The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
    25 posters qualify.
You have 0 points. Copying this list does not send funds. Paste it on Disperse, then connect your wallet there. |
Not hitting on anyone till January, possible? [pensive]
Poast new message in this thread
Date: October 6th, 2005 6:58 PM Author: orchid library Is it possible to go 3.5 months without hitting on anyone? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988410) |
 |
Date: October 6th, 2005 6:59 PM Author: bonkers disgusting stain prole Inaction is harder than action? Hmmm. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988422) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:01 PM Author: orchid library Yeah. If your resolve is to do something, you have lots of time to do it. If it's NOT to do something, then one slip-up and you failed. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988424) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:01 PM Author: hairless emerald gas station Does being a creepy stalker constitute hitting on a girl? If not, I'd say you have a shot, Mike. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988426) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:02 PM Author: orchid library I've never stalked anyone, and only you (and toothbrush, perhaps) consider me "creepy". (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988434) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:04 PM Author: hairless emerald gas station Carleton's entire female student population disagrees. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988439) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:06 PM Author: orchid library 1. Not true, but perhaps the three women you know think that.
2. Do they even remember me? 1/4 of them never met me, and 1/2 more weren't there when I was at my most interesting, so to speak. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:10 PM Author: hairless emerald gas station Among the current class, no, most of them probably don't know you. But the girls who were there while you were would certainly agree, because you hit on a sizeable portion of them. Most of the rest would have at least heard of you, if not seen you in action. It's interesting that you've already more than doubled the number of people you're willing to concede might find you creepy. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988469) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:12 PM Author: Lime Meetinghouse How many fucked him? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988478) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:12 PM Author: orchid library Zero, because none of these women exist. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988482) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:14 PM Author: hairless emerald gas station Zero. But I will concede that I have it on good authority (her roommate) that one girl was at least somewhat-seriously considering leaving her boyfriend for him at one point. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988490) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:15 PM Author: orchid library Really? That's cool. If you want to tell me, you can send an email. (Do you know my address?) If not, that's fine also, but I am curious. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988498) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:17 PM Author: hairless emerald gas station I think you've actually maintained that you were in a relationship with her for something like 6 days. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988509) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:19 PM Author: orchid library Same girl? Do you actually know her?
I don't think she seriously had any interest in me as a person. She did break up with her boyfriend. Then she used me as a rebound tampon. I realized the relationship wasn't going anywhere (at 4 days in) but was new to the whole thing, considered breaking up but didn't. Two days later, she did so. Then she guilt-tripped me into being "friends" with her after the breakup, even though I told her it wasn't possible. Then she decided I was completely worthless to her and stopped talking to me at all. Her loss, and I'll (probably) have a great girlfriend soon anyway. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:31 PM Author: hairless emerald gas station I'm pretty sure it's the same girl. I mean, how many 6-day relationships did you think you had? I don't remember her roommate's whole story, and it's entirely possible that what she heard was just a lie after the fact. But her roommate definitely heard that she had not broken up with her boyfriend but that you thought she had. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988597) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:33 PM Author: orchid library Huh. It's great that she's a liar on top of being intensely manipulative. It would be great if she were also a grave robber or the such, for the stacked-scandal clusterfuck.
I lost a great opportunity because of her, too, which is even more infuriating. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:29 PM Author: mustard station So then, he was doing something right, correct? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988586) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:35 PM Author: hairless emerald gas station For one thing, this was not during Mike's insane, hat-wearing, bearded lunatic days. By all accounts, he was way more normal senior year, except for on the internet, where he still flame-baited relentlessly. And it depends if you think having one girl sorta consider dating is worth having a couple hundred think you're the creepiest guy they've ever met. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988620) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:37 PM Author: orchid library Not a couple hundred, but maybe ten or twenty from my long-running User File schtick, which was highly prestigious. I was Carleton's version of the great 174, and actually instrumental in breaking a whole forum.
Moreover, I had other dating opportunities I didn't pursue for usually very complicated reasons. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:45 PM Author: ruby cerebral tanning salon feces You ran a 174-type schtick? Explain. How would it work if you're all at the same school? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988701) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:07 PM Author: orchid library It was 174-like in terms of the ability to dominate an entire forum. More people than not actually believed in the whole thing. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988838) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:50 PM Author: hairless emerald gas station Your UF schtick had a number of problems. The most glaring is that it wasn't anonymous. Another is that it was clear that you meant a good deal of what you said, but turned the schtick way up as a kind of defense mechanism when everyone (literally, everyone who responded) attacked you (or at least, said something you perceived as an attack). And stemming from the lack of anonymity is the fact that some people actually met you through your UF, which definitely did not help you. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988734) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:05 PM Author: orchid library Anonymity is overrated. The fact that I had the courage to post in the clear made the schtick even that much better, at least from an art perspective.
I meant some of what I said, yes. Isn't that true of all schticks?
If I were to do college over again, I probably wouldn't have run such a schtick. However, you must admit that it was highly prestigious, moreso than anything most people have ever done. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:12 PM Author: hairless emerald gas station From an "art" perspective, sure. In the sense that watching someone destroy his social life on the internet is a work of art, I guess so.
The problem with your schtick is that it was so heavily personal and that I honestly don't think YOU were even sure when you were being serious or just flame-baiting. You lowered yourself to the level of the people you were baiting, which is highly unprestigious. If it was really schtick, then I guess you deserve credit for managing to get even people who considered themselves your friends to think you were an intolerably arrogant prick. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:15 PM Author: orchid library I ran the schtick after my social life was destroyed by things outside of my control. As is documented, I was followed around by a bunch of loser-fuckers, freshman year, who did everything they could to spread malicious lies about me. Those stuck, hence destroyed social life.
The schtick SEEMED heavily personal. If it seemed that I was angry, or hurt, or whatever during the thing, I was actually in a state of extreme detachment. Blue-blooded detachment = prestige. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:27 PM Author: hairless emerald gas station That was the whole problem: you WEREN'T detached from it; you got right down in the trenches with the people there and issued line-by-line responses to what they said, in which you made it very clear that you really had a lot emotionally invested in it. Worse, you actually *said* it was just schtick after the fact, which seems like a cardinal violation.
You did a lot to destroy your social life freshman year. In one sense, it's kind of unfair that it sort of ruined your chances for the rest of college, but on the other hand, you were pretty goddamn creepy. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:42 PM Author: orchid library 1. Of course I issued line-by-line responses. The point of the schtick was arguing with people. That was the entire idea behind it, was being so fucking argumentative as to suck up all the intention.
2. I blew cover on the schtick because I was graduating, and wanted to blow cover so I couldn't come back to the schtick after graduation. I started to realize that it was a mistake, a highly prestigious one, but still a mistake.
3. I wasn't the one who destroyed my social life freshman year. I was a normal freshman, with the moderate awkwardness that entails, but made the wrong enemies. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:14 PM Author: Cruel-hearted Resort I don't we if are all talking about the same concept based on your use of "prestigious." (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988878) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:18 PM Author: orchid library The schtick dominated an entire forum with 1000+ members and ~100 regs. I'd say that counts. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988892) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:30 PM Author: hairless emerald gas station It was kind of like setting yourself on fire in the middle of a crowded room. You get a lot of attention for it, but it's ultimately self-destructive and you get the worst of it. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988980) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:38 PM Author: orchid library At that point, I didn't care. When your whole social life is ruined, one year into college, by something outside yourself, you don't give a fuck, and you'd rather go down in flames. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989052) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:40 PM Author: Claret rambunctious casino legend holy shit LACs are fucking crazy (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989065) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:44 PM Author: orchid library The social scene isn't the best (too damn small) but the academics are good. It's a mixed bag. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989107) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:12 PM Author: orchid library What the fuck are you talking about? I hit on a few women during college, but most single guys do. Moreover, my behavior was better than that of most college men. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988481) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:16 PM Author: hairless emerald gas station True or false: masturbation jokes are really funny, and should be told repeatedly no matter how bad the reception is. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988502) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:16 PM Author: orchid library Unresolvable. Masturbation jokes can be funny or not; most are not. I don't see what this philosophical exercise has to do with anything. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988506) |
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:24 PM Author: ruby cerebral tanning salon feces Why the hell would you want to do that? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988555) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:28 PM Author: hairless emerald gas station Maybe if you're awkward as hell at it and doing so creeps out everyone in the vacinity. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988581) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:30 PM Author: orchid library I am pretty awkward at it, or more appropriately, bad in general. The Game doesn't move at a speed appropriate to a 150+ IQ. I don't creep people out by it, though. Maybe I did freshman year, but that's ancient history. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988594) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 7:31 PM Author: orchid library I want to concentrate on other things during fall semester. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988599) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:06 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine fag (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988828) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:09 PM Author: orchid library I'm tired of caring, though. I've resolved myself to the fact that I have no control over anything with regard to my love life (when I meet "the right person", where, and on what terms) because the harder I try, the worse it turns out. It's better to just accept determinism. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988850) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:11 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine You have complete control. Or, if you don't want complete control you have to admit you're ugly. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988858) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:12 PM Author: orchid library I don't follow the logic. What does "complete control" have to do with a person being ugly or not? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988865) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:13 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine If you're ugly then it's not your fault no women like you. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988872) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:16 PM Author: orchid library Ok. I see. I don't think it's a problem of women not liking me, so much as bad timing. Anyway, I didn't have a chance in college [complicated story of L-F's ruining my social life here] and I've only been in Madison, on a fair game, for a couple months. It's too early to say anything conclusive. I haven't gotten a relationship to work, but I haven't been meeting enough people. (That, I guess, is my fault.) (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988885) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:17 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine So quitting entirely until January makes you think you'll improve? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988887) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:18 PM Author: orchid library Maybe. Also, when you're hitting on women, you don't notice the women who notice you, if that makes sense. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988896) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:20 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine Yes, but hot chicks are too shy to take the initiative to open you even if she likes you. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988906) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:21 PM Author: orchid library Hot chicks are shy?
I think it's more likely that they don't hit on men because they never need to. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:22 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine It's kind of weird how it works. Hot chicks are more insecure than ugly chicks. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988925) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:40 PM Author: orchid library I've noticed this. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989063) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:41 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine It takes balls to walk out in public with FUPA and rolls. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989079) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:46 PM Author: orchid library True. This is why it's hotter when above-average "8" women wear bikinis than "perfect 10" women. However, it's NOT hot when obese women do. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989118) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:08 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine Quitting a game you've been losing makes you a loser-fucker. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988841) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:10 PM Author: orchid library I'm not quitting. I'm just considering taking a break, if possible. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988855) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:13 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine That's a lame excuse. It takes 0 time and 0 effort to hit on chicks. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988867) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:19 PM Author: Razzle masturbator Tell me who how you usually "hit" on chicks. Please.
be detailed for I am willing to learn on account of my unsuccessful attempts at getting a girlfriend.
My biggest mistake is that I usually end up making her think I'm a weirdo :-( |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:20 PM Author: orchid library You're probably too uptight or forceful, or try too hard. I had the same problem in the past. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988905) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:22 PM Author: Razzle masturbator What do you do now ? What's your method ? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3988921) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:36 PM Author: deranged step-uncle's house There's no "method" other than regular social skills. You talk to them, they talk to you. STFU. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989027) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:37 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine you have to be dominant and clever, traits women lack and envy (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989034) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:38 PM Author: Razzle masturbator Edit: (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989051) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:39 PM Author: orchid library Haha. That's awesome. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989061) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:40 PM Author: Razzle masturbator Come on, tell me what you've learnt. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989069) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:40 PM Author: Razzle masturbator How do you get around those inevitable awkward moments in the conversation.
Like when she looks away with a slight smile on her face, or when you're struggling for words ? |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:41 PM Author: deranged step-uncle's house Don't ask me. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989078) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:42 PM Author: Razzle masturbator Why not ? You're the one who told me to just talk, and I'm telling you situations that occur while talking. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989088) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:42 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine Don't follow her movements, you don't move your face for anyone. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989089) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:44 PM Author: orchid library I agree. If she looks away for too long, to the point of being rude, then you need to ignore her for a little while, or draw back. Pretend in your mind that she has a big nose hair protruding from her left nostril. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989101) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:45 PM Author: Razzle masturbator And then she will become my girlfriend ? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989116) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:46 PM Author: orchid library Who knows? You can never predict these things. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989119) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:46 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine A girl is not your girlfriend until you fuck her. Follow this and you will never be a chump. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989121) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:48 PM Author: orchid library It doesn't have to be sex, but the maximum of what her religious beliefs allow. You can't trust a woman until she proves she's attracted to you, and that requires that she... well, you can figure this part out. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989137) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:50 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine women with religious beliefs are TTT (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989158) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:54 PM Author: orchid library I prefer women with religious beliefs, but an open and liberal mind. While it's a rare combination, it does exist. I'm attracted when a woman has some semblance of spiritual direction, which is rare at this age. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989194) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 10:56 PM Author: honey-headed shrine preventive strike It requires? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3997544) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:43 PM Author: orchid library Okay, so first of all, if she ever makes a gesture that indicates disinterest, you have to punish this behavior either by ignoring her, becoming callous, or being a jerk, until she's smiling at you again. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989091) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:47 PM Author: Razzle masturbator How do I tease properly ? Name-calling or insulting her intelligence obviously wasn't a good method. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989130) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:48 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine make fun of the fact that she thinks she's a princess, spoiled, huge ego etc. it puts up the frame that she PWNS everyone. everyone but YOU. you're onto her shit. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989139) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:51 PM Author: Razzle masturbator LOL, why am I taking advice from a fellow single virgin ? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989164) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:52 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine because i'm always right (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989173) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:54 PM Author: orchid library He's actually giving you good advice. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989200) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:50 PM Author: orchid library Insults to intelligence have to be subtle enough that she won't get them. ;)
The idea isn't "she was a bitch to me, how can I make her want me?" It's "she was a bitch, how can I end this behavior?" PWN her for it, and if she likes you, she'll stay (and improve her behavior). If she doesn't, then she'll leave and that's just as well. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:53 PM Author: Fragrant sandwich stead Has this approach actually been successful for you in the past? From the evidence, it seems like it's met far more often with failure...and that it's not "just as well" since it seems to have given you a rather negative reputation among your peers in the past. If you learned to take rejection a little more gracefully (or at least with a bit of humor as :D suggests), your social life with people of both genders would probably improve. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989193) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:57 PM Author: orchid library First of all, taking rejection "gracefully" is post-defeat strategy. Winning vs. losing is more important than retreating in style. The object is to reduce the number of defeats and increase that of successes, not to get knocked down "gracefully". This isn't like kata (in judo) where the person getting thrown gets points for graceful style.
Also, my lack of romantic success has largely to do with the fact that, during my first year of college, a group of loser-fuckers destroyed by social life there. I'm only at fault for years 0-18, and perhaps the past couple months of singlehood (but that's not unusual in a new city). |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:58 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine why did a group of people fuck you over? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989237) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 8:59 PM Author: orchid library It's a long, complicated story. Basically, I flirted with a girl early fall term, and she became interested in me. I realized she wasn't my type and rejected her. Her friends decided to fuck me over by spreading crazy rumors about me. This went on for about 2 years. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989244) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:01 PM Author: out-of-control dead dopamine Reason #2342342 LACs = TTT (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989254) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:01 PM Author: Fragrant sandwich stead I'm suggesting that your obsession with PWNing people interferes with your win/loss ratio. Hitting on someone often isn't a single event, especially if you hit on people you know. If you behave like a retaliative dork, it makes it that much harder for you to impress the next woman you hit on. :D doesn't have enough courage to try out his techniques, but his are much better - joking is vastly better than trying to show off how smart you are to women who almost certainly don't care.
Has it occurred to you that people might have conspired to destroy your reputation because you were kind of, well, mean? |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:06 PM Author: orchid library I only PWN the obvious losses, and I generally don't hit on people I know. I haven't hit on anyone in several weeks.
I wasn't mean to the girl I rejected. I actually thought she was really cool, but just wasn't interested in dating her. It was her friends who didn't seem to understand. (As for the original flirting, at the time I had thought I was interested, and moreover I was just a bit of an idiot.) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:10 PM Author: Fragrant sandwich stead As I've tried to explain before, PWNing the losses affects more than just you and the woman you're trying to hurt. Others in your school, community, workplace, or group of friends observe your behavior. If you're perceived as being a tool, it'll probably hamper your dating prospects within those communities. As I've mentioned to you before, it also makes it difficult to network.
Just out of curiosity, about how many women would you say you PWNed in college? |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:14 PM Author: orchid library To answer your question: As many as asked.
It's better to PWN than to be PWNed. If you PWN people, then observers will think you might have a temper or a tendency to pwnage indiscriminately, but if you get PWNed, then people lose respect for you. If a woman sees or knows of you getting rejected by someone else, she'll lose all respect for you anyway, so you might as well PWN rather than be PWNed. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:22 PM Author: Fragrant sandwich stead Not really. I'm not actually sure why you think responding to a woman's indication that she doesn't find you sexually appealing with what amounts to "Oh, YEAH, well I'm SMARTER than you are!" would maintain or increase social respect among your peers. Besides being entirely outside the scope of romantic interactions, it comes off as defensive and childish and suggests that you were deeply hurt by the rejection. Being known for those traits tends to harm a person's reputation as much as being known for being wimpy (though that's not what I'm actually advocating...it's a lot better to laugh off the rejection and make it look like you don't care).
Have you considered the possibility that it might be this huge number of nasty reactions to women that led to (or at least contributed to) your negative reputation, not some incident with a woman you rejected? If you've behaved like this on more than one or two occasions, I could easily understand why people would shun you. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:26 PM Author: orchid library 1. You fight with what you've got. She had the advantage of being female. (The dating game is to the woman's advantage, as you surely know.) I have my brain. She thrusts with her foil, I parry with mine.
2. Getting rejected by anyone, no matter what, destroys one's reputation with anyone involved or peripheral to the matter. It doesn't really matter how one reacts. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:37 PM Author: Fragrant sandwich stead 1. It doesn't work like that. If she doesn't even like you enough to talk to you, she's not going to care that you're smarter than she is. By rejecting you, she's already made it clear that she doesn't care about your opinion of her. You have to fight indifference with indifference - nothing else works very well.
2. Getting rejected makes you look like a dork, but there are differences in degree. It certainly doesn't have to "destroy" anything - most single men get rejected constantly. Most of them manage to have halfway decent reputations. If you laugh it off and seem like you don't care because you're successful with tons of other women, it only hurts a little. If you make a big fucking deal out of it and try to embarass the girl, you just convince everyone that the girl was right in telling you to get lost. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:42 PM Author: orchid library This is appropriate to a medium- or large-city setting, which thankfully describes the one I am in, and what you're saying is correct for that setting. In a city this full of opportunity, I honestly don't care if a woman rejects me, and hence the need to pwn is pretty much nonexistent.
In a small LAC, if a girl rejects you, the entire school will know anyway, so you're fucked. You get about 7 romantic pursuits in your four years before you get a reputation you'll never escape. So, when you go down with 1 out of those 7, you're mighty pissed. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:43 PM Author: deranged step-uncle's house "In a small LAC, if a girl rejects you, the entire school will know anyway, so you're fucked."
Wrong. LACs are pretty fragmented. There are many, many social circles I'm not even part of. And you are not fucked. People get rejected all the fucking damn time and you don't see their ruined reputations being dragged around campus. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:45 PM Author: orchid library Well, it's not so much that rejection leads to a "ruined reputation"; it has more to do with the fact that a woman is only attracted to a man if she thinks other women are, and rejection kills your alpha status. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989511) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:48 PM Author: deranged step-uncle's house Stop thinking of rejections as catastrophic. Even alpha males get dinged sometimes. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989534) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:46 PM Author: Fragrant sandwich stead If this model is only appropriate for small LACs, why are you recommending it to others? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989521) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:48 PM Author: orchid library I guess I didn't think it through that far. It was appropriate to a small LAC, which is where pretty much my entire romantic "life" happened. Then I realized that it wouldn't be applicable to real life, where rejection's not a big deal and won't kill your chance at alpha status forever. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989537) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:41 PM Author: deranged step-uncle's house pensive: You're a smart guy with an untested (or possibly failed) model. Rowan is a smart gal with a model proven by experience. She wins, you lose. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989477) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:43 PM Author: orchid library I think we may both be right; our difference of opinion seems to be based on different experiences. Mine is more appropriate to Carleton, where the bulk of my romantic "life" happened, while hers is more appropriate to the world at large, where there are plenty of women and rejection really doesn't matter as much. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989494) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 10:01 PM Author: Wild property She went to Hamline, I think, which isn't much bigger that Carelton and isn't far from it, either. She's 100% right, in any case. You need to swallow your pride and suppress these crap theories you have about how women operate and start listening to sound advice. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989637) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 11:17 PM Author: orchid library Maybe it doesn't have the defective dating scene Carleton has. Seriously, at Carleton if you make more than 7 romantic pursuits there in your four years, your reputation is fucked. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990274) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 11:47 PM Author: Cerise cocky university ape i must have made over 30 at college-- and those are the ones that i remember when i was sober. in return, i was hit on five times, and two of those times were by men. the nice thing about acquiring a clownish reputation is that you can travel all the way around the mobius strip of popularity and land neatly where you started, intact.
the immense practice that i have gained through dating, coupled with my natural awkward tendencies, have resulted a synthetic personality that can only be described as ludicrously suave yet absurdly ungainly at the same time, much like a bazooka mounted on a tricycle. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:07 AM Author: orchid library You went to a larger school, so you could get rejected and it wouldn't get around.
What I hated was the fact that, because I had been smeared so bad as a freshman and it was such a small school, every woman was on the defensive for no good reason. So eventually I just got sick of pretty much all of them. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:12 AM Author: Cerise cocky university ape well, another advantage was that everyone was pretty much an oddball, so even outrageous behavior was deemed to be completely acceptable.
i imagine that LACs are much like law school in their gossip, and from what i've seen here, i can see how it could be quite miserable. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:14 AM Author: orchid library It's miserable for some. It's certainly not the norm, over all 2000 students, to get dogged by gossip, but it does happen. About 20 males per year get dinged by it, the other 230 (out of 250) just live in constant fear. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990555) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 9:50 PM Author: Erotic scarlet kitchen This wouldn't be hard at all. Just hang around me for three months. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989561) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 10:05 PM Author: Wild property Realizing when women think you are hitting on them might help. Of course, that would probably leave you in complete silence since you have absolutely no idea how to act around women whether you intend to pick them up or not, but I think the ladies of Madison would appreciate it. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3989657) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 11:20 PM Author: orchid library "Of course, that would probably leave you in complete silence since you have absolutely no idea how to act around women".
The successful way to act around women is to belittle or even try to defeat them. I refuse to treat a woman like crap just to attact her. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 11:34 PM Author: deranged step-uncle's house "The successful way to act around women is to belittle or even try to defeat them."
Wrong, wrong, wrong. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:10 AM Author: orchid library It's successful in the sense of being what causes them to be attracted. I'm not saying that it works for long-term relationships because I don't believe it does. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990520) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 5:51 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage but as you've described, you belittle and "try to defeat" (WTF??) women all the time... and frankly, you don't seem very successful at all. you honestly think you've "attracted" some women by doing this?
i think you become less attractive every time you do it, and if you keep doing it, your reputation will be fucked in madison just like it was in carleton--and for precisely the same reason: your own boorishness. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:05 AM Author: orchid library Yeah, I'm going to get a "fucked" reputation in a metro area of 500,000. Right.
It's better to defeat than to be defeated. Is there not agreement on this? |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:16 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage "It's better to defeat than to be defeated. Is there not agreement on this?"
dating just doesn't work like that. look at it like this: you're willing to believe that word of your getting rejected could get around to a metro area of 500,000, and thus feel the need to pre-emptively "pwn" women who seem to show no interest in you. however, it's pretty much clear that news of being rejected is MUCH MUCH MUCH less likely to get around than news of being rejected AND throwing an arrogant "pwning" hissy-fit afterwards. or even just the hissy-fit. I'm way more likely to tell a buddy "hey, this guy went berserk on some poor girl today in the coffee shop" than I am "hey, this guy was kind of ignored by some girl today in the coffee shop." the former is a rare and noteworthy event, since most people aren't psycho. the latter happens every minute of every day.
also, you've already got this rep in your own department at Madison. that's only going to branch out into the range of "most of the girls you encounter very often" if you don't CHANGE... YOURSELF... NOW. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:28 AM Author: orchid library "you're willing to believe that word of your getting rejected could get around to a metro area of 500,000".
It's unlikely.
"thus feel the need to pre-emptively 'pwn' women who seem to show no interest in you."
Well, it made sense at Carleton. You're right that, in a big city, it's better to just take rejection in stride because it won't follow you for 4 years.
"this guy went berserk on some poor girl today in the coffee shop"
Indicating your intelligence and well-bred diction != going berserk. The latter is psychotic, not prestigious.
"[Y]ou've already got this rep in your own department at Madison".
Wrong. I made one off-handed comment in March that got a lot of attention, and even apologized to the one person I offended by it (who graduated and is now in another city). This isn't going to still be interesting to anyone 7 months after, especially since most people in the department weren't even there. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:37 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage rejection wouldn't have followed you at Carleton either. acting like an arrogant asshole (indicating your intelligence and well-bred diction!?! WTF?) certainly DID. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992320) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:39 AM Author: orchid library I wasn't that arrogant. Moreover, by late sophomore year, I had pretty much stopped making romantic pursuits at all because I realized it wasn't worth it. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992326) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:40 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage but you've said that even now, in madison, you're "pwning women with your intelligence."
THAT behavior is precisely what you should've left behind in Carleton. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:43 AM Author: orchid library That was in one example as recited by Media Kid, which I acknowledged to be partially true, though it was an exaggeration.
I'm still adjusting to the new lifestyle, too much to be chasing women. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:47 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage just make sure you've left that, your hostility towards women's dating habits (it's OK to be frustrated and confused, but unacceptable to lash out and blame), and the general propensity to blame all of your social problems either on others' inadequacy to recognize their greatness or others' irrational hostility.
then you'll be fine. seriously. :-) step 1, though, is recognizing that you have NOT been fine in the past predominantly because of YOUR actions. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:50 AM Author: orchid library Um, I had loser-fuckers following me around for 2+ years. I pretty much spun out of control for a while after that, but pretty much anyone who went through what I did would have gone through the same shit.
Most women's dating habits are two standard deviations of intelligence below them. Is it right not to look upon this with disgust? |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:51 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage yup. nothing's changed.
you're basically hopeless on this and your years in madison are going to bear a remarkable similarity to your years at carleton. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:57 AM Author: orchid library That's doubtful. In a city, it's not normal for a person to get plagued by deleterious gossip. Moreover, I think I'd do something about it if people were inappropriately following me around for 2 years. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992453) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 3:19 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage that's just it--"deleterious gossip" and "inappropriate following" weren't your problem at carleton and they won't be your problem in wisconsin.
YOU were your problem in carleton and YOU will be your problem in wisconsin. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 3:26 PM Author: orchid library You're factually incorrect. I don't even know why I'm still arguing with you. You don't even know the story, yet you get on a high horse about it. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3993920) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 9:56 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage how come essentially EVERYONE ELSE at carleton would say I'm factually right-on? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4003696) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:00 PM Author: orchid library Name ONE person who would agree with what you've said about me. If you can't, then you've refuted yourself by omission. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4003732) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:01 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage my friend sarah, whose roommate was one of the unlucky girls you hit on.
although essentially, you could pick a random carl who was there when you were, say the name "mike church" and get a knowing look and a story of how unbelievably offensive you were to them (or to a friend) at one point or another. especially if the person is female. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:08 PM Author: orchid library Sarah who? Your schtick falls even further on the credibility ladder when you choose the MOST COMMON FEMALE NAME on the campus. "My friend Sarah." Give a last name or you have no credibility.
Where the fuck would I get time to be "unbelievably offensive" to thousands of people? You still haven't supported your claims with one instance of me being offensive. Name ONE. (I want to see how creative you are in making shit up.)
Very few people, if any, had credible stories about me doing something even slightly off, much less "unbelievably offensive". |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:16 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage right. you stalk and slander the ONE girl on campus who even CONSIDERED dating you for the rest of your time there... and you think I'm going to give you the full name of a friend who said negative things about you? what will you do to her if you had such a violent response to a girl who actually (briefly) considered giving you a chance? mmm. now, if you think about it for a second, and consider that i consider my relationship with her valuable and my relationship to you essentially worthless, i think you'll understand why i'm not going to sell out a friend to a mike church stalking vendetta. :-)
and no, i'll admit you were not "unbelievably offensive" to everyone on campus personally. but you were at least moderately offensive to most people who interacted with you, (enough for the stories to get around), and since people do not exist in isolation, that's enough.
most of the "offensive" stories about you revolve around your inability to sense when a girl would rather you just stopped talking to her and left her alone. the incident in the coffeeshop was one of these; the thing with sarah's roommate (though I didn't personally witness that one), from what I hear, was one of these. instead, you keep... well, for lack of a better word, bragging. talking about your card game is NOT a good pickup line, mike. neither is making really "clever" jokes, and neither is trying to insult a girl or her friends for not showing immediate interest in you. girls aren't dumb--they might not get your stupid "pwn" (not that they care), but they certainly can tell that you're treating them with contempt. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:28 PM Author: orchid library "you stalk and slander the ONE girl on campus who even CONSIDERED dating you for the rest of your time there..."
This is completely untrue. I did say some nasty things to her after she fucking BETRAYED me because of some stupid fucking pushover guy in Texas. (The reason for the breakup was that she was in a dying relationship for far too long, and that relationship made it impossible for us to work out, and when she said some things that were insulting in the aftermath, I told her to fuck off.)
"and you think I'm going to give you the full name of a friend who said negative things about you?"
1. No, because you made her up.
2. You're clearly annoying me for a specific reason (your own amusement, maybe?) and if you lose credibility it defeats your purpose. So if this girl existed, you would name her.
3. I'm in ANOTHER STATE. Why the hell am I in any way going to interact with someone from ancient history, especially based on the rantings of an anonymous Internet poster with no credibility?
"i consider my relationship with her valuable and my relationship to you essentially worthless"
Um, you don't HAVE any relationship to me, and white trash such as yourself never will. I'm almost certain I know who you are at this point.
"you were at least moderately offensive to most people who interacted with you"
Unsupported claim, made up.
"[blah blah blah] incident in the coffeeshop [blah blah]"
I'm glad to see this made-up story expanding with more detail. You're not very creative, but it's fun to watch you try to come up with shit. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 10:17 PM Author: Cerise cocky university ape women are a phenomenal waste of time. sometimes i wonder what i could have accomplished in my life so far if i didn't so much time lusting after their tight bodies silken hair pouty lips carnal allure galore.
i'd probably use my liberated spare time to do something productive, like find a girlfriend. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 11:19 PM Author: orchid library I agree wholeheartedly with your first sentence.
I actually liked women a lot, more than guys, in high school. I started to change my opinions when I realized that most of them become absolutely disgusting, worthless people in the context of their romantic activity. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 5:54 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage this attitude is what keeps you from getting one. refuse to change at your peril, mike. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3991689) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:06 AM Author: orchid library No. I'm just aware of the facts as they are. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992160) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:17 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage fine. then it's your cynicism about women that will prevent you from ever getting one.
whether it's objectively true or not, what member of a class of people would possibly want to spend time with someone who detests that class so much? I don't think black chicks date KKK-ers very often, even if the KKK-er in question thinks "Oh, this black chick is really nice, not like most other black people, who are [your words] absolutely disgusting, worthless people." |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:23 AM Author: orchid library "[M]ost of them [women] become absolutely disgusting, worthless people in the context of their romantic activity."
I'm not saying that I detest women. I can't tolerate how much of them act in one context, but as people I don't dislike them at all. In fact, I like a lot of them. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:26 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage yeah? could've fooled me.
you seem to regard them approximately as a hunter regards a deer, except with more contempt for the fact that deer don't really want to get shot. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:33 AM Author: orchid library No, but I realize that this is the type of thinking a man needs if he is going to attract women. You can't reason a woman into being attracted to you, and you can't get it by being nice to them. Most women's attractions are not rational, and in fact highly self-destructive. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992312) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:38 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage "Most women's attractions are not rational, and in fact highly self-destructive."
assuming you believe in evolution, this seems pretty trivially untrue.
women like people they feel comfortable around. you make women feel uncomfortable. it's that simple. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:42 AM Author: orchid library "assuming you believe in evolution, this seems pretty trivially untrue."
Human behavior in modern society and evolution are wholly disjoint matters.
"[Y]ou make women feel uncomfortable."
By which you mean that some of them yield-protect against my superior pedigree. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:50 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage yield-protect? yield-protect??? for someone who likes to "cleverly" insult the women he talks to if they don't seem interested (basically as a some sort of a perverted face-saving measure--I say "perverted" because actually you LOSE quite a bit more face doing that than just letting it go), that's an awfully odd accusation to make.
you don't honestly believe that, do you?
but no, you make them feel uncomfortable because they don't want to interact with you romantically (or perhaps at all) and yet you still come on hot and heavy. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:56 AM Author: orchid library "you don't honestly believe that, do you?"
Yes, I do. You've probably noticed by now that women favor lower-class personality traits. They like money, but their preferences in terms of male appearance and personality are distinctively lower-class. Seeing as I'm a grad student (thus, no money) with excellent blue-green pedigree, I guess I'm in the worst of both worlds.
"yet you still come on hot and heavy."
This, if you consider covertly elitist schtick mixed with irony to be "hot and heavy". |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 12:46 AM Author: honey-headed shrine preventive strike What is the context of their romantic activity? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3998495) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 2:53 PM Author: orchid library What I mean is that, in terms of how they conduct themselves not with regard to relationships, e.g. as friends and acquaintances, women behave in an acceptable manner. It's not like they go out of their way to do horrible, malicious things to random strangers. When we get to romantic behavior, where the stakes get higher, a lot of women don't have the moral mettle to avoid succumbing to evil. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4000576) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 11:42 PM Author: Puce Electric Dingle Berry Ceo Why are the guys on this site so obsessed with picking up girls and analyzing how to so much?
|
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 11:47 PM Author: Cerise cocky university ape girls are hawt. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990414) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 11:54 PM Author: Puce Electric Dingle Berry Ceo K, but you don't need to obsess over it. I do not waste my time obsessing over guys. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990440) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 11:54 PM Author: Cerise cocky university ape girls are hawt.
guys are not hawt. |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 11:55 PM Author: Puce Electric Dingle Berry Ceo You are mistaken. My pseudo male companion is HAWT but I'm definitely not obsessed with him. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990446) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 11:57 PM Author: Cerise cocky university ape by 'pseudo-male,' do you actually mean 'female'? because if so, we are in complete agreement. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990454) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 11:58 PM Author: Puce Electric Dingle Berry Ceo LOL, no. I am referring to a pseudo companion who is a male. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990456) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:09 AM Author: orchid library You are officially a TTT. The spelling "HAWT" is as unprestigious as licking sweat out of the ass crack of a Cooley dropout. So let me find one for you... (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990512) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:10 AM Author: Puce Electric Dingle Berry Ceo The other guy spelled it "hawt" too. I am very prestigious, bitch! (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990522) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:13 AM Author: orchid library He was clearly being ironic. Or, perhaps I should say, irawnic. (See? It looks stoopid.) (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990541) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:13 AM Author: Cerise cocky university ape prawned! (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990547) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:15 AM Author: orchid library Shrimp3d! (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990561) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:16 AM Author: Cerise cocky university ape 180 (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990570) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:14 AM Author: Cerise cocky university ape i learned all my internet lingo by conversing with asian women. the consequences have been problematic, to say the least. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990557) |
|
Date: October 6th, 2005 11:52 PM Author: Wonderful flesh dilemma Holy shit this is a prestigious thread. I hate when I miss the good shit. Where the fuck have I been? Anyway, just thought I'd drop in. I gotta take care of some bullcrap here on my end; we'll be in touch. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990434) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:06 AM Author: orchid library The most prestigious thread about me was one I didn't even start, or post in until it got to 130.
Does pensive attend a FUCKING TTT math program? |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 5:55 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage no one actually believes your "math is prestigious! math is prestigious!" rant. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3991691) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:21 AM Author: orchid library And yet "my side" won the argument before I even posted in the thread. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992256) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:24 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage not really. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992276) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:09 AM Author: honey-headed shrine preventive strike Why don't you want to? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990517) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:12 AM Author: orchid library I'd rather spend my time/energy on other things, and very few women deserve my attention at all.
There's a girl I met in a coffeeshop who I've been in touch with, and she's really awesome, but she's a freshman and I don't think grad students should be dating frosh fall semester. I doubt anyone can measure up to her in the next three months, and if someone does, maybe I can make an exception. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:16 AM Author: odious hominid it sucks that it takes you to so much "time and energy" to meet women. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990569) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:19 AM Author: orchid library It takes time and energy to hit on them. I can strike up a friendly conversation, no problem. Hitting on them is annoying and difficult, and I hate doing it. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990596) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:25 AM Author: honey-headed shrine preventive strike What is the difference between having a conversation and hitting on them? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990641) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:30 AM Author: orchid library Having a conversation is talking to someone. Hitting on a woman is goal-directed: you're trying to pwn her (sexually, that is) and if you don't, the entire interaction is worthless. Usually you don't, and hence... conclude your own about the interaction. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990685) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:40 AM Author: honey-headed shrine preventive strike How does someone sexually pwn someone else? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990756) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:41 AM Author: INSANE 80S MUSIC LYRIC GUY (nosearmy@gmail.com) Now I wish I had the link to that bigcock guy on Hot or Not. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990763) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:09 AM Author: orchid library Getting that person to have sex with you = PWNing her. This is in contrast to the intellectual PWNage I was discussing with Rowan. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992175) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:14 PM Author: honey-headed shrine preventive strike Moral people aren't looking to have sex the first time they meet a person. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3997734) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:23 PM Author: orchid library Nor am I, but the eventual goal of "hitting on" is either casual sex, a relationship, or marriage, all of which entail sex. This is true regardless of how moral someone is. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3997801) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:53 PM Author: honey-headed shrine preventive strike Then how does someone hit on another? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3998065) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 12:00 AM Author: orchid library I can't give a precise definition, because there isn't one. But when someone's clearly only talking to another person because he or she is interested in romantic pwnage, that's a hit-on. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3998132) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 12:45 AM Author: honey-headed shrine preventive strike What I mean is, how are you able to tell when someone is only talking to another person because he or she is interested in them such as a relationship? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3998485) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 2:47 PM Author: orchid library It's hard to tell. This is why I get pissed of when people claim I or someone else is "hitting on" someone, because 90% of the time, they're completely wrong. There are some obvious calls, yes, such as the creepy guy at the bar who asks women if they're virgins. However, when a normal guy like me is just talking to a girl pleasantly, it's not an obvious call at all, and people just make that presumption to be self-satisified and ignorant. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4000554) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 4:08 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage "However, when a normal guy like me is just talking to a girl pleasantly..."
hey, who can find two assumptions in this one sentence? |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 4:11 PM Author: orchid library The one where your mom is tubgirl, and the one where your dad was the photographer. Done. Do I get my A+ now? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4000933) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 4:16 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage have I just been "pwned," in your eyes? you responded to a pretty cogent criticism with a snappy, unsubstantive "comeback"?
pretty unprestigious, if you can't even address the substance of my comment (which, in case you're too dense, was that you are most assuredly NOT normal and you have NO IDEA of knowing whether the other half of those conversations found them "pleasant" or not--and I suspect not). |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 4:21 PM Author: orchid library Yes, I detected the so-called "substance" of your throwaway comment, I just considered it beneath me to respond to your repetitive and idiotic shit. Your criticism wasn't "cogent", it was bland and useless.
You have no idea who I am and have admitted so much, so shut the fuck up, you unprestigious life failure. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 9:55 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage so, basically, you don't have an answer. you're not "normal," and girls do NOT consider it "pleasant" to interact with you. fine.
i went to carleton, i've seen you hit on a girl in real life, and many of my friends know who you are (though they're hardly your friends; they spent most of their time in your presence either disgusted with your attitude towards woman or amazed that someone could be that dense about interpersonal relationships). |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:04 PM Author: orchid library I won't get into a "normal" debate when my experiences have been decidedly abnormal and unhealthy.
Most women I've met since about 2003 have found it pleasant or neutral to interact with me. If you had ever spent any time around me, you'd know this.
Name one of these "friends" or otherwise your credibility is null. Moreover, describe this incident where you supposedly saw me "hit on a girl in real life." I thought your story before was that you had never met me and were c/o '99. An inconsistent schtick tends to lose its fan base on account of incredibility. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:09 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage i have no fan base and don't care. YOU told me i was class of 99. i told you i was a carl and not in your class (and that you probably wouldn't know me--but of course that I know you because everyone knows you)--that's all. in fact, you were firmly convinced i was some other guy, or perhaps several other guys, at various points.
i was visiting friends and saw you talking to a girl in the coffeehouse. i was like "what the FUCK is he trying to do over there?" and they said "that's mike church" and I said "ah, i've heard of him"... they then explained and recounted a few other stories. apparently one of them even had a roommate you'd awkwardly hit on at one point. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:12 PM Author: orchid library I never said you were c/o 1999. Someone else figured that out and threatened to out your sorry ass.
That would be a great story you're telling, except if you don't give an exact date and time of day, or at least name these friends, then you're clearly just making this up to get attention.
PS. You write like a five-year-old. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:22 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage "...if you don't give an exact date and time of day, or at least name these friends, then you're clearly just making this up to get attention."
i think you need to consider a third possibility: i don't want to expose my friends to your stalking, and i certainly don't want to out myself to your stalking. your entire corpus of human interaction, both writing and speech, makes it abundantly clear why that is very important to me. (hint: some people actually have friends and become loyal to them. this might not make any sense to you, but then again--someday you might understand) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:31 PM Author: orchid library I have no interest in "stalking" you. You may recall that I have been stalked, and I'm starting to suspect that you were one of the original perpetrators in that ordeal.
The "third possibility" is empty. You know that you are making unsupported claims, and when I call you out on your shit, you make more unsupported claims. The reason you don't want to out yourself is because you know that you have given me enough evidence for a slander suit. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:48 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage truth is an absolute defense to slander, you know. and the claim of "i was lying! it was all schtick!" doesn't mean shit in court. you've posted enough on xoxo alone to corroborate everything i've said quite well.
you've obviously never been to law school. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:50 PM Author: orchid library 1. The shit you're making up isn't true, as you know.
2. What did I post on xoxo to corroborate the crazy shit you're making up? |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 3:16 PM Author: Fragrant sandwich stead If you consider starting a relationship or a marriage with someone to be "pwning" them, it goes a long way towards explaining why you're such a failure at dating. You'd probably suck less at it if you just focused on talking to women, rather than "hitting on" them so that you can "pwn" them by persuading them to date you. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4000681) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 3:25 PM Author: orchid library See, but that's not the attitude I take; the "pwn" attitude is the one I probably should be taking, if I want to be successful with women. I'm speaking the language of the successful American male here. The fact is that the men who are most successful in relationships, the bad boys who get to paw all the decent women before they settle for men less skilled at destroying their resistances, are the ones who see dating as a "game" and women as objects to "pwn".
Men who are too successful with women objectify them; men who are unsuccessful with women hate them. The moral best place to be is that thin margin between those two extremes, but it's very narrow and there's not much room in it. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 3:30 PM Author: Fragrant sandwich stead I don't buy this. You have admitted you "hit on" women. When someone asked you what you meant by that, you offered that definition. This word obviously means something to you in the context of your own behavior; one would think you'd be able define what it means to you rather than to the bad boys.
Moreover, you've admitted that you enjoy "pwning" women who seem disinterested in you by trying to show off your intelligence and breeding (whatever that means). You even recommended that someone else behave in the same way to punish women for not returning his interest. You're definitely not immune from the "dating as a game" problem, which is part of the problem I've tried to point out to you several times. The thing is, dating as a game does work...for short term relationships. Since you seem to be seeking a girlfriend, the "pwning" attitude is probably doing you a great deal of harm. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 3:37 PM Author: orchid library I haven't seriously hit on a woman in months, if not years. When I do, it's more out of boredom than anything else.
"The thing is, dating as a game does work...for short term relationships. Since you seem to be seeking a girlfriend, the 'pwning' attitude is probably doing you a great deal of harm."
There's an ethical Catch-22 at hand. It's not morally acceptable to seek women out as "pwns" with no long-term relationship interest. On the other hand, if you're 22 and have never had a serious girlfriend, you need to get some pwns to build up confidence and experience before a serious relationship so you don't fuck it up when you do find someone you really like. It's an intractible no-win situation, because neither solution is morally acceptable: you can mistreat a bunch of women by using them for short-term experience, or you can not do so, which is going to inflict considerable pain on the other person during your next relationship. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 3:40 PM Author: Fragrant sandwich stead "I haven't seriously hit on a woman in months, if not years. When I do, it's more out of boredom than anything else."
You still haven't answered the question. What does "hitting on" someone mean to you? Is it the bad boy definition, or is it something else.
"On the other hand, if you're 22 and have never had a serious girlfriend, you need to get some pwns to build up confidence and experience before a serious relationship so you don't fuck it up when you do find someone you really like."
I see nothing wrong with this, and would only point out that your current methods of interacting with women and attitudes towards relationships have resulted in nothing but failure in the past. Your old college may not have been the ideal place to date, but some of this responsibility does fall on your shoulders as well - you've been trying to find a girlfriend for years and nothing you've done has worked. Would it really hurt matters any if you tried something else for awhile? |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 3:47 PM Author: orchid library "Is it the bad boy definition, or is it something else."
I guess it can be anything. I haven't had the motivation to do it for a long time, so I really don't care what it is.
"I see nothing wrong with this".
With being 22 without a relationship? You're not a guy. Women become less attractive as they get more relationship and sexual experience. Men, however, become more attractive with increasing levels of experience, because inexperience connotes incompetence. I know I have a lot to offer in a relationship, but the fact is that there's no woman out there who would still want to date me (or any guy in the same situation) after knowing about my empty resume. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 3:58 PM Author: Fragrant sandwich stead "I guess it can be anything. I haven't had the motivation to do it for a long time, so I really don't care what it is."
I don't believe this statement either. You apparently care enough about the general topic to have either started or participated in several threads about the issue over the last week. Do you not want to admit that you share a common point of view with the bad boys, or don't you want to examine what hitting on someone means to you?
"With being 22 without a relationship?"
Being 22 with no dating experience whatsoever is generally a drawback, for both men and women, since it often signals that the person in question lacks the social skills to attract a date.
"to build up confidence and experience before a serious relationship so you don't fuck it up when you do find someone you really like"
This was the part that I found unobjectionable. It's generally a good idea to date casually or at least have positive casual interactions with women before beginning more serious relationships. It's just your proposed method of "getting some 'pwns'" that I find a bit ridiculous. You're not "pwning" anyone. You're not "pwning" in the sense of having casual sex with women, since that's not the result of your attempts. You're also not "pwning" when you try to embarass women who aren't interested - if they don't even want to talk to you, they definitely don't care if you think you're smarter.
Why not try a different method of gaining relationship experience? What you've been doing in the past hasn't worked very well. Given the empirical evidence produced by your old dating methods, trying something - anything - different, might be a logical response. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 4:10 PM Author: orchid library "You apparently care enough about the general topic to have either started or participated in several threads about the issue over the last week."
Boredom. Fucking extreme boredom.
"Do you not want to admit that you share a common point of view with the bad boys, or don't you want to examine what hitting on someone means to you?"
I just don't care that much. Whenever I hit on someone, it's not to "pwn" them; it's just out of ennui.
"Being 22 with no dating experience whatsoever is generally a drawback, for both men and women, since it often signals that the person in question lacks the social skills to attract a date."
I have dating experience; I've been on first dates and second dates and higher Nth dates. It's just that, for one reason or another, it never turns into a relationship. Usually, there's a mutual acknowledgment that it won't work out that way.
Also, as a man, I form my own opinions about the woman I'm dating. If I like her, I don't care at all how much experience she's had. Women care intensely what other women think of their boyfriend, and assume that a 22-year-old singleton is reject material not worth a second glance. Men make up their own minds with regard to their attractions. I'd rather a woman be inexperienced than baggage-laden and weathered.
"You're not 'pwning' in the sense of having casual sex with women, since that's not the result of your attempts."
Nor is it the intent. I'm describing the attitude taken by most American men, not my own.
"Given the empirical evidence produced by your old dating methods, trying something - anything - different, might be a logical response."
Between 18 and 20, I tried everything under the sun, short of cutting off an arm: the "nice guy" strategy, the aloof asshole strategy. None of it works. The simple fact is that, if you get to 20 or so without any relationship experience, your love life is a non-starter and might as well be considered over. Women do not want inexperienced guys, and would rather see us in death camps than in relationships. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 4:19 PM Author: Fragrant sandwich stead "I just don't care that much. Whenever I hit on someone, it's not to "pwn" them; it's just out of ennui."
This seems to conflict with several of your past posts: the one a few days ago about how I'd be pretty angry at a rejection too if I went to a school where I got only 7 chances, the one last week about how you found your low odds of finding a mate depressing, and the one today about getting a few pwns in to build confidence.
You were asked, I think, about your own attitude. Why are you so reluctant to discuss it? What are/were you trying to do when you hit on someone?
"Between 18 and 20, I tried everything under the sun, short of cutting off an arm: the "nice guy" strategy, the aloof asshole strategy. None of it works. The simple fact is that, if you get to 20 or so without any relationship experience, your love life is a non-starter and might as well be considered over. Women do not want inexperienced guys, and would rather see us in death camps than in relationships."
Women, in general, don't want inexperienced guys. But having one black mark doesn't brand you a loser for life. There are a lot of guys in their late 20s and early 30s who had neither sexual encounters nor relationships until finishing college. I know at least three such men personally. While none of them is exactly a player, they've all managed to have at least one and often several rewarding, long term relationships. If you figure out what you're doing wrong and don't make a big deal about the fact that you're inexperienced, you'll eventually find a woman who's willing to take a chance on you.
But you have to actually change what made you fuck up last time around. Neither the "nice guy" nor the aloof asshole strategy works. Get to know women as people. Don't focus so much on winning, just on getting to know them. Try to suppress your prestige-whoring, zero sum game, schtick-obsessed tendencies. Don't take rejection so seriously. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 4:35 PM Author: orchid library "This seems to conflict with several of your past posts".
Sometimes I care more than others, but I try not to care. Caring about this type of shit is hilariously unprestigious, and I feel awful that I do care, because I shouldn't.
"Why are you so reluctant to discuss it?"
I kind of lost any semblance of a coherent "attitude" about these things around age 20. Now, I just carry on an ironic farce. I have a soul and identity, but if I "hit on" anyone, I make sure those things aren't invested in it; instead, I carry on a schtick. It's better to create a false self, so that when women attempt to tear you down, they only destroy that. It's very rare that I'm sincere around most women, because they're just so vicious and evil. So I just run a false self to get as much attention as possible, and if that false self goes down in flames I can invent another.
"Women, in general, don't want inexperienced guys. But having one black mark doesn't brand you a loser for life. There are a lot of guys in their late 20s and early 30s who had neither sexual encounters nor relationships until finishing college."
Um, that particular black mark does. It's worse to be inexperienced than to be 400 lb. overweight. Men who are 400# overweight generally don't have the ability to date the types of women that I want.
"[Y]ou'll eventually find a woman who's willing to take a chance on you."
I wish this were true, but the fact is that women are inherently risk-averse and rely on their friends' opinions for their own attractions. If you're inexperienced, they assume no other woman wants you, and they won't either. That's just a fact of life. If you haven't had one long-term girlfriend by 24, you're finished. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 4:49 PM Author: Fragrant sandwich stead "It's very rare that I'm sincere around most women, because they're just so vicious and evil. So I just run a false self to get as much attention as possible, and if that false self goes down in flames I can invent another."
This is probably a large part of your problem. Schticks aren't prestigious in real life. They're just a little sad.
"Um, that particular black mark does. It's worse to be inexperienced than to be 400 lb. overweight. Men who are 400# overweight generally don't have the ability to date the types of women who attract me."
Being inexperienced is a black mark mostly for what it signifies - poor social skills, unrealistic expectations, misogyny, religious fanaticism, being too afraid to ask women out, a lack of interest in women, or something similarly bad. The title itself does some harm, but if you can demonstrate that you lack the traits of a social reject, you can generally make some headway. Most of the sizable minority of men who haven't had girlfriends by their early 20s go on to have relationships that end in marriage. Most have them used the interim period to repair whatever flaws made it difficult for them to find dates.
"If you haven't had one long-term girlfriend by 24, you're finished."
Patently untrue. Huge numbers of men choose not to have serious relationships until they're considerably older than 24. A lack of dating or sexual experience is far more difficult to overcome. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 5:01 PM Author: orchid library "Schticks aren't prestigious in real life."
No, they aren't prestigious, but they're damn useful. I've had women cannibalize me, and I've had them devour false selves, and the latter is infinitely preferable. Call me a risk-averse asshole, but I don't see that what women offer is worth the infinite risk involved in approaching them sincerely and accepting the possibility of them destroying your entire life.
"Being inexperienced is a black mark mostly for what it signifies - poor social skills, unrealistic expectations, misogyny, religious fanaticism, being too afraid to ask women out, a lack of interest in women, or something similarly bad. The title itself does some harm, but if you can demonstrate that you lack the traits of a social reject, you can generally make some headway."
So I need to become a religious fanatic? ;)
Could it just be horrible, awful luck? I've met several women whom I would date, and who would date me, except for the fact that they had boyfriends. I've been pwned by this enough times that I refuse to believe that my inexperience is completely my fault, given how much ass-pwnage I've taken from past events that had nothing to do with me.
"Most of the sizable minority of men who haven't had girlfriends by their early 20s go on to have relationships that end in marriage."
This may just be my cynical asshole self talking, or it may be the fact that I'm a belligerent fuck who likes pissing people off by reminding people of how pervasively negative all this romantic shit is, but I suspect that a lot of their relationships ended in marriage not because of the relationship, but because a lot of them didn't want to go back into the horror of being single with no game, and so they settled for OK rather than excellent. If that's my future, I want no part in it.
"Huge numbers of men choose not to have serious relationships until they're considerably older than 24."
I tend to doubt this. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 5:14 PM Author: Fragrant sandwich stead "Call me a risk-averse asshole, but I don't see that what women offer is worth the infinite risk involved in approaching them sincerely and accepting the possibility of them destroying your entire life."
That's even more pitiful than the women you criticize for not taking a chance on you. If you're not willing to risk being hurt at least once in awhile, you probably deserve to be lonely and bitter. Why not grow some balls, change your tactics, and find a way of presenting yourself - sincere or insincere - that won't lead to so much failure?
"Could it just be horrible, awful luck? I've met several women whom I would date, and who would date me, except for the fact that they had boyfriends."
No. We all occasionally meet appealing people who would be perfect for us but for the fact that they're taken. The vast majority are also able to find appealing people who are single, and occasionally develop relationships with them.
However, you might want to consider what it is about these interactions with women who have boyfriends that's led to more acceptance. Possibly you're interacting with them in a different way, since you're not seeking out sex or afraid of rejection, and that's leading to a more positive reaction from the women.
"I've been pwned by this enough times that I refuse to believe that my inexperience is completely my fault, given how much ass-pwnage I've taken from past events that had nothing to do with me."
I don't think you have to accept that anything is *completely* your fault. You have some amount of fault in this. External factors probably contributed as well. To the extent that you are at fault, you should work to remedy things. It's actually a much more hopeful attitude to admit that you screwed some things up, since it offers a chance at repair and future success.
"I tend to doubt this."
Huge numbers of men, especially those under 24, aren't interested in having a girlfriend of any type, especially a serious one. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 5:25 PM Author: orchid library I would continue this, but I don't feel it's right to troll this much; you're trying to offer serious advice, I'm trying to troll you. It's not right for me to be manipulative like that, so I'll shut up. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4001443) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:05 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage oh shut up. you're being honest and you know it. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4003788) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:10 PM Author: orchid library Then I would have been dishonest in the message to which you replied. The logical implications of your claim contradicts precisely what you said, which makes you an idiot. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4003834) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:24 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage or in other words, you play games and lie all the time... and then wonder why people don't consider you a nice person to be around and interact with? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4003965) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:33 PM Author: orchid library This statement is a lie.
Logical contradiction. PWN3D!
Seriously, though, what the fuck do you know? Sometimes I say things for attention, yes, but it's not frequent, and everyone does. It's what you're doing right now. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:51 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage no one would honestly say your need for attention is "not frequent"--seems to be just about every day. and the big difference between you and me is that people consider me a nice person to be around.
apparently i manage to do whatever the hell it is i do in a much more non-offensive way. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:57 PM Author: orchid library "the big difference between you and me is that people consider me a nice person to be around."
Um, except for the fact that you're a terrible schtick on an Internet forum, a forum that that (for non-law students) would be boring if not for a few dedicated elitism-schtick posters (such as 174).
"apparently i manage to do whatever the hell it is i do in a much more non-offensive way."
You haven't seen me in YEARS, and you admit that you've never met me. Essentially, you don't know me at all, yet you're attacking me on the Internet and making shit up. Why? Why is this worth your time? |
|
Date: October 9th, 2005 12:11 PM Author: Cerise cocky university ape '...people consider me a nice person to be around...'
considering that you hide behind a shield of anonymity to persistantly stalk someone on the internet, this seems exceedingly unlikely. |
|
Date: October 9th, 2005 12:49 PM Author: orchid library What I find ridiculous about "can't edit me away!" is that, if what he says about me-- stalking an ex-girlfriend, reacting "violently" to other people-- is true (and it's not) then I am one nasty motherfucker that anyone sane would want to stay far away from.
I know enough about computers that, unless he's been posting from a proxy IP all this time, I could find out exactly where he lives, down to a 5-digit ZIP. I have no desire to do this, which would be highly illegal, and moreover I don't care so much who he is. (The reason I keep asking him to out himself and his associates is that I'm looking to establish how much of an incredible hack he is, because he can't even support his most basic claims with verifiable evidence.)
He's attacked me (and Media Kid, whom he once believed to be me) several times here; I've never attacked him. So, he's either inconsistent or exceedingly dumb. If he believes what he says about me being a "stalker", he'd have to be a real idiot to harass me, as one usually wants to stay far away from such people. More likely, he doesn't believe his shit, knows I never meant anyone any harm, and is just attacking me for attention.
He's right that I had an interesting and well-publicized freshman year, but the roots of my problems are not what he described. I was as awkward around women as any college freshman, but my prominent social deficit was that I was a huge braggart. I simply didn't know how much of a huge, fatal faux pas it was to brag about accomplishments and talents; I was pretty damn obtuse. I did a lot of poetry readings, which I self-advertised heavily, and through this self-promotion managed to have a well-known name by mid-freshman year. (I was a half-decent poet, but not great, and definitely not the best on campus.) The fact that I was such a braggart and attention whore (and I wasn't trying to be a dick, just socially inept) got a lot of people really pissed, and they proceeded to stalk me until the end of my sophomore year, ruining my social life and spreading all sorts of rumors. Then I had to deal with all the crazy post-traumatic shit that followed in the wake of that, and to this day I follow very specific dietary and exercise habits in order to prevent a possible lapse into craziness. Moreover, I had a pseudo-blog (called User File) that started out pretty normal, but eventually became an avenue for people to attack me, and when I didn't care anymore, I spun it into a 174-like schtick that carried my name even further.
This is what happened at Carleton, in truth. It had nothing to do with me "stalking" or inappropriately approaching women because that none of that ever happened, and if anyone has the right to claim having been "stalked" or harassed, it's me, and this loser-fucker "can't edit me away!" is only helping my case in that claim. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:01 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage "the infinite risk involved in approaching them sincerely and accepting the possibility of them destroying your entire life."
uh, you know, it's statements like this that make your claims that you "don't care" exceptionally ridiculous. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:09 PM Author: orchid library Part of why I make concerted efforts not to care is because I don't want to take on the risk. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4003822) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:25 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage but don't you see--the fact that you believe that the potential exists to "destroy" you, indicates that you take this WAY too seriously, ergo you care A LOT. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4003980) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:37 PM Author: orchid library No, I'm just aware of the fact that the women who like destroying men outnumber those who don't. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4004140) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:16 AM Author: Puce Electric Dingle Berry Ceo Yeah, especially since many girls don't spend any time and energy at all... (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990574) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 12:18 AM Author: orchid library No, because men come to you. We do the heavy lifting, then you get to parse out the rewards in a rather arbitrary manner. Being a woman must be a great job. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3990587) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 5:58 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage i have it on good, recent Carleton authority that your "heavy lifting" when you hit on girls is some of the most offensive stuff on earth to behold and hear. since you refuse to acknowledge anything wrong with your approach and attitude so far, we can only assume that you haven't changed a bit. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3991692) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:07 AM Author: orchid library First of all, you haven't been at Carleton in 6 years; we never interacted. Secondly, this "recent Carleton authority" was just trying to get attention at my expense, and you fell for his/her bullshit like a sucker. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992166) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:22 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage huh? the people who told me this (yes, more than one) have hardly even talked to you, and were in your class or the one right below you. i sincerely doubt they'd be more than just faces in the crowd to you--though of course, it being a small place, they often saw you around (everyone on campus, of course, knew who you were).
when you hit on or even flirt with a girl, it's painful and embarrassing to watch, and everyone feels bad for the girl--ESPECIALLY if she doesn't show any interest or tries to politely get away or go back to whatever she was doing before you talked to her. (because then, you tend to get upset and do even more embarrassing things.) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:30 AM Author: orchid library Ah, whatever. I don't believe you, but all this is exactly why I'm glad not to be on such a small campus anymore. I really fucking hate being followed around by oblique misinterpretations of ancient history. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992300) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:38 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage you don't believe the perceptions of several "normal" people who saw you interact very awkwardly with girls? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992325) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:44 AM Author: orchid library Everyone's damn awkward as a freshman. What's your point? That was years ago. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992354) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:48 AM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage who said anything about you being a freshman or it being long ago? there were many many times after your freshman year that you tried to (as you put it) "warm up an ice queen." (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992381) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:52 AM Author: orchid library Haha, yeah I think I did write that on the UF. First of all, that was schtick. (After Oct. of senior year, everyone could basically fuck off by that point, given that my then-girlfriend had betrayed me and my faith in other human beings was at an all-time low.) Second of all, I'm sure I believed that was possible (warming up an icy bitch) at one time, but I've grown up and realized it's not; moreover, why would anyone want to? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3992416) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 3:21 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage this isn't based on UF. one of the people i know physically actually saw you during the incident you described as "warming up an ice queen." you were persistent to the point of offensiveness and were NOT getting her very clear signals that she wasn't interested in you. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3993866) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 3:28 PM Author: orchid library There was no single instance of "warming up an ice queen"; I was making a joke about the concept. Apparently you don't understand schtick. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3993933) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 10:45 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage uh, you described an incident in a computer lab that people I've talked to ACTUALLY WITNESSED. this was completely real. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3997466) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 10:53 PM Author: orchid library Computer lab? Oh, yes. That was in fucking freshman year. Get the fuck over it, shine my shoes and wash my car, you plebeian fuckup. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3997523) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 10:56 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage you described another incident in later years where you kept trying to hit on a girl who went back to reading her book--giving you just about the clearest "no" signals possible to give while still being polite, which you then proceeded to blame on HER being "socially inept." (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3997543) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 10:59 PM Author: orchid library No, she actually was socially very awkward as a freshman. I know her, you don't. She honestly wouldn't know that her behavior would be considered rude by most people.
It turns out that she's a really cool person, but were not compatible on several levels, which is why nothing ever happened between me and her. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 10:54 PM Author: honey-headed shrine preventive strike You went to Carleton? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3997529) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:08 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage yes. i didn't overlap with mr. pensive directly, but have many many friends who knew him. i've also observed his work in person, though not very many times. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3997679) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:11 PM Author: orchid library It's my "work" now, haha. You've just upped my prestige another notch.
Your friends who fed you this shit are either idiots or amusing themselves at your gullibility. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:13 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage dumbo, i don't mean your posting (which is NOT schtick, but that's beside the point). i mean that i've seen, with my own eyes, your interactions with another human being--one who happened to be female. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3997721) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:17 PM Author: orchid library One of whom happened to be FEMALE?!? Oh, I am so PWNed now! That proves your entire case!
Nah, most of my real-life behavior was schtick too, for a period. I honestly stopped fucking caring about anything circa sophomore year, with my faith in my fellow humans at an all-time low. |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:20 PM Author: honey-headed shrine preventive strike Look above at my post about sexually pwning someone. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3997772) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:29 PM Author: orchid library I responded. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3997866) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:23 PM Author: concupiscible therapy piazza hell, it better be possible. it's what i'm going to do. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3997806) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:27 PM Author: orchid library Good luck.
I wish I never had to do it again. It would be great to live in an alternate universe where women are the pursuers and make good dating choices. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 3:41 PM Author: INSANE 80S MUSIC LYRIC GUY (nosearmy@gmail.com) Yeah, I'm still waiting for that phone call. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4000786) |
|
Date: October 7th, 2005 11:58 PM Author: Mind-boggling lilac windowlicker Got probation, huh? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3998110) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 12:01 AM Author: orchid library 178. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#3998140) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 3:32 PM Author: hairraiser buff new version next time i hit on a girl i wanna make sure i really like her so i can do it with absolute sincerity. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4000742) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 3:40 PM Author: orchid library That sounds great in theory, but if you don't know that she likes you, you shouldn't waste your time liking her, because unrequited attractions are about as unprestigious as crying while masturbating. So how can you get to really like her without knowing if she likes you? To know if she likes you, you'd have to somehow (perhaps very subtly) breach the subject, and usually this is classified as a "hit on" by most of society. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4000777) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 9:58 PM Author: Drab floppy round eye Pensive created these anti-pensive accounts to create drama. He trolled you very well. You lose. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4003717) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:26 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage this might be true, if he weren't (unfortunately for himself and the rest of the world) exactly what he appears to be. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4003991) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:34 PM Author: orchid library What do I appear to be, troll? (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4004094) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:47 PM Author: orchid library So I've got a question for this loser, "can't edit me away!"
Why the fuck do you keep posting solely for the purpose of annoying me? Don't you have better uses for your life? There are certainly things I would rather be doing than dealing with your bullshit, though it is fun watching you try, pathetically, to build a case for something when you have none. |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:53 PM Author: Crystalline Soul-stirring Menage what's really funny is that those who try to help you get pretty much exactly the same response. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4004306) |
|
Date: October 8th, 2005 10:58 PM Author: orchid library Yes, you're trying to help me by attacking me on the Internet and making up a bunch of shit that never happened. I see your angle now. (https://autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=273774&forum_id=2#4004353) |