08-25-2019, 12:31 PM
(This post was last modified: 08-25-2019, 12:45 PM by EvolvingPhoenix.)
@Relaxo
Just caught this part: "I'll add in here - often people who wanted to partner with me - I didn't want to partner with; even though they were attractive and good people.
The person I was looking for may not be incarnate. I don't know."
And then you go onto mention you previously used to have lovers in your life. My guess is this was when you were young.
Donovan Sharpe and other red-pilled commentators cover this one rather extensively.
It seems as you got older, the people that still wanted to partner with you were "attractive" but not sexually arousing, so you noped away from them, despite the fact that they were "attractive and good people". I'm going to guess they were nice guys, but not sexually appealing ones. In other words: betas. They were not the people you would have taken on as "lovers" when you were younger. And nobody you would have taken on as a "lover" seems to want to partner up and commit with you, now that you've hit what is termed in the red pill community as "The Wall" Another term that probably elicits a *lol* or *mentally vomits* from you but nonetheless objectively describes a real life phenomenon that you are no exception to. "Maybe the person I was looking for may not be incarnate" No, they're incarnate, but they're looking for younger women. This is what I mean when I talk about a "mating market" Yet for some reason, the thought makes you "mentally vomit" even though I am seeing CLEAR SIGNS of a mating market playing out in your statements.
As for marrying yourself, this is making necessity a virtue, but I'm beginning to think there's still something to it. Hey, if it makes you happy, go for it.
"you DON'T get to tell me who I am. SIMPLE." Calling you a liberal isn't defining WHO you are, but objectively, WHAT you are. You are left wing, as is clearly evidenced in your posts. And have you not been telling me what you think I am in your posts? I don't see why you get to define me, but nobody gets to define you.
Just caught this part: "I'll add in here - often people who wanted to partner with me - I didn't want to partner with; even though they were attractive and good people.
The person I was looking for may not be incarnate. I don't know."
And then you go onto mention you previously used to have lovers in your life. My guess is this was when you were young.
Donovan Sharpe and other red-pilled commentators cover this one rather extensively.
It seems as you got older, the people that still wanted to partner with you were "attractive" but not sexually arousing, so you noped away from them, despite the fact that they were "attractive and good people". I'm going to guess they were nice guys, but not sexually appealing ones. In other words: betas. They were not the people you would have taken on as "lovers" when you were younger. And nobody you would have taken on as a "lover" seems to want to partner up and commit with you, now that you've hit what is termed in the red pill community as "The Wall" Another term that probably elicits a *lol* or *mentally vomits* from you but nonetheless objectively describes a real life phenomenon that you are no exception to. "Maybe the person I was looking for may not be incarnate" No, they're incarnate, but they're looking for younger women. This is what I mean when I talk about a "mating market" Yet for some reason, the thought makes you "mentally vomit" even though I am seeing CLEAR SIGNS of a mating market playing out in your statements.
As for marrying yourself, this is making necessity a virtue, but I'm beginning to think there's still something to it. Hey, if it makes you happy, go for it.
"you DON'T get to tell me who I am. SIMPLE." Calling you a liberal isn't defining WHO you are, but objectively, WHAT you are. You are left wing, as is clearly evidenced in your posts. And have you not been telling me what you think I am in your posts? I don't see why you get to define me, but nobody gets to define you.