Comments by "DavePazz" (@davepazz580) on "PsycHacks"
channel.
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You have to first understand that men aren't women... meaning: men don't view women and sex in the exact same manner women view men and sex - they are actually worlds different.
I know modern feminism teaches that men and women are perfectly identical in every way possible, but this is complete nonsense... the truth is women have one reproductive "strategy" and men have another which is quite different.
Women tend to naturally focus on "quality" first and foremost when it comes to selecting partners or potential serious partners... men are the opposite of this, they tend to focus on quantity first and foremost (quality concerns comes later, after he has known several partners).
The basic reason for this (to summarize) is that a woman can only become pregnant with only one man's child at a time... and that time lasts for months, so this necessitates her to focus on quality above all else in selecting a proper mate.
But a man is capable of impregnating several women at once (and he suffers no physical alteration whatsoever int he process)... so his reproductive "success" depends on quantity first.
This is what women don't seem to understand about men... male brains are wired completely different when it comes to all this, men are stimulated by the purely visual way more than women are - which is why pornography is such a successful business, men have no choice but to keep becoming stimulated by it.
Btw, it doesn't have to be just "pornography"... simple pictures of random, attractive women work just the same - the point is that it's all immediate visual stimulation.
Women aren't like this to any degree even close to how men are about it, so you wouldn't really understand...
But since men naturally prioritize quantity first in women/dating/relationships and quality second, men have a "two minds" approach to women...
One "mind" is focused totally on the visual and sexual aspect of the woman (which is the first one to take command)... the other "mind" is focused on her qualities beyond that.
So it's perfectly logical and normal for men to spend "sexual" time with some women but never consider them to be anything more than casual relationships... he saves his "commitment" for a woman that has the other qualities combined with the physical.
As I've often said, the "serious relationship" standard a woman has is way higher than the "sexual" standard alone simply because a serious relationship demands a lot more time and effort from a man than the purely sexual one (which is disposable)... so obviously, he isn't going to give commitment away so easily or for just anyone.
The sexual/casual relationship standard only implies the women be physically hot... the serious relationship standard requires a woman to not just be hot, but have a great personality, be totally compatible with him in other aspects of life, be a respectable woman, supportive of him, be a true asset in his life, have a "clean" sexual past, etc.
There are more hurdles to clear for the serious relationship standard than the casual one...
Along these same lines (and because of everything I just said above), men don't naturally "seek out" serious girlfriends and wives... in other words, men don't view dating/mating as "searching" for wives - dating/mating is it's own ends and it's own rewards.
This is different from women, who do in fact, look at dating as "searching" for a husband or long-term, stable partner.
Men simply don't view it this way... they initially plan on dating multiple women for a very long time - only when they come across a true quality woman (as I explained before) will their minds then shift to commitment/long-term relationships.
Bottom line here is that men aren't women... so they don't think like women do when it comes to sex or dating.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
My fiancé has been with exactly one other person before me (he was 30 when we met). I had not told him I was a virgin (29 years old) and so he felt self-conscious about his own amount of experience, thinking just like you, that every woman wants a man who is experienced. We do not.
It's not so much the "experienced" part that most women want exactly... they are attracted to the confidence that comes from having experience.
All the surveys done about women point to the undeniable fact that confidence in a man is most attractive... but you know, "confidence" doesn't just magically appear out of thin air - it must be genuinely earned through practical experience.
For a man, this means direct sexual experience... there is no way in hell a man is going to have any confidence in himself (as your fiancé showed) if he has very little sexual experience - how could he?
This is what women will never understand... because women are born with built-in sexual value just for being female, you don't have to put in any real "work" to earn the attraction you generate from males - a woman can build years of confidence with zero direct sexual experience because it simply isn't necessary for them.
Women will fully attract multiple men on a constant basis simply for being female...it doesn't matter if you've had sex or not, your physical presence is enough.
The problem here is that women assume the exact same thing holds for men... it does not.
A man with very little or no real sexual experience is like a dead fish in the water in the dating game... how on Earth can he be sexually confident around women when he knows damn well he hasn't been with any (or too few) to judge for himself of what he can do?
Like I said, women have a very hard time understanding this about men... they want to view men through the eyes of women's personal experiences, but men are not women.
Values have a lot to do with it. Obviously I'm conservative, having remained a virgin until I found a man I thought I'd want to marry. There's no way I could have taken seriously a man with bodycount 5 or higher.
All this is wonderful... but doesn't change anything I said.
These days, men with bodycounts of 5 or higher are very rare... but as I said before, these virgin or very low body count guys aren't receiving any special rewards or attention from women for this fact anyway - which makes it a very useless thing for most men to have.
I understand that you think the way you do if you have spent a lot of time in the redpill community or in a big american city. The culture there is very liberal and liberal women tend to have a high bodycount.
Yes they do... but regardless of that, it really doesn't change anything for men to feel confident in themselves - it still takes real experience to do that.
America is not the only culture there is however. Even inside of America there are very different cultures and the variety is even greater if you consider Europe. I'm from Europe, for reference. Don' t think it matters which country.
All this is true... but we all have to deal with whatever situation we find ourselves in at the moment.
1
-
I'm not looking for a man who is confident in his sexual skills or his seduction.
No woman "looks for" such things... but when a proper seduction does take place somehow, women won't be complaining (I don't care who they are).
Nevertheless, all women claim they find "confidence" to be a very attractive quality in men.. but as I said earlier that confidence doesn't just magically pop up out of nothing, it must come from previous success and practical experience.
Another thing you may not understand about men, all forms of confidence in life in intertwined... and sexual confidence in particular is very important for men to have, which is why they know they aren't "complete" without it.
Your fiancé proved this by at least trying to put up the illusion of having "experience"... he was doing it as much for himself as for you.
That would be a red flag for me because I do not want to marry a man who has been doing those things to many women.
From what you've been saying until now, it seems you'd only feel most comfortable with the most sterile, unexperienced guy with absolutely no past of his own that has anything to do with any other woman... I'm not buying that idea not even for a second.
The only excuse a man has for being "too good" at seduction is if he is a salesman, as sometimes those skills translate well.
Something told in sales classes (which is perfectly true btw) is that we are all trying to "sell" ourselves to others though life in one form or another... i.e. we put on certain faces for some people we care about, and we don't for others we don't care about.
It's really all the same thing in the end...
But I say again, as a woman, it's very clear you have no understanding nor appreciation for what men have to uniquely do in life...
I do want a man who is confident in his value as a man (having survival skills, being useful to family and community) and in his interpersonal skills.
As long as none of that has anything to do with yucky women or sex... right?
What you don't seem to understand is that for men, sexual confidence is very much intertwined in all that... a man "who is confident in his value as a man" will fully include sexual confidence with women in that as well.
Otherwise, he isn't going to be confident in other aspects of life... sadly, you don't seem to understand this basic point.
Most people practice interpersonal skills with family, friends and at work, which is why it is important for a man to actively interact with his environment.
For a man, this must also include successful interaction with women he is interested in or attracted to as well... there is no one without the other.
It is true that if a man does not have that critical experience, then it would be a no for me.
Right... but it would also be a "no" for him as well because he would be fully aware he is lacking confidence from lack of practical experience.
1
-
Is a sexually liberated woman what you want to attract? Or something moderate perhaps, something in between what I represent (virgin) and a modern woman?
Good question...
The truth is (based on our particular environment here), we cannot afford ourselves the luxury of comporting ourselves only in one, singular way in the hopes of attracting one particular type of woman...
That may seem like a good idea at first... but in the shoes of a man in today's world, it's very likely such a strategy will leave you more alone and lonely than ever because without learning the vital skills necessary in dealing with women in general (dating, communication, sex, etc.) and the confidence that comes with that, it all just leads to a depressing downward spiral for a man.
You first have to understand how a typical, average man goes about his dating/romantic life... to summarize, a man will date continuously and spend time seeing how far each relationship takes him... if a woman is enriching his life, comports herself in a manner that shows she wants to be a permanent part of his life (and her sexual background proves this also), then he does what he can to formalize the relationship and make it permanent.
If she does not, then he moves on ...
It's very possible to date a woman who shows such good signs at first, but later degrades as you learn more about her, or it's possible life events will pull 2 people apart over time... either way, a man simply continues dating others to see how new compatible he is with new women.
The positive of this typical male strategy is the more girlfriends and relationships he goes through, the more he learns how to better deal and handle women... I don't mean this to be interpreted as being more "manipulative", but rather the process of a man knowing how to be more "cooperative" with a woman and her particular nature, rather than simply interpreting everything in his own way all the time.
This also builds up his confidence around women in general... and leads to more positive experiences in the long run.
But today, dating and relationships have become far more difficult to obtain even for the "best", most well-comported average men... these days, such men don't receive any special "reward" for being good- meaning, there is no payoff or incentive for doing things the "right" way.
If all single women (all 30 million) were exactly like you and had your exact mindset on this issue, then all men would be literally forced to play by your rules... they would fear messing up by getting with any random girl with no direct intent of marriage and would present the absolute "cleanest" possible image of themselves always.
But understand that they ultimately wouldn't be changing their behavior this way because their basic hormonal nature as men had suddenly changed... no... they would be doing this specifically because not behaving such a "restrained" way would = no sexual partner in the future at all.
Remember, men don't control access to sex, women do... therefore, men can only do certain things and hope it yields results in sexual access later on.
But this big change of behavior and attitude in men caused by facing an entire population of women with your exact standards and expectations would be also dependent on the men who "follow all the rules" achieving assured success in the end... i.e. they do get a payoff and reward for restraining themselves sexually (in the form of a virgin wife to be faithful to him forever).
But if men would see that they are comporting themselves in such a way and it's not leading to any such reward... then why bother?
That's the current situation we face here... the vast majority of women don't follow your exact principles, and men with no experience with women (virgins or very low body count) are not achieving any kind of success with women at all today.
If anything, the men who dedicate themselves to being financially successful or who have a high social profile are being fully rewarded by never settling down... by constantly dating new women all the time.
I know you are not a man and therefore, cannot even begin to know what is inside a man's psyche on this issue... but given the world we are in right now, the best option is for men to build up wealth, social status, date multiple women and just enjoy life - anything short of that will not lead to any happiness or content for men today.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
see, but celebrating a man for having many sexual partners still has to be cultural, because in many other cultures in the past, it wasn't necessarily considered a good thing for men to fuck around as much as possible.
In actuality, men are not celebrated for such things in this culture either (at least not "officially")... I have yet to see or hear of any news report or social media piece (for example) "praising" a man who has fathered 20 kids by random women who are not his wife nor girlfriend and whom he is not financially supporting.
However, its only human nature to inwardly "admire" certain accomplishments based on perceived difficulties...
For example, a 6'4" tall fighter weighing 250 lbs. has very obvious physical advantages when facing smaller opponents... so when he handily pummels such disadvantaged opponents, it's never viewed as some sort of admirable "accomplishment" because the end result was never in question.
But if a 5'6" tall 150 lbs. fighter takes on much larger opponents and actually beats them in fights, that will illicit instinctive feelings of admiration because our perception tells us (and correctly so) that a smaller fighter has the odds against him, so his success in these fights against bigger guys deserves much more respect than the 6'4" fighter doing the same thing.
Whether or not you approve of the sport of fighting (or fighting in general) is beside the point... no matter your views, it's only human to observe this situation and instinctively admire and give more "respectability" to the smaller fighter for his results vs. the larger fighter.
But going even further, the larger fighter even has an extra responsibility and expectation placed on him that the smaller fighter doesn't have: He has to "watch himself" and not abuse his obvious size and strength advantages...
All this describes sex in exactly the same way... women represent the 6'4" 250 lbs. fighter because women have much more sexual power than men do and can, therefore, have random sex almost at will - and men represent the 5'6" 150 lbs. fighter who has to really earn his status in the sexual world despite his natural limitations.
And like in the previous analogy, women have a different standard of sexual behavior placed on them because they have so much more sexual power than men do... with this extra power comes greater responsibility in using it.
1
-
Crime is an extreme example, but you could take a profession like a woodcutter or plumber, or any other manual labor that comes with a very low social status and you'd have the same problem.
The difference here is that woodcutting or plumbing can't be put in the same category as the very basic human need for the basics such as for food and the need to reproduce (and all the natural impulses that go along with that)...
But yes, "effort" alone doesn't make something "desirable"... you could take years and tons of hours building the greatest statue ever, and other people might (or might not) admire your finished work - but how many of them will be inspired enough to want to build their own statue because of it?
Some may not even be able to understand why it took you so long to create that statue...
However, just about everyone can directly relate to the intense, all-consuming need for sex and (in the case of men specifically) would directly understand how difficult it is to obtain it regularly from multiple partners the "conventional" way.
As for men and sexual partners, your logic mostly works, but only if we discount prostitution or other ways to "persuade" women to have sex with you even if they're not attracted to you.
I don't include prostitution in all this... I only refer to conventional man/woman relations.
And in conventional man/woman relations, women are the ones who control access to sex, men do not... which man gets to have sex and which don't is entirely based on the approval of women's needs and who they choose.
Much of the natural, instinctive "admiration" for men with multiple partners comes from this very fact... if some magical power existed where men had fully equal control over sexual access (making the ratio in any given society where 50% of the available women were having sex with 50% of the available men) then this type of intrinsic admiration and desirability for a man with multiple partners would slowly disappear because every average Joe could achieve it.
But no such magical power exists and never will...
Now look at prostitution... this is a case where a man can "circumvent" (in a manner of speaking) a woman's power of sexual access by directly buying it.
Are such men who pay for the services of prostitutes "admired" or is this type of lifestyle even "desired" by men or society in general?
No... they are generally regarded as being reckless with their personal health, undesirable (because they had to resort to paying for sex) and all-around losers.
i.e. such a man's sexual value is not validated by a woman he had to pay, cheat, lie to, entrap, take illegal actions against, etc. in order to obtain sex.
So you see, this male desirability for multiple partners hinges on the fact that men don't actually control access to sex... it has to be granted by a woman first and he won't be seen as a desirable man if he "cheats" his way to a high body count.
Also, while it's true that men desire more sexual variety, generally speaking, you have to ask yourself, why is it then that women also have lots of sexual partners when they can?
A woman with multiple sexual partners is basically signaling that she's giving away her body to several men in an attempt to get one of them to bond with her permanently... and it's obviously not working, so she keeps going from man to man in the hopes the next one will take the bait.
I'm not saying this is exactly what's going on with every woman out there who does this... but it's the instinctive impression she is giving off in general.
If anything, a man who impregnates multiple women at once, should be seen as even worse relationship material, because in most cases, the only way he can keep going like that is not only by abandoning the woman but ALSO the children he fathers.
Which is why I said earlier that such men are never "praised" in the news or other social media outlets for what they do...
However, never underestimate a woman's attraction for men who show visibly show they have been with many other women or have achieved some type of "celebrity" status....
How many times have you heard of murderers or other criminals in jail suddenly get flooded with all kinds of fan mail from interested women?
Even those guys who impregnate 20 women he obviously can't support... I wonder how many of them will actually get more interested women after the fact thanks to being reported on TV (even if the coverage about him was totally negative)?
One thing I've learned about women is that (as a man) you'll never be able to relate to their thought process on such things...
that is quite the stretch, and does not seem to fit with reality. If that were true, most women would never be attracted to any man because this would lead to a vicious cycle where a woman first looks at other women before making up her own mind.
I've never seen it being a "stretch" in my own life and from observing others...
I can't tell you how many times I've walked into clubs in the past either totally alone or with a few guy friends, then walked into the same club in the company of a few women and how hugely different the end result of that night was in terms of other women around us.
Walking into a club alone as a man, you may as well be invisible... you look around and notice women aren't even looking your way at all.
But walk in with a few attractive women by your side, and suddenly the other women at the club are "glancing" your way, sizing you up, you can even see on their faces they are wondering if they should come approach you.
They suddenly become more "forward" and try to make small talk when they see you with attractive women already... this almost never happened when I was totally alone or with just a group of guys.
All this relates the general concept that a woman's "optimal" choice will be a man that is not "abundant" in number... out of say, 10 guys (just a random numerical example here, don't take it literally) maybe only 1 or 2 will be able to satisfy all her needs in a partner - so most women will only be interested in those very few guys (which other women will likewise also want for themselves).
Since women can only have one man's child at a time, and that process is really going to take so much out of her and compromise her physically for some time, she better make sure that one man is a "choice" one...
It's the opposite for men... the desire to "spread one's seed" means men's choices are abundant in number - any attractive woman with a uterus fits the bill perfectly.
oh boy ... that's bold.
Yes it is... but it's also true.
For clarification, I was not talking about children here. I was talking about the relationships between one man and one woman. And in this case, it's actually women who need men less than men need women. Women have better social connections and larger social circles than men.
It's true that women have more and better social circles than men do... but ask a group of average women if they want to remain totally single and man-less for the rest of their lives - I guarantee you none of them will say yes.
