"She Wants a Man, Not a Boy"
You asked her if she wanted to grab coffee. Then you asked if the time worked. Then you asked if the place was okay. Then you asked if she'd prefer tea.
Four questions. Four chances for her to say no. Four signals that you're terrified of making a decision.
Plan it. Pick the place. Pick the time. Tell her where to meet you. She'll either show up or she won't.
Either way, you look like a man instead of a scared little boy.
Dr. Phil Squashes Men's rights.
- Thread starter DJDamage
- Start date
"She Laughed All Night. Then She Ghosted You. Here's Why."
Dinner ran three hours. She laughed at everything. You walked her to her car thinking this one's locked in.
Then: nothing. Two texts. No reply. What happened?
You did what most men do on a great date. You filled every silence, answered every question, and left her with nothing to wonder about. No mystery. Nothing to sit with when she got home.
Rule 3 of the "22 Rules" changes the ending: tell her a little, hold back the rest, and let her imagination do the chasing. The ghosting stops too.
chickenlegs03
Banned
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2006
- Messages
- 270
- Reaction score
- 8
Actually, I agree with Dr. Phil. The guy made a choice to not use a condom. I'd wear one no matter what the girl said. He has no argument, he had the choice, and he chose not to wear a condom.
Sucks for him.
You know, you can say Dr. Phil is a 'terrorist' but if you were in that same situation, no matter how you spin it, it is the guy's fault.
I'm sure it's not the first time the girl wasn't completely upfront with him. It was his fault for letting stuff slip.
And if I ever got into such a situation I would pay for it. I wouldn't want the kid to grow up and know that I didn't want to be his father. It is his child, he needs to grow up and stop being so immature.
If you think about it, he's probably paying his lawyer and that other guy more than $500/month right now to defend him. Lawyers usually charge around $200/hr...I know, I've had one before.
Btw, the reason they show more women in the audience is because there usually are no guys in a Dr. Phil show audience. His main audience is 95% women probably.
Sucks for him.
You know, you can say Dr. Phil is a 'terrorist' but if you were in that same situation, no matter how you spin it, it is the guy's fault.
I'm sure it's not the first time the girl wasn't completely upfront with him. It was his fault for letting stuff slip.
And if I ever got into such a situation I would pay for it. I wouldn't want the kid to grow up and know that I didn't want to be his father. It is his child, he needs to grow up and stop being so immature.
If you think about it, he's probably paying his lawyer and that other guy more than $500/month right now to defend him. Lawyers usually charge around $200/hr...I know, I've had one before.
Btw, the reason they show more women in the audience is because there usually are no guys in a Dr. Phil show audience. His main audience is 95% women probably.
daSoCalpimp
Don Juan
is this guy a real doctor? or did they just give him a DR. Prefix?
Re:
Because I think this is a chump, I'm still compelled to write.
The law SHOULD be changed. Period. End of story. But this guy will end up being a martyr to the cause. I do agree, the law is UNbalanced, in the sense a woman's biological right prevails over the man's choice. Now IF she choices she wants the baby, and decides NOT to exercise any care in the outcome, she bears FULL responsibility for it. That should be clear and evident.
However, we all men know this should be an uphill battle because society DOES NOT WANT a bunch of welfare women. They don't want people humping and abandoning kids to either parent. Society does not want, nor can it handle, a bunch of people with laws bending its whims to whatever the sexual moors of the times are. It SHOULD be fair and equal, period. End of story. It's a touchy area because you're dealing with a woman's body, and that has HUGE repercussions in law. If you begin saying you can determine legality IN the body, where is the boundry?
Bottom line...if a man chooses NO, despite all attempts at protection, he shouldn't be forced. Moreover, if she chooses yes, and he makes attempts to be a father and involved, and the relationship does not work, and for whatever reason, she just wants his paycheck, then she should not get it.
This kid was DUMB DUMB DUMB. Double dumb.
[]He didn't use protection
[]He treated the hookup or relationship like a business; every man knows a woman has a strong biological imperative, everything out of her mouth, or on her body is made to bring that specific reaction of manifest mating.
[]He trusted her too much
[]He told her he didn't want to be a father, which likely made her bitter. "What, you can fvck me, but you can't be with me?"
Bottom line, don't go that far with a woman whom you don't want kids with or to be father with or to marry. This should be a drastic lesson to all you guys not wrapping it up, sleeping with sluts you don't want a baby with, and would never do well in a crisis mode. The worst situation is getting a psycho, illogical bytch who'd put you on payroll for 18 years.
A-Unit
Because I think this is a chump, I'm still compelled to write.
The law SHOULD be changed. Period. End of story. But this guy will end up being a martyr to the cause. I do agree, the law is UNbalanced, in the sense a woman's biological right prevails over the man's choice. Now IF she choices she wants the baby, and decides NOT to exercise any care in the outcome, she bears FULL responsibility for it. That should be clear and evident.
However, we all men know this should be an uphill battle because society DOES NOT WANT a bunch of welfare women. They don't want people humping and abandoning kids to either parent. Society does not want, nor can it handle, a bunch of people with laws bending its whims to whatever the sexual moors of the times are. It SHOULD be fair and equal, period. End of story. It's a touchy area because you're dealing with a woman's body, and that has HUGE repercussions in law. If you begin saying you can determine legality IN the body, where is the boundry?
Bottom line...if a man chooses NO, despite all attempts at protection, he shouldn't be forced. Moreover, if she chooses yes, and he makes attempts to be a father and involved, and the relationship does not work, and for whatever reason, she just wants his paycheck, then she should not get it.
This kid was DUMB DUMB DUMB. Double dumb.
[]He didn't use protection
[]He treated the hookup or relationship like a business; every man knows a woman has a strong biological imperative, everything out of her mouth, or on her body is made to bring that specific reaction of manifest mating.
[]He trusted her too much
[]He told her he didn't want to be a father, which likely made her bitter. "What, you can fvck me, but you can't be with me?"
Bottom line, don't go that far with a woman whom you don't want kids with or to be father with or to marry. This should be a drastic lesson to all you guys not wrapping it up, sleeping with sluts you don't want a baby with, and would never do well in a crisis mode. The worst situation is getting a psycho, illogical bytch who'd put you on payroll for 18 years.
A-Unit
Bonhomme
Master Don Juan
Dr. Phil wussed out and took the "PC" position.
Yes, it is very unjust for him to pay child support, because she told him there is "absolutely no chance" of her getting pregnant, and he told her straight up that he had no intention of being a father.
Was he a fool to trust her? Absolutely!
Should she be rewarded for deceiving him into being her sperm donor? Absolutely not!
Perhaps he should have called her bluff, and went for full custody if he had a chance of getting it. On the basis of her poor character, he may have had a shot. That would really make the b1tch sh1t bricks.
The upshot of this ruling: women get rewarded for deceiving men.
Yes, it is very unjust for him to pay child support, because she told him there is "absolutely no chance" of her getting pregnant, and he told her straight up that he had no intention of being a father.
Was he a fool to trust her? Absolutely!
Should she be rewarded for deceiving him into being her sperm donor? Absolutely not!
Perhaps he should have called her bluff, and went for full custody if he had a chance of getting it. On the basis of her poor character, he may have had a shot. That would really make the b1tch sh1t bricks.
The upshot of this ruling: women get rewarded for deceiving men.
"She's Out of Your League"
You've said it a hundred times. Maybe a thousand. And every time you say it, you train your brain to freeze the next time she walks into the room.
Leagues are a myth invented by guys who are scared of women.
She's a person. She has bad breath in the morning. She picks songs she can't sing in the shower. She overthinks her own texts.
Walk over. Say something. The league dissolves the second you open your mouth.
Bonhomme
Master Don Juan
Can't even write the sonofab1tch without opening up yourself for them to spam and junk mail you to hell.
SELF-MASTERY
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2004
- Messages
- 1,971
- Reaction score
- 7
Rule #1 NEVER trust a byatch...
Rule 2 Take care of the children you create.
The fool should have worn a condom, not only to stop pregnancy, but to shield himself from STD (reference rule 1-never trust a HO)
I think that we should be able to make women sign a reproductive contract before we engaged in sex that says that if u pregnant you are own your and I will not support yo financially or emotionally. Men have do not have ANY rights.
Rule 2 Take care of the children you create.
The fool should have worn a condom, not only to stop pregnancy, but to shield himself from STD (reference rule 1-never trust a HO)
I think that we should be able to make women sign a reproductive contract before we engaged in sex that says that if u pregnant you are own your and I will not support yo financially or emotionally. Men have do not have ANY rights.
Rollo Tomassi
Master Don Juan
OK point one: Dr. Phil is a high preist in the cult of Oprah. Every woman in that audience loves the guy, but none of them would sleep with him if they met him in a bar.
Point two, and more importantly, he's right about the responsibilities, but for the wrong reasons. The chump in this story is the father and he should Man up and support his kid. All of the bravado and stuborn, self-righteous resolve he has now should've been applied when he was banging this girl. He comes off as this hard ass who's committed to his convictions now that his nuts are on the anvil, but like most AFCs I'm sure this guy thought he'd hit a sexual jackpot with this girl and got comfortable. FRANCISCO's correct here, WTF would she need birth control pills for if she was unable to conceive? You could make the argument that she used them to regulate her menstrual cycle, but lets get real here.
That said, this is yet one more occurance of 'birth fraud'. Dr. Phil loves to pop off with these self-righteous, sympathetic pulls to his all female audience, "Is anyone thinking of the child here?" knowing he'll get approval from his cult members. Well, we sure as hell can't ask the mother if she was thinking about the best interests of the child she defrauded this man into having with her now can we? We can't ask her if she was thinking this guy would make a great father for her child, we can't ask her if she'd had kids or abortions by other men prior to (or after) this guy can we? We can't discuss the fact that if the roles were reversed and the woman wanted to abort a child that the man wanted he's still just as fvcked because the law is on her side. We can't discuss the fact that "accidental" pregnancies are practically a cottage industry these days.
The guy was an idiot, granted, but this is yet one more instance of masculine villany and feminine empathy in the media. All this serves is to reinforce the mythology that anything masculine is to be ridiculed, feared and held with contempt. We all pay a social cost for lopsided, popularized portrayals of masculinity. Dr. Phil practically spooges over himself thinking how many books he'll sell and how many women will love him for more completely identifying with them. This guy and his 'crack' law team will gleefully deposit the big check from Oprah the next day for appearing on the show (sorry but the ponytail lawyer only makes it look like they took a break from playing Dungeons & Dragons to go down to the studio to tape the show). All of the women in the audience will shake their heads and think "that poor, poor mother, tsk, tsk,.." as they contemplate and confirm their plight as women opressed by men who "just don't get it." And all of the advertisers will fork over even more money to have thier commercials played on the next show.
The real fallout from this will be the AFCs who'll follow in this guy's footsteps due to exactly the dynamic that Dr. Phil is fostering here.
Point two, and more importantly, he's right about the responsibilities, but for the wrong reasons. The chump in this story is the father and he should Man up and support his kid. All of the bravado and stuborn, self-righteous resolve he has now should've been applied when he was banging this girl. He comes off as this hard ass who's committed to his convictions now that his nuts are on the anvil, but like most AFCs I'm sure this guy thought he'd hit a sexual jackpot with this girl and got comfortable. FRANCISCO's correct here, WTF would she need birth control pills for if she was unable to conceive? You could make the argument that she used them to regulate her menstrual cycle, but lets get real here.
That said, this is yet one more occurance of 'birth fraud'. Dr. Phil loves to pop off with these self-righteous, sympathetic pulls to his all female audience, "Is anyone thinking of the child here?" knowing he'll get approval from his cult members. Well, we sure as hell can't ask the mother if she was thinking about the best interests of the child she defrauded this man into having with her now can we? We can't ask her if she was thinking this guy would make a great father for her child, we can't ask her if she'd had kids or abortions by other men prior to (or after) this guy can we? We can't discuss the fact that if the roles were reversed and the woman wanted to abort a child that the man wanted he's still just as fvcked because the law is on her side. We can't discuss the fact that "accidental" pregnancies are practically a cottage industry these days.
The guy was an idiot, granted, but this is yet one more instance of masculine villany and feminine empathy in the media. All this serves is to reinforce the mythology that anything masculine is to be ridiculed, feared and held with contempt. We all pay a social cost for lopsided, popularized portrayals of masculinity. Dr. Phil practically spooges over himself thinking how many books he'll sell and how many women will love him for more completely identifying with them. This guy and his 'crack' law team will gleefully deposit the big check from Oprah the next day for appearing on the show (sorry but the ponytail lawyer only makes it look like they took a break from playing Dungeons & Dragons to go down to the studio to tape the show). All of the women in the audience will shake their heads and think "that poor, poor mother, tsk, tsk,.." as they contemplate and confirm their plight as women opressed by men who "just don't get it." And all of the advertisers will fork over even more money to have thier commercials played on the next show.
The real fallout from this will be the AFCs who'll follow in this guy's footsteps due to exactly the dynamic that Dr. Phil is fostering here.
The lesson here is to never trust a woman.
Don't believe anything she says, especially when it's something you want to hear (it's manipulation of some kind), and especially when it's about kids, because she knows that a kid is her ticket to Easy Street even if she hates them as much as you do.
Don't believe anything she says, especially when it's something you want to hear (it's manipulation of some kind), and especially when it's about kids, because she knows that a kid is her ticket to Easy Street even if she hates them as much as you do.
brucevangeorge
Banned
Agreed.Visceral said:
That is why you should always have a backup plan and always use protection. When you leave such decisions that affect YOU in someone else's hands... they will screw it up.
It's better to be safe than to pay out of your ass for the next eighteen years.
"I'm Not Looking for Anything Serious Right Now"
When a woman says it, guys hear a confession. A heads-up. A scheduling conflict.
Here's the translation: I don't feel anything. Right now. With you.
Watch what happens when a man triggers actual attraction. The busy career, the recent breakup, the "not in a place to date" — all of it evaporates instantly. The same woman who was guarding her freedom is suddenly free every night.
The "22 Rules" explain why. When the right switches flip, her timeline rearranges itself around you.
This is a good discussion...
It reminds me of a quote a former poster named Giovanni Casanova once posted. Something like....
"Paternity laws will be fair only when men start giving birth."
I happen to agree with him......
It reminds me of a quote a former poster named Giovanni Casanova once posted. Something like....
"Paternity laws will be fair only when men start giving birth."
I happen to agree with him......
Shiftkey
Master Don Juan
Good quote, I agree as well. Isn't he still around though?Survivor said: