Death of casual sex, and is the game revelation ending?

[cervantesscthree]

As I've gotten older I've noticed that many of the girls I speak to, and eventually sleep with, are always wanting to take our situation further, but in my late-teen years bang-and-go relationships were pretty much all I used to have, whether it was through a one night stand or a street approach.

I'm aware of the game of course, so a woman having a lasting attraction after meeting me isn't surprising, but is there such a a lack of game with men - within my generation anyway (early or mid twenties to late teens) - that any woman I have an extended conversation with nowadys thinks I'm daddy material? Why isn't there more men around with an understanding of game ever since the PUA network boom in the early/mid 2000s and the deeper understanding of game today? Is the revelation of game over?

In my lifetime I've met two people (un-including online connections) who have an understanding of it, and I'm finding this knowledge is becoming rarer and rarer to see in men I meet in general.

What are your thoughts on this?

 

[cervantesscthree]

No thoughts?

 

[logicallefty]

I can understand this. I haven't dated anyone below 25 sense I was in my 20s myself, but I do very casually talk to a lot of women between 18-25 in the course of my daily life. My read as of late on some of these chicks, particularly the 18-19-20 range , is that they aren't the slvts that we may stereotype them as. They just don't have that vibe and they act more like they would rather be treated with traditional respect than like their dirty h0r counterparts in their mid-late 20s-30s. I know several 18 year old chicks, hot as he\_\_, that flat out have said they have only had 1-2 sexual partners in their life. One of them is married already. The man, 21, has had two partners himself and the woman just one.

So yeah you very well may be on to something.

I would love to see our next generation of women not be the trash that lives amoungst us today. But even if these younger women have more integrity as far as not being slvts, they still need to get off their arses and work. Most are very lazy!

 

[Cremasta]

If you think the game might only be useful in your late teens, then my friend, you ain't seen nothing yet.

If you're still single in your early thirties and you're hitting on women in their late twenties/early thirties, then you are seriously going to need every bit of game you can scrape up.
At that age, women are horny, empowered, have their own money and house... and think they simply don't need you. Your game is what will create that need.

Unless you're rich

 

[cervantesscthree]

If you think the game might only be useful in your late teens, then my friend, you ain't seen nothing yet.

If you're still single in your early thirties and you're hitting on women in their late twenties/early thirties, then you are seriously going to need every bit of game you can scrape up.
At that age, women are horny, empowered, have their own money and house... and think they simply don't need you. Your game is what will create that need.

Unless you're rich

I didn't mean that I won't need game outside my early twenties, shvt it's in my blood, I've been aware of it since I was eleven after watching some of David Deangelo's stuff and reading up on a lot more. What I mean is that why haven't more men, so it seems, of a younger age become aware of it. The past decade has had more information around game shot into the world more than any other period in history, but all of my buddies and other people I meet are as beta as ever, despite all the good work that's been done to get the knowledge out there. Are they all doomed to discover it for themselves after a failed marriage or some other meltdown when they're in their 30s/40s?

 

[cervantesscthree]

Failed marriages are becoming more and more common these days. I agree with you that men are much more beta these days. Chalk it up to Hollywood's version of romance that gets shoved down the throats of all unsuspecting men.

Too many.....wayyyy too many men....talking to women about how to get with women.

STOP THE MADNESS

Hollywood and what these young guys are being told by damn near everything around them. And of course that whole asking women how to deal with women is suicidal, but they don't know any better

It doesn't seem like it'll end. My older brother said to me (after all of his childhood friends had married into the worst relationships possible) that the sudden rush of game-based knowledge during the last 10+ years was almost like a trend, and that it's come and gone; some people have taken it on board, others haven't, and that they'll discover it for themselves when they need to. That's a pessimistic view, I still like to think that eventually there'll be a revolution of thought amongst men, but at the moment I can't see it happening soon.

 

[jurry]

What revolution? Go to any bar/club or college campus and you will see millions of people having random casual sex. This really isnt a very novel idea, the PUA community would like to make it seem like some holy grail of information but the reality is people all over the globe are fvcking each others brains out every second, sex is as liberal as its ever been.. id like to see a revolution among men (and women) but for quite different reasons.

 

[( . )( . )]

A wave of deviancy glorification does not equal more sex.

sex is as liberal as its ever been

No it's not. Sex with different partners is as liberal as it's ever been, a big difference. Even despite our handlers best efforts to have us all sex obsessed retards statistically sex is declining among unmarried women, they're just getting banged by a larger pool of men. Between the pill wreaking havoc with a chicks libido and now anti-depressant usage among Western women at an all time high it was a no-brainer anyway.

tl;dr Sex down, whordom up

 

[jurry]

so men and women have a larger pool of people to fvck and are having sex with different partners yet somehow this is not equating to more sex? If women are fvcking more men ("deviancy glorification" i guess is how you put it) then mathematics tells us more men are fvcking women.

 

[( . )( . )]

so men and women have a larger pool of people to fvck and are having sex with different partners yet somehow this is not equating to more sex?

We going to go the retard route and pretend you're all mystified are we?

Fine. Remember those 1950's housewives you told us you hate because they were "dumb and cooked"? They were actually having more sex.

An increase in you GoGrrrl-ing it in the club toilet with randoms does not equate to women having more sex.

This should not be that hard to grasp princess.

 

[jurry]

They were actually having more sex.

Says.. Who exactly?

And yes.. "You gogrrling" (and you call me a woman) it in the toilet does equate with more sex.

 

[( . )( . )]

Do you bother with facts or?

Read the link sweetheart.

And yes.. "You gogrrling" (and you call me a woman) it in the toilet does equate with more sex.

No it doesn't.

Edit:

If women are fvcking more men ("deviancy glorification" i guess is how you put it) then mathematics tells us more men are fvcking women.

Nope, wrong again. Did you forget about the 80/20 rule? A woman would rather gnaw her arm off than be banged by this current sea of herbs.

 

[jurry]

So your source is a blog article discussing how we cannot trust statistical data regarding sex surveys? Great.

Yes, it does.

Again, you have no evidence besides your opinion that men are now more "beta" or that people are having less sex in general. It's just more of the absurd, doomsday, women-are-evil manosphere horsesh!t. Since these people are so bad with women they have to come up with grand societal justifications for why this is the case, otherwise they might have to face the fact that they just have no game and need to work on it.

 

[( . )( . )]

So your source is a blog article discussing how we cannot trust statistical data regarding sex surveys? Great.

And you have what exactly? A television telling you "empowered" chicks are apparently fvcking like demons? gtfo.

Nevermind soaring levels of obesity, the pill, depression/anti-depressants and men now with half the test counts of their grandfathers and an actual study showing women are fvcking less (aka science).

Again, her getting banged out by a larger pool of men does not equal her having more sex.

^^ Read that again.

It's just more of the absurd, doomsday, women-are-evil manosphere horsesh!t.

Are you insane? Did you forget you were pretending to be a man for a minute?

 

[jurry]

"And you have what exactly?"

You're the one making the claim. I don't see where it can be reliably demonstrated one way or another. From what I can tell sex is the same as its ever been. The only place I ever hear anyone complaining about it are these websites, who incidentally have a lot of men who are not good with women.

There are surveys that compare over 5-10 years which doesn't tell a whole lot. I dont see anything at all that goes back more than 10-20 years. Marriage was more common and earlier then, are we talking more sexual acts or more sexual partners? Also, in the last 5 years people are getting poorer and having to work harder, which can also skew the data. More sex in good times.

People are partying and fvcking just as much as they ever have, and now you have online dating. Any person with half a brain can log on and have a date in a matter of minutes. I'm not buying it.

Also, you have a great deal of homophobia, trying hard to suppress something over there?

 

[Peaks&Valleys]

are we talking more sexual acts or more sexual partners?

More sex, less partners. Think about it. Even if a chick has 2 one night stands a month, 24 new partners in a year....complete wh0redome, although that's still only 24 times she had sex that year. Versus back in the glory days, dominant husband comes home from work, subservient wife feeds him his meal, cleans the dishes. Her vag starts tingling because the Man is Masculine, and she is feminine-doing feminine $hit, NOT feminist $hit (which completely kills her libido, and his for that matter). She puts the kids to bed, husband takes her to bed. She's getting banged out almost every night (rough estimation) 300+ times a year.

300 vs. 24. Now for the "liberated" woman, she's stil going to have FB's thrown in there, FWB's, whatever, and the 50's married man wasn't always a stud, however the averages still work out.

EDIT: Also, posted this in a different thread, the women in the 50's had 6" less on their wasteline http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...son-They-dont-use-elbow-grease-housework.html If you became a wife, you stayed in shape.

 

[( . )( . )]

You're the one making the claim.

I believe you were the one making the claim. Let's scroll up shall we.

sex is as liberal as its ever been

Surprise suprise.

People are partying and fvcking just as much as they ever have, and now you have online dating. Any person with half a brain can log on and have a date in a matter of minutes.

Any person with half a brain can tell the difference between women acquiring a larger pool of men and the changing biological/environmental factors that have decreased a woman's libido.

More sex, less partners. Think about it. Even if a chick has 2 one night stands a month, 24 new partners in a year....complete wh0redome, although that's still only 24 times she had sex that year. Versus back in the glory days, dominant husband comes home from work, subservient wife feeds him his meal, cleans the dishes. Her vag starts tingling because the Man is Masculine, and she is feminine-doing feminine $hit, NOT feminist $hit (which completely kills her libido, and his for that matter). She puts the kids to bed, husband takes her to bed. She's getting banged out almost every night (rough estimation) 300+ times a year.

300 vs. 24. Now for the "liberated" woman, she's stil going to have FB's thrown in there, FWB's, whatever, and the 50's married man wasn't always a stud, however the averages still work out.

ffs thankyou. That was like pulling teeth trying to explain. I suspect "he" figured it out anyway and just decided to cvnt it up for the hell of it.

 

[jurry]

More sex, less partners. Think about it. Even if a chick has 2 one night stands a month, 24 new partners in a year....complete wh0redome, although that's still only 24 times she had sex that year. Versus back in the glory days, dominant husband comes home from work, subservient wife feeds him his meal, cleans the dishes. Her vag starts tingling because the Man is Masculine, and she is feminine. She puts the kids to bed, husband takes her to bed. She's getting banged out almost every night (rough estimation) 300+ times a year.

300 vs. 24. Now for the "liberated" woman, she's stil going to have FB's thrown in there, FWB's, whatever, and the 50's married man wasn't always a stud, however the averages still work out.

Thats all entirely your assumption of course as I was saying theres no real info to support any of this one way or the other.

Assuming it is true though, ok but why is it the apocalypse when a woman sleeps around? A guy can go around banging 24 girls in a year, but if she does it society is collapsing?

I don't see the problem. Marriage is dead (good riddance), women are much more open to just sleeping around, the taboo of casual sex is falling away. This is the exact opposite of what the OP is claiming.

Haha and yes I must thank you as well for translating between me and tits here.

 

[( . )( . )]

Assuming it is true though, ok but why is it the apocalypse when a woman sleeps around? A guy can go around banging 24 girls in a year, but if she does it society is collapsing?

Focus on what the current discussion is. Save that "but..but..but misogyny coz eqwaaality" sh!t for another thread.

 

[jurry]

Focus on what the current discussion is. Save that "but..but..but misogyny coz eqwaaality" sh!t for another thread.

The rise of sexual partner count versus number of sexual acts, that was the current discussion you initiated, I believe, and leads one to wonder why so many "DJ's" would be bemoaning the rise of "wh0redom" in the first place if it would make their lifestyles more socially acceptable.




EDIT (at the limit): lol, cmon you can say it, you hate the idea of women sleeping with more men, you don't have to hide it. P&V just referred to the "glory days" of the submissive wife staying home waiting for you, and I've had a number of the same discussions with you before.. so just man up and stand behind your argument.

The problem is you only know absolutes, she is either a submissive housewife or "you-gogrrling it in the club toilet" and a "carousel rider".. she can't just be an average person travelling from relationship to relationship. If you cant control what she does, then fvck her shes a slut bringing down the whole society, right?


Edit: no actually youre the one whos going to have to deal with it, im not the one incessantly whining about rampant "wh0redom" and pair bonding. What the fvck do i care if women are less likely to form LTR?? Theres plenty that do if i want that kind of thing. Look at your post history bro, every single thing you write is just filled with hatred and negativity, you provide no positivity or support to people just jump in to pointless argumdnts. Maybe (gasp) the problem isnt the carousel riders, but the angry frustrated douche behind the computer screen. Go out and get laid.