Guys, we all lost according to ladder theory!

Page 4 of 8 [ 123 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

AussieMatty
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 21 Mar 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 404
Location: Townsville, Queensland

14 Jun 2012, 11:42 pm

So what is an answer? Communication disconnection......



MXH
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,057
Location: Here i stand and face the rain

14 Jun 2012, 11:53 pm

you never made a question to answer



HisDivineMajesty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,364
Location: Planet Earth

15 Jun 2012, 12:48 am

DogsWithoutHorses wrote:
dingdingding


Is this response a result of your hidden desire to sleep with every man you see walking on the street?
You see, that's about as good a theory as the one you agree with. Dubious analysis, based on little more than your views on certain types of people.



Zinnel
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2011
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 405
Location: Missouri, USA

15 Jun 2012, 1:11 am

JanuaryMan wrote:
LOL. Well....just go to any council estate in the UK. Casual sex and relationships are rife and constantly changing partners between circles. It's not something I like but it's abundant and definitely exists regardless of any ladder theory. In fact I'd definitely say their standards are almost non existent.

And all I do is just stay reasonably healthy, have a good demeanour and some wit about me. I know a lot about various topics so conversation isn't too hard, either. Of course, some other "experience" helps too.. I have to use my wit to make up for my physique but that works just fine. I'd say the girls I pair up with are average to 7. And as far as the scale goes I put myself in the same bracket, a 5-7.

Anyways, in short, had this ladder theory been devised by someone more experienced on the field, there would be no ladder theory. It is simply one's elaborate coping mechanism to deal with failure, and their creepy attempts to get dates by being friends. At least, that's how I see it.

When I was a teenager, I was once this ladder theory guy. As time moved on, and I moved on with it, I got more experience and developed more in social environments. My views changed, my understanding changed, my awareness increased. These things would have never increased had I stayed in the same hole, waiting for people to pity or agree with me, and tried denying my problems instead of dealing with them. But that is what many people that buy into this theory ARE doing - not moving forward with their lives. Not allowing themselves to make mistakes to learn from. Not allowing rejection to better prepare them for rejection in the future. Not opening their minds. Not allowing their ego to be broken as well as fixed (how can you fix something not broken?) and so on.


:lmao: Men who are "successful" in dating or having relationships with women still do those things. Honestly, you can be that guy who cuts himself everytime he gets rejected, has biggest ego in their city and isn't willing to even try and go for an interview for a job because he is afraid of making mistakes and you will still be capable of finding a woman who will want to be with you.

The funny thing about trying to figure about why some people struggle while other people flurrish in the dating seen is that as soon as you label a reason(s) for a woman's/man's lack of "success" you can easily find someone who has "success" and yet has those trait(s) aswell.


_________________
keep an open mind but not so open your brain falls out


MR20
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Sep 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 945

15 Jun 2012, 9:52 am

JanuaryMan wrote:
I have been reading the whole of this "theory" and the "theory" I'm getting is the author is all of the common criticisms rolled into one.

It's no more scientific or accurate than a person that gets robbed by a black man trying to find bizarre logic to explain his disdain for all black people based on one failed interaction with another human being. He makes a website like this for fellow losers that fail at dating to agree with him and feed his narcissism.

The author rejects all criticism from women as proven by his criticism page, and/or any LOGICAL reasoning on how he can be a useful member of society let alone more successful at dating. Quite frankly, he's no better than any one of the people that sometimes come to Love & Dating pretending to seek advice but secretly wanting people to agree with them and ganging up on the problem they have instead of approaching it with lateral thinking.

These sorts of people are almost beyond help, but insist on being heard over and over and over about the same topic. Having been to other chatrooms and forums I do see this as being something especially existent in AS folks and wish there was a way to help them see things differently. Alas, I don't think there is. This sort of cognitive thinking is either something you accept, ignore or oppress. I choose to do a mixture of the first 2 and go somewhere else if it becomes abundant. And while I think everyone has a right to their own opinions and express them within reason, I hope this sort of thinking doesn't remain abundant on WP.


Hey dude you can go f**k yourself. I know you're talking about people like me in that bolded sentence. So what if I come here and vent about my problems? I don't have any friends or a therapist/doctor, so coming here talking is how I let go of stress and frustration.

Why do I need to be a "useful" member of society when it's done nothing but treat me like s**t. I've been ridiculed and rejection more times than you can count by people of both genders.

Why waste time spending money on clothes, faking interesting in certain things, just to impressive douche bags like you who think they're better than everyone just because they can get laid?

Sometimes being hermit is probably the best thing for me. No one to bother me. Just the things I love and show interests in. Most of all, I don't have to deal with Aholes like you.



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

15 Jun 2012, 10:08 am

Based on my research, he's not far off when it comes to certain aspects of it. I tend to doubt the ladder concept, but the "how we measure a potential partner" thing is not outlandish by any means. If you look into the material of Mystery or David Deangelo this is in essence what they seek for their clients to become. At one point when I was studying DeAngelo's material, the girl I was testing it on went on a tangent (without knowing I was studying and using the material to great effect on her) about how "BS" the PUA movement was and how it would never work.



deltafunction
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jun 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,094
Location: Lost

15 Jun 2012, 2:57 pm

TM wrote:
Based on my research, he's not far off when it comes to certain aspects of it. I tend to doubt the ladder concept, but the "how we measure a potential partner" thing is not outlandish by any means. If you look into the material of Mystery or David Deangelo this is in essence what they seek for their clients to become. At one point when I was studying DeAngelo's material, the girl I was testing it on went on a tangent (without knowing I was studying and using the material to great effect on her) about how "BS" the PUA movement was and how it would never work.


You studied this stuff? Was it for school, or personal interest?


_________________
Your Aspie score: 93 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 109 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits


TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

15 Jun 2012, 4:13 pm

deltafunction wrote:
TM wrote:
Based on my research, he's not far off when it comes to certain aspects of it. I tend to doubt the ladder concept, but the "how we measure a potential partner" thing is not outlandish by any means. If you look into the material of Mystery or David Deangelo this is in essence what they seek for their clients to become. At one point when I was studying DeAngelo's material, the girl I was testing it on went on a tangent (without knowing I was studying and using the material to great effect on her) about how "BS" the PUA movement was and how it would never work.


You studied this stuff? Was it for school, or personal interest?


Not ladder theory, but human behavior, the psychology and biology of attraction that type of stuff. Some of the prevalent theories on the topic are that to use Deangelo's phrase "attraction isn't a choice" it's based on a largely subconscious process where certain criteria are judged. In effect the "status" of a potential partner is evaluated without the person doing the evaluation realizing they are doing it. The criteria used differs between the genders, but is focused around the biological need to reproduce and our desire to give our offspring the best possible chance to reproduce.

The beauty of it is that it explains everything about the selection process for a mate, why certain things are valued, how some of them are biological others cultural and so on.



AussieMatty
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 21 Mar 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 404
Location: Townsville, Queensland

15 Jun 2012, 7:08 pm

TM wrote:
deltafunction wrote:
TM wrote:
Based on my research, he's not far off when it comes to certain aspects of it. I tend to doubt the ladder concept, but the "how we measure a potential partner" thing is not outlandish by any means. If you look into the material of Mystery or David Deangelo this is in essence what they seek for their clients to become. At one point when I was studying DeAngelo's material, the girl I was testing it on went on a tangent (without knowing I was studying and using the material to great effect on her) about how "BS" the PUA movement was and how it would never work.


You studied this stuff? Was it for school, or personal interest?


Not ladder theory, but human behavior, the psychology and biology of attraction that type of stuff. Some of the prevalent theories on the topic are that to use Deangelo's phrase "attraction isn't a choice" it's based on a largely subconscious process where certain criteria are judged. In effect the "status" of a potential partner is evaluated without the person doing the evaluation realizing they are doing it. The criteria used differs between the genders, but is focused around the biological need to reproduce and our desire to give our offspring the best possible chance to reproduce.

The beauty of it is that it explains everything about the selection process for a mate, why certain things are valued, how some of them are biological others cultural and so on.


So you saying that most of human actions on this finding a partner is more of natural circumstance rather than a theory? I thought the theory is proven in this society because the lustre of terrible behaviour? Mental disorders or whatsoever is quite related to ladder theory. Most women are actually competitive and seek for potential mate. So we are looking at age range between 15 to 29. This same age range in the past is least competitive, since the everchanging society into very different world like we are up to now it causes malfunction in the ladder theory. It becomes more potential to be true and evident. Now women in this age range is more competitive. This competitiveness is massive disadvantage for everyone because it can wipe out the population.

Think about using the animal and biological theories. Pretty close to what you were studying?



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

16 Jun 2012, 6:02 am

AussieMatty wrote:

So you saying that most of human actions on this finding a partner is more of natural circumstance rather than a theory? I thought the theory is proven in this society because the lustre of terrible behaviour? Mental disorders or whatsoever is quite related to ladder theory. Most women are actually competitive and seek for potential mate. So we are looking at age range between 15 to 29. This same age range in the past is least competitive, since the everchanging society into very different world like we are up to now it causes malfunction in the ladder theory. It becomes more potential to be true and evident. Now women in this age range is more competitive. This competitiveness is massive disadvantage for everyone because it can wipe out the population.

Think about using the animal and biological theories. Pretty close to what you were studying?


I'm saying that the various status elements can be organized into a theory similar to what has been done with the ladder theory. In essence, a person can fake what women find attractive quite easily.



AussieMatty
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 21 Mar 2012
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 404
Location: Townsville, Queensland

16 Jun 2012, 9:43 pm

I think that would be a common problem these days when people intentionally fake their mentality or personality aspects.



TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

17 Jun 2012, 8:23 am

AussieMatty wrote:
I think that would be a common problem these days when people intentionally fake their mentality or personality aspects.


I don't view it as a problem, I view it as an easy blueprint on how to get a woman. In essence, if women went for the qualities they say they want in a man and which our mothers/sisters and whatnot told us would help us be successful in dating it wouldn't be a problem.



HisDivineMajesty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,364
Location: Planet Earth

17 Jun 2012, 11:08 am

Indeed. You can go about yelling something is unfair, or you can just do it and be succesful.

Work out. In general, women like muscles more than friendliness, even if they claim otherwise.
Be dominant. In general, women like dominant men better than funny men, even if they claim otherwise.
Make money. In general, women like material status, even if they claim otherwise.

That should get you right up on a lot of women's ladders, I suppose. Attraction is not something you decide on. I can tell everyone that I'm attracted to blonde women, but in reality, I find most of them boring, stupid and irresponsible, and the ones who have some kind of personality are almost all members of my family.

In another thread, I saw a woman claiming an actor appeared to be so intelligent it was attractive. However, it was naught but charisma and dominance. The man had no formal education beyond being a part-time film director, but he was an actor who spent a lot of time on his appearance, and was dressed in expensive clothes. Intelligence was an explanation, not a reason, for attraction.



RICKY5
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Dec 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

17 Jun 2012, 9:55 pm

AussieMatty wrote:
Yep well said ladder theory.

http://www.laddertheory.com/

This applies that why me and rest of aspie guys on here are losing at this game. I want a true love long term relationship. To the extend of the ladder theory, it not going to happen......................

I guess this is purpose of why I am struggling......I lost and still losing at this. Competitive for genetic diversity. My generation is at loss. I guess its biggest concern that I'm becoming extinct.

So are we gone?


Ladder theory is obsolete. Read http://heartiste.wordpress.com/the-sixt ... s-of-poon/

Why should your sense of self-worth be defined by a fickle and emotional judge?



Shebakoby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Sep 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,759

17 Jun 2012, 11:57 pm

my ladders are empty.



CaptainTrips222
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,100

18 Jun 2012, 12:06 am

bizboy1 wrote:
I really don't see how people with Asperger's lose with this theory.


It's not so black and white. I wouldn't get too hung up on these ideas.