tylercdurden2004 Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 I don't do rockets, I do Earth-Moon transits using natural solutions to the multi-body dynamics. Got delayed by the dishes, actually had to wash 'em. I remember a question in the previous post along with my Smart A'ed remark! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarnelianButterfly Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 Got delayed by the dishes, actually had to wash 'em. I remember a question in the previous post along with my Smart A'ed remark! I'm confused, which question, there were several? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tylercdurden2004 Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 I like that. Just wonder why you were so defensive in the beginning? This is the Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarnelianButterfly Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Oh, do I sound defensive? What makes it sound defensive, I thought I was just being expressive... hmmm, thats the problem with not having debates vis-a-vis you lose the intonation and body language. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tylercdurden2004 Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 One of the things I've noticed reading through this thread is that none of the upstart roosters have replied yet. Why, because they most likely have no defense for themselves and just like to instigate and never fully support their assertions. The men who are touting those degrading and ridiculous techniques are trying to convince everyone that they are the man when in fact their bravado is false. The reason these guys get rejected by women is because we can feel their desire to control and dominate, they may act like a nice guy, but I think most women can tell later in the relationship they will be monsters. I am just trying to understand your original post here. To me there are a lot of assertions and very few questions being asked and sprinkled with a touch of name calling. Personally I think the whole point of what these other guys are ssaying to each other is not to care what a women you have just met thinks, just be yourself. I could be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarnelianButterfly Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 I am just trying to understand your original post here. To me there are a lot of assertions and very few questions being asked and sprinkled with a touch of name calling. Personally I think the whole point of what these other guys are ssaying to each other is not to care what a women you have just met thinks, just be yourself. I could be wrong. I was referring to several posts that had been made regarding controling the relationship and some of the general disrespect of women shown in the must read guy list. I didn't feel the voice of that post was defensive, but then again maybe I should have put lots of angry faces all over it [-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tylercdurden2004 Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 I was referring to several posts that had been made regarding controling the relationship and some of the general disrespect of women shown in the must read guy list. I didn't feel the voice of that post was defensive, but then again maybe I should have put lots of angry faces all over it Well if a realationship is like a road trip at times one or the other needs to be in control? Think it was also stated that being in control of oneself is the most important issue. Not caring what someone you just met thinks about you. And just being yourself. i do have a tendency to misread things occasionly so maybe i did just that. Ps I had to erase your angry faces. cant send more than 4 images! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarnelianButterfly Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Well if a realationship is like a road trip at times one or the other needs to be in control? Ps I had to erase your angry faces. cant send more than 4 images! I think a mid-ground is more what I would believe in. You don't always have to have your hands on the wheel for the car to go in a straight line, little bumps will require some steering, but no white nuckled drivers for me! You can give a relationship direction, but it should be so that both parties working together. Ahh, my angry faces got booted , they were so cute. This ones my fav, it looks like a guy I knew, he could always make me laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tylercdurden2004 Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 I think a mid-ground is more what I would believe in. You don't always have to have your hands on the wheel for the car to go in a straight line, little bumps will require some steering, but no white nuckled drivers for me! You can give a relationship direction, but it should be so that both parties working together. Ahh, my angry faces got booted , they were so cute. This ones my fav, it looks like a guy I knew, he could always make me laugh. Yup and thats what the guys were getting at. Too many guys let the girl do all the driving! I kept those ones up because they are obviously special ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarnelianButterfly Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Yup and thats what the guys were getting at. Too many guys let the girl do all the driving! I kept those ones up because they are obviously special ones. Special is a nice way of putting it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tylercdurden2004 Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Well when I tried to remove them they got real angry like and put up these defensive little boxes around them. I thought it was best to let be. Let sleeping dogs lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarnelianButterfly Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Well when I tried to remove them they got real angry like and put up these defensive little boxes around them. I thought it was best to let be. Let sleeping dogs lie. Well the only thing better than a fort made out of boxes, is one made with all the sofa cushions in the house and a bed sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayKay Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Okay folks....sorry but I have to ask you to keep things closer on topic, and debate emoticons intent, driving and engineering analogies in PM's or elsewhere...I know where you are trying to go, but it gets confusing for people reading the post for advice, and especially for the original poster. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin T Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 She IS involved in the relationship. I am not talking about RAPE. Sure I think its perfectly normal and fine for women to have an equal say in where the relationship is headed. I mean, thats how these works. If i want to get married, and she wants to screw the lawn boy, then of course, I consider what she says, and I end it. However, being strong and in "control" per se in a relationship is different than DOMINATING your partner. I like to take the lead. Plain and simple....doesnt mean her opinion is pointless. I understand what you're saying. But I (and I doubt if I am alone in this) equate the need for control with being dominant, hence domineering. To me, it's the same thing, and unnecessary in many cases. A woman doesn't need to be controlled by someone trying to fulfill the role of her father in order to be happy. Wouldn't that be the female version of an Oedipus complex? I don't totally disagree with you, but as much as the man may be the head in a marriage, without a strong neck (the woman), it'll surely fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tylercdurden2004 Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 I understand what you're saying. But I (and I doubt if I am alone in this) equate the need for control with being dominant, hence domineering. To me, it's the same thing, and unnecessary in many cases. A woman doesn't need to be controlled by someone trying to fulfill the role of her father in order to be happy. Wouldn't that be the female version of an Oedipus complex? I don't totally disagree with you, but as much as the man may be the head in a marriage, without a strong neck (the woman), it'll surely fail. "control per se IN a relationship" is what he said differs from control per se OF a relationship. Again like a road trip mate. Its about first being in control of yourself and understanding those times when you have to take control. I dont think Cam is remotely talking about abusing, controlling, domineering or any of that. And you know a relationship never works when one party is grossly stronger than the other. both have to be similar in strength otherwise someone ends up taking care of the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yeawutever Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 What type of guy would ever want a woman with no voice, nor opinions at all?? Wouldn't that be boring and pointless? Cuz imagine, the guy says something and though the girl deeply doesn't agree, she goes along with it, with almost everything he says, everything he does. Then it wouldn't be a relation at all, but mostly like a fairly tale, a fantasy!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin T Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Or a puppet show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tylercdurden2004 Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 What type of guy would ever want a woman with no voice, nor opinions at all?? Wouldn't that be boring and pointless? Cuz imagine, the guy says something and though the girl deeply doesn't agree, she goes along with it, with almost everything he says, everything he does. Then it wouldn't be a relation at all, but mostly like a fairly tale, a fantasy!!!!! And vica versa. That is the point of this thread. Too many guys meet a girl and sit there and smile and nod and "think jeez I dont wanna offend her, might lose my chance" ie being what has been called here a wus. Do girls want a guy does the above? While being called "nice" this is actual direspectful if you look at it. It says "if I say something stupid I wont get in her pants". Its always out of lack of confidence that guys act like this. If you have confidence you dont care about getting in the girls pants, and no its not about girls waiting in line to blow ur mind. Its about confident and feeling good enough about yourself that you dont need a girl to make feel good or whole or whatever. Funnily enough the more confident you are the more women come a knocking. Its a fact. And I would say confident women dont go for unconfident men so what kinda woman should a man look for? Thats right one with confidence. Look at the posts asking guys what they want. All the arguing here is semantics. Differing definitions of words. But certainly some words like rapist a hole etc etc are missing the point. Done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tylercdurden2004 Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Then it wouldn't be a relation at all, but mostly like a fairly tale, a fantasy!!!!! Huh??????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrocza Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Exactly. That's basically the back bone for all those guy theories, the friendzone the losers guide to getting laid. They feel to get somewhere they have to establish dominance and control within a relationship, by playing these games (don't pay attention, don't this and that) Frankly, it doesn't work. Most women can smell it a mile away. Being fake won't get you anywhere. However, I do believe it is tough out there for guys in the dating world...you guys are the ones putting yourselves out there, where 9 times out of 10 you'll be rejected. But abstaining from these "theories" has nothing to do with self esteem but common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tylercdurden2004 Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Exactly. That's basically the back bone for all those guy theories, the friendzone the losers guide to getting laid. They feel to get somewhere they have to establish dominance and control within a relationship, by playing these games (don't pay attention, don't this and that) Frankly, it doesn't work. Most women can smell it a mile away. Being fake won't get you anywhere. However, I do believe it is tough out there for guys in the dating world...you guys are the ones putting yourselves out there, where 9 times out of 10 you'll be rejected. But abstaining from these "theories" has nothing to do with self esteem but common sense. Sorry maybe I am misunderstanding. What part of my thread mentioned games, dominating women, controlling women? Just curious now as to how my typing has given you that impression? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrocza Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 I was responding to CarmlelinButterfly. It was a general statement in response to why should it be a game. Previously in the threat it was mentioned that some guys feel the need to use the mind games and little ploys to challenge a woman to keep her interested. I didn't quote you. :S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrocza Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Oops! I just realize I missed a few pages! Sorry! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tylercdurden2004 Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 I was responding to CarmlelinButterfly. It was a general statement in response to why should it be a game. Previously in the threat it was mentioned that some guys feel the need to use the mind games and little ploys to challenge a woman to keep her interested. I didn't quote you. :S No worries happens all the time. Challenging someone is not really game but it can be fun for some so maybe its kinda like a game to some. Probably not good to challenge someone til they get sick of it or if it done to spite yourself. but challenging someone really is the only way to get to the bottom of what someone is all about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrocza Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 I agree with that. In the beginning of a relationship it is a sort of a game. Challenging the other to meet your expectations, trying to figure them out without giving yourself away or seeming to obvious or laying all the cards out on the table. Rarely is one ever truly "themselves". I do believe challenges are a good part of a relationship to keep the spark alive, but thats when the definition comes into play. There are many nice guys on this site who aren't doing anything wrong and just can't find a nice girl. There are many people on this site stuck in abusive relationships. The majority of the time, they're each going for the wrong people...they don't know what they want. There are some people so consumed with their rejections, they resort to a set of rules to make sure that they stay "on top of the game", so they never have the chance to feel vulnerable again and put their hearts out on the line because they're in control and by playing these little games, it's the woman who is always wondering if he;s interested, if he's going to call back, if he means it. It's one thing to challenge someone to see how deep their roots run and it's another see how far they can bend before they break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts