Sunday, June 9, 2013

Who came up with the "sex is the greatest thing in the world" nonsense?

Did you ever watch any of those teenager movies like American Pie, or did you ever skim one of those magazines that are aimed at teens? Or did you just listen to what other people say? If so, then you may have gotten the idea that sex was absolutely fabulous, like, the totally best thing in the world. However, once you have had sex, you realized that it isn't all it's cracked up to be. Sure, it's nice, but it's hardly a step up from masturbation. I'd argue it's different, but not better or worse.

Sorry, that wasn't quite right. Sex can be worse than rubbing one out. I've had "lays" that were infinitely worse than my worst wank. I don't think I ever failed pleasing myself, but that's not something I could say of all the girls I've met. In fact, I've found myself questioning whether pulling girls just for sex was really worth it. I think any guy who has the option of being with many women --- this only applies to a minority of guys --- eventually gets to the point at which he'll simply get tired of sex. The reason why guys pursue meaningless lays, though, has often more to do with a sense of validation, but even that gets boring after a while.

Let's look at the big picture, though: How does a guy feel about sex who lives in an oversexualized society that offers HD porn at his fingertips and shows him tits and asses in pretty much every ad, but who has very little experience himself? If he's a virgin, he may think he's missing out on something, and feel miserable about it. (This is quite common.) On the other hand, if he's one of the desperate ones who gets laid once every four years, he might think that sex is special just because it's so rare for him to do it with a woman.

I think that the image of sex being oh-so fabulous puts tremendous pressure on guys since they normally play the active part. A woman can always just lean back and let the guy do all the work, even if this leads to a piss-poor experience for all parties involved. On a side note, passivity on behalf of the girl might explain a lot of those "statistics" according to which 30% of women don't orgasm. They're just lying there, not moving their pelvis, not contracting their pussy, not doing anything else either, so how great can that be?

You could almost describe the myth of sex as some kind of elaborate societal scam, intended to encourage boys and girls to experience sex, and to get the average guy to buy into the "system". Imagine you spread the message that sex was barely better than rubbing one out, or that most women suck in bed? Surely then little Jimmy wouldn't feel quite so bad about himself if he was a virgin, or if he hardly ever got laid. He would know that he isn't missing out on much. The irony, though, is that he isn't missing out on much, but doesn't know it.

If the previous paragraph sounds too absurd to you, then please remember that some countries have set up a non-free system of higher education in order to yield a docile and indebted workforce. Home-ownership was also promoted with the aim to make the labor force more easily controllable. Debt is a powerful force. You could make the same argument based on the fact that health care in the US is tied to the employer. Saddled with college loan, mortgage, and health insurance that is conditional on employment, you'll probably think twice about speaking up at the work place. But what is a big motivator for guys to buy a house and make money? Well, to get chicks...

What's your opinion? Do you think sex is overhyped? Do you sometimes feel as if society dangles sex in front of you to make you act against your best interest? Let me know in the comments below!


  1. Oh man... I've been thinking about this exact same thing lately. I could probably write on this topic for days, but I'll try to keep it short.

    Rationally, it makes no sense for men to be the pursuers in relationships. Throughout much of the animal kingdom, and indeed our own history, males spend the bulk of their time building value within their communities; and once they're established, the females choose them. As a rule, men -- at least the type of men women would want to be in relationships with -- bring far more value to the relationship than women do. I don't know that women consciously desire sex as much as men do, but they are certainly far more open to the idea of it than much of our culture would have us believe. But our society has a vested interest in keeping women sexually repressed.

    Western society has always prioritize "growth" and production above all other things. Give men free access to sex with attractive women and growth and productivity would plummet. One of the key features of Western culture is that sexual relationships between men and women are dysfunctional by design.

    The evidence for this is all around us. I mean, look at the US. Here, productivity has risen dramatically over the past 40 years. Yet our women are fatter and our relationships more dysfunctional than anywhere else in the world. It's the Red Queen in action. Between work, school, gym, and social functions, most [beta] guys have to put in 60-90 hours/week just to stay in the game with the rapidly diminishing supply of attractive women. Barring total economic/social collapse, this will only get worse over time.

    That's why I appreciate the work that guys like you, Alek Novy, and Brent Smith are doing. The only real way out of the game (short of MGTOW) is to focus on developing the handful of traits that maximize your appeal to women, figure out where the type of women who find you most appealing are, then only spend time on the women who are already most interested in you. No one else out there is really teaching this to men. Our society functions on the deluded belief that if men just work hard enough, eventually they could have any woman they wanted. And sadly, rather than offer men a path of deliverance from this trap, the PUA movement came along and made the problem even worse.

    This is a great subject... I'm curious to see what the rest of your readers have to say about this phenomenon.

    1. "PUA movement came along and made the problem even worse"??? No sense. Look at this amazing video:

    2. I think this post is about the fact that sex even under the best of circumstances with great normal women who are thin and pretty is just not that special. It's not about the peculiar problems and difficulties facing Western men. Even if everything you mentioned was "fixed", sex still wouldn't be all that.

      Several posts on this thread are about how Western women suck, as if if they didn't, then sex would be good. Point is, even with the best women, sex isn't all that.

    3. @Anon,

      Well I'm not of the opinion that Western women suck. I just think our culture erects unnatural barriers between the sexes to promote a capitalist/consumerist society. I've had many amazing sexual experiences, so I think that sex can be special. But for me, these false barriers we've erected between the sexes has made it a poor value proposition for many guys.

      So I guess that's where I disagree with you. I do think sex is over-hyped and that society uses it as a carrot to tempt us to act against our best interests. But when I've been able to bypass that by finding girls who were into me right away and didn't play games with their sexuality, the quality of the experience was significantly better.

  2. "Sex can be worse than rubbing one out. I've had "lays" that were infinitely worse than my worst wank."

    Amen. Absolutely. A couple of times I've even journaled to myself notes like "See? You fucked, you came, now she's gone, now you're alone. You've had your orgasm and after that you just wanted her gone. You enjoyed the process more than the sex itself. Draw your own conclusions."

    Did this help? Not a jot. Blue balls are blue balls. Fact. You don't reason well. How I see women after sex or a wank is very different from how I see women after one week of abstinence, when 5s can easily become 7s under certain conditions. You’re ravenous. You can redirect this energy, but you can do it only for so long. Then you have to wank or fuck because you know, deep down, that it’s either that or start penning your manifesto. This is our damn cross to bear.

    If I could kill my sex drive in a non-physical way (that is, without lopping off my balls), I think I would do it. I doubt I would even speak to a woman very often after that. It would make my life easier and arguably more honest.

    Companies (which are made of people, so yes, let's just say people) know that very well, they know every trick in the book, and they use it.
    Women know this instinctively as well, which is why they go ballistic whenever a man “cheats the system” and exercises his sexual freedom (oh noes!) with, say, Thai hookers or escorts or just refusing to marry (“40, never been married and lives alone? Basement-dwelling creep!”), or even choosing to marry a woman from a more accommodating culture.

    I sincerely believe, after having met, talked with, and occasionally fucked with women from many walks of life, that we simply don't like each other very much. Women like their sons and men like their moms. The End.

    Given the option of having unlimited freedom from the other gender (without sacrificing much) both sexes would take it.

    1. "I sincerely believe, after having met, talked with, and occasionally fucked with women from many walks of life, that we simply don't like each other very much. Women like their sons and men like their moms. The End."

      Although I wouldn't state it in a such a binary fashion like you did, but as a general rule, I too have come to the conclusion that men and women were just never meant to be "friends". Sure, spending a lot of time in the company of each other has taught men how to behave with women, and women how to behave with men.

      This is why you see two average women (or two men) just spontaneously hitting it off, much much more frequently than two people of the opposite gender.

      In fact, realizing this had also led me to a strategy I have used somewhat successfully to make friends in a new city/environment. Go to a bar, see a couple who seem to be in a long term relationship and start chatting with the guy. It's very very likely that he will be happy to have a long conversation with you.

    2. Really? Men and women are never meant to be friends? I've got plenty of great female friends. Though they're all people I was never sexually interested in (which isn't to say they're all ugly, some are attractive but just not my type looks or personality-wise). I've learned the hard way that if you try to be friends with a woman when you really want something more, that's always going to be a mess. But if the sex-factor isn't there and you just get along as people? It can totally happen.

    3. @Anon above - I think I have more female friends than most people would ever have. Some of them are very attractive as well - one is a fairly popular model who has appeared in a couple of big music videos. I also have very good female friends who are very fat.

      In spite of all this, at least in my experience, my very best friends are definitely male, and I most certainly am more comfortable with an average guy than an average girl.

      I personally make the distinction between "hangout buddies", and "good/real friends". Majority of my female friends lie in the former category. In fact, the majority of my hangout buddies are female (some very attractive ones as well), whereas most of my "real friends" are male.

      None of this is by design. It just turned out this way

    4. I am only truly happy when I have a girlfriend and male or female friends have never helped. I need the sex factor to be there to want to be with someone. Otherwise I just don't care that much. But sex itself...meh. Its ok.

    5. If you're only "truly happy" when you've got a girlfriend, then you'll never be truly happy. True happiness has to come from within, not from something external, like a girlfriend or a fancy car.

  3. Love it!

    I've been thinking this for soooo long now. I really think this whole sex craze thing is attributable to Freud. It's such a crock, such a falsehood! I also think it fits in with the modern trend towards reductive primitivism, in which our primitive instincts are supposed to dominate us. This began with Darwin.

    You could almost describe the myth of sex as some kind of elaborate societal scam,

    Exactly what I have long felt ;)

    I remember long periods when I just wasn't that interested in sex, but turned to it out of boredom or just a sense that this is what I need to feel fulfilled since everyone says so. Of course, it just was never that good.

    I remember thinking that sex with really pretty girls was surely the best thing in the world, until I started having it, regularly, and I realized it simply wasn't that special.

    I am now at a point in life where I am genuinely somewhat bored by sex - I realize that it just can't give me what I demand of it. It's not where happiness and fulfillment are to be found. Sex is good and will always be a part of my life, but like all other pleasures, food, drink, etc - it will never be the centerpiece of my life. It's just one of life's pleasures, not that important, and easy to do without.

    One of the things that made me spot Roissy as a fraud right away was the way he talked about sex, like a teenager - "the exquisite pleasure of sex with beautiful women" - no one who actually has sex with pretty girls thinks that way, or talks that way. That's the language of an excited virgin. Mature experience is always more calm and measured.

  4. Read a comment from Alek Novy in an earlier post talking about how the community brainwashes you into looking down on social circle and how you would get laid much more if you had a social cirle than spending the equivalent time cold-approaching (I agree).

    Wondering if you or Alek have any advise for an older guy (early 30's) on creating/getting into a social circle (most of my friends are married with kids at this point so I'm almost solo)? I'm just an average guy, not that cool, not that intelligent, not that unique (I am working on myself, but that takes time). I know cold-appropaching isn't very effective but don't see any other options.

    Any tips, or directing me to somewhere you've already discussed this, would be much appreciated.

    1. I second this! I'd love to read more from Alek on that one.

    2. And I'd love to write it. I'm probably the most qualified to write that article, trouble is... the paradox is, my lifestyle is so busy (successful) I never find the time to sit down and write it.

      I'm probably the most qualified to write it, since I went from

      -> no-friends-hermit (who used to only get laid from cold approaches)

      all the way to

      -> super-popular guy with hundreds of high-status friends (celebs, models, millionaires)

      When I walk into a party/club, I walk in with with the highest-status group in that club, and the hottest chicks in that club are actually at my table... So you can imagine all the approach invitations I get.

      And I did it in less than a year. My closest dozen friends are all hot chicks (half are teenagers actually). And I'd be able to get laid with dozens of 9s each year for the rest of my life without ever having to make a cold approach for as long as I'm alive. The only "effort" I have to put nowadays is just to be physically persistent on chicks which I already know are interested. I just do the physical bit. That's it.

      Short version of guide

      It's simple. Just invest a TON OF MASSIVE EFFORT. Like look at something like the RSD videos on how to get good at cold-approaching, and all of tyler's philosophies on getting good at cold-approach i.e. massive effort, going out every single night, etc etc.

      And then apply it to building a social circle. Like when I was building this, I went MEGA MEGA MEGA MEGA MASSIVE overboard. I was literally outside socializing 8-12 hours EVERY SINGLE DAY for 6-9 months.

      This means going to one event, then going to another seminar, then followed by another event, then going to another party, followed by another party.

      It's just investing unhumanly high amounts of effort for 9-12 months, after which it all spills over and you find you've made the top 2% of men in that field.

      - One key would be picking a niche, and sticking to it... and then going to EVERY SINGLE EVENT/party/organization around that niche. You literally want to become a familiar face to every single person in that niche in the entire city (if u're in a big multi-million city). They've all either seen you around, heard of you, or know of you.

      Specifically in my case, to give you an example, I can't walk anywhere in the city without greeting at least a dozen people. There's this momentum where the more people you know, the more people you get introduced to, which makes you even "cooler" coz you're the guy who knows everyone, which boosts your popularity and status etc etc.

      Does that make kind of intuitive sense? Like the very act of appearing and being seen in every single event for a year, will raise your status without you having to do anything specific.

      Socializing has its own numbers game too. You don't have to read "making friends guides", just by being around 100x more people, you'll make 100x more friends.

    3. 8-12 hours/day seems like a ton of time. Were you working at all during this period?

    4. Yep, I actually built a new business during that same year, and took it from zero employees to 60 employees. (only maintaining older businesses)

      So it was mega-mass-effort on both the social front and the business front. In that period I didn't open a single blog, didn't read a single news story, didn't play a single game, didn't watch a single movie, didn't have a SINGLE chat online with any friend, didn't read a single book, didn't watch a single youtube video etc etc... Like hardcore time-management extremism.

      People waste 4-8 hours a day on crap, easy. I did make the occassional break like every 3-4 months, when I'd go on a KJ-binge and post long-rants on here (aaron's blog/forum is literally the only internet activity I'd have literally, and even that was once every 3-4 months for only 2-3 days).

    5. Ahh... okay. Thanks for the response. Victor Pride's been harping on pretty much the same thing lately, but it's been hard for me to make that mental leap. Good to hear someone else validating this approach to changing your life around.

    6. Alek,

      You should make an e-book detailing your experiences. Maybe AS here could help you.

    7. AlekNovy : "And then apply it to building a social circle. Like when I was building this, I went MEGA MEGA MEGA MEGA MASSIVE overboard. I was literally outside socializing 8-12 hours EVERY SINGLE DAY for 6-9 months."

      Let's take the average, so 7.5 months x 30.5 days/month x 10 hours/day = 2287.5 hours.

      At an hourly wage of, say, 20$, that's an opportunity cost of 45750$.

      In Eastern Europe, you could bang one new escort every week for over 20 years, for that amount of money.

  5. Wow, this is one of your weakest posts every. In every way I find sex with a woman to be more pleasurable than "rubbing one out". Sure, I rub one out on occasion, and sure there are some women who aren't very good. But on the whole, it's always better with a partner. Ultimately, that's our nature-driven primal purpose on earth, isn't it? Of course we need to protect ourselves from being taken advantage of, but ultimately I want the pleasure of orgasm in a pussy or a mouth, and it's good for my health, too.

    1. How many women have you had sex with, and how long are your dry spells?

      Among the guys that get laid regularly I have never met anybody who held the act of sex in particularly high regard. They were either in it for the thrills, or for validation. Believe it or not, but those people eventually dropped out of the "game" altogether, staying single and fucking some woman when it's a very low investment of time (don't make the wrong inference: women do come on to you if you're in reasonable shape and/or have your life together), and others settled down and married.

  6. Fantastic post. We briefly talked about this in the book, but this was a great post nonetheless.

    The evidence of it is also there for anyone who is actually willing to see. Every guy who gets laid a lot, talks about one night stands, or the number of girls he has had sex with. It's never about how much sex he had with them. This is all validation and thrill related. Not about how much fun sex is. A random boring fat guy in a long term relationship, might have had more sex than an average PUA.

    This is also why guys stop calling girls after they've fucked her once. It's because the thrill and the sense of validation is gone. I mean, if they really enjoyed the act of sex so much, wouldn't it make sense to now keep fucking her given that they put in all that effort to find one? But that is not what happens in reality, does it?

  7. Good post Sleazy. This is like the "statistic" that men think about sex thousands of times of day. I've never thought about sex that much or even close to that much and I can't imagine anyone who is that twisted. Sure if I see an attractive woman at work I get slightly aroused or attracted, but maybe 7 times a day

  8. Well this pretty much does it for me. I've been searching for a long time, but now women have been pretty much demystified.

    Perhaps this sort of explains why marriage is at an all time low. Sex and marriage is used as a manipulative marketing ploy to get men to go along with society, behave and be productive. Men are slowly starting to figure out that it's much easier to take care of themselves rather than settle down with some vain woman who expects to be comforted with a constant stream of material crap.

    Actually, now that I think of it, I've gotten waaay more pleasure from spanking it than from getting my load sucked out or pumping it into a vagina. I can control the intensity and there's no pressure to perform or obligation to cuddle. Then I can just go on and do something productive.

    I think I'm officially done chasing poon, for real. If it comes to me, then I may or may not take it. I owe this peace of mind to Aaron and the honest people who contribute to the blog/forum. PUA never would have told me it's okay to think and act in a more rational way. The manosphere says that you have to learn a new language, move to the third world and establish passive income. WTH??

  9. Totally agree. Although I've never had sex with someone i really care about (thus rendering my views a little skewed), I honestly believe that sex is one of the most wildly over-rated things on this planet - though this is often forgotten by those of us with penises (as Marky pointed out). Why is this issue not spoken about more among men? I thought I was the only one who believed this (and used to feel that i was somehow "missing out").

    The 'sex as a form validation-seeking behaviour' is an interesting phenomenon as anyone with experience knows that most guys that get laid regularly aren't sleeping with stunners anyway. Where's the glory in that?

    Also, ironically, it appears that the value in the “be indifferent/don’t give a fuck” ‘community’ advice has nothing to do with the mindset/behavioural repertoire itself (supposedly making 10's want your cock, lol), but from this advice acting as a reminder that the end result (i.e. the sex) will not be something worth 'giving a fuck' about.

