When you are in your twenties---I assume Turbatio is in his twenties---it is the absolutely easiest thing to find women to hang-out with and to do all the things that people do together.
That is not the same thing as developing a sexual relationship.
I did it dozens of times!
Dozens, not thousands.
Keep in mind that some on this thread are recommending paying prostitutes! I am recommending what is infinitely more simple and more rewarding.
There is absolutely nothing as simple as paying a prostitute. He wouldn't have to worry about saying the right things, meeting her expectations, and all the complications that come from being in a relationship with someone. The latter is hard work and involves suffering. It is hardly ever worth it.
No one here, from what I have seen to date, will ever recommend what is the simplest thing in the whole world: just to find some woman that you really like and develop a relationship with her.
Simplest thing in the whole world? Are you insane?
-
I dunno about "simple" Alex, but it took a lot of work, on my part, to woo her. From there on out ... once she accepted me, it was pretty much Easy Street. We figgered out that we "had to" agree on the tough stuff and let the little stuff .. just stay little. Teamwork.
PS - Shah - In her and I world, yuh gotta be a little insane to work it out :-/
That's interesting, Shahrazad. Have you heard of incestual sex, ie. unrelated couples knowing each other so well, they see each other as siblings?
That's one of the reasons why I don't feel anything more than a mental tint of sexual desire. I seem to know people too well. No mysteries, nothing to desire.
I think men feel sexual desire within a quest for power. The exploits achieved throughout sexual conquest bolster the male's ego because he has overpowered (a female). His sexuality demands engaging in a chase: it is a game. So men go for flirts and other Willy Wagtail-like creatures.
By contrast, women feel sexual desire because they feel unsupported. Their weakness is from not being identified and noticed as a woman. When she is conquered and claimed, then she feels real and powerful. Her sexuality demands being caught and held within that identity of a valuable prize. So, women tend to go for good liars.
Everyone here is working their angles, trying to make a case for their way of seeing things, making recommendations left and right, and all this with a tone of authority.
Bullshit. I certainly don't see my previous post to Turbatio like that at all.
Relax, Jason. Old Alex is a dramatist. He exaggerates in order to show us something about ourselves. He pontificates in print to work out in his mind what he himself believes. It is the shamanic South of the Border Jewish way.
When I said 'and do all the things that people do together', I hope you understood sex to be one of those things. What I wrote to Turbatio was precisely about a sexual relationship, but in the context of 'seeing someone', which is not as rigid as a marriage, say. There is no easier time to do that than when one is in one's twenties. It is almost as simple as walking down the street. All you have to do is overcome the discomfort in saying 'hi' to someone you've never met.
You've got a daughter about 18, Shah---can you arrange for her to service him? Is that an idea you like? You could get some part of the money too. It'd be a clear win-win[-win situation.
Don't be silly, Shah. Prostitution is a really vile thing. Exceedingly ugly. Socially destructive.
Last edited by Anonymous on Mon Sep 15, 2008 2:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I can't remember the documentary, maybe it was Louis Theroux's 'Swingers' episode. The thing was that people couple up so as not to have to pay for sex. As soon as your loved-one becomes a prostitute, you realise you're getting the same thing as the paying clientele: the only difference is you don't pay. Then you realise you are paying, with other things - affection, doing the dishes, rubbing their back when they're stressed, taking out the garbage, taking her out to dinner or the movies now and then...
Alex Jacob wrote:When you are in your twenties---I assume Turbatio is in his twenties---it is the absolutely easiest thing to find women to hang-out with and to do all the things that people do together. I did it dozens of times!
Open your eyes Alex, it's very difficult for some people, and some who are capable of it don't want to engage in that sort of thing and all that it entails anyway. Turbatio explicitly said that he has had problems in this area.
Alex Jacob wrote:When I said 'and do all the things that people do together', I hope you understood sex to be one of those things. What I wrote to Turbatio was precisely about a sexual relationship, but in the context of 'seeing someone', which is not as rigid as a marriage, say. There is no easier time to do that than when one is in one's twenties. It is almost as simple as walking down the street. All you have to do is overcome the discomfort in saying 'hi' to someone you've never met.
If a guy is just after sex then this "saying hi" is really a euphemism for sustained and premeditated deceit and manipulation. It doesn't surprise me that you see it as no more than saying "hi" and the "absolutely easiest thing", so much of your character seems to be built upon contrivance and not being straightforward.
Jason wrote:It's unfortunate that sex can be so problematic for many of us horny males, there's a tightly controlled supply and artificial scarcity.
It's funny you would say that, since sex is a lot harder for females than it is for males. There are a few females who find getting lots of unattached sex easy, but those are a small minority.
Maybe from a more stereotypical female point of view, it could be said that longterm commitment from males is a tightly controlled supply and subject to artificial scarcity.
I don't think you actually wish to solve your dilemma. I suspect you are holding out because it creates meaning and the hope that when/if you decide to have sex it will be with a female who proves everything you've observed in others regarding sex wrong. You're not sure your interested in enlightenment anymore because your great enlightenment is to come in the form of a female.
Can you rephrase that slightly? I don't think I understand you.
Shahrazad,
I’ll tell you. A woman’s fantasy is to be able to have sex for the sake of sex. She wants to have sex with a stranger, go home, forget the stranger exists, and in a couple of weeks (or months, depending on her libido), repeat the same experience with another stranger, or maybe even the same stranger. But it will never work that way, ever. This is because as soon as she has sex with a man, he is not a stranger any more -- they have been intimate, and her brain has released oxytocin, which makes her feel great, and makes her associate this feeling with the man she is with at the time. She cannot escape this chemical trap, except of course by avoiding sex.
If the man she has casual sex with is not compatible with her, and she does not enjoy the act, then there will be no oxytocin, and therefore no emotional attachment. However, this is no consolation to her, as she just wasted her time and will never want to see him again.
But for her to get sex - that is still easy, is it not? You're just saying it's hard for her to get it "successfully", right?
Am i getting it?
Alex,
Everyone here is working their angles, trying to make a case for their way of seeing things, making recommendations left and right, and all this with a tone of authority. It is a pretty interesting place, not very common at all, and I think it is getting better too. It is worthwhile to stick around and see what you think about all of it. But, I would not recommend taking anyone too seriously, especially those who offer opinions about 'enlightenment'. First, no one who writes here is, in fact, 'enlightened', and you can easily uncover whole invisible armies of neurosis and conflict in what they write. That 'by the way'.
Ok, maybe you're right, I obviously don't know.
In any event, I think it's best I try to limit my time here. I have a tendency to use forums for the wrong reasons.
No one here, from what I have seen to date, will ever recommend what is the simplest thing in the whole world: just to find some woman that you really like and develop a relationship with her.
Yeah, like it's been mentioned by a few people, they don't see it like that. And I'd say that for me it may be even more difficult.
All you have to do is overcome the discomfort in saying 'hi' to someone you've never met.
Lol, yeah man. Who are you? George Clooney?
Don't be silly, Shah. Prostitution is a really vile thing. Exceedingly ugly. Socially destructive.
I don't think any of this would cross my mind until after. If I went through with it.
I don't think there's anything wrong with seeking peace as a student of enlightenment. Mental agitation and suffering can greatly deteriorate one's quality of life, and aren't terribly helpful when trying to pursue a line of thinking either.
Thinking also raises a storm, in the sense of a demolition team raising a storm of dust and debris. The ego's edifices collapsing can create a hell of a mess. During those times, it does help to take time out, to have a rest, and provide a bit more mental calm to sort out the detritus.
It all boils down to how deeply one values peace, and what sort of peace one imagines it to be.
So, having said that, it's time for me to pass the baton onto the next runner.
"Open your eyes Alex, it's very difficult for some people, and some who are capable of it don't want to engage in that sort of thing and all that it entails anyway. Turbatio explicitly said that he has had problems in this area."
One overcomes problems...
