American Women

[Rjsss212]

Just goes to show you how entitled this AW broads feel. She clearly was insulted that I suggest we go dutch, but I swatted away her shit tests like Dikembe Mutombo. Ah, ah, ah, not in my house bish!

Wow, another "tough guy" who can't get laid without dead presidents. Your in the right thread.

[TellAll]

You misread my message.

I never said I would find a woman with that description attractive. Do you think an 18 year old finds a mid-50's overweight man attractive? I don't know what your point is.

My point is they have a bad rep because they earned it and if defending them is so important to you, you should get you one and live happily ever after.

By the way. I don't care what some 18 yr old thinks so long as she will fuck my brains out. That's all I would want from her anyway.

[SavePros321]

I'm not defending our women, I find the majority of them not attractive. Let's just be able to separate and make the distinction between women we pay to fulfill our desires and women we want to pursue a real meaningful relationship with. I'm afraid a lot of us are mired and blend the two together (or too jaded to see it).

I make it absolutely clear in my online profile that I am not looking for anything serious. Just someone to have fun with. None of these broads are relationship material and useful to me beyond a pump and dump.

It's really simple: men want sex from women; women want commitment from men. Women will trade sex for commitment and men will trade commitment for sex. It's the core of our being.

And no one here was talking about "women we pay", so not sure how you assume we have confused the two.

[AZN Monger]

American Women have the rep that they earned. I personnally don't find a 50 something fat chick with a I'm a queen complex attractive, regardless of my weight or age.

But if you feel differently good. Grab you one, settle down and you will never have to monger again. Even when her fat ass refuses to fuck you for whatever stupid reason, remember to be understanding.

You misread my message.

I never said I would find a woman with that description attractive. Do you think an 18 year old finds a mid-50's overweight man attractive? I don't know what your point is.

[TellAll]

American women have a bad rep, especially if you compare them worldwide. However, I think we should be careful trying to agree amongst ourselves. After all, this forum doesn't contain a diverse demographic.

I have lived, worked and vacationed in many countries. However shitty the ROI, most women would feel the same way in splitting a check. Most men wouldn't let the women split the check.

You want a prostitute, then you pay for their time fucking you. You want a relationship, then ROI doesn't apply. Believe it or not, not everyone is jaded, not everyone is bad. Your sole aim is not sex in a relationship. Her sole aim is not money in relationship.

I find it funny that a lot of members complain American women are fat and ugly when they don't look at themselves in the mirror. Most men are as heavy or heavier, but yet somehow think they all deserve a supermodel. I'm not defending our women, I find the majority of them not attractive. Let's just be able to separate and make the distinction between women we pay to fulfill our desires and women we want to pursue a real meaningful relationship with. I'm afraid a lot of us are mired and blend the two together (or too jaded to see it).

Monger on.

American Women have the rep that they earned. I personnally don't find a 50 something fat chick with a I'm a queen complex attractive, regardless of my weight or age.

But if you feel differently good. Grab you one, settle down and you will never have to monger again. Even when her fat ass refuses to fuck you for whatever stupid reason, remember to be understanding.

[AZN Monger]

See attached photos of the conversation below (my responses are in blue). Just goes to show you how entitled this AW broads feel. She clearly was insulted that I suggest we go dutch, but I swatted away her shit tests like Dikembe Mutombo. "Ah, ah, ah, not in my house bish!"

American women have a bad rep, especially if you compare them worldwide. However, I think we should be careful trying to agree amongst ourselves. After all, this forum doesn't contain a diverse demographic.

I have lived, worked and vacationed in many countries. However shitty the ROI, most women would feel the same way in splitting a check. Most men wouldn't let the women split the check.

You want a prostitute, then you pay for their time fucking you. You want a relationship, then ROI doesn't apply. Believe it or not, not everyone is jaded, not everyone is bad. Your sole aim is not sex in a relationship. Her sole aim is not money in relationship.

I find it funny that a lot of members complain American women are fat and ugly when they don't look at themselves in the mirror. Most men are as heavy or heavier, but yet somehow think they all deserve a supermodel. I'm not defending our women, I find the majority of them not attractive. Let's just be able to separate and make the distinction between women we pay to fulfill our desires and women we want to pursue a real meaningful relationship with. I'm afraid a lot of us are mired and blend the two together (or too jaded to see it).

Monger on.

[UltraHappy]

See attached photos of the conversation below (my responses are in blue). Just goes to show you how entitled this AW broads feel. She clearly was insulted that I suggest we go dutch, but I swatted away her shit tests like Dikembe Mutombo. "Ah, ah, ah, not in my house bish!"

So, the suspense is killing us. How did the rest of the conversation go? What did she say next?

[SavePros321]

See attached photos of the conversation below (my responses are in blue). Just goes to show you how entitled this AW broads feel. She clearly was insulted that I suggest we go dutch, but I swatted away her shit tests like Dikembe Mutombo. "Ah, ah, ah, not in my house bish!"

[D Cups]

[QUOTE=SavePros321;1760591 Ya, I know what you mean. Ten years or so ago I dated an AW who told me I should ADORE her. And she was SERIOUS. We dated on and off for two years only because I was addicted to her humongous tits. These days I just p4 p. It's a lot cheaper and not emotionally draining.

[SavePros321]

This post is basically the foundation of ISG and how we found ourselves here in this forum:

==================

Why you should fuck an escort, at least once

By NPIF (TRP)

One of the greatest challenges to newcomers still swallowing the pill is the realization that women are not delicate creatures that need protecting. The propaganda has been strong. Constant - unending. That women are damsels in distress; that they need us to protect them; and that being the white knight in shining armour will grant us their love and adoration.

It's a dream we're fed since the time we are children to the days of our adulthood. Rom-coms will tell us the nice, funny, charming guy will always get the girl. Our female friends will reassure us that "women want a nice guy", or that "you just haven't met the right girl yet." It's an agonizing pain of involuntary lovelessness. The beta mindset continuously fed by re-application of tired and useless techniques. "Maybe if I do this for her" eventually becomes "Why doesn't she love me?"

And then you discover the pill. You don't want to believe it but something tells you there's truth here. That if women do want the nice guy, why are they so duplicitous with their behaviour? Why do they chase the rich guys, the stud guys, the bad boys who treat them like shit? Because they get something out of the relationship. This is the key to understanding a woman's actions. There is always an exchange of some kind, because her love does not come free. You must play a role; provide a purpose, for her presence.

If you're rich, you provide financial satisfaction. If she fucks you, you'll buy her shit. If you'are athletic and / or attractive in any way relating to social SMV, you provide her an image boost. She is with a hot guy.

Providing for her desires. Her satisfaction. All the things you need to give her or do for her which suck away your time, energy, and money. These are the reasons you may idolize the pussy. Because you have to put so much fucking work into getting it.

Now take all of this away.

What if you didn't have to do any of that work? Didn't have to focus on a woman's needs or desires at all, and still get what you want from her? What if you had the choice of what girl to fuck? How to fuck? What if you had complete control over a sexual interaction without having to do a fucking thing for a b!tch once in your life?

I'll tell you what happens. You take the pussy off the fucking pedestal. Because now you know that pussy is worth about $100, and you can literally get it any time you want from hotter bitches than the one you're chatting up right now in the bar.

Now I'm not advocating giving up on learning game and how to meet and pick up women organically. In fact, you should do that infinitely more often than you should fuck escorts. But every now and then, maybe just as a reminder when the oneitis creeps in, or the beta starts to resurface, you fuck a ***** who you don't have to call the next day. Just as a reminder that pussy is cheap and plentiful. So that makes you the prize that's worth winning.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/...t_least_once/?

[SavePros321]

This article was up-voted 696 times and is certified TRP (The Red Pill) Gold:

===========================

Never sacrifice a thing. Make her sacrifice for you.

