Veering into the dark zone of female psychology

From the conclusion of a long dating saga:

She does like to be molested. It’s quite obvious.

Did she want me to push even harder? Did she want me to “take” her virginity. If she didn’t want it at the level of her “fore brain,” did she want it in an animal way… at the level of her “hind brain?”

I think she did. I have met girls like this, who can be can be very dangerous and who are also totally invisible to the modern feminist ethos, like so many truths about male-female polarity. Girls who say one thing, but want another. This is the sort of place even I don’t want to go, online, as it is too incendiary, but I’m drawing attention now because I’ve seen these girls happen, in real life.

It’s a part of the “Women don’t like responsibility or having to make choices” theme that I have written about… many women, maybe most, don’t want to be responsible for their sexual decisions, and some take that fundamental desire to be led further than they should. They emit these “invitations” to go “too far” in a way they are not responsible for. They put themselves into the situation where “it just happens,” while later they will say, probably to themselves too, that they don’t know how it happened. They go to the situation, only to be able to have some psychological ability to deny what happens, afterwards.

I have touched a little bit on these thoughts, and they are why  why I don’t believe a lot of the stories women tell me, and I believe even less about the stories in the media. Usually there is complicity. Unacknowledged, of course. Chicks often don’t understand their own psychologies… they can’t… it’s part of their evolved strategy.

This chick sounds like she is complicit and does not wish to take responsibility for what she does. She wants you to, and you alone. But that is very dangerous, probably unwise, in a foreign country, where you don’t know the justice system, where you don’t know that much about her family situations, etc., unless I missed part of the story (it is a very long story… in my view, Nash does too much texting, although I believe that it didn’t matter in this case).

If you read books of women’s sexual fantasies, like Nancy Friday’s collections, you will find fantasies that are illegal, that include illegal elements. If you read romance novels, you will often find the same. In romance novels, the heroine is often “taken” and taken superficially “against her will…” but by a high-status, attractive man who will then pledge himself to her. That is an interesting element in porn made for and by women, an element that almost no one in mainstream culture talks about.

I do not advocate any of the ideas or strategies I am skirting here. I don’t want to go here. It’s too dark, especially for readers who are in a “cold” state.

Nash thinks my reading of the girl is wrong: “I don’t happen to think this is it. I believe that concept is true… but she wasn’t looking for ‘deniability,’ she was turned on me pushing her boundaries. That is a different phenomenon.” He further says

I want to be careful that I don’t miss parts of this that are about me not being willing to pull the trigger… but with her, I think she was actually so young, she wasn’t quite ready. I believe that really was the first time she’d been in that position. I saw when she was genuinely close to fear. Not because I wasn’t being cool… but because it was so new.

And she was adjusting fast. Like her reaction to my cock the first time was close to panic. 2nd time, nervous avoidance. 3rd time… she was fascinated. That is a sexual learning curve.

He was there and I wasn’t. But I know and have encountered the types of girls I describe, even if this girl isn’t one. There is one other guy in the comments pushing in the dark direction I mention.

Author: The Red Quest

How can we live and be in society?

9 thoughts on “Veering into the dark zone of female psychology”

  1. Nash (and that other dude Riv) seem well meaning but very vanilla. The purity fantasy purple pill thing stops them from understanding the true dark nature of male-female sexuality. That’s why I prefer this blog. Tell them to bin their sweet ‘romanticredpill’ nonsense.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. H… you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

      I would challenge you in a couple of areas…

      This is at the level of “measuring cocks,” but if you’re not getting laid more than me (YHT), my version of “vanilla” might have more to it than you understand. It’s possible you could learn something.

      It is very possible I could have more edge, or push girls harder (I am sure that is true), but unless that is working for you, and you’re getting more/better in a way I am not… I am back to wondering if you know what you’re talking about. That is not meant to be disrespectful… you might be 1000% better than me (many men are), but to say “that’s vanilla” implies you have more on the ball than I do… so, this is a “show don’t tell” moment for you.

      The second area where I would challenge you is… I’m not sure you have enough details about what sex is like for me with women for your analysis to be interesting. I know what vanilla sex is, and I think you’re using that phrase without knowing what you’re talking about in terms of the sex I have with women… or maybe about what the world of “vanilla sex” means or doesn’t mean.

      There is an awful lot about the sex I have with women out there. Is there much about you? Do you have sex with women?

      : ]

      I’m not certain that you don’t know what you’re talking about it… but it seems that way to me, in both regards. You’re using “vanilla” at the level of name calling… like, you could say “Nash is gay,” and it would have the low-level lack of meaning to me. I am saying I’m not impressed by that.

      Now I’ll go out on limb and say that you think “vanilla” means any sense of romance. That’s not what you said, but that is basically how I am reading you. Which is to say, you don’t like romance (which is fine… say that). So you name call anything that looks like romance. And you use “purple pill” to talk shit about anyone who isn’t BLACK PILL and PURE PSYCHO SEDUCTION.

      Perhaps you admire that more? Are you a real medieval cunt fucker? Is that what you’re trying to tell us?


      That I disrespect. Not whatever you do in the dark with women (or whatever you’re into). But you stepping out of your world to talk about things you’re too inexperienced (or simple?) to understand.

      Again, I would suggest you don’t have the experience of being “non vanilla” and romantic at the same time. So… you don’t know what you’re talking about. And if you do… well, with that, we’ve established that such a thing is possible.

      I’ll resist the urge to brag about details, but I would say that I go WAAAAY our of my way to make sure no one thinks I am talking about “making love.” That is close to what I understand vanilla (missionary, lights off, making love, candle light, dozen roses) to mean. Nothing wrong with that, but I am not interested in that myself.

      I am into DEEP SEX. Meaning I want to “feel her,” that girl underneath me, in more than purely physical ways.

      And before you lose your mind… I argue (over and over) that as you “inter-relate” at more than just a physical level… it makes the PHYSICAL PART stronger. I come harder with girls that I “inter-relate,” more than when I am only fucking her body it an intentionally unconnected way.

      The girls get off more too (but maybe that isn’t SUPER EVIL BLACK PILL… so, you know, it’s not cool?). And when girls get off more… they tend to come back for more sex. You can be selfish, have a big appetite, be very into the physicality with one or many girls… and deep sex can help you get all that.

      Maybe that is all too vanilla for you… but I would argue you can have “deep sex,” emotional sex, “spiritual sex,” while you have your cock in her ass and your hands wrapped around her throat. I’m not sure you can hold all those ideas in your head at one time… but I can… and many men can.

      Maybe that is all still too vanilla… but I would venture to guess you didn’t really think about it. You just started talking shit about “purple pill” in some keyboard jockey, low experience kind of way. You probably do this often. And sometimes… you are talking about a guy that has a “purity fantasy.” But most of the time…

      You just don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about. You are an amateur. You’re a spectator. That is what you sound like. The knee-jerk analysis of spectators isn’t anything I respect.

      Am I wrong? Care to demonstrate that you have expertise that could make us all believe you’re more than just talking shit? Care to say more? Or did you run out of BLACK PILL BUZZWORDS? Maybe go read some Rollo… he has tons of “womenz… so dark” bullshit for guys like you.

      And if not… next time, say what you do, that is so BLACK PILL or whatever hardass kind of relationship you’re into. Show us how fucking cool you are, bro. How the girls just can’t get enough of you.

      I’m all ears.



      1. I’m not sure I merit any praise for that… or if this is a kind way to mock me (if so, I appreciate the kindness!).

        But I decided a long time ago that I am often not talking to the person I am responding to… that the conversation is with the 3rd parties reading on. I wrote that for them. And because I am still working this out in my own head.

        Cheers to TRQ… for a place for interesting conversation. And my apologies to you and the other readers if I was more hostile than I might otherwise be.

        And to the guy that wrote the comment I responded to… I meant every word of it… and may we all get what we “deserve.”


  2. > the dark zone of female psychology

    I will be specific here, and keep my comments to LMR. This scenario was about an instance where I had LMR with a girl. I also had LAST MINUTE “”THIS IS FUCKING GREAT!!”” with that girl, in that same instance. My experience wasn’t really one of “resistance.” Not in general. She was into it. So I was I. It was sexy for both her and I. To call that “resistance” would be to miss what was really happening.

    But I am fascinated by that moment when sex is 1% away… and she is saying something like “no.” I have been there many times. I have fucked some of those girls.

    > I don’t want to go here. It’s too dark

    This is such an interested topic, for several reasons. Most men don’t have that much experience here… not on all sides of that “1%” moment.

    — Where the sex WAS supposed to happen, she was available, but the guy didn’t get it done (they both had a BAD EXP)
    — Where the sex WAS NOT supposed to happen, he pushed enough, she stopped him (she had a GOOD EXP)
    — Where the sex WAS NOT supposed to happen, he pushed too hard, she stopped him (she had a BAD EXP)
    — Where the sex WAS NOT supposed to happen, HE SAW THAT, pushed some, led her properly (she had a GOOD EXP)
    — Where the sex WAS NOT supposed to happen, she made it hard for him, he did it anyway (she had a VERY BAD EXP)
    — Where the sex WAS supposed to happen, she made it hard for him, he got it done (she had a VERY GOOD EXP)

    There are a few such scenarios.

    If I wanted to be an expert here (and I do), I would want a LOT of experience with each of those instances except one…

    > Where the sex WAS supposed to happen, she made it hard for him, he did it anyway (she had a VERY BAD EXP)

    If I ever force sex to happen when she really was a no… I have failed in a pretty significant way. Legally, yes. But more than that. I have one story where I pushed way to hard, and too long. I did not have sex with her, but she left mad. That was failure on my part. Nothing cool about it.

    > Where the sex WAS NOT supposed to happen, he pushed enough, she stopped him (she had a GOOD EXP)

    I think this is real. It’s common. She wants to fuck. She wants to fool around. She wants to feel his desire. But she will fuck next time. If she’s very inexperienced… she’ll fuck after a couple more times like this. I just fucked my first virgin, took me 5-6 dates. Most of that time was in/around this scenario.

    > Where the sex WAS NOT supposed to happen, he pushed too hard, she stopped him (she had a BAD EXP)

    This is just amateur hour. I know, as I have been this kind of amateur. Many times. This is actually a “no means no,” and he was too uncalibrated to read it well… he probably has a bad time, she does too, he loses the girl.

    But (gently) exploring this area… is a part of getting experience. That’s real. Stay on the safe side, but most men make “false negative” judgments (miss times when she clearly wants it), because they have not tested this area enough.

    This is a space to avoid.

    Now… the real interesting case is this one:

    > Where the sex WAS supposed to happen, she made it hard for him, he got it done (she had a VERY GOOD EXP)

    Exploring this area is expert-only territory. If you have “I had instances, where I know it’s 100% on, and I know she wants it, and I also know, she wants for me to take the full responsibility for it. And she gives a kind of resistance. I learned to just stay there. Because she wanted it. And I wanted it.”
    — Hans

    Check out the last 1/2 of that podcast.

    Zan is doing the “sex positive,” “I only want it when she is 100% into it,” something close to “verbal consent” (almost). And I find that POV boring. I know a lot of women do too. It is super safe (which has it’s merits), but it misses a lot of the action, some of which is hot, juicy, delicious for everyone involved.

    But HANs… that quote… that is a man that DOES know what he is talking about. He is a man that DOES love women. And he knows this is true.

    “I see what she wants. And I know what my role is. And I give her that.”
    — Hans

    Edgy. He is pro. I think he knows what he is talking about. I think HE GIVES WOMEN GOOD EXPERIENCES.

    Dangerous, expert-only territory… but this is a real space in sex. A very interesting one.

    > If you read books of women’s sexual fantasies, like Nancy Friday’s collections, you will find fantasies that are illegal, that include illegal elements

    That is a fascinating way to say it.

    I’ll say… if you close that 1%, when she showing faux-resistance, as you get to 0.1%… she should “open” to the experience. Her body, her mind, her heart. You should see her open. You should see her validating the way you are reading her.

    If you don’t see that, you’re wrong. If each step bring a “richer no,” stop. She does not want it. If you keep going, you actually are a rapist.

    What you’re looking for is an “openness” (body/mind/heart), despite words/action to the contrary. That is how you know. You need to see that opening, and… and you need a lot of experience to even play with this one.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: