lance is a genius at this level. I agree with him… you don’t have to.
So… the UNDERSTANDING is essentially traditional wisdom. Imagine a grandmother, telling her married daughter… “yes, dear, he might take a girl on the side from time to time, and this too is part of marriage. He takes care of you. You have a family… don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.” Timeless solution. The best I’ve seen.
The UNDERSTANDING already exists. And I think you know it. Many reject this model. But that doesn’t mean that many married couples don’t know “something is going on,” but don’t probe (and certainly don’t brag about it)… as the marriage has value for them enough that they don’t want destroy is because “she fucked the pool boy” or “he banged a cocktail waitress on a business trip.” The reason those are “classic examples” is because… they are classic examples. Again, I think you (or at least some of your readers) know all this. This is what I mean by “an understanding.”
If my “wife” (again, I’m a player, I’m not married) said, “Honey, I love you so much… but I want to fuck Chad from work:” In some scenario (assuming we’re sexless), I might be okay with that… but I would think she was clueless cunt to announce it. And if she said it in front of my friends (making me a public cuck), I would congratulate her on becoming a divorcee. “Hey Chad, she’s all yours… good luck, pal.”
This ^ is SLEDGE HAMMER HONESTY, (c) me 2019. Some people like it… usually only 1/2 of a rel. The other 1/2 hates it… or may tolerate it (out of weakness, fear or other motives).
For most people… the more explicit it is… the more it’s intolerable.
FULL POLYAMORY (the saddest most ridiculous version of this, IMAO) is full of one-sided love for the VERBAL OPENNESS, the explicit open rel. I have watched this community try to survive jealousy and hurt… I have no evidence they have (beyond isolated examples). That community is full of fools trying to do “the impossible,” and they suffer for their insane liberal “openness.” Mostly the guys… as they think it sounds good, but can’t get dates of their own, and their pink-haired GF announces she has a date with “green hair boy,” and her primary tries to “be big” and hates every minute of it. Sad. “Openness” run a muck.
So… what I am pointing to, is something you already know exists. You’ve all seen it in the relationships around you… you’ve been out to dinner with a couple where you “had a hunch” that one/other was having an affair. So did they. So did everyone. There is that UNDERSTANDING again… we all know it. And it’s an ugly truth, but it works. It’s less insulting than other solutions.. so it works (better than most alternatives).
And the reason those relationships survive… is because it is NOT explicit. If it was, except for “swingers” (which do happily exist, but are rare), that would be a very uncomfortable dinner.
I’m not challenging your model, man. Have at it. I am sure it works… for you. And for other men. Many of which I respect.
But the JEALOUSY CRITIQUE is valid. I think it applies to MOST people. And the “French Marriage” addresses that. And I like it. It’s proven. It’s sophisticated. It’s respectful. It’s smooth.
I do a version of it as a single guy… I date multiple women… I have had several LTRs, and overlapping LTRs, with other dates happening as well… and I tell exactly NONE OF THIS to any of the girls. No promises… but no SLEDGE HAMMER HONESTY either. I think it’s smoother. The girls know, they have a hunch…
I like it better. You don’t have to.
I didn’t find BD/s responses to Nash to be adequately subtle.
If I were to try to paraphrase BD’s overarching view, it’s that he has created a system to maximize consistent low drama happiness, and anything that falls short of that is fine for you, but he’s not interested in it, and can explain how other systems fall short.
For instance serial monogamy falls short because you’ll have periods of heartbreak and drama and unhappiness during and for a time after breaking up.
He says that a “don’t ask don’t tell” policy that Nash advocates falls into same category as cheating, and therefore puts the man on edge, which is a type of stressful drama burden, and besides, he’ll eventually get caught and bigger drama will ensue. I think BD puts “don’t ask don’t tell” into the same category as cheating in a too facile way, with a brief hand-wave. They are not the same category. It’s a different thing. Even if it’s a matter of nuance, it requires a different category altogether, and requires dealing with on it’s own terms. There are DIFFERENT pitfalls and problems with a don’t ask don’t tell relationship as compared to an assumed monogamy with cheating relationship.
And I’m going to copy some of his last post here.
Women CAN be “incrementally” better than others, in that “bigger tits” or a “better smile” can make us more interested and hustle a bit harder. The game of seduction is on us, so the primary drivers of making it work are on us, not the girls. So marginal gains by girls might inspire us. But as it’s on us to start the game, those bits about women aren’t essential. If a woman can follow a man’s lead, the game can begin… even if the surface rewards for a man are +/- a point or two in one direction or another.
But for a man, there are QUANTUM LEVEL skills that can’t be “almost-ed.” There is no “close” in masculinity. There is no “close” in being a leader. You can’t be “almost convincing” when it comes to her spreading her thighs.
This is why the classic Beta/Alpha thing is so persistent. Those “jumps” as Krauser calls it make the all the difference. They are distinct categories, not small tweaks. If you can make the jump… you can have the rewards.
This is why many very attractive men can get a girlfriend, but can’t create choice with women on the fly. They are surface hot, but lack the real drivers that really successful men possess. It is why men with money can find a girl that will spend time with them (sometimes), but it doesn’t at all mean they will “get what they want” from those women. Those men become cash-machines for gold diggers (some of them in the context of marriage) and get worked over.
An aside: lately I’ve been talking about how betas don’t have the reference experiences to be even able to know what it is that they don’t know. They have no idea and keep repeating over and over their clueless beta-viewpoint that a man with money that he shares with his women is just another category of beta. They can’t even begin to imagine having Top Guy frame of reference.
Hooking the girl – through good looks or cash – is a weak start, unless you have the skills to manage her psychology once you have her. Catching a snake is one thing. Enjoying it without being bitten is quite another.
This is rarely articulated. Unfortunately the red-pill/PUA/manosphere/androsphere/MGTOW/Men’s communities on the whole are at a basically grade 3 level of education. They imagine themselves as a university, with a full curriculum, but it’s still basically extremely chunky clunky cartoonishly oversimplified to the point of wrong memes that barely scratch the surface of what is required to maintain strong loving passionate relationships – yet alone strong loving passionate non-monogamous relationships. There is next to no conversation about this at all. And what there is is still very new and barely formed.
So back to Red Coco.
He does a great job of acknowledging some of the “side dishes” associated with wrangling women. How accumulating various kinds of value can make you more attractive on the front end, but also can add depth in the context of a long-term relationship.
I hear him saying that men that have been in the “boyfriend box” a few times know what it’s like to feel a girl chip away at a man’s frame. They can see the warning signs. They might have some skills in detection, if not control. A lot of that is true.
I know what that is like in my own life.
In the last 10 years I had two serious girlfriends where I lived with both of them (very briefly). They chipped away, despite my education in game. I could see it. I could deflect some of it, counter other parts, shock-and-awe her back into my frame… but the “betatization” of relationships is real. I wasn’t able to hold it back with those girls. And as I wasn’t that into them (and particularly that behavior), I chose to get out. My education and my frame weren’t quite what they needed to be… but I was wise enough to know I use boundaries to get back to a good place, a place I knew I could be happy(er)… which was single.
It wasn’t hard. I ended those relationships, got free, got happy. As the song goes… there are 50 ways to leave your lover.
But Red Coco is talking about a skillset that works within the context of an LTR. And I admire that investigation. Which is why I wrote this post.
Red Coco explores the idea that starting Beta can prepare you to function more successfully in longterm relationships. I was inspired by his thinking, but no… I don’t think that is true.
I don’t think being Beta helps, precisely because of the those QUANTUM LEAPS between categories. Those leaps are based on skills and qualities that the previous category fundamentally does not possess. The differences define the categories themselves.
Unfortunately this idea is directly applicable to Rollo and his readers. They are all stuck with the worldview of the underdog, and think that this is the real world.
It’s not the real world! It’s a worldview. That’s completely different.
Or as I put it before: ” He’s completely stuck inside a world that he himself created, and talks from that world, to people in that world.
That’s totally the wrong tactic.
That world is irrelevant.
Don’t be in that world.”
Beta’s learn a lot of bad habits that are hard to shake off. So starting there… will mean it takes years to get even middling success, as you “leak” Beta and girls can smell it, instantly disqualify you. Those Beta-tells push you down a quantum category… back to Beta… and barely fuckable, if fuckworthy at all.
We see this as otherwise “cool players” hook a girl, but they “like her too much,” and they stop running good game. That is a Beta-tell. That is a bad habit of a man that spent too much time in Beta Country and slips back into those patterns in moments of weakness. Once she see Beta… you don’t lose “a point,” you lose a whole leap of status. You’re busted from hero back down to Beta, and then… it’s gets worse and quickly.
For contrast, I’ll tell a story of an old friend of mine. We’ll call him The General.
The General is a piece of work (an imperfect man), but he is not the slightest bit Beta. He can’t imagine thinking that way. He is packed with flaws and many women would laugh at him, but he has always had tremendous control of women, access to women, he can make it happen (not with every woman, but with some girl) any time, any place. He is a proper Natural. He is the same way in business. This goes beyond surface level qualities of “catching” a prospect (be it a woman or a business client). The General is successful on the front end and also has the management skills and behavioral traits that cannot be faked, traits that hold together long-term success.
The General can display HONEST SIGNALS that are proof to many around him that he is in the category of ALPHA, even if he is not particularly Hot Guy. He is a bit short, bald, and kind of fat. But, he can pull with the volume of Hot Guy (if not the quality, but sometimes there too). And then he can run laps around guys that can only attract, as he is a natural Alpha and can control women via his own psychology and knowledge of theirs.
He is also a bit of tyrant. And I think that actually, totally serves his marriage. I have a side-theory that tyrants have the best marriages. Tyrant + restraint + benevolence, that’s the formula. I’m speculating, I’m not married… but that is how you keep the betatization process at bay. But I digress.
I don’t think most Beta’s will ever learn to be like my friend. Not even close. When they try, they will look like they are LARPing (= playacting and incongruent), and they’ll get rejected (rightfully so), or have short-terms gains that don’t serve them or their girls in the long-term.
Much better to start Alpha (which is not a choice for most guys, so this is theoretical) or… come from a family with an Alpha father (or an Alpha culture, etc) that instills this kind of Alpha thinking in you, so you default back to it (based on your upbringing)… even in hard times.
Now I’ll hat-tip to Yohami.
Yohami introduced the concept of TOP GUY to me here in this blog. Top Guy (as I see it) is a fourth category for male SMV I would add to Krauser’s totem pole. It’s above and beyond “hotness” (with that label, Krauser clouds the water a bit).
“Hotness” sounds like physical attractiveness, which is almost meaningless for a guy like me. He adds charisma, fame and lifestyle, but again, not good enough for what gives a man “hand” in a relationship. If you need to spend your time talking about how it’s all about hotness or looks, I think you’re a serious “junior leaguer” and I can’t be bothered to try to convince you otherwise (Full disclosure: I wasted some time doing that this week, and I’m bitter about it).
Looks help… yeah, yeah, yeah. Super boring, low-fidelity point. Swagger (an Alpha trait) trumps looks by a wide margin. A good looking Beta isn’t nearly as attractive as a less “hot” guy with serious swag. And above looks and swag is applied psychology. Mindset, yeah… which is byproduct of a man’s psychology. The player’s own psych (“inner game”) is crucial for Top Guy. And his knowledge of the intricacies of the minds of women.
Top Guy is all that. Looks are almost irrelevant for Top Guy. His swag and his insight into the churning gears of the SMP are what take him beyond hero (let’s say, a relatively successful PUA) into Super Hero – a man that not only has choice upfront with women, but can wrangle them once he has dragged them into his world.
I am no expert in Top Guy. I have had “Top Guy” moments, as I talked about above. When Krauser says he has fought his way into “Hot Guy” category, I think he is saying he has learned some aspects of the life of Top Guy (certainly more than me).
And I think most Top Guys are born, not made (most of them). Even if those skills lay dormant and never “activate their potential.”
Others are made. Like Yohami. I believe that he is Top Guy and wasn’t always. He says so.
I think I have had flashes of Top Guy… because Yohami schooled me so hard (he molded my psychology), and because I have APPLIED IT (this is not about memorizing theories). I have endlessly more to learn. But I make the jump up into Top Guy (always temporarily), particularly when I am working hard and have tons of options (and the Daygame Gods will it so). And then I slip back down into a productive Sigma lifestyle for most of the rest of the time.
Being Beta will never give you Top Guy insight. So you will essentially fight fires (or distract the girl from setting them), but never deal the root cause. She will fuck with a Beta. And fuck with him more aggressively every time he shows his “Bottom Guy” nature.
This was a big part of what Yohami was trying to teach. When you flash Bottom Guy at her… you drop down a quantum leap and you are really in trouble. A lot of the tools you learn in that phase of your life are half-baked recipes that highlight ingredients, but are really… nothing at all. And she knows it. So she works you out of your job (and her life).
It’s how nature intended it to be.
Being Beta may give you insight/motivation that will help you strive to actuate Top Guy… but anything remotely Beta, is the antithesis of Top Guy. Those worlds don’t coexist well at all.
To make it personal again… I don’t know that I could ever run a proper marriage. Perhaps as I have too much in my Beta past. I can run very solid relationships these days, full ROMANTIC REDPILL, but the best tool I have when things get rough is cut it off and start over. Short of that, I control a lot of the negotiation these days by controlling my time (I don’t give her too much), which means anything domestic is out.
I don’t want The General’s life, but I really admire the mettle of that man. He is a traditional guy, one that has had a ridiculously hedonistic backstory, but settled down, and now runs a business, raises two boys, and wrangles his wife (including keeping their sex life functional… which is almost all him, it’s amazing… no way a Beta could do what that man does).
And based on both genetics and his influence, I bet his son’s will have a better shot at Top Guy relationships than most. And certainly more than aspiring Beta’s can hope to know.
The game is played in psychology. And you learn each lesson via your own personal reference experiences. You can’t even begin to earn those reference experiences as an invisible Gamma (you can’t get girls to play). And Betas and The Dateables can earn reference experiences, but often the wrong ones. They learn what it is like to be seen as “high functioning” Beta. That is still a flavor of Bottom Guy.
No, I don’t think starting Beta has many advantages.
Alpha is the place to start (as Yohami would insist), as all of your incoming references are as a man that is seen and treated as Alpha. You learn the right habits… right from the beginning. You always see yourself from the right POV. And so do the girls.
May we all find the balance, the balls, and the boldness to inspire women to see us as Alpha (even if that is concentrated into the limited time we are with those girls). And if we’re good… tastes the fruit of the Top Guy lifestyle. It is from that “upward spiral” that the world opens up.
Update:
First off, about watch what a woman does instead of what she says, perhaps I deserved such an easy low blow from poor word choice, of “some girls will tell you upfront”. Or perhaps its dissimulation via red pill 101 obvious truths. Some girls will tell you before, during or after the fact. Some girls will communicate. Some girls believe. Some girls say and act such that. Ok, I think we can move past the “I’m more red pill than you” phase, and talk about the actual subject.
I get your point, BD, that ideally people can have open relationships where jealousy won’t get in the way of that.
I heard you say that if people are too jealous, they can work on that, and change, and therefore have more satisfying lives and relationships.
But I question if your theory of mind is accurate. I think you are making quite the big leap of faith, in regards to how psychology and neurology actually works.
For some people, regardless of how much experience of non-monogamy they have had, jealousy still happens, and there is no off switch. No counselling or meditation that makes it completely stop. They need to find ways to MANAGE it.
I believe that you have quite the simplistic theory of mind regarding the differences between people, and assume too much that others can be similar to you in their levels of jealousy, and their ability to keep fuck buddies at an emotional arms length.
And what about if a person does want to consciously change their level of jealousy? Should he just try to grit his teeth and bear it, until he just gets over it?
Again, I believe that does a disservice to what is, in favor of what could be. Start with what is, and work with that. For some peopl
e, don’t ask don’t tell is a good framework to start with what is. Jealousy is a hard wired evolved trait – it doesn’t disappear because of a world view or philosophy.
And sure, many people, especially here, will feel it less. Good for you! Don’t get cocky about it and assume that others can or will be able to have low jealousy.
And it’s not just about us men. It’s about managing the girls. You’d have to discard more women that you are into if you are strict about eventually being full disclosure about all details of who you fuck.
An entire page of text that says “I’m a really jealous guy and there’s nothing I can do about it.”
Good luck with that then. You’ll never be as happy as me though.
If you are not familiar with the term “dissimulation”, BD has been quite helpful in showing how that works throughout his replies.
I’m not going to reply to his last comment, as he’s obviously closed off from touching the idea of theory of mind, even with someone else’s ten foot pole.
Ok, fine. He’s got his head up his ass about his system. That’s completely normal and common; if you become a teacher and get followers, you run that risk. You stop learning, and start repeating yourself.
But such an extreme level of dissimulation tells us more than about his thinking or learning or argument style. It tell us about how he must therefore deal with women.
As his theory of mind about jealousy is so incredibly lacking, and as he lives a non-monogamous lifestyle, he will by necessity have to blow through a lot of girls, and only keep around those that fit with his view. He can’t keep around girls with differing minds and mindsets, because he won’t have the skill to wrangle them. Because he doesn’t care to even acknowledge that different mindsets have any use or validity.
So you get his system, built out of his worldview. It’s not the other way around.
But his system is not as red-pill as he thinks. I would have thought that others would have picked up on it. But again, it’s just as we’d expect. Wherever there are acolytes, there is group mind, and people self censor. They not only don’t want to be rude, but humans are evolved to never question authority, especially within the context of a group that they want to belong to.
So the teacher, and students, get these gigantic blind spots.
The blind spot is that BD gives authority over to his number one girl of who he can fuck or not.
He lets her decide how often he can see his other girls.
He limits his attachment to fuck buddies, and rotates through the fuck buddies if they ever want a deeper relationship or more time.
That’s nothing close to red-pill, in my view.
It’s a system, that works. BD has pretty good knowledge of women, and has one of the most in depth and detailed and well thought out blogs about basic 101 red-pill knowledge, and very simple forms of non-monogamy.