By Archwinger (TRP)

Disney, popular culture, and modern feminism foster a viewpoint that having a woman in your life is a great reward. The modern story goes that a regular guy is supposed to pursue a fairly average girl, she probably rejects him a few times at first, but he keeps himself present in her life, is a great guy, does things for her, and demonstrates how much he can benefit her and how in love he is and willing to sacrifice for her, and she eventually agrees to be his girlfriend. The fact that she agreed to be a part of his life is his reward. He had to jump through hoops to earn it, and he needs to go out of his way and do everything he can to keep her happy so she stays with him, because having her in his life is his reward. A man should be grateful to have a girlfriend at all, because if you don't have a girlfriend, you're a loser.

A girlfriend's not really required to do anything. You're not supposed to make her buy you things, clean your apartment, cook your meals, or insist that she have sex with you. You're not entitled to any of that just because she's your girlfriend. She does those things if and when she wants to. Your reward is that she's willing to be your girlfriend. Not any of those things you'the think a girlfriend might do for you. Just having her in your life is the reward. A woman spending time in your presence is the greatest thing ever. Forget that spending time in your presence usually involves giving you one-word responses to anything you ask while not looking up from her cell phone, because she's too busy doing something on Facebook. That's more than those losers who don't have girlfriends at all are getting.

Meanwhile, to keep your girlfriend, you have to keep her happy, entertained, and feeling special. That's a girlfriend's biggest complaint by the way: he never makes me feel special. You have to plan and execute an entertaining date at least once a week, buy her gifts, be smart and funny and at the top of your game, complement her often, and if you successfully make it through enough of her hoops, she might let you hold her hand for a little bit, or even give you a goodnight kiss. Keep up this great behavior long enough and maybe, just maybe, you guys can take it to the next level and she'll reward you with sex! But even if you never get there, it's a great reward just to have a girlfriend at all. Guys who don't have girlfriends are losers.

And that's how the others would prefer the game is played. Jump through hoops, do what you're supposed to do, be entertaining for girls, sacrifice left and right giving them whatever they want in a desperate attempt to make them happy, as the bare minimum just to get a woman to spend time with you. Forget sex. Just having a woman in your life is considered a great prize for which you must sacrifice heavily. A man should be lucky he had a woman agree to this! A woman who will put up with him? That's a rare find! He'the better work hard to keep her happy.

We know how this story ends. A man who spends his life searching for a woman he can sacrifice for ends up getting his wish. He sacrifices everything and becomes an empty shell, all for the joy of having a woman grudgingly spend time with him, hoping that maybe, just maybe, if he sacrifices a little bit more and works a little bit harder, she might even let him touch her. Oh, sure, that guy is still screening women somewhat. He won't date just anybody. But his perspective is that of the supplicant. He's searching the world for a woman he wants to work for. A woman worthy of his hard work and sacrifice, so that he may give it to her, impress her with it, and maybe one day get to hold her hand.

That's the true measure of love. How much you're willing to sacrifice for someone. And men across the world leap at the chance to demonstrate their love for their women by sacrificing.

But wait. If the true measure of love is how much someone is willing to sacrifice for someone else, what's up with all of these women who aren't doing a damn thing, except spending time with their men? Surely, a woman's love is measured differently then, right? We don't ask a woman to sacrifice. It's her willingness to accept a man's sacrifice that demonstrates her love, right?

Wrong. Women show their love the same damn way. When a woman loves a man, she sacrifices for him. She does things for him. She buys him things. She begs to fuck him.

If your woman is not sacrificing for you, eagerly, in an attempt to please you, impress you, and keep you happy, guess who doesn't love you?

The Red Pill is a shift in our perspective. Cast off the old system. The goal is not to find a woman worth sacrificing for. That's the old you. The loser you. The goal is to find a woman who will sacrifice for you. And to do this, you become the kind of man women will want to sacrifice for. You're not searching for the right woman. You're searching for the right you.

If you build the right you, women will be bending over backward trying to please you, just for the pleasure of your time, and maybe, just maybe, you can reward the best few whose sacrifices please you the most with a good, hard fucking.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/...fice_for_you/?

