Monday, June 3, 2013

Romance is for Losers

A big mistake inexperienced men make is that they believe mainstream dating advice, and then there are of course those who believe the equally nonsensical advice of PUAs. It is not true, as PUAs claim it, that you can get any woman you want if you just used the right technique. However, following mainstream advice by being courteous, and not too pushy, taking girls out on dates, and waiting for at least two weeks before attempting to have sex with her will also guarantee that you won't get much action.

Plenty of girls don't mind if you waste your time or money on them, though. Why time? Well, it equals attention, and a plain average girl would rather have some average guy drooling over her than none. It doesn't mean that she can't wait to rip his clothes off, though. What guys who take girls out on dates don't realize is that there is a much faster route. It's just not necessarily available to them. Based on my experience, I am tempted to say that girls make the decision to have sex with you very quickly --- if they are attracted to you. Then there are guys that just don't do it for them at all. However, there is an unfortunate third category that can be exploited for material gains. This is where dating and diamond rings come in.

I found it quite startling that some girls were openly mocking the guys they were dating when they hung out with me. This also ruined any notion I had of women being kind. One particularly materialist bitch in London viewed some middle-aged guy as nothing but a walking wallet, and thought this was all good fun. Once she even asked what I think he should buy her next. I didn't quite manage to develop a lot of respect for that woman. However, I'm undecided whether that guy deserves pity or ridicule. He only has himself to blame since he should be perfectly aware of the fact that he's not getting anything in return. Still, it struck me that they were willing to fuck me so quickly, while they only dangled a carrot in front of some other guys.

Sure, some girls fuck those losers. Gold-digging can be a rather lucrative profession, after all. What is noteworthy, though, is that you can get all of that without the slightest notion of romance. It was rare for me to even take a girl out on a date. In the few cases I did, it was normally a short 30 or 40 minutes before heading back to mine. Heck, even a nonchalant rhetorical question like, "Why don't we just skip this and head back to my place?", or when calling on the phone, replying to her probing question where we should meet for dinner, "You can drop by at my place in about two hours" normally did the trick as well. Some girls don't necessarily want to lead you on. Instead, they are only familiar with the typical dating protocol and think they have to meet you for dinner first. Those can be quite relieved when they can skip that ordeal. This only applies if she's sexually attracted to you, though.

If you don't push the interaction towards sex, you'll have a hard time getting laid. On the other hand, if you put the offer on the table, and the girl knows that she won't be able to mooch off you (or that you won't wait long for her to change her mind), you can force a decision quickly. She's either going to have sex with you or not. She knows that you'll be gone if she turns the offer down. However, letting a reasonably hot guy just walk off isn't such an easy thing to do. So, what's the conclusion? It's simply that if she likes the idea of having sex with you, then chances are very good that she will --- even if this might mean that she won't wait as long as she normally does. Maybe it's a bit uncomfortable for her, but she'll soon find comfort, so don't worry about it.

On the other hand, if you have no spine and think that a kiss on the cheek is enough compensation for an expensive dinner, nothing much is going to happen. If she let's you wait, then she's simply not that interested in you. She may still enjoy the attention. It's not romance, though. Yes, the losers will think it is. For women, "romance" means steamy sex. Candlelight dinners or long walks with polite conversation are quite the opposite of that.

Lastly, let's not forget that many girls find it more comforting to be able to say that they are
seeing some guy, even if he doesn't mean anything to them, than admitting to their girlfriends that they are single. Nobody has to know that she's not fucking him. Heck, some guys told me that they have sex with their "girlfriends" once every six to eight weeks. I'm sure they've got plenty of romance, though. A guy who does not pose a sexual threat is perfect for that category. He's easy to please, and for girls they are convenient, too. Nominally, they aren't single, and can still conveniently look for some other guy who gets their juices flowing. Without the notion of "romance" such a charade would be impossible.

What's your opinion? Let me know in the comments below!


  1. The last girl I was with became very fond of me because of the way I looked out for her best interests. I'm a health nut and love educating and mentoring people in general. We had sex on the first date and it only cost me a couple beers. Afterwards, I never bought her anything expensive or frivulous, but I'd take care of her in little ways by rubbing out her muscle knots, making sure she ate healthy and was generally taking care of herself as she has a demanding career.

    She later explained how I made her feel wanted and appreciated, and how her former boyfriends would attempt to 'buy her' with material crap. I was rewarded with sex on demand at a minimal cost. It's much more romantic to have good sex and chill at house making dinner together.

    1. All I'm reading here is she took your advice seriously and let you touch her. Basically, she was attracted to you from the start. I'd argue, because of looks.

    2. Well yea, for sure. She was attracted to me, no doubt about it. Though, I'm saying that the way you treat a woman is certainly a factor. Obviously she wouldn't have been so infatuated had I smacked her around and called her a skank.

      I'd argue that you will most likely get a different outcome should you choose to shower a girl with gifts and compliments vs. treating her with care and respect. This is assuming you've already slept together.

    3. Your statement is utterly meaningless.

      She was attracted to you and fucked you that is all. Female rationalize attraction after the fact.

      Also lots of men treat women like shit and get pussy. IF the women is really attracted to the man she will put up with abuse.

  2. This reminds me of the "Dinner whore" from Craigslist, examined in the following article:

    So do you not believe in mutual romance as a winning proposition at all, or would this blog entry be better off titled "Don't be duped by the illusion of (developing) romance"? Dangling the prospect of romance clearly made the women you mention richer or better off while giving nothing in return for the men. I wonder if more and more women nowadays would react to the prospect of being taken to the park to walk and talk with "You call that a date?".

    And when you said "For women, "romance" means steamy sex"--isn't the criteria of what exactly falls in the category of "romantic activity" different for everyone? Even the steamiest of sex won't by itself get a woman to emotionally, physically, and mentally commit to a man in a mutually beneficial arrangement, which is what I thought the end goal of romance was.

    1. The walk in the park normally comes after dinner. I've heard that some women even push for this as it wastes some more time and then gives them an easy way out for turning the guy down for sex should he get pushy ("Gee, it's getting late. I really have to get up early tomorrow.).

      In my view, relationships work in the following order: mutual attraction - having sex relatively soon after meeting - keep seeing her and figure out how well you like each other. At the last step, you've got the chance to move towards a mutually beneficial relationship. No, just through sex she won't commit, but physical connection is an important prerequisite.

      You are right, though. Men are being duped by the trappings romantic relationships (as they are portrayed in the movies). It has little to do with how relationships normally work, though.

    2. Interesting article. It does not surprise me, but makes me just think a little.

      There are men out there who are just not being loved and suffer from it. Common "wisdom" may lead them to believe that younger women answering to their ads may actually be interested in them. Maybe those men also worked hard to get money, believing that it will get them women.
      And then they get used by women faking interest (yes, contacting them based on personal ads is showing interest) who just want expensive dinners, causing costs that cannot be justified with claims of "desperately requiring food".

      Imagine the following scenario instead: an attractive male contacts single mothers based on ads that they are looking for a new dad for their children - a new partner for life. He feigns interest, fucks them and then (as he planned) dumps them.

      In both cases the victims were quite naive. But I'm sure one of them would get more sympathy than the other.

    3. Thanks for this great comment! In fact, I recently received a link to a story that seems to show the exact same pattern, with the interesting twist that the victim is in complete denial and look for support online. I'll try to publish an article on that before the weekend.

      Also, the scenario you describe is much more common for women. Single mothers are desperate to get laid anyway since they are highly unattractive to a regular guy. Why the f*ck would you want to bring up the child of another man instead of your own?

      It is a sad fact that society perpetuates the myth that possessions will make you more attractive, instead of warning guys that it will only make them prime targets for financial exploitation. Also, there are obviously guys who neglect their appearances and personality, focussing instead only on making more money. This won't work so well, either.

    4. When you say "the walk in the park normally comes after dinner" do you then mean that women today won't entertain a cost-free option like walking and talking? I would think that simply walking-and-talking allows you to check out whether you actually have a good interpersonal connection worth building on, and given its cost-free nature you aren't left paying for her drinks (or whichever) if she turns out to be not worth your time and effort.

      As for "having sex relatively soon after meeting," here's a blog entry showing how delaying can filter out the wrong kind of people:

      I'm all for checking out sexual compatibility before marriage, because there's potential for serious friction there in a committed relationship. Of course, sexual habits can change during a relationship, such as the old joke about a bride at the altar "smiling because she's given her last blowjob."

  3. Sleazy, even though i some how had made the same conslusions in my mind - reading it there made me realize how spot you are.

    It is a decision within seconds, and that whole "romance" concept is a big joke.
    I'm guilty of having fallen into trap last year a couple times, but i#m recovering. Still, i occasionally spend money on women (drinks, etc).
    Its usually wasted.
    I will completely cut it.

  4. The one thing which I never do is spend tons of money on women. Most of my "dates" are really semi casual hangouts, which double up as dates. I think through "dating", I have been the person who has got richer as most of the time we end up splitting and quite a few times, girls foot the bill for me.

    Quite a few girls have told me that they like it this way because they never feel as if I am trying to buy their attention.

    Now that I have not paid for a girl in a very long time and usually just do casual hangouts, it just feels very natural. We hang out a bit (mostly in small groups). No one pays for another person. If you like each other, you either "drop the person home", or split away from the main group or just ask them to meet you alone next time.

    No BS dating this way

  5. Hey Aaron, you're nailing it with this aarticle. All of this confirms my own personal experiences to the n-th degree… from my unsuccessful, but terribly heartfelt and "romantic" endeavours some years ago of never getting the women (I thought) I desired into the sack… to my much happier, relaxed and satisfied state nowadays.

    Particularly the notion of "For women, 'romance' means steamy sex." is soo true, that it isn't even funny anymore.
    In contrast, those ideas and images of romance popularized by the entertainment industry are usually enough to make a cat laugh.

  6. Interesting post.

    Fortunately, guys like Ross Jeffries came and told that the traditional dating process doesn't work for men. It's only good for women to have free meals, jewelry, ..., for the entertainment industry and for the restaurants.

    1. Unfortunately, Ross Jeffries' gift to the world was Speed Seduction, which doesn't work either.

    2. Yeah. Just out of curiosity, Aaron. A lot of people seem to say that speed seduction doesn't work. How would you explain that Ross (but also V Kelvin, RSD, and other "guru$") is still making money and have supporters?

    3. Here's your answer:

  7. "However, letting a reasonably hot guy just walk off isn't such an easy thing to do."

    What if you are much, much less than "reasonably hot"?

    1. Have a look around yourself! If you're toned, have a nice haircut and beard, dress well, and have a modicum of social skills, you should be doing much better than average. Of course, this doesn't work so well if you have unrealistic expectations and, for instance, want to pull women who are taller than you, or if you're 40 and believe that only a teenager is good enough for you. Otherwise, it's really not that difficult to stand out from the crowd. I know, I know, if everybody did this, it wouldn't have any effect. However, only a minority of men work on their appearance, so you'll be fine.

    2. Whenever I feel unattractive (because I saw too many adverts or what not), I just look around me and go "Wow, look at my competition", I actually look pretty good...

      It's extremely, extremely easy to be in the top 10% of attractive men. You don't have to have a sixpack, just by lifting and being lean, you easily have a physique that stands out above 95% of the male population (on the street, in the mall), and even above 70-80% of the club-going males.

      If you then have EVEN A TINY sense of fashion (just 10% above "ok") and compliment that physique, you can easily turn heads.

      And this is all assuming you're of average genetics (average facial structure). It's amazing how little the average man tries, which consequently makes it super-easy for the average guy to stand out without having to resort to surgery.

      want to pull women who are taller than you, or if you're 40 and believe that only a teenager is good enough for you

      This is another way the community screws up guys with impractical dogma-advice.

      Things like "age is just a number" and "looks don't matter" will cause guys to be celibate, because they're shooting for the exception.

      If you're 40 it is possible to occasionally bang the odd teenager. If you're a 5 in looks, it is possible to occasionally bang a 10. You should consider those as a bonus, something that happens a percentage of the time, but you shouldn't make it a goal. You should definetely believe its a possibility, and will happen every now and then sure - but it's a "bonus".

    3. Alek Novy:

      "If you're 40 it is possible to bang the odd teenager."

      But far too many men think they can be like Woody Allen in his 1979 film Manhattan, where he plays a balding 42-year-old neurotic Jewish man who dates and eventually "bags" a 17-year-old.

  8. Whenever I feel unattractive (because I saw too many adverts or what not), I just look around me and go "Wow, look at my competition", I actually look pretty good...

    This isn't true where I live. In NYC, there are tons of men who are genuinely good looking, tall (over 6 ft), thin, with good features and great fashion sense, especially in the clubs. Many have good jobs as well. An average male who is thin and has some fashion sense will at best be around the 50% mark in the clubs. He is average.

    In Amsterdam, the men are even better looking and better dressed than NY, and I suspect it's the same in London as it is in NYC.

    Basically, most major cities in the West have lots of fashionable good looking men, and a thin fashionable average man remains average.

    1. Notice that you are experiencing reading-comprehension issues. Both me and Aaron were talking about having some MUSCLE, not merely being thin. Aaron said "TONED", not "thin". Most guys where I live are thin, and yes, it doesn't cut it.

      Being thin and ok-fashion-wise does only put you at the 50% mark, you are correct. But it's kind of a strawman, since nobody ever claimed being thin would achieve more.

      I thought my language concerning top 10% physique and LIFTING would have made my point clear, so let me spell it out in actual numbers.

      - If you add about 10 kg/20 lb of muscle and you get to about 12-14% bodyfat, you'll look better than 95% of the male population.

      And this is actually easy, takes just 2 years of lifting hard (and you'll get most of the muscle in the first 6 months). Being 12-14% is actually quite easy, in fact 10 times easier than having a sixpack (8%) yet it will get you most of the same benefits.

      In other words, when it comes to building a physique, the law of diminishing returns hits pretty quickly. A 10 year physique only gives marginally better chick-getting benefits than a 2-year physique.

  9. Men need to have standards...everybody does really, but ESPECIALLY men.

    What do most people do when they go for a job interview?

    They try to impress the employer.

    But heres an idea...when you go to an interview why not use it as an opportunity to ask the employer as many questions about the position as possible.

    Big companies have 1000s of people working for them, they can afford to have a few bad apples.

    However, we (the person getting interviewed) are going to commit years of our lives to the position. So you better be sure you'll be happy where you end up.

    The same applies to women. Why would you spend money on someone you don't even know well?

    Why try to impress her?

    Why isn't she impressing you?

    I don't go on dates but when I'm about to meet up or go out with a girl I now find myself using the same lines I used to hear them use.

    "Don't act creepy or think I'm your boyfriend...we're just hanging out".

    "I don't think this is going to work out"

    "It's getting late and I need to be up early" (note this is an invitation to go to my house, NOT to see her another time).

    Also, I NEVER ask a girl ANYTHING any more.

    "I'm going to X place, you should come". NOT "Do you want to go to X place?"

    "Give me your number and we'll meet up sometime" NOT "Can I have your number?"

    You see the difference? I'm not asking for permission...I'm just offering.

    I now offer girls to come to my place (or occasionally their place) EXPECTING sex....or else why would they go?

    Finally I disagree with one of your comments Sleazy.

    "Of course, this doesn't work so well if you have unrealistic expectations...for pull women who are taller than you..."

    I'm not short nor tall, but I've banged PLENTY of girls taller than me and it's NOT a problem at all.

    Why? Because I'm sure to mention the issue is that SHE is tall, not that I'M short...i.e. she's the unusual one NOT me (not in a serious way). Remember most women are short anyway.

    Finally, and I might make a post about this: the main effect of working out and being wealthy is that it GIVES YOU CONFIDENCE in yourself and in turn makes you more attractive to women i.e. it's the confidence that's attracting the women NOT so much the way you look or the money...get it?

    1. There are many good points in your post, but let me just respond to your last point: I live in a world in which basically every couple I see has a guy who is taller than the girl. I do not live in a world where all the short guys have women taller than them and the tall guys are all single. So, even if you have had the fortune of getting with some women who were taller than you, you can't make the point that this is generally true. You're an exception to the rule, and not every guy can be, or is, exceptional (see above). This is called the fallacy of distribution, by the way.

    2. I understand your point (I did from your earlier post), yes, most short guys aren't with tall women and I never said that this was the general rule...because of course it isn't.

      Most people aren't wealthy either, or famous, or are extremely satisfied with their lives.

      But I don't care about that. To me, your blog is a place where people think out of the box. It's astonishing to me how little people actually attempt to do something they perceive as difficult...and even when they do it's halfhearted.

      Most men want to find women they share common interests with...I don't...most men feel rejected when women react coldly to them. Me? I find it hilarious.

      I've had the most humorous and engaging conversations with women I share absolutely nothing in common with. I find out things they like and if I like them too that's good, but if I don't I constantly tease them about it throughout, if she reacts negatively? That's good, and I push it further. I don't care how she feels because that's NOT my's like creating fireworks...and you know what that leads to...

      You know what I call women that I share common interests with? A friend.

      I tell my friends (who don't listen) all the time with women:

      "If you're her friend, you can't be her lover. If you're her lover you can't be her friend. And if you're foolish enough to attempt both, then you're her bitch."

      Attraction isn't a conscious decision that people make...attraction is a unique thing, men and women are attracted to all sorts of people...even people they would swear to others they would never go out with.

  10. You're sounding more and more like Advocatus Diaboli and the rest of MGTOW everyday.

    I don't get it though.

    Why do you sound so bitter or at least cynical if you had plenty of success with women? People with success sometimes have positive views of the system they did well in. Doesn't your girlfriend read this in disgust?


    1. Dude, I think you spend too much time reading feminist literature. Being called "bitter" is nothing but shady rhetorics, and the aim is generally to distract from the real issues. By the way, your supposed argument is quite prominent in the seduction and internet marketing (IM) industry as well: Think that RSD sells bullshit and makes empty promises? Nope, you're just bitter. Realize that there are only bullshitters in the IM world that sell you a system for selling a system, but who have little success to back it up. Easy, you're just bitter. This reminds me of an amusing Salty Droid clip where some IM douchebag talks shit about Salty, calling him a "basement dweller", "poor" and whatnot --- and then the clip shows that guys actual apartment...

      The point is simply that you can view something as critical without being bitter. You can have financial success while realizing that the way society works is deeply flawed and based on nothing but exploitation, and you can also enjoy success with women while being aware that most women aren't really worth your time. Or you can enjoy a good movie while being fully aware that most that comes out of Hollywood is pretty crappy. Do you get me?

    2. Just because you do well does not mean you cannot think critically of the situation. Unless you are extremely stupid and have your about people and situations based solely on what they do for you. That would be extremely simple and shallow-minded.

      Do you think that way?

  11. "Gold-digging can be a rather lucrative profession, after all."

    Just watch playmate Nina Schwake on the German (scripted reality) tv show "mieten kaufen wohnen" and how she tries to exploit her estate agent.

  12. 3agle 3eyz, I like your posts. ,)

  13. Speaking of losers, there are plenty of women out there that are.Especially when they take advantage of guys with money.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.