Should You Delay Sleeping with a Girl for a Better LTR?

[topcat]

But I do find that sometimes, being overly sexual or using certain sexual gambits seem to push such girls away that would work well on otherwise more open to casual stuff girls.

Wrong diagnosis. They’re not necessarily looking for something serious. Your approach to setting sexual frames just isn’t working on her for whatever reason.

In the case that verbals aren’t working, you shift to building arousal covertly (vocal tone, proximity, eye contact touch, pregnant pauses..) and pulling via plausible deniability.
You shift to building comfort verbally, and addressing sexuality via proxy with innocent appearing conversation that gets her to open up about her past relationships and romantic ideals. You relate to her on these and provide incite based on your own experiences and preferences.

Tbh, you should be doing this anyway, as it will raise the odds of a successful close across most types of girl.

Calibration is everything.

 

[Conquistador]

Is there any way to identify girls who may be genuinely only looking for LTR with serious guys and do not sleep with guys on first few dates? And if you have a strong feeling she may be such (and you are looking for a LTR), would you change how you act on a date? I don't mean not pushing for sex, because I find that even if girls wait for a deeper connection, they still prefer a guy who knows how to lead them to sex. But I do find that sometimes, being overly sexual or using certain sexual gambits seem to push such girls away that would work well on otherwise more open to casual stuff girls.

My experience on 'identifying' LTR girls are those who do not state it outright, nor do they talk about their expectations of guys, and they tend to avoid getting too deep on personal sexual topics too quickly as well. They will often deflect the "lets go back to mine" plausible deniability with a simple - "I can't" or "Not today" without justifying it with a reason. I also find they are less likely to friendzone but will often ghost or disappear after a few messages if not interested.

Whenever a girl tells me she is only looking for something serious, it gives me "I've been taken advantage of many times and now I have some over complicated rules to protect myself which I don't always follow if the guy has enough game". But maybe I'm being too harsh.

Well, it’s actually very easy to find girls like that. But there’s a tradeoff a lot of guys understandably don’t like.

All you have to do is date religious girls and screen until you find one who uncritically swallows her denomination’s teachings and really implements them unreservedly. They pretty much grow on trees in some parts of most countries.

Granted, some guys might have a hard time figuring whether she’s actually for real, esp as percentage varies a lot by group. But I’m sure you’ll get the hang of it.

It’s been well documented that women’s sexual instincts can be suppressed by social cues much more effectively than men.

Just don’t blame me if you find out your devoted GF is dogmatic, judgmental, socially conservative, conformist, and/or a little boring…it’s a trade-off, and you have no guarantee she won’t have other toxic traits like cluster B or normal cattiness

Edit: oh and by the way, a lot of these girls get snapped up young and semi-permanently so that’s another factor

 

[POB]

I'm pretty sure most guys got lazy and didn't watch the whole video smfh.
He gives a pretty fair chance to marriage and monogamy.

Still think people underestimate the power of brain chemicals, and overestimate the power of love.
Basically, if you skip some steps the relationship will either derail or run it's course faster.

Sucesfull LTR always look the same:
sex > companionship > deep friendship > making plans > achieving common life goals > end (by death or divorce)

Unsucessfull ones usually invert this order:
companionship > deep friendship > making plans >sex > achieving common goals > end

Now imagine going through all those emotional phases, and arriving at sex with an uncompatible person in bed.
This is what they did 40-50+ years ago, and this is what people try to do today.

 

[Conquistador]

I think the real problem with delaying sex isn’t actually what they’re doing, it’s how.

Today ppl don’t delay sex for understandable reasons like pregnancy fears or socioreligious conservatism.

Still think people underestimate the power of brain chemicals, and overestimate the power of love.

Love being the main thing about marriage is a fairly modern invention. Unsurprisingly so. And it’s lame.

Sucesfull LTR always look the same:
sex > companionship > deep friendship > making plans > achieving common life goals > end (by death or divorce)

It’s a valid pattern. Not the only one.
Respectfully, that “always” is ultimately coming from the same perspective that intersectional feminist criticism comes from. Nothing against anything else you wrote.

Unsucessfull ones usually invert this order:
companionship > deep friendship > making plans >sex > achieving common goals > end

Aka loser game. I haven’t read the take OP mentioned, but last I read them, AoM was preaching pre-1960 retro stuff. And in those days, people either had sex once the girl trusted the man not to pump-n-dump (social factors being a deterrent toward such caddishness) or in some places times and situations they held each other in their arms passionately while they tried to make enough money to set up together, all the while burning with unconsummated desire.

The pill and other such changes may have had something to do with it too.

Either way, healthy married people should be at it like rabbits. Not necessarily all the time, but for at least 40% of the time.

Now imagine going through all those emotional phases, and arriving at sex with an uncompatible person in bed.

The whole “incompatibility” thing is mainly a thing invented by people who are submitting to the frame of the people shaming them.

More importantly, it’s a luxury of people who have little else to worry about. Aka a first world problem. Ask most happily married third-world dudes and they’ll explain better than I ever could.

No, seriously. Post-industrial prosperity combined with various socioeconomic factors is the primary cause of current obsession with sex and relationships.

Try to imagine a PUA guild at different times and places and you’ll see what I mean.

(Un)luckily, Chase might be right about the whole civilizational-life-cycle thing (I think history is too chaotic for such patterns to be inevitable) and we could totally be headed for an era of renewed manliness and probably fewer sex partners.

This is what they did 40-50+ years ago, and this is what people try to do today.

Huh? I don’t understand this part.

But yeah, I agree non-religious people who have a relationship without sex are lame. Especially if they’re in a dead bed marriage. My mommy told me that men whose wives won’t sleep with them should be able to get at-fault divorces, but most of the real world isn’t that enlightened yet haha

 

[Skills]

@TestY you can delay sex if you are advanced on porpuse like chase is mentioning,cj etc...pure evil used to do that:

Advanced Technique - Clarification of the Pureevils' 3- day game method

I am totally purposely posting this in advance cause it was ORIGINAL DESIGN TO BE AN ADVANCE CONCEPT... I am a good friend of pureevil so i know him pretty good and I fought like crazy with him in pm, forums and threads when he came out with this concept, which made me pretty much understand...

www.skilledseducer.com

Teevester did also a deeper look in girls chase if someone can find it post please..