Monday, April 13, 2009

What makes a woman good in bed?

[edit: click here for results of the poll]

One of the golden rules of game is: do not talk about sex.

Once you start an open, direct conversation about sex with a woman you have not slept with, you seal your fate. Women are socially savvy, and instinctively avoid awkward situations. Having talked extensively about your or her sexual experiences and - worse preferences - is likely to prohibit any physical escalation since now any actual action will be tainted by uneasy thoughts about the previous conversation.

There are two exceptions to this rule:

1) sub-communication/indirect talk about sex (ambiguous "double talk", innuendos, sexual body language and eye contact): this one is hard for (many) guys to master, but an absolute requirement for same night lays.

2) you are not interested in having sex with that woman

The latter one is worthy of mastering, too. For one, you can always use social proof (pivots). And/or, you can learn massively from a woman that is uninhibited and unbiased. Women tend to open up completely when talking half drunk to strangers at a bar. The "confessions" I heard from women this way have changed my world view forever.

A fun way to start a sexual conversation (that, depending on your delivery, is more likely to have you end up with exception #2) is to ask a woman out of the blue - "On a scale from 1 to 10 - how good are you in bed?".

[If used correctly, this is a classical example of "flipping the script".]

What is more surprising maybe is that the answers are stereotypical. They fall into the following categories:

If the woman is getting the joke, she will answer with something like "11" or "0" (you decide which one is funnier).

If she is not getting the joke and she is not fully attracted to you, she will reply with something lame like "are you serious?' or "7" (which is above average, yet seemingly "modest").

If she is not getting the joke but attracted to you, she will start qualifying by bragging about her skills. And a 100% of the time this will be about blow jobs.

Fellatio skill seems to be the only field of sexual technique in which women think they are competing against each other.

What is your opinion? Let's flip the script of publicly criticizing bedroom skills. What does it take for a woman to blow your mind in the sack?


  1. Passionate, really is into YOU, is a good kisser, is a little playful, DOES NOT STINK (God's punishment to all of us), knows how to roll her lips over her teeth so she doesn't scrape your shlong on the BJ's, doesn't have to be tight, but no "mudhole" either, uses her hands a little instead of just laying there.....

    Note-----anybody else ever notice that some "spinners" are very loose down there, while some rather thick chicks with some height have tight stuff? Thats something I came across back when. You'd have a 5-4 110 pounder with no kids and you'd be able to put your foot in her, and then have a 5-9 165 pounder with big boobs and big bones and she'd have some quite good wish you could put the big gals snatch (and personality) on the small one...... One felt more "lust" for the ballerina going into it, but felt more warmth with the "good ol' gal".

    Life is funny sometimes.

  2. i allowed myself multiple preferences. interestingly my preferences matched the set of popular preferences exactly. (unexpectedly high stereotypicality can be interesting.)

    my preferences were: passionate, expressive, orally skilled, submissisive, responsive, kinky/naughty, libidinous, tight.

    level of experience (virginal - promiscuous) does not matter (or perhaps there are pros and cons to either pole).

    the active-passive dimension also doesn't seem to matter to us too much.

    bisexuality and polyamory as well appear to be beside the point.

    the next one should be on female preferences. i'm almost 100% certain, it will show that they want our pricks to be bigger than theirs. tight becomes big. submissive becomes dominant. experience now is a good thing. passionate, expressive, orally skilled, kinky/naughty, and libidinous remain. imaginative, tender, and rough might be added to the list -- and dirty-talking.


    ps: thanks for the link to johnny soporno's "seductive reasoning" talks. i agree with his views by and large. it would be good to hear your response to his ideas (including his whole-hearted acceptance of female promiscuity).

  3. ...including his whole-hearted acceptance of female promiscuityI can see why it works for him and not for others.

    To say it somewhat provocatively - his solution to annihilate the Madonna/Whore complex is to think of all women as whores.

    In my view the true basis of the Madonna/Whore dichotomy is not in the mind of men. It lies in the nature of female desire.

    From a biological point of view it simply does not make sense for men to categorize women in this way. There is no benefit in (mis)labeling women as fuck versus marriage material. Au contraire, there may be a high evolutionary cost in falling for the "Madonna" extreme and failing to guard against her desire to cheat.

    It does make a lot of sense, though, for women to embrace both a "long term mating strategy" (i.e. falling in love with beta providers) as well as the "short term mating strategy" of alpha male flings.

    The male M/W complex is the result of observing and/or experiencing these conflicting sides of female sexuality at different points in time - and failing to realize that these two sides co-exist in the same individuals.

    Why does that matter?

    The problem lies in the fact that the optimal female mating strategy is to fake monogamy while practicing polygamy.This is completely at odds with an optimal male strategy of pure polygamy.

    Hence, women will push for commitment - while keeping themselves the liberty of breaking the rules, simply by living their lives following "in the moment" feelings more than anything else.

    The crux is that a committed man quickly becomes less attractive. Not just to the woman he commits to, but to all other women, too. His value in the mating market drops. By getting a guy to commit or even taking up more an more of his time and attention, a woman can "force" a guy into monogamy since his options go down. At the same time, she will not lose an iota of her own attractiveness. Under these circumstances the chances of either of the sexes cheating are completely skewed.

    The equivalent scenario would be if a woman would get defaced or double her weight the moment she commits. Now the guy would instantly lose his attraction to her and simultaneously become more attractive to others than her.The latter scenario is somewhat reminiscent of the Arabic tradition of veiling married women. Since facial features and body contours are the main factors that cause male attraction, veiling will rob a committed woman of tremendous value in the mating market.

    In a way it is telling how vehemently women all over the world protest against this societal norm - and bitterly fight for their "right" to wear sexy miniskirts in public. What for, one wonders? After all, if a woman is committed to a man (and supposedly completely happy now that she got every woman's life dream), why would she still have a need to be attractive to other men? :-p

  4. The crux is that a committed man quickly becomes less attractive. Not just to the woman he commits to, but to all other women, too.

    Does not this go against the proven phenomena of women being magnetized to married men (in a social setting: bar, crowds, etc)?

  5. Does not this go against the proven phenomena of women being magnetized to married men (in a social setting: bar, crowds, etc)?The main effect is well described in roissy's post on "getting rusty":

    No doubt, a wedding band helps to attract women. However, most married men cannot capitalize on that. They have taken on beta-behavior, and therefore lose any potential attraction a woman might have the moment hey open their mouths.

    Women are not simply attracted to married men. They are attracted to married men who (managed to) still exhibit alpha traits. The standard husband is unattractive (you probably know tons of these guys yourself). The cheating liar will get all the attention.

    In other words, women lust for the asshole husband at least as much as they lust for the asshole bachelor.

    If a guy loses his asshole edge due to the "softening" effects of a committed relationship, or is a beta to begin with (still attractive, but only as long term mate) he'll not gain any female attraction by having a steady partner.


  6. Most women don’t know this... but even if a man is attracted to you or even says he loves you...

    ...chances are he still feels something is missing.

    Because there is a secret, emotional need hidden within his heart that he craves more than anything.

    And in most cases, is not being met.

    The problem is, if it’s not being met, his attention will inevitably wander until he finds a woman who can give it to him.

    Maybe one in a thousand women knows how to do this instinctively, and they usually rise to unbelievable levels of influence and fame.

    But most women, or men for that matter, don’t even know it exists.

    On the other hand, when you have this 1 simple secret...

    You won’t believe the shocking effect you have on the men in your life.

    Here’s a video I discovered that shows you exactly what I’m talking about:

    Here’s how: ==> He’ll give his heart to the first woman who does THIS... ]