TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

SuperBiasedMan Archive

View 1 post and 30 comments by SuperBiasedMan on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
0

SuperBiasedMan/r/MensRights10/09/13 09:06 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

I do want sex as part of a relationship, but I don't think it necessarily has to be happening from the start, it's something that can develop, and I prefer it developing. Nobody's forcing me, obviously. But the people in this thread are acting like the idea of waiting a few dates for a kiss is laughable, and I'm more worried about them dumping great women that I am about myself getting laid.
/r/seduction25/11/11 12:56 AM
1

You said anyone who would wait 6 dates for a blowjob was a 'raging AFC' and that no girl was worth that. I would gladly wait longer for the right girl. I'm aware this place is for people who want to be PUAs, but the prevailing attitude worries me and I do feel like it's worth correcting, lest some of the guys here miss great opportunities because they think that all women should be quick to do things.
/r/seduction25/11/11 12:52 AM
2

AFC is a motivational term we use in this self-help genre to represent what we're trying to move away from: a guy who doesn't know how to attract women any more than the mythical "average Joe". An AFC is the sort of person who doesn't maintain high expectations, allows himself to be a doormat, lacks confidence, and allows his social life to proceed more or less by chance. Except you're under the assumption that a guy who isn't a PUA is an AFC, where as they just might not have an interest in usi…
/r/seduction24/11/11 10:06 AM
1

"Escalate" is simply a term we use around here. ...it really doesn't stand out as one. I assumed you meant the word itself instead of some meaning you came up with. I'm not reading through a whole glossary, I just look up what terms you mention.
/r/seduction24/11/11 09:53 AM
0

This is pretty much what I was thinking, I don't see how the guys here don't get it. My current girlfriend would toss me on my ass if I came on too strong, but having gotten to know her better first...she is quite likely the most sexually compatible woman I will ever find. She's no prude, she's just not looking to let me into her panties right from the start. I am not hitting on you when I say this, Hahahaha. I like how you made sure to point this out. :P
/r/seduction24/11/11 09:52 AM
2

I'm glad there's another person here to agree, it was getting worrying. <.<
/r/seduction24/11/11 09:50 AM
1

The best PUAs I know are completely genuine, open, easy to talk to, and confident in themselves. I don't doubt that, but this entire thread has been full of guys who wont stay with a girl for longer than a few dates if they aren't getting any. That's not the approach I want. And I've always despised the idea of negging or any kind of technique like that. I am a social person. Probably could be better if I wanted to get right down to it, but I'm happy with my current girlfriend who I communicate …
/r/seduction24/11/11 09:49 AM
1

The logical endpoint of physical escalation is sex ...so basically you're saying you want the relationship to reach the logic endpoint in the first few dates or you'll break up? I get to know the girl, and after a period I let the sexual stuff develop too but there's other things that are more important before I want that to happen. There's also emotional and romantic 'escalation' though, and I'm much happier making sure those are being developed before we're trying to climb into bed.
/r/seduction24/11/11 09:47 AM
1

Ah this makes sense. This is probably technically what I am, not that I'm really bothered by it too much. Particularly as the pick up artist thing seems to much like manipulation for me to feel comfortable doing it.
/r/seduction24/11/11 03:16 AM
1

I still don't agree with that frankly. You cannot escalate indefinitely, at some point you would have to slow it down. And it's really not a good idea to be so worried about escalating that you don't take the time to make sure you know the person in other ways.
/r/seduction24/11/11 02:54 AM
0

But you're saying it like only a certain few women who are interested would wait longer than a date or two. That's flat out not true. Sure, plenty of guys misread signals all the time (I've done that too) but that doesn't mean you should overreact in the opposite direction and only take very definite hints as meaning anything and assume anything else is a rejection. Women have habit of thinking subtle signs they've given guys are very blatant, so if you're only taking the most obvious signs as m…
/r/seduction24/11/11 02:19 AM
1

It took weeks to know with my current girlfriend that I was actually attracted to her. And even then another couple weeks before I knew I wanted to be in a relationship with her. Not everyone is that quick to decide, and that's not always specific to women. But don't assume because a girl isn't interested quickly that she never will be. Just to clarify, I only brought that price thing up for comparison, not suggesting it's any fair.
/r/seduction23/11/11 11:57 PM
0

There's a difference between naturally leading to having sex and limiting sexless dates to 3. You made it sound like you had a rule to give up on any relationship where you hadn't gone laid after three dates, which is pretty foolish considering that it's a pretty quick test and could easily have just not turned sexual for many factors without being a bad relationship. Imagine if the girl told you that she was breaking up because you hadn't taken her to a fancy restaurant the first three dates.
/r/seduction23/11/11 10:12 PM
1

You made it sound like it was more definitive 'interest or non-interest determined'.
/r/seduction23/11/11 10:09 PM
2

The communicating is less saying "Oh yeah, I'm GREAT at sex." And more about saying what you like and how interested you are in things. Someone can easily lie about their personality too. If you're disbelieving them from the start then you really don't have a great hope for the relationship.
/r/seduction23/11/11 10:09 PM
-1

AFC?
/r/seduction23/11/11 10:03 PM
1

Except she could be interested but not want to kiss then for a different reason. Maybe she's still getting to know you? Maybe she's worried about how her breath smells? Maybe she'd rather develop other parts of the relationship first? It seems premature to give up just because of this one possible rejection.
/r/seduction23/11/11 07:45 PM
2

It's just my point of view Precisely my point. I'm not saying you can't think like this, but you can't go around telling other people they have to.
/r/seduction23/11/11 07:29 PM
2

<.< I meant interested in me. The sex comes later if we hit it off.
/r/seduction23/11/11 07:18 PM
1

But there are other ways to be on the same page. I've actually just flat out asked women if they were interested, and I think it works for me because that's a pretty good way of both finding out directly if they are and showing how I generally handle things. (not saying it's a good way, but it's what I do)
/r/seduction23/11/11 07:07 PM
0

Sure, no-one could possibly have had a different experience to you.
/r/seduction23/11/11 07:05 PM
3

...what?
/r/seduction23/11/11 07:05 PM
2

Who says there needs to be a kiss for it to be improving though? Hell, why does the absence of a kiss mean it's stagnating? If you'd feel hard done without it then fine, but that's not how it works for everyone.
/r/seduction23/11/11 07:02 PM
2

But surely you don't need to have sex from the get go with a person? Sure sex is important to me, but I'm not just ending it because she's not putting out after an arbitrary number of dates since there's other parts to the relationship keeping me interested.
/r/seduction23/11/11 07:01 PM
6

That seems like a rather blanket statement. Do you not think it's possible for people to take it slowly even when they both like each other a lot?
/r/seduction23/11/11 06:57 PM
2

Ah, by non sequitur you meant it was going off on a tangent due to only responding to the latest post, I apologise I thought you were just saying it was irrelevant.
/r/MensRights30/05/11 02:27 PM
2

Divorce stats Not really.
/r/MensRights30/05/11 01:55 PM
3

It's not limited to elsewhere. There are companies that make it policy not to sit unattended children next to any men. :/
/r/MensRights30/05/11 12:49 PM
5

Statistics are a good way of ignoring individuals.
/r/MensRights30/05/11 12:42 PM
12

That's not even that old fashioned. I was expecting beatings.
/r/MensRights30/05/11 12:35 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter