How much is enough?

2Rocky

Senior Don Juan
Joined
Jun 13, 2016
Messages
201
Reaction score
134
How much "spinning plates" is enough before deciding on a long term relationship course of action?

And how do you avoid discarding potential long term partners in the process of sowing your oats?

Seems like the mindset for a plate spinner and a good partner are at odds, so how does one's mindset change between the two.

Now I know it is going to be hard for a hard core "f-em and leave 'em kind" of guy to begin to comprehend how one woman would enrich their life, so I'd be interested to hear from men who have made the transition from one mindset or are in the transition period.

Let's see if we can keep this discussion MATURE as the subforum is named...
 
Read the 22 Rules for Massive Success with Women. Everything you need to know to become a huge success with women. And it's free!

Glassguy

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 25, 2016
Messages
2,986
Reaction score
4,329
Age
42
3 woman "enrich" my life more than 1 can.

I spin plates and have a rotation because I NEVER have to put up with a woman's bullshyte and go without until I find another to replace her.

I dont go through breakups and have a lull in between.

I simply discard the one that causes a headache and move to the other ones. Eventually replacing the one I discarded once I decide that one is worthy of what I am looking for and I screen her.

I dont spin a rotation to find a LTR. I spin plates because I like more than 1 option always.

If I wanted an LTR, I would be in one with any of my 3 plates. Its my choice not to do so.

This is why spinning plates and more importantly, a rotation, must incur with the correct mindset.

I do it because its what I want to do. Not doing it to get something else that I can freely have already if I wanted it.
 

Mauser96

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 28, 2012
Messages
4,550
Reaction score
1,365
GG, well-said
 

Epic Days

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 7, 2019
Messages
1,578
Reaction score
1,380
Age
35
Polygamy works.
 

xplt

Don Juan
Joined
Apr 16, 2019
Messages
98
Reaction score
74
How much "spinning plates" is enough before deciding on a long term relationship course of action?
The last weeks, I asked myself the same question over and over.

I'm 32, four months out of a 4 1/2 year relationship. For the last eleven years, call me serial monogamist.
Two LTR's, one over six, the other over four years and a few flings inbetween.
After making the same mistake of choosing the wrong mate twice and realizing this way too late, I started exploring spinning plates in the last months.

Being in Relationships for nearly eleven years, I was overwhelmed by the sudden variety of possibilities, and the fear that taking advantage of it would damage my ability to form a meaningfull connection in the future.

But I promised to myself to never repeat my failures again, so **** all doubts.

I don't have the experience and knowledge like other guys here, but I'm continuing to rotate till I meet someone who's on my wavelength and fits my needs. I will never settle for someone again who doesn't show the traits I'm looking for.

Seems like the mindset for a plate spinner and a good partner are at odds, so how does one's mindset change between the two.
I don't think so. Just because someone exploring what's best for him, doesn't exclude someone from being a good partner. That's too much of black and white.
 
Read the 22 Rules for Massive Success with Women. Everything you need to know to become a huge success with women. And it's free!

zekko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
12,567
Reaction score
4,413
How much "spinning plates" is enough before deciding on a long term relationship course of action?
I think this is completely up to the individual, like so many things. Only you can answer that question for yourself. I'd say at least find out what's out there.
 

taiyuu_otoko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
4,456
Reaction score
2,634
Location
象外
This is something that only seems complicated in the abstract.

But once you get some experience, it makes much more sense.

The more ladies you date, the better idea of what you want for a more permanent thing, if that's what you're looking for.

It's essentially something that is normally natural for most humans.

Most people date around until they settle on somebody.

The concept is made unnecessarily complicated because there's a huge market for sideline guys who want to reverse engineer every last detail before even getting their feet wet.

The idea of dating multiple girls at once before deciding on one at a time is pretty normal.

But since social media, etc., everybody wants to be a game theorist and describe normal human behaviors with complex sounding metaphors.

Just get in the game and get some experience, and if you keep at it you'll keep meeting higher and higher qualified ladies.
 

