She calls you when her car breaks down. When she needs help moving. When some guy she's actually dating treats her badly.
You're the listener. The reliable one. The guy who would treat her so much better, if she'd just open her eyes.
She won't. You trained her to see you as the low-effort option — the friend who requires zero risk and zero investment. Every favor dug the hole deeper.
The "22 Rules" break the pattern. You'll stop auditioning for a role she already cast and become the man she chases instead. It starts with Rule 1.
I could talk to any woman I wasn't attracted to. Charming, funny, relaxed. Then a gorgeous woman looked my way and I'd become a sweating, babbling mess.
The fix took me years to find and ten minutes to learn. Nervousness and excitement are the same physical state — pounding heart, adrenaline, flushed face. Your brain just picks the label. And you can pick a better one.
Rule 16 shows you how. You feel the nerves, relabel them as excitement, and let that energy pour out as enthusiasm. Women notice the guy radiating it. They always do.
You made your case like a lawyer. Stable job. Good guy. Ready for something real. All true. All irrelevant.
She weighed your points, nodded along, felt nothing — then fell hard for some tattooed bartender with a motorcycle and a gambling problem.
Logic is where attraction goes to die. The "22 Rules" work a level deeper, on the subconscious switches that decide within minutes whether you register as a MAN or as part of the furniture.
Stop presenting evidence. Start flipping switches.
All relationships, (male - male, female - male, female - male, male - corporation, etc) are based on a perceived exchange. NOBODY ever stays in ANY relationship unless they think they are receiving more than they are giving, based on their own subjective value system.Burroughs said:BRIFFAULT’S LAW:
The female, not the male, determines all the conditions of the animal family. Where the female can derive no benefit from association with the male, no such association takes place.
This goes both ways. Benefits are now, or believed to be coming in the future, or the relationship ends.Past benefit provided by the male does not provide for continued or future association.
This has been a problem for mankind in general since the dawn of time. How to make sure people don't "cheat" in ANY kind of exchange.Any agreement where the male provides a current benefit in return for a promise of future association is null and void as soon as the male has provided the benefit (see corollary 1)
You're missing some variables.A promise of future benefit has limited influence on current/future association, with the influence inversely proportionate to the length of time until the benefit will be given and directly proportionate to the degree to which the female trusts the male
bmp2cpm said:I don't know that I would call this a law. I think it applies more to short-term relationships rather than marriage or a long-term relationship. It most certainly is more accurate for animals than humans.
For a forum that's suppose to be about living the best life you can while attracting quality women, there's a lot of hostile posts about women on here lately. I agree women have their limitations, but can we have something more positive on here? If women are so terrible, why are so many on the board trying to attract them? Some people here just seem really angry.
“Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”
Just live the best life you can with or without women. Don't try to come up with fool-proof ways of totally understanding women, it's impossible. Sure you can know what's going on with a woman by her actions. But, a law implies some kind of serious scientific research with 100% accuracy, which I kind of think is not what you're talking about.
For the angry people, let go of whatever it was those women did to you, let go of what your mom did to you, don't let it have power over you to the point you're writing about how bad women are and coming up with some silly laws that give a ridiculously false sense of security.
Also, the guy who has the website in question has been married 4 times. I may not know much about women, but I know enough not to get married 4 times. Just saying.
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.
You guys make hypergamy sound like it's some kind of evil conspiracy to make males suffer at the expense of females.TyTe`EyEz said:I appreciate your positive attitude, but you're going to have a hell of a time trying to disprove hypergamy.
taiyuu_otoko said:Your acting like the fact that it exists is some kind of impediment.
taiyuu_otoko said:All relationships, (male - male, female - male, female - male, male - corporation, etc) are based on a perceived exchange. NOBODY ever stays in ANY relationship unless they think they are receiving more than they are giving, based on their own subjective value system.
This goes both ways. Benefits are now, or believed to be coming in the future, or the relationship ends.
This has been a problem for mankind in general since the dawn of time. How to make sure people don't "cheat" in ANY kind of exchange.
You're missing some variables.
For example, consider the following two situations, assuming the trust is equal.
A) Male will be graduating from law school in three years, and has sufficient contacts and a reasonable expectation to get a six figure salary. The woman has to wait until he is employed before she'll marry him.
B) Male has a job as the fry chef at McDonalds, and will get a bump in salary in two weeks of fifty cents an hour.
All other things being considered, which male has more leverage with his girl?
I will remind members here I wrote exactly the same several years ago, that loyalty, honor, etc are distinctly male traits due to our upbringing. As a tangent I've remarked before than an example of this is that men have bros before hos and women do not have a corollary. In fact they're distinctly opposite and are innately competitive when an alpha male comes into the picture. The joke is that when a buddy introduces his awesome gf to the guys, they remark they'd love to meet a woman like her someday. When women meet their friend's awesome bf, they conspire to make him theirs someday.Loyalty, honor, gratitude, and duty are male values that we men project on women, but which very few, to no, women actually possess. We aren’t born with these values; they are drummed into us from the cradle on by society/culture, our families, and most definitely by the women in our lives (sorry, but that includes you too, Mom). Women get different indoctrination, so they have different values; mostly, for a woman, whatever is good for her and her (biological) children is what is best, full stop.
That sentence contains at least five follow-up questions she WANTS you to ask. Where in Florida? What brought you here? How long have you been in the area? What do you miss? How does it compare to here?
She handed them to you on a silver platter. And you said, "Oh cool. I come here every week. I love this band. Ummm... pretty crowded tonight."
She smiled politely. Nodded. And never texted you back.
I was that guy for years. Talking too much. Listening too little. Panicking about my next sentence while she was literally feeding me the answers.
Then I found 22 rules that fixed the whole thing. Rule number one: shut up and listen. She'll tell you exactly what to say.
No, I'm highlighting the impact being BORN as a male has on relationships. There is no such thing as "loyalty, honor, etc." There is only behavior in certain situations.Nutz said:You're completely ignoring the impact that being raised as a male has on relationships:
I will remind members here I wrote exactly the same several years ago, that loyalty, honor, etc are distinctly male traits due to our upbringing. As a tangent I've remarked before than an example of this is that men have bros before hos and women do not have a corollary. In fact they're distinctly opposite and are innately competitive when an alpha male comes into the picture. The joke is that when a buddy introduces his awesome gf to the guys, they remark they'd love to meet a woman like her someday. When women meet their friend's awesome bf, they conspire to make him theirs someday.
Findog said:Anyone who thinks that there is an immutable law that governs male/female relationships is smoking something. If there were an ironclad law or formula, you would be able to predict how every relationship plays out in the end. Not all relationships fail. Some women have the capacity for loyalty and devotion, and not just because her man is a super alpha and not a beta.