5,5,3 rule

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Nov 29, 2018 8:13 pm

I've referred to it here but never have I typed it out, it's just in my videos… I wanted to change that, and post a summary of it here.

The 5 Stages that a Sex dimorphic species must traverse to not contradict itself.

In a sex dimorphic species, one sex is larger and more threatening than the other gender.

If it's not the individual, it is the whole… a 5 foot man approaching a 7 foot women is still more threatening (his other friends), because the sum total of men are stronger and more threatening. If for some bizarre reason, men and women decided to go to combat against each other, men would kill all the women, they would win that war.

Because of this phenomenon, when men approach women with the same approach a women can use for a man, the women will show more discomfort than the man will, from minute discomfort, to extreme discomfort. Where a man may look in disgust and say "go away", the women will call the police, or get a bunch of her male friends to get the guy off her. For the same approach women are always more uncomfortable than a male.

What this means as a whole, is that women have a "no" for first approaches. This may not be true of all women, this discomfort for being approached, but, since this is so extremely rare, this forces the man to play mind reading games about female consent, which can lead to very dangerous situations.
So the rule, is "No" for all first approaches from a male to a female.

This rule also applies to all children, as they are dimorphic as well, compared to adults. It's a "no" for first approaches.

But it's not only the first approach that matters. It is the escalation that matters as well. If a women turns to you and smiles and holds your hand for the first time in an intimate way. Leaning over to kiss her, is an escalation of first approach. This is also mind reading, "the vibe"… every stalker on earth or inappropriate person is feeling "the vibe". Vibe is almost universally abused, as a mind reading game, and is not an excuse for escalation.

The problem here is that any behavior that is ornamental or escalative from the male side, is already turning a "no" into a "I don't care about the no". If an escalation is used and it turns into something more, then the female is sending the signal to the entire species, that "no means yes"

This is where the first stage comes in:

Everyone who has violated the 5,5,3 rule, needs to split up, or never make sexual contact until the 5 stages of a sex dimorphic species are cycled through. Otherwise it's just a "no means yes" relationship.

The second stage is to create intentional communities of about 1000 to 3000 people to work on the other stages.

First approaches must be 100% from the female side. This means NO ornate male behavior.

Sex distribution ratios need to be equalized between the sexes. The largest aggravation on the male side is that women are only having sex without about 2% of the male population before they settle down with somebody. For men, it is non consensual that women even have sex with men, but it's vastly more non consensual to men that only 2% of men get almost all the sexual contact with women.

The next stage is that the sexes can start to approach at a 50% to 50% ratio, with males only using direct approaches and not ornamental approaches. Now this entire time, females can use ornamentation and homosexuals can as well.

The 5th and final stage is now that the species has been made aware of the damage of "no means yes" for all heterosexual bondings, males can finally start to use ornamental behavior again.

The problem with the subconscious being aware that all sexual encounters are rape "no means yes" is that men take it out on women, society, other men and the environment at large.

If everyone is trained to use better communication for better outcomes sexually as a global community of intentional communities, then we can expect nothing less than better outcomes in all areas of our lives here.

------------

The 5 heartbreaks of relationship

1.) If you've ever been hurt by not being in a situation that someone else is, when you get to that point and it hurts someone else, somewhere in the back of your mind is a self hatred for doing to others what hurt you.

2.) If someone is attracted to a person you are with, it may make you feel superior, however, the idea that the person you are with would be with them the way you're with the person your with, causes fear , defensiveness and anger. The anger is actually at yourself. The reason it's at yourself is because you share the attraction to one person in common with them, to be angry at them for being with the person you're with, is the same as being angry at yourself for being with the person you're with. This causes self hatred. This is avoided if people follow the step of evening out the distribution ratios between the sexes.

3.) Depending upon the person, millions if not billions of people could be equally or more compatible in an exciting and different way than the person you are with. One love does not outweigh millions if not billions of heartbreaks in terms of the loss

4.) I call this is commiseration heartbreak. When we love something or someone, we are compelled to share it without harm, so that we can commiserate with others in a bonding way about that love.
Hoarding a relationship, doesn't allow for this bonding to occur. And causes the 4th heartbreak of relationship.

5.) The fifth heartbreak is that you don't have relationship in the way you desire.

--------

The three objectifications:

Large Penis
Tall
Money

--------

The three abuses:

1.) proclivity to marry (slave/master/zero sum/victor mentality)
2.) sexual jealousy (if a woman has sex with another man, she will leave you if you're not angry at her or the man she slept with) (conditions men to be sexually jealous)
3.) approach escalation: Women have said no to all escalations - so any escalation that turned into relationship is a no means yes relationship.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Thu Nov 29, 2018 11:39 pm

The primary ornamental behavior men use is self contradiction.

I forgot to add that marriage is by definition, an ANTITRUST contract between people, and is the conspicuous consumption of relationship itself.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Mad Man P » Sat Dec 01, 2018 10:04 am

Ecmandu wrote:But it's not only the first approach that matters. It is the escalation that matters as well. If a women turns to you and smiles and holds your hand for the first time in an intimate way. Leaning over to kiss her, is an escalation of first approach. This is also mind reading, "the vibe"… every stalker on earth or inappropriate person is feeling "the vibe". Vibe is almost universally abused, as a mind reading game, and is not an excuse for escalation.

The problem here is that any behavior that is ornamental or escalative from the male side, is already turning a "no" into a "I don't care about the no". If an escalation is used and it turns into something more, then the female is sending the signal to the entire species, that "no means yes"


I have to disagree... underdeveloped social skills can make this interaction seem like it hinges on assumptions or "mind reading", but it's actually a fairly precise language.
We communicate with more than our words, and like any language, if you don't have a good grasp of it, it may seem confusing...
You can ask if you may kiss a woman and get an answer from her without ever speaking a word... we communicate this way a great deal, all the time.

But in our current day and age, I guess kids spend much less time being social in a physical space, they lack the same opportunities to learn this language...
Which may explain the perception that this form of communication is imprecise and prone to misunderstanding etc.

I'm not sure that it's merely a cultural artifact that males have to make the first move, as this is a custom reproduced by virtually all cultures...
I believe it has to do with how we establish hierarchies, the females of our species select for competence, that gives the other males something to aspire to and a reason to do so...

Which leads right back to the "no means yes" thing... this can be another opportunity for the man to demonstrate his social competence.

Women can say no before the man even approaches them... doing so anyway just to extract the verbal denial may likewise be considered a demonstration of your incompetence.

Like when men invent an excuse to talk women, it's rare that you get someone to flat out say "you're lying about why you're here" but you can easily expect the conversation the male started to be met coldly, borderline rude to further signal a "no"
and if the male persists despite what would amount to the woman screaming "NO" so as to finally ask verbally if there is any interest. Well then he may extract a verbal denial in a frustrated tone...

He may be confused by the frustration... all he did was ask, and all she had to do was answer.
But the fact is that he had asked and she had answered a hundred times over at increasing volume, before the verbal asking and answering ever took place...
"I'm just saying that if we want to have a fruitful discussion, we all need to know what the fuck we're talking about" - Carleas

There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
User avatar
Mad Man P
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2456
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 7:32 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Sat Dec 01, 2018 4:43 pm

There's nothing fairly precise about the escalation from sex dimorphism being a no means yes.

You're also deluding yourself, creating a special category for you, that you know what's best with non verbal cues, and that you are the exception.

everyone who's bad at this, most people, think the same way that you do.

For a women to assent to the exception, makes all men the exception.

Words don't cause this issue. Women need to use their words for sexuality every time.

Because women only have sex with 2% of the male population before settling down with someone, males are vastly undersexed compared to females ... this means that males will become more desperate. Combine that with ONLY non verbal cues, and you have a recipe for disaster. Which I don't think women want.

You also have to keep in mind, that while male flirting is unacceptable, males, when they do flirt, do actually want to have sex with that woman.

Women in the other hand, will commonly show all of the cues, and have absolutely no intention of having sex with the 10's of thousands of men they flirt with for protection and gifts other than sex.

So, again, your cues are a mind reading game with women.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby lordoflight » Sat Dec 01, 2018 6:47 pm

I don't know what the 553 rule is and I don't see what each number means of the rule.


Ecmandu wrote:I've referred to it here but never have I typed it out, it's just in my videos… I wanted to change that, and post a summary of it here.

The 5 Stages that a Sex dimorphic species must traverse to not contradict itself.

In a sex dimorphic species, one sex is larger and more threatening than the other gender.

If it's not the individual, it is the whole… a 5 foot man approaching a 7 foot women is still more threatening (his other friends), because the sum total of men are stronger and more threatening. If for some bizarre reason, men and women decided to go to combat against each other, men would kill all the women, they would win that war.

Yes more physically threatening. But women are manipulators and therefore more of an actual threat. Remember that women can manufacture lies and make a man an outcast if she so feels like. Women can also manipulate beta cucks (such as other men interested her) to attack a male she don't like. And also remember women has the entire support of the police and law enforcement on her side. Being an alpha male body builder isn't going to save you from the collective wrath of an angry mob of beta males and police.

Also, men don't really work together with other men very well when it comes to girls. So when they are approaching a woman they are usually on their own without any other men. Except in rare cases such as gangs or something. If a woman rejects a man, 99% of the time there isn't gonna be a group of men that pressure her into giving him a chance. The man is done, alone, with no support from the community.


Because of this phenomenon, when men approach women with the same approach a women can use for a man, the women will show more discomfort than the man will, from minute discomfort, to extreme discomfort. Where a man may look in disgust and say "go away", the women will call the police, or get a bunch of her male friends to get the guy off her. For the same approach women are always more uncomfortable than a male.


Yes you are correct. You know I don't agree with all your views but you know what Ecmandu, you are still smarter and more knowledgeable than most of the of the people nowadays out there who are utter retards.

What this means as a whole, is that women have a "no" for first approaches. This may not be true of all women, this discomfort for being approached, but, since this is so extremely rare, this forces the man to play mind reading games about female consent, which can lead to very dangerous situations.
So the rule, is "No" for all first approaches from a male to a female.


Yes this is correct. If u are born male you will be treated your whole life as disgusting as an ugly duckling and noone will care about you unless you are the lucky 10% of males. And if you are a female you will be constantly approached by men u do not love and pressured into relationships.

This rule also applies to all children, as they are dimorphic as well, compared to adults. It's a "no" for first approaches.


8 year olds dont lust so their relationships is more about dating other kids they have stuff in common with.
Teenagers lust and its a completely different world. When I was a teen females approached and flirted with me. It wasn't all cupcakes and rainbows and frequently rejected and bullied by females who called me mean names and horrible things and I frequently cried.

But as an adult its a different world, suddenly if ur male females want nothing to do with you whatsoever and the teenage days are gone.

But it's not only the first approach that matters. It is the escalation that matters as well. If a women turns to you and smiles and holds your hand for the first time in an intimate way. Leaning over to kiss her, is an escalation of first approach. This is also mind reading, "the vibe"… every stalker on earth or inappropriate person is feeling "the vibe". Vibe is almost universally abused, as a mind reading game, and is not an excuse for escalation.

Yes I know. Women are hypocrits that molest and approach but then if you molest and approach them they suddenly lose their minds and say you're innappropriate.

Its like those women who go around in seductive sexualized clothes which is a form of molestation because it is meant to cause sexual arousal. Yet are defended by feminists who are hypocrits who say its ok for women to molest but lose their minds when men do.


The underlying reason is because most men are physically ugly. While most women are easy on the eyes. And people don't care about ugly people, if youre ugly they dont even view you as a person and that is why feminists dont view males as people.

First approaches must be 100% from the female side. This means NO ornate male behavior.

It sounds good on paper but the only way it can happen is males become beautiful. My idea was to make males into chicks with dicks, however that idea has some problems. Estrogen reduces sex drive and causes impotence and/or a faggy/feminist mindset for many males, so estrogen doesn't seem like a viable approach. With our current level of tech it doesn't seem feasible. My other idea was to somehow just make the population 90% female. This would remove the power females have in the dating game, if the population was only 10% males would have more pride and hate other males less, women would also begin to crazy for males and value males.

Sex distribution ratios need to be equalized between the sexes. The largest aggravation on the male side is that women are only having sex without about 2% of the male population before they settle down with somebody. For men, it is non consensual that women even have sex with men, but it's vastly more non consensual to men that only 2% of men get almost all the sexual contact with women.

I think your numbers are not accurate.

Accurate numbers would be 40% of teenage males get approached by women.
2% of adult males get approached by women.
10% of adult males are virgins.
88% are not virgins but encounter difficulty in dating and sex.
50% have never had a satisfying relationship or satisfying sexual encounter with a female, yet are not gay.

The next stage is that the sexes can start to approach at a 50% to 50% ratio, with males only using direct approaches and not ornamental approaches. Now this entire time, females can use ornamentation and homosexuals can as well.

Whats the difference in those approaches.

The problem with the subconscious being aware that all sexual encounters are rape "no means yes" is that men take it out on women, society, other men and the environment at large.

America is materialistic and greedy and selfish because men become aware women dont love them, and all they want is money. And then there are the other males, who recognize women love bad boys, so they dont focus on money but being a bad boy/scoundrel, because the only time women date poor people is when they are bad boy scoundrels. Culture then degenerates into an Idiocracy of hypermasculine, macho degenerates who are obsessed with getting laid because dating conditions are absolutely horrible, especially with all that scam online dating with fake female profiles and or feminist dating sites where the females have all the attention and power.
If everyone is trained to use better communication for better outcomes sexually as a global community of intentional communities, then we can expect nothing less than better outcomes in all areas of our lives here.

Communication is a feminist delusion, feminist believe that all it takes for a better relationship is more "talking" yet I analyze what is the real cause, real causes I mentioned earlier in this post.



1.) If you've ever been hurt by not being in a situation that someone else is, when you get to that point and it hurts someone else, somewhere in the back of your mind is a self hatred for doing to others what hurt you.

2.) If someone is attracted to a person you are with, it may make you feel superior, however, the idea that the person you are with would be with them the way you're with the person your with, causes fear , defensiveness and anger. The anger is actually at yourself. The reason it's at yourself is because you share the attraction to one person in common with them, to be angry at them for being with the person you're with, is the same as being angry at yourself for being with the person you're with. This causes self hatred. This is avoided if people follow the step of evening out the distribution ratios between the sexes.

3.) Depending upon the person, millions if not billions of people could be equally or more compatible in an exciting and different way than the person you are with. One love does not outweigh millions if not billions of heartbreaks in terms of the loss

4.) I call this is commiseration heartbreak. When we love something or someone, we are compelled to share it without harm, so that we can commiserate with others in a bonding way about that love.
Hoarding a relationship, doesn't allow for this bonding to occur. And causes the 4th heartbreak of relationship.

5.) The fifth heartbreak is that you don't have relationship in the way you desire.


I agree. That is why I believe married men should offer me their women, so I can fuck them, in order to better this world and as a token of world peace.
User avatar
lordoflight
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Sat Dec 01, 2018 9:58 pm

5 heartbreaks of relationship
5 stages a sex dimorphic species must go through to not contradict sex
3 abuses

I also put in the three objectifications

You can circumvent the three objectifications by using one or more of the three abuses .

Direct approach "would you like to go out with me sometime?"

Ornate approach: watching sports

Even if I could "give" you all women, that would be approach escalation by proxy.

I like your use of molestation, it's a better word than rape, because the issue is cognitive age.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Mad Man P » Sun Dec 02, 2018 5:23 pm

Ecmandu wrote:There's nothing fairly precise about the escalation from sex dimorphism being a no means yes.

You're also deluding yourself, creating a special category for you, that you know what's best with non verbal cues, and that you are the exception.

everyone who's bad at this, most people, think the same way that you do.


You must believe that there is no such thing as body language, that facial expressions express nothing, and finally that tone of voice conveys nothing.

Because if you do not... it stands to reason that some people are simply more adept at reading body language, discerning facial expressions and understanding tone of voice.
That those are skills we can acquire as we socialize with other people... and like with any other skill we could develop a test for social skills and categorize people's ability as average, good or bad.
Most people do in fact think like I do, because it's common knowledge that such methods of communication exist...

That some people who are bad at it delude themselves into thinking they are good at it, is neither here nor there.

Because women only have sex with 2% of the male population before settling down with someone, males are vastly undersexed compared to females ... this means that males will become more desperate. Combine that with ONLY non verbal cues, and you have a recipe for disaster. Which I don't think women want.


I agree that in general women don't seem to want desperate, socially awkward men... I don't know that this is a disaster for women, as much as it is for the desperate, socially awkward men.
If you're suggesting a scenario would develop where the male no longer cares for consent... well, at that point the METHOD of communication seems irrelevant, no?
"I'm just saying that if we want to have a fruitful discussion, we all need to know what the fuck we're talking about" - Carleas

There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
User avatar
Mad Man P
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2456
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 7:32 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Dec 02, 2018 6:39 pm

Women use body language different than men do, as I already brought up. Most women flirt 24/7 with no intention of ever having sex with those men. You claim to have the secret knowledge of when those cues are just for you. You're a rapist trying to justify himself.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Mad Man P » Sun Dec 02, 2018 9:54 pm

Ecmandu wrote:Women use body language different than men do, as I already brought up. Most women flirt 24/7 with no intention of ever having sex with those men. You claim to have the secret knowledge of when those cues are just for you. You're a rapist trying to justify himself.


It's not secret knowledge... it's common knowledge

I don't know about you, but I grew up on a planet filled with boys and girls, men and women... where we were raised by men AND women.
That's where most of us learned how to socialize... this is not our first day interacting with members of the opposite sex so as to be dumbfounded by their strange and alien behavior.

Does that mean a women can't purposefully lead men on in order to get something out of them? Of course not.. men do it too
I said the language was precise I didn't claim people don't lie and manipulate.

And the only way I'm a rapist, is if you're an idiot.
"I'm just saying that if we want to have a fruitful discussion, we all need to know what the fuck we're talking about" - Carleas

There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
User avatar
Mad Man P
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2456
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 7:32 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Dec 02, 2018 10:28 pm

Mad Man P wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:Women use body language different than men do, as I already brought up. Most women flirt 24/7 with no intention of ever having sex with those men. You claim to have the secret knowledge of when those cues are just for you. You're a rapist trying to justify himself.


It's not secret knowledge... it's common knowledge

I don't know about you, but I grew up on a planet filled with boys and girls, men and women... where we were raised by men AND women.
That's where most of us learned how to socialize... this is not our first day interacting with members of the opposite sex so as to be dumbfounded by their strange and alien behavior.

Does that mean a women can't purposefully lead men on in order to get something out of them? Of course not.. men do it too
I said the language was precise I didn't claim people don't lie and manipulate.

And the only way I'm a rapist, is if you're an idiot.


It's a logical and cognitive age issue that you are a rapist. I've raped this way as well, approaching women with the intent of my behavior eliciting hopeful sexual contact.

Forcing women to have sex with you, with their consent.

When the cognitive age grows older, it is understood that approaching women in anyway is causing the destruction of the earths ecosystem. Which is a consent violation.

You can easily appeal to people as dumb as you, to agree that you're not a rapist. Most people don't want to experience the horror of the magnitude of the realization that every sexual encounter on earth thus far has been rape. Yours and mine (was) akin to taking advantage of invalids and the mentally handicapped. The problem is that you're still refusing to accept that you've yet to take on the responsibility of your actions to this regard. You haven't turned into a man yet, just a child in a mans body who knows somewhere that what he does is wrong.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Sun Dec 02, 2018 10:58 pm

Ecmandu wrote:
Mad Man P wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:Women use body language different than men do, as I already brought up. Most women flirt 24/7 with no intention of ever having sex with those men. You claim to have the secret knowledge of when those cues are just for you. You're a rapist trying to justify himself.


It's not secret knowledge... it's common knowledge

I don't know about you, but I grew up on a planet filled with boys and girls, men and women... where we were raised by men AND women.
That's where most of us learned how to socialize... this is not our first day interacting with members of the opposite sex so as to be dumbfounded by their strange and alien behavior.

Does that mean a women can't purposefully lead men on in order to get something out of them? Of course not.. men do it too
I said the language was precise I didn't claim people don't lie and manipulate.

And the only way I'm a rapist, is if you're an idiot.


It's a logical and cognitive age issue that you are a rapist. I've raped this way as well, approaching women with the intent of my behavior eliciting hopeful sexual contact.

Forcing women to have sex with you, with their consent.

When the cognitive age grows older, it is understood that approaching women in anyway is causing the destruction of the earths ecosystem. Which is a consent violation.

You can easily appeal to people as dumb as you, to agree that you're not a rapist. Most people don't want to experience the horror of the magnitude of the realization that every sexual encounter on earth thus far has been rape. Yours and mine (was) akin to taking advantage of invalids and the mentally handicapped. The problem is that you're still refusing to accept that you've yet to take on the responsibility of your actions to this regard. You haven't turned into a man yet, just a child in a mans body who knows somewhere that what he does is wrong.


Let me explain this further. It can take decades for a person to realize that their consent was manufactured against their will in ignorance ...

You're still the type of guy trying to get away with it.

You totally ignored my point that men flirt only when they want sex and women flirt 24/7.

