An LTR, for me personally, is not even a consideration.. I’m looking for a good time, only, and the company of my bros is far superior to that of a female companion. I do enjoy the company of a woman in small doses, but mostly I’m only interested in them for occasional sex at this point. The only way I’d ever enter another LTR is if all the pieces just fit perfectly, and even then I’ll address it with an entirely new RP mindset. Thank you Rollo, Roosh, commenters and PUA in general.

“So the remaining question is, is the girl worth the LTR (aside from the sex)?”
No. And you shouldn’t have thoughts of a LTR when initiating a relationship any more than you should have a million frontal cortex thoughts in your head when you are teeing up a golf shot.

I see a one hundred eighty degree difference. You are thinking in an equalist feminist mind-set. You can reach equilibrium, sure at the juncture where you are spreading your cheap sperm and she is exercising her AF’s strategy.

If she isn’t on the pill, I would suggest you get with her primarily only in the proliferative phase of her menstrual cycle. When she wants Alpha F*cks most. Don’t even think about a LTR until you get to know her well or after a significant length of time.

Thanks for the great podcast/interview. From my point of view you also outshined Mr. McQueen, and it was really nice listening to your calm and thoughtful voice.

It got me thinking that would be nice for you to make more podcasts of your own, to play with these topics you write about in a live setting. Have you ever thought about that?

We had a radio format here (in Finland, where I live) couple of years ago: a local self-help guru/business guru had a monologue-based radio show, which became really popular and also received kind of a cult following. The idea of that show was that every week he wrote a column about a subject, and received comments for that in his website. Then couple of days after that column he had a 1-hour monologue in a radio talking about the same subject – no visitors in the show, just kind of preaching by himself but he also took many of the comments he had gotten in the Web regarding his column, and also took some comments live in the Web during the monologue show and included that in the discussion. Initially sounds like a boring idea to listen to a monologue, but with a good speaker and interesting topics in can work really well.

With the high standard of your columns, the intellectual people doing the commenting on this website every week, and the way you represent yourself when you speak – I feel a similar format could work very well for you.

There’s not a whole lot of difference from a purely sexual perspective.

1. Thanks for the shout out, Rollo, but I didn’t predict that Yes Means Yes would soon become widespread or controlling law around the US. Novaseeker did that, at JustFourGuys and Dalrock, and elsewhere. I just put it on blast around the manosphere. Right now, YMY is controlling at state supported California institutions of higher education. The move is on to spread it to more college campi around the nation. And YMY’s advocates want it as a fixture of criminal law, which would absolutely revolutionize rape law and intersexual relations as we know them. I can only conclude that sending one’s son to a college or university where YMY is law would be a death wish for that young man.

2. You said that men aren’t angry at women; they are angry at themselves. They are angry at a lot of things, and people, but they aren’t angry at women. They aren’t angry at women as a group or a sex. They aren’t angry at women for being women, or for acting in ways characteristic of women. They aren’t angry at women for being hypergamous or for wanting attractive men or for not wanting unattractive men. They aren’t angry at women for wanting to work or slut around or go to college or get married, or all of the above. They just think women, and society, should be honest about it and don’t expect men to foot the bill for it.

Yeah, I agree with your entire post.. and this..

But look. I was on top of the world for years, when I had it good. Then I didn’t. And I still had the rest of my life to live.

I can totally relate to. I’m seeing both sides of a shiny freshly minted coin for sure.

All I was trying to say is if you look at it from a purely sexual standpoint, there’s not a lot of difference between being the PUA player (given that you have moderate success), and committing to a former CC rider. The quality is fairly equal.

So the remaining question is, is the girl worth the LTR (aside from the sex)?

And you are sure it’s not a trick by your wife’s divorce lawyer to send a seductress you way?

Yeah, I’m sure, but we are 100% on the down low anyway, at least as much as possible.

@sj

Yeah, it’s just for fun..

I’m not worried about her at all.. What I’m saying is she’s a pretty cool chick, actually has a head on her shoulders, and, imo, will make someone a decent wife someday even though she’s slutting it up with me right now.

My rambling has a lot to do with the paradox I found myself in when my wife came back to my bed after her affair (during our ongoing divorce). I knew if I worked at it, I could probably salvage and bring her back for good, but of course, I was pissed and she seemed like damaged goods now (which I realize now, is really only in the mind).

So on the one hand I wanted her back, but the slut factor was too much to overcome. On the other hand I wanted to go play and do the PUA thing, though I realized I’d be playing with sluts.

See what I mean? There’s not a whole lot of difference.

I completely disagree with you. From the Biblie, sex is not sinful, it was created by God for us to reproduce. The carnal desire is kind of a “mechanism” for us to desire to reproduce.