AttackFormation

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Messages
2,815
Reaction score
2,163
Age
26
Location
Sweden
3 woman "enrich" my life more than 1 can.

I spin plates and have a rotation because I NEVER have to put up with a woman's bullshyte and go without until I find another to replace her.

I dont go through breakups and have a lull in between.

I simply discard the one that causes a headache and move to the other ones. Eventually replacing the one I discarded once I decide that one is worthy of what I am looking for and I screen her.

I dont spin a rotation to find a LTR. I spin plates because I like more than 1 option always.

If I wanted an LTR, I would be in one with any of my 3 plates. Its my choice not to do so.

This is why spinning plates and more importantly, a rotation, must incur with the correct mindset.

I do it because its what I want to do. Not doing it to get something else that I can freely have already if I wanted it.
And for OP's sake, this is what women want anyway if they themselves are looking for a LTR. They want to compete for the (high value) man. They want to "impress" and "change" the hot player and feel like they beat the other women for him. They'll either allude to it, or just admit it outright, as the women on this forum do.
 

BeExcellent

Master Don Juan
Joined
Dec 16, 2015
Messages
2,565
Reaction score
3,251
Age
50
And for OP's sake, this is what women want anyway if they themselves are looking for a LTR. They want to compete for the (high value) man. They want to "impress" and "change" the hot player and feel like they beat the other women for him. They'll either allude to it, or just admit it outright, as the women on this forum do.
I think the characterization above is skewed. It’s not like a mob scene on Black Friday competing for premium product...

Just to clarify @zekko I routinely date high value men and often the player archetype as I have stated around here. However I do NOT “compete” against other women in the sense of chasing and jumping around going “Pick Me! Pick Me!” If a man doesn’t show interest through his actions and investment I jettison from the interaction. There must be mutual/reciprocal interest & investment but the man starts that cascade.

I am high value myself. I simply exist. Either a man appreciates what I bring to the table or he does not. If he does not, then he is not worth my time or emotional bandwidth. Simple.

There is a difference between existing as you are in the world and “competing”.

Men are the hunters & pursuers. That is masculine. Women receive and respond to the subset of men who approach/pursue. That is feminine. Women who compete or chase or whatever might get laid & tossed aside...women who simply exist are the ones who intrigue men and require investment. I look for investment. I don’t need to compete. I am patient and allow the men to approach, become intrigued and invest.

This is why the player types often fall for me. Because I do not compete. Rather I retain the ability to walk at all times.
 
Read the 22 Rules for Massive Success with Women. Everything you need to know to become a huge success with women. And it's free!

zekko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
12,567
Reaction score
4,413
Men are the hunters & pursuers. That is masculine. Women receive and respond to the subset of men who approach/pursue.
I'm curious how you square this mindset with Stormbringer's, which is that it is the woman's job to seduce, and that approaching is not masculine?

And for OP's sake, this is what women want anyway if they themselves are looking for a LTR. They want to compete for the (high value) man. They want to "impress" and "change" the hot player and feel like they beat the other women for him.
That may well be. But I don't think women who are looking for a LTR necessarily want men who are dead set against commitment, that sounds very counterproductive. There's a difference between saying "I will never commmit" and being open to the idea if you meet the right person, but not actively or desperately seeking that situation out, or trying to force it to happen (like putting a square peg into a round hole) - in the meantime, they are having fun. I don't think women find the latter any less attractive than the first, especially if they are seeking a LTR themselves.
 

AttackFormation

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 2, 2014
Messages
2,815
Reaction score
2,163
Age
26
Location
Sweden
I'm curious how you square this mindset with Stormbringer's, which is that it is the woman's job to seduce, and that approaching is not masculine?


That may well be. But I don't think women who are looking for a LTR necessarily want men who are dead set against commitment, that sounds very counterproductive. There's a difference between saying "I will never commmit" and being open to the idea if you meet the right person, but not actively or desperately seeking that situation out, or trying to force it to happen (like putting a square peg into a round hole) - in the meantime, they are having fun. I don't think women find the latter any less attractive than the first, especially if they are seeking a LTR themselves.
Personally I agree with stormrider on your first paragraph. The older and more experienced I become, the less inclined I am to pursue women. It's not even a choice so much, and more of a physiological transition that you just "feel" your body has developed to. Honestly, I now get angered by just the idea of qualifying myself to or validating women. My experiences have cleaned out the reserve that lets your body put up with doing it and deal with their narcissism. I can only deal with women who are as reciprocative as I am.

Yeah, my point was to say that he shouldn't feel spinning plates is at odds with looking for a LTR.
 
Last edited:

LARaiders85

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 4, 2016
Messages
7,172
Reaction score
6,193
Age
34
How much "spinning plates" is enough before deciding on a long term relationship course of action?
Until you find someone worth settling down with.

For me, I tend to not screen long enough .
 

ubercat

Master Don Juan
Joined
Mar 6, 2015
Messages
3,135
Reaction score
1,689
Location
Australia
I like the self-selecting nature of spinning plates and it seems to cut down drama.

I wish I d done it 10 years earlier. I had wrong thinking that two girls would be double the drama but actually things seems to work synergistically.

I hadn't learnt my history. the Arabs have a long history of polygamy and they say if you have one woman you have trouble if you have two you have more trouble if you have 3 no trouble they keep each other busy.

You normally seem to have one girl who is showing more interest than the other 2. So you spend less time with the other two and they either come back around or shuffle off the rotation. And it seems to align well to female psychology. They always know that you're seeing other woman and early on they seem to quite like that. At the point where they want to go exclusive they will let you know. If it that point they meet your standards go for it. if they don't they will shuffle off the rotation and you have to go get more. Which is easier when you have at least one girl because you don't have that smell of desperation about you.

So yes I would say it works well for men because of the nature of women.
 

Augustus_McCrae

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 3, 2012
Messages
789
Reaction score
773
I think the characterization above is skewed. It’s not like a mob scene on Black Friday competing for premium product...

Just to clarify @zekko I routinely date high value men and often the player archetype as I have stated around here. However I do NOT “compete” against other women in the sense of chasing and jumping around going “Pick Me! Pick Me!” If a man doesn’t show interest through his actions and investment I jettison from the interaction. There must be mutual/reciprocal interest & investment but the man starts that cascade.

I am high value myself. I simply exist. Either a man appreciates what I bring to the table or he does not. If he does not, then he is not worth my time or emotional bandwidth. Simple.

There is a difference between existing as you are in the world and “competing”.

Men are the hunters & pursuers. That is masculine. Women receive and respond to the subset of men who approach/pursue. That is feminine. Women who compete or chase or whatever might get laid & tossed aside...women who simply exist are the ones who intrigue men and require investment. I look for investment. I don’t need to compete. I am patient and allow the men to approach, become intrigued and invest.

This is why the player types often fall for me. Because I do not compete. Rather I retain the ability to walk at all times.
Assuming that you want a monogamous LTR, have you considered that the type of men you date (the player type) have a high risk of failure in an LTR?

Is it simply because those are the only type of men who turn you on? For example, thin women do not appeal to me, the boner factor just isn’t there. So is that it? The player type is the only one who gets you juiced so you accept the inherent potential failure risk with that type of man?

-Augustus-
 
Read the 22 Rules for Massive Success with Women. Everything you need to know to become a huge success with women. And it's free!

Mauser96

Master Don Juan
Joined
May 28, 2012
Messages
4,550
Reaction score
1,365
I think the characterization above is skewed. It’s not like a mob scene on Black Friday competing for premium product...

Just to clarify @zekko I routinely date high value men and often the player archetype as I have stated around here. However I do NOT “compete” against other women in the sense of chasing and jumping around going “Pick Me! Pick Me!” If a man doesn’t show interest through his actions and investment I jettison from the interaction. There must be mutual/reciprocal interest & investment but the man starts that cascade.

I am high value myself. I simply exist. Either a man appreciates what I bring to the table or he does not. If he does not, then he is not worth my time or emotional bandwidth. Simple.

There is a difference between existing as you are in the world and “competing”.

Men are the hunters & pursuers. That is masculine. Women receive and respond to the subset of men who approach/pursue. That is feminine. Women who compete or chase or whatever might get laid & tossed aside...women who simply exist are the ones who intrigue men and require investment. I look for investment. I don’t need to compete. I am patient and allow the men to approach, become intrigued and invest.

This is why the player types often fall for me. Because I do not compete. Rather I retain the ability to walk at all times.
This is very, very well-said. And could apply to either gender, except I agree the man will start/initiate in most cases.
 

BeExcellent

Master Don Juan
Joined
Dec 16, 2015
Messages
2,565
Reaction score
3,251
Age
50
I'm curious how you square this mindset with Stormbringer's, which is that it is the woman's job to seduce, and that approaching is not masculine?
These things are not incongruent. Quite the contrary. They are two sides of the same coin. Think for example of a great work of art that you personally find beautiful or inspiring. Something that speaks to you; that moves you. Is that work of art not passive? Is that work of art doing something or extending effort? Nope. It simply exists. It has an energy that makes an impression in your psyche. Something about its existence stirs something within you; moves you; inspires you...

And so it is with a beautiful woman. Her seduction of a man is passive in nature. She exists. There is something inherent in the way in which she exists in the world that draws men toward her. It is effortless at its core. It is pure. Perhaps it is her beauty, perhaps it is her smile, perhaps it is a certain joy and lightness of being that she exudes, perhaps it is her kind heart or her sweet nature or her wit or any number of other factors that create a constellation of traits that impart upon her an allure. And there will be men who are attracted to her, who are intrigued by her...and these men are the ones who approach because when the men approach the seduction is already progressing.

Assuming that you want a monogamous LTR, have you considered that the type of men you date (the player type) have a high risk of failure in an LTR?

Is it simply because those are the only type of men who turn you on? For example, thin women do not appeal to me, the boner factor just isn’t there. So is that it? The player type is the only one who gets you juiced so you accept the inherent potential failure risk with that type of man?
Augustus it is always a good conversation with you. Cheers.

As to your questions the answers are Yes but No. I shall explain. As I have noted elsewhere on the forum in past posts I have two overarching themes that color the way in which I view dating prospects. They are (in this order):

1. Do I desire him sexually? Answer must be yes.
2. Can he lead me? Answer must be yes.

There are many things that factor into answering those questions. Looks, fitness, stature, sex appeal, social skills, does he have his shjt togetherness, business acumen, intelligence, wit, style, confidence, etc., etc., etc. Those traits that combine to answer my two questions are things that I individually value. It is the composite that determines the answer.

Now. Obviously the men who appeal to me personally have wide appeal in the marketplace. Without a doubt. However I do not worry about that. I know with conviction that my value will reveal itself through interactions (that the man initiates and drives *investment*). I know that the man will whittle down his other options as he recognizes what I bring to his life. The selection process is mutual.

At the end of the day the vast majority of men want something meaningful in their lives. They want a confidant, they want a lover on an emotional level as well as a physical level, they want intimacy. They want a place of respite and recharge from all the exertion of the dragon-slaying that men do. They want to be known, they want to be understood.

But finding a woman who meets those deep emotional needs is unusual. So when a man comes across such a woman, no matter his trajectory in the dating realm, something inside him stirs and responds to the way such a woman exists.

Therefore the player archetype, who has experience and knowledge within the "game", and with myriad women, will recognize rapidly when a woman is of a different constitution than the crowd. It will be obvious to him based upon his experience and his curiosity will be raised. She is at once a mystery and a challenge because she is unique. She will have solidity and substance beneath the shallow appeal of her physical presentation.