[SavePros321]

Just would like to share with you thought-provoking articles that I come across during my traversing through the Manospehere. This one is from one of the well-know titans in the Manosphere: Rollo Tomassi.

==============

Iron Rule of Tomassi #3

Any woman who makes you wait for sex, or by her actions implies she is making you wait for sex; the sex is NEVER worth the wait.

When a woman makes you wait for sex you are not her highest priority. Sexuality is spontaneous chemical reaction between two parties, not a process of negotiation. It's sex first, then relationship, not the other way around. A woman who wants to fuck you will find a way to fuck you. She will fly across the country, crawl under barbwire, climb in through your second story bedroom window, fuck the shit out of you and wait patiently inside your closet if your wife comes home early from work. Women who want to fuck will find a way to fuck. The girl who tells you she needs to be comfortable and wants a relationship first is the same girl who fucked the hot guy in the foam cannon party in Cancun on spring break just half an hour after meeting him.

If a girl is that into you she'll have sex with you regardless of ASD (Anti-$lut Defense) or having her friends in the room videotaping it at a frat party. All women can be sluts, you just have to be the right guy to bring it out in them, and this happens before you go back to her place. If you have to plead your case cuddling and spooning on the bed or getting the occasional peck on the cheek at the end of the night, you need to go back to square one and start fresh.

I'm probably going to ruffle a few PUA (Pick-up Artist) feathers here, but I've never been a proponent of breaking down LMR (last minute resistance) with a woman. Maybe it's a result of experiences in my rock star 20's, but at some point I came to the conclusion that sex with a woman who's turned on by me is always a far better than one where I had to sell her on the idea of sex with me before the act. Now don't take this to the binary extreme and assume I mean the only good sex you'll ever have is a first night lay (FNL) with some tart who can't keep her legs closed. What I mean is that if you're still trying to figure out what the magic words are to convince some girl that she ought fuck you after 3 dates or longer you're in desire negotiation hearings counselor. You are wasting your time and limiting your opportunity with better prospective women in waiting out a woman who would defer less than 100% of her real desire to have sex with you. The sex will NEVER be worth the wait. A prostitute would be a better alternative.

Genuine desire cannot be negotiated. Once you get past a certain point in the waiting game, what once had the chance to be an organic, sexual desire becomes mitigated negotiation of a physical act. Just the fact that you're having to make a case for yourself (even covertly) is evidence that there are other factors inhibiting her capacity to be sexual with you. As I stated, barring a physical inability, this is almost always because of an unmentioned agenda on her part. It may be due to a concurrent boyfriend, it may be a natural internal caution, it may be that your process is telegraphing 'beta' to her, or it may be that she's filibustering you while waiting to see if another, more preferable guy pans out for her, however, none of these are insurmountable if she has a genuine desire to bang you. Many a cheated on boyfriend knows this is true. In any circumstance, sex with you is not an urgency for her. If she's perceiving your value as as high as it should be, she won't hesitate longer than a few dates to become sexual and she certainly won't tell you she's making you wait. Hypergamy doesn't afford a woman much waiting time with a Man she sees as superior stock.

One of the more frustrating situations I often encounter comes from guys who've been OVERTLY told that they're being made to wait for sex until some circumstance or criteria is met for the woman. The standard filibuster (or loss-leader as the case may be) usually comes with the reasoning that she "needs to feel comfortable" before she has sex with a guy. Even more distressing is the guy who was getting laid, only to be told the same thing by an existing girlfriend. If you find yourself in either of these situation there are a couple of things to bear in mind.

First and foremost, sex, by it's nature is uncomfortable. Sex that is motivated by mutual, genuine desire is a tense affair, fueled by testosterone, anxiety and urgency. When two people get together for a first dance (a precursor to copulation), it's rarely if ever an intimate slow dance. It's salsa, it's grinding, it's pumping, it's heat and it's sweat. What it's not is comforting and familiar. It's not a nice warm bathrobe fresh out of the dryer. Don't take this the wrong way, but sex is threatening. It needs to be, and you need to be considered a sexualized player in her personal sphere. Overtly agreeing to wait for her to become sexual is anti-seductive. It confirms for her that you aren't a sexualized player to her; an Alpha wouldn't wait for sex and she knows this. Worse still, it devalues her SMV as being worth less than of your utmost urgency.

Secondly, always remember why women resort to OVERT communications (the language of men) so there is no, or less, margin that her message will be misunderstood. If a woman, point blank says, "I'm not having sex with you until X,why, and Z happens", what is her MEDIUM telling you? That there is a precondition that's more important to her than fucking you with genuine, uncontrollable passion. You want her to be so into you that she's willing to break the rules. The ideal situation is for her genuine passion to be so uncontrollable for you that she'the renounce her religion and throw her convictions to the wind to be with you. That might seem a bit dramatic, but you get the idea. The good news now is that she's being overt, which means she's exhausted her reserves to be covert and, assuming you're not so desperate as to delude yourself, you can NEXT her and move on.

Rapport ≠ Comfort.

A lot of "waiters" find all that a tough road to hoe. They want to stick it out and see if things "might develop", and NEXTing their 'waiting girl' seems a lot like throwing the baby out with the bath water after all the time they've invested in building what they think is rapport. Usually this is due to the guy not spinning (enough) other plates that would bear more fruit. However, keep this in mind; waiting for sex isn't building rapport. There's a lot of confusion about rapport, most of which is due to well meaning PUAs conflating rapport with comfort. It's a pretty esoteric term, but rapport is a connection; it's an implied trust between two acting agents who previously had never met or only have limited knowledge of each other. You can have rapport with an animal that's the connection, it's instinctual.

Comfort comes from familiarity and predictability; all decidedly anti-seductive influences. And while comfort has it's own merits in interpersonal relationships, it is not the basis for genuine, passionate sexual desire. For people (myself included) involved in a marriage or LTR, it's serves our long-term best interest to convince ourselves that sex is better when your comfortable with your partner, however, the reality of it sings a different tune. Here's an easy illustration: As reported by both men and women alike, which of these circumstances provokes the most intense, memorable sexual experiences? When a couple plans and arranges a romantic "date night" to 'keep it fresh' and reconnect? Or is it the 'make-up sex' after a horrible breakup, or narrowly averted breakup, where long dormant competition anxiety is brought back into being a very real possibility again? If you said the breakup, you're correct! One scenario is comfortable, the other uncomfortable. One has the element of predictable certainty, the other is chaotic and uncertain, however in both situations there is definitely a working mutually connective rapport operating.

http://therationalmale.com/2011/09/23/wait-for-it/

[SavePros321]

I wish American broads would have access to this. I wonder how the USA Compares. Hell, I won't even date American broads let alone have a relationship with them. Just for fun I keep an account on Plenty of Fish dot com (it's free) and my inbox is inundated with inquiries from fat, old, ugly whales. I keep a subscription to the site to motivate me for my next overseas trip.

True POF story that happened to me just yesterday:

I had been talking and texting with a woman from that site all week, and quickly began to escalate the timeframe that we agree to meet up (I don't like spending too much time on the phone with women. Got too much value-add shit to do in my personal life). All we agreed on was that sometime this weekend we would meet.

Last night she asked me to come out and meet her. I already had stuff of my own going on, so I told asked her if we could meet up tomorrow (today) for coffee.

Her response: "I don't drink coffee."

I'm thinking: Shit, Starbucks has more than just coffee!

Me: "Do you drink tea? Smoothies?"

Her response: "LOL."

I then ask: "What do you suggest?"

Her: "I don't know. What's around you?"

Immediately my Spidey-senses kick in and I'm thinking: Yeah, this broad is going to want to go out to eat somewhere.

Me: "Probably the same stuff around you. What, are you wanting to meet at a restaurant or something?"

Her: "It doesn't matter."

Me: "I'm good with that so long as we are going dutch."

Then she goes silent on me. Bingo.

