Tubarao with some excellent field tested rules about relationship management
Rules Revisited
0.) All rules can be broken if you're EXPERIENCED.
1.) Time spent together
FB - Only see once a week.
MLTR - 2 - 3x a week. Even if she's the only girl you're [currently] fucking, you still have to schedule her with the idea that you need nights free to fuck/sarge other women (+ nights for yourself).
LTR - See as often as you'd like, but don't move in together unless you marry. A "test run" will not give an accurate indication of what it will be like to live with her once you are married. As long as you are not married, there's the possibility of you NEXTing her, which is harder to do if she's living with you.
2.) Communication
FB - Only call for sex. 50/50 calls are ideal, but it doesn't actually matter, as long as you stick to whatever precedent you set.
MLTR and LTR- At least 50/50 is necessary, although higher on her end is preferable. Mental NEXT after two unanswered messages/calls.
3.) Sharing personal info
FB - Don't answer any personal questions (except regarding contagious diseases, etc.). She is not your girlfriend.
MLTR - Don't answer any questions regarding the other women you're seeing. Sub-communicate only!
LTR - Make sure there's always something about you for her to wonder about... Also, do not enter into a frame of accounting for every time that you are apart! Have your own life.
4.) Never talk about the other women you are fucking, although talking about it abstractly in the form of Rich Descriptions is ok!
5.) Non-sex time
FB - Avoid casually hanging out together. If you run into her, treat as normal. No PDA (except your usual KINO that you use on all women). No dates (movies, dinner, coffee, walks, picnics, etc.)!
MLTR - A "date" counts as time spent together, even if you don't end up having sex, as pertains to rule 1. Most encounters should end in sex. If she starts withdrawing sex, and treating as shit test fails, downgrade or NEXT (also pertains to LTR).
6.) Maintain your frame! Regardless of FB or (M)LTR, you should have the same frame as the day she met you. If you develop one-itis, GFTOW immediately.
7.) Monogamy
FB and MLTR - If she communicates a desire for monogamy, upgrade or NEXT immediately. If she demands monogamy, NEXT her immediately.
LTR - Monogamy must be clearly stated. Don't assume monogamy, as this puts you in a double-bind: If you fuck someone else, she gets mad, if you DON'T fuck anyone else, you become betaized, and the whole time she's free to fuck others.
8.) Fuck her good and hard. Hot sex is KEY, and can alleviate many problems.
9.) As Franco says, "put her to do things for you." Make her bring you things, cook for you, give you massages, etc. She should be compliant. This is especially important for LTR.
By category:
LD - FB only! It seems counter-intuitive that an LD woman could be an FB, but that's the ONLY position that she should even be considered for. LTR with an LD woman is doomed.
HD - Make sure your sex drives are compatible.
LSE/Freak - FB only!!!!!! If I read one more post about someone whining about how their LTR with a Freak is going shitty, I'm going to pound my head into the wall.
HSE Freak/ Libertine - Whatever you call this type of woman, she should be an FB only. "Squishy" FB is ok (FB + friend/ pivot). Frame must be ROCK SOLID.
MD or MSE (normal girls in early 20's) - Screen heavily to see if she's suitable for (M)LTR. If you can't tell, assume LSE and/or LD; better to err on the side of caution (and no, you're not giving up on her out of paranoia; she can still make an awesome fun FB).
Ho - FB. MLTR is possible only if she already has a rich boyfriend. If she NEXTs her rich boyfriend, downgrade her.
Masculine woman - FB only. Every woman is at least a little masculine, but one who is excessively so will eventually drain you (think Hillary Clinton; do you want to be in an LTR with her? Ugh).
Good girl - Screen (a lot) to be sure. Good for everything!
Woman with boyfriend - Nothing changes. He doesn't matter.
Married woman - Don't communicate in any way that's stored. Set a procedure by which you get in touch/ get together. Never bring her to your place, in case she gets attached/psycho. Don't go to places that either of you frequent. Don't ask about her husband or children. Never fuck a married woman in your social circle. The relationship should be purely about sex. If a woman suggest leaving her husband for you, NEXT her immediately. Follow the rest of the FB rules.
Marriage - I have never been married, and I don't believe in marriage. If it is something that you desire, then consider this advice with a grain of salt. As far as I see it, you should only get married to have children, in which case you are choosing to sacrifice a piece of your independence for the sake of procreation. Good for you.
