Hello Friend,

If this is your first visit to SoSuave, I would advise you to START HERE.

It will be the most efficient use of your time.

And you will learn everything you need to know to become a huge success with women.

Thank you for visiting and have a great day!

The Desire Dynamic

Rollo Tomassi

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
5,336
Reaction score
335
Age
55
Location
Nevada
Recently I’ve been reading about the importance of Interest Levels in attraction and how useful a skill it is to accurately make assessments of interest in inter-gender communications when in the field. Ross Jefferies and David D’Angelo continually press upon the need for determining IL and quantify it in percentage points as well as qualifying it under varying circumstance. However, IL remains this nebulous X factor that qualifies or disqualifies a man from for a woman’s intimacy. I’ve read long discourses on ways to raise IL (such as establishing rapport) or techniques in maintaining IL over the course of an LTR, but hardly a word on what determines IL from the outset.

In my counseling I never advocate becoming a woman’s friend and then attempting to move to intimacy. Social conditioning has taught most women that the “friendship route” should be the best way to become intimate with a man, yet as we’ve experienced more often than not that this ‘safe route’ is rarely the one that leads to a lasting intimacy. We constantly hear women (and now men unfortunately) parrot the same response of becoming ‘friends first’ and then shifting to more intimate relations. In my own estimation this is yet another psycho-social convention effectively used by women in their sexual selection process; the latent purpose of which is meant to determine sexual acceptability while retaining the man’s attention (something she seeks for affirmation purposes). The problem with this line of reasoning is that this very convention diffuses what I call the Desire Dynamic – a necessary ingredient in any relationship, LTR or otherwise.

Think back to the experiences you’ve had in clubs or other social occasions where you’ve met a woman with whom you simply ‘clicked’. As some will attest, this initial ‘chemical reaction’ to each other is an overpowering physical passion (some would say lust). Some may result in a ONS, others may be the start of an LTR, but the result isn’t what I’m onto here, it’s that the desire is there. IL is simply a quantification of basic desire. Some of the hottest, most spontaneous sexual encounters we have are the result of this primary desire.

It should be noted that some guys may have never experienced this and will readily call attention to the lack of ever having experiences such as this and have in fact turned their female friends into lovers. In these instances there is still a basic desire, but not to the chemical reaction degree as I’ve stated above. Mitigating factors may exist in these instances where a friend becomes the ‘lover of second choice’ or the guy’s game is such that he’s never had the occasion to experience it. All exceptions aside, the desire for one another must exist and the degree to which it does will determine the quality of that experience or that relationship.

In their initial assessment of IL, I’ll have to agree with Jefferies and D’Angelo so far that determining the intensity of a woman’s interest is a determining factor in becoming intimate. However, I think that an even more important skill for a man to develop is accurately assessing IL through the course of a relationship as well, and developing techniques with which to maintain it. Most men generally complain of a lack of desire on the part of their wives after marriage. Things ‘cool off’ and the real desire declines on her part. Through routine, convenience or any number of other factors the passion both had in the beginning is traded for security with her and the convenience of a regular sex partner for him. Both make concessions for each other in order to maintain what has now become comfortable. But the problem with desire is that it is necessarily uncomfortable, it is non-routine and spontaneous. The butterflies in her stomach are there because she isn’t in control of her circumstance – a security she would otherwise strive for. I can’t tell of the countless articles I’ve read by women attempting to explain why men cheat on their spouses/girlfriends, but none of them address this basic desire principle. Rather it’s explained as a man’s biological imperative to seek variety in his breeding selection, and while there is some merit to this, I would argue that what a man seeks in his infidelity is a return to this degree of passion. His need to experience this desire becomes such that he will seek it outside of marriage if the opportunity permits. And I shouldn’t limit this strictly to men; women are equally affected by this principle.

Many times I’ve counseled married men after they or their wives have been caught in extramarital affairs and pop psychology would have us believe that the two need to “build back the trust they once shared” but, this line of thought, I believe is egregiously in error. It takes no account of any mutually shared desire that the couple had (or didn’t have) prior to the offense. To put it bluntly, if a woman is a dead lay for her husband or a man is so overweight as to not be arousing for his wife, no amount of ‘trust building’ will compensate for a basic lack of desire. It’s not trust that is lacking in failing relationships -it’s desire. Pop culture ignorantly tells us we have to keep things fresh to keep a relationship going: roleplay, go get fashion shots, have a date night and any number of other ideas meant to recapture this passion, yet never is it discussed the lack of desire to do things such as this. I would argue that if a couple needs to recapture this sense of spontaneity and passion, the problem exists in the desire dynamic and may well be past due. Rather I would encourage couples (men in particular) to maintain a constant sense of spontaneity and unpredictability in this regard throughout an LTR.

Holding fast to DJ principles in a marriage or LTR is a good start. DJ skills and ideology (what I call positive masculinity) can serve a man well into marriage so long as the man internalizes them and lives them out. Too many times do AFCs use methodologies and formulae to acquire the woman of his choosing only to settle into ‘getting comfortable’ in a relationship and regress back to being an AFC, because he never internalized the value of being a true DJ. Again a desire for who you were is evident in the woman, but a pale desire (if at all) for who you regress into after you’ve become intimates is a recipe for disaster.
 

NewMan

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jul 29, 2003
Messages
2,406
Reaction score
16
Location
Los Angeles
Too many times do AFCs use methodologies and formulae to acquire the woman of his choosing only to settle into ‘getting comfortable’ in a relationship and regress back to being an AFC, because he never internalized the value of being a true DJ

yes, yes - I can only but agree.
 

Ricky

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
3,914
Reaction score
702
Age
50
Very true.
 

RedPill

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 13, 2005
Messages
794
Reaction score
50
Location
Midwest America
Great post! Per usual, you're right on the mark Rollo.

I think that most guys who will regress into that comfortable, familiar AFC state (at the cost of desire) will do so because they:

1) fear that their woman will not put up with "positive masculinity"

2) OR they aren't willing to give up the pvssy they're getting in order to continue developing as men.

With the first reason, the fear is only a result of societal conditioning and an AFC mindset at the core. Inner game needs to be addressed first.

With the second, it's just pure laziness and a lack of life ambition. It's a trade of short-term pleasure for long-term unhappiness. Live for the moment, damn the consequences is a popular and horribly destructive attitude of modern society.

Both men and women are responsible for maintaining the desire dynamic, and when one or both parties fail to do their part, that's when otherwise good relationships die. Like you're always saying Rollo, you're not anti-marriage, you're anti-bad marriage - which happens (among other reasons) when the principles of the desire dynamic are not adhered to.

Some of the posters on the threads about cheating would be wise to consider the desire dynamic instead of attributing cheating to a lack of integrity.
 

Friendly Otter

Don Juan
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
184
Reaction score
4
Location
Sverige
For some reason, this thread makes me remember something I read once: "Canadians are nice people who grow up to marry their best friends." :)

Rollo Tomassi said:
But the problem with desire is that it is necessarily uncomfortable, it is non-routine and spontaneous. The butterflies in her stomach are there because she isn’t in control of her circumstance – a security she would otherwise strive for. I can’t tell of the countless articles I’ve read by women attempting to explain why men cheat on their spouses/girlfriends, but none of them address this basic desire principle. Rather it’s explained as a man’s biological imperative to seek variety in his breeding selection, and while there is some merit to this, I would argue that what a man seeks in his infidelity is a return to this degree of passion.
Possibly ... you mean the instinct to hunt, to win? This is indeed a strong instinct in men. I find it funny that guys will always appreciate computer games that allow them to solve problems, defeat opponents and gain ground, while girls made The Sims one of the most best-selling games ever. We men definitely do like the chase.

Keeping marriages exciting - yes, this is important. But on top of all other factors is one that RedPill touches on, a very important factor: that we have a feel-good society, where you live for the moment. It used to be that people lived for higher purposes than their own happiness, and it was generally understood that this was what you were supposed to do. They could never imagine the endless debates in our time about how to be happy - to them, that was a non-issue, a luxury that comes after you have done your duty. Your duty o God, to your tribe, your clan, your people, your nation, or somesuch.

And here's the kicker: you can only be happy if you don't live for your own happiness. Because if you live only for yourself, you're fighting a losing battle. You are going to die, right? And before that there is a slow and painful aging process, where your body is slowly shutting down. If you think you haven't gotten all your dreams fulfilled before, just wait until your own body starts limiting your life more and more.

If you live for something bigger than yourself, your perspective doesn't end with that day when you start pushing up daisies. If what you work for lives on, you'll get a feeling that you live on through it.

And that will make you and the missus much happier. And that thought is my contribution to this thread.
 

legolas

Master Don Juan
Joined
Feb 2, 2003
Messages
953
Reaction score
14
Location
Red Sox Nation
Rollo Tomassi said:
However, I think that an even more important skill for a man to develop is accurately assessing IL through the course of a relationship as well, and developing techniques with which to maintain it.
:up:

That my dear friends is the key to this game!! If you know just that, you never have to come here again and you can develop your own techniques. I'd say if the DJ message boards could focus in something, it would be to teach men how to quantify desire and how to build/ maintain it. However we're taught here that you can't quantify desire or IL, you'd have to make a move to find out if she likes you for real.

My friend had been going out with this chick for a while, they had even made out a few times getting quite physical, but things hadn't progressed beyond that point. On the last date she asked him blatantly "Why do you keep calling me and asking me out?" My friend, not picking up on the hidden message there said "Well you keep saying yes!" Good response, BUT he should have known well in advance!

By the way the hidden message is not "I'm not into you" although that's also part of that message. The hidden message is "I already told you I'm not interested" She never verbalized it, but she assumed he should have picked up on it. Maybe my friend did pick up subconsciously on it and then conscsiously overrode it saying to himself "Maybe there's still a chance. Maybe I still can get laid regardless"

Desperation got in the way and what he would have had, had he gotten laid, would have been passionless, desireless sex. Like Tom Vizzini says "Before you begin to calibrate, get your agenda out of the way!"
 

feelingloved

Don Juan
Joined
Jul 22, 2007
Messages
154
Reaction score
2
Location
edmonton
This thread could have been written for me. I've got a lot of AFC to drop.
 

azanon

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,293
Reaction score
41
Rollo Tomassi said:
Rather I would encourage couples (men in particular) to maintain a constant sense of spontaneity and unpredictability in this regard throughout an LTR.
Though I think this helps, RT, I think it's important to realize that when it comes to fidelity/infidelity in a marriage, there are other factors that can play significant roles in whether infidelity happens or doesn't happen that is completely unrelated to attraction levels.

One thing that always comes into play is a man or woman's personality, moral set (or lack thereof), and the ability (or lack thereof) to compartmentalize. Someone with an ordered personality, strict morals, and the lack of an ability to compartmentalize will probably not cheat even if their husband or wife were the worst lay, overweight, and the most unexciting individual you ever met. OTOH, an individual with a high sex drive, personable personality, variable morals, perhaps a powerful (or wealthy) individual, and one who can compartmentalize is far more likely to cheat even if this person's spouse were pegging the desire meter, including extremely spontaneous and unpredictable, and was a 10 out of 10 on a looks scale.

Do you recall Bill Clinton's answer to the question, "Why did you cheat?" He said (paraphrasing), "as horrible as this may sound..... because I could".

RT - I'm one of your biggest fans, and congrats on the 3 green squares, but I wish you could come to realize that fidelity/infidelity is a complicated animal with a host of potential variables that could play significant roles. And some of these have absolutely nothing to do with inter-marital desire levels. If i were to say these infidelity occurrences were case-by-case, it would be a great understatement deserving of a loud and emphatic, Doh!
 

LeftyLoosey

Don Juan
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
197
Reaction score
18
Azanon, so you're saying that if someone knows they can absolutely get away with cheating (i.e. what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas) that can be sufficient motivation to cheat, regardless of their IL in their partner?

If Bill Clinton was married to a super model I doubt he would have cheated as the likeliness of him getting away with it was not 100%. His motivators were related to the Desire Dynamic discussed by RT.

People are FAR less likely to compromise a relationship they're happy with.

In extremely rare circumstances where someone has the opportunity to cheat with almost no chance of being caught, I do agree that the risk increases, but that's why you should only have LTRs with someone whose values are in line with your own (i.e. can't compartmentalize by your definition). Unless of course you're a cheater, then you deserve what you get.
 

MacAvoy

Banned
Joined
May 10, 2003
Messages
2,952
Reaction score
35
Location
Northern Ontario
Lefty,

You ever hear of hot girls complaining that their man cheats on them? Even if they are a supermodel, after a couple hundred times, a totally new piece of tail is appealing even if she isn't as hot.
 

Mr. Wise

Don Juan
Joined
Dec 19, 2007
Messages
122
Reaction score
3
Well written post for a very tricky topic.
 

Rollo Tomassi

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
5,336
Reaction score
335
Age
55
Location
Nevada
The point of the thread is an essay on desire and it's effect on relationships, sex and attraction. Infidelity is only one aspect of this observation, and probably could use another thread entirely. That said, I wasn't saying this is a cure-all, but rather a starting point. Think of the most common complaints married men relate - lack of sex, boring sex, sex was more frequent and more intense while dating, she's gone frigid, etc. I've yet to meet the married guy who says his sex life has improved since marriage. Even the religious guys I know, who weren't even getting it before, complain about the drop off after a couple of years.

Desire plays into this, because of the nature of female sexual response. There's discomfort and anxiety associated with genuine passion; it's supposed to be an uncomfortable, anxiousness because there's uncertainty. I've got a friend, Sean, who married his wife last year after about a 2 year LTR. When they met his wife couldn't get enough of him to the point that she'd give him head in public places where she'd risk getting caught. However, gradually, as they became more and more exclusive, she became more comfortable and secure in her relationship with him and the sex declined. The frequency and the intensity dropped to the point where the comfort and security far overrides the desire.

Sean's story is so common it's a cliché now, and I should add that there are many social contrivances designed with the specific purpose of excusing a woman of her role in this while making the man ashamed for even expecting frequent, intense sexuality from his spouse. However, the point is, what changes in an LTR and marriage that affects sexuality that was different while single? That's real, genuine, Desire.

Desire goes beyond the act. Desire goes beyond the behavior and forms true motive. We do things all the time that we really don't want to, making it look as if we do, but as well as we can mask this for a time, our behavior will begin to betray our real desire. A man's wife can give it up the requisite twice a week, but of the 6 or so time per month, how many times is she really into it? And why does she fantasize about the pool boy when she is? Because of desire.

I have to laugh when I hear about how some of my married, male friends tell me how they think they've made a real breakthrough with their wives during therapy. "She's agreed to try to meet my sexual needs, and I've promised to be more aware of the dirty dishes." Heheh,..they simply haven't learned that true, genuine desire cannot be negotiated. This is exactly why I'm not a big fan of Mystery Method style takeaway tactics to get past LMR. It's negotiation of desire. How many degrees difference is that from rape? Just because you manage to persuade a woman to have sex with you doesn't mean she's going to be an insatiable nympho with you. I would think it a far better use of skill and effort to sarge a woman who is unquestionably ready to go than to plead a case successfully. Takeaways have their uses in other circumstance, but not against LMR.
 

ketostix

Banned
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
3,878
Reaction score
55
Heheh,..they simply haven't learned that true, genuine desire cannot be negotiated. This is exactly why I'm not a big fan of Mystery Method style takeaway tactics to get past LMR. It's negotiation of desire. How many degrees difference is that from rape? Just because you manage to persuade a woman to have sex with you doesn't mean she's going to be an insatiable nympho with you. I would think it a far better use of skill and effort to sarge a woman who is unquestionably ready to go than to plead a case successfully. Takeaways have their uses in other circumstance, but not against LMR.
This is where I disagree with you Rollo, which is to also say I agree with you everywhere else :D . I'd argue that desire=attraction but interest is a somewhat separate thing. If a woman is giving you LMR there was desire to get to this point, but women will still try to "negotiate" even when they have desire. That's what separates the difference between their sexuality and a man's. The LMR isn't legitimate resistance. it's just a powerplay or a hard-to-get game, or a test. She wants it, has desire, or she wouldn't be there. She's just trying to 1. make you want it more by making you work harder for it and 2. testing to see how desperate you are, will you stop when she gives resistance, etc. When you freeze out she sees that you don't put having sex above your own dignity to grovel for it and she sees that you can control yourself. I don't see it as coercion, I think continuing to physically stimulate her and continue physically escalation as more of being coercion.
 

Colossus

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
3,542
Reaction score
558
I think the more important question we need to ask is "what is that desire based on?"

Why does desire fade with time? Is it inevitable? Does it go into remission and reappear with a certain stimulus? Are there certain components that outlast others?

I'm not a psychologist, but sometimes I feel these are questions we will never be able to answer with comprehensive certainty.

Questions like these, and anecdotes like the story of your friend Sean, are what keep the thought of marriage at bay for me. My last LTR started with gratuitous sex, like many do; but in time the frequency and intensity fell to a monotonous chore, at least on her part. I remember having numerous talks with her about it, and we usually reached a negotiation where she would give more/better sex and i would stop being a d!ck in some way. But those agreements rarely lasted more than a week. Like you said, desire cannot be negotiated.

I am a firm believer in the principle of interest level and its role as a foundation of DJ principle. But what do you do when your WIFE looses IL? That's a scary thought. It's not like you can NEXT with the swagger of a single DJ.

So what advantages are there to me (or any DJ) getting married if an analog of this situation is an inevitability?
 

azanon

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,293
Reaction score
41
LeftyLoosey said:
Azanon, so you're saying that if someone knows they can absolutely get away with cheating (i.e. what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas) that can be sufficient motivation to cheat, regardless of their IL in their partner?

If Bill Clinton was married to a super model I doubt he would have cheated as the likeliness of him getting away with it was not 100%. His motivators were related to the Desire Dynamic discussed by RT.

People are FAR less likely to compromise a relationship they're happy with.

In extremely rare circumstances where someone has the opportunity to cheat with almost no chance of being caught, I do agree that the risk increases, but that's why you should only have LTRs with someone whose values are in line with your own (i.e. can't compartmentalize by your definition). Unless of course you're a cheater, then you deserve what you get.
Yes, hormones/strong sex drive can trump logic/reason. It happens all the time. Happened recently in NY as we all know.

People don't always make the wisest choices. Don't take this to mean I advocate this!

............

To quote a former cajun friend of mine, "Azanon....... there's nothing like strange".
 

azanon

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,293
Reaction score
41
Rollo Tomassi said:
The point of the thread is an essay on desire and it's effect on relationships, sex and attraction.
I wasn't trying to be more specific than you were, to be honest. In your original post, you were basically talking about desire dwindling in a marriage for the reasons you discussed which can lead to infidelity. You're still basically talking about before vs. after marriage with respect to desire so I don't think I'm being more specific than you.

But to reiterate my.... addendum to your discussion on desire, all I'm saying is, is that I agree with you that focusing on desire will show real improvements with regard to genuine, innate attraction whether in a marriage or not. However, even if you (you, meaning man or a woman) can generate the maximum theoretical desire by being the perfect DJ, or perfect desirable woman, it will still provide no guarantee that your partner, married or unmarried, will not stray. Decrease the chances of that happening maybe, but there are no guarantees. There are other significant factors in the equation.

To make a direct example of what I'm saying above, it is very possible to be having wonderful sex with your partner or spouse, and still want and have other sexual partners. Desire is mostly about how good the sex is between two people. Sadly, or not sadly, depending on how you look at it, it has far less to do with whether either of these two lovemakers will still want to partake in someone else.

Surely, I should have the easiest time convincing "DJs" that men want as much P* as possible, and a ceremony in a church has basically no effect on that ingrained need.
 

DavenJuan

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
Messages
792
Reaction score
32
Location
mistake by the lake
Holding fast to DJ principles in a marriage or LTR is a good start. DJ skills and ideology (what I call positive masculinity) can serve a man well into marriage so long as the man internalizes them and lives them out. Too many times do AFCs use methodologies and formulae to acquire the woman of his choosing only to settle into ‘getting comfortable’ in a relationship and regress back to being an AFC, because he never internalized the value of being a true DJ. Again a desire for who you were is evident in the woman, but a pale desire (if at all) for who you regress into after you’ve become intimates is a recipe for disaster.
this i think happens even outside the marriage and LTRs. any given opportunity that we achieve any form of "success" its very easy to lose sight at our true goal. bettering OURSELVES.

I am guilty of this just as others are.

wonderful post!
 

decades

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 3, 2004
Messages
1,224
Reaction score
34
Location
sf ca
many of the "hottest" chemical reactions a man has for a woman, i.e. they click instantly, result in Years of LTR misery because he clicked with a massively dysfunctional person. Why did "they" click? That's the real question.
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2003
Messages
10
Reaction score
1
Age
41
Location
Romania
Hi guys, long time no see.
To answer the last question, it's pretty simple actually but it involves some psychology basics.

Jung covered the subject pretty well and others expanded on it. To summarize, one's personality has 3 major coordinates: animus (the male aspect of the personality), anima (the female side) and umbra (the part of the personality that the person is in denial with/ the things he/she does not accept about him/her). Each person, regardless of gender has all 3 sides. A woman has animus and in some individuals traits of the opposite gender can be more proeminent than in others.

The theory (which I have frequently confirmed in real life) is that chemistry is generated when an individual meets his umbra (in translation that means shadow). For example, if a man has a very weak and dependant personality trait which he does not accept (because, for instance, he's trying to look alpha ;) ) and that man meets a woman with a dependant personality that encounter will produce chemistry. The psychological mechanics are pretty basic here. His reasoning is along these lines: "If this dependant woman likes me and has a relationship with me it is because I am strong and I can protect her". You see, the relationship has the purpose of proving that his ideal self is reality.

However, relationships based on umbra attraction are doomed to failure, because as soon as one of the partners is "cured" (meaning that he finally accepts his umbra) the attraction dissapears instantly.

Beware of such occurences and keep in mind that no one should enter a relationship to get something from it, but to bring something in it. Only a professional should be relied on for psychological counselling, not a significant other.

Cheers!:up:
 
Top