You HAVE to play mind reading games, by definition, to assume the flirting is targeted just at you in a sincere way.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Mad Man P » Sun Dec 02, 2018 11:58 pm

Ecmandu wrote:You can easily appeal to people as dumb as you, to agree that you're not a rapist. Most people don't want to experience the horror of the magnitude of the realization that every sexual encounter on earth thus far has been rape. Yours and mine (was) akin to taking advantage of invalids and the mentally handicapped. The problem is that you're still refusing to accept that you've yet to take on the responsibility of your actions to this regard. You haven't turned into a man yet, just a child in a mans body who knows somewhere that what he does is wrong.


....

Let me explain this further.


No need for further clarification... I believe you've demonstrated your mental capacity sufficiently.
"I'm just saying that if we want to have a fruitful discussion, we all need to know what the fuck we're talking about" - Carleas

There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
User avatar
Mad Man P
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2456
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 7:32 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Mon Dec 03, 2018 3:40 am

You argue just like iambiguous...

"Hey look everyone, I didn't address his core argument, look what a fool I made of him!"
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Mon Dec 03, 2018 4:46 am

Ecmandu wrote:You argue just like iambiguous...

"Hey look everyone, I didn't address his core argument, look what a fool I made of him!"


I have to say also, one of the most common traits in people that's a character flaw, is their bull headed insistence on trying to defend their entire narrative structure ...

When I tell people that had the world been a better place in the past, that none of us would have been born today, they can't enter that place because it excludes their narrative.

You are a rapist, so was I, statutory rape, extremely intelligent women and who consented to me, who I ended up more intelligent than them.

Your narrative is still stuck on defending all of your decisions instead of none of them.

As long as you stay stuck there, you'll still be the thing you hate.

The worst thing on earth is to be the thing you hate.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Mad Man P » Mon Dec 03, 2018 4:36 pm

Dude... relax, you win

It may well be that I'm too stupid, but the fact remains... I simply cannot argue against incomprehensible gibberish.
"I'm just saying that if we want to have a fruitful discussion, we all need to know what the fuck we're talking about" - Carleas

There are no stupid questions, just stupid people.
User avatar
Mad Man P
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2456
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 7:32 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby lordoflight » Mon Dec 03, 2018 6:09 pm

Ecmandu wrote:
It's a logical and cognitive age issue that you are a rapist. I've raped this way as well, approaching women with the intent of my behavior eliciting hopeful sexual contact.

Forcing women to have sex with you, with their consent.

When the cognitive age grows older, it is understood that approaching women in anyway is causing the destruction of the earths ecosystem. Which is a consent violation.

You can easily appeal to people as dumb as you, to agree that you're not a rapist. Most people don't want to experience the horror of the magnitude of the realization that every sexual encounter on earth thus far has been rape. Yours and mine (was) akin to taking advantage of invalids and the mentally handicapped. The problem is that you're still refusing to accept that you've yet to take on the responsibility of your actions to this regard. You haven't turned into a man yet, just a child in a mans body who knows somewhere that what he does is wrong.


I agree with you partially but not fully. I believe it is sick and wrong for men to have to go through life being ugly, instead they should all be hot lesbians. However, with current estrogen technology it would turn half of them into either cunts n fags, or limp wristed pacifists with no backbones. So it's just a fantasy with no tech to do it.

You see it is more complicated you know. When someone is born pretty and given a silver spoon, they tend to turn into assholes. That is why men tend to be less narcissistic and have stronger personalities. Until women turn 50 and then start to reflect on their selfish behavior. Men have to try hard to be a good friend, and be a better person, whereas women can be cunty and an asshole and still get worshipped and praised, solely because females look better.

That is not to say that all men are good people. There is a certain way men can turn into grinches and Khans after too long of being ugly. Sort of ruthless and amoral like Pirates. Women seem to date this kind of man more. I don't know if its because if women are inherently attracted, or because he's ruthless and pushy and they give in. Or because they have a kind of "suffering quota" and that man has achieved it so they feel sorry for him.

Nature did put a sort of "limiter" on women and an inherent moral compass and compassion sense. Like how they like cute kittens and puppies. Unfortunately it doesn't really work that well, it seems like it usually only works on only cute things most of the time.


As far as rape, I said earlier that most women molest everyone, wearing sexy clothes on purpose to arouse. Feminists will call me a misogynists because they are hypocrite narcissists who wont admit guilt. They will blame males for not "controlling themselves" enough. Feminists are ignorant of nature and do not believe nature is real. They do not believe males evolved a healthy natural sex-drive and want to pretend it is the male's fault for being a natural male.

The hypocrisy is even deeper than that... Women dress slutty on purpose and males dont. Males dress non-sexual and drab. Women dress to arouse and molest. Yet claim that they are playing "fair" and the same rules. Even though they don't follow the rules. Because males do not dress in a sexual way like they do. Yet are delusional narcissists who claim they do no wrong, and delusionally say males are the ones who are over-sexed. When males are only obsessed with sex because only 2% of adult males get approached by women. Males are under-sexed.

Feminists ban all prostitutes then complain if a man molests them or is horny...they are insane delusional narcissists who hate nature and believe nature does not exist.

Now, here is where me and Ecmandu disagree. I do not think all sexual encounters with females is rape. It is rare but sometimes females are the one who approach. Also, rape means there is no love. Rape means the woman fears, hates, and is disgusted by the person she has sex with. Usually because he is ugly or has a uninteresting personality. So if a woman loves a man it is not rape, it is ravishing which is different than rape.

Mostly, it has to do with spatial properties. Men are better with spatial things and women better at language, for sexual reasons. Its obvious because men are deformed and unsightly looking. Women are more sleek with curves and symmetry. So in order to enjoy sex with a man, the female must have hazy mind spatially. But her verbal mind just fine. Homosexuals same deal. More hazy. Less clear. Yet somehow Oscar Wilde great writer. It is really simple to see. Therefore women of high intelligence will be attracted to good looking men. Low intelligence willing to fuck uglier men. Women are the highest beauty. Lesbians tend to be more tomboyish and masculine. A certain masculine force of high intelligence. Therefore sex-slaves a way of dumbing down the mind. The longer one is a whore the dumber one becomes. Society hates rape because subconsciously they know it will dumb her down, erase her masculine virtue. Society wants to have masculine women to replace men at their jobs.

The other thing is, having kids doesn't necessarily mean you are evil. Most people are degenerates who eat fat foods, breed 5 kids, and drive a polluting car, and support fake news and industrialist anti-nature ideas. But what if someone gave birth to the next Tesla. To make clean energy and save the planet. They would not be evil. Ghetto pple, people of low IQ, poor people, or people without high taste should be forced to have a 1 child policy. This will save the planet. Anyone who doesn't listen to classical music should be forced to have only 1 kid. However if a poor person becomes rich or middle class, and they appreciate classical music, they will be allowed more than one. This cannot be faked because their brain will be scanned to determine the amount of pleasure the music gives.
User avatar
lordoflight
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Mon Dec 03, 2018 10:25 pm

Trixie,

The argument I make about rape is that a man needs to explain the 5,5,3 rule to a woman and she needs to understand it, in order for it to not be rape.

Otherwise it is manufactured consent.

Assuming they get wiser, they will realize that their consent was manufactured and thus violated.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby MagsJ » Tue Dec 04, 2018 1:46 pm

Ecmandu wrote:When I tell people that had the world been a better place in the past, that none of us would have been born today, they can't enter that place because it excludes their narrative.

..had the world also been a worse place in the past, none of us would have been born today either, as history would have took a different path either way.

But we were born, and we are here.. and that is the beauty of the process of creation, to me..
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite

--MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist
 
Posts: 17648
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Wed Dec 05, 2018 3:19 am

MagsJ wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:When I tell people that had the world been a better place in the past, that none of us would have been born today, they can't enter that place because it excludes their narrative.

..had the world also been a worse place in the past, none of us would have been born today either, as history would have took a different path either way.

But we were born, and we are here.. and that is the beauty of the process of creation, to me..


Maybe for women it is. Since 98% of men only receive sexual intimacy from 1-5 women in a lifetime, they have a different perspective. Also considering it's destroying the planet, they have a different perspective. I'm sure it's wonderful for you!
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby lordoflight » Wed Dec 05, 2018 4:01 pm

Ecmandu wrote:Trixie,

The argument I make about rape is that a man needs to explain the 5,5,3 rule to a woman and she needs to understand it, in order for it to not be rape.

Otherwise it is manufactured consent.

Assuming they get wiser, they will realize that their consent was manufactured and thus violated.


Without approach escalation, women are just going to gravitate to 2% of males, either rich high IQ males, or dumbass hood males, and 98% of males will get nothing. If you are high IQ but lower class u will not get laid, they only like IQ if you are rich also. However if you are a low class dumbass you will get laid. Since there are more low class dumbasses than rich high IQs, idiocracy is inevitable in 500 years.
User avatar
lordoflight
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Wed Dec 05, 2018 11:09 pm

lordoflight wrote:
Ecmandu wrote:Trixie,

The argument I make about rape is that a man needs to explain the 5,5,3 rule to a woman and she needs to understand it, in order for it to not be rape.

Otherwise it is manufactured consent.

Assuming they get wiser, they will realize that their consent was manufactured and thus violated.


Without approach escalation, women are just going to gravitate to 2% of males, either rich high IQ males, or dumbass hood males, and 98% of males will get nothing. If you are high IQ but lower class u will not get laid, they only like IQ if you are rich also. However if you are a low class dumbass you will get laid. Since there are more low class dumbasses than rich high IQs, idiocracy is inevitable in 500 years.


This was not at all a reply to the post you quoted.

Approach escalation is even more powerful than money ... it is also raping the planet.

I'll just assume that your reply was an amalgam of all my posts.

Women have yet in human history, consented to sex.

You know how hard it is to watch women holding hands and laughing with their rapists for people who know this truth ... it's disgusting.

Every woman thus far who had sex on earth has been raped.

Every man who has thus far had sex with women is a rapist.

That's our stupid world history
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby MagsJ » Thu Dec 06, 2018 9:40 pm

Ecmandu wrote:
MagsJ wrote:..had the world also been a worse place in the past, none of us would have been born today either, as history would have took a different path either way.

But we were born, and we are here.. and that is the beauty of the process of creation, to me..

Maybe for women it is. Since 98% of men only receive sexual intimacy from 1-5 women in a lifetime, they have a different perspective. Also considering it's destroying the planet, they have a different perspective. I'm sure it's wonderful for you!

..it is what it is, and that does not concern anybody else but the subject, who is not responsible for the destructive reaction of males. Do they not know any better? Oh, I forget.. they're not using their mind at this point, are they.
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite

--MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist
 
Posts: 17648
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Fri Dec 07, 2018 4:16 am

MagsJ,

I think you're assuming that since only men who act out can be sexually intimate with women, that I have this huge sympathy and heart of compassion for those men. I don't.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby Ecmandu » Fri Dec 07, 2018 6:58 am

Ecmandu wrote:MagsJ,

I think you're assuming that since only men who act out can be sexually intimate with women, that I have this huge sympathy and heart of compassion for those men. I don't.


Also, a deeper truth about women is that they have something called the paradoxical effect or paradoxical aversion. There are no exceptions to this.

What this means is that if a man proves why he deserves sex more than others, women will blacklist him for sex. However, if a woman proves why she deserves sex more than others, men will be so moved by it, that they will feel passion to have sex with someone they ordinarily would eschew.

Women hate any attempt at explaining a merit system, because deep inside it triggers their denial system of picking the worst men for se .

It's also about subjectification!

Men hearing a reasonable argument from a woman that she deserves sex will subjectify that woman more that objectify her, they'll lower their other standards for women exponentially. Women hate to subjectify men. Loathe it. That's why I often state that women objectify men more than men objectify women.

Well, that's enough of that for now.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 7448
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am

Re: 5,5,3 rule

Postby MagsJ » Sat Dec 08, 2018 6:03 pm

Ecmandu wrote:MagsJ,

I think you're assuming that since only men who act out can be sexually intimate with women, that I have this huge sympathy and heart of compassion for those men. I don't.

I said:
..it is what it is, and that does not concern anybody else but the subject, who is not responsible for the destructive reaction of males. Do they not know any better? Oh, I forget.. they're not using their mind at this point, are they.

I meant:
..it is what it is, and that does not concern anybody else but the subject/the female, who is not responsible for the destructive reaction of males. Do they not know any better? Oh, I forget.. they're not using their mind at this point, are they.

I know that you have very little.. if any, sympathy and heart of compassion for men who act out, to attract, and be sexually intimate with, women. As you can see by my small edit, in pink, it is the female that shouldn't be held responsible for the destructive reaction of males, and females can also be destructive too.. when they are spurned/don't get their own way/another female gets the man or things they desire.

Oh the things females do too!
The possibility of anything we can imagine existing is endless and infinite

--MagsJ
User avatar
MagsJ
The Londonist
 
Posts: 17648
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 2:59 pm
Location: London, NC1

Next

Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron