Define "Successful with Women"

[bigneil]

How would you define a man who is successful with women? Is there a way to quantify it?

Some suggested statistics:

1) Number of sexual partners lifetime
2) Number of sexual partners in the past year
3) Number of dates in the past year
4) Number of phone numbers in your phone
5) Percentage of the time you get the digits when you find yourself seated next to a woman by chance.
6) Percentage of phone numbers that lead to dates.
7) Percentage of dates that lead to second dates.
8) Percentage of dates that lead to sex.
9) Percentage of flings that lead to relationships.
10) Your overall rating by other women.

Or all or none of the above?

How would a man "prove" he was successful with women?

 

[bigneil]

The last thing your oppressors and haters want is for there to be any way to measure anything objectively. That would allow the use of Mathematics to demonstrate that A > B. How can a guy who has had 8 women compare to someone who has had 32 hotter women? By keeping everything mum, that's how.

Remember, we have the types of people here who, after watching him set every NFL record and win 4 Super Bowls, would actually whine for years about ball pressure and try to dismiss Tom Brady's every achievement (you watch, we'll hear from some (probably black) members on this immediately - spare us, Russell Wilson and Cam Newton fans, you lost, again). But those Super Bowl Rings and touchdown passes are tough to deny.

But let's hear from the Second Place Trophy winners.

 

[Asmodeus]

I do not define my success by women, I do not worry much about my success with them. I think anybody who puts success with women over personal success is focusing on the wrong things. Besides there are too many opinions on this for a unified conclusion to exist.
It is all relative... Like most everything else in life.

 

[Tictac]

How would a man "prove" he was successful with women?

You have nothing to prove to a woman or anyone else.

 

[wifehunter]

Success is when she has a high interest level, and you keep it that way.

 

[salinechow]

No offence Neil, but f*ck all that.

A man who is 'successful with women' is a man that supplicates the least. That transcends spinning plates, and extends to business and other relationships.

A guy can be getting laid left and right, but if he's doing that by being a simp, I don't consider that a success.

I consider the man most successful who compromises himself the least.

With respect to @bigneil. This is one of the great single posts I have ever read here.

 

[Slash Dolo]

Define your own success and f*ck what everyone else thinks.

 

[Serenity]

Success with women, the degree to which you personally are satisfied with success. Satisfaction can't be quantified, no number will ever control my feelings. I'm satisfied, I just don't give a fvck.

 

[logicallefty]

A man who is in control of his relationships with women.

 

[salinechow]

A possible DJ/SS definition of 'a man successful with women' might be: A man with the capacity to attract, lead and enjoy women, as much or as little as he likes, and as superficially or deeply as he desires, while always remaining true to himself.

Even if that authentic self is blue pill beta mentality?
--------------------------------
Also, if success is measured by contentment and being happy with oneself, than, why pursue or grow, in spirit, action, or understanding?

 

[wifehunter]

I must be missing something here because I can't imagine you actually intend to suggest a continual correlation/responsibility. To me, this definition correlates a man's success (and lack of) too strongly, to the whims of a woman's interest (and moods). I would not recommend that ride, for any man.

It's just an indicator of success. The reality is how he deals with the rollercoaster or doesn't. At the end of the day, it's all just opinions anyway.

Objectively, I imagine, actual success would be to treat women according to their intended design.

 

[dutchmaster]

I guess that stuff all works, but as a short answer I would say

"investing as little time and resources as possible in return for tons of p5ssy" lol

Think some guy like Hank Moody from Californicatin (granted this is a fictional character, he is a good example and constantly brought up in discussions like this one). Doesn't really date or anything. Goes out to a bar 1 night, pays for a few drinks and gets to bang as much as he wants after.

think of it as a mathematical equation. Or economics.

Investment = time, money, mental health (if she's a trip) etc
Return on investment = pssy (in different qualities and quantities)

So hank spent maybe $50-100 on drinks that night for 2 (Bars in LA are not cheap) and in return got to bang the girl whatever amount of times he wanted that night and then has them thirsting over him to give them another go. Or using the equation.

He invested probably 1/10th (in time too, not just money. I'm not saying you have to drop 1k on dates before you bang a hottie, ball park figures.) of what most guys would invest to bang a girl as hot as he does and then she wants return business most the time. This makes his investment smaller than the average guy and the return higher. Therefore he is successful with women, he used little investment and gets a high return.

If you want real life examples too I know two guys and girls in my social circle who are banging. The guys are single and spinning plates and are good seducers. 1 is probably the best I know in fact(helps that he's ridiculously good looking). The two girls they are banging both have bfs. They barely sleep with their bfs even while going on expensive date and sh1t throughout the relationship.. With these two guys I know and all they do is call those dirty sl5ts over to their house an bang them out. Maybe drink or smoke a bit with them then send them back to their BF. No time, no money and no headache. Some guys just got it like that. You need the right mix of LMS and/or game

just a theory off the top of my head.

Edit: Stoned right now, too many typos.

 

[Serenity]

I guess that stuff all works, but as a short answer I would say

"investing as little time and resources as possible in return for tons of p5ssy" lol

Think some guy like Hank Moody from Californicatin (granted this is a fictional character, he is a good example and constantly brought up in discussions like this one). Doesn't really date or anything. Goes out to a bar 1 night, pays for a few drinks and gets to bang as much as he wants after.

think of it as a mathematical equation. Or economics.

Investment = time, money, mental health (if she's a trip) etc
Return on investment = pssy (in different qualities and quantities)

So hank spent maybe $50-100 on drinks that night for 2 (Bars in LA are not cheap) and in return got to bang the girl whatever amount of times he wanted that night and then has them thirsting over him to give them another go. Or using the equation.

He invested probably 1/10th (in time too, not just money. I'm not saying you have to drop 1k on dates before you bang a hottie, ball park figures.) of what most guys would invest to bang a girl as hot as he does and then she wants return business most the time. This makes his investment smaller than the average guy and the return higher. Therefore he is successful with women, he used little investment and gets a high return.

If you want real life examples too I know two guys and girls in my social circle who are banging. The guys are single and spinning plates and are good seducers. 1 is probably the best I know in fact(helps that he's ridiculously good looking). The two girls they are banging both have bfs. They barely sleep with their bfs even while going on expensive date and sh1t throughout the relationship.. With these two guys I know and all they do is call those dirty sl5ts over to their house an bang them out. Maybe drink or smoke a bit with them then send them back to their BF. No time, no money and no headache. Some guys just got it like that. You need the right mix of LMS and/or game

just a theory off the top of my head.

Edit: Stoned right now, too many typos.

This works..... If pvssy is your only desire in women.

 

[ohrein]

Let's break down successful with women.

Successful - "Accomplishing a desired aim or result."

So success is entirely subjective to the person deciding if they are successful with women. As it has been said above, to be truly happy you cannot depend on the whims of others. You define success on your own terms.

 

[Floydispink01]

Embracing fear and rejection.

 

[dutchmaster]

This works..... If pvssy is your only desire in women.

What else do you desire? Her home?

Joking aside, anything you want from a woman is going to require resources on your end(time, attention, sympathy etc). Just replace p5ssy with whatever you want, relationship, emotional insight, strap on session etc. Either way, as seen here:

A guy can be getting laid left and right, but if he's doing that by being a simp, I don't consider that a success.

I consider the man most successful who compromises himself the least.

Successful with women = desired return with low investment

 

[Serenity]

What else do you desire? Her home?

Joking aside, anything you want from a woman is going to require resources on your end(time, attention, sympathy etc). Just replace p5ssy with whatever you want, relationship, emotional insight, strap on session etc. Either way, as seen here:

Successful with women = desired return with low investment

No, success is not the measure of how good you are at taking advantage of women. Which is what high return with low investment really is, you just put pretty words on it.

Everyone want something in return, including women. Of course they'll want something in return for what they give a man, but if you're unfair you'll lose the game eventually.

 

[Glumix]

A man who is successful with women is a man who do not need women to define his success.

 

[Serenity]

How would a man "prove" he was successful with women?

Forgot to answer this one. A successful man wouldn't prove his success, there would be no need to prove it. If a man really is successful it would just be evident to everyone, because it's the way he is. Trying to prove things is what unsuccessful people do, trying to convince others they are something they really aren't.

 

[dutchmaster]

No, success is not the measure of how good you are at taking advantage of women. Which is what high return with low investment really is, you just put pretty words on it.

Everyone want something in return, including women. Of course they'll want something in return for what they give a man, but if you're unfair you'll lose the game eventually.

So what's your definition?