The Official BGOL " All About Women" Thread....

[blackras9]

Yes. Just deal with your misses and don't worry about the others. If you have to step out, use hoes, no attachments.

 

[KnownUnknown]

Yes. Just deal with your misses and don't worry about the others. If you have to step out, use hoes, no attachments.

Preciate the feedback fam.


Sent from my Cerebrum.

 

[ArsenalCannon357]

In a buzzy blog published on HuffPost Divorce earlier this week, single mom Emma Johnson admitted that she prefers dating alpha males -- and men who are agressive in bed.

"When you are an independent woman with lots of responsibilities, many men assume that we want to carry out that strong role all the time. But I need to feel like a woman, and times I enjoy that most are when I am with a man," Johnson wrote. "If I am being honest with myself, being a woman means -- to a degree -- being passive. And that requires a man who is -- to a degree -- the alpha."

Johnson talked more about her dating preferences on HuffPost Live Thursday, and noted that many woman are afraid to admit that they want an alpha male.

"We feel so afraid to acknowledge that we have this inherent need to be with manly men. We fear that we're going to give up some of our power," she said. "I like to be with agressive men, alpha men who are strong in this world and strong with me one on one, but that doesn't mean I want to give up my right to vote or that I choose to earn less than a man in the workplace. "

Watch what else she had to say in the video above, then click through the slideshow below for dating dealbreakers, according to the Twitterverse.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/26/what-women-want_n_3166256.html

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

Single Moms (And Other Strong Women) Need Alpha Males
By: EMMA JOHNSON

The other night, my single mom friend Sarah and I were IMing about how we prefer men who are aggressive in bed.

"I'm the CEO of my entire life!" Sarah complained. "Do you know how hot it is to let someone else take over for 20 minutes?"

"It's not just in bed -- give me a vacation from my life for a while," I responded. I was referencing my weekend date -- a guy I met on OKCupid named Lou who I have pretty much nothing in common with but proved to be the perfect Saturday night activity. For the past few months I've been in a dateless funk, fueled by disappointment that a love interest didn't pan out and a long, gray, life-filled winter. Despite being anything but what I am looking for in the long-term, this Sicilian-born, Harley-riding electrical engineer from Queens charmed me with a witty profile, flirty and articulate messages and pics that suggested -- quite accurately, I found -- a darling smile and a 6'3" body built like a brick shit house.

Hotness aside, I knew Lou was just what my mental health needed when he called to arrange the date. He would drive to my neighborhood, so, per protocol, I promised to text him a location to meet. "What are you talking about?" he said in a loud, friendly, Queens accent. "I'm picking you up and I'm taking you out!"

Music to my ears!

Let me back up here. If I had to describe myself -- which one is prone to do when she finds herself juxtaposed with a Lou -- it would be that I'm a New York intellectual who dates more or less the same. My boyfriends tend to be writers and film makers interested in lefty politics and sustainable urban development. Lots of skinny jeans, the occasional fedora and dates that involve plenty of polite negotiating and triangulating a mutually convenient meeting point. Lou is Republican who wore a gold crucifix under his slim-cut waffle shirt, and he picked me up and took me out.

When I got in the car, I immediately took to Lou's big, warm vibe. He took my hand and kissed my cheek hello, cracking a giant, handsome smile. "What's this?" he said. "You're the only woman I know who doesn't do her nails!" And off we went in his pickup all the way across Queens to a neon-lit Mexican restaurant with valet parking.

I could write a whole post on the beauty of going out with men you have no interest in dating long-term. If you don't care if you ever see the guy again, somehow everyone is freer to be themselves -- and enjoy each other more. If I was looking at Lou through relationship goggles, I might have bristled when describing his most recent relationship with a woman who moved into her new house by transporting one dining chair per day in her car.

"Look, sometimes I like to be a man, you know?" Lou said. "I told her, 'Listen, I'll come by Saturday with three of my friends and we'll move you in one day.' But she said I was being too pushy. Women!" Instead of recoiling in feminist disgust, my interest was piqued. What other ways did he like to be a man? And was he going to show me on our singular date?

That's the thing with the Lou's of the world, Sarah and I agreed. We love that they take over plans for the evening, and then take over our bodies for the night. When you are an independent woman with lots of responsibilities, many men assume that we want to carry out that strong role all the time. But I need to feel like a woman, and times I enjoy that most are when I am with a man. If I am being honest with myself, being a woman means -- to a degree -- being passive. And that requires a man who is -- to a degree -- the alpha.

Lou is not going to be my boyfriend. My boyfriend will be "an artsy-fartsy guy" (as Lou described my type) with whom I will triangulate our first date. I loved hanging out with Lou, the macho way he relived me of any responsibility for the evening, the easy way I fell into passively following his lead, crucifix dangling in my face much of the night. But I am a woman with an opinion or 50, and a clear vision for my role in the world. I can't imagine settling for anything less than intimacy with someone who is my partner, my equal. Can that person be someone who is totally dominate? Could I ever be happy being consistently passive?

"You're fun to hang out with," Lou said, pulling the covers up to his chin. "Do you like to spoon? Roll over, let me spoon you."

And I did.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/emma-..._b_3117711.html?utm_hp_ref=divorce&ir=Divorce

 

[Louis Koo]

i think this is my most important contribution to BGOL even though i think i bring a lot of finance/accounting/tax knowledge to the forum. here's a bunch of cut-and-paste knowledge from various sources, some of which i've edited for my own purposes

it all boils down to LAMPS

L - Looks
A - Athleticism (sexual market value)
M - Money
P - Power (the most important one)
S - Status

LAMPS. L is for looks (which isn’t fitness per se, but how handsome you are naturally in terms of genetics, symmetry and so on), A is for athleticism (either actual sports or, for most people, fitness and muscle structure/tone), M is for money (self-explanatory), P is for power (which is generally contextual social power) and S is for status (both your actual social status in general, and your contextual social status relative to other men on the radar screen). That’s what the market looks like. Now, you may look at that and think “Hmmm, I have all of those”, but that’s doubtful. Very few men have all of them, and the ones who do are swimming in women. You need to take an honest look at the LAMPS factors and assess what your actual value is — and don’t overvalue the “M” factor, because it really isn’t a huge factor as you can see for yourself, as long as you aren’t living in Mom’s basement at age 40, because women have their own money now.

more insight into LAMPS
http://leticiamary.wordpress.com/20...-attraction-to-men-guest-post-by-donalgraeme/
http://www.evostudies.org/Modules/neave-lects/06-fmp.ppt

power & status

- Power is what makes a male a man. When attributed to men they are viewed as masculine: “confidence, assertiveness, self-mastery, a commanding presence and indomitability”. These traits tend to masculinize women when applied to them. A man is attractive when he shows these traits. If a woman shows too many of these traits too aggressively, she’s considered bitchy, rude, unfeminine.

Power (or lack thereof) is a characteristic that men learn from other men, usually their fathers. Men teach their boys (or at least SHOULD teach their boys) to get back up when they fall; to try again when they fail; to learn something and learn it well; to keep going until they get it right; to manage the people and situations within their domains; to fight, to win with grace; to lose with dignity and live to fight another day. A woman simply cannot teach a boy these things; he MUST learn it from other men.

Interestingly, when both men and women are being honest and blunt, they both view it this way: a confident, assertive, indomitable man with presence and self-mastery is attractive. Men want to emulate him; women want to f*ck him. A confident, assertive, indomitable woman with presence is a shrill, shrewish bitch. Men want to pump and dump her; women want to avoid her.

None of the other traits are unique to men. Looks and athleticism can be displayed by women. And women can have money; but it doesn’t make them attractive. Women can have status, usually conferred by her looks. Power is the only trait that is completely corrupted and sullied when applied to women; yet remains in its intended state when applied to men.

- Power is internal, and Status is external. That is why they are two different vectors. They share a lot in common, but that critical difference between the two is why they are separate. Remember, Power represents a man’s personal masculine power, while Status includes his authority, which would include the power he can wield from some office or trust.

- Status is only attractive to women because it is an indicator of power. Of influence over a company, a community, a group of people. It is a very real, very easy way for women to gauge a man’s power without knowing him at all. If a woman does find that the man has status without any of the power, she will generally become unattracted to him. She will be disillusioned. She has bitten into what she thought was a succulent fruit to find that it is over ripe, too sweet, and disgusting to her.

Also, this has been more of a problem in modern times. The problem of men having status but not power, that is.

- negotiation skills: he was so confident and assertive and he just spoke to people and things happened as he desired. I kid you not, if someone told me my hotel room for work was going to be $100 and come with a shower, he would say, “Gimme the phone, babe” and within seconds my SUITE was $65 and came with a flipping hot tub and sauna! I was falling all over myself, and he knew it. It is hilarious in retrospect. We talk about it all of the time.

- The religious man is weak and Power-less and unattractive because he submits to a Power greater than he is, he doesn’t think for himself, and he is judgmental and narrow-minded.

lex luthor summed it up best
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoFKHbaUdbY&feature=player_embedded#at=47

the truth is you *deserve* nothing; it’s a matter of adapting to the environment and grasping what is available. You already do this in your work life, so it’s a matter of adjusting to it in the social sphere.

lay out your goals and requirements: what do you actually want? Do you see it around you? If not, figure out where it is (or find a sphere of people that can suggest where to look).

working betas are despised by everyone who’s not a working beta, because everyone instinctively knows that you’re the useful idiot of the welfare state. Your tax dollars are diverted to people who despise you: “single mothers”, female office workers, welfare queens and the psychopathic alpha thugs occupying the top of the male socio-sexual hierarchy.

You think you’ve worked hard all your life because you have morals and a noble work ethic. Everybody else thinks you’ve worked hard because you’re a dumb shit. As far as they’re concerned, you’re either too dumb or too cowardly to steal other people’s money in one way or another. You either lacked the connections to become one of the fat cats of society who amass their fortunes by cheating clueless people out of their money, or you lacked the necessary testosterone and aggression to become one of the violent alpha louts who get sexed by women. The top men despise you, women despise you and the underclass despises you as well, because they all agree that your ilk only exist to be milked. They let you create wealth so that they can plunder it. That’s the only reason they tolerate your existence.

You’re not entitled to anything just because you decided to work hard and establish yourself. You’re entitled, of course, to what that *directly* brings if you are successful at it — money, success, business relationships. The “indirect” benefits of that have been taken away due to the fact that women can support themselves very well now without your money directly, through a combination of their own money and tax-funded state subsidies.

Change what you need to change and improve what you need to improve, keeping in mind that none of this means you “deserve” anything — it just makes you a better competitor in the market.

the first step you need to overcome is getting past your sense of entitlement, and the idea that you deserve a certain kind of woman because of what you have built in your life. You don’t. You deserve the sort of woman you are capable of attracting in terms of what this market demands. The old script is dead. You have to adapt to the new one, or find other options, but stewing with a sense of entitlement will get you precisely nowhere.

- His income and wealth will create an incentive for divorce. This is where all of the advice to just import a foreign woman is so dangerous. Getting married is easier with his income/wealth, but staying married will be harder. This is an insane system, but to not acknowledge the insanity is extremely dangerous.

the purpose of marriage for females is to secure resources and status, and the pussy tingles evoke from a man's SMV.
High-quality women generally don't really care about money, only status and SMV.

 

[Louis Koo]

How many times have we heard, or even said one of the following statements; “Good men are hard to find,” “There aren’t any good men available,” “A majority of men are homosexual or on the down low,” or “All good men are already taken.” These statements and many others have more often than not been said by woman of all races, creeds and color for a number of reasons. However, what I want to know is what is the definition of a good man? What does he look like? Does he carry himself in a certain manner?
There are a variety of adjectives that can describe and define a good man, but are these adjectives based on what he has, or who he is? Most women may initially define a man as good, or a good catch based solely on his exterior; meaning we have the tendency to focus first on the way he looks, his style of dress, what kind of job/career he has, so on and so on. But do these things truly define a good man? The answer is no. Now don’t get me wrong, these characteristics are nice to have, but they should not be the primary or the initial focus of a man, nor should they increase his value. The makings of a good man are not his outer possessions, but they are within his internal character.
As women, me included, it is imperative that we learn how to look in a man, rather than looking at him. And not only that, but we must learn what to look for inside of a man because his internal characteristics are what make him who he is. But I believe this is not simply a question of what we as women desire in men, but it is a question of what our morals and values are. Do we value physical and exterior qualities more than we value internal qualities? Or is it that we don’t know what characteristics to look for in a man? But then again, it could also be a question of how many women were raised to view men.
I recall a case study I conducted of one hundred women from a wide range of ages, socio-economic, religious, and educational backgrounds. The study asked women to list the top ten traits/characteristics (ten being the least important, one being the most important) they desired in a mate along with a brief explanation as to why these particular traits were vital to them as a woman, and the results were as follows: 10. a tie between intelligence and being physically fit, 9. selfless, 8. a tie between faithful and financially stable, 7. a good communicator, 6. a tie between career/goal-oriented and loving, 5. respectful, 4. a tie between family-oriented and honesty, 3. attractive (as in good looks), 2. God fearing. And the number one trait women desire in a mate is a sense of humor.
Other traits and characteristics women desired were: romantic, legally employed, outgoing, trustworthy, a good lover, understanding, loves children, open-minded, educated, stylish, supportive, dependable, great personality, a leader, caring, a great listener, likes to travel, tall, a friend, spiritual, affectionate, a good cook, strong, patient, independent, helpful, healthy, Christian, loves his mother, a protector, mature, a great provider, and disease free. While all of these traits and characteristics make sense, and reveal what different women think defines a good man, my questions and concerns are what traits matter more to women, and why? And how do we as women truly define what a good man is? Many times a lot of women measure a man by standards they set based on what they have (the independent woman), what they don’t have (the completion seeker), and what they desire to have (the potential gold digger), so on and so on. Rather than doing this what women should do is measure a man for who he is by observing his character, his good works, the way he speaks and interacts with people, so on and so on to see who he really is and begin to define him from who he shows he is. Good men are not hard to find, they are not all taken, and yes there are plenty available to have a productive and prosperous relationship with. It just depends on how one defines what good is. Ladies, what characteristics do you think define a good man? What matters more to you?

Read more at http://madamenoire.com/208044/what-makes-a-good-man-a-good-man/#qRHPE0uUW7QcU4ua.99

this is the type of bullshit emasculated shit u get when u get advice from a female-targeted website

 

[Louis Koo]

Reason #5 – You Look Like Precious But You Want LL Cool J

 

[playahaitian]

^^^

 

[Osca Lee]

bump

 

[(0_0)..l.. finger]

 

[True Real Info]

^^^^^^^^^

 

[AtomAnt]

 

[Osca Lee]

mfs better wake up...

I just talked to a buddy of mine for about 3 hours...

fellas if you are married or dealing with a woman who is rotten or has done her past husband or dude she was dealing with bad....leave that bitch alone on the cool... cause in the end you will be fucked up just like the others

 

[Sampson]

Subs.

 

[creepin]

I will come back to this one. It does strike me though that women are not aware of their dualities.

 

[the13thround]

I need to re-read this thread.
I wasn't ready to be laced with all this info when this thread was first created.
Glad I was able to find this gem again.

 

[Lexx Diamond]

Rewind this...

 

[BlackGoku]

mfs better wake up...

I just talked to a buddy of mine for about 3 hours...

fellas if you are married or dealing with a woman who is rotten or has done her past husband or dude she was dealing with bad....leave that bitch alone on the cool... cause in the end you will be fucked up just like the others

For my sons mother, my dad told me that i needed to talk to her past bf to see why he left. This is when i was in my 20s and i thought it was the craziest thing i ever heard...now in my 40s, i had to learn the hard way...still "paying" for it