Boundary Implementation

Danger

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
9,189
Likes
996
#21
^^^^

Fantastic post Kailex. I think Men do realize they have the ultimate power to walk away, but in the end it comes to them valuing even the chance at pu$$y over self-respect.

Hell the poster Trump on here admits he would take all of the disrespect just to show that he has a girl on his arm. Talk about pedestalization.
 

How This "Nice Guy" Steals Women from Jerks

Did you know a woman can be totally UN-ATTRACTED to you...

And she'll still sleep with you?

If you've ever seen a girl go home with some asshole she didn't even LIKE, you know this is true.

But how is this possible?

Because deep inside her brain, sexual desire has nothing to do with what you LOOK like...

And everything to do with how you make her FEEL.

Matt Cook knows this all too well.

Matt is a nice guy... but he steals women from JERKS all the time.

In this free video training below, he'll show you how he does it:

How to Control Her Emotions and Make Her Chase You

zekko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
10,922
Likes
2,690
#22
Peaks&Valleys said:
Okay, so what would have happened if someone else told you you needed to cut out carbs when you weren't really ready to, or even thinking about doing it in the first place? What if you didn't even WANT to? How much harder would it have been to cut out carbs in that scenario?
If I am looking for a woman who does not eat carbs, the only relevant thing is whether or not she is willing to cut out the carbs. If I want a woman who doesn't eat carbs, why would I keep it a secret? That way, when we go to the restaurant, and she orders the breaksticks and spaghetti, there won't be any confusion about why I dumped her after the dinner. Why should she have to guess whether or not I tolerate her eating carbs?

I say let her know the expected behavior, and if she can't meet those expectations, or finds it "unattractive" that I won't tolerate carbs, so much the better. That way I know not to waste any more time on her, because she's not what I am looking for.

Danger said:
Overt boundaries do not put you at a disadvantage at all, as long as you truly mean it and will walk away at a moment's notice.
Agreed, women want a man who is in control of his life and knows what he wants. I've never agreed with any of these ideas where you can't overtly say something, or you might lose attraction. Why should any man be afraid to speak his mind? Why should any man be afraid to plainly state what he wants and expects?
 

Danger

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
9,189
Likes
996
#23
zekko said:
Agreed, women want a man who is in control of his life and knows what he wants. I've never agreed with any of these ideas where you can't overtly say something, or you might lose attraction. Why should any man be afraid to speak his mind? Why should any man be afraid to plainly state what he wants and expects?

I completely agree.


The difference is that it is the PUA's who promote hiding what you want, and that is because for them the ultimate goal is to just fvk her.

This means they can't risk losing the pu$$ based on what their expectations are. Unfortunately this habit can spread over into the relationship and before you know it, you aren't being upfront and direct as men are likely to be, but instead you dancing around in her frame in an effort to manipulate her mind.

The greatest irony is, by being a man and laying out your expectations, it doesn't reduce attraction at all, but makes you more attractive. Sure there are women who will b1tch and moan and some will be downright violent about it. But most actually agree and follow, the rest are worthless for relationships anyways.
 

zekko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
10,922
Likes
2,690
#24
Danger said:
The greatest irony is, by being a man and laying out your expectations, it doesn't reduce attraction at all, but makes you more attractive. Sure there are women who will b1tch and moan and some will be downright violent about it. But most actually agree and follow, the rest are worthless for relationships anyways.
It's true that being upfront is more of a long term mating strategy, I guess. That may be one reason why Peaks is against setting boundaries - he's younger, and closer to the short term strategies and casual dating practices. Although regardless, I still see no shame in a man openly declaring what he wants.

I've been reading Kezia Noble's "15 Steps to Becoming a Master Seducer" because I saw it on the recommended books list on RSD. She says that the main thing that a woman wants from a man is Strength. This wasn't just her opinion, it was based on a study. So being in control, being strong in your convictions and expectations, being able to lead the relationship, and being unwavering and unapologetic in your views and yourself should be attractive.

To get off topic a little, this is also why many older men succeed with younger women. As a man matures, he becomes more manly, and less boyish in his look and style. And who communicates strength more, a man or a boy?
 

Kailex

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 3, 2010
Messages
2,083
Likes
179
Location
New Jersey
#25
I have to agree with the last few posts.
Example being a woman I went out with a week or two ago. The first time I went out with her, she never brought her phone out, AT ALL. This is a rarity. Usually if you sit at a bar, they will leave it up there and as the notifications come in, they will at least glance.

During that date, I did indeed leave to use the restroom and upon my return, lo and behold, she was still not on the phone nor had she brought it out.

I told her right off the bat, that I was surprised that she hadn't done that and how much it peeves me because it's rude to just pick up a phone and text. I let her know I was old-fashioned and it was impressive to see that in this day and age.

We've gone out multiple times since, I honestly don't know what her phone looks like but she knows not to do it anytime I am with her in a dating environment.


On the flip side, I did go out with someone just last night who in the middle of the "date", AS I WAS TALKING, she picked up her phone and started texting her best friend. As soon as she put down the phone, she began talking about the person she just texted. She completely missed a good 3-4 sentences of what I had said. Now we've had this conversation before and she is older than me. As the bartender came over, I motioned to the woman to excuse me and I asked the bartender for the check.

The woman opened her eyes wide and asked why I was doing this. I very calmly and collected stated that it seemed that she had more important matters to tend to at the time than an ongoing conversation with me, so I would leave her to her phone and be done for the night. Her first reaction was disbelief and slight. The check came and I paid for my drinks, got up and left.

My phone has been going next level bonkers with messages from her. It went from disbelief, anger, and now apologies. She knew better, she tested me, I got up and left. There is no need for me to sit there and take it but sadly there are many men out there that would never had just asked for the check. Do you know how many men I see now just glancing up blankly at the TV screen at a baseball game they don't even care about because his girlfriend is just Facebooking away?

And this is just a microcosm of the very many other things that men just let slip through the cracks. If you are going to implement boundaries, it's not just about setting them up, it's about following through with them. Realize that not ALL women are going to break your "rules" but you don't have to mold your boundaries based on whoever you are seeing just because you value the box in between your legs.

At the end, it's all about self-respect and what you are happy with within your life.
 

guru1000

Master Don Juan
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
4,680
Likes
2,910
#26
zekko said:
Why should any man be afraid to speak his mind? Why should any man be afraid to plainly state what he wants and expects?
^^ This. The other camp's position of not speaking their mind is grounded in the fear of loss:
  • The fear of looking like a chump, which could prompt her exit.
  • The fear of losing attraction, which could prompt her exit.
  • The fear of exhibiting beta behavior, which could prompt her exit .
  • The fear of walking away, a definite possibility, as the woman is now accountable.


They may posit that Boundary Implementation is an act of fear, as why should a DJ, even incidentally, refrain undesirable behavior if he is confident in himself? This counterclaim fails it overlooks that a DJ's superlative principle is self-respect. Restraining undesirable behavior is an overt declaration that "Hey, these are my rules of respect. Now you know. Respect ME or I'M gone." The underlying impetus, here, is respect, not fear.

In any context, the "act" itself holds little relevance. The "motivation" behind the act is paramount.
 

guru1000

Master Don Juan
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
4,680
Likes
2,910
#27
Kailex said:
On the flip side, I did go out with someone just last night who in the middle of the "date", AS I WAS TALKING, she picked up her phone and started texting her best friend. As soon as she put down the phone, she began talking about the person she just texted. She completely missed a good 3-4 sentences of what I had said. Now we've had this conversation before and she is older than me. As the bartender came over, I motioned to the woman to excuse me and I asked the bartender for the check.

The woman opened her eyes wide and asked why I was doing this. I very calmly and collected stated that it seemed that she had more important matters to tend to at the time than an ongoing conversation with me, so I would leave her to her phone and be done for the night. Her first reaction was disbelief and slight. The check came and I paid for my drinks, got up and left.
Hehe, this happened to me twice before I married. Mid-convo, girl starts texting. I didn't even wait for the check. Just got up, left two 20s on the table, and said "Have a nice day."
 

samspade

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
4,318
Likes
607
#28
I would rather stay true to my own code, even if it means I lose a few chances with women in the process. Now some men are more fixated on notch count, and to each his own. I personally prefer spending time with women whose values more or less match mine. Roosh just lamented on his blog that men can no longer be "authentic," but I disagree. However my goal (women-wise) is to enjoy the company of women that make me happy, not necessarily to collect feathers in my cap.
 

Peaks&Valleys

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
1,713
Likes
94
Location
Nowhere and everywhere
#29
guru1000 said:
They may posit that Boundary Implementation is an act of fear, as why should a DJ, even incidentally, refrain undesirable behavior if he is confident in himself? This counterclaim fails it overlooks that a DJ's superlative principle is self-respect. Restraining undesirable behavior is an overt declaration that "Hey, these are my rules of respect. Now you know. Respect ME or I'M gone." The underlying impetus, here, is respect, not fear.
I skipped through some of these posts here, I'm in the middle of something, I'll revisit, but this one caught my eye.

Think about people YOU respect IRL? Some of them "Command" it, some of them, like bosses so to say, rule with an Iron Fist. Well, they're respected! However, once that boss starts telling you that you HAVE to work two more hours every day, or comes to you on Friday and tells you you're now working the weekend. What happens? You may still RESPECT him, however, you're not going to like him, and you're probably going to go start looking for other jobs.

But what would happen if this guy were a great motivator? What would happen if he's such a great leader that you WANT to work that over time, you want to impress him...... you WANT to follow him into Hell (Tony Soprano reference).

Two different ways of dealing with people. You can ORDER them around, or you can LEAD them....


"Leadership is the art of getting someone else to do something you want done because (s)he wants to do it." -Dwight D. Eisenhower
 

Peaks&Valleys

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
1,713
Likes
94
Location
Nowhere and everywhere
#30
guru1000 said:
^^ This. The other camp's position of not speaking their mind is grounded in the fear of loss:
  • The fear of looking like a chump, which could prompt her exit.
  • The fear of losing attraction, which could prompt her exit.
  • The fear of exhibiting beta behavior, which could prompt her exit .
  • The fear of walking away, a definite possibility, as the woman is now accountable.
It seems a lot of these points you're making guru have come up in previous discussions on this topic. No big deal, however, it seems to me that the "boundary guys" all come from a different mind set. "Set boundaries, Alpha's don't let their women hang out with other men, that's disrespectful for her to do so, she doesn't know it's disrespectful." And then this: "You guys don't set boundaries because you FEAR setting them."

There is no fear....at all. Setting boundaries is just not me, it's not me to tell ANYONE who they can or can't hang out with. It's just not my way. And it's not weakness.....

I'd rather guide, lead, teach, and educate. If that doesn't work, and she still insists on hanging out with some guy that's "just a friend", who is obviously someone that tingles her vag, then I'm going to back off from the relationship. This chick is not invested into this relationship as much as I am, she may be giving 51%, but that is not enough.

A lot of guys talk on here about NOT marrying chicks, NOT going monogamous with a chick....and how it's a lose/lose situation. Okay, it CAN be a lose/lose. So why then, would you EVER get into an exclusive relationship with a chick that insists on hanging out with guys that are threats to the relationship? And, if it's because "she doesn't understand" then guess what, there's going to be a lot more $hit she doesn't understand as well. You can't watch them 24/7. If you're going to give up YOUR exclusivity, then it SHOULD be with a chick that you feel can stay faithful. Just don't give it up to some chick who, after meeting you, is STILL displaying red flags. It's about character. She can hide her faulty character when you OVERTLY tell her she needs to cut other dudes out. She can play into your perfect image of a "girlfriend" by ACTING her way through the honeymoon phase. Or you can sit back and WATCH what she does. And, if all lights are green, then you can contently move forward with the relationship. If not, oh well, she'll probably make a good plate that you can hang out with every once in a while.
 

jc_80

Don Juan
Joined
Jun 22, 2014
Messages
101
Likes
19
#31
This is a really interesting topic the more I think about it. On one hand, exclusivity is a boundary itself and self explanatory. So any attempt to add to it could be interpreted as a sign of insecurity and controlling behavior. Essentially, you're saying, "I'm not sure yet if I can trust you". If you don't trust the person enough to use common sense to honor the commitment, then why bother being exclusive? On the other hand, many relationships fail because of incompatibility about boundaries, and this may have been discovered or prevented earlier if a good discussion about boundaries was discussed when exclusivity was asked for.

My solution to discussing boundaries without appearing insecure is to ask her why she wants to be exclusive and what she expects of me to make her feel respected and secure in knowing I'm honoring the exclusivity agreement. If she omits issues that I might have, then I ask her how she would feel if I did this or that. If she is uncomfortable with it, then I say fair enough I won't do it and expect that you won't either because relationships don't work with double standards. This approach forces her to reveal her insecurities and willingness to be fair. If you don't like what you hear, then decline the offer. If you like what you hear, then time will tell if you're compatible. And when you catch her violating the agreement, you can say hey what happened to the agreement rather than hey I said you couldn't do that or I assumed you wouldn't do that. What happens at that point is another issue.
 

guru1000

Master Don Juan
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
4,680
Likes
2,910
#32
Peaks&Valleys said:
Think about people YOU respect IRL? Some of them "Command" it, some of them, like bosses so to say, rule with an Iron Fist. Well, they're respected! However, once that boss starts telling you that you HAVE to work two more hours every day, or comes to you on Friday and tells you you're now working the weekend. What happens? You may still RESPECT him, however, you're not going to like him, and you're probably going to go start looking for other jobs.

But what would happen if this guy were a great motivator? What would happen if he's such a great leader that you WANT to work that over time, you want to impress him...... you WANT to follow him into Hell (Tony Soprano reference).

Two different ways of dealing with people. You can ORDER them around, or you can LEAD them....
I am an employer. Accordingly, quite a relevant analogy you describe. When hiring new employees, I meet with them for 30 minutes, specifically to delineate their job duties, or shall we say my expectations. Following, I peruse the employee handbook with them, which repetitively outlines the same expectations I had just narrated. The new employee must execute the employee handbook. The handbook is a preemptive measure, as to deter the potential excuse that the employee was not properly apprised of his/her duties.

I have a team of a dozen loyal employees. I have also had employees who didn’t perform their duties. Accordingly, as explained in the handbook, violation of duty results in termination. NYS law also supports my termination, under the doctrine of “employment at will.” But, I don’t fire them right away. Once an employee fails to perform, I advertise for a new employee, a replacement. Once I secure an adequate replacement, I fire the old employee. Delineating my expectations from the onset of employment is a necessity: When the employee violates my expectation, I’m put on alert to find a replacement, as I know it’s a question of time before the violator will quit or sabotage my business.

The same applies with DJ boundary implementation. If a woman violates an overt boundary, this would be your cue to branch swing or start recruiting new plates for a harem, as your woman is on her way out. Ergo, you will never be blindsided. Make sense?


A lot of guys talk on here about NOT marrying chicks, NOT going monogamous with a chick....and how it's a lose/lose situation. Okay, it CAN be a lose/lose. So why then, would you EVER get into an exclusive relationship with a chick that insists on hanging out with guys that are threats to the relationship? And, if it's because "she doesn't understand" then guess what, there's going to be a lot more $hit she doesn't understand as well. You can't watch them 24/7. If you're going to give up YOUR exclusivity, then it SHOULD be with a chick that you feel can stay faithful. Just don't give it up to some chick who, after meeting you, is STILL displaying red flags. It's about character. She can hide her faulty character when you OVERTLY tell her she needs to cut other dudes out. She can play into your perfect image of a "girlfriend" by ACTING her way through the honeymoon phase. Or you can sit back and WATCH what she does. And, if all lights are green, then you can contently move forward with the relationship. If not, oh well, she'll probably make a good plate that you can hang out with every once in a while.
I agree with this. The confusion is what constitutes a violation which merits Boundary Implementation.

Violations can be bifurcated into two categories: (1) Capital offenses, which merit no boundaries; (2) Subtleties, which should be overtly disclosed to maintain good relations.

Capital offenses are ubiquitously known relationship breakers: Cheating, male companions or orbiters, whorish behavior, etc. These offenses need not be forewarned, as the woman is damaged, thus automatically disqualified from long-term intimacy. Never implement boundaries to a broken woman. I have always preached to qualify your woman extensively; I spoke more about this topic here.

Subtleties are not capital offenses; but notwithstanding critical to overtly disclose as a myriad violations of these seemly insignificant subtleties could collapse any relation. My subtleties include carrying a respectful tone during a disagreement, maintaining a clean household (if living together), maintaining a level of respect for and time to spend with each other’s families (assuming exclusive relations), no texting during OUR time, etc. There is no right or wrong subtlety; it is individual-based--simply an outline of what will make/keep you happy and the relation respectful.
 

zekko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
10,922
Likes
2,690
#33
jc_80 said:
And when you catch her violating the agreement, you can say hey what happened to the agreement rather than hey I said you couldn't do that or I assumed you wouldn't do that. What happens at that point is another issue.
This is pretty much what most of us are saying. I don't think anyone here is saying to ORDER any girl what to do (as far as boundaries go). It's more like saying "This is what I expect of a girlfriend, if you are wanting to fill the position". And this is only done AFTER she starts pushing for exclusivity.
 

Die Hard

Master Don Juan
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
1,682
Likes
234
#34
So let's say you meet a girl, start dating her and on the third date you find out she has a 'guy friend' who sometimes comes over to her house to watch a movie or something similar to that. You probe some more and she tells you she doesn't see him "that way", there is no physical contact between them whatsoever, he's more like a brother to her blah blah.

Aside from this 'guy friend' matter, she seems like a good catch and you can imagine yourself becoming exclusive with her in a possible future, IF she'd accept your boundary and make an end to those meetings with the guy friend.

So what's the smartest course of playing this out?

1. Do you wait for her to bring up 'exclusivity' and only THEN tell her about your boundary, that you can't be exclusive with a girl who does what she does with her guy friend?
2. Do you mention your boundary BEFORE 'exclusivity' is brought up?

See, my idea would be that the second option is better coz she'll have some time to prepare and adjust to it. However, when it comes to discussing exclusivity, we all know that SHE has to bring the subject up, right? Coz if you let her know that you want to be exclusive before she does, you put yourself in a very weak position and all that.
Well, when you tell her about your boundary and communicate that you could never be exclusive with someone who watches movies with guy friends, you are basically bringing the exclusivity subject up!
It makes her think: "Aha, the simple fact that he tells me what he expects in an exclusive relationship, reveals that he is interested in an exclusive relationship with me..." and she'll use this indirect "revelation" of yours against you.

So what are your thoughts about this? Bring up the boundary BEFORE exclusivity is mentioned (gives her some time to prepare and adjust to it) or WHEN exclusivity is mentioned? (which raises the possibility of her accepting coz she never could "prepare" for it"her
 

Danger

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
9,189
Likes
996
#35
Die Hard,

Honestly, that would just disqualify her for me. No point in even setting a boundary on that one.

If her friendship is close enough to the point that they are watching movies home along together? No thanks. That is a no-win scenario. Best to just keep her as a fvk plate and look for higher value women for the long-haul.
 
B

BeDJ

Guest
#36
I've noticed a lot of Red Pill responses in this thread, it's an absolutely valid insight. It would be naive of me to ignore other ways to make a woman respect, at the same time, affectionate with you.

It's not a 'power struggle' as some SoSuavers think, it's much more than that. Every action has a reaction. At the end of the day, how we can control women is through psychological manipulation. Comp anxiety, dread, submissiveness, fear of abandonment, etc. I'm not denying the effectiveness of these tactic. Walk away, right? Absolutely, if she does not co-op with those tactics, you should walk away.

This will not lead to a healthy relationship. Ever. It's manipulation. I'm not giving any judgments or hailmary's, but I will say I have been in a lot of shoes in the past couple of years.
 

Danger

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
9,189
Likes
996
#37
BeDJ said:
I've noticed a lot of Red Pill responses in this thread, it's an absolutely valid insight. It would be naive of me to ignore other ways to make a woman respect, at the same time, affectionate with you.

It's not a 'power struggle' as some SoSuavers think, it's much more than that. Every action has a reaction. At the end of the day, how we can control women is through psychological manipulation. Comp anxiety, dread, submissiveness, fear of abandonment, etc. I'm not denying the effectiveness of these tactic. Walk away, right? Absolutely, if she does not co-op with those tactics, you should walk away.

This will not lead to a healthy relationship. Ever. It's manipulation. I'm not giving any judgments or hailmary's, but I will say I have been in a lot of shoes in the past couple of years.

Great insight BeDJ.

At the end of the day, it isn't about manipulating her, it is about being honest with your own desires and having the fortitude to follow through on your expectations.

This means communicating your boundaries and sticking with them. If you aren't living life on your terms, she certainly won't. If she isn't going respect your terms, quite honestly, why would you want to be with her in the first place.
 

guru1000

Master Don Juan
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
4,680
Likes
2,910
#38
Great responses, gentlemen. Every robust organization incorporates a modus operandi. Why shouldn’t we?

Die Hard, Danger is on the money. Intimate guy friend is subsumed under “Capital Offenses,” described in Post 36.
 

Die Hard

Master Don Juan
Joined
Nov 15, 2009
Messages
1,682
Likes
234
#39
Okay, that doesn't change the general principle, guys. Imagine it being something else, not a guy friend she watches movies with or another capital offence. Just something else that you need to set boundaries with but which isn't a reason to Next her , I don't care, make something up in your mind.

Have something in your mind? Great! Now can you answer my question?
 

guru1000

Master Don Juan
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
4,680
Likes
2,910
#40
Re: Subtleties

Originally Posted by Anti-Dump
You should be free as a bird, flapping around, singing, full of joy with life. Women want to trap the bird and throw it in a cage (cage = commitment). When birds try to fly into the cage, wouldn't you think something is wrong with that bird? After all, who wants a bird that WANTS to be in the cage? No, women want the birds that are FREE, WILD, and BEAUTIFUL. They want A GOOD CATCH. Good Catches do not fly into cages. Only wounded or needy birds do.
Damaged birds fly into cages. Why? Men want sex; women want commitment. Exclusivity is her benefit; not yours. Accordingly, never initiate discussion of exclusivity or boundaries relating to exclusive relations.

If she requests exclusivity, that’s a tall order: She is asking you to sacrifice your harem. What exchange of value would merit compliance to such a demand … your boundaries.
 
Top