Mileage -numbercount. Your opinion. Is there such a thing as low-milage?

[Desdinova]

If a woman has had many partners and a man can make it to the top, could the relationship flourish? Or is she much more likely to screw it up before that happens?

If she's had a string of men who haven't made a deep emotional footprint in her, then it is possible to still get to the top. However, women generally pursue dominant sexual men who are desired by other women. If a man such as this fvcks her both emotionally and sexually and doesn't stay with her, then she becomes an alpha widow. An alpha widow becomes cursed because the man at the top of her high score list is no longer in her life.

And your saying she may be doomed to singledom the rest of her life? For a woman, this is doom.

Exactly. One-itis works differently for each sex. For a men, it's a temporary illness that can be cured by time and experience with new partners. For a woman, one-itis is a terminal illness. They generally do NOT get over these men.

I got that grim reality check where I just felt that girls 25 + mostly are done.

This was an extremely hard pill for me to swallow as well. Women in the 23-27 age bracket are my absolute favourite to date because they're done the party years and their maturity is at the highest point it will ever get. However, the window of opportunity is sadly closed on them because their desires were secured by the men they fvcked before age 23.

This is the conclusion I've come to when you're pursuing a woman for a LTR...

Age 18-23: Meet, seduce, fvck, establish commitment
Age 23-27: Enjoy the LTR, create memories, talk about the future
Age 27-32: Start making kids.

This is based on a woman's vulnerability in her younger years, her maturity in her mid-20s, and how her biological clock starts ticking in her late 20s to early 30s. This is IMO the only way to build a successful relationship and a family in today's age. If you meet her any later than age 23, you're going to run into trouble either with not getting into her fantasies and her pvssy soon enough for her to be committed, or have trouble with her urgency in dealing with the ticking biological clock.

With this model, you also have a good 10 year window to decide on whether you want to procreate with this woman or not. If you don't want to, then you alpha-widow her and fvck up her ability to have meaningful relationships in her future.

 

[Roober]

I completely agree with that.

I think that most men can make an emotional imprint on a naive virgin girl. That can be useful when selecting an appropriate woman for having kids.



Here is where I think otherwise.

The amount of work I have put in to creating emotional responses is unlike most men.

I moved her over the approach, messaging, and dates in a way that many men simply can't. The word she used a few times was "stimulating" (which on reading your stuff about emotional fluctuations, I take as the highest compliment).

Good luck to her finding another man in England who can scratch that itch.

It's important to remember that this is a sexual market-place. And any red-pill man should fancy himself the entrepreneur of it.

Therefore, we should be looking to outperform our rivals, in order to sell our product to the consumers that we want (HB's).

If you provide a unique experience that she can't get anywhere else, then you monopolize the market (or her particular high-score theory).

Look who made it back from the dead! Welcome back dude!

 

[MrAddiction]

I'm still confused as to why DJ's are encouraged to make the 'mileage/number count' go UP and then turn around and pass judgment on the female surrounding the very thing they encourage.

Women Do not have a high numbers count because of use few djs. Most of us came here in the First place because their disney fantasy got shattered by realitiy. DJing is a way to adapt action to reality, to the market and the true nature of women. Djs are told to spin plates and next fast because of the mature of Women and not because they aim to fcuk as many poon as possible. That would be the Pua way. The DJ way is more about weeding out to find a quality woman. And at least it is not the djs fault if he has to root throug lots of women to find there is no such thing as a quality woman.

 

[MrAddiction]

Look who made it back from the dead! Welcome back dude!

I second that! ..and appreciate to Welcome you back!

 

[MrAddiction]

Because a man opening locks is a master locksmith. A woman getting opened enough is just a crappy lock.

That is cool! Had to requote cuz a like was not enough;-)

 

[Roober]

Thanks, mate.

How's it going? You shagged a San Fran slvt yet?

Haha! Sadly no... got a plate I see once a week and the past couple weekends have been packed (had an interesting experience last weekend with some swingers...). I am going to cut back on the dating thing, and spend that time cold approaching more. Kind of broke it down in another thread "Observations...", but I need to be more selective in who I spend time with... My current plate is solid, but I imagine "the talk" is coming...

Found out my exgf was in fact branch swinging, kind of messed with my head a bit...

