Ive dated girls before and my previous approach has been to reinforce and let a girl know im only down to fuck with a girl who is a girl of strong commitment. She
will know that i have this opinions through subtle social cues or directly telling her. Ive recently thought though, how does this compare to being a guy who allows for breakups, divorces and leaving a girl behind.
Will this draw stronger or weaker commitment from a woman in an LTR.
There seem to be a few pros and cons from each approach. (My goal here of course is strong commitment.)
Option 1: A girl thinking you only want to date a girl if shes a woman of high commitment -
Pros
-
if she respects you she will try to become this person for you and show you how committed she really is. She may also start subconsciously embodying this personality trait, so, becoming more blinder focused on just you.
- If she sees you as her main option she cant have a great option while also window shopping for other guys to monkey branch to. Eg she knows if she wants you she will have to become someone who is committed to you and you only
Cons
- She may think your insecure about breakups or divorce because you have scares options
OR
Option 2: A girl thinking your pretty laid back about breakups or divorce and its just something you let go
Pros
-
She may think you have this mindset because you have an abundance of options
- She thinks your secure in yourself as you are sure of your abilities to attract another woman after her
(These feels are proven when a girl breaks up with a guy, he says “ok” and she suddenly second guesses herself)
Cons
- She may adopt a similar view to the relationship if she follows your frame and sees it as acceptable to adopt a view of leniency to a committed relationship
//
Whats your opinion on this and what approach do you personally take?
Also how does it differ in game vs LTR?
No-Stress-Cat 5mo ago
This is incorrect. Women already put up enough of a facade to get what they want. They also try to change men in order to fit their ideal guy, and it never works out for either of them. You'll find the same thing happens in reverse. We do not want to change women. It's like trying to make a cat become a dog. You can't change nature, and you can't make a cat be obedient like a dog.
What we want is for women to conform to certain expectations. This is done by "training" them (laying down our expectations, rewarding them when they abide by them, and punishing them when they don't).
For example, in order to get a cat to shit in the toilet, you have to do the work in order to guide them to the desired result: move the litter box into the bathroom, when they adapt move the litter box to the toilet, when they adapt cut out and gradually increase the size of the hole in the litter box, when they adapt remove the litter box altogether.
The same thing applies to human behavior. Impose incremental steps to get to the desired result. YOU have to do the work. That is why YOU are the leader. YOU lead, they follow. You can't just drop a woman into an LTR and say, "Here are the rules, follow them or get the fuck out." That's what you do with hoes and plates.
coolsocks00 8mo ago
How about reading the sidebar and figuring this out yourself in short order, instead of trying to reinvent the wheel here.
Read humansockpuppet's guides to bitch management and training.
Main issue with your thinking is your madonna/whore complex, and that you're aiming for "solid commitment", which is largely a fool's errand.
Vermillion-Rx 8mo ago
This needs to be posted in askTRP