Guest viewing is limited

Done screwed up

I am confused by his statement. I'm supposed to just accept the fact it's a lame excuse and move on? I am going to call you out on it.
I have no idea what he meant exactly. I assumed it had to do with beating or not the stock market index :D
 
Oh boy, you have issues, you know that I suppose

Funny this is coming from a guy getting depressed over a sugarbaby and rant about it on an internet forum ;)

Have you ever had a real relationship?
 
You keep saying beta but I somehow doubt that you’re this alpha you claim to be.

These are common terms in PUA / Red Pill scene. You should learn to take feedback instead of seeing everything as a personal attack.
 
Last edited:
I am confused by his statement. I'm supposed to just accept the fact it's a lame excuse and move on? I am going to call you out on it.

You should learn to take feedback instead of seeing everyone who disagrees with you as a personal attack.


Whatever you say beta.


"I see where this is going, how you are and where you are currently at right now so let me make it really easy for you. Go and date a Japanese or a Gaijin who speaks Japanese, because obviously you are not interested or care about me other than my language abilities."

The irony :D

Triggered much?
 
  • Like
Reactions: JpLove66
You should learn to take feedback instead of seeing everyone who disagrees with you as a personal attack.


"I see where this is going, how you are and where you are currently at right now so let me make it really easy for you. Go and date a Japanese or a Gaijin who speaks Japanese, because obviously you are not interested or care about me other than my language abilities."

The irony :D

Triggered much?

Yet, you're the one who is purposely trying to assert dominance over someone on a thread that was dead long before you got here.

That being said I can deduce a few things here from your jackassery.

1) Only internet trolls and eThugs go around boasting about being an alpha.

2) That was an obvious statement from a breakup. At what point do you not get this? There were personal attacks on both sides, and that was the end of the conversation.

3) You have NEVER been in a relationship.

4) The fact that you are here and go through old threads to revive them to offer your pointless critiques is beyond ridiculous.

5) You offered NOTHING in the form of any real positive and or negative critique that I can use for future relationships.

The irony is that you're a sad, sad little boy who has nothing better to do other than start flame wars. So with that, I will allow you to have the final word as I already know what it is going to be as you don't have anything useful to say.
 
Yet, you're the one who is purposely trying to assert dominance over someone on a thread that was dead long before you got here.

That being said I can deduce a few things here from your jackassery.

1) Only internet trolls and eThugs go around boasting about being an alpha.

2) That was an obvious statement from a breakup. At what point do you not get this? There were personal attacks on both sides, and that was the end of the conversation.

3) You have NEVER been in a relationship.

4) The fact that you are here and go through old threads to revive them to offer your pointless critiques is beyond ridiculous.

5) You offered NOTHING in the form of any real positive and or negative critique that I can use for future relationships.

The irony is that you're a sad, sad little boy who has nothing better to do other than start flame wars. So with that, I will allow you to have the final word as I already know what it is going to be as you don't have anything useful to say.

1) Where do you see me boasting? Stop taking everything as a personal attack
2) Obvious statement from a breakup? No it was butthurt and vindictive (hence the angry beta comment)
3) Ok..
4) I did not revive your thread. Your thread was on the frontpage.
5) Because you're not the guy who can take feedback. You're here to rant and look for people who agree with you. Sorry for not joining the upvote circlejerk.

-- AlphaGRAY
 
Last edited:
Define Real

Real Doll:

sol_03w-1434674280.jpg



Real Troll:

fba17a068156ce2e84de9020d40e2a2f--leonardo-print-design.jpg
 
For any kind of relationship to work between a man and woman attracted to each other the man has to be willing to walk away. It doesn’t matter if it’s a one night stand, dating, or a marriage. The man must always be willing to walk away. When a man is always willing to walk away the woman knows the man is strong and therefore she’ll want to screw him/stay with him. It’ll make her attracted to you and know that you are a high value man. As you have standards and options for yourself and aren’t weak.

Wrong.

-Ww
 
  • Like
Reactions: just4fun and MikeH
Wrong.

-Ww

Wrong how? In order to be able to keep the correct frame in keeping a woman, you must be willing to lose her / walk away. I’m not saying you should WANT to lose her, nor that you shouldn’t care about her. But if you can’t live without her, you eventually will. Tell girls how much you need them. They'll run away like rats from a sinking ship. Now, I show girls how much i LIKE them, when appropriate but not that i NEED them. I always let them see that I can replace them very, very easily if need be. Guess what? They don't go anywhere, most of the time. And if they do leave, I'm never caught unprepared.

--LG
 
Wrong how? In order to be able to keep the correct frame in keeping a woman, you must be willing to lose her. I’m not saying you should WANT to lose her, nor that you shouldn’t care about her. But if you can’t live without her, you eventually will. Tell girls how much you need them. They'll run away like rats from a sinking ship. Now, I show girls how much i LIKE them, when appropriate but not that i NEED them. I always let them see that I can replace them very, very easily if need be. Guess what? They don't go anywhere, most of the time. And if they do leave, I'm never caught unprepared.

--LG

Wrong in many ways, but the simplest one is that you vastly underestimate the huge variety of different behaviors and psychologies of individual human beings, men and women, much less those of the possible types of relationships between them. You have made a very common but extremely limiting error in trying to understand the complexities of life in the real world involving real people. Namely, you are trying to force everything into (i.e., understand everything via) a single simple model or concept and just ignoring all the many exceptions.

What you say above may be true of some relationship, possibly even of all those in which you have been involved (try to realize that only certain sorts of women will find you appealing and that you have zero relationship experience with those who do not) , but it simply isn't true, not even roughly true, of many others. I have observed many exceptions in relationships that have already lasted decades and been personally involved in some.

Open your eyes and mind to what the world presents to you rather than trying to insist on it following some simplistic idea you have that imagines that everyone reacts the same way to the same situations.

Let me give you one concrete example of a type of exception to your notions as described in the above quote: There are quite a lot of women who basically desire to be a metaphorical mother to their mates; they want the love they receive to be like the love a child for its mother...one which is need based. If they don't see, feel and hear that sort of need in their mate, they quickly lose interest. Fortunately there are men who desire metaphorical mothers to take care of them in their mates. It is a good thing when these sorts find each other, obviously. But the point is that the world is full of working and fulfilling relationships that work with a dynamic just the opposite of the one you describe above.

There are lots of other types of relationships that don't fit your conception too; that is just one example.

Clear?

-Ww

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. "
- Hamlet (1.5.167-8)
 
Last edited:
Wrong in many ways, but the simplest one is that you vastly underestimate the huge variety of different behaviors and psychologies of individual human beings, men and women, much less those of the possible types of relationships between them. You have made a very common but extremely limiting error in trying to understand the complexities of life in the real world involving real people. Namely, you are trying to force everything into (i.e., understand everything via) a single simple model or concept and just ignoring all the many exceptions.

What you say above may be true of some relationship, possibly even of all those in which you have been involved (try to realize that only certain sorts of women will find you appealing and that you have zero relationship experience with those who do not) , but it simply isn't true, not even roughly true, of many others. I have observed many exceptions in relationships that have already lasted decades and been personally involved in some.

Open your eyes and mind to what the world presents to you rather than trying to insist on it following some simplistic idea you have that imagines that everyone reacts the same way to the same situations.

Let me give you one concrete example of a type of exception to your notions as described in the above quote: There are quite a lot of women who basically desire to be a metaphorical mother to their mates; they want the love they receive to be like the love a child for its mother...one which is need based. If they don't see, feel and hear that sort of need in their mate, they quickly lose interest. Fortunately there are men who desire metaphorical mothers to take care of them in their mates. It is a good thing when these sorts find each other, obviously. But the point is that the world is full of working and fulfilling relationships that work with a dynamic just the opposite of the one you describe above.

There are lots of other types of relationships that don't fit your conception too; that is just one example.

Clear?

-Ww

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. "
- Hamlet (1.5.167-8)
You miss or deliberately ignore that Leongray is obviously stating a maxim. He is making a point about one element of psychology: people want what they can’t have or might not get. And conversely, what they can easily get or can easily keep, they don’t want. This maxim doesn’t overrule everything. As you state, life, relationships and the human mind are much more complex. But Leongray’s maxim is a good one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LeonGRAY
Well , inflation had been at zero or close to zero for years ;)

That's still better result than what your average day trader gets. :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frenchy
But Leongray’s maxim is a good one.

Not when he uses it as the basis of bad advice, as in this case, imo. But I agree that there is some truth to what he said...just much less than he apparently thinks. In fact there is about equally much truth in the exact opposite of what he said.

Anyway, now that he has involuntarily departed the realm of TAG discussion threads, it matters too little to debate further, doesn't it?

-Ww
 
Not when he uses it as the basis of bad advice, as in this case, Imo. But I agree that there is some truth to what he said...just much less than he apparently thinks. In fact there is about equally much truth in the exact opposite of what he said.

-Ww
And thankfully neither you, me nor Leon is the supreme arbiter of what is a fact and what is the truth. You seem to think you are though. And that is what gets you into trouble.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LeonGRAY
And thankfully neither you, me or Leon s the supreme arbiter of what is a fact and what is the truth. You seem to think you are though. And that is what gets you into trouble.

Actually, if you checked, I bet you'd find that I use "ime" and "imo" ("in my experience" and "in my opinion") and similar caveats in my assertions as much or more than any other regular poster on TAG...and I certainly can't compete with you for making completely unsupported (by any explicitly given evidence, expertise or experience) flat and unconditional statements of "truth".

What sort of trouble do you think I'm in??? It must be so subtle as to be imperceptible to me!

-Ww
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AliceInWonderland
Actually, if you checked, I bet you'd find that I use "ime" and "imo" ("in my experience" and "in my opinion") and similar caveats in my assertions as much or more than any other regular poster on TAG...and certainly can't compete with you for making completely unsupported (by any explicitly given evidence, expertise or experience) flat and unconditional statements of "truth".

What sort of trouble do you think I'm in??? It must be so subtle as to be imperceptible to me!

-Ww
There you go again! Stating opinion as if were fact! And don’t try to deflect the spotlight away from yourself by casting aspersions in my direction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LeonGRAY
You keep saying beta but I somehow doubt that you’re this alpha you claim to be.
He's been banned from posting because he's a troll.