I met up with a friend to discuss an art project yesterday evening. At least, outwardly that's what happened. It's possible that beneath the surface, he was only acting nice to get sex from me, and I was only acting "friendly" to use him and rub in his face that he wasn't getting that sex. I mentioned this aloud, and we laughed and made fun of it, but maybe he just felt he had to do that so he wouldn't kill his chances. The mindfuck never ends.
The Venusian Arts : The Four SIrens and the legal changes feminists have instituted to obstruct beta men have created a climate where men have invented techniques and strategies to adapt to the more challenging marketplace, only to exceed their aspirations. This is a disruptive technology in its own right. All of us know a man who is neither handsome nor wealthy, but seems to have amazing success with women. He seems to have natural instincts regarding women that to the layperson may be indistinguishable from magic. So how does he do it?
Just as "hypergamy" is his ten-dollar word for "slut," "The Venusian Arts" are PUA by any other name. Why you would want a woman when they're evil monsters who will take all your money, I'm not sure. I guess it's just the "sports car you can stick your dick into" factor.
Anyway, in this case the Venusian Arts don't exist to get women, they exist to plug a hole in the theory: if women are horrible monsters, why do some guys seem to have satisfying relationships with them? It's inconceivable that they might actually be bonding to the women and double inconceivable that women might be bonding with them. Clearly the only answer is woman-taming magic.
Men who comprehended the concepts (a minority) and those who could undertake the total reconstitution of their personalities and avalanche of rejections as part of the learning curve (a still smaller minority) stood to reap tremendous benefits from becoming more attractive than the vast majority of unaware men.
Ah yes, if it doesn't work you must be misapplying the principles! You're such an idiot, next you'll be telling me you can't even see the Emperor's wonderful clothing.
Among the most valuable learnings from the body of knowledge is the contrarian revelation that what women say a man should do is often quite the antithesis of what would actually bring him success.
This is one of those parts that's really disturbing to read. Because I'm stuck in the body of a woman, and I'm only able to speak with a woman-voice. Could there be a sign or something I could hold up when I really mean what I'm saying? Maybe I could talk in a deeper voice when I say things that aren't lies? Some sort of signal?
For example, being a needy, supplicative, eager-to-please man is precisely the opposite behavior that a man should employ, where being dominant, teasing, amused, yet assertive is the optimal persona.
Oh yeah, I always go around telling everyone I want a needy, supplicative man. "Why can't a guy follow me around laughing too hard at my jokes and giving me weird awkward compliments while never actually being sexually assertive," I always ask my girlfriends. When I go on dates, I tell the guy, "you better start whining and wheedling now, mister," and see what he does.
As for dominant men, of course I really like dominant men, but that's a different use of the word. But I only like dominant men who are capable of talking to me on the level too. If a guy won't break out of his "ho ho, I am Lord King Man, you wanted to say something to me, that's so funny" persona long enough for us to have a goddamn conversation, well, we're not going to have a conversation.
I know, a woman just said what she wanted, how quaint, everybody do the opposite now.
An equally valuable lesson is to realize when not to take a woman's words at face value. Many statements from her are 'tests' to see if the man can remain congruent in his 'alpha' personality, where the woman is actually hoping the man does not eagerly comply to her wishes.
Again, I only have a lady voice! I am incapable, in this framework, of communicating when I actually mean "please go away, you're making me uncomfortable." Or even things like "can you hold my drink" aren't big planned-out tests, I just have to go potty and it would be gross to bring my drink in there.
It's important to point out at this juncture that I didn't go to Lady School. I just got dropped off in this world with no directions, and nobody ever took me aside and said "hey, you're a member of the Lady Club, here are the techniques you gotta use." I don't really know anything about relationships or attraction that guys don't. I'm making it up as I go along too.
Similarly, the 'feminist' Pavlovian reaction to call any non-compliant man a 'misogynist' should also not be taken as though a rational adult assigned the label after fair consideration. Such shaming language is only meant to deflect scrutiny from the woman uttering it, and should be given no more importance than a 10-year-old throwing a tantrum to avoid responsibility or accountability.
Whereas someone sticking their fingers in their ears and yelling "I can't hear it when girls talk, LA LA LA" is clearly nothing like a kid throwing a tantrum.
And this is such a 10-year-old-level attempt at a mindfuck, too. "I know you're going to call me a misogynist, therefore... I can't possibly be one?" Yeah, even my sarcasm-quote couldn't follow the logic there the whole way through.
For anyone seeking advice on the Venusian Arts, there is one rule you must never break. I believe it is of paramount importance that the knowledge be used ethically, and with the objective of creating mutually satisfying relationships with women. It is not moral to mistreat women, even if they have done the same to countless men. We, as men, have to take the high road even if women are not, and this is my firm belief.
Wow, what a fucking saint. You're like if Mahatma Gandhi fucked Mother Theresa and the baby took lessons from the Dalai Lama.
Anyway, the "even if they have done the same to countless men" is the sort of thing that sounds like you're not mistreating women now, but you'd definitely be justified if you did, and bitches shouldn't push it.
This was a short section, but I have to go to work soon, my shift at the Testicle Removal Factory starts bright and early, so I'll just post up when I've got now.
I recommend that all comments on "I just knew you bitches would cry misogyny", from misogynists, should be replied to only with references to poop. No more rebuttals. Just poop. This may seem like a frustratingly childish and debate-stalling tactic, but it takes one to know one, POOPHEAD.