muggiwhplar

Total Frat Move.

Yes, stigmas are generally irrational too. Stigmas are also the problem of the person stigmatizing, not the person being stigmatized.

Do you not look at their profiles or something? :P

It's the only PUA forum I visit because the majority of the posters there have very high self-esteem and are very genuine, helpful, and experienced. I understand why you could be apprehensive and biased when examining the thread, though, considering pretty much every other PUA forum is full of disingenuous, awkward, irrational guys that think sleeping with women will validate them and make all of their problems go away. If it really makes your eyes bleed that badly, just read the posts by mods/admins.

You know you can get 240k xp and 24k tokens in less than 10 minutes of work, too, right? At what dg lvl? lol

Do the lamps only work on DG?

This is the reductionist argument that means very little. I'll illustrate - two consenting adults, whom are siblings of the same sex, fall in love and enter a relationship... Why is that anyones business >_>

This thread is really interesting to skim through. Basically, a girl signed up for a seduction forum and all of the "gurus" there are slowly but surely reconstructing her beliefs on relationships, society, monogamy, etc.

sinkholes will now spawn every 30 minutes instead of 2 hours

Does she consider hypoagency to basically be the same thing as being an object?

Prostitution should be legal. What are the moral arguments against porn/prostitution? Unless that would be getting off-topic.

That was covered in the video :P

Do you have any long-term RL goals after you hit 200M all? I imagine you could become successful much, much faster than the average person with your level of drive and dedication

No. I've posted a lot of images with bad language here but kept them in hide tags with "language warnings." Is that ok? I think you've even "liked" some of them :P

I don't think the betas are objects and become a woman's pawn according to girlwriteswhat. The point in the video is that women have incentives to be objects and to select less risk-averse partners, because they'll put themselves on the line to provide. But according to her, the less risk-averse men are the "objects," right? I think this provokes the question of whether or not men back then "wanted" children, or at least understood the implications of it. Sex? Yes. Children? Probably. Responsibility attached to children? Not sure. In her Genghis Khan example, he just banged hundreds of women and had hundreds of kids, without the responsibility of raising them. He just played it like a numbers game. The kids' upbringing was dependent upon the mothers and how quickly they could find some poor chumps to help them raise the kids :P If the men are raising a kid that isn't their own, then they're being used. But if they're also having sex with the mother, then who knows. Kind of a grey area to think about >_> Well from what little I know, I align most closely to the libertarian party apparently. Whether or not their beliefs are actually practical, I don't know. I know very little about history and politics so I can't speak much on the subject.

What if he had a list of all people who made donations and planned on reimbursing them after getting 200M all? We should start calling them "loans," not "donations" if that's the case :P And slap on some interest rates too while we're at it haha :D

This doesn't have much to do with this thread. Still interesting though. I was just wondering where you stand politically, actually. Well with regards to this thread, a few points I took from it: The agent-object dichotomy is similar to the alpha-beta or lover-provider dichotomy as far as men go. The "agent" like Genghis Khan was only able to be "successful" with women by "playing the field" constantly. The "object" plays it safe and pretty much becomes a woman's pawn (friendzone). More interestingly, I think it gave some insights as to why women have a tendency to "betaize" men in relationships. If a man's an alpha/lover/agent when the relationship begins, the woman will try and convert him into a beta/provider/object because objects are/were much more useful to her from an evolutionary standpoint. Hope that makes sense >_> "Betaization" is something that hasn't really been discussed in this thread before AFAIK. I don't really have any political views and I generally choose to remain blissfully ignorant as far as politics are concerned. Mostly because I've never met anyone who was happier as a result of their knowledge of politics. :P From what I hear, things are [bleep]ed up and it's not going to change any time soon >_>

Just have her give you the URL of her FB page. Or give her yours and tell her to add you. If she's hot, give me the URL to her FB page too.

...is she hot???

Ok, so you admit that accepting donations it is logical and efficient, you just don't like it. Glad we cleared that up. Also, check your inbox.

For future reference, does that mean we aren't allowed to discuss that term at all? Or if it's allowed as long as we don't evade the censor, then how should it be discussed?

Is buying spins not an efficient training method?

The same concept applies to training via the SoF. But nobody ever wants to talk about that either. What a vain, masochistic community we have here :lol: I like how there was no mention of SoF in my comment. I stated something unrelated to spinning. What you said may be true or untrue but is independent of what I said. There was no need to post that post as a response. I wasn't responding to you. I was just adding on to what you said. >_> I don't want SoF to get mixed into what I am talking about because I do not wish to discuss it. Then don't discuss it.

The same concept applies to training via the SoF. But nobody ever wants to talk about that either. What a vain, masochistic community we have here :lol: I like how there was no mention of SoF in my comment. I stated something unrelated to spinning. What you said may be true or untrue but is independent of what I said. There was no need to post that post as a response. I wasn't responding to you. I was just adding on to what you said. >_>