In reply to Nash’s post about marriage
All she does is devotion… then ‘fuck you!’… then devotion… then ‘fuck you!’ That’s the feminine.”
— David DeidaYou have to build a relationship with a women to even create that state of devotion. And even then… that “fuck you” hiss of the chaotic feminine will be there to find you when you are not bringing your best game.
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 sublimely low level of 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 you’s. 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 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 above what we mean by alpha.
Wizard could work.
*******
I have over 950 posts on this blog, and it’s not possible to summarize in any one blog post how to achieve very low conflict. It’s a gestalt of many things. To mention a few:
- frequent sex – the more frequent the better. And the higher quality the better, which can be a never ending life-long deepening, especially if you learn chi-kung sex.
- looking physically attractive – to her, and to others
- the girl has to be physically your style and you have to be really into her; so into her that just looking at her is a type of pleasurable sex. If not, move on or move plural.
- maintaining boundaries not only of what behavior you won’t accept, but of what behavior you expect out of her in devotion to you.
- her frequently doting on you and following orders, as a habit that you’ve trained her to do in a way that she finds pleasurable and fulfilling
- a constant sense of playfulness and humor and mutual fun
- a constant sense of mutual warmth and love and bondedness
- growing into unifying your mind and forgiving your own and her hidden corners and moving into your artistic right brained ways of holistic empathetic improvisational playing.
- attracting a girl who isn’t fubar or personality disordered, and not letting others suck up your attention from social climbing your way into the company of such girls.
And much more. As I said, over 950 posts, and tangentially most touch on what’s required for low conflict.
It’s great to hear some of these ideas that were first seen on this blog many years before anyone else was saying them, now are common and popular on other peoples twitter feeds.
Either six degrees of separation influence is happening, or I’ve subconsciously learned some memes from a forgotten meme pool, or timeless truths are being rediscovered by guys who have never been influenced by shared memes, or Sheldrake’s Morphogentic Fields of a shared learning subconscious is happening.
********
Oh, also, the flip side to low conflict is high passion and high giving of value from the woman and to each other.
That’s the same coin.
You don’t get low conflict combined with low passion and low value unless you live in different houses and rarely see each other. Actually, I have no idea what low passion would look like. You probably need to not see each other at all, if you want a combination of low conflict and low passion and low constant mutual doting (with the man doting from his ritualistic and improvised masculine frame methods).
**********
There is a flip side to shit tests that you rarely hear about. It’s being treated as more than a king. More than a leader. It’s being treated with religious sexual devotion. How many times a day does my mate say “I love you so much”? I’d need a clicker to count, and we’ve been living together for over a year, and she moved in with me on the first date. And her actions speak volumes more than her words. Yesterday I drifted out of sleep to realize my cock was being sucked by this 22 year old devoted hottie. She is out shopping for groceries now, and refuses to let the maid shop, because she wants to be inspired by the produce to make something new and delicious for me. On and on she ACTS out her love – constantly. She misses me even if I just step out to go the the gym, and tells me so. And she’s no outlier.
This type of behavior is common and usual for me – so common that I was talking about love at first sight and girls moving in on the first date just a few days before meeting J. And not just with random nobodies, but with girls less than half my age (sometimes closer to 1/3rd) and many points above me in looks that are my style and that I’m really into. And I’ve been talking for ages about being treated with constant reverence and doting devotion. At least since Kiki (another love at first sight move in on the first date girl), which was the year of 2009. The beginnings of being treated with devotion for me go back over 22 years, but the beginnings of mastery and knowledge and words for how to do it probably started around 2007.
And it’s not a skill set that you learn and graduate from with a diploma; it’s a never ending continuing education.
A continuing education that you can’t exactly pass on, in book or any other form. Because we all have to embody our truths uniquely and create and build our best relational selves.
*********
Related, from 2013
LTR game can be so refined that it becomes fast seduction. Your LTR game becomes love at first sight game. Girls fall right into your orbit and can not escape.
Update: Nash and his commenters made many insightful and detailed analyses about handling shit tests and frame, which are in the essense of maintaining low conflict.
That type of deftness leads to wizardry, and a different lived experience of “handling shit tests”. It becomes second nature fun banter, and not a drama puzzle drudgery annoyance that you are forced against your will to deal with.
Same concept of “shit test”, but totally different animal.
D said:
What you are describing IS ALPHA.
I recently revisited both Vox’s and Roissy’s definitions. Bear in mind that Betas get sex, they just don’t receive the unwavering devotion that alphas receive with women.
My recent experience has been that I get one giant crap test from women early in, and then either:
1) I set good boundaries => all is magical for some indefinite period [year(s)]
2) I fail to recognize and call it out => what follows is a gradual downward spiral.
I have come to the conclusion that I am basically at the same place the late Patrice O’neal was at. A man has to know how to train a woman to suit him. And American women need nearly ground up retraining.
As for David Deida and the ‘fuck you,’ I have been thinking that maybe the bible is correct in that for women their relationship with a man parallels a mans relationship with God. We want to know that there is purpose and reward to our struggle to figure out and to play the game, but God seems to refuse to speak directly to us to reassure us, and we periodically get sullen and act out. Analogously, women live wanting to know that their devotion to a man is not misguided and without purpose. They want the sort of faith in a man that we have in our place and mission in the world. The moment we waver they waver.
Sooner or later we all waver. So training a woman requires that we gradually increase her agency, her ability to bridge our missteps and absences. But we don’t ever overload her for too long or with too much. And we forgive when she falters. I think that the moment that you forget that you are dealing with ‘what a woman is;’ That is when the ‘fuck you’ appears. Sometimes it just appears anyway.
‘What a woman is.’ Beauty and something to be treated very very carefully. Like fire.
xsplat said:
I’d be satisfied sticking to the term alpha, except that such a term is dilluted, and has no gradations.
Have you ever heard of people talking about their lived experience of relationship after relationship (or even any very long term relationship) having the strong unmistakable characteristic of being treated with devotion and reverence and constant active doting?
Sometimes in reading my stuff, I have to wonder if I’m not just showing off and bragging in a deluded way.
But then I have to admit that I really am 52, short, and with a below average face, really am living a very attractive doting 22 year old, who comes many times every day, and my past is a long series of highly similar and related types of relationships that I very consciously built and documented in detail.
What I’m doing is extremely unusual. It’s not a delusion or fantasy. And it’s unusual enough that I should document it, and how to do it, even if I’m so socially unskilled as to be unable to do so without coming off as bragging.
Since what I talk about is so rare and unusual, we either need grades of alpha so that we have a short hand that distinguishes being treated well from being treated with reverence, or we could use different words.
I’m going to start using the word wizard. It even has different connotations from Alpha. It implies charisma and sublime social deftness – near hypnotic powers.
The word alpha has it’s roots in leadership. Wizard has it’s roots in hypnotic charisma.
D said:
I agree that the term is diluted. I have experienced briefly – for a few moments here and there – what it means to be a man chased after by young beautiful women. That’s women plural. It does open ones eyes wide with wonder. Its not the same as ‘getting laid.’
Regarding ‘wizard’
I had decided about three years ago that I would attend a university and pursue a PhD in theoretical chemistry. As I walked about the streets and hallways and chatted up coeds, I thought of the ‘wizard’ archetype, and decided that ‘alchemist’ was an appropriate description for myself. Because I was bent on creating something of value from something quite ordinary and useless looking.
Of course that ordinary and useless thing was me, in part. A late forties guy with no wealth, no assets, no college degree and apparently nothing going for him. And I created someone who could be loved. The other part was recognizing the same potential in the people around me.
xsplat said:
That’s a big deal.
I used to live in a monestary with Pema Chodron as the Abbess and my meditation instructor. She’s famous for teaching about Maitri, or self acceptance and love.
It’s a rather huge foundational part of all Buddhist practice, without which one can’t deepen and grow it into compassion.
Or the simple common sense notion that you can’t love others until you love yourself.
And no girl will love you for long if you don’t love her. Falling in love is something people prefer to do together.
So ya, keeping that warm sweet fire of self love in your heart is foundational to being loved.
daysofgame.com said:
> As for David Deida and the ‘fuck you,’ I have been thinking that maybe the bible is correct in that for women their relationship with a man parallels a mans relationship with God. We want to know that there is purpose and reward to our struggle to figure out and to play the game, but God seems to refuse to speak directly to us to reassure us, and we periodically get sullen and act out.
This is a great read. I really like it.
> Sooner or later we all waver. So training a woman requires that we gradually increase her agency, her ability to bridge our missteps and absences. But we don’t ever overload her for too long or with too much. And we forgive when she falters. I think that the moment that you forget that you are dealing with ‘what a woman is;’ That is when the ‘fuck you’ appears. Sometimes it just appears anyway.
Patrice talks about “karate school.” Saying she “learns your moves” and eventually you have to let her go and start over. This is “betatization” sort of, but staying one step ahead of her “chipping away,” and when she is too good… push her out.
And you are saying almost what Deida says. He says, in the end… women always win.
DEIDA: “Feminine always wins… The container is temporary.”
I took this ^ note after hearing him talk live. I like the concept. “The feminine always wants more,” so she works to eclipse any level of skill you have. Interesting concept.
And I think Xsplat might be looking for a level beyond that.
daysofgame.com said:
> 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 give Deida more credit than you do (I think he might be more than at the Top Teir, but he doesn’t bother proving himself, he just gets to what is on his agenda)… but I like the comment.
There IS a layer above “alpha”/”advanced.” What Yohami calls Top Guy. I really believe it.
> I’ve been writing for years about how women are trained, not found, and over time I continue to get better at it
I am waking up to this. As I learn more, and the “matrix” slows down, I can change the course of events in real time… so “shaping her” is becoming more common for me.
> Recently I mentioned how I’m finding it easier for there to be less conflict, down to a sublimely low level of conflict. Three years with V with little to zero arguments
Yeah.
D said:
>I am waking up to this. As I learn more, and the “matrix” slows down, I can change the course of events in real time… so “shaping her” is becoming more common for me.
That is such a good description. I am reminded of so many moments, particularly with women, where things do slow to the point where one can discern all the edges of what is happening, in someones face perhaps, or in their body. Like when a grouse explodes into flight in front of you and the gun goes up and the safety goes off and the barrel swings ahead of the bird and then the bird falls. And it seems like the process was so leisurely but it happened in fractions of a second. Like a singer or a dancer who is playing in the space between the notes, where anyone else would just be trying to keep up.
Zan Perrion talked about asking a girl why she rejected his offer, and finding that sometimes explaining no would wake up yes.
D said:
> Recently I mentioned how I’m finding it easier for there to be less conflict, down to a sublimely low level of conflict. Three years with V with little to zero arguments
What if you really trusted that someone truly wanted you to have what you wanted, and would act to help you get it? Would there be any need to manipulate that person through drama, through threats, through yelling or hitting? What if you could just ask for what you wish – and know that someone would grant that wish if it were in their power to do so, and sympathize with you if it were not?
There is still drama in finding out what will happen. It just plays out in a different way.
daysofgame.com said:
> What if you could just ask for what you wish
What if she never had to ask? What if you could take her someplace far more interesting and rich than she could plan for herself?
What if the very act of being taken someplace she couldn’t imagine was itself the experience she “always wanted?”
xsplat said:
Dating someone that I’m very physically attracted to is important for me; I’m a sucker for a pretty face. So I’ve compromized many times on personality and brains.
But some of my girls were also proper companions; we were on the same team.
I think that’s what you’re getting at.
Sometimes a girl get’s oppositional, and nothing you can say will get her to think that you are on the same team. It’s like a drug for her. She gets off on the outrage.
But some girls are not like that.
Which reminded me and emphasized for me the value and power of not getting distracted by a bird in the hand, and working hard for the better birds who are still in the bush.
Some girls are capable of theory of mind and genuine gracious compassion. They will act on the same team.
And when heartbreak arises, such a girl will graciously tell you “It’s fine if you want to keep many girlfriends. But just not with me. I can’t handle the heartbreak.”
She’ll be gracious, yet maintain healthy boundaries.
There will usually remain some competing interests, and I know of no easy solution or way around that. It feels horrible to break someones heart. And horrible to give up one’s own needs and desires.
For me lately I’m graced with being satisfied enough to have my desires for novelty calmed down. I can’t put my finger on why. Each singe positive thing that J has to offer many other girls as pretty as her have offered me. Perhaps it’s the combination of offerings *, and my time in life.
* Especially being exactly what I said I’d need to find in a new girl, in a blog post just a few days before meeting her:
1) physically small. I’m only very attracted to small girls. And have a preference for an alien shaped face.
2) light hearted enough about jealousy and my roving eye. At least enough that she makes a man out of me more than tries to put my balls in her purse. Light hearted enough to joke about jealousy role plays, instead of trying to get me to walk on eggshells.
3) High in the trait of openness.
And of course I could never take any girl seriously who did not regularly and easily orgasm. Or who could ever let her self get fat. I can have some patience with a girl learning how to come, and then how to come regularly, and then how to come without losing all her power so that she can have multiple orgasms. That can take many months or even 1 or two years for some girls. But no orgasms at all is real downer for me, and simply not good enough for mate material, no matter what else she can offer.
Also of course personality disorders are beyond a girls realistic control, yet makes her not worthy of being a live in or one-and-only mate. No matter how hard she works or what else she can do. There are minimum requirements that are out of a girls hands. Sad, but there it is.
xsplat said:
What happens for me seems to be the reverse. I might look back at what I just said and note with some surprise how appropriate it is.
Actually, no, you’re right. There is awareness in that split second improv moment, and we are aware of what micro-split second decisions we are making as we riff.
This is very similar to improv on a musical instrument. I wrote a post about that, that referenced a study of jazz improvizationalists that showed that the usual analytical decision making process gets shut down during improv. I think we get more right brained, and the flow moment puts us both more into the moment yet at once less in “decision making mode”
So maybe it’s the analytical part of my mind that sometimes looks back and is surprised at what I’ve just said.
Because there is no time for the analytical part to make such choices. The other way to think is massively-multi-parralel. You can’t be analytical and fast on your feet like that. There is no time for it.
Lately I’ve been talking a lot about improv and moving into right brained artistic ways of being, as well as muscle memory from reference experiences.
I think we also need to talk about feeling love and lusty appreciation as habit. I’ve been chewing on that idea these last few days, waiting to be ready to write about it.
Together they add up to all at once a mixture of:
* being into the girl
* showing it
* leaning back instead of leaning in, as Riv would remind
* constantly joking and using her micro-shit tests as fun starting points for agree-and amplify or role play or changing the subject if a funny way or banter and so on.
* filling the room with lusty paternal love that lights her up as if it’s opium in the air.
* a constant feeling of sexual addiction and lust; constant sexual flirting
* a feeling of long standing ease and closeness, as if you could have a conversation with your lips touching. You don’t have to move away from the fridge as she’s reaching in, she’ll appreciate you just being obstinately in the way as she sidles up right against you, as if you share the same body, you are so comfortable and familiar.
So ya, time slows down and you direct her attention and who she is, constantly, but also it’s a matter of habit, but habit of improv.
Always fresh, always new, yet always of a very familiar theme.
Being into each other and celebration.
Such a type of relationship is highly archetypal, by the way. If you act like this on the first date, the woman will fall straight into it, in mutual role play. She will feel as if the two of you have been in a great relationship for a long time.
It’s a kind of secret society. That even virgins can join. It’s just archetypal and easy. First date sex, and first date openness and coupling.
daysofgame.com said:
> 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 keep things at a 101 level forever.
This is exactly the point I am making with my initial reference to what Deida is teaching with the “open her heart” to have better sex (in a purely physical sense) and encouraging “connecting” (having her “100% there with you”) as a means of making the sex “god like” in intensity (which again, can be experienced in more pleasure as well… if that is a man’s incentive).
And I think Deida is doing all that. And I think most guys won’t get what I am saying at all (they are still trying to get their dicks wet (me too!)), so they can’t see the next set of lessons.
I have some ideas of how to frame this, so we can make the conversation partially intelligible for guys that are close to being ready, and hook more advanced guys who are ready – but don’t have a forum to consider/discuss these deeper topics.
An active conversation with men with real experience on truly advanced topics would move all of us fwd… deepen the practical renaissance of sex/relationship mastery.
PhD sex (which is not “fucking 200 girls”, not “making her come,” but “fucking her open to God”). PhD wrangling… creating the girl you want, leading her “much deeper than she can take herself” (=Deida concept).
So… I am trying to push past “game 101” lessons (“Do looks matter?”) into much deeper talks.
We are the men that can drag part of the community in this direction. Even guys that don’t have experiential knowledge… will begin to see the signs to look for (and they will love the mental masturbation of talking about it… I would). And as they pick up those ref exps… they will have “Ah ha!” moments as we have planted the signposts long ago in their minds… they will trip over those lessons when the time comes.
This happened to me (and happens to me) all the time. Lessons from other guys smack me in the forehead as I get advanced enough and sensitive enough to see them.
xsplat said:
You can’t get better at tennis if you only play against newbs.
You’re perfect to have in the conversation about advanced relationship skills because three things:
* your breadth of study
* your willingness to tease out the wheat from the chaffe in what anyone says, plus your ability to translate between different frames of reference and metaphors and ways of thinking
* your Dale Carnegy high end skills of diplomacy.
An intern once asked me to teach him about Chi-Kung. I gave him an overview and a few lessons, and he went off on his own from there. In my understanding, there is no ultimate true method; you grow the phantom limbs that you choose to pay attention on growing. The framework that we grow on is very very loose. I don’t teach much of the traditional things, such as red on the outside white on the inside left side channel beside the central channel beside the white on the outside red on the inside right side channel. That channel is not a discovery of something real, it’s a creation of something that becomes real.
So anyway, within a brief period of some months, he was having very strong Chi-Kung and Chi-Kung sex experiences. Very different from my own.
So if we get a community of guys talking about advanced stuff, we aren’t going to be agreeing on where is the right-hand channel and what color it is. But some underlying patterns might still be discernable.
The way that someones heart-chakra energy opens will be experienced uniquely for everyone. But love is an underlying pattern we will be able to notice. And we can consider the different frames of reference and viewpoints on love as real different worlds, seeing reality. The fun task isn’t to see the same reality, it’s to see the breadth and profundity. More info at once, and better integration of the massively parralel insights and embodied wisdom that are not surface.
daysofgame.com said:
> I’ve subconsciously learned some memes from a forgotten meme pool, or timeless truths are being rediscovered by guys who have never been influenced by shared memes, or Sheldrake’s Morphogentic Fields of a shared learning subconscious is happening.
This ^ is what I think is happening.
I haven’t read that much of your stuff… but I am “reinventing” the wheel as I come to conclusions other men that pointed me toward… or have “simultaneously invented” (re-invented) as they are “logical”/masterful conclusions to common progressions in the domain of sex/relationships.
xsplat said:
Well, that doesn’t give me the social validation that I seem to crave in regular doses the same way that I crave the food of sex, however it’s still quite heartening.
Less struggle to get “my” message out there, in order to not feel alienated and alone. It’s a message that is coming to and out of many of us, as if we are all swimming in the same ether.
daysofgame.com said:
> Yesterday I drifted out of sleep to realize my cock was being sucked by this 22 year old devoted hottie. She is out shopping for groceries now, and refuses to let the maid shop, because she wants to be inspired by the produce to make something new and delicious for me
I have believed that you give girls this level of “inspiration” for some time now. I think you are for real. I think you really are doing something special.
And while I know you have a lot of experience, I think you can do this with many girls… you’re not “finding unicorns.” You are building them… because of what is unique to you. Not what is unique to them.
And the best tool I have for understanding how you do this… is Deida. And the training I did with John Wineland (“fearless intimacy” was the name of the class… I took it three times… it’s extraordinary, exhausting… and it changed me).
I assume we are all pointing in the same direction. I have had more exposure to them (Deida/Wineland) than you. So when I hear them “point to the truth,” and then you say, “this girl is looking at the truth,” I think similar things are happening.
My best guess (in part, as I’m doing this when I am “blowing girls minds”) is you are “bringing more and more energy through the girl.” This is “fucking her open to god.”
To be as literal as possible… you’re making the experience of being with you, so intense, that she is “on drugs” when she feels that, it “changes her,” and she expects to be in a devotional state around you… and she has evidence… as you continue to use her as a vessel to concentrate “intense feelings.”
SMALL EX: you can glance at a girl < you can stare at a girl
The latter is much more intense. But think of those as steps 1-2 of a 20 step possibility. Imagine step "3" is looking at her in a way that makes her blush. Step "4" might make her cry… in a cleansing way. Now imagine step "10." I am still talking about something that is happening via eye contact only.
There are additional paths to "work" on the girl's experience, on the shared experience… TOUCH would multiply things many times over.
I can look at a girl, in an intentional way… let's say, on a date. I will tell her I am going to do it. Then I will do it. And she will "pop" as I do what I mean to do.
