Over 50% of wives cheat

[jnMissouri]

All of this arguing is pointless. I've got news for you. MOST PEOPLE CHEAT. If you want to get married, do it. If not, don't. I personally won't get married since I have money and feel the opposite sex is not to be trusted (after all, they can get hit on without fault on their own until they run into a guy who has a ton of game and they are attracted to more and willing to risk it for), and tying the penalty of losing half your assets or raising a child that isn't yours no matter WHAT she does, with NO benefit in return is pointless IMO. If she cheats, she get's half your stuff, if you cheat, she get's half your stuff.

In comparison, if you hit on other women while you are married, you are cheating emotionally or trying to cheat. She has the advantage in that she can sit back and look good and be hit on until she finds a guy she wants to have a fling with and claim that it's not her fault other guys hit on her whereas if you hit on other women you are breaking the rules even without having sex with any of them. The only way I would get married would be if she had a ton of money and in that case, if *I* cheat, I STILL win. Marriage is frankly a losing proposition for most men, especially those who have money. Attraction is not a choice after all, it is something that overpowers logic. Humans are not creatures of logic but emotion, we make decisions based on emotion and then rationalize them.

 

[The411]

Typical KJ analogy.

The kid has no choice but to follow his parents rules. He can't choose new parents. Countries? Yeah, people come into this Country all the time, illegally. Not much good that boundary is doing is it? SS's terms and conditions? They're a joke. People break those "boundaries" all the time. Nothing happens to them. Those boundaries are set but people keep breaking them. You yourself, 411, admitted to having previous usernames. Did you get banned? What happened there. You came back and are still posting like the keyboard warrior you truly are. And, yeah, employer's do set boundaries, those get broken too. People come in late, slack off, fvck around. Then they quit when they find a better job, or get fired. So what?

You have no point here. Your analogy has nothing to do with attraction or the male/female relationship dynamic. Your analogy is idiotic.

^^^^.

Awwww you mad? Everything is an 'insecure boundary'.

Nowhere and everywhere. God is dead. I want pvssy. The polyamorous Peaks&Zarky. The keyboard couch drifter has spoken.

 

[Peaks&Valleys]

^^^^.

Awwww you mad? Everything is an 'insecure boundary'.

Nowhere and everywhere. God is dead. I want pvssy. The polyamorous Peaks&Zarky. The keyboard couch drifter has spoken.

Nice rebuttal, great points, you got me. At least it wasn't the typical copy and paste job you're usually so good at.

 

[VikingKing]

:trouble: :trouble: :trouble: :box: :box: :box: Oh here we go, now to the name calling.

LOUD NOISES!!!!!

 

[jurry]

The moment a woman loses attraction for you whether its because of something you did or didn't do, or if she simply finds some one else more attractive, her "morals" and "conviction" will go out the window. This is how most women are.

Stop being a white knight.

Exactly right, which is why the boundary/exclusivity discussion serves no purpose. Either she wants to be with you or she has moved on, both of which will be evident in her behavior. If she does move on, whatever expectations or precedent you have set prior makes no difference, shes done! This isnt a business contract.

 

[Soolaimon]

The problem with lil Sooli is that he's attempting to speak as the authority on boundaries when he isn't the authority on boundaries in the first place. If lil Sooli is going to make an argument based on authority he'd have to first prove he is the authority.

I've slept with taken women who cheated on their boyfriends breaking their useless boundaries with ease so I know they don't work. Boundaries are useless. If you knew any better and had experience with that you would know they are useless.

Solly's point can only stem from 3 mindsets.

Scarcity: Where there is a fear that the women will walk away and cannot be replaced.

Perverted equalism: Where men are not allowed to have expectations of women they commit to.

All women are low-quality: There is no point in filtering women because they are all low-quality.

What's with you lying all the time? This is your mindset. Why are you projecting your fears on me?

You don't even know what you are saying or understand anything.

I fear making bad investments.

You are the one with fear. You fear a woman cheating on you. This is what you said. Your woman is the bad investment you are in fear of.


1. I don't care if she walks away. That is why I don't need boundaries to contain her out of fear like you do.

That is her free will to do so. If she walks away I will replace her. I've said this many times. Why are you lying again?

You need a boundary to contain her cause you are terrified of her other men.


2. I already have my expectations of what I expect from a woman.

My woman has already met my expectations without me having to ask her like you have to do.

Is that too difficult for you to comprehend?

Learn something about having High Value where women will do what you want without having to prod them to do it like you do.


3. I've never said all women are low quality. Where did you get that from? That's what you said.

Your false premise is that women don't know what is acceptable for a relationship.

I filter my women before I become exclusive with them.

You have a short term memory or a reading comprehension problem.

You keep repeating these same false claims over and over.

You have no clue what you are even saying.

This proves it again.

Soolaimon makes a good point that she could lie to you and no matter what boundary you can't control her. But I don't see the harm in throwing out there what you expect from her if she is trying to get your commitment. This way it is easier to let her go if she ****s up.

Telling her what you expect is fine.

It's a waste of time when she doesn't care to follow your expectations.

The taken women I slept with didn't care to follow their boyfriend's expectations. They still slept with me anyway. That didn't work out too well for the boyfriends did it?

I already have expectations of what I expect from her.

If she doesn't meet them I dump her.

Women are smart enough to know what a relationship is supposed to be.

I don't think Soolaimon is saying to let her take advantage of you.

Of course not.

I'm saying setting a boundary in January is a waste of time when in November she might not care to follow your boundary.

It's all about respect, interest, and attraction.

When she loses that your relationship is over with or without a boundary.

Soola, jurry, and exception you are way to sympathetic to women. You are either ignorant men (who may be choosing to stay ignorant) or you're women who screech nawalt.

More ignorance here.

Where's the sympathy at?

If she is not behaving I dump her. How is that being sympathetic?

Women are going to do what they want.

Setting a bunch of rules of what you expect isn't going to work when she doesn't care to follow them.

Get some experience with women so you know how they actually behave.

I doubt you even get laid.

Again I ask, why are you so against taking 1 minute to define exclusivity when she requests it?

Cause smart intelligent classy women don't need to have exclusivity defined for them. They are smart enough to know what exclusivity already is.

Women want a high value man. When they have him they only want him. You don't have to waste your time with definitions cause you can get more women if they don't behave. It's not serious to me like it is to you. That is your scarcity mindset talking.

Who cares what she requests. If I don't want to be exclusive I decline unlike you who contains her to a boundary that she may not choose to follow.

It's about what I want. Not what SHE wants. You are becoming exclusive cause SHE wants it and you try to define your terms to her.

You can define exclusivity all you want. When she decides to fvk another man she won't care about your terms, definitions, boundaries, exclusivity.

Gain some experience with women first so you know this stuff.

 

[jurry]

Spoken like someone who thinks the main purpose of a boundary is to keep her from cheating.


Again I ask, why are you so against taking 1 minute to define exclusivity when she requests it?

Its not that im against it, its that I dont understand what would motivate you to do it. Everyone knows what it means. For you to make it into this multi pointed presentation of your expectations is pretty bizarre. Every relationship involves risk and vulnerability. Every hot girl you date is going to be approached by other men, will have "orbiters" at work hoping to get with her, etc. The man of abundance doesnt give a fvck because he knows and she shows him that he is what she wants. And he also knows and shows her (subtly) that he can replace her in a minute if he wants, and is not scared of losing her.

What kills attraction for hot women is when their bf loses his cool, starts getting all puppydog on her, and she sees how scared he is of losing her, and that she can do better. And at that point all the definitions and expectations you have set amount to precisely nothing.

Edit: sool posted same time I did didnt see that, sorry about making similar points.. But i agree with what he says.

 

[TheException]

Every relationship involves risk and vulnerability. Every hot girl you date is going to be approached by other men, will have "orbiters" at work hoping to get with her, etc. The man of abundance doesnt give a fvck because he knows and she shows him that he is what she wants. And he also knows and shows her (subtly) that he can replace her in a minute if he wants, and is not scared of losing her.

Not the boundary folk bro......

They set them boundaries to manage their "risk" (buzzword)....because you know.....women are to be treated like a financial investment. Duh.

Lol.....the need to feel "in control" of their women is one of the biggest signs of insecurity.

 

[The411]

I've slept with taken women who cheated on their boyfriends breaking their useless boundaries with ease so I know they don't work. Boundaries are useless. If you knew any better and had experience with that you would know they are useless. .

Did you break all those boundaries by being "attractive" in the Coffee shop? LMAO.

Not getting married is a boundary.

Getting married has boundaries.

Dating has boundaries.

Not wanting to be exclusive is a boundary you place on yourself.

Unfortunately for you kid, there's no escaping boundaries since you are unable to break your own boundary of going in circles about boudaries. Like it or not.

 

[Evan]

He's not talking about escaping boundaries and not having them. He's talking about not needing to verbalize them. Women have free will and imposing your boundaries on her is useless because she will do what she wants to do. I would even say that some women would feel more dread if you said nothing and allowed her freedom to do what she wanted.

Because if you don't fear her cheating and know you are able to find another women she will be the one thinking about losing you. So she will be the one discussing exclusivity if she doesn't want to lose you. So the meaning of what is "exclusive" is not needed to bring up. In fact it only proves that you also fear losing her. Imposing your boundaries or values on her only begins a negotiation on what commitment means. When that shouldn't be necessary.

If you use the excuse that women can't be trusted then why would you even need to bring up your values and boundaries to begin with? If you can't trust women why would you even need to bring up boundaries? It sounds like a last shot at hope that you can trust her. I think that you can't change or impose what you think the way the world should work on others. She is more likely to be dishonest if any cheating does happen. She knows that it could risk her relationship with you and what you provide for her. We know that her actions are the biggest forms of female communication of truth. If she is around a lot and acting the way you want her to then she is actually earning your time. If she is off cheating she's likely not going to value your time as much.

So i think I side more with soolaimon and jurry here. I know what danger is talking about but find verbalizing your boundaries to be useless. You can throw them out there but likely she will still do what she wants.

 

[sylvester the cat]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jaAgAFLtL0

 

[zekko]

Women don't. The fact that you do not recognize this shows how young and inexperience you are. Backbreaker posted yet another example of this today.[/QUOTE}
Good point about Backbreaker's thread. The girl is devastated that she is losing most of her orbiters. Clearly she meant to keep them, even though she got engaged.

If you are believing it is to keep her from "doing what she wants", then you are only buying into the straw-men that the anti-boundary group keeps building

Yeah, no offense to you, Evan, but if you are arguing that a boundary will not keep her from doing what she wants, you don't really understand the argument that the "pro boundary side" is making.

 

[jurry]

You're presenting this like you are just some passive victim to the whims of women, trying to hold on and hope they dont cheat on you. Reread the above posts, when a woman finds a man of value that she wants, she will do all the things you are expecting on her own. If her attraction is high this conversation will never need to take place, because it will he obvious.

We would get into a commitment with them because we know and can see how they feel about us, and that them being able to do what they want means only wanting to be with us at that time.

As evan points out above, it is your mindset that has no reason to be committed with a woman. If you cant trust a woman as you say, then what difference is having the definition discussion going to have? Either you trust her or you dont trust her, it cant be both.

The only scenario I can envision this kind of discussion needing to come up is if you are dealing with an extremely immature girl (most likely with mental issues) that needs to be totally dominated in every aspect of her life, and constantly kept in check. While this type of girl is generally amazing in bed, it does not make for a healthy relationship and I think youd be in for lot more than you bargain for in the long run.

 

[Evan]

Remember, the primary purpose of the boundary is to filter out women with different values, and to communicate and be clear upon what the definition of exclusive is.

I realize that but I don't really see the point in talking about the definition of exclusive. Even if you have this discussion with them it doesn't mean she's going to cater to what you want. Sure your filtering but in my honest opinion what you call filtering can be done best by watching her actions and then doing what you want. Letting only certain people in your life that you want. In some cases that doesn't have realistic boundaries are limiting. You can say whatever you want it doesn't mean anything. In fact women find it suffocating if a man slaps rules on her. Beautiful and attractive women have abundance. They can find a guy who they really like who doesn't have rules.

Solly says a girl who respects you will never hang out with other men.Exceptions girl hangs out with other men.Peaks girl hangs out with other men.Jurry thinks the same as Solly, but they both avoid the facts on Exception and Peaks, and avoid the backbreaker and Exceptions example because it demolishes their narrative.

More importantly, from their point of view it is FAR MORE important that only for girls do you not have any expectations, define exclusivity or have any sort of rules. This is madness, plain and simple. The women don't have to follow your rules, but you MUST filter for women who do not share the same values as you, or who openly believe they can and should do as they wish.

So what if women hang out with other men! Your boundary isn't going to stop her. If you think it will then by all means verbalize the boundary. Filtering women who you want and don't want are important things to do but if you think your boundary is going to make her more attracted and stuck to you for the long haul your mistaken. Women are social creatures. They love talking to other men and women. A boundary doesn't stop that.

If women will "only do what they want", then why are you guys getting into a commitment with them anyways? What is the point? You are only handcuffing yourselves and if she wants to fvk only you, or spend time only with you, she will do it anyways. So why put the chains on? What is the benefit. 

Why is this discussion even happening if all women will only ever do what they want without regard? Why would ANY man commit to a woman when this is the case for all women?

Me personally I don't think women are monogamous creatures. People aren't monogamous. We want to meet many people. We are attracted to multiple people and would like to sleep with them. Women are no different. I believe that if you negotiate what commitment is then your giving your buying into her frame.

She wants to lock you up so that you won't **** other girls while you think she won't **** other guys. None of this is guaranteed. She will never tell you what happens with her if it means a disrespect of the boundary you set on her. One day she meets a guy who is more attractive than you. She still won't tell you because likely he isn't going to give her the time she would like. So no harm done to your relationship the hamster says.

Hypergamy doesn't care about your boundary. The world doesn't care about your boundary. It's for you to know and only you. Let your actions do the talking.

 

[VikingKing]

You're presenting this like you are just some passive victim to the whims of women, trying to hold on and hope they dont cheat on you. Reread the above posts, when a woman finds a man of value that she wants, she will do all the things you are expecting on her own. If her attraction is high this conversation will never need to take place, because it will he obvious.

We would get into a commitment with them because we know and can see how they feel about us, and that them being able to do what they want means only wanting to be with us at that time.

As evan points out above, it is your mindset that has no reason to be committed with a woman. If you cant trust a woman as you say, then what difference is having the definition discussion going to have? Either you trust her or you dont trust her, it cant be both.

The only scenario I can envision this kind of discussion needing to come up is if you are dealing with an extremely immature girl (most likely with mental issues) that needs to be totally dominated in every aspect of her life, and constantly kept in check. While this type of girl is generally amazing in bed, it does not make for a healthy relationship and I think youd be in for lot more than you bargain for in the long run.

Stop defending women, and blaming men from everything. Even a "good" woman can cheat on you, and hide it well. Even your woman could cheat on you at any time. They can change on you real quick.

 

[jurry]

Danger youve got to be kidding me, how many times have you contradicted yourself in one post.

The same guy who has been going on page after page about how important it is to DEFINE EXCLUSIVITY is now saying that a high value man "could not care less whether he is exclusive with her".

If you dont care then WHY ARE YOU GOING ON AND ON ABOUT DEFINING IT! You shouldnt give a shît, if she is digging you you'll know it, if she lost attraction you'll know it. Either way you got a million more girls behind her. Next. Done. No girl has ever pushed for exclusivity with a high value man then been like "oh wait what that means we dont date other people im so confused glad you cleared that up for me".

Ahh man im done lol see you in the next thread.

 

[synergy1]

I don't see how this issue is getting people bent out of shape. We continually stress about spinning plates and fvcking multiple women, but get buthurt once women do the same thing. I would love to pull the data and check to see who cheats more, and by how much...but those facts aren't readily available to us. Odds are, both cheat the same amount making this issue completely moot.

I'll be the first to say that it is a painful truth to realize that your girl might cheat on you for a better guy. I hate to think there is someone better than me in certain aspects in life, but its always true. Its that whole red pill thing where the truth aint pretty, but there is no point *****ing about it. Life isn't fair.

 

[Soolaimon]

The primary purpose of a boundary is to inform her of your expectations and the definition of exclusivity.

She must be reminded of this because a large number of women think they can date other men while being committed.

Your same false premise argued with your same thin argument.

Since you have no High Value you can't understand what women want.

Women don't date other men when she already has a High Value man. There is no reason to.

The only reason women date other men during commitment is cause the man she is currently with has low value. She will soon dump him for a better man.

You can remind her all you want. When she doesn't care to listen to what you say she will still date other men anyway.

You sure are ignorant.

It's just a fake power trip for you cause your reminders comes from insecurity.

Deny it all you want, but it happens and there is constant proof of it daily. And you can go ahead and make up all of the reasons being about keeping her from cheating, but in the end you know that is not the argument I am making. You are just too cowardly to keep it on that topic as you know you are losing

You lost the argument in the last thread. Everybody can see that here too. The majority of people agree with me including the moderator.

Your argument is thin.

There shouldn't even be an argument. I'm talking common sense. You are speaking nonsense.

You can demand, remind, set your terms and definitions all you want with her.

If she doesn't care to follow them it is a waste of your time. She will do what she wants.

When your relationship is done your terms and definitions meant nothing.

Who is lying? The only reason to not communicate this definition to them is because of....

Scarcity mindset
Perverted sense of equalism
Belief that all women are low-quality and therefore it is pointless

These aren't lies, these are the base sets of the arguments I have heard for being against spending one minute to tell her your definition of exclusivity when she asks for it.

You are lying like you have been in 4 threads now projecting all the time.

You repeat the same lies over and over again with your thin useless argument quoting other posters.

I've never said any of that.

You are putting boundaries on one woman out of fear.

Women are scarce for you so you try to contain your one woman the best you can.

Me I don't care.

If she misbehaves I dump her. It isn't that serious to me cause I can get other women
whenever I want.

I've never ever said all women are low quality. That's what you are saying.

I'm arguing that smart women know what an exclusive relationship is cause they are high quality.

You need to set boundaries defining behavior to your one woman.

That means she is low quality not knowing what to do and how to behave.

You contradict yourself lying over and over again projecting.

Everybody can see it. You don't even know what you are saying or arguing.

This is hilarious!

I fear a bad investment. Women who have a different definition of exclusivity or different values are a bad investment.

Yes you are riddled with fear and scared to death of your woman cheating on you. That is why you are terrified of marrying her aren't you?.

We all know that you are all about fear cause you need insecure boundaries.

Thanks for confirming that to all of us again.

Then you shouldn't commit to a woman who has a different definition of exclusivity.

That is your fault.

If you had high value and a lot of women you could choose from you wouldn't have to define terms and worry about this stuff. The women would define your terms for you instead like mine did.

You commit to one women that shows interest cause that is all you can get.

You try to contain her to your terms out of fear even when she has a different definition of exclusivity.

That is why you need your boundary cause of insecurity.

This is inarguable. If you want to say it is a fear of cheating, go right ahead. It doesn't change the fact that they are a bad-investment if they have different values or different definitions.

That's not a problem for me cause I don't commit to hors. I just fvk them for fun. I don't try to contain them to boundaries out of fear like you do

You can't argue with that, so your only weapon is the shame-gun.

Come up with a better logical argument sugar.

The fact is, you are a pu$$Y who is afraid she will walk away.

You are lying again.

More projection coming from you.

You are the one shaming me. Look at those weak feminist shaming words by you.

Hilarious!

Your argument is as thin as your experience with women.

Calling you insecure and afraid is not shaming you. That is the truth. I'm not the only one saying that about you. Almost everybody else is saying it too.

I don't care if she walks away. YOU DO, because you are TERRIFIED of taking one minute in defining exclusivity when she requests it.

You sound angry with more projection repeating your same thin argument.

Your thin projection argument has failed. Everybody sees that.

I don't care if she walks away cause I'm not containing her to an insecure boundary like you are.

She is smart enough to know what exclusivity already is cause she is high quality.

You need to define your terms to a low quality woman cause you are scared of her cheating on you.

You can define your terms all you want.

When she gets tired of you she will leave you after you already defined your terms.

Who cares what a woman requests.

I'm only going to become exclusive with her if I want to be exclusive with her on my terms.

You are committing to her on her request trying to impose your terms on her.

That is very weak and shows you have no other options and no value.

But, because you can't argue with the filtering or the value argument I make, you have to try and say it is "controlling" or "containing". The fact is, you are a pu$$Y who is afraid she will walk away.

I've already argued against it in detail. You repeat your same vague weak answers. Everybody sees that.



I filter women before I decide to commit to them.

The women show me their intentions by cutting out other men from their lives.

That shows me they are defining my own terms of exclusivity to me.

They are giving me what I want without me having to tell them.

That shows me they know what they really want and are firm in their decision about exclusitivity.

Are you that ignorant with a lack of comprehension to understand that?

Get some experience in dealing with women having high value.




If you weren't such a big pvssy you would put a ring on your woman's finger and marry her.

What do you have to be afraid of?

You defined your terms and contained her to your boundary.

Put your money where your mouth is.

Marry her.

I am not lying. This is the only possible reason you would be so terrified of stating the definition of exclusivity.

Yes you are lying in every post.

You are terrified of your woman cheating.

The reason you need insecure useless boundaries.

You are still terrified of your woman cheating. The reason you are scared to marry her.

WHY ARE YOU SO AFRAID OF A ONE-MINUTE STATEMENT OF YOUR DEFINTION OF EXCLUSIVITY WHEN SHE REQUESTS IT????

WHY IS THIS SOOOOO BAD AND SCARY?

GIVE US A REASON.....WHY?


I don't have to ask her, I remove ambiguity. Why? Because I have enough value that I am not scared of doing so.

TELL US AGAIN WHY YOU ARE SOOOO TERRIFIED OF A ONE-MINUTE DEFINITION OF EXCLUSIVITY WHEN SHE REQUESTS IT?

Why are you so angry?

I don't care what a woman requests. Why do you care so much?

When I have no intentions of becoming exclusive there is no point of defining any terms is there?

I want women to define my terms to me through their own actions.

Haven't you ever heard the phrase "Judge a woman by her actions and not her words"?

You are only going by her words telling you that she agrees.

Months later when she loses interest she won't care about your definition and will cheat.

My woman has proven to me with her actions of cutting men out on her own that I have high value and that she understands what an exclusive relationship is.

There is no need to define it to her when she already has done what I wanted.

I have a maid that cleans my house once a week. Why would I clean my house myself after she did what I wanted? Same thing with my woman.

You have no value that's why you need to define your insecurities to a woman that never bothered to cut other men out cause of your low value.

My way is better and I'm not terrified like you are of her straying with other men.

Put a ring on her finger and marry her if you aren't so scared.

Women don't. The fact that you do not recognize this shows how young and inexperience you are. Backbreaker posted yet another example of this today.

I filter them too. I am just not so stupid and terrified about it as you are.

Now you are saying that women don't know any better and are low quality.

You have no clue what you are even saying. Contradictions in each sentence.

One example of one woman isn't how all women are.

Your argument has failed everybody can see it that reads it.

Quit projecting in each sentence.

Up your value as a man and marry your woman!

 

[zekko]

I realize that but I don't really see the point in talking about the definition of exclusive.

Would you sign a business contract without knowing the meaning of the contract? This whole approach is absolutely insane to me. Insane! It makes no sense.

Beautiful and attractive women have abundance. They can find a guy who they really like who doesn't have rules.

And they are free to do so. Let them go do as they please. They don't have to agree to be in an exclusive relationshiip to me (which THEY want in the first place). But if they are going to be with me, then we at least have to agree on our values.

That aside, I don't agree with your premise. EVERY guy has rules and expectations in a relationship, whether it be the girl not fvcking the neighbor, or the girl not spending his money, or the girl not smoking all his weed, whatever it is that couples fight about. EVERY guy expects some minimum baseline of behavior.

Women are social creatures. They love talking to other men and women. A boundary doesn't stop that.

I have no problem with my girl talking to other men. As I've said before, my line is that they do not start spending one on one time with them. Because that, IMO, is inappropriate in a committed relationsip.

Me personally I don't think women are monogamous creatures. People aren't monogamous.

Here the truth comes out. This discussion is SPECIFICALLY and ONLY about exclusive relationships. I've said repeatedly that most of the anti-boundary crowd is not interested in exclusive relationships themselves, or like you, do not believe in them anyway. How can you make an argument about monogamous relationships when you don't believe in them in the first place?

I am not the one saying she can't be trusted. It is YOUR camp saying she will do as she wishes.

Exactly. THEY are the ones saying the girl will do what she wants regardless. Therefore, there is no reason to get into an exclusive relationship in the first place, because she is going to cheat whenever she wants to. An exclusive relationship IS A BOUNDARY IN ITSELF!

Now the truth is, as long as her interest is high, she will comply with the relationship. But at least if she knows my expectations, I shall have the relationship that I want as long as her interest remains high. And if her interest drops, then she can be replaced.

My opinion is that her interest is more likely to drop if she is encouraged to see other men, because that pushes her into situations of temptation. I think it is Peaks who believes that setting the boundary will make the fruit seem more "forbidden", thus increasing the odds that her interest will drop. We can agree to disagree there. But regardless of that, if she messes up, she can be replaced.

For three posts now you have failed to address the point on Peaks and Exceptions position where their girls go and hang with their orbiters (date), and backbreaker's example where a recently engaged woman was sad her orbiters fled upon her engagement.

You can add London Towers to the list, as his post linked to below describes his LTR with a girl who continued to see her ex. Clearly many, many women consider it completely okay and appropriate to continue to see other men while in a relationship. And Exception thinks so too.

http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=221804

 

[Soolaimon]

I am not the one saying she can't be trusted. It is YOUR camp saying she will do as she wishes.

She doesn't know any better so when the time comes that she wants to, she will engage in behavior unacceptable for a committed relationship.

Most girls have never been taught was is respectful in a relationship.

It's clear you have no idea what you are talking about here.

Another contradiction to your fallacy argument.

If you trusted her you wouldn't need your insecure boundary.

You are saying she can't be trusted. That is why you need a boundary to contain her.

We don't need a boundary cause we already trust her.

Are you that freaking ignorant?

You say she doesn't know any better. You can't trust her.

Every human can do what they wish in a free country. That's what makes us humans. Men and women have free will.

Smart intelligent women know what is acceptable for a relationship.

Your projecting and ignorance is amazing!

Exactly. THEY are the ones saying the girl will do what she wants regardless. Therefore, there is no reason to get into an exclusive relationship in the first place, because she is going to cheat whenever she wants to. An exclusive relationship IS A BOUNDARY IN ITSELF!

Another guy who repeats himself with his fallacy cause he can't understand.

I've already explained this to you in the last thread. Did you forget already?

Women won't cheat when you have high value and she is attracted to you.

Can you understand that part?

When she loses interest she will look for other men and cheat.

Are you following me?

That will happen whether you set a boundary or not.

It's about attraction and interest not a verbal boundary you set months earlier.

Months later her feelings might change if she isn't into you.

That will happen with or without a boundary.

That means your boundary was useless when she broke it.

Does that finally sink in or are you going to repeat this same fallacy projecting again?

Your boundary isn't going to stop her.

Hypergamy doesn't care about your boundary. The world doesn't care about your boundary. It's for you to know and only you. Let your actions do the talking.

Here is a man that understands! Good job Evan!

Let them ramble on about their boundary.

When their woman loses interest cause of their insecurities riding another guy's d!ck they will realize how useless their boundaries were.

Just like those other guys found out how useless their boundaries were when I fvked their girlfriends who broke their boyfriends boundaries with ease.