Spinning Plates is overrated and should NOT be advised!

[Pierce.Manhammer]

@SmoothHendrixPS2

Interesting reply.

Would it be safe to say that you consider yourself to be that Alpha that turns out beautiful women? That you’re capable of giving women the best sex they will ever have? I’ve detected this tone from you here and in other threads

That you’re just that good?

First of all, I have 0 interest in what @catsmeow2 has to say about this. She knows not to talk to me on here. Chances are she's had casual sex before and is embarrassed to speak up since ya'll are so quick to diminish a female for exploring her sexuality.

I wonder if you would call your mother or sister low quality for having casual sex a couple of times.

Guys like ya'll want to control women's p u s s y. Men have been doing this for hundreds of years, mutilating their ****oris's and making sure they get married before they lose their virginity, etc. Women got sick of this **** and wanted CHOICE. Men like ya'll are to blame since it's your belief system that makes women spiteful towards us.

@pipeman84 @Dr.Suave
I'm here to tell you guys... If you want a hot AND "high quality women" by YOUR standards, then you are now looking at less than 1% of modern women. Good luck with that, especially if ya'll don't believe in spinning plates lol

HARDCORE TRUTH: Majority of desirable women get turned out by an alpha early in their adult life. Being "turned out" means they develop a freaky kink side to their sexuality which gives them the everlasting desire to be erotically dominated. These are the women that cheat on their beta provider husbands looking for good D I C K.

THE red pill isn't easy to swallow but this is the truth, and at the risk of assuming, you both sound like you don't have the sexual prowess to put girls pasts aside and have fun with them when it's your turn.

Maybe you are both into monogamy (which I respect), or you just truly prefer a SMV 7 or LESS who has never had casual sex in her life... Not me. I like feminine, submissive, hot and sexy women, and If I can seduce them into casual sex after they initially decline, then they weren't as "high quality" as they or YOU both thought.

Understand that you are eliminating a good percentage of the most desirable women on earth with your attitudes, and need to wake the
F U C K up!

Respectfully

 

[kavi]

IMO, a quality woman can certainly have casual sex if she so desired, why wouldn't she?

I am not judging either as I am in the camp that pretty much all western/modern women have had casual sex and it is the norm in our current culture.

But to answer your (likely rhetorical) question.

There is no difference in Casual vs Relationship sex. Casual Sex is also a relationship of sorts. I think women are in a tough spot because on the one hand they kinda have to use their sexual value to lock-a-man-down into marriage and ltr, but at the same time they want to be able to enjoy sex without always using it to 'game' a guy into marriage or ltr, hence I see casual sex and relationships/ltr/marriage being in conflict due to most women attempting to use sex to get the latter, but giving away sex for free in casual sex.

So in a marriage or ltr or emotional relationship, sex is supposedly more meaningful etc etc but then these women having casual sex, kinda makes the marriage or ltr guy feel stupid to value romantic emotional sex with a woman when she just did that with no feelings with other guys.

IMO, casual sex is a terrible thing atm, because in the current climate I only see it going to low-value guys. This could be a v attractive 22-30yr old guy but casual sex usually means no feelings, but if a woman meets a real high quality guy she is gonna have feelings and emotions and then that will stop her from having sex with him, this the higher quality male loses and the lower quality one, who doesnt generate feelings and attraction win.

I'm really just making a point for the thread, not here to debate this or anything.

Women do have a problem just giving up sex to high quality guys, and then in secret give it up to losers.

 

[Dr.Suave]

IMO, a quality woman can certainly have casual sex if she so desired, why wouldn't she?

Like you said, we all have different definitions but What´s the difference between a high quality woman and other women then? If they both can have sex outside relationships.

 

[pipeman84]

IMO, a quality woman can certainly have casual sex if she so desired, why wouldn't she?

So leaving aside the societal stigma attached to women having casual sex... you know, a man having casual sex is a player, a woman doing the same is a slvt, a key that opens multiple locks is a master key, a lock that's opened by several keys is a broken/sh!ty one. Aren't women supposed to perceive a strong connection between sex and love/feelings? Isn't it true that 50%+ of women don't orgasm from penetrative sex alone, and that's in a relationship?

What's the incentive then for casual sex, where the chance of having an orgasm is tiny? How can then a high quality woman be seeking something that's societally disapproved and which gives her no real pleasure? Using that line of thinking, quality women are doing hard drugs too.

 

[Dr.Suave]

For me personally, yes. Sexual intimacy is linked to my emotions, which is why I never engaged in casual sex.

However, I cannot speak for all women, there are many women who DO enjoy casual sex, for them sex is not tied into their emotions, they can enjoy the physical aspect of it without getting too emotionally involved.

I try to not to judge and like I said, as long as she behaves with honesty and integrity, respects herself and others, that is all that should matter imo.

So a man who doesnt cheat is a high quality value man? Edit: There should be other stuff too but I guess thats a different conversation. I just didnt think your definition of a quality woman would be one that engages in casual sex. Im a little suprised, thats all.

 

[kavi]

So a man who doesnt cheat is a high quality value man? Edit: There should be other stuff too but I guess thats a different conversation. I just didnt think your definition of a quality woman would be one that engages in casual sex. Im a little suprised, thats all.

But why not?

More high-quality women are single
Single women have more casual sex. Hence high-quality women may have more casual sex than average women.

High Quality Women: Intelligent, healthy, good looking, decent career/money, social life etc. Basically Upper-Class vs Lower Class kinda thing.

The irnony is that the higher the womans quality, the more likely she is to be single (due to higher standards), and hence more likely to have casual sex. Irony is a terrible thing that occurs when human social systems are broken and there are conflicts between good things.

 

[kavi]

That type of mindset is exactly why many women feel a sense of entitlement simply because she has a vagina. And that her vagina is some precious commodity only given to those men who earn it by giving her a "relationship"?

No, women have this mindset themselves, it is not coming from this generation of men, maybe those earlier boomer fathers or whatever.
There are men who will critisize women for casual sex but do it themselves. Its complicated.

The problem is simple. Women still think sex is power. This is the reason men are belittling themselves with 'seduction' which is really just clown game.

This is the reason why when a guy and girl is getting to know each other, he just cant come out and say "So we have known each other for x weeks, I think things are going well so maybe we should have sex" or something, but instead he is kept on his toes, not knowing if it is going to happen or not until it actually does.

There is also a weird idea out there, or maybe it is outdated now, that a guy needs to 'make it happen', have sex quickly, too slow to act and he is gonna lose the chance. All of this puts the women in an unbalanced high-power position, where her vagina has the most value in the whole relationship.

 

[Stanley]

There is also a weird idea out there, or maybe it is outdated now, that a guy needs to 'make it happen', have sex quickly, too slow to act and he is gonna lose the chance. All of this puts the women in an unbalanced high-power position, where her vagina has the most value in the whole relationship.

Sad, but true for most men

 

[kavi]

I mean the problem with casual sex, is that men trying to get it end up doing stupid clown ****...

I just remember poster Pan87 who had this whole system in place of telling stories, it seemed so feminine and manipulative and weak, I just think women are not strong enough to give up sex to high value guys but esp in casual sex these stupid things are happening. In LTRs we dont have this issue, men are judged on their whole character and Game in a much more complete way. A guy who can get lots of casual sex may not do well with women long term. The difference in types of behaviours that get casual sex vs those that get ltrs is what interests me.

Beta and fake alpha males think Alpha get lots of casual sex and beta males do better in LTR but this is not true. Alpha males dont tell stupid stories to women to impress them to get laid.

 

[Dr.Suave]

I dont understand that mindset and only adds to the already toxic dating environment happening today.

I politely disagree. I'm engaged to be married. I don't think me having x or y mindset really adds to an already toxic dating environment. It's not like go around IRL preaching x or y mindset.

Edit: Feels like You are saying I'm the Bad Guy while plate spinners and Pump&Ghost are the good guys

 

[kavi]

I politely disagree. I'm engaged to be married. I don't think me having x or y mindset really adds to an already toxic dating environment. It's not like go around IRL preaching x or y mindset.

Edit: Feels like You are saying I'm the Bad Guy while plate spinners and Pump&Ghost are the good guys

Women dont really care about the plate spinners. They will let themselves be spun until they meet a high-value guy and then will demand a relationship and commitment or nothing.

 

[pipeman84]

But like I said to @pipeman if it's one or two men in a FWB situation wherein they were friends and cared about each other as friends do, and assuming she also behaved with honesty, integrity, and treated herself and others with kindness and respect, than she would be considered high quality IMO.

In my opinion, FWB is synonymous with mediocrity. So you can't have a woman in a FWB situation (ie mediocre) be high quality, it's a contradiction in terms. If she was truly high quality, then she would find/attract a man she would call fiancee/husband. Plus, it's known from real life accounts of FWB that one friend always cares more than the other (usually the woman), wants more, becomes jealous etc, and thus the arrangement doesn't work anymore and they lose the friendship as well.

Not sure why some of y'all believe a woman who enjoys sex for sex and doesn't necessary need to be emotionally involved or in a serious committed relationship would be considered low quality? Or that sex (or her vagina) is something to be bartered, or "given away" as some sort of prize or reward?

For one, a woman who sees sex more as a man does is not attractive to a masculine guy (due to lack of sexual polarity). Secondly, a woman who enjoys sex for sex, ie sees men as interchangeable, has demonstrated lack of loyalty, therefore she's put herself in the 'fun only' category. Thirdly how she handles her sexuality and femininity is what defines her as a woman: 1. when she barters sex either direct (sex workers) or indirect (casual sex) it makes her much less desirable for investment from a man.

As the old saying goes, why buy the cow when you get the milk for free? 2. when she sees herself as high quality, sees men as more than walking dildos and therefore only a man who went through a vetting process can access the goods, then she's worthy of investment.

That type of mindset is exactly why many women feel a sense of entitlement simply because she has a vagina. And that her vagina is some precious commodity given only to those men who earn it by giving her a "relationship"?

A woman with that mindset (entitled, manipulative) will most probably have a string of failed relationships behind her. And that's another alarm bell regarding her quality.

 

[Gamisch]

I am not judging either as I am in the camp that pretty much all western/modern women have had casual sex and it is the norm in our current culture.

But to answer your (likely rhetorical) question.

There is no difference in Casual vs Relationship sex. Casual Sex is also a relationship of sorts. I think women are in a tough spot because on the one hand they kinda have to use their sexual value to lock-a-man-down into marriage and ltr, but at the same time they want to be able to enjoy sex without always using it to 'game' a guy into marriage or ltr, hence I see casual sex and relationships/ltr/marriage being in conflict due to most women attempting to use sex to get the latter, but giving away sex for free in casual sex.

So in a marriage or ltr or emotional relationship, sex is supposedly more meaningful etc etc but then these women having casual sex, kinda makes the marriage or ltr guy feel stupid to value romantic emotional sex with a woman when she just did that with no feelings with other guys.

IMO, casual sex is a terrible thing atm, because in the current climate I only see it going to low-value guys. This could be a v attractive 22-30yr old guy but casual sex usually means no feelings, but if a woman meets a real high quality guy she is gonna have feelings and emotions and then that will stop her from having sex with him, this the higher quality male loses and the lower quality one, who doesnt generate feelings and attraction win.

I'm really just making a point for the thread, not here to debate this or anything.

Women do have a problem just giving up sex to high quality guys, and then in secret give it up to losers.

They way I grew up was simple; you were bf/gf. Period. Any form of sex out side a relationship was considered as slvtty. Women who were known to do this were the " easy women in town" and no man really respected them.


Later I got introduced to the word "dating". I've never heard one of my homies say he "dated " a woman up untill recently. Then the phrases " casual sex " and "fwb"were added as well. Now we even have " situation ship". No man with self respect will say he is in a " situation ship with her". In man language that means she made it clear you are NOT her first option. These are words used originally by gullible ,naive women who get played and spun ,but refuse to see it how it is and now these words are used by men/ media as well Remember the Facebook "its complicated " option? If any one of my friends would say "its complicated " about a woman I would (have to)smack him.

All this terminology is used by (top)men to keep women at bay. Most men won't say " I am just fecking you but I feel nothing ". When a woman tells me she wants me to be her " fwb" she immediately used to lose value (in my bluepilled eyes). And when a woman tells me she's "dating " someone I assume she is either chasing a guy who wont commit, or leaves the door open to new men.

If there's not a clear LTR, she can name it however she feels like. The choice of words will be influenced by who is chasing who more. Everything other than LTR is a feminine way of creating distance and keeping one foot on the brake from the actual LTR, or the opposite; a fantasy phrase to seemingly be closer to the LTR she'll never get. I I benefitted greatly from all this tbh. There were women who I would never LTR, and all this modern dating jargon gave me plenty of leverage to keep some around on vague , moderns terms. "(I believe we are now in a ...uhm..fwb casual situation-ship?").

I mean the problem with casual sex, is that men trying to get it end up doing stupid clown ****...

I just remember poster Pan87 who had this whole system in place of telling stories, it seemed so feminine and manipulative and weak, I just think women are not strong enough to give up sex to high value guys but esp in casual sex these stupid things are happening. In LTRs we dont have this issue, men are judged on their whole character and Game in a much more complete way. A guy who can get lots of casual sex may not do well with women long term. The difference in types of behaviours that get casual sex vs those that get ltrs is what interests me.

Beta and fake alpha males think Alpha get lots of casual sex and beta males do better in LTR but this is not true. Alpha males dont tell stupid stories to women to impress them to get laid.

Funny you mention Pan. If there was anything I agreed with him upon and learned from him, it was his stance on women and casual sex. I agree with him that casual sex for women is more of a myth. We men like to believe that sex without feelings is possible for women. Maybe because it's this Sex and the City hook up culture that's been stuffed down our throat and too much p0rn. I have yet to meet one women I fecked who didn't had feelings for me on some level.

Think about it, what's the best most women will have to offer ? Poosy. But when she deals with a man who doesn't put her on a pedestalize for having a V G , she wont have much left. Dude lets her pick any phrase she likes as long as it NOT LTR, and nowadays "dating " might also be too hefty to describe a casual relationship "(all initiated and maintained due the man's stance on the relationship!!).

So fellows, NEVER believe a woman when she says it was " just casual" with dude x y z. Her " just casual " can be equal to our "dating". Casual for a man would be visiting a hooker. Even a ONS isn't that casual for most men (the thrill of the hunt can't be replaced by a hooker). Casual sounds innocent, but when you start to understand women better you'll see it's a made up modern post 2000's phrase .


Casual sounds innocent but its NOT.

 

[eli77]

Nice post I would say you should only be doing it in high school maybe freshman year of college and very overrated

 

[SmoothHendrixPS2]

@SmoothHendrixPS2

Interesting reply.

Would it be safe to say that you consider yourself to be that Alpha that turns out beautiful women? That you’re capable of giving women the best sex they will ever have? I’ve detected this tone from you here and in other threads

That you’re just that good?

This has nothing to do with me, and everything to do with hardcore truth that many on here are naive too. It's one thing to read about being red pill, and it' another to experience it. I provide insight, wisdom, and knowledge based off of my personal experiences.

I'm all for women's freedom. And just as I believe they should be free to fvck and marry whomever they want, I have the choice of who I spend my time with. I don't really get what you mean, do you expect me to treat all women as if they all have the same value?

Ummm yea lol that's one of the basic principles to juggling multiple women - Treat them all the same. But once again you prove to pedistalize them. If you are a monogamous guy, then I can understand your approach. Every time you respond, you reveal more and more of your blue pilled ways. I hope you stop talking to me for the sake of your credibility.

 

[SmoothHendrixPS2]

You might enjoy trying to date them, 'seduce' them, manipulate them into believing you're actually interested and care about them ... in other words spending an inordinately amount of time and likely being dishonest in the process just to get access to their pvssy. I don't.

You have a monogamous mindset which is totally fine. But if that's the case, then you shouldn't try and debate me on hardcore red pill truth and female nature as you just lower your credibility with each response...


If you believe all beautiful, good looking women are basically hoes (exploring their sexuality, having casual sex as you put it) then that's your projection and I disagree with it.

When did I say they were hoes? don't flip this on me. You're the one who called them low quality/mediocre. I'm WAKING YOU up to the fact that a high percentage (not all) of desirable women will have casual sex at least once in their life. GET IT? GOT IT? GOOD.

 

[SmoothHendrixPS2]

@SmoothHendrixPS2 actually I know of no such thing and if I have something to say to you, I will. I am not afraid of your wrath or insults, I have heard it all before, doesn't rattle me in the least, I promise you.

In this case however I will will respond to @Dr.Suave since he is the one who asked for my opinion about this

IMO, a quality woman can certainly have casual sex if she so desired, why wouldn't she? As long as she's honest about it and not misleading her partner to believe it's going to lead to some grand passionate serious relationship, it's all cool. Same for the guy.

The key word in there is "honesty," as well as possessing character and integrity. Which would include honoring her commitment and not stepping out (i.e. cheating/sex outside committed relationship). That would be a big NO in my book.

There are so many other things that make a quality woman, but with respect to sex (casual sex while single and no sex outside committed relationship) this is my opinion.

How hot she is doesn't have much to do with it, a woman can be extremely hot and be a lying sociopath (I know of one actually), a woman can have mediocre looks and be of superior quality and high character. As long as she takes good care of herself, physically and mentally, and treats herself and others with respect and behaves with integrity, those are the qualities that matter.

JMO, everyone has their own definition, there is no wrong or right.

P.S. @SmoothHendrixPS2 I do feel inclined to respond to your assertion that "chances are" I have had casual sex but too embarrassed to admit it? Lol, you don't know me very well do you, clearly. I don't get embarrassed about anything I do, I OWN what I do, I take responsibility for what I do and if I were the type to have enjoyed casual sex while single (I am married now so it's a moot point), I would have no problem admitting it.

I knew you'd let your beta army know how silly and ignorant they are! I never said that high quality women HAVE to be hot. I said that many hot women wouldn't be considered high quality by @pipeman84 standards.

P.S. Nobody cares

 

[Pierce.Manhammer]

​

 

[eli77]

Everyone wants different things. Everything is relative. What might work for me might not work for you. Understand what it is you want and go after that. Want a relationships? Cool, go for a relationship. Wanna be transient and enjoy the casual side? Spin plates. Want to test the waters and vet for an ltr? You could spin plates or actively seek a relationship exclusively. Spinning plates is but one of many sexual strategies and few guys can actually pull it off.



Plate spinning is not for everyone, but in reality you could just think of it as not dating exclusively, even Rollo himself has made an effort to stop saying spin plates and refers to it as dating non-exclusive. Do not blame a sexual strategy for the sabotage of your relationship, that doesn't track. Just because you hear something online does not mean you need to act on it. If you had a quality relationship I haven't a clue why you would jeopardize that. A lot of guys here are in happy ltrs and they would tell you to NOT to spin plates. A large premise of spinning is literally to find a quality girl to move up to relationship material. You blew it, not the site, not the methodology, you're lack of productivity was your own fault. A lesson to be learned



Disagree. Casual relationships allow you to be transient, they are great for when you are in a changing period of your life. Stability is when you want a relationship (if that's' your prerogative). Women who want commitment from a man (key word man, not boy) expect a incredible amount of stability in your finances, emotions, strength and so on. Casual relationships do not. This is why you even hear from boomers to young men to not date 'seriously' in their 20s. BUT again, everyone is different. I dated two girls seriously in my early 20s and I learned a lot. I also learned I don't want a committed relationship any time soon and by 'playing the field' I've come to know myself better and know what I want out of women.



Yes, some people here lack nuance and they read clear as day. Again, you need to be aware of this and need to have the common sense to think for yourself. You do not need to take on someone else's opinion or stances on things if you do not want to. Reflect on them, consider them, and adjust as needed (if even needed). In this post I am writing currently I express disagreement and counter you with takes from my own experience, you do not need to take them on for yourself if you do not want to. There is a lot of finger pointing and old man screaming at the sky going on in your post op. It sounds like you are bitter and angry and looking to take it out on the board. Don't do that. I think some of your critiques are valid, but this seems entirely like a you problem. I don't want to call you immature because I've made some dumb mistakes while listening to others advice in my early 20s when dating and it burned me good. But when you realize those mistakes, own those mistakes and address the insecurities behind them you grow exponentially. The first step in that process is being accountable.

I'd advise taking a step back from all of this and just spending some time upstairs and readdressing what is you want, from this board, from women, from relationships, from life, from your career/education and so on. That said YOU DO NOT NEED TO HEED my advice if you don't want to. This thread will likely turn into a bunch of dudes arguing with you, justifiably so since the tittle and post alone will ruffle feathers.

Well said sounds like a way to get a std