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.
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.
Oh, Ok, maybe I should consult a Quija Board, base my decisions on Astrology, or ask Angels for insights into attraction. This isn't a philosophical debate, it's much more simple. Run tests on a large number of men and women, and look at the results. If it wasn't for science you wouldn't be able to refute scientific methods on a computer genius.JLW said:
So were newtons laws the absolute truth? no. Reductionists determined that quantum physics is more suited to describe our universe. Science isn't the absolute truth, its a method to describe what we see around us. There is always a degree of uncertainty. Take for example the Heisenberg uncertainty principal that states that an observer created universe in and of itself skews results ( more precisely one can not determine and objects location and momentum simultaneously, i digress). The idea is that there is always a degree of error even when data supports an hypothesis, and anyone worth a damn in the community knows this.Mistic said:
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.
This is a classic example of one of those word problems with all that unnecessary information in there to confuse people. Confidence, wit, and money are the important things that you mentioned.Mistic said:
Dude. You posted a topic in order to incite discussion about "Do looks matter? If so, how much?" Please don't try to act like you're not looking for debate. You've been here long enough to know that there's two clear sides to this issue, and neither side will give way to the other. I mean s.hit, didn't the fact that there's an 85 page thread about this subject in the Archives clue you in that this may be an incendiary topic?
Mistic said:
This is a 100% accurate statement, but people will still disagree (and have, as you've seen) with it. Which makes it more and more apparent to me that getting to true knowledge by discussions with random people on the 'net is an exercise in futility.Mistic said:
Three seconds. That's how long it took. Your shoes. Your posture. The way you held your drink. Whether you looked at the floor or looked at her.
She already filed you away. Interesting. Boring. Safe. Bold. Before you even opened your mouth.
Everything you say after that is just her confirming what she already decided.
So stop rehearsing lines. Fix the first three seconds. Stand tall. Look up. Smile like you mean it. Walk like you belong wherever you're standing.
The words come later. The impression comes first.
Okay, so can you prove scientifically that this statement is true? That was a rhetorical question, because you can't. There's no way to test that science is the best way to obtain knowledge through the scientific method. Science is merely a means by which we make assessments of the physical world....Zarky said:
I would mostly agree with you here, however.
I'm not sure if you were suggesting this, but figuring out if 2+2=4 employs absolutely NO scientific method. Figuring out if 2+2=4 is a mathematical truth. Mathematical truths presuppose science. You need logic/math before you can start doing the scientific method.
I use these boards exclusively for kicks. I agree that simply practicing is far more useful than these boards. I will sometimes get advice on these boards when I experience a moment of craziness (it's hard to look at your own situations objectively so going on here gives you a good dose of reality if you're struggling with something).
We are talking about the physical world genius. When you shoot loads of sperm all over face and in her nostrils, is that a spiritual thing? Is pvssy juice etherical slime or can you actually watch it squirt across the room upon a proper female ejaculation?JLW said:
You have completely missed the point.real2 said:
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.
Mistic said:
You guys should be able to find it on a torrent site. "The Science of Sex Appeal."real2 said:
