(chuckle) Okay I looked up this book and read a bit of it online to see what it was. It's just silly hype to make a dollar, of the type that has been around for ages.
The first chapter opens with: “Only 5 steps are required to pick up a girl and get her into bed. Amazingly, this simple process works anywhere in the world with any girl. …..I had no translators and had never seen any of these girls before, yet within minutes of meeting, we were on our way back to my apartment or hotel.”
Uh huh, yeah right. It then goes on for several pages without actually SAYING anything. Just more of the carnival barker routine. Reminded me of those program length commercials in the the middle of the night on US television.
I'd say just consider this book in the same catagory as the cheesy male enhancement spam you get in emails.
Sorry, GuessWho, but studying a book like that sounds way too much like the guys who say they only read Playboy for the articles.
(and great post, silky)
I think we sociologists have determined, regretfully, that a significant proportion of not just men but also women confuse their hearts with other anatomical features.
And yes they do deserve each other.
You want a game? Play chess, checkers, Uno, Connect Four.
I don't play games. And I'd never use sex to "get to know a woman"
Every time you see something on the Lifetime channel about some woman being continually mistreated, having a teenage birth, or what not, a real man could have prevented that.
But then Lifetime would have to show more positive movies for women.
Still, I'd like to be the kind of man who makes women's lives better not worse.
And above all, make one woman's life incomparably better, whoever she is, and be what she needs, and also hopefully what she wants and expects.
Heck, I may know her name already, and the stealth lover comes in without warning.
Why did Groovy Druid entertain the content of that book in his Web research paper on Asperger's, flirting, and getting attention from the alternate gender?
Given that he abbreviated the full title of the book.
I think Roy's point is that you have to get a woman's heart first before a dog of a man can get what he came for.
And right now the New Testament seems very relevant:
where your heart lies, there your treasure will be also.
Heart in the sense of soul, not a muscular organ pumping blood.
Now the kind of woman Roy is talking about, if her heart bleeds, it is another muscular organ altogether.
Where are the real men and women in America?
It sounds like The System was written for men in the hopes of cashing in on the kinds of profits The Rules made from women.
I have all three books referenced by Groovy Druid now
1. The System, Roy Valentine
2. How To Succeed with Women, Ron Louis and David Copeland
3. Signals Allan Pease
I think The System by Roy Valentine and How to Succeed with Women by Ron Louis and David Copeland, despite their heavy emphasis on immediate sexual applications, are describing merely how to get into a woman's heart with nonverbal communication
If it sometimes leads to sex (Valentine's 1% of all women who are ready to sleep with you), it is because men confuse the heart with their member and women confuse the heart with the uterus, which is actually a better analogy for the women, as it is a beating muscular organ and both pump blood at least some of the time. And some (mind you) in either gender seem actually that stupid.
The serious Christian does not even entertain the thought of sex before marriage. Maybe in my case, we don't want to give our treasure to [someone] and have him or her walk off and look for something better. Many men and women can bluff their way into bed. Blufffing their way through two years of dating (Equally Yoked warned us in basic training that it would take two years to identify a fraudster) and a legal-religious wedding ceremony, probably not.
Serious Christians make mistakes. But they aren't stupid.
I rigorously condemn the recommendation to target the "easy" one percent of women. Even if I wasn't a Christian I would condemn it on Marxist philosophy or secular humanism (my thanks again to the six ladies in the honors dorm at Shepherd that introduced me to neo-Buddhist humanism).
I'm kind of looking for the one percent of one percent (.01%) that is probably relationship material. I may have met several thousand women since age 18, knowing their names or not, closely enough for them to have had the opportunity to notice and sent some kind of a signal. Hmmmmm, let's see, Shepherd College (5000) Marshall University (15000), Maryland Rehabilitation Center (hundreds), the cumulative total of thirty job placements (includes large distribution centers in light industrial work and the Suitland MD Federal Center during my Census Bureau days) and not forgetting my current one of eight years to date (300-400 around DC), churches, the gym, the dating services (Dateable, unknown, Equally Yoked Christian Singles, easily hundreds), the neighborhoods (Shepherdstown Huntington Hedgesville and Martinsburg WV, Greenbelt MD, and Arlington-Alexandria VA), possibly even vacations (Orlando FL, greater Los Angeles area, Detroit MI, Death Valley and vicinity).
So it could be one per thousand or ten thousand, not per hundred.
Those books can be applied to getting into a woman's heart (and hopefully that's all, folks, for a year or two).
But it requires nonverbal communication. And it does seem to be more complicated than I think it needs to be.
This is intended as a critique of men and women within the context of Roy Valentine's 1% of women and the men who chase them.
Not all guys and girls.
And yes, I am taking it kind of personally and I am a little upset (understatement?)
If it sometimes leads to sex (Valentine's 1% of all women who are ready to sleep with you), it is because men confuse the heart with their member and women confuse the heart with the uterus, which is actually a better analogy for the women, as it is a beating muscular organ and both pump blood at least some of the time. And some (mind you) in either gender seem actually that stupid.
The serious Christian does not even entertain the thought of sex before marriage. Maybe in my case, we don't want to give our treasure to [someone] and have him or her walk off and look for something better. us in basic training that it would take two years to identify a fraudster) and a legal-religious wedding ceremony, probably not.
Serious Christians make mistakes. But they aren't stupid.
GuessWho, I swear, there is no bullshit you won't believe as long as it has "Jesus" plastered all over it.
Divorce Rates Highest for Christians, Lowest for Atheists.
George Barna, president and founder of Barna Research Group, commented:
"While it may be alarming to discover that born again Christians are more likely than others to experience a divorce, that pattern has been in place for quite some time. Even more disturbing, perhaps, is that when those individuals experience a divorce many of them feel their community of faith provides rejection rather than support and healing. But the research also raises questions regarding the effectiveness of how churches minister to families. The ultimate responsibility for a marriage belongs to the husband and wife, but the high incidence of divorce within the Christian community challenges the idea that churches provide truly practical and life-changing support for marriages."
...
Barna's results verified findings of earlier polls: that conservative Protestant Christians, on average, have the highest divorce rate, while mainline Christians have a much lower rate. They found some new information as well: that atheists and agnostics have the lowest divorce rate of all.
I am really more a mainline Protestant. I think Methodism and Baptist are fairly interchangeable. I care more about the ministry. Back when I was at a Baptist Church and felt that I wasn't "man" enough to date the ladies who spurned me, I left for a Methodist church with an autistic kids ministry. I actually did some good, and I think the kids knew I was different from the other adults.
I do listen to research. Thanks for the research.
Now here is the Julie hypothesis for why the Christians get married more often (and maybe more often married wrongly). Back in 1992-1993 I remarked to her the numbers of my Christians friends planning marriage (the first of these took place in September 1993 and ended in June 1995). Julie's answer?
Well..... the Christians have to wait till they're married to have sex....
Julie was one of the six ladies in the honors dorm attached to neo-Buddhist humanism. One of them was the alpha woman and she often wrote me about humanism and what she thought about my early Christian development.
Yes, Julie seemed to think more freely than the Christian crowd at a time when I saw a group of 30-something Christians in Martinsburg that made me rethink all the stuff I thought Christians were (based on the college crowd). The older crowd were above petty bickering and prejudice, it seemed, and returned love for anger so well that after six months of it I came to the recognition that maybe there is something to the Holy Spirit after all.
That is usually the best way to shut up a bitter skeptic, like me before the presidential election when Clinton kicked H.W. Bush's butt. That was a great election thing watching with dad, the same dad that thought the Christians were the Nazis: for several hours we saw the Republicans on the run, and Clinton won! (I wish Clinton had not backed off from don't ask don't tell)
So it was no fun two years later when Julie and I went to one wedding back around the vicinity of Shepherd College, leaving Marshall University where I was. Six hours of flirting. Back then I made the mistake of letting Jesus try to introduce me to some Christian girl. I never heard Julie talk like a Christian, and instead, we scoped out the Spirit of the Hills gay ministry at Marshall.
I also didn't like standing off from one of our friends, another of the six. I liked her too.
I actually said it Max. I made the mistake of letting Jesus try to introduce me to a Christian. See I am starting to think that way. In more recent years I cold-shouldered a woman with no religious affiliation, maybe even an Aspergian, certainly one my own level occupationally and maybe intellectually. (I am playing Metallica black album, the God That Failed, at this moment)
I don't think I am going to cold shoulder the next woman without a religious affiliation.
I am kind of fed up when other Christian women don't seem to think I am spiritual (well, one Christian woman thinks I am sincere, the pastor, and I'd better get to bed now, she pastors Al Gore's old church in Arlington). Moreover, my ideas to reduce my usage of gas were erll received. Green Christians!
If you don't think Christians have bad days, well, we're not all the same.
Let me end the rant by saying that it is tough when God usually looks after you, but women of your own religion eschew you (or maybe it looks that way if you have Asperger). I guess even if Jesus wants a woman to meet you, she has to think so.
But back to the point.
Non-Christians are not restricted by prohibitions against sexual activity before marriage the same way Christians are. If they marry, maybe it is really is right.
The Christians, well, if they make a hasty marriage, despite everything the New Testament says, they'll simply break off and try again. But that is not what I have seen. I saw only one divorce in 14 years amongst 6 to 10 couples. That couple stuck it out until very recently.
And really, my wait-to-marry stand is really motivated by cover your ass (or cover your heart). I wouldn't touch a sexual union on someone's say so. People break their word all the time, even Christians. The only best strategy to reduce that possibility is to make her (and him too) pay pretty long and hard first, because that would seem to eliminate a lot of meat seekers.
I appreciate what you say Max, even if I sometimes disagree about what a religion says and should do. And I would defend your right to say it.
You only get to understand why you have been single in hindsight, not why you are single now.
It made sense once. The Dad and Mom downhill period (1995 to 2003) and shutting down her legal and financial existence and renovating and selling two acres of West Virginia (2003 to tax time 2005).
No I guess I didn't really need a relationship to interfere with the job to be done, or spend less time away from my ancestors.
I am not sure why I am still single now. 2 1/2 years since the job was done.
And we must not graduate school before all this, starting in 1993, to do something productive without a job (the unemployment bothered me worse than the) (being single), but
Lesson: If you aren't doing like working or being in a relationship can you use that time to your advantage another way?
I could have vegetated on those two acres but Mom did not raise a quitter. Besides, some of my friends did not even try to get a job, they did grad school with hardly a summer off. The alpha woman in my above post, mentor to Julie, myself, and the other woman I liked, B., don't even try to get a job with a B.A. in English with honors. Straight to Catholic University (purgatory for her, especially before the first Clinton election) and WVU (what a relief). The only difference between us was that she didn't try for a job for a year and she had the relationship stuff figured out, and he waited for her and they married after her second graduation.
To the extent that some guys with Asperger are so wanting to be good mates that they will try to learn the appropriate recognition and sending of signals, it seems unfortunate that a woman would overlook basic human character and proceed straight to nonverbal cues, which can be used against her by, um, say Ted Bundy (who managed to lure his victims because they thought he was a different kind of lady killer entirely).
Maybe a wiser woman would start with his character.
"Christians have to wait till they're married to have sex.... "
But they don't. They just lie to everybody and say they're waiting. The deal is "I'll pretend I believe you're a virgin if you'll pretend you believe I'm a virgin."
It's really one of the principle ways Christian practice one of the most sacred tenants of the church: Co-operative Mass Hypocrisy.
But I really am a virgin. And if my friends and other Christians weren't virgins before marriage, how would I know if they didn't say?
How can we say who is doing what? I think what we can agree on is that of those who call themselves Christians there are those that really stay virgins and those who are lying.
Problem is, being a real Christian is kind of like being a virgin, who is to say?
Also, the word virgin needs to stop being an insult (recent movie titles, lack of sexual experience is not comedy!)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, there is one flaw with the interpreting body language as permission for sex argument: we know a person might want to, and show those signals, but doesn't want to actually go that far for one's own protection or for someone one cares about (one's parents, God).
Under those circumstances even giving the right signals does not give permission.
Another of Shepherd's outstanding residence assistants told me not to let myself be talked into premarital sex, on the basis that she was, and really felt crummy for some time before God. How similar is that, anyway, to books like Judy Mamou The Other Woman describing a sense of shame after one is molested as a kid?
Yes, there are actually serious Christians out there who care what God thinks about what they do in their lives.