A player I know says he was talking to a wing about the sex clubs and some of his ecosystems,
It seems that the feeling now for me is that when you channel a girl’s promiscuous side, they are subconsciously signalling to you that they are not a good choice for children due to paternity issues. The other feeling I’m getting is that all women are exchangeable – you can just trade and find a new one that suits you better. I’ve never felt like that. The talk about “Frame” seems to center on controlling a woman’s sexuality … but after going to a sex party I don’t really care what the women does if I don’t want children with her. Some very new feelings for me and not very palatable for the average red pill or tradcon commentator.
I’m not as sure about the good choice for children, cause some women going to sex clubs still want children and have (should have) the forebrain, conscious ability to be monogamous with a man in order to conceive. A lot of men are not as eager for these women as primary partners, however. But “The other feeling I’m getting is that all women are exchangeable – you can just trade and find a new one that suits you better. I’ve never felt like that,” that is accurate and true to my experience. I feel for this player, cause I’ve been feeling like that for a while… and I’ve actually become kind of weary of that feeling… which doesn’t make a huge amount of sense but it’s true. It’s the thinking behind why women hate the demystification of romance and mating offered by the game. When players build value and learn attraction triggers and game, we can move to the abundance mentality that is much-discussed online. The non-monogamy raises and increases the abundance.
This only works for the guy with some underlying value, some game, and a functioning environment (big city). If a guy has true abundance… if he has more than he can handle… he’s not so worried about controlling women’s sexuality… she should be worried about controlling her own sexuality in order to entice him. Women over time become more worried about controlling his attention and resources. When guys online write about “making her chase,” this is what they’re talking about… but it only really works after the woman has invested, not before. For a non-elite man, trying to “make her chase” when she knows nothing about you is foolish, because there is nothing for her to chase. When she figures out you are not a commodity guy, then there is.
Most women are the same… but not all of them… it takes a lot of experience to recognize the genuinely non-commodity woman. Most guys going on about their angel who isn’t like other girls… don’t realize she’s not an angel… she is like other girls… he’s just blinding himself to the obvious. Until he finds her in bed with another man, divorced, etc.
To me… the sex clubs shift female sexuality TOWARDS commodification, which can be a benefit to guys. This is what the “LOL cuck” guys miss, because they can’t imagine a different world from the scarcity one they inhabit. The player I’ve been talking to is seeing the world in a different way, based on experiences that are foreclosed to most guys. He is now seeing the secret society, which most guys don’t (can’t) do.
If you’ve read this piece, you’ll like the free book, too.
9 thoughts on “Combining non-monogamy, game, and sex clubs to unlock abundance and commodification”
Good post–maybe what I was trying to get at a bit with my post on why smart men SHOULD date younger women and not feel the least bit bad about it.
Admittedly, I haven’t yet done the sex party thing although at some point I’m sure I will–however, I’d argue the same thing is basically happening in the broader society, and on both sides, for both men and women. If you’re a good looking chick or a player, it’s easy to meet people (way easier for girls let’s be clear, but relative to their own sex–i.e., players/Chads have a lot easier time meeting girls than other guys; and hot chicks have a lot easier time meeting guys than other chicks), and thus, the individual qualities fall away a bit. Additionally, because our society has become androgynous in many ways, people aren’t bringing the traditional masculine/feminine qualities with them to relationship. They’ve just either got a dick or a vagina that they can fuck with, so unless they’re particularly smart and/or clever, easy come, easy go.
> all women are exchangeable
Exchangeable for what task? All tasks? Who has that experience with women??
Thomas Crown just did a post about “the funnel” as a metaphor for Game/Daygame. He actually said it is NOT like a funnel, I happen to disagree with that.
It IS a funnel.
At the very TOP of the funnel, before I have meet the girl… maybe she is very exchangeable/interchangeable. As a “pretty face” in the crowd, sure.
In the pickup, much less so. Some girls are precious, even in the pickup. There are girls I never dated that I remember for years… Not because my memory is special, but becauae the combination of tht girl/I was special. Maybe here tht “no’s” are exchangeable, but the “yes” rarely so.
There ARE girls that are interchangeable even in the dating stage… Mostly because the dates are boring, she never opens up (so she remains generic), I run a very predictable date (so I remain generic), etc. That happens. But that isn’t about either of us being a commodity… It’s about us never proving the notion untrue (because of a lack of depth).
The very worst sex I’ve had – where I was “masturbating into that girl” – those girls were commodities… In a way. The worst sex. But the best?
For the most part, I don’t see girls like this at all. This isn’t about them… It’s about me… And how I enjoy them at a level that isn’t close to interchangeable.
It is healthy for a guy to make his life about him. Where he is the train station, and the girls are all trains, coming and going around him. To see himself as singular and the girls as many. Yes to that… But the subject here is the player, not the girls.
But even from that POV… He can enjoy the uniqueness of each train, the different levels of pleasure and inspiration each girl brings with her.
I assume you too, Red Quest, feel this way. It’s clear in your writing you don’t see the girls as even similar, let alone exchangeable.
I think saying “the girls are exchangeable” is ego stuff on the players part. I not only don’t believe that is true… But I doubt that player even actually feels that way.
When a player says that, he is doing something for his own psychology with that line.
I go back and forth on it… you can probably tell as much because the view changes some with the mood…
This writing is sloppy on my part
>> A lot of men are not as eager for these women as primary partners, however. But “The other feeling I’m getting is that all women are exchangeable – you can just trade and find a new one that suits you better. I’ve never felt like that,” that is accurate and true to my experience. I feel for this player, cause I’ve been feeling like that for a while… and I’ve actually become kind of weary of that feeling… which doesn’t make a huge amount of sense but it’s true. It’s the thinking behind why women hate the demystification of romance and mating offered by the game
I should have written that many women are exchangeable and have commoditized themselves. The word “all” is implied in what I said.
I think the second half of that paragraph, about me being a bit tired of the game as I’ve pursuing it, does include the idea that not all chicks are the same.
It might be better to say that a lot of chicks are exchangeable (that is true in my experience, sadly) and that being a guy who knows he can get laid (whether with commodity chicks or not) unlocks the ability to be chooser… an ability most guys appear to lack.
I also think that a lot of guys go through a phase in which being able to get laid regularly with different girls is intoxicating… and it’s easy for the chicks to feel like they are commodities in that phase.
> I go back and forth on it… you can probably tell as much because the view changes some with the mood…
There is a lot of self-awareness in this line from you. You and I have different interests, but your self-awareness is part of why I trust/respect you as much as I do.
You’re a very smart, solid guy.
> many women are exchangeable and have commoditized themselves
At the level of facade… This is totally true. The more “shallow” the rel, the more this is true. Womens desire to be “deep within the herd” almost guarantees it.
But after you get past the facade, they couldn’t be “the same” if they tried… They “leak” their individual quirks and expectations and insecurities… That is often the best part for me. I like getting off, and I will fuck just to fuck… but that isn’t where the “juice” is for me.
> it’s easy for the chicks to feel like they are commodities in that phase.
This is a very different point, and it’s definitely true. When we as Players genuinely presume they are “exchangeable” we prove them right.
While I believe women take great comfort from “the herd,” they also want to “feel special” (which, for them, is a way of ensuring the herd keeps them protected). They may be delusional about how “special” they are, but that doesn’t mean they are “exchangeable.”
This “special” is what Hans Comyn is talking about when he says master seducers work to “make her shine.” This can be done by making her feel desired for her individual parts (not hard for me)… Or in Zan’s case, by demonstrating that “all women are special” – some women can embrace that too.
I personally resist the concept that women are exchangeable -again, not because I see them as Angels – as to do that would hurt my results to think that. Of course it would.
If we assume AWALT, or that they are “exchangeable” (which is ridiculous to me) then a given seduction is about us… and technique. And men seem very prone to over-emphasis technique as it is (make them “think” too much in set)… and under-emphasize female psych… which for me, is where the game is played.
>>But after you get past the facade, they couldn’t be “the same” if they tried…
There is some truth here but I have met a lot of girls who are like, what are you into? “Watching TV, social media, hanging out with my friends, traveling.” Push on them… and there is not much underneath that.
I want to find the unusual ones… I want them to be not all the same.
Some women will also take on the characteristics of the guys they are with. I have seen that. The chick I wrote about https://theredquest.wordpress.com/2017/05/21/women-want-to-follow-your-lead-a-story-about-a-woman-presenting-as-slut-versus-prude/ (long time ago) is an example of this. An extreme one.
“Exchangeable” and “abundance mentality” (really abundance experience… when I have had too many girls in the queue and too many going on, my own behavior changes, not always for the better) are different and I should have been clearer about that in the original post.
> There’s also the observation that as the Daygamer becomes more advanced his lay reports appear simpler; that’s because he takes for granted what the beginner finds difficult.
— Thomas Crown
“his lay reports appear simpler”
I can’t be certain what TC means here, but I think it’s a similar sentiment.
If a man thinks that girls are exchangeable, and he gets better, and his lays come easier… His lay reports will have less to say, as he is like, “The girl… is irrelevent, and I did everything right… +1, The end.” Boring report, indeed.
For my part, the entire reason the Game isn’t in any way boring for me after all these girls/years is precisely because the girls – and the experiences – are NOT exchangeable.
So I go back to the funnel:
Early funnel? Like “should I approach THAT cute girl or THAT one?” Interchangeable, in some ways.
But at the level of spending any kind of time together… Only in the crudest and most cynical ways could I imagine the girl, the context, or even myself as “exchangeable.”
If Game serves to “numb us out,” maybe that is true. As it serves to wake us up, to make us connoisseurs… No way.
Good points. Very true that women don’t like the demystification of romance … game turns romance into a predictable sales cycle for men. Without being able to manage the sales cycle the dating life of most men is just left to the chance of girls from social circle, general neediness and needing to get a girlfriend first to have sex. Men with game are good at the sales cycle and can have predictable outcomes… but this takes the romance out of it. It’s just improving the product, giving pitches online or in person, setting up dates, being aggressive enough to move toward sex on or before the third date. Now this SEEMS very romantic to all the girls I’ve slept with but they don’t know I’m basically doing the exact same thing with other girls. And any guy that is good with girls is working to generate multiple options. In this way it is sort of a commodification.
Not to enter to much into the interchangeable debate here but what I can say is basically the foundation of good game/a good sex life is the ability to replace a girl with an equal or hotter substitute in a reasonable amount of time if she leaves. Hot girls have this ability in the SM, guys need to develop SMV and the skill to play the numbers game (or sales cycle how I look at it)
The commodification also is inherent in the swinging scene but also most people involved prefer not to look at it that way. They prefer to see it through the lens of liberation, acceptance, sex positivity, etc. and these things have truth to them. It is also equally true that the sexual market operates and that there is a closed fence around the community that keeps out single men who don’t have options. The women especially the hot women are the commodity that is traded and swapped by guys that have a way above average sex life. have the ability to introduce a girl to the scene and your in, if not your out. Lose your girl and you’re also pretty much out until you find a new girl.
The point is that the scene can operate with this commodification and not make anyone feel too bad. The fat chicks are accepted and not made to feel bad. The single men that operate around the periphery are tolerated and not overtly condemned or ostracized. They get about the same treatment that they get from girls in real life (which amounts to get lost, but in a polite way) So the commodification exists TACITLY. That’s my interpretation from 3 experiences