In any Relationship - Zero expectations. Always positive. Never react emotionally (be AWARE of your emotions, and APPRECIATE the positive emotions that you experience and share them with her; don't be a robot; negative emotions are a waste of time). Always busy (with things you genuinely enjoy). You love your life and you are allowing her a place in it. Always lead. Never be fearful. Never see her as perfect. Always be ready to NEXT her (again, this isn't about emotional detachment, this is about only choosing to be with her when both of you are enriched by it; if it becomes a negative thing for EITHER of you, NEXT her). Only think about her when you're with her. Be non-reactive; be non reaction-seeking (and follow all the rest of TD's 25 points and normal PU practices).
NEXTing above also includes soft nexts. Use as appropriate/ based on your skill.
Before you enter into an LTR, you have to have experienced MLTRs. Before you enter into an MLTR, you have to have experienced FBs. Before you have FBs, you have to have a complete life that fulfills you and makes you happy. Most men do this exactly in reverse and suffer at every single step of the way.
And remember rule 0, but don't break rules simply for the sake of breaking them. These are rules that you impose on YOURSELF until you learn to have an unshakable frame. If you break a rule and suffer from it (read 99% of posts on this board), then it is your own stupid fault.
And for those who think I sound like a misogynist: I love women. They are beautiful and incredible creatures.
EDIT (thanks Humbledad):
My definitions:
Next = Stop having sex
Hard Next = Next and cut off communication
Soft Next = Next and continue communication
Mental Next = Taking just the mental steps of a Next.
Downgrade = Go from (M)LTR to FB.
Zan = Soft Next or downgrade with the deliberate intention of rekindling the relationship.
Credit - Tubarao off MASF
Showing posts with label Relationship management. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Relationship management. Show all posts
Saturday, 19 January 2008
Wednesday, 9 January 2008
MASF relationship doctrine codified
MASF is the premier forum online for PU. The guys on there really do know their shit. Here's a post by one of the guru's Kwagmyre trying to codify current relationship doctrine. Kwag's had some pretty down times, where his wife who he had oneitis for cheated on him. He recovered from a severe betaisation (will post his two betaisation solved posts later), however wasnt able to save his marriage. He's picked up from it remarkably well and is MLTRing like theres no tomorrow. He now feels that if he wanted he could get his wife back, but like any self respecting PUA with better options is continuing to play the game on his terms.
Here's his post:
Chicks love drama, and need regular injections of it into their lives. If you do not provide them with it, they will create it.
Likewise, chicks are emotion junkies (this is why they love drama, it feeds the emotional needs machine). To a chick, feeling ANY emotions, even bad ones, is better than feeling no emotions at all. This is exactly why a woman will leave a man who loves and cares for her, but is supplicative and does not excite her, for one who is cruel to her either emotionally, or physically, and beats her. In a chick’s mind, some emotion is better than none at all.
Women are incapable of understanding logic (within the context of romance and seduction, not in day-to-day type stuff). If a woman has learned to view you as a lover, then everything you say and do gets processed through her emotional filter. And this is a good thing! However, if you then attempt to subsequently communicate with her through logic, then she will literally not understand you. A woman who is attracted to you will not understand why, something she had previously attached emotions, is now speaking in logic. To put this another way: If you wind up in a logical convo with a chick you are in a relationship with, ABOUT the relationship, it means you fucked up. Get the conversation off the logical track as soon as you realize this.
Further, because chicks are creatures of emotion, and not logic, they have no “integrity to action”. They base decisions upon how they FEEL about something, rather than about how that thing truly is. This is the basis for “chick logic”, and it goes something like this: If a chick makes a promise to you, to do something, because she “felt” good about it at the time, and then later reneges on that promise, because she no longer “feels” good about it, then she will not keep her promise. Chicks simply do not see this behavior as dishonorable or incongruent – they simply changed their mind, as they believe they have every right to do. Contrast this with a man, a creature of logic, who will keep a promise to do a thing, even if he does NOT want to do it. This is because men base their decision in logic, and thus see things in an A+B=C kind of a frame. So, if a man promises to do a thing, then he will do it, simply because he promised – to a man, doing a thing he promised, even if he does not want to, will cause him less internal conflict, than it will with a woman, due to his decision-making paradigm. It is interesting to note that, in a sense, both sexes make their decisions the same way – they choose the path of least resistance, the one the minimizes their internal conflicts. They simply have different mechanisms for regulating those internal conflicts.