 

[sazc]

Not sure if you are just attention wh0ring, or what. You can't be that stupid.

You need simply take a look in the mirror if you want to see an example of that.

 

[fastlife]

@deesade @Desdinova

I think the missing link re: HST & various counter-experiences is self-esteem, which in a woman is super rare. I've met maybe a handful of girls whose lists were totally open--even though they had guys from their past who should've been on there given what we know about girls & alphas. What these girls had in common were that they had HSE and a genuine sense of self worth that extended beyond the appraisal of any guy; what they also had in common were (from what alpha fathers and a healthy view of sex vs. attachment. These women are slow to form attachments, but also quick to move on without chasing validation--and I think those qualities stay with them regardless of age & promiscuity (as opposed to girls who are externally bolstered by their youthfulness & hotness who later hit the wall much harder).

LSE women, on the other hand, never get over the guy(s) at the top--especially ones who treated them like sh1t. That devalidation matches their own self-concept they formed during childhood and really resonates with them. Unfortunately, that's probably 95% of our dating market in the U.S.--and they either can't attach or make very quick & superficial attachments.

It's important to remember that this is a sexual market-place. And any red-pill man should fancy himself the entrepreneur of it.

Therefore, we should be looking to outperform our rivals, in order to sell our product to the consumers that we want (HB's).

If you provide a unique experience that she can't get anywhere else, then you monopolize the market (or her particular high-score theory).

Agreed. Every guy should find his niche: What can I provide that no one else can or will? How do I market that effectively--and distinguish myself from other products on the market? What's my asking price? But I don't really resonate with the competitive aspect--or the idea of 'rivals.' I guess on some level we are all competing--but the competition is as direct/indirect as you want to make it. In my reality I'm the only guy--so I just focus on that.

 

[logicallefty]

A woman has two lay counts; the number of men she slept with and enjoyed, and the total number of men she slept with. Many women only speak of the 'enjoyed' number which is going to be 1/4th or 1/10th the total number. They can throw the other 75-90% into the hamster shredder in their mind and justify making them not exist in their version of reality.

 

[resilient]

Great points, @fastlife. I hadn't necessarily thought of alpha fathers + attachment theory + self esteem + HST. I had some thoughts and questions come to mind:

Most early relational, emotional bonding is built in her childhood. The bond is forged or is weakened depending on the love and affection received from the parents or lack thereof. Or in the general, the ability to self-sooth w/o requiring rescuing from crying when working on self esteem.

The Good Dad / Lower mileage

If the father had has sh!t together, provided well for the family, nurturing, had a back bone, then in theory, good mix of alpha/beta; the daughter should then look for a romantic relationship to mirror the respect held in the father = lower mileage? So in theory, the woman with a HSE should have lower mileage on her HST based on being more selective in who she decides to mate with by the nature of healthy emotional interpersonal boundaries, yes?

The Bad Dad / Higher mileage

Hence, you hear about "daddy issues" when a woman had an alcoholic father, workaholic/absent, swinger dad, abusive, etc. Parents divorced, blended families, makes it harder to form a solid bond with her, which would suggest higher mileage. Bonds may feel fast and fleeting, new dopamine/oxytocin sources (guys) needed to replenish her external validation of self. Meaning the "high"/feels felt in new relationship is fleeting with absence of a mature bond forming (post infatuation/honeymoon stage), so the "grass is greener scenario" starts, comparing, criticism, stonewalling, until a new guy enters the scene to distract her and start the process over.

The Grass Is Always Greener

*Edit* Also, @Desdinova, you would LOL so hard at this HuffPost piece on this married woman who has a good beta provider husband, yet is always obsessing over her ex-bf who got her mind/body engine revving hard, yet feels "meh" for her husband. -> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sheryl-paul/the-grass-is-always-green_1_b_1281590.html

 

[sazc]

Because men don't have unlimited options to pick and choose. They have to use discernment within their own sphere of influence. This is the hardest mental block for women to understand in my discussions with them. Multiple woman have been absolutely shocked when I told them how difficult it is for men who look like me to get a ons. Flattering but pure delusional projection.

A woman with decent looks can easily find a reasonably attractive good man if she has some looks. The dilemma for her is choosing between him and the maximally physically/personally attractive man who is generally of poorer character.

On the hand, a man of decent looks must search far and wide for anyone attractive period. If he is skilled enough he can attract multiple attractive women of poor character but it requires luck to attract the reasonable attractive good woman.

This is why most of the advice here is telling men to mimic what women are already naturally doing due to their multiple options.

Okay, I see what you are saying. It really wasnt till I got on here that understood the gravity of the situation. You are right. When I am active on OLD I am inundated with messages to the point where I will hide my profile so I can focus on 2, maybe 3, men without interruption. And, yes, I surely could get lad as much as I wanted, especially on any OLD. (no, I do not. random stranger sex has never been attractive to me)

So is part of the argument that females have more opportunity, so they should be more selective and, when they are not, it speaks to this idea of their quality, in the eyes of a male?

Women Do not have a high numbers count because of use few djs. Most of us came here in the First place because their disney fantasy got shattered by realitiy. DJing is a way to adapt action to reality, to the market and the true nature of women. Djs are told to spin plates and next fast because of the mature of Women and not because they aim to fcuk as many poon as possible. That would be the Pua way. The DJ way is more about weeding out to find a quality woman. And at least it is not the djs fault if he has to root throug lots of women to find there is no such thing as a quality woman.

This makes sense. I hadnt pulled the idea apart like that. It's difficult to tell who is commenting from a PUA angle vs. a DJ angle

 

[Pandora]

@deesade @Desdinova

I think the missing link re: HST & various counter-experiences is self-esteem, which in a woman is super rare. I've met maybe a handful of girls whose lists were totally open--even though they had guys from their past who should've been on there given what we know about girls & alphas. What these girls had in common were that they had HSE and a genuine sense of self worth that extended beyond the appraisal of any guy; what they also had in common were (from what alpha fathers and a healthy view of sex vs. attachment. These women are slow to form attachments, but also quick to move on without chasing validation--and I think those qualities stay with them regardless of age & promiscuity (as opposed to girls who are externally bolstered by their youthfulness & hotness who later hit the wall much harder).

This is very interesting. I think you are on to something.

 

[Desdinova]

The Good Dad / Lower mileage

If the father had has sh!t together, provided well for the family, nurturing, had a back bone, then in theory, good mix of alpha/beta; the daughter should then look for a romantic relationship to mirror the respect held in the father = lower mileage? So in theory, the woman with a HSE should have lower mileage on her HST based on being more selective in who she decides to mate with by the nature of healthy emotional interpersonal boundaries, yes?

I'm not agreeing either. What I've found is a bit different...

The presence of the father alone is generally what dictates how a woman treats a man. I've been with women who have rode the c0ck carousel and have their fathers securely involved in her life.

Self-esteem comes from self-perception and has more to do with her totalled childhood experience. If she was around peers who were pieces of 5hit and her parents were fvck ups, her self-esteem might be low. She also could've had parent who didn't give a 5hit about her but had peers who were very level-headed and supporting. I honestly don't think it's that easy to read a woman's self-esteem simply judging from the family she came from.

The only time I notice a huge difference is when she had a father who abandoned the family. The woman will have a permanent disrespect for men. She will still sexually desire them, but she won't have a clue how to be nurturing in a relationship.

The amount of work I have put in to creating emotional responses is unlike most men.

I moved her over the approach, messaging, and dates in a way that many men simply can't. The word she used a few times was "stimulating" (which on reading your stuff about emotional fluctuations, I take as the highest compliment).

Good luck to her finding another man in England who can scratch that itch.

It's important to remember that this is a sexual market-place. And any red-pill man should fancy himself the entrepreneur of it.

Therefore, we should be looking to outperform our rivals, in order to sell our product to the consumers that we want (HB's).

If you provide a unique experience that she can't get anywhere else, then you monopolize the market (or her particular high-score theory).

I agree 100% with you on this. Giving her the ultimate emotional experience is going to put you ahead of most men. Although emotional fluctuation can get you to shoot to the top of her HSL, I'm not convinced that it can overthrow the man at the top, especially if the woman is in her late 20s to early 30s, or if the guy at the top is still even somewhat actively involved in her life.

I pushed for emotional fluctuation on the women I was highly attracted to and had excellent results, but overthrowing the guy at the top was not possible. The only way I could see it being possible is to spend a very lengthy amount of time with the woman, and possibly break up with her once or twice. You have to be more of a d1ck to her, and you have to be more involved with her as well. It's something that I'm not sure I'd want to do. The woman gets older during the process and may even bring up the bad 5hit you did that you used to get to the top of her HSL. I honestly have no desire to put the time in to overthrow the guy at the top when it's much easier to get a younger woman, race to the top without treating her like crap, and actually enjoy the relationship.

There are lots of things you can do to cause emotional fluctuation in a woman, but the ultimate thing you can do to cause it is throw her away. That is the ultimate reason why she's an alpha widow, and the ultimate reason why there is a man at the top. So it's possible that you may be climbing to the very top of her HSL, but that only happens once you throw her away.

 

[Desdinova]

So, to go back to the original point, although I agree that the investment of playing a really great game isn't really worth it when properly considered. I would also suggest that every single man should go through a phase of spinning plates, and understanding how to push women's buttons - merely for the invaluable experience it provides.

There is a massive value in good game. My ultimate goal was to improve my game to a point where I could get damn near any woman I wanted. I did that, but I had to try figuring out what to do from that point on. What was the value of good game when all I could find was garbage women covered in tattoos who surrounded themselves with male orbiters?

When I started dating women in the 18-23 age range (without even consciously trying), I started seeing things that were different. No tattoos? No orbiters? What the hell is going on here??? This was more along the lines of what I wanted in a woman (and I'm a sucker for companionship). Although there's still plenty of garbage to find, it's not as polluted as the 25-35 age range.

This is where good game has started to reap its rewards. Being in my mid to late 30s and being able to get myself a 20 year old woman is fantastic. So now I'm able to get youth, non-vandalised skin, no fvcking AFC losers hanging around, no ex-BFs who are "just friends", and no kids from some other sperm donor. It also doesn't matter what my baggage is. The woman doesn't care because she feels that we belong together.

Men can ultimately have the win-win. It just takes a ton of work, patience, practice, persistence, self-reflection, and learning. I've been doing it for the last 15 years since I joined this site. I've made a lot of fvck ups, but that's the only way to victory.

 

[MrAddiction]

We should all be attempting to have our cake and eat it too. Anyone telling you that you can't, that you're not good enough, or that it's "immoral", or whatever, should be ignored like a fat woman.

The general message of this current society is "men should expect less and provide more" (blue pill). Any red-pill guy should flip that script, "men should expect more and provide less".

Could not agree more - but most man are willing to put up with way to much bull**** just for the sake to have a Women and not to be alone or seen as so called lonely loser by society. These man do not expect anything. They have got no selfrespect. They even got no balls anymore. They are in a glas in the handbag of their girlfriend for the purpose to be shown around to her girly friends.

Fcuk it! Better happy of alone - than putting up with that bullshsyt!

 

[Milano]

A woman has two lay counts; the number of men she slept with and enjoyed, and the total number of men she slept with. Many women only speak of the 'enjoyed' number which is going to be 1/4th or 1/10th the total number. They can throw the other 75-90% into the hamster shredder in their mind and justify making them not exist in their version of reality.

My ex can confirm this

 

[fastlife]

I'm not sure that I agree.

Furthering the market analogy, you can't sell something to a contented person.

You can sell quality. Someone already contented will still buy nice things--maybe luxury items--and not necessarily be in a hurry to shop around more. By no means a unicorn, but people with the means will take better care of a Maserati than people with necessity will take care of their Honda.

Also, most women with alpha fathers are often absent fathers by way of their jerkboy natures.

I should've specified--Alpha fathers who, whether they remained married to their mom or not, is still a part of their life. Most alpha fathers hit & quit--creating beautiful daughters with all sorts of issues. The overwhelming majority of present fathers are super beta, if not to their wives (and most are there, too) then to their daughter--put their daughters on pedestals, NAWALT her, mateguard her incessantly, feed her with unrealistic fantasies of a happy blue pill ending. These daughters might love their father, but don't respect him--and that dynamic creates the kind of cognitive dissonance that causes her to get hung up on jerkboy exes (which she doesn't think she wants and doesn't understand why she does) and run over nice guys who initially present the fantasy she's been conditioned toward (and she can't understand why she doesn't like them either).

Most early relational, emotional bonding is built in her childhood. The bond is forged or is weakened depending on the love and affection received from the parents or lack thereof. Or in the general, the ability to self-sooth w/o requiring rescuing from crying when working on self esteem.

The Good Dad / Lower mileage

If the father had has sh!t together, provided well for the family, nurturing, had a back bone, then in theory, good mix of alpha/beta; the daughter should then look for a romantic relationship to mirror the respect held in the father = lower mileage? So in theory, the woman with a HSE should have lower mileage on her HST based on being more selective in who she decides to mate with by the nature of healthy emotional interpersonal boundaries, yes?

Lower emotional mileage.* The girls I've met with genuinely high self esteem were all probably slightly above average as far as their kill count went; but they view sex as something independent from commitment, generally understood why they had made the decisions or been attracted and why things didn't work out. Basically a high degree of male empathy and an understanding of her female nature, so they don't get caught up on guys that didn't want them. Again, they had never been pedestalized by their fathers; and their fathers, being natural alphas, pretty much viewed sex as no big deal & held their daughters accountable to make their own decisions. These are the girls who've said things like, "Look, I know you have to see other girls and that's OK," and actually meant it--since their self-worth was independent of my philandering & they understood it was just my nature.

Needing to have "the talk" is symptomatic of LSE--those girls need the validation of that commitment or the security of understanding where they stand.

I'm sure there are some HSE girls with low partner counts--but I haven't met any girls with low partner counts the past 2-3 years. Think of a bell curve re: partner count. I this LSE girls probably are mostly at the high end of the curve (typically slvts) or the extremely low end (body image issues, guilt, underdeveloped social skills). Some of those girls might make super loyal, if slightly clingy, partners, like @deesade's cousin. I think in general, if you're looking for monogamy, low partner count isn't a bad place to start--but I'm not sure those attachments would be as stable as finding a girl whose identity/self-worth wasn't tied up in her sexuality. Not anything I've field-tested long term, except I can say that girls who've been totally abandoned by their fathers aren't

Self-esteem comes from self-perception and has more to do with her totalled childhood experience. If she was around peers who were pieces of 5hit and her parents were fvck ups, her self-esteem might be low. She also could've had parent who didn't give a 5hit about her but had peers who were very level-headed and supporting. I honestly don't think it's that easy to read a woman's self-esteem simply judging from the family she came from.

Agreed. It's not just as cut and dry as--Oh, father at home, she's a unicorn. But as far as self-esteem, the girls I know with high self-esteem--and it's an admittedly small sample size--all had dads in the picture who treated them the way girls need to be treated--teasing, calling out their bullsh1t, passing sh1t tests, prioritizing their own life purpose. Several of those dads were still married to mom; several had upgraded to younger, hotter models; but they were in the picture and their daughters hadn't been poisoned against them.

 

[Desdinova]

These are the girls who've said things like, "Look, I know you have to see other girls and that's OK," and actually meant it--since their self-worth was independent of my philandering & they understood it was just my nature.

If a woman said that to me, I'd probably see it either as a red flag or low interest. That kind of feedback would tell me I've done something wrong, whether it be choosing the wrong woman or I haven't seduced her enough to a point where she wants to hang on to me. She wouldn't even be considered for a relationship.

I firmly believe that women are extremely competitive creatures, moreso than men. I've seen women do crazy things solely to compete with other women. I've had them damn near fighting over sleeping with me but it wasn't because they had high interest in me, it was because they wanted to be the winner. I honestly believe that is the only reason why I ended up married. She saw how many women were interested in me and decided she wanted to be the winner. Once she had the ring on her finger, she quit bothering with the relationship.

Lower emotional mileage.

That's an interesting phrase, but if I were to attach that concept to women, they'd all be high mileage. I'd have to go with the term "emotional resistance". This happens when women expose themselves to certain levels of drama just for the excitement of it. The more they expose themselves to it, the more emotional resistance they get. You have to game the fvck out of these women to get them remotely interested in being with you, unless you have money, fame, or looks that trigger their emotions.

 

[EyeBRollin]

I don't bother wanting to know body count. I am optimistic about my current 21 year old girlfriend because she is inexperienced in relationships which allows me a firmer imprint on her memory banks (credit to @Desdinova for the inspiration). I was previously only messing with "seasoned" women between 25-35, but they are far dulled to the whole dating experience. My girl naively worships the ground I walk on and I'm pretty sure "emotional mileage" has a lot to do with it.

 

[BeExcellent]

This is an area where perspective REALLY matters.

Think of it as an opportunity decision tree:

Hot woman perspective:

Option A: Common
Every man wants sex...decide to have sex with numerous men...perceive reputation as sl ut...self esteem craters...men use her because she is hot...self esteem suffers more...woman ends up with high number, inability to bond, damaged goods. Eventually settled & misses alpha widow men or those whom she loved early etc. (HST).

Option B: Rare (less rare in younger women)
Every man wants sex...woman knows this and understands her value...woman is selective about man whom she chooses from...man sees her value because of her selectivity...woman pair bonds to man and retains low or exclusive partner count.

Option C: Rare
Every man wants sex...woman starts down path A and reverses course OR starts down path B and gets really hurt...she evaluates what has happened and WHY/HOW it happened. But as @fastlife alludes to in his post, she seeks her own self awareness and builds an unassailable self esteem & value independent of a man's assessment. She then may retain her ability to bond at an older age than 23 or with a higher partner count. But this has everything to do with her seeking her own self awareness and young women with self awareness are extremely unusual.

Typically women just branch swing & don't examine why.

I was an Option B girl who waited into my 20s for sex and thought I was going to marry the first real boyfriend I had more than 2 years as college graduation neared. He cheated & branch swung & left. I was devastated. I had waited, been selective and done the "right" thing. So I thought ok, screw it, I'm going to enjoy myself and my looks/body...only I couldn't bring myself to do that. I was petrified of pregnancy, of STDs, of getting hurt. More than that I was SUPER petrified about getting a "bad rep". The values and virtues from my upbringing and the fears and risks were drilled deep into who I was, but like the guys who come here, my Disney fantasy got dashed too.

Even so I cringed at things my guy friends bragged about on Sunday afternoons watching football while telling stories about adventures with women earlier in the weekend. My buddies were players. I saw how they ran through women & although I could have dated them I had zero interest in that.

No way in hell was I going to be known as a sl ut or be *that who re* I heard my buddies comparing notes on while watching the game. The idea of that was gross. It taught me a lot. So I got over my college LTR and dated carefully, always looking for the right combination of excitement and sexuality and real interest in me as a person as well as self sufficiency.

Was I an alpha widow? For a little while. The experience ended up badly with him such that I didn't want that ever again but I didn't feel attraction nor the desire to settle for beta men either. That first BF never crosses my mind and I get a disgusted taste in my mouth if I think about him. But I healed myself and moved on. I developed patience to find the right sort of man.

Women can REMOVE men from the HST if we want to consider that paradigm. Few women gain the self awareness to do it, but it can be done.

I would argue that widows who pair bond to a man after losing their husband have to if not remove, then make room for someone else, and some women who are widowed never do.

My mother in law is an example of this. She was suddenly widowed in her late 30s, never even dated anyone else, and her late husband was the only man she was ever intimate with. She would actually turn down offers for dates by saying no one will ever compare to my ex husband.

So she was loyal to him and him only in life and after his death. She still adores him and the anniversary of his death is a date akin to a birthday every year. It's a personal Memorial Day in our family.

As per normal I've run long. I think HST is useful, and widely applicable but like @deesade and fast life I do not find it universally true.

Things seem to have run their course with my recent Hollywood man, who I saw for nearly 2 years. I got over the infatuation phase, came to love him but I knew eventually things would fizzle since we each kept our lives separate and he has got to pick up his life post divorce. I chose to love him anyway and I am not hurt but rather happy to know him & happy to have provided him love and support during a dark period in his life.

I have unassailable self esteem that fastlife talks about. If I love it is from a full and giving place and I do it freely, even though it may hurt in the end. It is a choice and while I remain selective and slow to attach, I taught myself years ago I must not FEAR to attach. So I can bond and frankly prefer to see potential for bonding before I'll get sexual.

I did have a great date (dinner date) two days ago with a man who seems very cool. And yes I offered & no he didn't let me pay. We went for drinks after dinner...had club sodas at a swank place. They didn't even charge us. And yes he kiss closed & seems to be a good kisser. Still have to get a thread going about good versus not good kissing...

Welcome back deesade