I look at her, I get super into the "bubble" of her and I, I ratchet up the intensity of how "deep" I am looking into her… I SHOW HER MORE AND MORE OF ME (which may be a key ingredient) and she "expands." And you see her pupils dilate. She has an experience like falling in love. And then I FEEL IT… it's like joy. It's God (and I do not mean that in a religious way). If it doesn't feel exhausting… it's not what I mean.
I did this last night, at dinner, on a first date, on purpose, over and over, at the dinner table… and I saw it "land" over and over. She was a radically happy girl last night. I am 100% certain, if/when I fuck her… it will be incredibly deep sex, even if it is not athletic/kinky, but it might be that too (that is not the important part to me, as this stage of my game).
I am a rank amateur. A master could help me understand what I'm dabbling in.
My guess is, I am pointing to one of many ways that you can "expand" a girl, "expand" the shared space, the depth of the shared space… and if you do this, she will lose her mind, fall beyond in love with you… and as a byproduct… the sex will be extraordinary.
There… that is a pass at what I am trying to understand better.
xsplat said:
To quote myself: “You have to feel a lot in order for the girl to feel a lot”
I like the way you put it too. We all know that the more sexually responsive a girl is, the more fun she is to be with. Funny how guys never talk about that about themselves.
Children from a young age learn to sex differentiate. Part of it is innate; boys stop joining in on playing with dolls with the girls and get more interested in the Tonka Trucks. Part of it is just noticing what each group is doing. So I don’t know how much it’s cultural sex differentiation that keeps guys from talking out loud that they will be WAY way way better in bed if they FEEL more and are more sexually responsive.
Or maybe it’s because most guys are struggling to feel less, because it’s too easy to orgasm.
That’s where chi-kung comes in, of course. It increases no only your libido, but your control. You can hold MUCH more energy. It can be so intense as to be indistinguishable from pain.
I remember going to the dentist during a period when my sex was usually extremely intense. The dentist pain became the same as the sex pain for me – indistinguishable from pleasure.
That’s just one manifestation of high energy though. There are many other ways. Again, why chi-kung helps; to find many voices, to find many embodiments. And why formless meditation helps. To not need any dreams or embodiments at all, but to just let aliveness be simple. To appreciate the appreciation, and let it broaden in a non-local way.
People have mind expanding experiences in the presence of advanced yogis. My money would bet that the yogi isn’t reaching inside your brain to make you feel anything. We have mirror neurons, and are amazingly in tune with the most subtle of body language.
If you are open and relaxed and feeling strong love and lust, and not demanding, this allows her to open and feel more.
You don’t really have to reach into her heart with your mind.
But you can do that too. You can mix like that too.
xsplat said:
Yes, and not just intense feelings.
You feel good. You feel good around her. You like, love, lust, and appreciate her.
So you celebrate the energy-baby that is the love that the two of you create. You both feel that love as a real thing. It’s in the room, and you both deeply respect that baby. You both nurture it, constantly.
That baby needs sex, comfort, delicious food, quiet time apart, and on and on. It needs strong passionate sex, time with her listening to you play your muscial instrument or watching you be above average at the gym, or whatever it is that feeds the baby.
She’s going to be constantly saying “I love you”, because you are constantly, quietly, feeling love.
Her mirror neurons will pick up on your very suble body language that you are unconscious of. All you have to do is be into her, (and 1000 other things that are already natural habit) and she’ll associate all her good feelings with you, and be constantly addicted.
She’ll miss you while doing the groceries, or if you step out to the gym. Even if you live together 24/7, she’ll not only never tire of you, but might burn with love so strong that it physically hurts her in the chest.
My girl dreams of me every single night. Unfortunately I’m often cheating in her dreams, or about to. That’s my karma, I suppose. That must be in my body language. But it’s also just because of the love-existential-angst.
xsplat said:
I’ve talked about “the eye trick” on this blog many times. Good to hear that you are spontaneously discovering it. It has felt very different for me at different stages in my life and on different occasions. So it’s one of those real things that doesn’t take a specific form.
But it’s an amazing part of charisma and connecting. I fall in love when I do that. It’s no game. It’s no dress rehearsal.
xsplat said:
This hasn’t been my experience. However girls will leave a guy, eventually, who won’t commit in the way she wants. Marriage with monogamy is a common line in the sand that a woman is waiting for.
Blackdragon and others contest this point, and say that many women will hang around for years as fuck buddies.
That’s apples and oranges.
Women who are deeply in love with you and already pair bonded have expectations – biological expectations. It’s called having a baby.