Shit tests are constant, and are NOT A BAD THING! They are a GOOD thing. Women only shit-test men they are attracted to, and who they perceive as a potential lover. They do not shit-test men who are not prospects, since that would defeat the purpose of the shit test (to see if he is man enough to be her lover). Conversely, a complete lack of shit-tests, generally means a loss of attraction, and is a bad sign. So, rather it is best to interpret shit tests, as IOI’s, because THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE, since women, by definition, do not “test” men they are not “interested” in.
You must pass shit tests. No one passes all of them, but if you fail a series, and/or, simply acquiesce to them in order to “keep the peace”, then you will head down the road to the process known as “betaisation”.
Betaisation could simply be defined as what happens when the man loses the position of leader in the relationship. To be clear, this is always bad. This is never attractive to women. And this will always lead to problems within the relationship, since women are not capable of being attracted to men who will surrender the position of emotional leadership to a woman. And to be clear: No woman “wants” a betaised man. A woman wants a man who can pass her shit tests, and NOT become betaised, and therefore continue to prove his dominant status to her. This makes her feel secure, and safe with him – which is, and will always be, a woman’s #1 need.
Once betaisation has occurred within a relationship, the only way you can salvage it, is by being willing to destroy it.
Women will viciously resist “de-betaisation” attempts. This is also a good thing! What this means is that, the woman is testing, to see if your attempts at regaining control are genuine, or merely a façade. To a woman, the literal survival of herself and her offspring is at stake here, on an unconscious level (even if she doesn’t have offspring yet). So, behaviorally, for her, the stakes could not be higher. She may even threaten to end the relationship, which is why you must be willing to destroy it, in order to save it (as above). If she senses any weakness or hesitancy during this phase, she will blow you out, and the only way to maintain this frame, is both to mean it, and to own it. No matter what.
Women have no sense of fairness, equity, or reciprocity. A woman, is a creature that is designed to procreate and produce and protect offspring. Therefore, the only concern a woman has is for her own welfare (as it relates to the care of her offspring), and for the offspring themselves (even if they are unborn yet). The only thing a woman will sacrifice her welfare for (and will do so every time), is her offspring. A woman will NOT sacrifice her welfare for a man, unless she can somehow relate it back to the welfare of her offspring as well. IOW, a woman will take care of herself, and her children. The only person who will take care of a man, is himself. If this sounds harsh, consider this; the very moment a man relies on a woman to provide for, and take care of his needs (including his sexual needs), is the very moment her attraction for him will begin to wane. This is exactly why women find neediness in men so unattractive. To display neediness, in any form, is to invite failure and/or betaisation.
The Alligator eats the Chihuahua. Why? Because it’s an Alligator, and that’s what it does. It doesn’t eat the Chihuahua out of a sense of malice, or malevolence. It is simply following its own evolutionary program that has been bred into it as a survival instinct over millions of years. Likewise with women. Women don’t shit test, break their word, betaise men, cheat on men, or anything else, out of a sense of malevolence. They simply do it, because, that’s what they do. Therefore, there is no room for misogyny in the doctrine. It is a waste of useful energy. Such attitudes as “all chicks should be treated like ho’s, because they cheat on you the moment you turn your back”, are coming from a needs-based frame, wherein the poster is wishing about how things could be, rather than as they really are.
The techniques and attitudes espoused in the current doctrine are designed to minimize what we socially perceive to be the negative consquenses, and maximize what we perceive to be the positive actions, by doing things designed to influence» them on a subconscious level. At the core, ALL humans “manipulate” one another to their own ends in relationships – children manipulate their parents, bosses manipulate subordinates, wives manipulate husbands, PUA’s manipulate targets. To rail against the idea of manipulation in human relationships is to rail against the very survival and evolution of the human race.
As women respond better to techniques designed to influence» them on a subconscious level, rather than a conscious level, so likewise do they respond better to SUBcommunication, rather than direct communication. It is nearly always better, in matters of realationships, to lead a woman to a conclusion, or even better yet, DEMONSTRATE a conclusion, rather than state it. Examples:
STATING a conclusion (bad):
“I am a high-value man, and I can go find other women to fuck if you do not please me sexually.”
LEADING a conclusion (better):
Guy: “The cashier was making fun of my purchase at the grocery store – Beer, Bacon, and Cookies. She said ‘this is an interesting combination’”.
hB: “Oh really, was she hitting on you?”
guy: “Hmm, I hadn’t thought of that, I thought she was just being friendly and making conversation.. But she WAS playful… hmmm, maybe you have a point.”
DEMONSTRATING a conclusion (best):
Guy: (Goes with wife to her cousin’s wedding, ignores wife, dances with the hotties)
Wife: (next day): “Well, you were certainly having fun with everyone last night but me!”
(all the above are real-life examples)
The game never ends. There is no such thing as entering into a relationship to “retire” from the game. It just takes on a different form, one that is not signifigantly different from regular PU/sarging. But the game itself never ends, anymore than you stop being a man, or your woman stops being a woman. If you are a man, and a woman, who are in a relationship, where you are having sex with one another, then “the game” is in play, by definition.
(credit: Kwagmyre - MASF forum)
Here's his post:
Chicks love drama, and need regular injections of it into their lives. If you do not provide them with it, they will create it.
Likewise, chicks are emotion junkies (this is why they love drama, it feeds the emotional needs machine). To a chick, feeling ANY emotions, even bad ones, is better than feeling no emotions at all. This is exactly why a woman will leave a man who loves and cares for her, but is supplicative and does not excite her, for one who is cruel to her either emotionally, or physically, and beats her. In a chick’s mind, some emotion is better than none at all.
Women are incapable of understanding logic (within the context of romance and seduction, not in day-to-day type stuff). If a woman has learned to view you as a lover, then everything you say and do gets processed through her emotional filter. And this is a good thing! However, if you then attempt to subsequently communicate with her through logic, then she will literally not understand you. A woman who is attracted to you will not understand why, something she had previously attached emotions, is now speaking in logic. To put this another way: If you wind up in a logical convo with a chick you are in a relationship with, ABOUT the relationship, it means you fucked up. Get the conversation off the logical track as soon as you realize this.
Further, because chicks are creatures of emotion, and not logic, they have no “integrity to action”. They base decisions upon how they FEEL about something, rather than about how that thing truly is. This is the basis for “chick logic”, and it goes something like this: If a chick makes a promise to you, to do something, because she “felt” good about it at the time, and then later reneges on that promise, because she no longer “feels” good about it, then she will not keep her promise. Chicks simply do not see this behavior as dishonorable or incongruent – they simply changed their mind, as they believe they have every right to do. Contrast this with a man, a creature of logic, who will keep a promise to do a thing, even if he does NOT want to do it. This is because men base their decision in logic, and thus see things in an A+B=C kind of a frame. So, if a man promises to do a thing, then he will do it, simply because he promised – to a man, doing a thing he promised, even if he does not want to, will cause him less internal conflict, than it will with a woman, due to his decision-making paradigm. It is interesting to note that, in a sense, both sexes make their decisions the same way – they choose the path of least resistance, the one the minimizes their internal conflicts. They simply have different mechanisms for regulating those internal conflicts.
Shit tests are constant, and are NOT A BAD THING! They are a GOOD thing. Women only shit-test men they are attracted to, and who they perceive as a potential lover. They do not shit-test men who are not prospects, since that would defeat the purpose of the shit test (to see if he is man enough to be her lover). Conversely, a complete lack of shit-tests, generally means a loss of attraction, and is a bad sign. So, rather it is best to interpret shit tests, as IOI’s, because THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE, since women, by definition, do not “test” men they are not “interested” in.
You must pass shit tests. No one passes all of them, but if you fail a series, and/or, simply acquiesce to them in order to “keep the peace”, then you will head down the road to the process known as “betaisation”.
Betaisation could simply be defined as what happens when the man loses the position of leader in the relationship. To be clear, this is always bad. This is never attractive to women. And this will always lead to problems within the relationship, since women are not capable of being attracted to men who will surrender the position of emotional leadership to a woman. And to be clear: No woman “wants” a betaised man. A woman wants a man who can pass her shit tests, and NOT become betaised, and therefore continue to prove his dominant status to her. This makes her feel secure, and safe with him – which is, and will always be, a woman’s #1 need.
Once betaisation has occurred within a relationship, the only way you can salvage it, is by being willing to destroy it.
Women will viciously resist “de-betaisation” attempts. This is also a good thing! What this means is that, the woman is testing, to see if your attempts at regaining control are genuine, or merely a façade. To a woman, the literal survival of herself and her offspring is at stake here, on an unconscious level (even if she doesn’t have offspring yet). So, behaviorally, for her, the stakes could not be higher. She may even threaten to end the relationship, which is why you must be willing to destroy it, in order to save it (as above). If she senses any weakness or hesitancy during this phase, she will blow you out, and the only way to maintain this frame, is both to mean it, and to own it. No matter what.
Women have no sense of fairness, equity, or reciprocity. A woman, is a creature that is designed to procreate and produce and protect offspring. Therefore, the only concern a woman has is for her own welfare (as it relates to the care of her offspring), and for the offspring themselves (even if they are unborn yet). The only thing a woman will sacrifice her welfare for (and will do so every time), is her offspring. A woman will NOT sacrifice her welfare for a man, unless she can somehow relate it back to the welfare of her offspring as well. IOW, a woman will take care of herself, and her children. The only person who will take care of a man, is himself. If this sounds harsh, consider this; the very moment a man relies on a woman to provide for, and take care of his needs (including his sexual needs), is the very moment her attraction for him will begin to wane. This is exactly why women find neediness in men so unattractive. To display neediness, in any form, is to invite failure and/or betaisation.
The Alligator eats the Chihuahua. Why? Because it’s an Alligator, and that’s what it does. It doesn’t eat the Chihuahua out of a sense of malice, or malevolence. It is simply following its own evolutionary program that has been bred into it as a survival instinct over millions of years. Likewise with women. Women don’t shit test, break their word, betaise men, cheat on men, or anything else, out of a sense of malevolence. They simply do it, because, that’s what they do. Therefore, there is no room for misogyny in the doctrine. It is a waste of useful energy. Such attitudes as “all chicks should be treated like ho’s, because they cheat on you the moment you turn your back”, are coming from a needs-based frame, wherein the poster is wishing about how things could be, rather than as they really are.
The techniques and attitudes espoused in the current doctrine are designed to minimize what we socially perceive to be the negative consquenses, and maximize what we perceive to be the positive actions, by doing things designed to influence» them on a subconscious level. At the core, ALL humans “manipulate” one another to their own ends in relationships – children manipulate their parents, bosses manipulate subordinates, wives manipulate husbands, PUA’s manipulate targets. To rail against the idea of manipulation in human relationships is to rail against the very survival and evolution of the human race.
As women respond better to techniques designed to influence» them on a subconscious level, rather than a conscious level, so likewise do they respond better to SUBcommunication, rather than direct communication. It is nearly always better, in matters of realationships, to lead a woman to a conclusion, or even better yet, DEMONSTRATE a conclusion, rather than state it. Examples:
STATING a conclusion (bad):
“I am a high-value man, and I can go find other women to fuck if you do not please me sexually.”
LEADING a conclusion (better):
Guy: “The cashier was making fun of my purchase at the grocery store – Beer, Bacon, and Cookies. She said ‘this is an interesting combination’”.
hB: “Oh really, was she hitting on you?”
guy: “Hmm, I hadn’t thought of that, I thought she was just being friendly and making conversation.. But she WAS playful… hmmm, maybe you have a point.”
DEMONSTRATING a conclusion (best):
Guy: (Goes with wife to her cousin’s wedding, ignores wife, dances with the hotties)
Wife: (next day): “Well, you were certainly having fun with everyone last night but me!”
(all the above are real-life examples)
The game never ends. There is no such thing as entering into a relationship to “retire” from the game. It just takes on a different form, one that is not signifigantly different from regular PU/sarging. But the game itself never ends, anymore than you stop being a man, or your woman stops being a woman. If you are a man, and a woman, who are in a relationship, where you are having sex with one another, then “the game” is in play, by definition.
(credit: Kwagmyre - MASF forum)
Addressing womens' emotional needs
I've found that for a lot of people (including me), at times their PU game is tight. But their relationship management skills suck bigtime. This article by Frank B Kermit (from the montreal lair) helps address womens emotional needs and makes hooking relationships that much easier.
Frank has several books on lulu.com and the one where he speaks about addressing womens emotional needs (there are 10 of them) 'Everything out of her mouth is a test' is the pick of the bunch. An excellent matrix-aware treatise on relationship management.
Other matrix aware books on relationship management would be (in no particular order):
Franco's excellent ebook on Seduction for Husbands and Players
David Deida's Way of the Superior Man
Mark Cunningham's Building a Better Girlfriend (bit hypnotic and sneaky for my tastes, but seems to be pretty solid)
So enough babble - here's the good stuff
How and Why Women Test Men and About What...
Here it is: My Frank B Kermit Philosophy on Men, Women and Relationships and the definition of a test.
A TEST: is when a woman says or does something, specifically to evoke a reaction out of a man, whether verbal or action based. It is a SUB-CONSCIOUS mechanism that a woman uses to find out about what kind of man she is dealing with. It is the predictor and basis for all sexual attraction and love she will have for a man. Every test is designed to make her feel special (your lover) when a man passes it, or makes her feel un-special (thus turns her into your mother) if you fail it.
At least, that is how I see it.
During the process of my development, I went searching for one or two unifying themes to apply as a rule when I attempted to analyze relationships between men and women.
I came up with the following:
The Frank B Kermit theory:
1-Everything out of her mouth is a test (even when it is not, treat it as so anyways)
2-A woman can only fit into 1 OF 2 roles in any mans life. Mother or Lover.
3-She constantly tests you to see what role she should follow
4-Within each test is an emotional need being communicated
5-If you address the emotional need, you pass the test, she feels attracted to you, she gets to be your lover and you have sex
6-If you do not address the emotional need, you fail the test, she loses attraction to you, she is forced to assume the role of your mother and you do not get sex
and the final part to this:
7-A women always tests because her instinct to mother is stronger than her instincts for sex
I have identified 10 emotional-need categories, but for the purposes of this book, I will only list the category names here, and not a lengthy description of each.
The 10 Emotional Needs of a Woman
1-The protection of her most valuable asset: Her Reputation
2-Women want to FEEEEL a range of emotions. Do not try to make her happy, give her a full range from fury to ecstasy. This is a.k.a. her Drama Cookie
3-Cater to the little girl in her. Know the difference when to ignore her ramblings and when she needs you to give her a hug. Sometimes she just needs to be reassured like a little kid
4-Be dominant and take responsibility for leading the relationship. This includes making all the decisions, and taking 100% responsibility for the sex in the relationship. It all has to be the mans fault
5-She fears abandonment. This is part biological programming, as in the event she is left with a child, she needs to be sure that she will not be abandoned, and left alone to care for it. This covers her emotional need to feel secure.
6-Trust. The key here is if she can trust you to be honest with her; even if you know she will not like what you have to say. In a womans reality, she is used to people lying to her ALL THE TIME because of the way she looks, or they simply want something from her. If you are willing to piss her off with your honesty, you have demonstrated that she can trust you.
7-Her physical safety. A man must demonstrate that he is capable of protecting her physically from the threats of the outside world. This is to make her feel safe.
8-Women need to know you can handle her TRUE sexuality. She will only be as wonton with you as you demonstrate that you can handle it. She needs to explore her sexuality and let it be free with you as a Natural Woman
9-Prove that you have high quality sperm by showing other girls want to have sex (procreate) with you, and/or you are a good catch and he kids with you will also be a good catch enough to also attract a mate.
10-Prove that you are not a homosexual. She knows every homosexual male friend she has that is not out of the closet yet. Could you be one too?
Regardless of what she tests you with, if you can spot one of these ten emotional needs in-between her words and you address that need by your communication and actions, you will pass the test, and she will by default feel attraction for you, and desire to be your lover.
I think what happens in most relationships is that a man attracts a woman as his lover, and over time, she becomes more like his mother to him, thus sacrificing her attraction to him. In my unscientific-based opinion, that is when the relationship starts to die.
That is my theory anyways. So far, it has worked for me
(Credit - Frank B Kermit at FrankTalks.com)
Get his book on relationship management 'Everything Out of Her Mouth is a TEST: A Man's Guide to Satisfying the Emotional Needs of Women'
Frank has several books on lulu.com and the one where he speaks about addressing womens emotional needs (there are 10 of them) 'Everything out of her mouth is a test' is the pick of the bunch. An excellent matrix-aware treatise on relationship management.
Other matrix aware books on relationship management would be (in no particular order):
Franco's excellent ebook on Seduction for Husbands and Players
David Deida's Way of the Superior Man
Mark Cunningham's Building a Better Girlfriend (bit hypnotic and sneaky for my tastes, but seems to be pretty solid)
So enough babble - here's the good stuff
How and Why Women Test Men and About What...
Here it is: My Frank B Kermit Philosophy on Men, Women and Relationships and the definition of a test.
A TEST: is when a woman says or does something, specifically to evoke a reaction out of a man, whether verbal or action based. It is a SUB-CONSCIOUS mechanism that a woman uses to find out about what kind of man she is dealing with. It is the predictor and basis for all sexual attraction and love she will have for a man. Every test is designed to make her feel special (your lover) when a man passes it, or makes her feel un-special (thus turns her into your mother) if you fail it.
At least, that is how I see it.
During the process of my development, I went searching for one or two unifying themes to apply as a rule when I attempted to analyze relationships between men and women.
I came up with the following:
The Frank B Kermit theory:
1-Everything out of her mouth is a test (even when it is not, treat it as so anyways)
2-A woman can only fit into 1 OF 2 roles in any mans life. Mother or Lover.
3-She constantly tests you to see what role she should follow
4-Within each test is an emotional need being communicated
5-If you address the emotional need, you pass the test, she feels attracted to you, she gets to be your lover and you have sex
6-If you do not address the emotional need, you fail the test, she loses attraction to you, she is forced to assume the role of your mother and you do not get sex
and the final part to this:
7-A women always tests because her instinct to mother is stronger than her instincts for sex
I have identified 10 emotional-need categories, but for the purposes of this book, I will only list the category names here, and not a lengthy description of each.
The 10 Emotional Needs of a Woman
1-The protection of her most valuable asset: Her Reputation
2-Women want to FEEEEL a range of emotions. Do not try to make her happy, give her a full range from fury to ecstasy. This is a.k.a. her Drama Cookie
3-Cater to the little girl in her. Know the difference when to ignore her ramblings and when she needs you to give her a hug. Sometimes she just needs to be reassured like a little kid
4-Be dominant and take responsibility for leading the relationship. This includes making all the decisions, and taking 100% responsibility for the sex in the relationship. It all has to be the mans fault
5-She fears abandonment. This is part biological programming, as in the event she is left with a child, she needs to be sure that she will not be abandoned, and left alone to care for it. This covers her emotional need to feel secure.
6-Trust. The key here is if she can trust you to be honest with her; even if you know she will not like what you have to say. In a womans reality, she is used to people lying to her ALL THE TIME because of the way she looks, or they simply want something from her. If you are willing to piss her off with your honesty, you have demonstrated that she can trust you.
7-Her physical safety. A man must demonstrate that he is capable of protecting her physically from the threats of the outside world. This is to make her feel safe.
8-Women need to know you can handle her TRUE sexuality. She will only be as wonton with you as you demonstrate that you can handle it. She needs to explore her sexuality and let it be free with you as a Natural Woman
9-Prove that you have high quality sperm by showing other girls want to have sex (procreate) with you, and/or you are a good catch and he kids with you will also be a good catch enough to also attract a mate.
10-Prove that you are not a homosexual. She knows every homosexual male friend she has that is not out of the closet yet. Could you be one too?
Regardless of what she tests you with, if you can spot one of these ten emotional needs in-between her words and you address that need by your communication and actions, you will pass the test, and she will by default feel attraction for you, and desire to be your lover.
I think what happens in most relationships is that a man attracts a woman as his lover, and over time, she becomes more like his mother to him, thus sacrificing her attraction to him. In my unscientific-based opinion, that is when the relationship starts to die.
That is my theory anyways. So far, it has worked for me
(Credit - Frank B Kermit at FrankTalks.com)
Get his book on relationship management 'Everything Out of Her Mouth is a TEST: A Man's Guide to Satisfying the Emotional Needs of Women'
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)