The point always missed

I think everyone here is interested in "high quality women." How you define that will be an individual thing. I guess the low quality women are left for old guys like Shadowcat who are more interested in what kind of senior discount they can get than what they are rubbing their little viagra induced old man boners on.

The point "always" missed is that there are a few normal girls who happen to be working as strippers at this particular time? Or that "in love" is biochemically induced non-volitional? Not sure there is any particular connection between "strippers" and "falling in love", compared to, say, "nurses" and "falling in love". The point always missed????

Other TUSCLers please help out here. I have read David9999's post three times. I understand the title. But I don't see much connection to the text that he posted.

I couldn't figure out what "the point" was either. Maybe David was drunk when he wrote this?

"and all of that relates to earlier times"

And that my friend is the problem, that is an opinion, yours, and it steals many intellectual bases, as I've tried to explain, yet you present it as fact. It is not.

Sorry I meant to quote "and that all-critical component I believe is in the nature of a a bio-chemically induced non-volitional involuntary feeling - and all of that relates to earlier times"

To re-iterate, that my friend is the problem, that is an opinion, yours, and it steals many intellectual bases, as I've tried to explain, yet you present it as fact. It is not.

I think the point that's often missed here is that there is almost always likely to be a lot of lying going on. Let's face it, if you're a regular strip club customer, you're probably used to lying about it - to your SO, your friends, your co-workers. How many paople here have never told someone they were going somewhere else when they went clubbing? We're probably all liars. So why should anyone expect to find much truthfulness on this board?

FONDL: I agree. I lie to friends and co workers by omitting information. I tell them that I am going to Columbia SC to visit friends. I just omit the fact that my friends are also strippers. My son and especially my daughter always know where I am going. I lied to my ex wife but that was mutual. There are a dozen or so guys on here that I have met personally. We email/PM each other regularly. I trust them and believe what they tell me. Although I have not met you personally, you have shared enough personal information with me, that I trust you. There are a lot of others that post on here that I believe. But there are a few that I believe to be totally liars. Attention getters.

OK Parodyman, take your best shot.

"when women today speak of "chemistry" being a requisite to sustain a relationship with a man, they are actually talking about "falling in love" and that all-critical component I believe is in the nature of a a bio-chemically induced non-volitional involuntary feeling - and all of that relates to earlier times"

I believe "the point always missed," in David9999's opinion is that 'chemistry' and 'falling in love' for women are critically related to much earlier human evolution. Back in the caveman days a woman would seek certain traits from a man and those traits were likely to be passed on to later generations. Wonderful, except that the modern world doesn't "need" or "want" these traits they are consciously perceived as negative. Dragging a woman around by her hair is unlikely to elicit many cheers, but due to genes that may be exactly what a woman craves; subconsciously. :)

Easy proof: Go to the local bar and start dragging women and see 'em fall madly in love. ;) Anyway, I believe David9999 has an excellent point as far as genes regulating what many women want as far as manly behaviors.

I believe David's "point" is that he's a hot stud; he's got lots of money; he's got incredible game; and he wishes everyone would pay attention to him for that, which is why he goes on and on about it. I believe David is full of shit, and I never cease to marvel that anyone on this site takes him seriously at all.

Hi njscfan,

IMHO, it seems like you take David9999 seriously. :) By that I mean you seem to have typed an awful lot to discredit him. If he was a mere 15 year old boy as you've written, then is there a real point blowing his bubble? If he was financially starved and a total loser with females of all species, then again is there a real point in deflating him?

I happen to enjoy his seed spreading posts as well as his other insights----correct or incorrect. Perhaps that just reflects badly on me. :(

You've written about exposing lies in a 30 plus year legal career. IME, too often people, especially logically grounded attorneys, equate crazy with untrue; I'm guilty of this. If I hear a nutty or improbable story, then my kneejerk reaction is that the person is confused, deceived, misinformed, puffing, lying, mentally ill, etc. etc. etc.

Jablake

Who ever said I was an attorney? Not me. And I can't have a 30 year plus career -- I'm not in my 50s (yet).

When David posted his last round of shit about alpha male seed spreading (perhaps a couple months ago) I tried to reason with him, saw that was impossible, and then gave up. My initial assumption was he was just a harmless idiot.

When he started up again a couple weeks ago, I was troubled because I felt there were some sad sack guys on this site (I am not referring to you) who seemed to actually be taking David's idiotic advice seriously. That troubled me because his advice is terrible and stupid and could seriously lead astray anyone who tried to follow it. I felt like exposing David as the fraud that he is, and it was not hard to do.

I believe there are some people on this site who desperately want to believe David (or at least someone like David) really exists. (Again, I'm not referring to you.) It gives some kind of false "hope" to the PLs out there who think their sex life will change if they just get the right "game". (It won't. Your sex life has very little to do with your "game". ) It's almost like a form of perverted religion, and I find it really sad. I'd love to shake those guys into reality, but I realize I will probably never succeed (just like you can't get most of the population to give up their most deeply held fantasies).

So I take David seriously in that I think he is a menace for fools on this site who cherish their fantasies. I do not take him seriously in the sense that I think he is not giving an even vaguely accurate description of his real life. I think he is as phony as a $3 bill, and posts his warped fictitious life to gain the approval he pathetically craves from his fellow tuscl members. The really sick part about David (as none other than Shadowcat has pointed out in another post) is that David desperately wants the approval of the sad sacks who look to him for advice -- which is why it is so important for him to get other people to believe he's a 6'3" 200 lb lawyer with a $500k income who is fucking ultra hot 9.75 girls blah blah blah blah blah. Really I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

"Who ever said I was an attorney? Not me. And I can't have a 30 year plus career -- I'm not in my 50s (yet)."

My bad. I either misinterpreted or misremembered. Sorry, about that.

Hi njscfan,

"So I take David seriously in that I think he is a menace for fools on this site who cherish their fantasies. I do not take him seriously in the sense that I think he is not giving an even vaguely accurate description of his real life. I think he is as phony as a $3 bill, and posts his warped fictitious life to gain the approval he pathetically craves from his fellow tuscl members."

Thank you for the detailed explanation. I didn't see that TUSCLers were using him as some type of guru. Of course, looking at some of the stranger cults it seems like almost anyone can become a guru.

"(It won't. Your sex life has very little to do with your 'game'. )"

I will always remember this short fat slob with a beautiful smile and his ability it seemed to make almost anyone else smile. It was amazing how successful he was with hot women and women period. His car was a clunker and he was on a tight budget, but when it came to women he was a winner. If he had charged a $100 per hour to desperate guys to hang out with him and observe, then I think it would have been a bargain for many of them.

Did the short fat happy slob turn me into a lady's man? :) Not by a long shot, but it did help me understand that you don't need looks or money to be successful with women. Don't get me wrong, looks help big time. I knew a real slow poke who did well with women and again and again I heard how attractive he was--yes, I could see it, but that was all he had. Oops, NO he also had sexual skill. Money, imo, is also a definite winner from what I've witnessed.

The short fat slob was RARE. But, if he could be a winner with women then it seems like almost any man has that potential. Can it be taught? His style consisted to a high degree of very quick wit and that award winning smile. Still, a few points here and there should be available for the average joe. For me the high point was that being short, fat, and poor weren't deal breakers. That was one hell of a revelation. If I hadn't seen this guy first hand, then I probably wouldn't either believe or appreciate that lesson.

Proof is in the pudding-----I would think that some guys could be taught how to improve their sex life dramatically. It would, imo, take not only a fair amount of work, but it would take an unusual personal trainer. I mean how common are fat, short, poor, men that are winners with hot women? :) That man was a rare talent and it was a true pleasure watching him in high speed action.

For myself, some friends are in complete disbelief that any hottie would be interested in me----it is a tradeoff on many fronts. One huge difference is that for me, I have NO interest in wasting any time or effort on a woman that I don't consider to be super hot. I'm not even a little intimidated by youth or beauty. And, many/most young hotties are totally turned off by me.

Thinking of game, I can't help but think of Gambling dancer. A man could love her and treat her like a princess and meet all her physical requirements as far as good looks and I strongly believe the true end result would be ZERO assuming the man was looking for love.

For her it is all about game and because of her business as well as her natural talents she plays fairly hard ball. I wouldn't trust her. :) I wouldn't want "free" sexual favors from her. :) I wouldn't expect appreciation or fair play from her. :) Having said all of that I very much appreciate her----especially if she is willing to treat me like other customers i.e. focus on making the dollar.

Can a man be "successful" with Gambling dancer? If success is defined down to mean "love" as some limited point in time, then, imo, the answer is YES. Money isn't going to open the gates of love nor is good manners nor are a host of other "good" traits. She says and imo believes she wants an educated man interested in being successful. The key, imo, is to look at her male relatives and behave like them. That is what I believe will capture heart at least temporarily. How difficult is it to act like her male relatives? Well, if you hang out with them it shouldn't be that difficult to follow along if you don't mind spilling blood and acting like a brute. :)

Bottom line and I could be wrong is that the key to being successful with many women is having game. I don't know if it was what she learned or her genes, but I think Gambling dancer is much more interested in the game then in the money when it comes to many aspects of her life especially when it comes to love.

Shadowcat, that was funny. I almost said that you were probably the exception to my post, and here you are the first to admit it. I believe about half of what I read here, which is about what I believe of anything I see on the internet. If something doesn't ring true, it probably isn't. I don't think this board is any better of worse than any other. And frankly who cares what's true and what isn't, if it's entertaining that's all I care about.

"And frankly who cares what's true and what isn't, if it's entertaining that's all I care about."

:)

One thing I very much appreciate about the real world is being surprised when a very apparent tall tale is shown to be true. With the internet message boards tall tales merely remain tall tales; hopefully interesting tall tales.

Also, perhaps I know the wrong people or I misunderstand . . . but, the logic even among the logical seems missing more often than not. I had a very good guy call me and tell me that he wanted to do X, Y, and Z to help me out. It didn't make any sense because although he is a very good guy being generous just isn't who he is and you shouldn't expect that from him. Besides, in the past he has always made it very clear to me and others that he will NOT help under any circumstances as far as money. Frankly, people shouldn't expect help from him unless they're a son or daughter or other close relation.

So why did he call and offer help out of the blue? I doubt that I'll ever find out, but sure don't seem a bit logical. Also, normally any offer of help even that not accepted is very much appreciated as a sign of caring. When the good guy offered all this help it made me feel very uneasy and worried. It just seems too strange given his love of money. I was thinking he might be losing his mind or he got real bad medical news. :(

Funny when offers of help from a good man bring dread instead of joy. :(

Talk about unbelieveable there is a "homeless" man in Hialeah who has different mental problems and uses different drugs. He is connected to some wealthy friends of mine. I didn't understand the connection because this bum seems like a absolute nothing. He works for peanuts and what little he earns goes to drugs.

The supposed inside scoop, which I happen to believe (shame on me, btw), is that the bum is related to extreme wealth in Iran----100s and 100s of millions. Makes NO sense, imo, that the family isn't taking better care of this bum if they're worth 100s and 100s of millions. I sort of feel like an idiot believing the story, btw. :)

I didn't mean it to be funny. I always try to tell the truth on here. What do I have to lose? I have pissed off a few members (usually intoxicated) for which I apologize. I am what I am.

IMHO being able to sustain in a convincing way the "gentlemen horndog vibe" will end up kicking up the all important "chemistry" which (all things otherwise equal) in practical terms will tend to improve both the level of physical attraction that the female has toward the man and (to the exent it might exist at all) the degree of any "in love" feelings the the women may or may not be carrying.

Some of us who go to clubs (believe it or not) are actually tall, athletic, in-shape, presentable looking, have a high net worth, high net income, and are actually lawyers (is this all really so rare these days) - and its certainly not a big deal, hardly something that has to be invented by a (mythical) 15 year old a few posters apparently are still harping about.

Ok if you want to say its all about money or some of the other factors, Ok fine one can argue that, but I'm honestly stating that IMHO this "tinge of nonomonogamy" issue seems to a very critical factor.

By the way, somewhere in the range of 120 times in total visting (a number of different clubs) over the past year is also an accurate estimate.

As for the James Bond bullshit, well no one claimed that

AbbieNormal

I present it as FACT?.

OF COURSE ITS A THEORY

This time I will cap the words and phrases you've obviously skipped:

"It is MY LONG HELD BELIEF, when women today speak of "chemistry" being a requisite to sustain a relationship with a man, they are actually talking about "falling in love" and that all-critical component I BELIEVE is in the nature of a a bio-chemically induced non-volitional involuntary feeling - and all of that relates to earlier times"

Yes, in recent threads you have begun to qualify your statements a lot more than you used to. This is a positive thing, since it puts the discussion in the proper frame. Something notably lacking in previous go-arounds.