thegreatmoose Posted December 10, 2009 Posted December 10, 2009 If a man cheats it's his fault. If a woman cheats it's her fault. It really is that simple.
sally4sara Posted December 10, 2009 Posted December 10, 2009 If a man cheats it's his fault. If a woman cheats it's her fault. It really is that simple. If only they'd listen. But they don't. They don't even listen to their own logic when its given back to them.
thegreatmoose Posted December 10, 2009 Posted December 10, 2009 If only they'd listen. But they don't. They don't even listen to their own logic when its given back to them. It doesn't matter what someone else does. It matters what you do. It matters for me what I do in the same way. This whole gender war is the silliest thing I've ever seen.
Sam Spade Posted December 10, 2009 Posted December 10, 2009 If a man cheats it's his fault. If a woman cheats it's her fault. It really is that simple. No: If a man cheats - it's his fault. If a woman cheats - it's his fault.
stillafool Posted December 10, 2009 Posted December 10, 2009 What makes me angry is that regardless of the past, women RIGHT NOW have a choice whether to look for red flags, get into FWBs, date a guy that treats his exes like garbage and badmouths them, has a list of lovers a mile long and a woman doesn't feel worthy enough to know that she deserves to be treated better. Though that goes both ways, and even within same-sex relationships. I guess I wish that people were a little more old-fashioned in their selection. This is so true. No one has a right now-a-days to complain about playboys, playgirls and playas. You make your own choices.
Dexter Morgan Posted December 10, 2009 Posted December 10, 2009 No: If a man cheats - it's his fault. If a woman cheats - it's his fault. or more accurately, if a man cheats, he is a low down dirty pig....if a woman cheats, then it is to be understood and she had good reason:rolleyes:
ADF Posted December 12, 2009 Posted December 12, 2009 Dude, are you a girl? Hey, how about a little respect? For all you know, I could be your father.
meerkat stew Posted December 13, 2009 Posted December 13, 2009 (edited) The word "player," as we all know is street slang for "pimp." Women, via pop rap culture, migrated it into popular, general speech to rationalize and shift accountability for their poor sexual decisions, i.e. "blame the bad ole 'player' and Sweet Suzy can still feel good about the mattress strapped to her back." It is a nonsense word with no meaning that can be agreed on, as evidenced by this thread, and should be done away with. There are better, more precise words and phrases. For example, "promiscuous" "seducer," etc. Women tend not to like these more precise words, because 1) they often prefer nebulous words that can be facilely used in rationalization, and 2)unlike "player," the more precise words don't remove women's accountability for their sexual choices nearly as conveniently. If one gets "played" it's not really their fault right? I hardly ever hear men use the word "player" when talking to men about men unless they are talking about real pimps, imitating street culture, or as a form of greeting. Hear it CONSTANTLY from women these days though. Most of the bad male behaviors detailed here have little to do with seduction and more to do with being a sex addict, a sociopath or a narcissist (Suzy doesn't like these words either, though, because they bring her choices into question and make her look stupid as opposed to casting her in the ever-desired female role of "victim"). So, IMO, the better thread title might be "Seducing women as a lifestyle: positives and negatives." To the topic, it usually takes a man much experience to learn the plain fact that 10% of single men have 90% of the sex with women. Unlike women, it's not good enough for a man to be "average" in mating. Average men get none, or almost none. Moreover, counter to what the usual male-bashing "accepted" attitude expressed as "you are the common denominator, you or your bad attitude are to blame for your mating troubles and the bad actions of the bad women you select" preaches (and how wonderfully convenient for Suzy to spout this one out over and over as panacea), average men don't do any real selecting. Only the top few percentiles of men have any real choice in what woman accepts them. Men learn this over time, but it's funny to see the tired old "common denominator" BS trotted out whenever men vent about the unfairness of mating. Men display, women select. Finally, men must display continuously to have a chance of getting any sex. In other words, to get any sex, men must be trying to get it repetitively from different sources. A man is either the tiger hunting or the tiger rug, no in between. So 1. 10% of men get most of the available sex. 2. Men do not select, they display. Women select. 3. If men do not display, they do not get any sex at all. When a man realizes the alchemy of the above very plain, basic facts about human mating, he may take steps to improve his chances by either 1. Moving himself into the top 10%, 2. Varying his display and 3. Displaying as frequently as possible. Men learn from experience and improve. As they improve to a certain level, they end up becoming more "successful" in seduction than they ever intended. Most men mislabeled as "players" started out looking for one single girlfriend, not to notch bedposts, but as one poster says in the thread, he sleeps with lots of women, yet a relationship eludes him. The point of all this ramble is that unfortunately mating and sex for men is an all or nothing proposition. You either have more options than you need or none at all. It is massively unfair for women to continue to use terms like "player" to describe men who are doing what must be done to get any sex at all, and have, with experience, gotten good at it over time. When I hear a woman use the term, my decoder ring translates it as "guy I slept with, but can't easily own/manipulate because he has options." The whole concept "player" is really just bitter female hissing and spitting about a man who through effort and hard work, has the same options and control of his sex life that the -average- woman has, nothing more. To preempt one argument, I'm not talking about "liars," (one of those much better words than "player"... women don't like the term "liar" though because it can't be used to get them off the accountability hook when the guy didn't actually lie) not talking about men who make false promises. Once a man gets good enough at seduction, he doesn't have to promise anything or lie at all. In fact, much of the advanced pickup artist literature is devoted to how to be straightforward with women, not deceive them and how to make sure both are on the same page about expectations. Summary: the choice is not between being a "player" and a sincere guy, but whether or not a man chooses to take the immutable steps towards success in getting sex. As someone who prefers to have some control over life than none, I chose to get better at getting sex. The healthy man then gets to a point where he knows that he can have women when he wants and uses this power with care. Most of the bad behavior attributed to "players" is more about a sex addiction, narcissism or sociopathy than seduction. Men, never ever apologize for your natural, healthy desire for sex and pursuit of same, nor be made to feel "less than" when your desires don't comport with a given female agenda. Edited December 13, 2009 by meerkat stew
Recommended Posts