You see fellas, after spending a good amount of time hanging out at the Reddit thread r/TheRedPill/, I am no longer the Beta chump that I once was, which involved buying chicks dinner on our first meet up. That is the shittiest ROI for a guy in the U.S. dating game. Coffee is a safe investment. Hell, a walk in the park is an even safer investment. If she turns out to be a fatty, or gives you no indication she's be interested in anything other than your wallet, the only thing you've lost out on is time that you could have spent in the gym, or doing something hobby-related.

To agree to buy dinner for a chick you have just met is to acknowledge that you are paying for her companionship. That you are paying for the honor of having her in your company. That shit doesn't fly with me anymore. If I am going to pay for a woman's companionship, I'll hire an escort.

Anyway, I then replied to her: "Well, I have some work I brought home and will be on my laptop for the most part tomorrow, so if you want to meet then just give me a timeframe so that I know in advance."

Her: "Oh, ok."

And I imagine that's the last I'd hear from her, which is absolutely fine with me. We are not going to play the game of multiple dates with me buying you shit until you decide you might give me a peck on the cheek, LOL.

I like the photo Mr. Enternational posted of his chat conversation with a broad who said she was "Old Fashion" and believed that a man should pay for everything. To which Mr. E responded: "So I guess the game is to see how much of my money we can spend then?" (Mr. E: Please repost if you still have that pic)

Don't be a sucker for these modern-day "independent women" who still expect you to pay their way in life, especially in the online dating world. There are women on there that have dates lined up for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, and then drinks at the club later that night with thirsty betas that are tripping over themselves to spend their entire paychecks on a hope that her arm might brush across their dick at some point during the date.

Spend some time on The Red Pill. There is no such thing as "I need to get to know you first." Women know if they will fuck you or not from the first time they meet you. You cannot negotiate attraction. Rule of Thumb: If you cannot get a chick to come over to your place after meeting her for the first time (either online or after meeting her in person), then you are wasting your time with that chick.

[ThatGuy865]

While marriage is down. Its more about the binding financial contract than not wanting to be with just one woman.

I say that because the number of marriages are down. But. The number of couples living together out of wedlock has steadily increased.

There is no longer that stigma, towards women who live with a man without being married. So many couples now simply live together.

In a monogamous relationship.

And whether a guy is married or not and has kids. The situation of support does not change.

If you are a millionaire. She will get custody and receive the life style for that kid of a millionaire's kid. There are so many examples of this.

So its not that men don't want to be in a committed relationship, they simply don't want to make it financially binding.

This thread is about AW and most guys on it thinking was men didn't want to be with western women at all, which is not the case.

The institution of marriage was created when the avg life span was around 40 and people got married as young as 12. Now as medicine.

Has progressed and the avg life span is 70 to 80 marrying for a life time is not realistic. So divorce is inevitable.

But. That doesn't mean guys / women don't want to be in committed monogamous relationships.

I have always thought they should make marriages sort of like drivers licenses, but longer. Maybe the contract expires every 5 or 10 yrs.

Very few people stay the same for 50 to 60 yrs. So as people change, relationships also do.

So whether married or living together. Men are still having committed relationships. Men are just becoming serial monogamous.

One long term relationship after another. Whether thru marriage or living together.

That's really the conversation on this thread or we should change the thread to "Opinions on Marriage" . Then I'd agree with most marriage.

As it stands today. For life. Marriage is not going to last.

===========================================

EDITOR's NOTE: This report was written with UNNECESSARY HARD RETURNS at the end of every line of text, resulting in the text being incorrectly broken up into separate, incomplete sentences.

There is NO NEED for any report to be written with UNNECESSARY HARD RETURNS at the end of every line of text.

If you are adding these hard returns at the end of every line by using the ENTER key, then please stop. Instead, when typing simply allow the text to "wrap" automatically at the end of each line. The ENTER key is only needed to separate the paragraphs.

However, if the unnecessary hard returns were the result of you having pasted the text into the forum from another source (such as a news website), then your option is to either edit out the unnecessary hard returns or don't post the text.

Please do not post text with unnecessary hard returns in the Forum. Thanks!

[George90]

I replied before reading Savepros' post about men's marriage strike in the UK. I am very glad its spreading!