Vantagepoint34
Master Don Juan
Why is this flawed?
Attraction runs on a clock.
She flirted for weeks. Touched your arm. Found reasons to be alone with you. And you were careful. Respectful. Waiting for the right moment.
The moment had a shelf life. It expired around month two, and by the time you asked her out, she'd quietly filed you under "little brother."
One of the hardest lessons inside the 22 Rules: women rarely wait. Interest either grows or it decays, and nothing decays it faster than a man who never moves.
Make the move while she's still inventing reasons to be near you.
You asked her if she wanted to grab coffee. Then you asked if the time worked. Then you asked if the place was okay. Then you asked if she'd prefer tea.
Four questions. Four chances for her to say no. Four signals that you're terrified of making a decision.
Plan it. Pick the place. Pick the time. Tell her where to meet you. She'll either show up or she won't.
Either way, you look like a man instead of a scared little boy.
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.
The reason it was banned. Wasn't it during the Civil War when they had the likes of Sherman running around. I'm sure there would be defense of Frankenstein should he have been alive today.taiyuu_otoko said:The term "Draconian" is extremely subjective. I'm sure that Vlad the Impaler didn't think he was being "Draconian" when he was implanting people's heads on spikes outside, his house, he was just being "proactive."
Generally speaking, throughout history laws have become "draconian" (at least in the sense that most non-lawmakers would agree they were such) when the law makers had power that couldn't easy be overthrown by the citizens.
Many would argue that any laws outside of "natural law," meaning a protection of life and private property, are too much and therefore "draconian."
e.g. bans on drugs, prostitution, gambling, any kind of price fixing (minimum wage, subsidies etc.).
Should I defy a court what would happen. Going against this Amendment to bring forth conspirators?dasein said:Without googling, my understanding is that "draconian" means "punishment significantly in excess of the wrong committed."
In the U.S., we have an 8th Amendment that expressly bans "draconian" law or punishments, so that's one reason why it's wrong. It's expressly outlawed in our highest law.