If you already have some experience with girls and non-monogamy and basic red-pill theory, you might not get much out of BD. Theredquest also practices non-monogamy, and was turned on to BDs blog, but said that he didn’t find anything new there to learn.
BD lack any interest in or need for theory of mind (that there are people who are not him and think differently than him), and his setup as a teacher from on high teaching to questioning students below, and his students gladly taking on that lower position, as is usual and to be expected, creates a situation where his head is stuck up his own ass.
That works perfectly well for him. He has a great system that will keep his head up his ass, and it works fine.
But if you have a psychological makeup even slightly different than BD has, his system won’t work for YOU.
daysofgame.com said:
Hey, man. Thank you.
I am honored.
If I can be useful to the community of men you and I belong to, I think it is because I have been at this for such a long time (I was a slow learner), I’ve studied so many smart guys (Krauser, Lance Mason, RSD Tyler, Sinn, Braddock from Love Systems, Franco, Patrice O’Neil, Jason Savage, Zan, etc) and… I am very active with girls in real life… I have earned my own reference experiences.
At this point, I am specializing more and more, finding my own flavor of game. I talk about “Octopus Game” and I like what Rivelino and TDdaygame are pointing at when they say #romanticredpill.
And that brings us back to you. I’m not sure you would like that description, but I think it’s a decent attempt to categorize your style of seduction and relationship dynamics. You are certainly awake… but you like depth and intimacy along with sex. If Black Dragon keeps his distance, you close that gap.
I want to have good experiences and give the girls in my life good experiences.
And I love the topics of mating and dating. This is what I want to talk about.
daysofgame.com said:
Which reminds me… I have been thinking about how to merge what David Deida might teach us and where many men (including myself) run into challenges in what we call “last minute resistance.”
The key point I am focused on here is that as men look to “take the notch,” they might be well served by focusing on “trying to open her” as the means to do that.
As a recommendation, this is a sort of Trojan Horse to men’s sexual psychologies. If men work to “open” and “soften” women, they will have to open/soften themselves. I’m 1000% pro robust, traditional masculinity… but I see no conflict with that and what David is teaching. In fact, I think it becomes a higher-level demonstration of leadership and taking a woman through an experience… the most intense experiences she can have sexually.
I think if men could pursue “the notch” (which is a lower level goal) via “learning to open women,” they would get laid more often. That is good. That is what they want… and it’s what I want. But they would grow tremendously if they took this approach. And have much, much better sex. I am no expert here… I am in this process myself… but I am seeing signs this is true.
Meanwhile… the girls would most certainly have a better time. They would get “fucked open to God.” And would become very happy lovers.
I think Deida has offered some real break-throughs here, but it is hard to get “normal guys” to look past his “hippy” presentation. I think he needs translation… “dumbing down” as an entry point for most guys.
It has occurred to me that he is running at the highest level of game and seduction. The experiences that women feel under this kind of leadership are mind blowing… I’ve seen it, I’ve studied it, I’m a believer.
David has little to offer at the level of “pickup lines” (which is, actually, the barest of entry points to women), but in terms of high quality experiences… and teachings that can unlock those moments, I think he is a very developed source.
I think you and he could likely trade notes. I want to write about this soon.
Red Coco said:
I was privileged to have Nash deconstruct my blog post, first as a extension to ideas that he had been fomenting regard tiers of seducers, and second, as a reminder I but an amateur at the application of Game (Applied Game as I call it) and bloggery.
Which brings me to a theme in the comments section – the Notch vs Deep Sex. I had prepared a draft on this topic as I am surrounded by Daygamers who speak glowingly of the Notch yet are unable to provide much by way of Deep Sex.
A German backpacker who stayed in my house had a comprehensive understanding of Deep Sex yet appeared to lack Game and some Mindset challenges. I had just assumed that Game went hand in hand with a good mindset and understanding of Deep Sex, but apparently not.
I jokingly considered the formula to be Game + Mindset + Deep Sex = Women. The total package so-to-speak.
That’s what I like about The Red Quest’s work – it’s a dive into Deep Sex. And I’m glad to see this theme raised by Nash and you.
daysofgame.com said:
> as a reminder I but an amateur at the application of Game (Applied Game as I call it) and bloggery
For the record, I don’t feel that way at all about you. You made a very interesting argument. It was well done. And it obviously inspired me. You stood out to me right away as a voice worth our time.
My thanks again to you.
> I am surrounded by Daygamers who speak glowingly of the Notch yet are unable to provide much by way of Deep Sex
I am not saying that is for everybody. And I still like notches and very causal “adventure sex.” But that doesn’t exclude depth either (just makes it less likely).
I am curious as to what is there in the pursuit of “soul fucks.” Is it only “flashing moments?” Lucky? Good combinations of body chemistry? Or can we have control and influence in the depth of our sex.
To be razor clear… I am NOT talking about “making love,” in some limp, soggy weak way. I am talking about having explosively deep sex. Might be super dirty (my favorite moments have been – Miss Thick is the deepest sex I have ever had, she is a legend to me, what we did was legendary). Deeper sex is measured by it’s richness, not it’s purity.
Related… I have been very into this for the last year. And it is still hit/miss.
And I had a very long date over NYE with a girl with a strong sex drive… but I could not find depth in her sex. I tried. And then I gave up and “had orgasms.” The last two nights I went down on her, and then had her jerk me off… if it was not going to be “rich and intimate,” I chose mechanical. It was great at a mechanical level. But I know there is more.
Failing to find it with her was also a type of lesson. She is a great girl, but I won’t see her again because of it.
I have another long date starting in about 50 hours. This is Miss Bangs, from China, she is flying in to Tokyo. I don’t think she has the strongest sex drive, but she could “meet me” in sex. She was awesome when we met up in China. Not kinky, not “athletic,” not particularly dirty at all… but she was “looking for me” in sex, and I was “looking for her,” and we hit that spot… and it was fucking fantastic. Glorious.
I don’t know if men will be interested in this topic. I have had this kind of sex (occasionally, with some lovers) since I was a kid. But I only identified it as a theme recently. It was via John Wineland’s classes, a proxy for David Deida (John is a student of Deidas… and is quite good).
I know this is where the glory of seduction lies.
xsplat said:
I wrote a reply earlier but the electrons got confused and fumbled it.
I agree that there are different lines of personal development. Sexual development can overlap with various other subjective and interpersonal lines of development, and also is a distinct line all itself.
My opinion is that to maximize sexual development, body centered meditations make a big difference.
xsplat said:
I’m listening to D. Deida on youtube now. Yes, I agree his wording is hippy trippy, which I have a difficult time getting past. But it’s worse than that – I don’t hear him talking about the extremely important subject of dominance.
For instance in the talk that he links to on his website, he uses hippy language to eventually say that guys don’t like women’s constant chatter. He gets around to the point that the guy has to choose to only interact with his woman when he truly wants to, and then to give full attention.
That’s fine, but he never says the important and obvious point. That the man has to tell the woman to shut the fuck up sometimes.
That’s a major dumbing down and sweetening up. He’s trying to be, in my opinion, far too female friendly, and not nearly harsh enough.
You HAVE to be harsh to teach “red-pill” truths. You can’t white wash it with energetic language. You MUST talk about dominance, and really down to earth language gets to the fucking point, I think, in the most effective way.
I don’t think that you can even begin to talk about attraction, at all, without talking about dominance. Using hippy terms dissimulates and hides the main most important point.
Also in that video he talks about how a guy needs to be basically emotional teflon, and put up with women’s shit tests.
That’s terrible teaching. That’s NOT how you pass shit tests. Way way way to kindergarden, and dangerously wrong. Do NOT be an immoveable oak tree! You’ll get tooled for sure. That’s just being a doormat.
Again, dominance MUST be directly addressed.
Only after that can we talk about finesse, humor, skillful means.
daysofgame.com said:
> I don’t hear him talking about the extremely important subject of dominance.
— X
Yeah. That’s not the lesson men will take from him. Not explicitly.
Although, you should see him control a room. He was “dominant,” in that he was head/shoulders above the Q/A. I saw him deal with a bunch of “look at me” hippies at a live event, who couldn’t wait to get the mic at a Deida event… they were very full of themselves… and he wrangled them masterfully. Amazing.
Which is a good way to see dominance. It’s “show, dont tell.” He is dominant, but not in a 50 Shades Way.
This is sort of at the heart of what I am getting at with what he has to teach. “Just be alpha” is Facebook-level advice. He is doing something more interesting for a man at my stage of the search of knowledge.
MILD EXAMPLE:
> The masculine navigates both bodies. The masculine partner may change the position of the bodies. Gently holding your partner’s wrists and moving them somewhere so her arms are in a position that their heart opens the most.
— Deida
So… I think he needs translation, so I would say,
“Give it 50% classical dominance, and then… look to see the TYPE OF LEADERSHIP where he is talking about opening her heart… what could he mean? Is he teaching you something that will cut back on LMR (junior level goal) or… blow open sex, as you show her you can not just lead, but lead TOWARD a place most men can’t take her… where she cannot take herself… to OPEN HER… to BLOOM HER OPEN.”
This is not just dominance. Or leadership… but leading her someplace very specific.
I think YOU know that destination. I have seen you point to it in your writing.
Where are you taking her when you/she fall in love on the first date. Is that all dominance? Is that what she see? Is it more than that?
> That’s fine, but he never says the important and obvious point. That the man has to tell the woman to shut the fuck up sometimes.
Agree. And YOU AND I already know that. So since we know that, can we take anything NEW from him?
And I have a hunch you have much less to learn here than I do.
So forget promoting Deida… can we build out some lessons here that incorporate what he is saying? Can we do it better than him??
> That’s a major dumbing down and sweetening up. He’s trying to be, in my opinion, far too female friendly, and not nearly harsh enough.
He is female friendly. But don’t miss his strength.
And he is translating women… not giving basic men a pep talk.
> The clear diamond vs the round ass.
> All she does is devotion… Then fuck you… Devotion… Then fuck you. That’s the feminine.
> If you master the consciousness in the moment… She reacts with devotional response. But it is only a moment… And it begins again.
Some ^ personal notes I took from a talk he gave live.
And that last one is a very good sample of Deida. I do not think he is being “female friendly” there. He is being “pilled,” and telling guys how it is… but in a way that Rollo wouldn’t approve of… as there is no “victim” role for men in that. It’s about the practice of mastering women. About the nature of women.
> You HAVE to be harsh to teach “red-pill” truths. You can’t white wash it with energetic language.
Yes… and… who hasn’t heard all that? Do we reread that book for the rest of our lives? When do we move beyond defense? And what does that look like?
> I don’t think that you can even begin to talk about attraction, at all, without talking about dominance.
Okay… more here.
I will give you a related example, from John Wineland, who I have studied with, and he is a Deida student. He is masterful. He is fucking badass… but not in “meat head” way.
JW: Come here… and suck my cock
If I want guys to pay attn, I can use this, and they’ll clap. It is dominant, or could be.
So what… I am way past this, personally. And I bet you are too.
HOW DO YOU MAKE IT WORK:
JW: Be 100% sure of yourself
JW: Commit to delivering it full out
JW: Add a touch of the divine
So now we are at a crossroads for you/I here. I am NOT saying I’m right. And I am not saying you’re interested…
But that TOUCH OF THE DIVINE. I bet you know what that means. I bet you have done that. That is UNCLEAR… but this is the “OPEN HER” component, referred to again.
I bet you have seen men that can do “dominance” and the DIVINE… and that last bit is what make these guys 10X more effective. Think of Zan, maybe. He is in the sweet spot.
I am inarticulate here… as I am working this out. Once I am closer, I bet you would have much more to add to this than most men. You may already. But repeating “we have to be dominant” doesn’t really help me (or you) or guys that are deep in the funnel here… that are looking for “better than FB” advice. “Deeper than RSD” POV.
Okay… More later.
Thank you for listening to this. I know I am opening up an unusual path in “pickup.” I think many people will dismiss it. But I am certain these guys are for real. They are POWERFUL SEDUCERS… and precisely because they use different tools.
I want their tools. Respectfully. And I want to introduce those tools to men that are ready.
xsplat said:
Thanks for taking the time to flesh out more ideas, and point out what you take away from Deida.
I expected, and was waiting for it.
Like I said before, you are a better listener than me.
Sure, I’m up to the challenge of “trying to do better”.
My opinion is that you MUST fuse cave-man ordinary joe language and attitude together seamlessly with Zen mind and tantric sex. No seams, no cracks.
There is no inner light to find. It’s allready all right there.
I’ll be more than happy to do my best do use words about it.
I really should simply record my day to day life. I think people would be fucking blown away. I’m still literally living with fresh extreme infatuation, day by day by day. And yes, it’s completely regular and normal. And fun.
Which is why I also point out dominance. I don’t mean it in a simplistic way.
You might never argue with your dog, but he knows who the pack leader is. Women don’t exactly shit test in the same way when you get extremely deft and when they are extremely into you. Yes, Deida can translate women very well; he’s extremely good at observation. But I said it’s explaining from a low value point of view.
I left open the possibility that this was on purpose, because his crowd needs to hear about their lives, not merely their possible high end futures, way down the line.
But I really believe the Buddhist way of explaining fruition and path at the same time is the way to go.
Fruition, or top guy, experience of shit tests is really nothing like I heard him describe.
And I think that’s because he didn’t explicitly explain what changes happen to the dynamic when playful dominance is introduced, seamlessly and in a fun way, into the fabric of the relationship.
xsplat said:
I understand that just saying the word “dominance” is clumsy and will bring up unwanted associations.
If you want to think about what dominance is, think about dressage; where a man or woman becomes one with a horse and trains it to dance. The horse does incredible side and backward steps, and together the two become beautiful and elegant. Or think of other equestrian arts.
That’s what dominance means. It’s listening to, loving, respecting, guiding and being guided by. Joining, yet from a position of authority.
xsplat said:
A comment I left on BD blog http://blackdragonblog.com/2019/01/10/my-parents-got-divorced/
First off, about watch what a woman does instead of what she says, perhaps I deserved such an easy low blow from poor word choice, of “some girls will tell you upfront”. Or perhaps its dissimulation via red pill 101 obvious truths. Some girls will tell you before, during or after the fact. Some girls will communicate. Some girls believe. Some girls say and act such that. Ok, I think we can move past the “I’m more red pill than you” phase, and talk about the actual subject.
I get your point, BD, that ideally people can have open relationships where jealousy won’t get in the way of that.
I heard you say that if people are too jealous, they can work on that, and change, and therefore have more satisfying lives and relationships.
But I question if your theory of mind is accurate. I think you are making quite the big leap of faith, in regards to how psychology and neurology actually works.
For some people, regardless of how much experience of non-monogamy they have had, jealousy still happens, and there is no off switch. No counselling or meditation that makes it completely stop. They need to find ways to MANAGE it.
I believe that you have quite the simplistic theory of mind regarding the differences between people, and assume too much that others can be similar to you in their levels of jealousy, and their ability to keep fuck buddies at an emotional arms length.
And what about if a person does want to consciously change their level of jealousy? Should he just try to grit his teeth and bear it, until he just gets over it?
Again, I believe that does a disservice to what is, in favor of what could be. Start with what is, and work with that. For some peopl
e, don’t ask don’t tell is a good framework to start with what is. Jealousy is a hard wired evolved trait – it doesn’t disappear because of a world view or philosophy.
And sure, many people, especially here, will feel it less. Good for you! Don’t get cocky about it and assume that others can or will be able to have low jealousy.
And it’s not just about us men. It’s about managing the girls. You’d have to discard more women that you are into if you are strict about eventually being full disclosure about all details of who you fuck.
daysofgame.com said:
> For some people, regardless of how much experience of non-monogamy they have had, jealousy still happens, and there is no off switch
I think it is fair to say MOST in this instance. I have no evidence that the % of people subject to rather severe jealousy (as in, “has a real emotional impact on them”) is
>And what about if a person does want to consciously change their level of jealousy? Should he just try to grit his teeth and bear it, until he just gets over it?
I think you are reading the world accurately when you get to that last line. I have seen many men in the Poly scene in Bay Area in CA try to live up to hyper-open liberal values. These people ONLY believe in cultural condition (no evo), so they think it is always learned and “unlearnable.”
And I have seen these men, totally committed, really lean in, as they watch their GFs go on “dates” with other men, and I have watched them suffer. And they suffer dually, as they have to endure both the jealousy, and the feeling that they are inferior because they cannot overcome it.
And it is precisely the forcefulness of BDs theory that leads to that… all-reason-no-evidence run a muck. He may be completely correct for him… while completely wrong for 90% of the population. As as he won’t acknowledge that… I think he is causing damage when he is insistent.
xsplat said:
Yup.
xsplat said:
Blackdragon replied:
—
If you are not familiar with the term “dissimulation”, BD has been quite helpful in showing how that works throughout his replies.
I’m not going to reply to his last comment, as he’s obviously closed off from touching the idea of theory of mind, even with someone else’s ten foot pole.
Ok, fine. He’s got his head up his ass about his system. That’s completely normal and common; if you become a teacher and get followers, you run that risk. You stop learning, and start repeating yourself.
But such an extreme level of dissimulation tells us more than about his thinking or learning or argument style. It tell us about how he must therefore deal with women.
As his theory of mind about jealousy is so incredibly lacking, and as he lives a non-monogamous lifestyle, he will by necessity have to blow through a lot of girls, and only keep around those that fit with his view. He can’t keep around girls with differing minds and mindsets, because he won’t have the skill to wrangle them. Because he doesn’t care to even acknowledge that different mindsets have any use or validity.
So you get his system, built out of his worldview. It’s not the other way around.
But his system is not as red-pill as he thinks. I would have thought that others would have picked up on it. But again, it’s just as we’d expect. Wherever there are acolytes, there is group mind, and people self censor. They not only don’t want to be rude, but humans are evolved to never question authority, especially within the context of a group that they want to belong to.
So the teacher, and students, get these gigantic blind spots.
The blind spot is that BD gives authority over to his number one girl of who he can fuck or not.
He lets her decide how often he can see his other girls.
He limits his attachment to fuck buddies, and rotates through the fuck buddies if they ever want a deeper relationship or more time.
That’s nothing close to red-pill, in my view.
It’s a system, that works. BD has pretty good knowledge of women, and has one of the most in depth and detailed and well thought out blogs about basic 101 red-pill knowledge, and very simple forms of non-monogamy.
If you already have some experience with girls and non-monogamy and basic red-pill theory, you might not get much out of BD. Theredquest also practices non-monogamy, and was turned on to BDs blog, but said that he didn’t find anything new there to learn.
BD lacks any interest in or need for theory of mind (that there are people who are not him and think differently than him), and his setup as a teacher from on high teaching to questioning students below, and his students gladly taking on that lower position, as is usual and to be expected, creates a situation where his head is stuck up his own ass.
That works perfectly well for him. He has a great system that will keep his head up his ass, and it works fine.
But if you have a psychological makeup even slightly different than BD has, his system won’t work for YOU.
daysofgame.com said:
> But such an extreme level of dissimulation tells us more than about his thinking or learning or argument style. It tell us about how he must therefore deal with women.
This is a great point.
>> As his theory of mind about jealousy is so incredibly lacking, and as he lives a non-monogamous lifestyle, he will by necessity have to blow through a lot of girls, and only keep around those that fit with his view. He can’t keep around girls with differing minds and mindsets, because he won’t have the skill to wrangle them.
You’re coming to this based on seeing him force-feed this theory to his community. I come to the same conclusion based on what I think I know about people.
I said this works “1000% for you, and probably less than 1000% for the women you date.”
Some must be on the same page… for whatever reason. Others will be beyond his grasp as he is one size fits alls. And still others will comply with this theory, even if they don’t FEEL it. That last part is the false-win for a lot of “no-jealousy” relationships… compliance without enjoyment or compatibility.
If he could acknowledge any of this… I would trust him more.
daysofgame.com said:
> Theredquest also practices non-monogamy, and was turned on to BDs blog, but said that he didn’t find anything new there to learn.
RedQuest is a man I talk with a lot, and a man I really respect. I have quizzed him a LOT about jealousy, as I think he is self aware, terribly experienced, very thoughtful.
From his blog (one of my favorite posts):
> I think she believed the non-monogamy scene would be filled with people who aren’t placing limits or bonds on each other, and who don’t feel jealousy, as Ms. Slav says she doesn’t. She has found some people like that. But she has found guys who are trying to take her, make her theirs, and control her sexuality… just like in the regular, monogamous world, just to a different degree.
— RedQuest
Ahhh. There is a man I trust. Perhaps I am also a slave to my worldview… but I think I am seeing what the world is really like… even in Red’s sex club, partner swapping scene.
> He found Ms. Slav on Facebook then invited her to an event… which she invited me to… and once there I found out about the arrangement. Annoying. Even I feel some amount of possession and jealousy.
— RedQuest
I think Red is a very interesting example in the study of the upper-bounds of tolerance to jealousy. And even so, I could see it working on him a bit with Miss Slav (it is a fantastic story).
He is very immune to it. I doubt BD could be better than Red here, and Red is much more honest/vulnerable, less bellicose than BD… so I trust Red’s self report more.
I think Red and I have one similarity in terms of jealousy (maybe only one, I am NOT immune to it)… is that we both casually steer away from it when it starts to work on us. he did that with Miss Slav… he started to disengage. That is what I would have done.
Red can take a girl to sex parties, and at a certain point, if she is too “unbalanced” (I cannot articulate this for him) in his arrangements, he will back away.
For me… if I feel even the vaguest bits of jealousy… I am OUT. No evidence needed. I really recommend this for men. If a girl makes you feel jealous… dump her. Unless you have a clear pattern of being hyper jealous… this will keep you out of that flavor of drama.
I never stick around, the other guy can have her. And thus, I never have jealousy in my 1/2 of the relationship. (And occasionally, the girl will chase me, and remove the other guy… this was back when I was monogamous).
Again, to make it personal… girls don’t talk to me about other men, and I don’t talk to them about other girls… and we never formalize that (I think they mirror me)… we’re just being smooth.
BD’s sledgehammer honesty is about him avoiding the psychological load of keeping his affairs personal. I don’t think he can handle it (which is fair, but he would never say that). Perhaps this is his get out of jail free card when women are hurt (which comes off as feminine to me). So he goes sledgehammer honest upfront, so he never has to bear a burden… which is also fine… but not the only show in town.
daysofgame.com said:
> Good luck with that then. You’ll never be as happy as me though.
– BD
Imagine saying this. Ha.
Maybe he is full narcissist?
To be honest… I never stick to his blog. I agree he has some smart things to say, but I don’t like his quality as a man. Not a man I would I would hunt with.
xsplat said:
This is the Vajrayana, or Mahayana Buddhist, or Zen, or Tantric viewpoint. Tatagatha, or suchness, or nowness. There is no mystical outer inner dimension or realm. Yet Buddha mind is our mind and outer experience, all at once.
It’s inneffable yet simple, and takes either a moment to realize or decades to glimpse, or one can work for the realization and it never comes.
But it’s very seductive, and loving, to accept and appreciate. That’s a big part of Zen mind, or Tantra. That inner light is already right there. Her laugh, her pussy, her sexual energy, and even her jealousy.
Truly loving yourself and the world and your lover is fucking important as fuck. What you love isn’t some hidden jewel. It’s right there in front of our faces.
Using hippy new age language actually is an insult to real love. Because it’s not really loving at all. It’s loving the make-up, and not the face.
Pissing in her mouth is just as much Buddha Mind as is kissing her in the heart chakra.
THAT REALIATION itself, and the absurd humor of it, is the essence of my seduction. We laugh all the time at the absurd shit and shine. It’s all grist for the mill. Nothing is sacred, everthing is sacred.
If something is sacred, that’s an insult to what sacred means. You can’t have sacred vs not sacred. That’s insulting.
That’s not what love means. Not what sex means.
xsplat said:
I never went to university. Which I think in some ways is a huge advantage, because for me continuing education was my education. When I was in the states I’d usually be taking various continuing ed and meditation related classes.
Learning is not a life stage, it’s a life style.
And so I’m learning from you. I’ve complimented you many times on what I see as some outstanding abilities. Very rare. You’re an incredibly good listener, plus very skillfully diplomatic, in a cheerful way. Great at comraderie.
It inspires me to try to listen a bit better. It’s not easy.
Yes, I think you’ve picked up on and put into words something important.
It’s not just dominance for the sake of it.
Putting it into words is tricky. By now you’ve read my recent post where I made great pains to point out that “the profane is the sacred”.
And above you talk about opening her to the sacred.
There are two ways to do “state control”. One is to get yourself into a good mood. The other is to accept whatever mood you currently have, exactly as it is, with no need to alter even a single bit of it.
Both are state control.
The latter usually takes many years of doing the former. There are two types of meditation. One is doing something with your mind, the other is not altering your mind at all. You can’t really do the latter, without a lot of doing the former. Not usually; a few rare people seem to pick up on that faster. Some never get it, no matter how hard they try.
Buddhists say that the nature of mind is, already, love and compassion.
Awareness itself; just naked awareness.
But they also do loving kindness meditations. I very often deliberately raise that sweet warm awareness in my chest, and physically feel a real living embodied love.
Yet I do believe that we can’t pidgeon hole it. The profane is also the sacred, and if not, then we don’t really love.
You have to love HER. Not just what we want her to be.
Love and forgive AND train her.
So yes, it’s opening her to a place. But to a place that she already is. She doesn’t have to go anywhere.
Holding that attitude by itself is transfroming and gets her there.
Sheer lusty paternal love.
As you know I’ve studied with several chi-kung and healing touch teachers. One of the more profound teachers taught how to simply listen with the hand. Profoundly listen and see divinity with the kinesthetic sense, without altering anything at all.
Doing that feels very profound and transformative to people. You don’t try to transform anything at all. Yet the bare awareness itself is the divinity, and does transform. Many of the students had also studied various more directly transformative energy work, and found the pure listening style to be fore more effective and profound.
But it’s not a philosophy. It’s a doing.
It’s unusual to even notice these “different tools”.
Tradition holds that when the Buddha got enlightened, he had decided to just shut up about it, because he assumed no one would be able to understand him if he tried to talk about it.
Yes, there certainly are different tools. There is real charismatic spiritual power possible. Love at first sight with young hot women several physical attraction points above a man is possible, not just once in a lifetime, but consistently, over and over, like a routine.
Talking about it is nearly futile. Most people first of all simply won’t believe it. Of those that do, who is willing to do the work to experience it first hand, in their own life?
Harold, the duck said:
Ignore Caleb, he is unfortunately a buffoon.
I say unfortunately because I truly like the guy. He is a smart man with some good ideas and I’ve given him money for some of his ebooks in the past because I think he’s worth listening to. But his problems are threefold: he has come to believe his own bullshit, he has no humility whatsoever, and he has no conception that there may be any path to happiness outside of his own incredibly narrow and pathologically self centered world view.
I take the point that these are necessary traits in a guru. And they would in fact be very useful if he were selling junk bonds or real estate; he would end up either in jail or President of the United States. But since he has chosen to sell his own lifestyle – and given the size of his ego he could have chosen nothing else – he now has a band of acolytes that think his way is the only way. I doubt that this will end well for anyone involved; Caleb, his partners, his acolytes, or their partners.
As you say, it’s kindergarten stuff in an adult world and I shudder to think that there are young guys swallowing this nonsense hook, line and sinker.
xsplat said:
You made a very good blog post about marriage, and used the Deida quote again. I’m copying my comment on your blog below, as it restates what I said above:
Reply to https://daysofgame.com/theory/on-marriage-quality-women-are-made-by-men/#comment-5774
This might seem nit-picky, but I think Deida’s idea here is true, but only from the frames of reference of a top beta or an alpha. There is a level above Alpha. You are talking about that level a lot in your post.
I’ve been writing for years about how women are trained, not found, and over time I continue to get better at it. Recently I mentioned how I’m finding it easier for there to be less conflict, down to a sublime level of low conflict. Three years with V with little to zero arguments, despite some serious relationship stress such as other girls. I’ve mentioned before that her gracious and warm character imprinted on me a bit, helping me to have a lower conflict relationship with my current live in, J.
So my experience now does not match the Deida quote at all.
I don’t get any fuck yous. As close to zero fuck you’s as imaginable. Even on her period.
You hit the nail on the head a few times in your blog post. The guy can be an environmental influence, as well as an in the moment manager, or “wrangler”. When shit tests happen, they look very different, and the level of sophistication in managing them can be sublime and simply funny. Shit tests can be just fun banter, instantly defused.
The reason I make this “nit-pick”, is because I don’t think we can keep saying over and over “yea, but most guys aren’t at that level yet. Let’s just talk about the level people can understand and relate to, so that it’s not confusing.” We can’t always keep things at a 101 level forever.
Even if you are studying high school algebra, it helps to have some idea about what advanced maths are out there and what they can do. You need to know what can lie ahead, if you keep at it. You’ll never get anywhere if you think that maths end at algebra.
I suppose we need a name for the level above alpha, where the man’s environmental influence already profoundly calms the woman down, and shit tests are handled so deftly that they change the very character of the shit test from anything resembling “fuck you” to opportunities for mutual fun play.
There is definitely a level far far above what we mean by alpha.
Wizard could work.
Shawn said:
There was always something shady about BD. I used to read him about 5 years ago but wrote him off as not legit.
Why discuss poliamorous arrangements instead of harem management? The only reason he needs to keep “his FB” at arm’s lenght is because, as Xsplat wrote, a woman dictates his lifestyle. The only reasons he has sex with FB who also have sex with other men is because he can’t keep them just for himself.
Let’s be honest, would you share your women if you could structure your life so you don’t have to share them?
I wrote long ago about what to do so monogamy is not required BY HER
https://experimentandstandardize.wordpress.com/2016/07/18/shooting-up-close-or-why-monogamy-is-not-required/
If a reader has experience on this, maybe he can expand further.