That about sums it up.

[–]justareflektorr90 points91 points92 points 9 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]mgtowthrowaway9052 points53 points54 points 9 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 9 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[removed]

[–][deleted] 45 points46 points47 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]UniquererUsername 32 points33 points34 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[removed]

[–]TedCruzEatsBoogers28 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]MuscleCarz2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Plenty of guys can use this knowledge to enjoy women AND have a great individual life.

I agree, but always advocate covering your ass and PROCEED WITH EXTREME CAUTION. Even the seemingly sweetest, loyal and caring females CAN TURN ON A DIME and fuck you over.

We must never forget, women, first and foremost are creatures of SURVIVAL, and are thereby not only capable of deceptive, callous behavior (50% of women in all relationships admit in survey having a "back-up man"), they can engage in said behavior, fuck you over, and then walk away without a care in the world. Walk away with ZERO remorse, guilt or shame. It's how they're hard-wired.

The longer you swim with sharks, no matter how well-fed and docile they seem, the odds are you'll eventually get bit...it's only a matter of how bad.

"I live life on my own terms and answer to no one." Steve McQueen

[–]slappydapussy6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]_Ubermann_6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]razikain 3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]misterbadattitude 29 points30 points31 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]TedCruzEatsBoogers29 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]LesterKadwell2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]MajorBeef2411 points12 points13 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

The following is just my opinion on this subject. I've pondered it a fair bit over the last few years and did go into an LTR after taking the red pill (though not before truly discovering MGTOW). My experiences with it were mixed, and I learned from my mistakes. My mistake was staying around far too long basically - there were red flags and I wasn't happy with the relationship but I stayed (partly through not wanting to hurt her (which is something you must shed, or she will use it to manipulate you endlessly) and partly through emotional attachment / "love", which should be kept under control or it destroys the rational mind, as do all emotions when they're very strong).

I do agree that LTRs can be good. But it does require care and caution to prevent it from "progressing" further - into cohabitation or worse. LTRs are hard work for a variety of reasons, and are especially taxing for MGTOW-oriented (i.e. independent and red-pilled) men. It is often stressful trying to keep an LTR enjoyable for both parties and safe for yourself. But that doesn't mean that stress won't be "worth it" for some relationships. If you enjoy LTRs and want one, and you have a girl who is (relatively) good LTR/relationship material.

LTRs really are tough work to both keep the girl satisfied and interested once novelty has worn off, and to stop you slowly becoming either blue-pilled (if the girl is superficially unicorn-like) or pussy-whipped/beta (if the girl is a good manipulator, which most are).

The key IMO is to always be ready to leave. That doesn't mean you can't "get into it" and enjoy it, but it does mean that you must leave quickly and cleanly if you honestly stop enjoying it. Also, leave if red flags appear. Even red-pilled guys can easily hamster away those red flags when they appear - especially when they feel strongly about the girl. A strong emotional response is hard to override with reasoning, but it MUST be overriden by the higher brain if you see a red flag.

Most importantly of all - DO NOT lose your independence, your own life - your friends, family, hobbies, dreams, goals, identity and favourite activities. That's immensely important, because if you do then you will have unknowingly ruined your own life. You won't have anything else to go to should your relationship suddenly end. In other words, don't put all your eggs in one basket!

Make boundaries clear, right from the start. State clearly that you will not get married, have kids or cohabitate. To enforce the boundaries, specifically the kids one, have a vasectomy. Condoms don't provide enough protection if you're going to be having frequent sex with the same person. No human female can be trusted 100% to take her contraception properly either. The only other viable option is to have her get an implant, since it's very unlikely she'd go to the lengths of secretly removing it and you'd be able to see even if she did.

Stay red-pill at all times - remember that, as lovely as she might seem to you, your LTR is AWALT deep down no matter how well she hides it (even from herself). Don't make exceptions for you, her, or your relationship - the same fundamental laws govern it as any other. Women only experience unconditional love towards their children, at most.

In short, set limits both for yourself and her (if anything, the limits you set yourself are even more important). Make no exceptions, and be very careful.

That's my "policy" about LTRs. I don't rule them out because I do enjoy them when they're good, and I feel I'm far too young to eschew relationships completely - though I do plan to when I'm older! I think setting a time-limit on an LTR may help avoid the problems and keep it interesting for you AND her. Not necessarily a chronological one, since the time it takes to reach the "shit point" is extremely variable (from instant to years) but to make sure you break up once certain signals appear showing you that she's lost some respect/attraction for you and/or you're losing interest in her.

Because there are very few things in life worse than being stuck in a crappy relationship. So we must make sure we are never 'stuck' - not finacially, emotionally, legally or through our own unwillingness to leave. With all those things implemented, you should be as close as possible to a hypothetical "MGTOW relationship". I know that's somewhat of an oxymoron, and that's why there has to be so many controls on the relationship to stop it completely ruining the MGTOW.

Disclaimer: It's just my opinion and limited experience. It's a very tricky and complex topic/question. One caveat is that I do not think it's entirely compatible with MGTOW even with all the checks and balances described. If one follows this I would call it "MGTOW-lite" (which is how I'd describe myself if I had to) or even just "red pill".

[–]Holdoooo3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MajorBeef242 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 9 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

You deserve credit for your argumented comment, that being said good luck trying to enjoy your LTR while constantly mitigating the risks (and maybe failing), enforcing your limits (and maybe failing), putting up with the bullshit/compromises, not even knowing if you are being cucked, and expecting the relationship to end at any random time for any irrational reason.

as possible to a hypothetical "MGTOW relationship". I know that's somewhat of an oxymoron, and that's why there has to be so many controls on the relationship to stop it completely ruining the MGTOW.

And that's where many men are completely deluded, in a committed relationship there is NO idea of MGTOW. Nada, zero.

You may claim to be Red Pill to some extend in a relationship, but except for some illogical irrational thinking you can't be MGTOW. As you said yourself that's an oxymoron. This is hard logic. There isn't much more to say past that point.

[–]MajorBeef241 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm not in an LTR myself, I was commenting on whether I think it's possible or not. And I agree, in my last LTR I was usually in one of two states: 1) Being alert and careful, keeping some distance, having my guard up, remembering red pill stuff. 2) Not being careful or logical, just being on autopilot and enjoying it.

The second leads quickly to problems, but the first is stressful and not as enjoyable. Having said that, however, the first way was still enjoyable at times and obviously worked a lot better. You get much better short-term "results" from a relationship when you're remembering red pill stuff and not getting too close or emotional.

I think the better solution for a MGTOW-oriented man who still wants some kind of relationship for whatever reason (only reason I can think of is frequent sex) is short-term relationships. Breaking up before you get too emotionally attached is also a huge benefit of this. I know that, for me, I'd really like to be single (meaning no relationships, not just unmarried) when I'm a certain age (sometime between 30 and 40). So I don't want to have too much difficulty when I break up with the last person and go fully MGTOW.

Plus, nearly all relationships are only any good for a "honeymoon period" that could be anywhere from a month to a few years in length. There is no reason for a man with standards to want to stick around after that unless he is forced to, anyway.

And I agree that a MGTOW relationship is a contradiction, but under specific circumstances it is possible to have a relationship that doesn't take away your independence/freedom, doesn't alter your lifestyle in a way you don't want, and doesn't preclude you from going MGTOW at will. After all, it isn't really women who take away those things from men - men give them up. Men lose their freedom by giving in to her demands and shit-tests, men lose their identity by making their lives revolve round her, men lose their lifestyles by catering to her 24/7 and not taking time to themselves, and finally men lose their option to MGTOW by getting married, having kids, getting to emotionally attached etc.

Women don't take men's freedom, men give it up for women. And we don't have to (as we all know very well here). The best way to avoid it is to avoid relationships, I don't disagree with that one bit. But I do contend that it is possible to fend off manipulation tactics and have a relationship where you're in charge. And it's simple - as simple as leaving when you spot certain signs - but that doesn't mean it's easy.

The problem is that women are such damn good manipulators. But, at the end of the day, we're more intelligent than them and far stronger mentally. If we use that intelligence and mental fortitude then we can out-play women.

But it isn't MGTOW and I'm not advocating it (let alone advocating it as part of MGTOW). I think it's a very dangerous slippery path to walk down and also a lot of effort.

[–]LesterKadwell1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Men lose their freedom by giving in to her demands and shit-tests, men lose their identity by making their lives revolve round her, men lose their lifestyles by catering to her 24/7 and not taking time to themselves

Yes, I agree, in facts that's the critical point of this discussion.

From my own experience when a woman feels a man isn't totally devoted to giving her his constant attention she will gradually increase pressure and start to behave increasingly like a brat (trying to get attention), then ultimately cheat or break up if she can't have her way.

That's why I think a man cannot both Go his Own Way and at the same time keep the relationship alive. Unless the woman is a complete slave or a robot he will always have to compromise to give her at least partly what she want, or she won't allow the relationship to happen.

In other words a woman won't let a man have his own way because she needs to extract something from the relationship. She needs something or the relationship would be useless to her. She demands the attention and the resources, making him focus on her, not on himself. She will monkey-branch to a better relationship if she isn't satisfied.

women are such damn good manipulators

I agree and would add that men are also strong at playing along. Men are masters at rationalizing the situation and deluding themselves in believing they are in control of the situation when they are not (in general life too). They are really good at thinking they are the one wanting what she actually wants. "She wants that, but it's OK, whatever, I'm fine with it." which is actually bullshit and detracting them from their Own Way. And internally, they are unconsciously coerced by the idea of making her upset once again (having to endure this unpleasant time).

I think it's a very dangerous slippery path to walk down and also a lot of effort.

You said it. This is SUCH a slippery path. The loss of control happens slowly like for a frog being boiled.

It even happens to Alpha bros from the PUA land, they though they were in control all the time, holding frame and everything. Well, no. When they wake up then they can only ask themselves WTF happened.

The problem is (as tempting as it seems) you cannot say "I will do this LTR until it sucks, then I'm done". There is no visible hard limit, it happens progressively. Inevitably you WILL lose some time, money, life opportunities, sanity (not accounting STDs, legal risks, paternity risks, and so on).

Plus, nearly all relationships are only any good for a "honeymoon period" that could be anywhere from a month to a few years in length.

Having tried to play that game in the past, my experience of honeymoons is 3-6 months max. After 6 months is when I usually see the HUGE red flags appear, actually the repeated red flags I missed (rationalized out, or she did hide better) around 1-3 month and which I remember now. The hard rule would be to pull the "eject" lever at the FIRST serious argument (when she starts to move the relationship her way). But then still expect having lost 3-6 months, being distracted from your project and yourself (honestly, during a honeymoon you are constantly distracted), expect money spend doing "things together" (she pays her part of course, but spendings will increase). Also, expect some stress from holding frame, holding limits, shit tests and stuffs, and from the break up (dopamine-down is biologically inevitable after a break up).

Today I would maybe have the patience to tolerate that bullshit maybe for one day before I tell a woman to go fuck herself. (Sorry for ranting about myself by the way.)

[–]PabloEscoba2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]the-capitan 73 points74 points75 points 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

pew shows that in the last 20 years, women wanting to marry went up from 29->38%, while men fell from 35->29%. meanwhile, the marriage rates of our generations have already leveled off at 60% for 80s babies and 20% for 90s babies. this is societal level destruction of marriage. what's causing it?

instead of getting married in their 20s, women are burning their most fertile and attractive years riding the CC until they're kicked off by crashing into the wall. at that point, their fertility is in the shitter, this is the most unattractive they've ever been since tommy made fun of them in middle school for her mouth full of braces, and they've completely destroyed their ability to pair bond for any sort of committed relationship. there's nothing suggesting these women will ever marry, and even if they do, their probability of divorce is 80%+.

[–]VanDerVaart 20 points21 points22 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]I-am-the-lul6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]MajorBeef242 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If marriage was turned into a purely religious or symbolic thing then many men would be OK with it. And why not? We'd have nothing to lose then except the cost of the party, and it's a good excuse for a big party if nothing else. If divorce could just be signing a form and had no real consequences then marriage would be no different to an LTR (or even STR if it's a short marriage).

But let's be honest, that's never going to happen. At best, the financial consequences may be reduced in the future to encourage more men into it. But it'll never be at a level I'd be comfortable with (basically no real 'ties' except words). And ironically, if the ties were reduced to encourage more men, it would discourage women from marriage IMO. Part of why they do it is the cash and prizes of divorce, as we all know.

[–]d1g1talherO9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Paladin29031 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]FoxIslander3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]FalloutFan29 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wildfireboat29 points30 points31 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 9 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

I need to know your secret in how you get away with not paying taxes.

[–]LesterKadwell4 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]indus360 29 points30 points31 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]80173514 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DirtieHarry3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]gravelheart 9 points10 points11 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]indus360 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]JacksterTrackster28 points29 points30 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 9 years ago* [recovered] (10 children) | Copy Link

That's because when you sleep around with multiple people, you lose your ability to bond with only one person later in life.

It's actually worse than that. The hormones and brain chemistry around orgasm & "bonding" (i.e. oxytocin, etc.) still happens... it's just that the BIGGEST EFFECT is with the FIRST male that they mated with (or probably more correctly ONE of the first males -- it may not have actually been the fumbling, awkward, premature ejaculating idiot that kinda-sorta "fucked" them first -- the oxytocin hormone "flood" is a result of, and requires a "psychological" orgasm).

So what you have is a shitload of "alpha widows" -- forever bereft and longing for the "one that got away" -- and regardless of who they eventually marry (even if he is a close "twin" to the lost "alpha"*), they'll never FULLY pair-bond with that guy, because they're still "pair bonded" with the first "alpha"... and they'll continue to try to find him, hold out/hold back with that fantasy in mind.

* Hell it could even BE the very same actual guy -- just a dozen or two years later -- and nonetheless because he's aged/time has passed, she won't really "pair-bond" with HIM either -- because her "memory" of said alpha has been "fantasy-polished-altered" in a way that he no longer matches (aka she "fell OUT of love" and/or "He's not the man she 'fell in love with' anymore.")

[–]FalloutFan24 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 9 years ago* [recovered] (8 children) | Copy Link

Any scientific study to back this up? Part of me still doesn't want to believe it, the simp beta part.

Problem with "scientific" studies in this kind of "human behavior" research is that -- despite the claims of various "study" authors -- there is NO SUCH THING. Seriously, to actually be "scientific" the study would have to have a fairly large number of participants; the authors would have to have FULL control over the them, then randomly (and blindly) assign them to various subgroups (probably including a nearly lifelong "celibate/virgin" group); and then have an objective means of determining the level degree of "love" within a relationship, a physical (and non-invasive) means of sampling oxytocin and other hormones & brain chemical levels (something that BTW simply DOESN'T exist at present)... and would have to diligently & consistently perform that across the entire lifespan of the participants (i.e. a longer time frame than the initial study creators own lifespan).

-- So, what you end up with instead is two options:

First is "animal studies" around hormones & neurobiochemicals -- usually on rather low-level inconsequential & short-lived, unsophisticated "mammals" like mice -- the results of which will be rather dubious, and easily/readily dismissed as "Less than proof of what happens in HUMANS."

The second is psychological/sociological "pseudo/faux 'scientific' " studies -- where some group of people (ostensibly randomly selected, but seldom actually so) are "surveyed" and expected to be honest about their "self-report" concerning their "feelings," etc. -- and then the whole thing STILL needs to be repeated (and ideally "replicated" which virtually NEVER happens with psych/soc "studies").

-- The point being that there is going to be a whole SHITLOAD of "issues" with any such study that render the results to be massively biased/dubious -- everything from the way the survey questions are phrased, the "context/environment" the surveys are taken, the level to which the participants actually believe that their responses will remain "anonymous", the degree to which they participants are choosing to be "honest" in their answers (versus the inherent temptation to "fuck with them" LOL), and so on.

And note that's JUST the issues with the survey-takers; valid & relevant BASE level objections that will be present even BEFORE we get to things like selection biases, the biases of the funding/sponsoring entity (somebody's footing the bill, and that somebody can then "tug" on the strings); or the potential socio-political agenda & other biases of the "researchers" themselves (among other things the basic & common desire of grad students to obtain some "sensational/novel" results that will be worthy of "publication," possibly be considered controversial {and thus able to be capitalized upon and build a career off of}, etc).

OTHERWISE what you're left with is "anecdotes" either from personal experience, social circles, or in various books written by "professionals" -- that is individual "case studies" from clients/patients (often "anonymized" to ostensibly "protect client's privacy" -- but also meaning the stories are subsequently entirely UNverifiable) from various psychologists and counselors as to what their patients/clients have conveyed about their husbands, exes (including past boyfriends), etc. -- and then layered on top of that, the authors own "spin" or "interpretations" (undoubtedly biased by their own beliefs, worldview, etc).

[–]FalloutFan21 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 9 years ago* [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

Fair enough. Is there anything though, no matter how inconsequential, that at least corroborates your claims?

Sure, there are a shitload of abstracts of "studies" listed on sites like https://www.oxytocin.org/

And just by searching on the terms you can find a whole host of articles about "pair bonding" and "oxytocin" (most of them probably about one or another study -- including a lot of them that were "presented" but often never finally "published" -- involving "prairie voles"* and etc.)

-- * Much like "mice" -- and more importantly unlike HUMANS -- you can apparently do all kinds of things to prairie voles (and other "voles") sticking them in cages, pairing them up with other prairie voles (and without the female prairie voles bitching about "how much does he make? does he have any degrees? what car does he drive?"* before letting the male prairie vole fuck them) and then being dosed with shots or nasal sprays of oxytocin, etc.; and the prairie voles don't seem to object.

[–]FalloutFan21 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]DWShimoda4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sorry I can't be more specific, but -- at least AFAIK -- there is no singular "big theory establishing study" regarding this stuff.

Rather it's sort of a quasi-consensus-interpretation of a whole array of different studies about men, women, sex, mammals, hormones, pair bonding, etc -- that have then been combined with an intuitive understanding of ourselves and our anecdotal experiences in life -- mix it all together, toss in a good deal of personal perspective bias, and then pull out a sort of "tapestry" image conclusion that helps you make sense of the world.

That's what the reality is of most of the quasi-scientific "books" are that are out there on this stuff.

The thing is that we really DON'T yet have anything more than the crudest comprehension of how the physical "brain" operates (and we're talking the rudimentary stuff there, despite the exorbitant claims about & around things like fMRI's -- well go google "fMRI Dead Salmon" if you want a good laugh about the "Scientific" basis of all of those colorful "brain images").

In terms of the CONTENT processing of the "brain" -- aka the "mind" and thoughts, thinking, memory, emotions, etc -- well, the fact of the matter (ignoring all the /r/Futurology & the "AI/Singularity" nonsense) is that science is almost entirely clueless -- that is all "theories" are speculative/intuitive/inductive garbage (doesn't mean they're wrong, just that there's no basis to really call any of it "scientific" -- no objective evidence; and to date, not even any real concept of where to begin getting any... we're really not much beyond Cogito ergo sum {and the post-modern deniers/negators of even that, LOL}).

[+][deleted] 9 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

Also, keep in mind that a lot of things are rather subjective.

What I mean by that is a woman who is an "alpha widow" -- i.e. decades later still (possibly only secretly) "pining away" over some lost boyfriend that "got away" etc -- well he may NOT have actually been an "alpha" in any way shape or form.

All that was necessary was that SHE saw/thought/believed him to be that; and that their "interactions" (which may NOT even have reached full "coitus" vaginal penetrative sex, maybe he just fingered her clit, or even just a "petting session" where he touched her boobs just right and which) created a sufficiently strong enough psycho-sexual "response" in her brain (virtual-mental "orgasm"), that she more or less "imprinted" on him as The ONE aka THE GUY her "Prince Charming" and etc.

Moreover, she may very well have dated -- and nevertheless rejected -- other men who WERE much more alpha-like in status (or at least AMOG's in a certain context)... but nevertheless still be pining over the one "true love."

-- You also have to keep in mind that again, the "sexual response" is really MOSTLY occurring within the brain (that's true of men AND women -- it's why both "porn" AND "romance novels" work on each respective gender); and that while there is no doubt that actual real-world aspects (and things like size, speed, depth of penetration) of the physical sex act ARE important; they aren't necessarily sufficient or even critically related to the degree of the internal subjective response.

-- To wit, some girl/woman who has somehow obsessively fantasized over having sex with some specific guy -- let's just say out of current celebrities some "Justin Bieber" -- and who goes out and gets drunk, hooks up with someone who (at least via her drunken state "beer goggles") kinda-sorta looks like Bieber TO HER (maybe has similar ridiculous tattoos, haircut, etc); well during the sex activities that follow (both REAL and possibly imaginary/dream) she'll probably have some EXTREMELY STRONG orgasmic responses (fantasy fulfillment usually does).

-- She will then "imprint" not only on "having sex with Justin Bieber" but ALSO on aspects of that REAL guy AS SHE SUBJECTIVELY (drunkenly) "experienced" them -- that is the oxytocin & other hormone & brain chemicals will be released in a large enough "flood" to create a VERY strong "memory pathway," a snapshot-like recording of her sensory perceptions of and around the guy/event. That will PROBABLY include a slightly FALSE (fantasy) image of his looks -- i.e. she'll be even MORE fixated on Justin Bieber.

But other things might (probably WILL) be oddly OFF, for example she might integrate both the specific cologne and/or antiperspirant/deodorant that the REAL guy she was fucking/sucking was wearing (keep in mind that Justin Bieber posters and music videos are notably BEREFT of any olfactory information, so the "fantasy" has a HUGE blank area that gets filled in), along with other smells from the REAL guy, sweat odors etc, possibly related to the guys job (maybe he's a mechanic and has a grease-oil smell, or a roofer & has a "tarry" smell on hands/clothing); and she may also integrate a specific "up close" view of one or more of his tattoos (which then may entirely DIFFER from the actual Justin Bieber's body art -- i.e. the mechanic/roofer has a tattoo of a yellow "Tweety Bird").

That array of "imprinting" is then going to "fuck with her mind" many times later on in her life.

Some OTHER dude is going to smell similar to that "Justin Bieber fantasy-fuck substitute" -- either some other guy with a Tweety Bird tattoo; or wearing that same cologne, or with a similar "sweat" smell; or perhaps some guy is a car mechanic or roofer (or hell, she might find herself getting "horny" any time she drops off her car for repairs, or is near "hot tar") -- and will probably be VERY confused about it -- WTF? Why is she getting "horny & wet" all of a sudden??? (And WHY 10 years from now -- when she thinks she is "totally over" her teenybopper fixation -- is she inexplicably, thinking about that "Justin Bieber" freak again?)

-- The human brain is a very WEIRD thing.

The chief conclusion here -- beyond that the human brain/memory is WEIRD -- is that early-deep/strong sexual experiences are GOING to crop up again later.

(Nor is that anything all THAT odd relative to other human memory/imprinting -- we have similar "blind spots" when it comes to things like mothers, or early childhood friends {and/or "enemies"} -- we may find ourselves "drawn" to {or averse to} someone entirely NEW that we meet simply because they share some "feature" to our childhood friends/enemies; everything from eye-color/shape/distance, to facial structure, to spoken accent, or again even certain, especially "distinctive" scents/smells. Among other things that kind of stuff of probably a chief source of various "deja vu" things... it's not a "glitch in the Matrix" it's some trigger to an early "imprint" memory.)

[–]FalloutFan23 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]DWShimoda5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That fixation must be even more amplified in females.

Well both the sort of self-reports of preferences -- women claiming to be more social and "relationship" focused, as well as the general stereotype of genders (and stereotypes exist for a reason, they're a sort of intuitive/consensus "summation" of things) -- would seem to indicate that it probably WOULD be more amplified in females.

And then you can add in other "observational data" so to speak: things like what women tend to take photographs of and therefore focus on as a priority (themselves, themselves with friends, themselves on a date with Chad/Jody, when running into some celebrity, etc -- IOW socialization and/or social-status related stuff), versus what men tend to take photos of (physical objects, i.e. things, whether it's hobby or work related: trucks, cars, buildings, machinery, etc) -- point being that as cliche as it sounds, women really probably DO get all "weepy-eyed" and emotional remembering some first date/first boyfriend, etc; whereas guys might remember (even fondly) some first crush, but are much more likely to get "weepy-eyed" and emotional when remembering their first car or first motorcycle.

[–]ColdStoryBro1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]totorox 14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]DirtieHarry8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]LetsGoAllTheWhey17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]DirtieHarry10 points11 points12 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Ironchar0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]invisiblepan1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]mgtowthrowaway907 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bikemarrow28 points29 points30 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]OneLostMotherfucker17 points18 points19 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]OutWithTheNew6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]relightit20 points21 points22 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]totorox 23 points24 points25 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]TedCruzEatsBoogers22 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Zombocom191118 points19 points20 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Lostwarrior147 12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]LetsGoAllTheWhey14 points15 points16 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]andreas-mgtow12 points13 points14 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]comptejete6 points7 points8 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]d1g1talherO4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mulistik3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SnapshillBot1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Snapshill0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]manifesto181 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]FalloutFan21 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bigglenn1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That about sums it up.

Comments

nevermarry

Also, keep in mind that a lot of things are rather subjective.

That array of "imprinting" is then going to "fuck with her mind" many times later on in her life.

-- The human brain is a very WEIRD thing.

Title	That about sums it up.
Author	55togo
Upvotes	416
Comments	78
Date	December 5, 2016 3:14 PM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MGTOW
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/5gmeai/that_about_sums_it_up/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MGTOW/that-about-sums-it-up.619388 https://theredarchive.com/post/619388