What exactly is "exclusivity"....

Discussion in 'The Mature Man' started by Danger, Jul 18, 2014.

  1. Danger

    Danger Master Don Juan

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,029
    Likes Received:
    956
    Guru started a well needed thread on boundaries here.....and dasein brought up a good point on Exclusivity.


    Before we go further, let's start with a key concept.


    • Women have the power to fvk whatever man they want.
    • Men have to work to fvk the women they want.

    This is a given so strong that even all of society is forced to agree with it. So let's keep that in the back of our mind for the moment and move on.



    In the linked thread above, dasein mentioned his tactical response when a prospect asks him to go exclusive, he responds by asking her, "what does exclusivity mean to you?".


    This is a very, very important question. The more time spent pondering such a concept, the more it becomes clear that exclusivity has different meanings for each gender. Or at least, will take on different meanings to create "wiggle room" for the party who seeks to push the boundaries or has the most to gain by defining exclusivity to meet their needs.

    When you ask a girl what she means by "exclusive", her first response will almost certainly be "no sex with someone else" and it ends there. Ok, fair enough.


    But wait a minute.....who exactly wins here? The girl implements her sexual imperative by securing the best man she can attract, while the man loses his sexual imperative by being only able to plant his seed in one woman.
    One could argue that he has a steady supply of sex but that is debatable since we have so conditioned men to say they don't even deserve sex when in a secured exclusive relationship. Even so, a steady supply of sex still subverts his sexual imperative of spreading his seed.

    Ultimately for men with options, sexual exclusivity will always benefit the female.


    This is WHY the woman asks for exclusivity with high value men. She wants to slam the door shut on the ability of other women to take the higher value man from her, but NOT if it means keeping away her ability to easily seek out and measure the value of other potential suitors.


    This begs the question. Why shouldn't the man set his own terms and conditions of exclusivity? And in doing so, should he not recognize the value and price of his exclusivity?


    So before you say yes to being exclusive, recognize what you are giving up, and what value your exclusivity brings to her. Consider these questions and then be sure to demand your fair value of the exclusivity contract.
     
    1 person likes this.
  2. zekko

    zekko Master Don Juan

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    10,541
    Likes Received:
    2,328
    Age:
    55
    I've seen a number of comments lately talking about sex being the best reason for being in an exclusive relationship. Really, I have to say that if that is your reason for getting into a relationship, it's a pretty poor one.

    It's true that you do get the steady supply of sex (in most cases), but you lose the variety and excitement of spreading your seed around. I would say you should have other reasons for getting into a relationship, and that to some extent you get into a relationship despite of sex, not because of it.

    Now regarding the definition of "exclusivity", women find it easier to be friends with men than vice versa. As a man, if I am going to be spending a lot of "friendly" time with an attractive woman, more than likely I am going to want to fvck her at some point or other. ALSO, as a man, I am the one who is going to have to take the initiative to invite her out. Whereas a woman can just sit back and take a passive role and accept invitations from whomever she chooses.

    To me, this is unfair. Why should the female be allowed to passively go out with a bunch of male "friends" and soak up the attention she wants if I cannot go pursue women on my terms? If she wants me to give up banging other women, then she can give up her orbiters. Otherwise, that is setting up an inherently unbalanced situation where she is going out with the opposite gender regularly and I am not. If that's the deal, why would I bother to be exclusive? In that scenario, it sounds like I would be the only one who would be going "exclusive".
     
  3. logicallefty

    logicallefty Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    3,993
    Likes Received:
    2,137
    Location:
    Hole in the Ground, Illinois, USA
    Age:
    44
    She says "no sex with someone else" but she means "You can't have sex with anyone else. I won't have sex with anyone else UNLESS I find a guy that I want to have sex with"
     
  4. guru1000

    guru1000 Master Don Juan

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    Messages:
    4,654
    Likes Received:
    2,884
    Excellent thread Danger, which conjoins and consummates “Boundary Implementation.”

    To further support your OP using a different vantage point, I’ll begin with this analogy:

    Taking this analogy further: If we understand that a DJ’s "stock value" is directly attributable to how much demand/available cages are present, then we can safely conclude that exclusivity, by virtue of the act, lowers demand by eliminating all competitors. Does not this decrease in overtly displayed demand then lower a DJ’s stock value?

    Accordingly, commitment could initially translate into lower value, as all competition and alternate demand/cages are eliminated. Now don’t get me wrong; I love commitment. But, awareness of underlying dynamics at the root of a commitment play is critical. Here, also, is why most pick-up artists fail in committed relations.

    How, then, can you compensate for this loss of value in a commitment play? Increase value commensurate with value lost. Contrary to SoSuave "popular opinion," one method to augment value is Boundary Implementation (“BI”).

    Logical proposition, rudimentary cause and effect: The harder you work toward attaining/keeping X, the more value you attribute to X.

    BI increases “stock value” by demanding your partner to step up to the plate with conditions to work toward. “You want exclusivity (remember exclusivity=cage); that’s quite the sacrifice you are requesting. What are you going to sacrifice for me?”
     
  5. G_Govan

    G_Govan Senior Don Juan

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Messages:
    489
    Likes Received:
    53
    This.

    I would also add "I promise I won't leave you until I have a firm grasp of another guy, you probably won't notice things have changed until I'm ready to leave."

    Of course it doesn't always mean this, but it's designed to force a compromise so a monopoly on your time and resources can be maintained.
     
  6. dasein

    dasein Master Don Juan

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,105
    Likes Received:
    165
    Age:
    49
    To address the topic and then broaden some in response to mistakes I made many times and see lots of younger men making today:

    Men are conditioned that they should want exclusive relationships because that signifies that they have "won," or are closer to winning a woman's love and affection. Read like that, does anyone not fail to see the problem there instantly? It is another piece of that "old world role" that just does not exist any more. IME the opposite is the case, and being exclusive lowers a man's value and attractiveness to women he is involved with. Walking into exclusivity without negotiation, as if "she's doing me a favor!" is the stupidest thing inexperienced men do IMO (other than marriage without being absolutely sure it's what HE wants), and a mistake I made many times in the past.

    In fact, let's expand to all areas of life, social, family, business partnerships, literally everything that involves human relationships. At certain junctures in all human relationships, there is a choice to fly by the seat of the pants, or to take just a little time to clarify the nature and expectations of the relationship. 90% of the unnecessary angst and drama in my early adult life was due to taking the "fly by the seat" option as opposed to coming to an understanding. No need to hire a lawyer for everything, though in certain relationships people should do more of that, but somewhere between seat of the pants winging it and a formal written agreement is the wise middle ground. Same applies to business planning, time planning, life planning of all types.

    Many laymen think contracts are primarily used as legal/court documents. This is incorrect. They are primarily -maps- defining how a relationship is to be conducted, who needs to do what, when, where and how. This is how they are most used. When you don't at least tell people what you expect, you will be disappointed by people over and over. You will never go broke overestimating people's ability to mess you up when relationships are left to just run feral.

    What is the most valuable thing you possess? Health? Money? Sanity? Family? Love? There are many answers, but for me it's generally TIME, and the amount we possess of that is always uncertain, making it extremely precious. How much time has the average mature adult man, married or single, spent on relationships with women? including prep time and the time spent earning the wherewithal to pursue and attract women? Can we agree it's generally a large amount of time?

    Would you enter into such a relationship, keeping opportunity costs in mind, without clear understanding of what that relationship is going to be? without a map defining how that relationship is supposed to work? without knowledge of what you will get and what you will need to give in return? Yet that's exactly how many men conduct themselves with women.

    These days, I don't even accept invitations to dinner or parties without some negotiation and due diligence. People, women included, even normal decent people, will waste the hell out of your time if you let them. Keep your eyes open and give people a map of your expectations. It will not always work out to be advantageous that you did so, but will more often than not. Most people want to be led through relationships of all types. Make it easy for them to understand how things are supposed to work and save lots of TIME and angst down the road. When done right, you will better respond to their needs as well, and will get the rep of a leader, which of course never hurts with women.
     
    1 person likes this.
  7. Espi

    Espi Master Don Juan

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2006
    Messages:
    10,179
    Likes Received:
    2,156
    Location:
    The Bay
    Age:
    46
    Ha! So true in my opinion. And perhaps more importantly, this shows yet another aspect of how exclusivity de-values men and empowers women.

    And when she's ready for another man, reasoning will be expressed latently: "going our separate ways" "not responsible enough" "lost the connection" or "not a good enough provider" etc. etc.
     
  8. In2theGame

    In2theGame Master Don Juan

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,362
    Likes Received:
    74
    Location:
    New York City
    Age:
    34
    Hahaha.. This is true.... Unfortunately.
     
  9. In2theGame

    In2theGame Master Don Juan

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    1,362
    Likes Received:
    74
    Location:
    New York City
    Age:
    34
    Like i stated in another thread, The idea if being exclusive is scary and risky with Women of today. You decide you want to be exclusive with the Woman, everything is great at first then it turns into a fvcking mudslide after some time (years) together. By that time though, your already emotionally in deep and have spent loads of money on her only for her to decide she "needs space", "Needs time alone", "Needs to find herself", "Not in love anymore", "Needs a break", "Needs to live "life" again", "Not happy"... etc the list goes on and on. By then she has already been getting plowed by some new guy already and your left to eat sh!t. Is it all worth it?....
     
    1 person likes this.
  10. Desdinova

    Desdinova Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2004
    Messages:
    11,146
    Likes Received:
    3,474
    Age:
    38
    This is a really good thread, and It's never even occurred to me to qualify a woman for exclusivity. Perhaps I should start doing it.

    The biggest thing here is you have to actually REALIZE your value before qualifying her for exclusivity. If you're NOT a truly high value man, then you have no business qualifying a woman for exclusivity. However, if you've got a stable personality, a good job, a good home, and many of your own orbiters waiting for you to ask them out, then you have every right to qualify her.
     
  11. Married Buried

    Married Buried Master Don Juan

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2012
    Messages:
    1,959
    Likes Received:
    72
    Age:
    38

    This guy freaking nailed it. This should go into the bible, he is a prophet.
     
  12. Die Hard

    Die Hard Master Don Juan

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    1,654
    Likes Received:
    201
    Age:
    36
    Ignorance is bliss?
     

Share This Page