What AFCs fail to understand about women

[El Payaso]

Most AFCs think that if they are "nice" to women, help them out of tight situations or do whatever the woman wants, that she will give them sex. This is essentially negotiated intimacy, and negotiated intimacy is never genuine.

You can fix a woman’s flat tire, help her out of a financial jam, fix her a nice lasagne, give her the perfect shoulder to cry on, take care of her kids and listen to her drone on for hours on the phone, and she’ll still go fvck her outlaw biker boyfriend because her intimacy with him is genuine, unnegotiated, unobligated desire. She wants to have sex with him, she doesn't owe him sex.

What AFCs fail to understand is that all the financial, emotional, dependable support you could possibly offer a woman is no substitute for raw, unmitigated, chemical desire. Some of the most irresponsible, unreliable, poverty level washouts often get more sex than any dutiful AFC suffering from Captain Save a Ho syndrome, because there is no obligation.

 

[Roni_88]

I totally agree with what you said, I'm still working towards this.. I believe there is a fine line between helping others and stopping from being a nice guy without being a jerk.. in my case I help others if I can but I don't suck up to people and say no when needed. Especially with women

 

[JohnyTheArrow]

Its even more tragic,men who married cant grasp why his wife doesnt put out anymore.They cant figure out they got some discount sex to hook up for marriage and then deal is over.They think if woman married them, they make her wet.Wet forever I will add.

Then you have articles on press what to do when she lost desire ... well ... she never really had any.She dreams to be fvcked by Mr Gray not by Jimmy from marketing department.

 

[JohnyTheArrow]

Its even more tragic,men who married cant grasp why his wife doesnt put out anymore.They cant figure out they got some discount sex to hook up for marriage and then deal is over.They think if woman married them, they make her wet.Wet forever I will add.

Then you have articles on press what to do when she lost desire ... well ... she never really had any.She dreams to be fvcked by Mr Gray not by Jimmy from marketing department but there is one Gray for millions of loosers.Then they read books like ....

The BIG BOSS Pounds My Wife: Dirty Promotions (Naughty Hotwife Cuckold Erotic Romance Story)

John knows his small manhood isn't enough to satisfy his wife... although he's reluctant, at first, to even consider 'hiring' out for the job

But soon, his taboo desire to see his wife stuffed and filled becomes an overwhelming obsession. The only problem is... his lovely woman, Janna, isn't too keen on the idea. So John devises a naughty plan to change her mind. What's one little white lie when her pleasure is on the line, after all?

He knows the alpha, rough, and domineering boss at his work is packing an impressive shaft beneath those expensive pants. And when the devious husband strikes up a deal with the large membered boss... it becomes only a matter of time until he is allowed to witness the erotic act involving his wife -- hard and without protection!


How to Get Your Wife to Have Sex With You [Kindle Edition]

Guys, do you remember what it was like to have regular sex with the woman sleeping next to you? Do you love your wife, but wonder what happened to that sex life you once bragged about to your friends? Are you trying to figure out why your wife still turns you on, but it seems like she's not as excited by you? Are you wondering what you can do to bring back the sex goddess who, once upon a time, couldn't keep her hands off you and was up for doing it anytime/anywhere? Well, get ready to find out what you may be doing wrong--and how to step up what you may be doing right. Here's a book to help you get the sex you want and need in order to stay sane and happy.

How To Get Your Wife In The Mood: Quick And Easy Tips For Seducing Your Wife And Making Her BEG You For Sex

What's the secret to getting your wife to have sex with you when and how you want it? Simple...learn how to turn her on by seducing her
The key to seduction is not difficult. It really comes down to four things: paying attention to your wife's needs, getting to know what she enjoys and what stimulates her emotionally and physically, doing the things she likes as often as you can, and most importantly...projecting a powerful, dominant masculine presence.

 

[_sideways_]

Does that mean im the crap of the earth if im being lusted after?

Negative.

The low life u describe is just a man with notjing to lose. Hence he puts or acts or behaves in a way where his gurls...or cash flow..food flow...movie flow...all his energy in pleasing girls cuz its better than work.

He has learned from an earlier age and doesnt need the masters degree to get women to do his chores.

Always with the hate thugs on ss. #Jealousy

 

[Stugots26]

You can think of the way AFCs act as very similar to the way the mob operates.

The mob grants favors in advance in order to extort returns later.

This is one of the many reasons why a shrewd attorney has a much easier time with women. Why? Because we understand that a GIFT, freely offered, is not consideration. You cannot freely offer something on the front end and EXPECT or DEMAND return on your free offer later. Men who convey unwavering explicit or implicit terms and expectations for their attention, time, and interest will always go much farther then AFCs.

 

[Sobliminal]

Didn't rollo-tomassi say this in his book?

 

[Oxide]

Didn't rollo-tomassi say this in his book?

was it any good?

 

[Sobliminal]

was it any good?

Honestly, a great read. Look for it on amazon "The Rationale Male" , this quote was taken directly from it; I've started referring to it as my Alpha Bible... So far it has yet to fail me; and only I fail it.

 

[Tenacity]

Most AFCs think that if they are "nice" to women, help them out of tight situations or do whatever the woman wants, that she will give them sex. This is essentially negotiated intimacy, and negotiated intimacy is never genuine.

You can fix a woman’s flat tire, help her out of a financial jam, fix her a nice lasagne, give her the perfect shoulder to cry on, take care of her kids and listen to her drone on for hours on the phone, and she’ll still go fvck her outlaw biker boyfriend because her intimacy with him is genuine, unnegotiated, unobligated desire. She wants to have sex with him, she doesn't owe him sex.

What AFCs fail to understand is that all the financial, emotional, dependable support you could possibly offer a woman is no substitute for raw, unmitigated, chemical desire. Some of the most irresponsible, unreliable, poverty level washouts often get more sex than any dutiful AFC suffering from Captain Save a Ho syndrome, because there is no obligation.

Everything you said is correct, but here's what I'm sick of you guys doing, and that's discussing this as if the women are somehow JUSTIFIED or PURE in these decisions.

This entire "worship the loser and bash the good guy" situation is in my opinion a relatively new phase that is a direct result of the negative effects of Feminism. You go back to the 1920s, 1940s, 1950s, etc. and you do not see this shyt. The guy getting "laid" was the guy that was smart and had resources to build and protect a family.

After Feminism, with the direct focus on trying to make women equal to men, I believe a deliberate strategy was created to destroy the good guy socially, mentally, and financially.

- Socially: The mocking of the guy because his IQ is high and he's smart. Never before in history did you see this until after Feminism.

- Mentally: The social isolation destroys the guy's confidence. If his confidence is destroyed he won't be as assertive and aggressive in his business dealings.

- Financially: See the Family Court. Losers don't get raped by the Family Court, it's the Good Guys that do.

So while your post is accurate in getting guys to understand how to break open her panties, this does NOT mean that the women are pure, or justified or with integrity based on these new ways of doing things.

It's for that very reason a lot of guys are MGTOW and have just said FVCK women.

 

[skinnyguy]

Everything you said is correct, but here's what I'm sick of you guys doing, and that's discussing this as if the women are somehow JUSTIFIED or PURE in these decisions.

This entire "worship the loser and bash the good guy" situation is in my opinion a relatively new phase that is a direct result of the negative effects of Feminism. You go back to the 1920s, 1940s, 1950s, etc. and you do not see this shyt. The guy getting "laid" was the guy that was smart and had resources to build and protect a family.

After Feminism, with the direct focus on trying to make women equal to men, I believe a deliberate strategy was created to destroy the good guy socially, mentally, and financially.

- Socially: The mocking of the guy because his IQ is high and he's smart. Never before in history did you see this until after Feminism.

- Mentally: The social isolation destroys the guy's confidence. If his confidence is destroyed he won't be as assertive and aggressive in his business dealings.

- Financially: See the Family Court. Losers don't get raped by the Family Court, it's the Good Guys that do.

So while your post is accurate in getting guys to understand how to break open her panties, this does NOT mean that the women are pure, or justified or with integrity based on these new ways of doing things.

It's for that very reason a lot of guys are MGTOW and have just said FVCK women.

Word. I think this site is more about bashing good guys than getting better with women. In fact most males on here feminists, always trying to justify what women are doing.

This worshipping of the bad boy/loser is only helping women even more.

 

[Tictac]

Most AFCs think that if they are "nice" to women, help them out of tight situations or do whatever the woman wants, that she will give them sex. This is essentially negotiated intimacy, and negotiated intimacy is never genuine.

You can fix a woman’s flat tire, help her out of a financial jam, fix her a nice lasagne, give her the perfect shoulder to cry on, take care of her kids and listen to her drone on for hours on the phone, and she’ll still go fvck her outlaw biker boyfriend because her intimacy with him is genuine, unnegotiated, unobligated desire. She wants to have sex with him, she doesn't owe him sex.

What AFCs fail to understand is that all the financial, emotional, dependable support you could possibly offer a woman is no substitute for raw, unmitigated, chemical desire. Some of the most irresponsible, unreliable, poverty level washouts often get more sex than any dutiful AFC suffering from Captain Save a Ho syndrome, because there is no obligation.

______

If you are doing any of this sh*t as quid pro quo, you should end up in a permanent sex dry spell.

Never do anything for anyone ever that does not make you feel good about yourself (even a simple 'thanks') as your prime mover. I may do some of the stuff you listed. But only because I like myself better for the effort.

If you think women can't tell when you are trying to trade your lame behavior for some p*ssy, you know nothing about women.

 

[SmooveMooves]

Word. I think this site is more about bashing good guys than getting better with women. In fact most males on here feminists, always trying to justify what women are doing.

Lmao.

How about this site and guys like you are more about bashing women and not taking accountability. No one is "justifying" womens' decisions, but there is a quote I like to live by. And it's:

IiWiI or It is what it is.

Women don't like spineless, non-assertive, kiss-ass, emotional BETAS.

That's just the way the cookie crumbles.

-And its always been this way.

Not just after feminism. Although, I do agree, things are in place to ruin the family unit, dominant male, and converging. (The Gov't divide and conquer scheme).

In any case, my point being, women have always been seeking out the top dawg. So you either become the top dawg or get eaten by the rest.

Not bítch about how evil women are for not liking a doormat.

And the MGTOW is a movement for pūssies who just HATE women. Full of pusillanimous, defeatist, & and socially inept men who couldn't go another way if they wanted to.

If MGTOW men were really going 'their own way' they wouldn't to label themselves and join an organization.

Because if MGTOW really simply meant not putting women as your top priority, as so many men tell me, then that doesn't make you MGTOW,

IIt makes you Alpha.

 

[Tenacity]

Dude come on, really? I'm in BOLD

Lmao.

How about this site and guys like you are more about bashing women and not taking accountability.

Taking accountability for what exactly? Accountability to morph into whatever "new rules for manhood" that society has established that make absolutely no sense? If the women were telling men to go out and start businesses, become rich, rather resources, or to become powerful in some sort of meaningful economic and political way....rather than this fake pseudo "social power" that we talk about...then maybe it would make sense.

No one is "justifying" womens' decisions, but there is a quote I like to live by. And it's:

IiWiI or It is what it is.

Women don't like spineless, non-assertive, kiss-ass, emotional BETAS.

That's just the way the cookie crumbles.

This makes absolutely no sense. If women didn't like non-assertive, kiss-a.ss and emotional men...then how it is that damn near majority of single mothers in this country have children by men you just described? The guy is usually broke (which points to him not being assertive), usually lives off of her and the kids (kiss-a.ss) and usually goes in and out of jail over dumb shyt (which means he's most likely emotional). Everything you are pointing to is based on this pseudo FAKE social power that's being promoted out here, fvck this fake social power shyt, how about actually go and build something valuable and have ACTUAL economic and political power?

-And its always been this way.

Not just after feminism. Although, I do agree, things are in place to ruin the family unit, dominant male, and converging. (The Gov't divide and conquer scheme).

I challenge you to go back prior to Feminism, and find a group of women saying that they are OK with their "man" not just making less than them, but they are ok with their man LIVING off them, not providing for his kids, and going in and out of jail for non-political based crimes. I challenge you to go find that.

In any case, my point being, women have always been seeking out the top dawg. So you either become the top dawg or get eaten by the rest.

Women prior to Feminism SOUGHT out the Top Dog. But women today are not, matter of fact if you are the Top Dog (while they might be still attracted), it internally pisses them off. And dude, the guy you are describing and have described is ANYTHING but the Top Dog lol.

Not bítch about how evil women are for not liking a doormat.

So if a man is not willing to play this stupid game setup by Feminism, to morph into some IDIOT to please women, then he's a doormat or weak? You see I think differently, if a guy is willing to say FVCK this shyt and be his own man, that takes a hell of a lot more strength than selling your soul for cheap, washed up, ran through, pvssy.

And the MGTOW is a movement for pūssies who just HATE women. Full of pusillanimous, defeatist, & and socially inept men who couldn't go another way if they wanted to.

Yep, you are a Male Feminist. You know how I know? You can easily bash men when they don't want to go along with the bullshyt that women do, but I have yet to see you say anything FVCKED UP with the shyt women are demanding, instead you give women a pass with "that's just the way it is". Fvck out of here with that bullshyt lol.

If MGTOW men were really going 'their own way' they wouldn't to label themselves and join an organization.

Because if MGTOW really simply meant not putting women as your top priority, as so many men tell me, then that doesn't make you MGTOW,

It makes you Alpha.

Alpha, Beta, Omega, whatever, those labels mean absolutely jack. You can't be Alpha in every situation, nor in every situation will you be Beta. If you have a Boss or a Manager at work, you damn sure aren't Alpha there, but you're Alpha in your own household to your children. MGTOW has different levels to it, some men totally avoid dating women at all, some men like me continue to deal with them but not in any type of legal relationships such as marriage or making children.

 

[El Payaso]

Everything you said is correct, but here's what I'm sick of you guys doing, and that's discussing this as if the women are somehow JUSTIFIED or PURE in these decisions.

This entire "worship the loser and bash the good guy" situation is in my opinion a relatively new phase that is a direct result of the negative effects of Feminism. You go back to the 1920s, 1940s, 1950s, etc. and you do not see this shyt. The guy getting "laid" was the guy that was smart and had resources to build and protect a family.

After Feminism, with the direct focus on trying to make women equal to men, I believe a deliberate strategy was created to destroy the good guy socially, mentally, and financially.

- Socially: The mocking of the guy because his IQ is high and he's smart. Never before in history did you see this until after Feminism.

- Mentally: The social isolation destroys the guy's confidence. If his confidence is destroyed he won't be as assertive and aggressive in his business dealings.

- Financially: See the Family Court. Losers don't get raped by the Family Court, it's the Good Guys that do.

So while your post is accurate in getting guys to understand how to break open her panties, this does NOT mean that the women are pure, or justified or with integrity based on these new ways of doing things.

It's for that very reason a lot of guys are MGTOW and have just said FVCK women.

It wasn't meant to bash the "good guy". :nono: I do agree that today's culture fosters a moral decline of most women and male bashing.

However, the post is meant to enlighten those men who think that supplicating to women will earn them sex. HINT: it doesn't. They often wonder why their ex didn't take part in anal sex with them but allows her new gangsta thug boyfriend and his friend to DP her. :yes:

 

[Tenacity]

It wasn't meant to bash the "good guy". :nono: I do agree that today's culture fosters a moral decline of most women and male bashing.

However, the post is meant to enlighten those men who think that supplicating to women will earn them sex. HINT: it doesn't. They often wonder why their ex didn't take part in anal sex with them but allows her new gangsta thug boyfriend and his friend to DP her. :yes:

Yes, I totally understand the supplication part of it, but the part that you are also leaving out is that too many women out here have a PREFERENCE for fvcked up men. I believe that PREFERENCE has nothing to do with sexual attraction per say, but more about the woman preferring a man that is "below her" in some type of economic and political fashion.

Ask yourself a question, get out of the PUA/Seduction material mindset for a minute, and ask yourself a question. When a woman leaves a "good guy" or a "decent guy" to go screw a convicted felon that's doing jack shyt with his life....is that moral? Does that sound like she has any care for her children to bring felons like that around them? Does that sound like this chick has any type of integrity?

I know that the PUA community doesn't look at "the other side" of the shyt, but just look at it and ask yourself does that make any sense.

 

[skinnyguy]

The sad part is that we are letting women dictate our lives.

Go to the gym and dress well - dictated by women.

Use game and spend money on bootcamps - dictated by women.

Go out and spend money on drinks - dictated by women.

If you don't want your life to be dictated by women, just watch or play sports that you love, and dress however you feel like it. An AFC would do things like get expensive clothes in order to pander to women.

 

[SmooveMooves]

Dude come on, really? I'm in BOLD

I couldn't quote your responses, so I'll just reply to them in the order they appeared. Tenacity

-Accountability for not expecting women to administer pvssy just because you're a "nice guy". Women do desire resourceful, powerful, men. And that's exactly what I'm recommending men pursue. Rather then supplicating to women & getting angry when she goes and fvcks someone who actually makes her wet. As for these "New rules of manhood" you speak of, I'm not talking about that shlt. I'm talking about exactly what the OP is, and that's supplicating AFCs & NiceGuys. Also, power is power. Economic, Political, and SOCIAL. Not sure why you'd give Social power a negative connotation, it has benefited me quite well.

- Women have children with the men I/you described because, as in your words, 'damn near majority' of men in the country are non-assertive, kiss-ass and Emotional. So what, women are just supposed to not fvck? Also, not every woman is quality enough to demand the 1% of men who are the top dogs. So they settle for people around their quality/level. What 'psuedo social power' are you talking about? I never said anything against going out and building something. I'm not even exactly sure what your response is referring to.

-This challenge makes no sense. I never described this man you speak of. Your view of a Top male must be skewed.

-No. The guy YOU described is far from a top dog. If you recall, YOU described a low quality woman with a 'Top Male' who is in and out of jail. Feminists and/or other masculine women might be 'internally pissed off' over a Top male. But a regular quality female will get gina tingles from one.

-Hm, I'm honestly not sure how to respond here. So... feminism set it up to where women desire a strong man? Or, not being able to simply supplicate and negotiate intimacy from a woman means you're 'morphing into an idiot'? Seriously, I don't understand your stance here. Do you think that simply 'being a NiceGuy' should = pvssy?

-No, I'm am not a male feminist. I disagree with most of their ideals. However, feminist didn't 'create' what makes women wet. I do not see whats so 'FvCKED UP' about not being door mat. I'm not giving them a pass, I'm controlling what I can control. Can I make women change what makes them wet? NO. Can I use the knowledge I have to do so? Yes.

-Alpha, Beta, Omega, labels are created for a reason. And obviously everything isn't black & white. I tell you what though, if you organize all men into these categories, I bet we can guess whose cracking open the most panties.

-As for your interpretation of MGTOW, which really isn't even MGTOW from the forums and people I've talked to (remember these are my experiences, I could be wrong), THAT sounds more realistic and intelligent. I was referring to the myriad of men who created this new 'asexual' sexual preference.

Allow me to clarify my point, as from your responses, I believe it was misconstrued:

Men should not expect women to dish out vagina because they're 'nice dudes'. And Rather then complaining that women don't and should like nice guys. For no other reason then that they're nice, Men should be assertive, non-kiss-ass, unfeminine, and masculine. I never once advocated to be a lowlife dlckhead, like you so described.

 

[Darth]

I have only one thing to say about this, and it is the following: "Nice guys" are actually hypocrites because they claim to be only interested in a girl's welfare, when what they are after is far more selfish.

You will find that many "bad boys" who aren't hypocrites are in fact much more altruistic.

 

[skinnyguy]

You will find that many "bad boys" who aren't hypocrites are in fact much more altruistic.

I don't know if I'd go that far. Many bad boys are narcisstic children who have a lot of issues. Many of them get women pregnant and bail. Don't start worshipping punks just because women do.

A nice guy may not be completely genuine but he's not robbing liquor stores and dealing cocaine.