mASF post by "esk6969"
posted on: alt.seduction.relationships, July 7, 2005On 7/13/05 11:19:00 PM, OceanEyes wrote:
>On 7/13/05 8:40:00 PM, esk6969 wrote:
>>On 7/12/05 5:02:00 PM, OceanEyes wrote:
>>If you DO decide to FB her, ...call less, fuck less, etc.
>>When she asks what's going on, tell her
>>you want to "cool it" for a while.
>>
>>Panic!
>
>She has already decided we need some
>"space,"
>which I am more than happy to provide.
Oooh, that doesn't sound good. Sounds like SHE'S calling the shots here. This
goes right back to my Sun Tzu thing, and how it's ALWAYS better to have the
other side reacting to you, rather than you reacting to them. Sounds like you
are in a reactive mode with the "space" thing. That means you won't be able to
manipulate the "sugar daddy/withdrawal" effect. Rather, she has become the
sugar momma. And when momma's not happy.... no one's happy.
>>love" literally have the same brain-MRI
>>patterns as drug addicts. Including,
>>the same syptoms accompanying
>>"withdrawal" of the drug. If you really
>
>I make myself go through withdrawal
>symptoms
>at least twice a month to acclimate
>myself
>to the emotion. This is letting me keep
>my sanity about me. I think she may be
>doing this herself.
Forgive my saying so, but this sounds to me like a description of two people
who are not willing to commit to one another. Yet, in a previous post, you
mentioned how one advantage to an LTR is that your other will help you out in a
bind - which I agree with. Is that the case here? If she were in trouble,
like, long-term trouble, would you be there for her? Would she be there for
you? At some point, to have an ltr BE and ltr, two people have to commit to
one another, either formally (marriage), or informally (merely and "agreement
in principle"). It sounds like this is more of a marriage of convenience,
rather than a marriage of commitment (figuratively speaking).
>, see yourself as a
>>pusher, and, like all good pushers, draw
>>the line out a little bit. Make her
>>miss it. And then, when you give it to
>>her, give the good stuff. And back, and
>>forth, and so it goes. BAM!
>
>I think she is doing this to me also.
Sounds like more of proactive/reactive. SHE should be reacting to YOU.
Otherwise, how to keep her off balance (and thus, maintain the excitement of
attraction?) As from DeAngelo, "Never let the line go slack".
>My guess is that she prefers
>to be in control of the relationship,
Sounds like a pretty good guess.
>but ends up losing attraction to these guys
>pretty fast.
Pretty predictable.
>I think this is an age thing. Women in
>their 40s, faced with decreasing
>prospects
>all around, may very well be satisfied
>to
>have a piece of something that is damn
>good, rather than having 100% of
>something
>really shitty. 1/3 of a player can give
>a women much more emotional and sexual
>validation than the average whole hubby.
This reminds me of a saying: "There are two kinds of women: Mothers, and
Aunts." This is a polite, southern way of saying, "There are good girls... and
bad girls". Sounds like you've got a bad girl. The kind who never settles
down, who wants to keep her options open, who like sex, but can't abide without
variety. The kind who has lots of interesting stories when she's older, and
alone. Which is better, to live a full, interesting life, yet die alone? Or
to build a long-term commitment, and accept some limitations in exchange for
lifelong companionship? I don't know the answer here.
>Thus the basis of PlayerSupreme's whole
>game, and harem of 35-45 yo hotties.
Sounds like he's made his choice, and that it's the right one for him. Only
time will tell.
>The difference is this: back a couple of
>months ago when I was a "lover" she
>would
>joke around about "sharing" me with her
>hottie girlfriends. Now, if I bring
>this
>up as a joke, she gets very upset. She
>brought it up first! In hindsight, I
>now know this was a test. I think I
>said
>something like "social circle is
>off-limits."
What does this chick want? To be in LTR, or to be single? To have an Alpha
male who fucks her good, or an AFC who she can betaise? I know that for us to
sit here and say that, her wanting contradictory things is textbook chick
logic, is obvious. But, the difference, I thought with her was, she was the
classic "execu-femme" type who got her power jollies at work, and then let the
hair down at home?
It's one of the reasons experienced dominatrixes do so well financially, even
though they don't actually fuck, for the money they charge. Most of their
clients are high-powered executive types who have all the power and
responsibility, and people coming to them for things and permission all day
long. The BDSM dungeon-chamber is the one place where they can "let go" of all
that, and become completely submissive, and thus, by having their body
enchained, their mind goes free. I thought she was of this type, i.e., likes
to be tied up, fucked in the ass, etc.?
Her wanting this, yet still to be in charge, in simply inconsistent, there is
no other way to put it. I know that there has been the thrill of the chase,
the ongoing excitement/attraction, "Will OE submit to me, like all the others,
or will he maintain his frame, and prove to me he is a REAL MAN."
But now that you seem to have passed this "test", her reaction is, "If a man
accepts betaisation, I will next him. If he does not, and I cannot have
control, I will next him." At some point, she is going to have to submit.
Even on the nature animal shows, the female eventually submits to the male so
he can fuck her, after initially giving him a hard time. Now, in some animals,
they maintain monogamy... in some, the pair bonding lasts only long enough for
the mating, and then the female gets hostile, and the male moves on... and in
some, the female eats the male when she's done with him. Hmmm, the more I
write on this, the more this sounds like humans...
Anyway, I guess the upshot of what I'm trying to say is, it sounds like you
guys will need to decide on a relationship model that is compatible with both
of your desires. Or, she will wind up an Aunt.
>>
>>"Get your validation from your life, not
>>your women." - L&C
>>
>>"Girls network" is like the Mafia with
>>the difference that they use the tongue
>>instead of Beretta. - Franco
>
>-OE
>
>----------------------------
>
>OE's First Law: Any sufficiently long
>thread on mASF devolves into a flame war
>about SS.
"Get your validation from your life, not your women." - L&C
"Girls network" is like the Mafia with the difference that they use the tongue
instead of Beretta. - Franco
|