Many things are difficult, and many things are far more difficult than learning how to make contact with women. One has to see things in perspective, and overcome one's fears. 'The difference between a coward and a hero is how they deal with fear'. It is far more manly to acknowledge one's fears, to deal with one's defects and weaknesses, and to be decisive in setting goals and achieving those goals. A decision to talk to, say, 3 women a day that you don't know will lead to over 1000 contacts a year. Not only are there books and even courses on the subject, there is a plethora of free information available on the Internet. Especially if one actually wanted to become just a 'player', if it were truly sex one was interested in. I would say that if someone does not NOW learn to overcome their fears and to take concrete steps to get what it is they want, they will likely not do it later.
"If a guy is just after sex then this "saying hi" is really a euphemism for sustained and premeditated deceit and manipulation. It doesn't surprise me that you see it as no more than saying "hi" and the "absolutely easiest thing", so much of your character seems to be built upon contrivance and not being straightforward."
The hormonal impetus gets well in front of us sometimes. When sexual desire is built up, and one is frustrated in releasing it, it tends to become predominant, and more often than not inhibits one from setting up situations that will enable one to get the sex one craves. Being intelligent, one comes up with a strategy, a plan. This is also a manly thing to do. I read a 'manual' of seduction in Spanish a while back, and the thing began, first off, with a rather elaborate relaxation exercise. You cannot start from an agitated position, and with women, speaking generally, you cannot approach them overtly sexually. You have to make a women feel safe with you, and when she feels safe, in exchange you get sex.
You seem to misunderstand what I am saying. The first step in meeting anyone, in opening any doors with any human being is to simply say 'hi', and then take it from there. I wasn't saying to be false or to lie---you can do that if you want but most people will respond better when you are being honest. But to be honest you have to know what you really want.
To tag-on to this what appears to be a mounting criticism of me---you could easily team-up with Grumpy Carl on this BTW---is misplaced. If you think I am not being straightforward, please let me know exactly why you think this. Be straightforward in your criticism...
Do you really think it is a Jewish thing, something having to do with 'shamanism'? Or, do you not actually believe that I am carrying the whole forum to the Gates of Zion?
Jason wrote:Open your eyes Alex, it's very difficult for some people, and some who are capable of it don't want to engage in that sort of thing and all that it entails anyway. Turbatio explicitly said that he has had problems in this area.
One overcomes problems...
Many things are difficult, and many things are far more difficult than learning how to make contact with women.
I think your underlying message is a good one, but at the same time sex with a prostitute is one way to overcome the problem of being deprived of sex. Contact with women for the purpose of fostering a more conventional romantic/sexual relationship wasn't necessarily the problem as I saw it, although now Turbatio is saying he thinks a girlfriend for sex might be preferable.
Alex Jacob wrote:
Jason wrote:If a guy is just after sex then this "saying hi" is really a euphemism for sustained and premeditated deceit and manipulation. It doesn't surprise me that you see it as no more than saying "hi" and the "absolutely easiest thing", so much of your character seems to be built upon contrivance and not being straightforward.
The hormonal impetus gets well in front of us sometimes. When sexual desire is built up, and one is frustrated in releasing it, it tends to become predominant, and more often than not inhibits one from setting up situations that will enable one to get the sex one craves.
How many young men are not almost constantly sexually frustrated to some degree? Many of us would need a full-time rotating harem to completely satisfy our hunger for sex. Your "dozens" wouldn't fill more than a few months at best, and then only assuming that all were willing and able when you were.
Alex Jacob wrote:Being intelligent, one comes up with a strategy, a plan. This is also a manly thing to do. I read a 'manual' of seduction in Spanish a while back, and the thing began, first off, with a rather elaborate relaxation exercise. You cannot start from an agitated position, and with women, speaking generally, you cannot approach them overtly sexually. You have to make a women feel safe with you, and when she feels safe, in exchange you get sex.
Like I said: manipulation and deceit.
Alex Jacob wrote:You seem to misunderstand what I am saying. The first step in meeting anyone, in opening any doors with any human being is to simply say 'hi', and then take it from there. I wasn't saying to be false or to lie---you can do that if you want but most people will respond better when you are being honest. But to be honest you have to know what you really want.
An honest conversation, with the knowledge that you really want sex, wouldn't deviate much from "Hi. I find you attractive, would you like to have sex with me?"
Alex Jacob wrote:To tag-on to this what appears to be a mounting criticism of me---you could easily team-up with Grumpy Carl on this BTW---is misplaced. If you think I am not being straightforward, please let me know exactly why you think this. Be straightforward in your criticism...Do you really think it is a Jewish thing, something having to do with 'shamanism'? Or, do you not actually believe that I am carrying the whole forum to the Gates of Zion?
At the risk of fatally weakening my attacks - I find it surprisingly hard to dislike you Alex. You can be irritating but I like what you bring to the forum, I like your energy, and I think some of your fundamental criticisms of the ideas and people that dominate this forum are completely valid and interesting too. I have even felt a little freed from my normal mindset at times, by reading your posts.
Think of my criticisms of you as a form of tough love, 'cos that's often really what they are. That's how I see a lot of what I do here. I'm attacking you to make you better. I'm not your enemy, I'm your sparring partner. It's the one's who I see nothing of worth in that I tend not to criticize or even communicate with at all.
EDIT: I don't remember ever having been specifically critical of any "Jewish thing" or shamanism. My last reference to those was just to illustrate my perception of you as being someone who oftentimes seems to actively want to make things complicated and convoluted.
I appreciate your words Jason. Similarly, I always like your input and the content of your posts.
"I'm attacking you to make you better".
I'm getting better by the minute, even Carl has to admit this...
;-)
You wrote:
"Contact with women for the purpose of fostering a more conventional romantic/sexual relationship wasn't necessarily the problem as I saw it, although now Turbatio is saying he thinks a girlfriend for sex might be preferable."
Well, here's the deal. I start with the premise that prostitution arises from sick social circumstances, and I refer to Colombian society, where I have lived and may still again. Drugs, crime, lack of opportunities, unjust social circumstances, the failure to respond to the call of justice, truth, love, kindness, turning sexuality into a commodity, disrespecting women at the most fundamental level----these things produce a social circumstance where young women resort to prostitution. In our porn-culture we essentially are training men and women to feel little aversion to this sort of imagery, and to desire sex of that sort. Sexuality is a huge subliminal motivator, and when you associate sex with certain messages, those messages by-pass the discriminating mind and find a way in. This is of course a separate conversation, but it would be a good one.
If one is clear about psychology, I am saying, it is not at all difficult to intuitively guess that men, despite the intensity of the sexual drive, seek more than just someone to fuck. This is also a complex subject and would require investigation. When you see what that sort of porn-sex does to men after so many years of it, I would suggest that no one should be recommended to devote themselves to it. What is extruded from the other end is something ugly and debased. You could refer, just for an example, to the writing of Mantac Chia on the (supposedly) Taoist teachings about male and female sexuality. It is terribly easy to squander sexual energy and to use it inappropriately. I don't want to make it sound like I am a Puritan or anything. It can also be engaged in in a way that is beneficial to the individual---promoting health and well-being, healing, relaxation, etc. But pornographic sex is not a part of that. I say that it is destructive, so why not avoid it? Instead, if you are wanting to have sex find a way to do it honestly, carefully, thoughtfully, constructively, and with affection. If you can find a solid argument against this common-sense approach, I'd like to hear it.
While I can't 'know' anything about anyone else, I know that what Turbation wants is different from what he thinks he wants. I start from that premise because, in simple terms, I trust myself and my hunch.
"How many young men are not almost constantly sexually frustrated to some degree? Many of us would need a full-time rotating harem to completely satisfy our hunger for sex. Your "dozens" wouldn't fill more than a few months at best, and then only assuming that all were willing and able when you were."
When I said 'dozens' what I meant was women that I dated over the years, not necessarily one night stands. What I meant was dozens of girl-friends and they were mostly all met with the initial 'hi'. Nothing complex, in fact all very easy.
Aldous Huxley wrote something to the effect that 'intellectual life' arises when one is not exclusively satisfied with sex. I assume that most men here have real interests and real tasks that occupy their time? The times that you don't have someone for pure sex are times to devote yourself to other pursuits. It's called 'sublimation' and according to the Freudian school, is the basis of cultural accomplishment. If a man is so weak, so female, that his sex-desire controls him, then he needs to deal with that. I had then---and still have now---the same basic sexual drive, but if that were all that were going on in my life I'd feel worried. If you look at men in their 40s and 50s who did not have self-control, what you see is something disgusting and even repellent. What one sacrifices in the fire of youth, you do not get to recover. Sexual energy is like money in the bank: do not spend it as if the supply is unlimited. (Refer to Mantac Chia and what he writes about 'cultivating' and not squandering sexual enegy. A man cannot waste his energy in too frequent orgasm, and the 'petit mort' is a thing to avoid like the plague).
You use the term 'manipulation and deceit' and I would rather, in the context of dating, the male-female dynamic, use the word 'game'. It is indeed a game. But, the more that each person has nourished the spiritual part of themselves, the better the game can be played. It can be a reasonably equitable game.
"An honest conversation, with the knowledge that you really want sex, wouldn't deviate much from "Hi. I find you attractive, would you like to have sex with me?"
Well, yes, but don't outrightly say that. If there is an essential rapport, and if you already know that the sexual thing will be forthcoming, then you can take that route. Sometimes that approach is perfect, but more often than not, no. Skipair seems to get it and writes about it in his posts. For example, the girl who gets miffed when you devote too much attention to her 'head' (her personality, her persona) and do not give sufficient attention to the real her---her tits, her pelvis. 'Why are you not paying attention to me?!' True, looked at in that way (the truthful way) it does tend to give one reservations about the whole undertaking, but in truth---especially in one's twenties---it is not so bad a game to play. There are literally millions of women willing to play, of that I am 100% certain.
Hey guys, I think I'm already making significant strides. But I may have blown it too, I'm not sure.
A few weeks ago I made a profile on a dating site. Anyway, a girl I messaged, with what may be considered almost a supplicating line (or quite the opposite if she thought there was a hint of sarcasm in it) - "Oh my God. I'd almost consider giving up smoking just to get a shot at you" (she specifically said she wasn't looking to meet anyone who smoked), replied this morning saying she liked my profile (on which I have lines like "I'm not at all interested in a career; I don't have a car; Freedom is important to me, etc) - really liked my introduction (who knew), and asked, "What it was I was looking to get a shot at", and "what would you do if you got said shot", and added at the end something along the lines of "Oh, and just to throw this out there, I'm not one of those girls who is always looking for something long term, I figure there are other ways to enjoy people, so why limit myself? Let me know if you're interested."
:)
Is a wooo-hooo! in order here? I think so.
So then I replied. I decided to tell her straight off that I was a virgin and was essentially "looking for a teacher". But I wasn't at all "Woe is me, please take pity on me." I think I chose my words well.
She's five years older than me, very pretty face, maybe about 20 pounds overweight, very curvy. And we actually have quite a bit in common.
Anyway, I hope I didn't blow it by admitting the virgin thing. I thought about not saying anything, but she probably, were something to happen, figure it out very quickly, and I think that might be worse/more awkward.
Okay, folks! Now's the time to make your opinions known!
Should he take the fat chick up on her offer? And maybe find someone to deflower the hell out of him? A (temporary) apprenticeship in cocksmanship, as it were?
Or, should he lead her on a little just to boost his own confidence, and then go in pursuit some shy, vulnerable wallflower who rubs herself raw at night dreaming of her pimply prince-charming?
Or start hanging around sleaze-bars with a few hundred dollars in his wallet, and PAY some palefaced, tattoed, junky slut to show him the ropes?
OR, should he give up the whole shebang and become a sage?
Should he take the fat chick up on her offer? And maybe find someone to deflower the hell out of him? A (temporary) apprenticeship in cocksmanship, as it were?
Yes, except that I find your "fat chic" crack somewhat disrespectful. Us girls are sensitive to being called that. I prefer the word chubby.
Or, should he lead her on a little just to boost his own confidence, and then go in pursuit some shy, vulnerable wallflower who rubs herself raw at night dreaming of her pimply prince-charming?
I myself don't like a dishonest approach.
Or start hanging around sleaze-bars with a few hundred dollars in his wallet, and PAY some palefaced, tattoed, junky slut to show him the ropes?
I wouldn't rule it out just yet.
OR, should he give up the whole shebang and become a sage?
He should not become a sage before he has sex. The curiosity is killing him.
Alex Jacob wrote:Okay, folks! Now's the time to make your opinions known!
Should he take the fat chick up on her offer? And maybe find someone to deflower the hell out of him? A (temporary) apprenticeship in cocksmanship, as it were?
Or, should he lead her on a little just to boost his own confidence, and then go in pursuit some shy, vulnerable wallflower who rubs herself raw at night dreaming of her pimply prince-charming?
Or start hanging around sleaze-bars with a few hundred dollars in his wallet, and PAY some palefaced, tattoed, junky slut to show him the ropes?
OR, should he give up the whole shebang and become a sage?
What a feverish mind you have Alex.
Wait, no -- what great peace and love you promote, Alex, what light and laughter you bring. I'm seeing cotton candy clouds and rainbows, angels and unicorns and painted ponies as I say this, I'm hearing drums boiling, and witnessing notes unfurling, cascading from electric guitars heralding a new world coming. Me, grumpy? No, with some thanks to you, never!
Your prose needs...remodeling...but I accept your humble obeisances, Carl, knowing they really come from your heart. Going down on one knee before my majesty is good for you and good for me...
My purpose, as you know, is to spark a cascade of effervescent bubblation in your soul, leading to sustained feelings of bliss that move through all the body's cells, that'll float you on your cotton-candy clouds right to the golden gates where the Lord awaits...
Are you getting closer to taking my Correspondence Course? Knock, and it shall be opened unto you, and at a discount.
I was fishing for Kevin but you're no small catch, and anyway Diebert is obviously irredeemable.
Alex Jacob wrote:Your prose needs...remodeling...but I accept your humble obeisances, Carl, knowing they really come from your heart. Going down on one knee before my majesty is good for you and good for me...
My purpose, as you know, is to spark a cascade of effervescent bubblation in your soul, leading to sustained feelings of bliss that move through all the body's cells, that'll float you on your cotton-candy clouds right to the golden gates where the Lord awaits...
Are you getting closer to taking my Correspondence Course? Knock, and it shall be opened unto you, and at a discount.
I was fishing for Kevin but you're no small catch, and anyway Diebert is obviously irredeemable.
Just a whimsical aside here.
Alex,
You are SO full of yourself!
Is there anyone here so grandiose as they view themselves in the mirror of a post so poetic and eloquent? I think not. Is it your purpose to be the bard with frills on your collar and sleeves... perhaps to wow the ladies in a renaissance setting and also dance like a dandy of words?
I did appreciate your recent criticism of the myopic adherence to reason alone as god in the "QRS philosophy," and i not only agreed but sent high praises.
But mostly this post is to highlight that your grand ego can only be described in the most superlative terms here (in your own mind)...
as so clearly exemplified in your above post and (without an actual count) most of your posts.
What do you want?
...To be the fairest of them all intellectually?
I know you think even worse of me. But you have never attempted to address the specifics of what enlightenment actually is beyond grandiose condescention and derision of all firsthand testimony..
Just the usuual *very smart* (assed) remarks.
... your trademark here.
Just an unfriendly (cantankerous... whatever) slap in the face. You obviously need it... tho you would never admit... "I needed that."
Throwing down the "glove" here. Are you enlightened as well as such a dandy and eloquent maker of prose and poetry?
(Rhetorical question.) Light recognizes Light, and i see only shadows of your ego in your play on these boards, gesturing with your back to the Universal Light... so enamored of the shadow your immense ego casts upon the wall.
Yes, "Them's fightin' words." Wanna fight about who knows the Light (as Identity) and who is engaged in egocentric shadow play.
I know the Answer. God is One in all. And you don't know this yet... so you are still engaged in the game of who is the fairest.
(Yes, repetitive... just so I know you get my drift. Some here require a lot of repetition as the ears are so plugged with EGO... (Your plugs are very dense and effective, as i see it.)