Contrary to what modern feminism tells you, women don't feel any kind of self-fulfillment in life unless a man has chosen her as his lifelong partner... social circles and girlfriends are not a substitute for this in any way.
The male equivalent of this would be a life-long virgin... a guy no woman thought of highly enough to ever grant sex to.
This is demonstrably false. Men's sexual market value drops too, even if it is at a later age.
A man's sexual value can drop yes... but it isn't directly tied to his age the way it is for a woman.
Men are not primarily valued for anything physical... by and large, they are valued for being able to be a provider and creating social status.
Your dating prospects in your 20s and 30s will still be better than in your 60s. But that's a common fallacy. Just because you have more time doesn't mean your clock isn't ticking.
Most men's dating prospects increase as they become better able to provide resources and/or gain social prominence... this doesn't exactly have a "clock" on it (although one day, we're all going to die).
If you can't find a suitable partner as a man, then to "keep going" is a very bad choice. If a strategy doesn't work out after you tried for a while, what do you think is gonna happen when you continue this strategy?
Because the strategy is to "keep going"... that's actually the end game.
It's only when a woman comes into your life who actually makes it better overall that a man will willfully give up the single life because he sees a valid reason to give it up.
But if no such reason presents itself, why stop dating?
Your argumentation seems to be putting blame on the women. You are also ignoring the negative side effects of either constant rejection or constant sex through no effort on your own (both extremes of the spectrum). Far from no harm done.
It's not "blame" but let's just be logical here: If no woman offers you a good reason to give up all other women, then why would you?
"Sex through no effort" - I have no idea what that means, there is always effort involved for a man to get sex.
this is a broad generalization which can only be made with many caveats. We have very solid evidence that BOTH men and women are happiest in faithful monogamous relationships.
I agree about solid relationships, but that doesn't negate what I said whatsoever...
which neatly reminds me of a great quote: "When we categorize things, we tend to overestimate the differences between individuals of different categories and underestimate the differences of individuals of the same category"
For topics such as this one, generalizing and categorizing are necessary... otherwise we'd have to go in to a million different exceptions forever.
1
-
yikes. I was hoping that you would give some good evidence for your claims. and you came with ... anecdotes
I apologize for not being a research scientist who has to leave links to official studies before being allowed to declare anything... I could've done that for sure, but I don't want to spend hours on every single response and it's also not my intent to make every conversation a battle over which study said what and where (I've been down that road many times before).
Some things one just knows from observation and using common sense... if you observe something happen the majority of times, chances are it was meant to happen that way for a reason.
I'm not really going to comment much on your points because there isn't much to comment on but I find it ironic that you say women's fulfillment in life is tied to a man choosing them, when it's men who are getting depressed and even committing suicide bc they can't find a girlfriend.
Seems like a fair comment until you take a closer look at it...
A woman's fulfillment is tied to a man choosing them as a long-term relationship partner... go look at the many TikTok's of older women lamenting the fact that they waited far too long in the game and rejected far too many men earlier in life and now they are left with very little or no real prospects for love.
Notice you never see videos of women like this being totally happy and singing the praises of being totally single with no man anywhere close in number to the ones where they are lamenting being single with no desirable man in their life.
I already know you are going to say: "That's all anecdotal, it means nothing, you have nothing to back up what you say"... but nobody is going to tell me what I'm observing here means the opposite of what I claimed, otherwise I'd see the tendency going the other way.
As for men... remember I said earlier "The male equivalent of this would be a life-long virgin" - basically someone who can't get laid.
And you know the number of male virgins (or men simply no longer having regular sexual relations with anyone) has risen sharply over the last several years, right?
So it shouldn't be a shock to anyone that more men are becoming depressed or committing suicide these days... if they had the power to go out and date women and have sex on a regular basis, I promise you they would never feel lonely or depressed again.
Notice also how in all these women's Tiktoks about how depressed and dissatisfied they are in the dating world, they never tell you they are suffering from lack of sex or lack of "dates" (women control sexual access, they could get random sex or go on endless dates with random men if they wanted)... no, they are depressed specifically for not having a suitable husband or life partner (big difference from the men, who don't control sexual access).
We have the red pill and the black pill, women don't have these kinds of movement, even though a lot of them can't find a partner either.
Give it time... they will get there eventually, and many new Red Pill content creators these days are women anyway and I suspect this is only the beginning.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1