So yes the player types, when looked at against the backdrop of the general marketplace are a low percentage bet for success in a monogamous LTR. Until they run into the right woman. And then all bets are off.

I have had deeply meaningful multiyear relationships with such men. I appreciate the challenge inherent in my inability to conquer them - this keeps me engaged and keeps me desirous, and they appreciate their inability to control me. This keeps them engaged and desirous...and intimacy is built along the way while desire is enhanced over time.

I wouldn't have it any other way. I'll take my chances on a sexy player any time. I know I am a worthy adversary and respected partner for such a man.
 

AJ84

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jun 16, 2017
Messages
2,302
Reaction score
1,987
Age
35
Location
Canada
I like the self-selecting nature of spinning plates and it seems to cut down drama.

I wish I d done it 10 years earlier. I had wrong thinking that two girls would be double the drama but actually things seems to work synergistically.

I hadn't learnt my history. the Arabs have a long history of polygamy and they say if you have one woman you have trouble if you have two you have more trouble if you have 3 no trouble they keep each other busy.

You normally seem to have one girl who is showing more interest than the other 2. So you spend less time with the other two and they either come back around or shuffle off the rotation. And it seems to align well to female psychology. They always know that you're seeing other woman and early on they seem to quite like that. At the point where they want to go exclusive they will let you know. If it that point they meet your standards go for it. if they don't they will shuffle off the rotation and you have to go get more. Which is easier when you have at least one girl because you don't have that smell of desperation about you.

So yes I would say it works well for men because of the nature of women.
Unlike polygamy in Arab countries, the plates a guy has most likely are not exclusive to him and are also spinning their own plates. That’s what many men and women do when dating, explore options and go exclusive with their top choice.
To me, spinning plates is just a red pill term for going on dates.
 

Augustus_McCrae

Master Don Juan
Joined
Apr 3, 2012
Messages
789
Reaction score
773
These things are not incongruent. Quite the contrary. They are two sides of the same coin. Think for example of a great work of art that you personally find beautiful or inspiring. Something that speaks to you; that moves you. Is that work of art not passive? Is that work of art doing something or extending effort? Nope. It simply exists. It has an energy that makes an impression in your psyche. Something about its existence stirs something within you; moves you; inspires you...

And so it is with a beautiful woman. Her seduction of a man is passive in nature. She exists. There is something inherent in the way in which she exists in the world that draws men toward her. It is effortless at its core. It is pure. Perhaps it is her beauty, perhaps it is her smile, perhaps it is a certain joy and lightness of being that she exudes, perhaps it is her kind heart or her sweet nature or her wit or any number of other factors that create a constellation of traits that impart upon her an allure. And there will be men who are attracted to her, who are intrigued by her...and these men are the ones who approach because when the men approach the seduction is already progressing.



Augustus it is always a good conversation with you. Cheers.

As to your questions the answers are Yes but No. I shall explain. As I have noted elsewhere on the forum in past posts I have two overarching themes that color the way in which I view dating prospects. They are (in this order):

1. Do I desire him sexually? Answer must be yes.
2. Can he lead me? Answer must be yes.

There are many things that factor into answering those questions. Looks, fitness, stature, sex appeal, social skills, does he have his shjt togetherness, business acumen, intelligence, wit, style, confidence, etc., etc., etc. Those traits that combine to answer my two questions are things that I individually value. It is the composite that determines the answer.

Now. Obviously the men who appeal to me personally have wide appeal in the marketplace. Without a doubt. However I do not worry about that. I know with conviction that my value will reveal itself through interactions (that the man initiates and drives *investment*). I know that the man will whittle down his other options as he recognizes what I bring to his life. The selection process is mutual.

At the end of the day the vast majority of men want something meaningful in their lives. They want a confidant, they want a lover on an emotional level as well as a physical level, they want intimacy. They want a place of respite and recharge from all the exertion of the dragon-slaying that men do. They want to be known, they want to be understood.

But finding a woman who meets those deep emotional needs is unusual. So when a man comes across such a woman, no matter his trajectory in the dating realm, something inside him stirs and responds to the way such a woman exists.

Therefore the player archetype, who has experience and knowledge within the "game", and with myriad women, will recognize rapidly when a woman is of a different constitution than the crowd. It will be obvious to him based upon his experience and his curiosity will be raised. She is at once a mystery and a challenge because she is unique. She will have solidity and substance beneath the shallow appeal of her physical presentation.

So yes the player types, when looked at against the backdrop of the general marketplace are a low percentage bet for success in a monogamous LTR. Until they run into the right woman. And then all bets are off.

I have had deeply meaningful multiyear relationships with such men. I appreciate the challenge inherent in my inability to conquer them - this keeps me engaged and keeps me desirous, and they appreciate their inability to control me. This keeps them engaged and desirous...and intimacy is built along the way while desire is enhanced over time.

I wouldn't have it any other way. I'll take my chances on a sexy player any time. I know I am a worthy adversary and respected partner for such a man.
BE, I enjoy conversing with you as well. And I hope you’re enjoying playing the field since leaving your last relationship.

So, have you always been so humble?

But to net out what you said, you would be bored to tears with any other type of man. I get that.

Just be aware that the player type is more prone to stray even if his woman is awesome.

-Augustus-
 

BeExcellent

Master Don Juan
Joined
Dec 16, 2015
Messages
2,565
Reaction score
3,251
Age
50
BE, I enjoy conversing with you as well. And I hope you’re enjoying playing the field since leaving your last relationship.

So, have you always been so humble?

But to net out what you said, you would be bored to tears with any other type of man. I get that.

Just be aware that the player type is more prone to stray even if his woman is awesome.

-Augustus-
Augustus I think you would find me humble and gracious if you were to meet me in real life.

Around the forum I share my actual life experiences. I don't embellish nor exaggerate. I am direct and succinct because I don't think it serves the reader for me to be otherwise. I make no apologies for my confidence nor my life's course thus far.

I know the player types can be more likely to stray physically. But these are also men who as a rule do not open up emotionally. Once such a man establishes an emotional connection of depth and creates a bond, it is not easily broken. Real connection is not easily replaced.

Last night my ex BF was out at a very popular major metro nightclub surrounded by women. He can get laid just about at will. The women kept pestering him, propositioning him, asking who was he texting...why is he preoccupied with his phone at the club, etc., etc. He was texting me. Blowing up my phone actually. He walked out of the club, phoned me (I'm in another state so this was NOT a booty call -I don't do those EVER-), walked to his car, got in his car and wanted to chat with me. So he sat in the cold running the heater for 2 hours chatting with me. This is from midnight until 2am...so prime pick up hours. I could hear women coming up to the car window wanting his attention. He was waving them off and/or telling them to leave him alone. He misses me something fierce. He wanted to talk. He also needed to sober up before driving.

He got a burger on the way home, wanted to talk on the drive, got to his buddy's house (his buddy had already taken a plate home to bang) and sat in the car outside chatting to me for another 45 minutes or so. Finally he went inside. He's on the phone with me this entire time...the plate's friend is lying down on the couch at the buddy's house, waiting for him. He says hello to her, excuses himself and goes upstairs to bed. We remained on the phone and were on the phone until 6am. He's already called me 4 times today, starting at noon. Did he bang the friend after we hung up this morning? Maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

My point is he misses me. He can't replace the connection he has with me with hook-ups. He's tried. He told me he had gone on dates nearly daily for a while with different women and he is sick of it.

And he hates the idea of me seeing other men. He is realizing he might actually lose me for good. Loss can be a brutal teacher.

But had I been unwilling or unable to walk away from him, he'd never understand the void my leaving created in his life. You see he invested. He connected. But only now is my value in his life becoming evident.

So yes, I am well aware of what I am dealing with. And yes, I have more attention from men than I can accommodate in my schedule, so I get to be very choosy. Life is good.

Cheers
 
Top