Welcome to The Hub. This is our welcoming tribe dedicated to introducing yourself, meeting new people, and learning about new tribes.
I think the crux of our disagreement lies herein,
"You still have to make use of it in a way that wets panties."
I am of the opinion that money simply does not wet panties. It just doesn't.
I've had money, and I've spent a long time around money, to see that money simply does not wet panties. If anything, it is negatively correlated to the dampness of the panties.
You might find that some gold diggers are prepared to strategically open their legs, but what you will find when they do, is not wet panties. They will be bone dry.
Money does not the undergarments moisten. It simply does not.
think of Mark Zuck or Elon. They can get laid. But I bet they can't dampen the panties. Whatever pussy they are getting, they are paying for it one way or another. your example of the ski lodge and the yacht are perfect examples - you would be 'paying' for it, even though no banknotes have been exchanged. the main problem with paying for sex is that there is the absence of the golden ingredient - which is desire.
Money does not dampen the panties. not if you give her $100 and not if you let her stay on your yacht.
Why do I suspect that money actually drys the panties? Because money can convey suitability. it shows that you are reliable, hardworking and mature. And that kills tingles.
The thing that moistens the panties is unsuitability. The guy that cleans the pool is far more likely to damped the panties of Ms Zuckerberg than Mark. Esp if he is unsuitable, vain, child like, egotistical, unreliable etc.
Read MoreThe Dylan movie has a great depiction of the unchainable Alpha archetype, together with a graphic little scece of a plate breaking.
Well worth the watch.
Where did i say flaunting it?
Perhaps my point was poorly articulated. Wealth gives you freedom of activity choice and different sceneries of intensity.
You still have to make use of it in a way that wets panties.
I used extreme examples and did not communicate my point in a way it was intended.
Gold diggers will prostitute themselves, but they won't be aroused
I openly made a point to that effect at the end of my statement. I'm not sure if it was glossed over. I was answering what role does money have in seduction, and there is very little role it has, but can somewhat
1
2
@Lone_Ranger Money is simply another tool. If you have no game but enough money, you can get laid just fine. Certainly the quality of women you attract will be much different than the girls floor-mattress guy gets, but you will get laid nonetheless.
The real magic happens when the money is implied and not flaunted.
@Vermillion-Rx saying that flaunting wealth leads to giney tingles is highly inaccurate
Gold diggers will prostitute themselves, but they won't be aroused
2
2
Boot out the Drunks
Well shit, there goes like 75% of the Infantry, whether Army or Marines
Oh god why did i search that up
Why stop there?
Boot out the Drunks, Addicts, Sociopaths, Psychopaths and Narcissists too, since any of those should be a violation of the rigorous standards necessary for Military Service.
It would probably eliminate a lot of the Top Brass.
1
1
This reply is going in my dot reds trophy case
