Red Piller

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:avoid these men. They use things like “negging”

Pick-up artistry taught rules for desperate young men to stop repelling women with unmerited flattery and overinvestment. It is like the Seinfeld episode "Opposite Day" where hapless George Costanza succeeds romantically by doing the opposite of his instincts.

When my nerdy friend got locked out of his house, he walked to a date unshaved in athletic shorts and a t-shirt. She paid for drinks and was relieved to meet a polite and athletic guy. They have been married for a decades.

Younger women felt I was trying to buy their affection by spending $50-$100 for cocktails. These same women would sleep with me after cheap, relaxed dive bars near my house. My success paradoxically improved by spending less money.

Negging was a pick-up artist rule when for conceited women. When a woman complimented baseball player Yogi Berra on his cool linen suit, he replied inadvertently ambiguous compliment "Thanks, you don't look so hot yourself." The Red Pill explains these pick-up rules work because women are tired of desperate and phony nice guys; they want an authentic, selective man.

Women have their own rules - don't sleep with men on the first date and don't answer texts after midnight. Dating is a game, and setting healthy boundaries is part of the strategy.

Nobody likes you dude.

I do.

Sure you do, sockpuppet.

Hey that’s what he calls his date too!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The skanks and scammers you find online ... are not the dating pool of women.

Anonymous wrote:can’t you kind of tell when a woman would be like that in advance though?

Most couples meet online now. The available dating pool is full of unattractive losers, weirdos, and absurdly picky singles. Compare DCUM. There are tens of thousands of posters, including many polite and helpful ones. But active posters are disproportionately trolls, political extremists and insulters, even with host Jeff's generous moderation.

Men match on Tinder at a rate of 3%. A man who swipes right on one third of profiles needs to see 100 to get one match. Women get inundated and do not reply to most messages. So a man might need 10 matches to start a few conversations and schedule one date. Often a scheduled date cancels, you have a free evening, and one of your other matches becomes available. Hmmm, she hasn't provided a lot of information. She might not look like her pictures, she might flake, or she might be incompatible or reject me. But she surely gets a ton of other messages, and you are sliding down the queue. If you don't schedule something now, then it will take another couple hours of swiping and intermittent messaging to get a date.

That is the conundrum. Meet conveniently with a questionable match, drive 10 miles for a less attractive match, drive 25 miles for an attractive longshot, or postpone until next week?

You could require a college degree, preferably graduate degree and career. Must be weight-proportionate, same race, non-smoker. No Trump supporters. No huge debt. Must be reasonably tidy. Must have same religion, but not be too religious. Must provide all this information and be eager to meet you, even though they don't even know you. Nobody with options would do that. Maybe I am one of the absurdly picky singles? So just schedule something and hope for the best.

Without specifics, it is hard to tell whether OP was reasonable. Maybe the man was a bitter, entitled misogynist. Perhaps he was merely jaded from online experiences. He didn't reply to her text, so he knew the score.

[Anonymous]

Heck no, block the loser.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:avoid these men. They use things like “negging”

Pick-up artistry taught rules for desperate young men to stop repelling women with unmerited flattery and overinvestment. It is like the Seinfeld episode "Opposite Day" where hapless George Costanza succeeds romantically by doing the opposite of his instincts.

When my nerdy friend got locked out of his house, he walked to a date unshaved in athletic shorts and a t-shirt. She paid for drinks and was relieved to meet a polite and athletic guy. They have been married for a decades.

Younger women felt I was trying to buy their affection by spending $50-$100 for cocktails. These same women would sleep with me after cheap, relaxed dive bars near my house. My success paradoxically improved by spending less money.

Negging was a pick-up artist rule when for conceited women. When a woman complimented baseball player Yogi Berra on his cool linen suit, he replied inadvertently ambiguous compliment "Thanks, you don't look so hot yourself." The Red Pill explains these pick-up rules work because women are tired of desperate and phony nice guys; they want an authentic, selective man.

Women have their own rules - don't sleep with men on the first date and don't answer texts after midnight. Dating is a game, and setting healthy boundaries is part of the strategy.

Nobody likes you dude.

I do.

Sure you do, sockpuppet.

+1
The red pill sockpuppet guy who hangs around this forum is so incredibly obvious and pathetic. I wish Jeff would just block him. Be sure to report whenever you see him doing his schtick

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The skanks and scammers you find online ... are not the dating pool of women.

Anonymous wrote:can’t you kind of tell when a woman would be like that in advance though?

Most couples meet online now. The available dating pool is full of unattractive losers, weirdos, and absurdly picky singles. Compare DCUM. There are tens of thousands of posters, including many polite and helpful ones. But active posters are disproportionately trolls, political extremists and insulters, even with host Jeff's generous moderation.

Men match on Tinder at a rate of 3%. A man who swipes right on one third of profiles needs to see 100 to get one match. Women get inundated and do not reply to most messages. So a man might need 10 matches to start a few conversations and schedule one date. Often a scheduled date cancels, you have a free evening, and one of your other matches becomes available. Hmmm, she hasn't provided a lot of information. She might not look like her pictures, she might flake, or she might be incompatible or reject me. But she surely gets a ton of other messages, and you are sliding down the queue. If you don't schedule something now, then it will take another couple hours of swiping and intermittent messaging to get a date.

That is the conundrum. Meet conveniently with a questionable match, drive 10 miles for a less attractive match, drive 25 miles for an attractive longshot, or postpone until next week?

You could require a college degree, preferably graduate degree and career. Must be weight-proportionate, same race, non-smoker. No Trump supporters. No huge debt. Must be reasonably tidy. Must have same religion, but not be too religious. Must provide all this information and be eager to meet you, even though they don't even know you. Nobody with options would do that. Maybe I am one of the absurdly picky singles? So just schedule something and hope for the best.

Without specifics, it is hard to tell whether OP was reasonable. Maybe the man was a bitter, entitled misogynist. Perhaps he was merely jaded from online experiences. He didn't reply to her text, so he knew the score.

I think if he’s gonna be lazy and not drive a bit to have a date with a better match … he gets what he gets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:he’s gonna be lazy and not drive a bit to have a date with a better match.

How you driven 30 minutes to Annapolis, one hour to Baltimore or 90 minutes to Pennsylvania dates? It does not sound like it. At best you get a long-distance relationship and only spend weekends together.

Many DCUM singles take a long time to find a relationship. You should enlighten them on how to find better matches.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:avoid these men. They use things like “negging”

Pick-up artistry taught rules for desperate young men to stop repelling women with unmerited flattery and overinvestment. It is like the Seinfeld episode "Opposite Day" where hapless George Costanza succeeds romantically by doing the opposite of his instincts.

When my nerdy friend got locked out of his house, he walked to a date unshaved in athletic shorts and a t-shirt. She paid for drinks and was relieved to meet a polite and athletic guy. They have been married for a decades.

Younger women felt I was trying to buy their affection by spending $50-$100 for cocktails. These same women would sleep with me after cheap, relaxed dive bars near my house. My success paradoxically improved by spending less money.

Negging was a pick-up artist rule when for conceited women. When a woman complimented baseball player Yogi Berra on his cool linen suit, he replied inadvertently ambiguous compliment "Thanks, you don't look so hot yourself." The Red Pill explains these pick-up rules work because women are tired of desperate and phony nice guys; they want an authentic, selective man.

Women have their own rules - don't sleep with men on the first date and don't answer texts after midnight. Dating is a game, and setting healthy boundaries is part of the strategy.

Nobody likes you dude.

I do.

Sure you do, sockpuppet.

Hey that’s what he calls his date too!

Almost spit out my drink.

Thank you for that!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The skanks and scammers you find online ... are not the dating pool of women.

Anonymous wrote:can’t you kind of tell when a woman would be like that in advance though?

Most couples meet online now. The available dating pool is full of unattractive losers, weirdos, and absurdly picky singles. Compare DCUM. There are tens of thousands of posters, including many polite and helpful ones. But active posters are disproportionately trolls, political extremists and insulters, even with host Jeff's generous moderation.

Men match on Tinder at a rate of 3%. A man who swipes right on one third of profiles needs to see 100 to get one match. Women get inundated and do not reply to most messages. So a man might need 10 matches to start a few conversations and schedule one date. Often a scheduled date cancels, you have a free evening, and one of your other matches becomes available. Hmmm, she hasn't provided a lot of information. She might not look like her pictures, she might flake, or she might be incompatible or reject me. But she surely gets a ton of other messages, and you are sliding down the queue. If you don't schedule something now, then it will take another couple hours of swiping and intermittent messaging to get a date.

That is the conundrum. Meet conveniently with a questionable match, drive 10 miles for a less attractive match, drive 25 miles for an attractive longshot, or postpone until next week?

You could require a college degree, preferably graduate degree and career. Must be weight-proportionate, same race, non-smoker. No Trump supporters. No huge debt. Must be reasonably tidy. Must have same religion, but not be too religious. Must provide all this information and be eager to meet you, even though they don't even know you. Nobody with options would do that. Maybe I am one of the absurdly picky singles? So just schedule something and hope for the best.

Without specifics, it is hard to tell whether OP was reasonable. Maybe the man was a bitter, entitled misogynist. Perhaps he was merely jaded from online experiences. He didn't reply to her text, so he knew the score.

And then you end up with someone you don’t even like, just because she said yes to you. What’s the point? You sound like you just swipe randomly, no actual interest in any specific person. Why would anyone want to date you knowing you don’t actually GAF about them specifically?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You sound like you just swipe randomly, no actual interest in any specific person.

You seem unfamiliar with online dating. A few pictures and snippets of text don't tell much. Women's profiles are notoriously short and uninformative. Long profiles can be indulgent and presumptuous, insisting that you like Tom Waits, Zora Neale Hurston, Bridges Over Madison County, and a bunch of forgotten local bands. None of this predicts compatibility and chemistry. So men swipe right on 30% of profiles and then filter a bit for education, class, and compatibility. We are both single, hot, educated, and like dogs. Great, let's grab cocktails. It is psycho to have deep interest in somebody you don't know before meeting them. At a certain point, it is more efficient to just meet the person.

So I have empathy and understanding for a person who is fed up with the losers online, or even a bit bitter about wasting time. It only becomes a problem if their bitterness and resentment color their attitude towards me. OP did not provide enough information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You sound like you just swipe randomly, no actual interest in any specific person.

You seem unfamiliar with online dating. A few pictures and snippets of text don't tell much. Women's profiles are notoriously short and uninformative. Long profiles can be indulgent and presumptuous, insisting that you like Tom Waits, Zora Neale Hurston, Bridges Over Madison County, and a bunch of forgotten local bands. None of this predicts compatibility and chemistry. So men swipe right on 30% of profiles and then filter a bit for education, class, and compatibility. We are both single, hot, educated, and like dogs. Great, let's grab cocktails. It is psycho to have deep interest in somebody you don't know before meeting them. At a certain point, it is more efficient to just meet the person.

So I have empathy and understanding for a person who is fed up with the losers online, or even a bit bitter about wasting time. It only becomes a problem if their bitterness and resentment color their attitude towards me. OP did not provide enough information.

That’s a long post to say “yep, I just swipe randomly and don’t gaf”.

[Anonymous]

Why would a man not protect his own interests? His own money, sanity, assets? You would protect yours. He gets to protect his. He doesn't have to spend his money on you unless he wants to. You have your own money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He doesn't have to spend his money on you unless he wants to.

Women loathe saps who desperately overinvest, even if it is only a $100 plate of sushi because he skipped dinner. To avoid awkwardness, these women ghost without even a thank you text. It seems rude and entitled, but it is actually efficient. Cheap dates are relaxed and convey that you are there to get to know each other, ideally in the biblical sense.

[Anonymous]

Women here seem bitter and like harpies, way overly demanding and not offering much in return.

Men here, the few posts that appear to men, seem shell shocked and jaded, and not willing to date anymore.

I guess the depopulation agenda is winning?