  10. Once again: this is spot on! Resonates with my experiences as well.
    Yes, sex IS a basic human urge, but it is not necessarily something that ought to be mystified, spiritually hyped or shrouded in glorified mystery. Which is exactly, what our stupid society and media do - either by promoting stupid "morality-based" limiting standards and/or the very opposite at the same time. Just with anything in life sex can be cool, great, boring, abysmal, average, normal, dull, addictive, fun, funny, bloody embarrassing etc.
    It is an important aspect of and in one's own psychosexual development. But it's certainly not the apex of one's own personal existence. And since most women are not that special or sexually experienced, the juice isn't always worth the squeeze anyway.
    Once a man gets to be more proactive in a right way and has more sex with different women, he quickly reaches such insights as described in your eloquent post, Aaron.

  11. During my time in Berlin from 2003 - 2006 I privately performed an extensive sex-self-experiment, an A/B-test of some sorts. I had quite some money on the side and spare time, thus I systematically fucked girls from Berlin's best brothels and contrasted my experiences from girls I hooked up with through online dating (the first and last time I did online btw.) and with girls I met during the day and in "night game" venues. In all interactions (be it a prostitute I really liked, a girl in a club or in the daytime) I was the initially active factor.

    And according to my experiences the constantly/reliably "most satisfying" sex was with prostitutes whom I liked. (Of course I'm not talking about "deep personal connections".) Because apart from the money involved there was no excess investment of time or energy (apart from fucking them, of course). Also the certainty of simply knowing that the likelihood of getting pleasurable sexual intercourse with HOTT women in a pay-sex situation was going to be extremely high added tremendously to the enjoyment, starting with the anticipation itself. The free choice from an array of varied, but mostly extremely mouth-watering girls, like being a kid in a candy store. And the ease with which I could have easily threesomes with girls far more attractive than most women I would encounter in everyday life. Most certainly it's this aspect of CONTROL, that did it for me in this private experiment (Alek Novy elaborated on this in post from his own blog).

    With "normal" (non-prostitution) girls this was not the case. "Control" was/is impossible to exercise (which conversely adds to the adrenaline rush, but that doesn't equal nailing hot shaved pussies). There was only ONE girl, which could sexually (and as far as her psychosexual attitude was concerned) compete with my electrifying prostitution-experiences (she was a cool and relaxed girl from East-Germany, those girls are usually much more at ease, she was not overly intellectual and had a good heart). Only now, that I've read this post of yours and looking back I understand, that with almost all those other girls from the "real world" the pick-up was indeed mainly about feeding my ego, about the thrill of the validation. The sex, the physical and general outward hotness of the girls involved and the overall impact on myself were never really worth the time and effort I had to put in.

    So, when I could have sex with three, (in my view) ridiculously hot prostitutes/call girls in one single day, I would feel "wow, sex is really great. I love women. I guess I will want more of that candy…"

    But after most sex-encounters with "normal" girls I felt "uuh, that was so-so. It wasn't REALLY worth the hype. I'm not sure whether I would voluntarily repeat this." Plus dealing with occasional personal BS from those girls and fending off their subsequent "I want to be your GF"-vibes…

    Of course after about 20 months or so I finally ended this experiment, after some analyzing of my catalogued experiences drew my conclusions… mainly because spending too much time on women in the real world just for "sex" or hyping one's own self-worth just isn't worth it (at all). Paying money to fuck callgirls can be a good investment, but doesn't have to be one, of course. Nowadays I don't see, why I should pay a women for sex (but that's another entirely different aspect).

    Btw: the bit on debt as a "motivating" factor of mandatory societal detainment is soo true as well. Great to see that you share some of these deep insights.

    1. How exactly are callgirls a good investment? It's not like you're establishing a lasting emotional bond or starting a happy family.

    2. "Because apart from the money involved there was no excess investment of time or energy (apart from fucking them, of course)."


      "Paying money to fuck callgirls can be a good investment, but doesn't have to be one, of course."

      In the second sentence, "investment" is probably not the ideal word, but don't get hung up on that. He does talk about value for money, and this is a plausible metric to apply in this context.

  12. I may take it a step further! As a straight man, if I give it considerable thought sex is kind of icky. Too many women(not most in my experience) dont really take care of themselves down there and lets not fool ourselves-as beautiful as a woman's naked body is, the vagina is a nasty place.
    And yes most women arent very good in bed, they think by simply being naked and in your bed they have done their part.
    I seek out women for their beauty,charm,warmth and companionship. I am an old fashioned guy who thrives on a woman's mystique and sex often kills it. Which is why I dont push for sex too much but as you guess this makes me more desirable to women and they in turn are more aggressive in pushing me for sex LOL

    1. I don't think vaginas are nasty or unattractive at all, assuming the woman isn't completely unhygienic.

    2. I never said that all vaginas are nasty but all vaginas CAN get nasty pretty easily.

      If a woman doesnt wash down there just for a day then she is courting yeast infections and other funk. This is a serious issue for women in combat which the feminist lobby was successful in suppressing

      Of course there is the menstruation,child birth and other stuff associated with the vagina that is less than appealing.

      So vaginas are very high maintenance and takes considerable effort for them to be presentable for men to find them fuck/eat worthy (especially the latter)

      Women in the past used to realize this. Ironically the feminists had a point-yes the patriarchal society used to consider the vagina a tad dirty but this would entail them to clean their privates during even though they were less promiscuous.

      Nowadays women are fed tripe such as Vagina Monologues where one of the acts states that washing the vagina to rid it of its musty smell is evil patriarchy at its most sinister because we are terrified of the power of the smell.

      As I said most of the women I have been with were varying degrees of clean but quite a few (yes attractive ones) were just too funky and they actually wanted to eat it.
      No fucking I told them

  13. The comments on here are disappointing...but yet, not surprising at all.

    I'm not being arrogant, but I feel like an adult in a classroom full of children.

    This is what happens when generations after generations of men and women are brought up not being told what sex is...and in this generation, when the only thing you can learn about sex is from watching porn.

    Does anyone here know what sex even is? Sex ISN'T penetrating a woman's virgina with your ISN'T playing with each others private parts.

    Sex is a unification between a man and a woman (when you penetrate her you LITERALLY become one). Sex AT IT'S BEST is when a man behaves like a MAN and a woman behaves like a WOMAN.

    Has anyone read the book of Genesis?

    I believe the original human being was a hermaphrodite...which was eventually split into two. The male, the female, the MASCULINE the FEMININE. When male and female become ONE is created i.e. babies (at least that's how it is naturally).

    When I first starting having sex I was the same as every other teenager...I said "Sex isn't what it is made out to be".

    The truth was I WASN'T DOING IT RIGHT!

    Our ancestors used to have rituals (some cultures still do) when boys were taken away by their fathers, to complete something. They would return as men.

    The western world has disregarded this...we now have pussified men and lacking in discipline and CONTROL women have been left to roam by themselves.

    Does anyone know when sex actually begins between a man and a woman?

    When you FIRST MEET HER.

    Woman want to be dominated! Men want to dominate.

    Subconsciously, when two people meet...both are trying to determine who is in control.

    Women are natural MASOCHISTS (how much? It varies between woman to woman...some like having their hair pulled, some don't etc) you cannot otherwise enjoy being penetrated without being a masochist (there is a fine line between pleasure and pain)...

    We men are natural SADISTS (again it varies between men), but how else can we enjoy thrusting?

    Unlike us men a woman's libido is likened to a kettle. You have to heat her up before she becomes hot.

    How do you get a woman hot? Here's WHAT I DO (this is a quote from the "Romance is for losers" post):

    "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.

    Women are turned on psychologically...women LOVE erotic novels they're not turned on visually. Women like to be bossed around (I'm serious...many have rape fantasies). When women act bitchy and when they act is a test. She wants you to put her in line!

    This is why the HOTTEST women have the most attitude. It's done on purpose, they want to be defied, they want to be a man.


  14. Cont'd

    Most of you guys don't think it's possible...but I SWEAR ON MY SOUL I have met women who have blanked me when I tried to speak to them...women who have insulted me....women who I have deeply offended...who I've had sex with on the same day....and not just normal sex.

    Women have fragile beliefs (even the hottest of women are mostly insecure) and are easily led.

    I don't entertain women when I speak to them. I don't look to make them laugh, I state my intentions...without actually saying it, I say:

    "I am a MAN and I think you're hot but that it isn't enough, I'm only attracted to WOMEN not GIRLS are you a WOMAN...or A LITTLE GIRL?"

    I advise EVERYONE (including Sleazy) to try it.

    Treat EVERY attractive woman like a LITTLE GIRL until she PROVES to you otherwise. (This is what women call foreplay).

    In case you don't know....the ONLY WAY a woman can prove her worth is DURING sex.

    I guarantee, you WILL NOT be disappointed....Unless of course SHE is a disappointment.

    Here's more from my previous post:

    ""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."

    We were never meant to be "friendly" with our women. Women exist to assist men...nothing else.

    If she has a problem with anything, DO NOT give her advise. If she wants help she can talk to her girlfriends...that is not your role.

    And finally...humans being ALWAYS follow to path of LEAST resistance.

    Your average man wants INSTANT GRATIFICATION.

    They say to themselves:

    "Why have sex when I can wank?"

    "Why have sex with women who are NOT interested in me (even though I like them), when there is that woman (slut) sitting over there with her legs open?"

    The BEST women always appear to be NOT available. They do this to put AVERAGE men off....DON'T fall for this!

    Have sex ONLY with women (I mean this metaphorically)...let the girls grow up. I do occasionally bring the women out of the girl though...if she's cute enough.

    Most men have it the wrong way round.

    We don't have sex with women to become men.

    We become MEN FIRST, then the women will come to us.

    1. I'm at the point where I'm sexually satisfied and educated enough to just not really care if a cute girl is dtf. It takes time and effort to seduce and sometimes girls are disappointed when you leave them soon after.

      I have dreams and ambitions and would rather put forth a 'super-massive-effort' into getting my goals realized. Maybe some girls will throw themselves at me between now and then, but either way it's okay.

      I'm whole-heartedly okay with being celibate and working hard. It's like a weight has been lifted. I'm also pretty skeptical when guys tell me what how you gotta be to be a man. I don't care anymore! So great!!

    2. What a bunch of PUA wisdom...

  15. You are right that the Western capitalist society is ruled by "sex sells" (or controls).

    However, my experience is that when I have sex with a girl that I am really attracted to, it is tenfold better (orgasm and all) than a jerk-off. There is a great touching sensation, too the jerk-off lacks, too.

    OTOH the sex with the most mediocre girls that I fucked (out of horniness or plain validation) was just that - mediocre and worse than a jerk-off. HOWEVER, there were a few that were really good with their mouth, which led to incredible orgasms!

    That's just me but I naturally have high testosterone (I'm really horny a lot and I have to jerk off at least 3 times a day when lacking a sex partner).

    So, I guess it also depends on how horny FOR real you are + if you are sexing the right or if the no-so-right girl is good in bed (esp with her mouth).

    I'm hoping you didn't write this extreme blog post because you were / are in a prolonged dry spell (like me right now - financial problems...).. Stuff like this happens and we tend to be more "hateful" and cruel. Just jerk off more often or work on your appearance and inner game (important too).

    1. Dude, I'm happily married. The topic of "dry spells" might also be worth an article, just like the supposed validation from sex.

      I've never slept with a woman I wasn't attracted to. I know that in PUA circles you'd just drop some Viagra and get it on anyway, but that's not quite my style. Maybe have sex with some more attractive girls, and ignore the dogs, and you'll realize that the novelty wears off, too.

    2. You should write a post about married life and marriage in general as well. Why someone would go from being a player, or good with women at any rate, to married guy is quite puzzling to me. I might understand monogamy, but marriage?

      Not criticizing or anything, I'm genuinely interested.

    3. You are probably right that it will wear off if you are sleeping around with many hotties.... Maybe then you start looking for a personality match and emotional connection, etc,,,

      I'm just not that good looking (maybe a 6) so that does not happen / will not happen to me.

      However, when I happen to lay a hot one (that I myself really really like) then it's usually really good, No need for elaborate sex moves.

      So, that's just the cards I've been dealt and trust me I hit the gym and dress well. I was mad for awhile about my poor cards but now I'm like "What the heck. I can still land something hot sporadically and that's not a bad thing..."

      Thank you.

  16. @ 3agle 3eyz:
    I don't completely agree with your assessment.
    Yes, the sexual union between man & woman has also been metaphysically interpreted as a symbol of creativity and thus for the creation of something new (e. g. new life). This is also a tantric view and your description of the proper roles of man and woman, the essential polarity, echoes this clearly. Now I'm myself trained in tantra and massages and I've benefitted a great deal from it, but at the same time I have never bought into this metaphysical exaggeration of phenomena in our banale, "real" world. Yes, women really love to do this for various reasons, but for us men - at least in my opinion - it is best to confront things as clearly and as plainly simple as they are.

    And to return to the spirit of the original post: the best attitude for us men seems to be to not focus on sex and/or women too intensely. But to focus on the personal (preferrably positive) vision or goal that we set for ourselves - and go for that. You are quite right in stating, that the woman is there to support us on our journey towards our goals ad not to (permanently) steer us away from our clearly set-out course. And psychologically speaking, that female impulse can also be a great agent of processes of maturing.

    Also, I think it is very wise to focus on a path of "least resistance" and not wasting one's own energy, time and attention unnecessarily. And I don't see why one should overly plough through a woman's "resistance" - because they are usually simply not worth that investment of energy. The sex doesn't really get that better, it's mainly ego gratification for the man and ego-pumping for the woman due to male attention.
    If a woman likes you, she's gonna like you right away and you can feel and observe this. Then any path to whatever kind of union with her is easy, electrifying and without unnecessary hassle.

  17. Just to elaborate on my previous post: there is this icky notion, that since women are the ones who select the male mates, they are the ones "in control" and that (for several reasons) it would be in their interest to keep the supply of their "commodities" as scarce as possible. Because otherwise, we men would be fucking around 24/7 and nothing in this would ever get done. But by wisely keeping access to their birth canal limited, women indirectly stimulated the creation of culture through us men.

    Now I see this as a typical overly hyped feminist phantasy. As if our entire as men life evolved solely around women. I think it's quite the contrary, we as men define us and our core self first of all by differentiation from the female sphere, which birthed us., from the "it" which we are not.

    So most men I know (and Aaron's post echoes this) will - once they get a certain share of women they desire - quickly come to the conclusion, that the novelty indeed wears off, that most women usually aren't THAT exciting to begin with and that in most cases there is "nothing" mystical or really "special", or a real "surplus value" to be found behind the fa├žade of the girl - and I mean this not in a derogatory kind of way, but as a plain observation (and of course this doesn't mean, that women aren't likeable the way they are).

    Still for us males "the juice isn't really worth the squeeze" and thus we as men have shifted our focus on something far more mesmerizing and worthwhile: understanding and shaping the world around us through philosophy, science, logical reasoning and art (e.g. name one female composer, who could ever compete with the likes of Richard Strauss, Bach, Beethoven or Bruckner - it's impossible). That's why this world is and will be a "man's world", because it has been built, organized and structured by us and the active part women played in this is not equally as substantial.

    Q.E.D. ;)

    1. Read something about sexual selection in relation to arts and science, and you will know that all of this is a basicaly byproduct mens evolutionary fitness show-offs. In the end, everything that was always done, was done for the pussy - current society only capitalized on what was already in place, and magnified it for gains.

    2. I'll have more to say on that in an upcoming article, but for now, maybe think long and hard about the fact that there aren't hundreds of hot women lining up outside Stockholm City Hall during the Nobel award ceremonies.

    3. This is very common yet false argument. Before you'll come up with the article read (inside great explanation of your mistake) and (how sexual selection fuels the market)

      And you will understand that all of this is already in place. It is exactly the reason why everybody falls into it and even those who see it for what it is.

    4. Ah, evolutionary psychology! It's always good for a laugh.

      Here is one more and presumably equally "common yet false argument": If men were only motivated by "pussy", how come that some school children (note: before the onset of puberty) show great interest in certain fields. Further, how do you explain that people devote their life to science while showing little to no interest in women? Not only is it the case that some of the most brilliant minds were gay, others were asexual. Probably I'm missing something that's obvious to feminists, but I just can't reconcile the innate male drive for knowledge and their determination with the statement that it must all have been just for the pussy --- when they just didn't care about that.

      Here, try analyze that guy:

      Lastly, how are feminists able to claim that ambitious men are only driven by pussy, yet when they encounter someone in their private life who is very accomplished, they are quick to proclaim that that person surely doesn't get laid, or doesn't have a life, or something like that?

    5. Also, Nikola Tesla.

      A bona fide genius, he was world-famous, rich (for a while), attractive, refined... and celibate. He claimed that his chastity aided his creativity.

    6. Another funny thing is that Gamers will say that intellectuals, artists, scientists, and serious accomplishers like doctors and lawyers are some of the least attractive men to women, yet now supposedly men evolved the desire to be these things to get women???? Okay!

      I think Freud was the first to suggest that art and science are really compensations for lack of sex, which is what man "really" wants. Ever since the 19th century, the fashion has been to explain human nature in crudely reductionist terms, without regard to plausibility.

      The thing about human traits is that it doesn't matter what they evolved "for", so to speak. A passion for science or art brings with it intrinsic satisfaction, even if it never gets the guy a single woman. That's how sexual selection works. A trait gives pleasure and satisfaction and then if its attractive to women, gets passed on to the next generation. What gets passed on is it's capacity to provide satisfaction, which exists whether or not the activity results i getting a woman.

      So even though it seems highly unlikely that a passion for art or science was ever sexually attractive to most females (not those with particular interests in art, etc), as Aaron soberly points out, even if that's how it got passed on it would make no difference to a man's ability to derive immense satisfaction from these activities on their own terms.

      Bottom line is, men can now enjoy a whole range of activities that provide intrinsic satisfaction even if they don't result in getting women, and it doesn't matter at all "why" these traits were selected for.

    7. You are one of those who think they get it, yet don't get it. Sexual selection is part of natural selection which promotes diversity of skills and intrests, plus orgin of adaptations does not determine completly how we benefit from them aside from their main purpose. There is whole chapter on this topic in the book about art.

    8. Anonymus two posts above me - I get it, obviously. We posted same thing in the same time. But fisrt: you seem to not realy know how subtle, motivating and how common are thos showoffs in everyday life and - second: I don't know how acknowledging that sexual selection creates such wide array of behaviours is undermining my argument which was about using those underlying instincts for gains by magnifying them?

  18. @ 3agle 3yez: "Unlike us men a woman's libido is likened to a kettle. You have to heat her up before she becomes hot."

    I thought I'd respond to this as well. And I cannot really share that notion. Women get just as easily and quickly aroused as we men do or sometimes they don't, just like us men. Even lesbian women get biologically aroused, when they get to watch heterosexual animals copulating (!). But just take alook at this study:

    So women are just more inclined to hide/mask their arousal for several different reasons. Any "amping up" of female arousal that surpasses a reasonable limit (woman as a "volume knob") is nothing but female ego-gratification and pseudo-whoring in my humble opinion. But it's widespread, 'cuz women get socially conditioned to this.

    Aaron once wrote somewhere on his forum that "What women want is really obvious […] they are attracted to good-looking, masculine guys, and it would be awesome if they had money, too." - and that's really about it.

    1. @ Marco_Polo
      I don't think you understand.

      Why should a woman be attracted to a man "right away" as you put it?

      Because he is physically attractive? Surely this is superficial. A self respecting woman would've gone through men who had no substance long ago.

      This is also the case with a self respecting man too. If the woman is in to me, I would make her work for my attention....I want to know her character first (namely whether she is feminine).

      This is what the mainstream calls "flirting".

      If a woman shows resistance why should it put you off? Resistance is an act used to put off men who do not respect themselves...a woman cannot dislike a man she does not know.

      Also the power to attract women who aren't initially interested gives YOU power.

      Friendly conversation is predominantly a fake attempt at flattery.

      Also about your comment on female arousal. This simply isn't true. If it was why is the audience for porn predominantly male?

      Why isn't the female version of playboy (Playgirl) even remotely as successful as the men?

      A high sex drive is scientifically linked to testosterone...testosterone is increased by excessive use of the muscles. These are MASCULINE traits...masculine traits are not attractive to men.

      Women ARE sexual just not in the same way as men.

      Human beings don't think logically about who they are attracted to.

      A woman doesn't think to herself:

      "Wow, he's good-looking, strong and has money...I think I'm going to find him attractive".

      I've had many women attracted to me initially in the past, but had lost interest when they spoke to me. And I was never a socially awkward guy.

  19. Instead of dry spells, regarding the days of abundance: when having a relationship/friends with benefits with (at least one) highly (by one's one standards) attractive woman that is good in bed, obviously very soon other things become more important than sex. And for a lot of men, me included, aside intellectual activities, having sex with other (new) women becomes compelling. But it cannot be for the quality of the sex, which is usually worse for random hookups (if not, you are imho keeping the wrong women around).
    But reading this article, I do wonder what the movivation really is?
    Aside "Legitimate/convincing reasons" like
    -to avoid dry spells when things go bad with regulars
    -to extend/upgrade one's current cycle
    -as a hobby that one actually enjoys
    -for the thrill and excitement involved in getting new women
    also inferior reasons like
    -to prove oneself, one is still able to fuck new ones
    -for one's "skills" not to wear off (PUAs like this reason, but I don't think it's legitimate)
    -conditioning by society
    -to get approval by others
    come to my mind.

    But those reasons don't include sex at all. At least personally, a believe that "the next one will probably be beyond everything already experienced!" does not play a role. I doubt many experienced guys do believe that the next one will somehow, magically blow their mind.

  20. "If I could kill my sex drive in a non-physical way (that is, without lopping off my balls), I think I would do it."

    "Fruitarianism and Sex Drive"

    If you eat this way you can kill your sex drive. 80% carbs 10% proteins 10% fats. No animal products. When you combine this with and eat very little calories interest in sex is gone.

  21. A.S.:

    On a side note, passivity on behalf of the girl might explain a lot of those "statistics" according to which 30% of women don't orgasm. They're just lying there, not moving their pelvis, not contracting their pussy, not doing anything else either, so how great can that be?

    Well, this is the flipside of how no one has a public duty to teach heterosexual men how to be good sexual partners. No one has a public duty to teach heterosexual women how to be good sexual partners either, so it wouldn't be surprising if women were as passive as you say.

    I sometimes wonder just how the world would be different if "everybody belonged to everyone else" and rampant promiscuity was the norm, as in the novel Brave New World. According to you, getting chicks is one of the main reasons for becoming a positively-contributing, tax-paying man in the First World. Without that, male productivity would dry up, but what about proving yourself in the world of work? Aren't there still people who still take pride in work they love?

    Also, do you think that men who discover a deeper, emotionally-bonding layer to heterosexual sexual activity are deluding themselves? Take a look at this short anecdote:

    Fictional or not, is a man with this kind of experience just deluding himself?

    1. I think this guy is deluding himself. He sounds like the guy who barely ever gets laid and happened to have sex with some non-ugly girl who wasn't completely horrible in bed. I've read similar descriptions of PUA dudes, and it was normally their lack of experience that made them come up with such bullshit.

      Taking pride in your work is an interesting topic. In most Western countries, short-term thinking is the norm, and so are absurd theories of human behavior (cf. "theory X" in HR circles). However, if you don't value an employee and view him as dispensable, he would be stupid to invest more effort than the bare minimum that is necessary to keep his job. Here's a neat blog post on that topic:

    2. If the man in the story is deluding himself that sex can really bond (more than just the "one-itis" that PUAs often prescribe the remedy of "fuck ten other women" for), then it's likely something that afflicts both genders (the exact extent for each is another matter). Here's a female-narrated version:

      I don't know how much you're interested in this, but an MRA blogger recently posted an entry talking about how heterosexual men need sex. You can read about it here:

  22. It's true: some women are hopeless in bed.

  23. I also feel, that this other guy is deluding himself, just in the opposite direction of the extreme, especially in stating, that pursuing goals of gaining higher insights would generally pale in comparison to crazy-kinky sex adventures (in the criticism of materialism I do concur, though):

    "People can say what they want. But having two young 19 year old girls looking up at you with their big eyes in a mix of innocence and naughtiness, licking your dick simultaneously and begging for your cum… it beats every fucking Ph.D.-degree, every fucking mind-numbing 50-inch plasma screen and every stupid materialistic Rolex or Ferrari."

    From my experiences - in the long run - other experiences and gained insights will rather trump experiences and (dis-)pleasures to be had with women.

    Do you guys agree?

    1. Yes, because sexual pleasure is temporary. Intellectual pleasure is more repeatable, sustainable, and dignified.

  24. This comment has been removed by the author.

  25. Just to elaborate on all of this - here's a formidable quote by Ms. Esther Vilar (from "The Manipulated Man"):

    "One of the results of this female system of sex rewards is that a man with strong sexual needs must be more obedient to women than others: look at the advertisements for dynamic, enterprising, energetic, enthusiastic young men, so much in demand in business. What are such men, in fact, but sexually dependent psychopaths who have set their standards in women too high? Why else would a man use all his energy and imagination to sell a particular commercial product? Only for this reward. The whole world outside his office window beckons him with the promise of adventure; yet so strong is his sex drive that he gladly forgoes all that is there and instead buys himself a woman with his hard-earned money. But even if he calls her his 'adventure', she will never be a substitute for what he has lost: when and if he meets her, everything will follow the strict system of supply and demand with its rigid rules and almost total lack of surprise.

    Probably no theory evolved by man is as absurd as Sigmund Freud's theory of penis envy. [...] Freud was merely the victim of training by woman's self-abasement techniques - thanks to his mother, wife, and probably his daughters as well. He confused cause and effect; a woman only says she is worth less than a man. She doesn't really think it. If anyone ought to feel a sense of envy, it is men. They should be jealous of women's power. But, of course, they never are, for they glory in their powerlessness."

  26. I would play devil's advocate here.

    We know we are:
    1) Guys who underwent many years of strained relationship to the opposite sex.
    2) guys who became interested in pickup, being decidedly non-normal in this aspect of ourselves
    and can conclude that:
    3) We have likely dramatized and intellectualized the sexual part of ourselves to an extent which would require a lot of self-awareness to realize.

    Many of the comments here point to sexual frigidity and dysfunction, but the commenters are projecting it outward as 'women suck in bed' and 'most women aren't worth it', etc. etc. Do you see the guy above who basically says that he thinks vaginas are dirty and unclean, basically nasty?

    Imagine you saw a woman saying "You know, I dont even really enjoy sex. Men's penises disgust me, they are dirty things." That woman clearly has issues; she has a distorted sexuality. Is the same not true for us when we say these things?

    I would just say dont kid yourself. You can lay a lot of girls and still be completely numb. Success in the world is easy, compared to overcoming the numbness of a shut-down emotional/sexual system. Its not that you dont enjoy it, its more likely you can't feel anything, being out of touch with yourself and more caught up in the intellectual/egoic aspects of the mating.

    Observing this doesn't make me above it. In fact I suffer the same difficulty and can (and have) put on this same pose of 'Not Even Really Enjoying It That Much', but in hindsight, I have realized that I am struggling with my own weak sexuality(it is still extremely powerful because that is the nature of sexuality!). I can bang 100 chicks and go crazy over porn and this would still be true. I would say don't believe the hype, you are weak sexually if your mojo gets low enough to trivialize this, one of the most powerful acts human beings are capable of. Like a man with no empathy or sympathy, scoffing over a heartfelt movie, we can only hope that if we laugh loud enough, we might convince ourselves. Or you could read this and perhaps, wonder if it applies to you. Just some food for thought.

    1. I always find it amusing when some lone guy/concern troll on the Internet who tries to be contrarian speaks in the plural. Anyway, I don't know which post and which comments you've been reading, but I certainly don't see any sign of "frigidity and dysfunction". If anything, you sound like a virgin to me ("strained relationship with the opposite sex" = no gf; "interested in pickup" = no sex; "intellectualized the sexual part of ourselves" = no sex), so what's your point? Maybe gather some actual experience with women before you start pontificating. Besides, vaginas are less clean than penises, just due to differences in the anatomy. Maybe start by looking up "vaginal flora". It's a bit more complicated than, "wash your cock when you shower".

    2. Wait, if you have a weak sexuality, then that means you don't enjoy sex that much. If a man has little empathy, then he won't be moved by a sentimental movie.

      Why is this "wrong"? Why "should" you have a strong sexuality? Why "should" you have empathy, if you don't have it? Things are what they are, you are what you are. At what point do you conclude society with it's "shoulds" might be selling you a pack of lies?

      I suspect far more men have "weak sexuality" than is commonly realized. I think that is actually "normal", not the sex-crazed modern male ideal, which is a fantasy.

      In Japan, up to 70% - 70%! - of men confess to not having any great interest in sex (google "grass eaters" if you don't believe me). Many of these men have girlfriends and friendships with women, but just don't care much about sex, even though many occasionally have it. Others don't have any sex or girlfriends at all and admit they feel no particular interest in getting one. Moreoever, in Japan sex is easily available through prostitution, which is widespread and carries with it no stigma for men at all, and Japanese women are still highly feminine with none of the personality problems that afflict Western women.

      Many Japanese say that these supposedly "feminized" males are actually more typical of traditional Japanese culture before it came into contact with the West (I put feminized in quotes because in traditional Japan, lack of interest in sex, devotion to refinement and personal appearance, and interest in simple pursuits like long walks in the countryside, etc, was quite compatible with an extreme warrior culture and extreme austerity)

      It would seem that Japan went through a brief abberation through its contact with the modern West and its obsession with "virility" and sex, and is now returning to a more "normal" male role - and Japanese men still admire male virtues, as you can see from their yakuza and samurai films, so are hardly feminized. It's just that they have moved away from a stupid ideal of masculnity.

      And maybe it is time for us in the West to do the same? Admit that we men are not really as sex-obsessed as modern culture, starting with Freud, wants us to be?

  27. sex is not that great when you get it all the time. However when you don't have sex for a long time you become a less happy person. Just like everything in life its enjoyable in a well balanced life.

  28. See, that's where we disagree. I was a very happy person when I was a virgin. If anything, women introduce chaos into your life, and this may or may not affect your happiness. In fact, there is research showing that the least sociable people are the most consistently happy subgroup of all.

  29. I have a buddy who has slept with over 100 women, goes out every weekend to the clubs, and bangs the ugliest trolls I've ever seen and calls his conquests "epic". I would venture to say the dude has issues.


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