Achieving Nirvana w/ DMSI V2.4 5.5G - Rape Me, My Friends(I'm not the only one!)

[SargeMaximus]

Yep, and oddly doesn't ask what I'm running. Even when I ran E2, she just referred to it as my "noise."

That is odd. You think she'd connect the two. Or at least wonder if the "noise" is causing the changes. I wonder why she doesn't notice. Naturalizer maybe?

Sorry if this is derailing your topic RT,

@ Shannon via the discussion between you and Dzemoo: Have you read about Bonobo monkeys at all? Apparently they have more in common with us than Chimps and in their society, sex is free and it's matriarchal. There's even been some studies (I've heard) that show that the most alpha monkeys don't get the most sex, simply the most friendly ones with the most female friends do.

Have you considered that this could be a way to improve DMSI? Looking at the "sex issue" as from the Bonobo paradigm (friendly sex) instead of the Chimp paradigm (Alpha sex).

I'm a couple steps ahead of you on this, actually. I have been researching and experimenting with this for several months now. The results, while not conclusive, do point to a definite difference in the approaches, but I can't say that one is better than the other. They both get results, but they get different results because they affect different groups of females. As far as I can see, the chimp model seems to be affecting those females who are genetically, if not subconsciously (or even consciously) seeking reproduction, while the bonobo model seems to be pulling those females who are interested in sex for fun, and FWB sex.

The difference seems to be in the perceived threat level, with, ironically, the "threat" being... impregnation! So those females who want that, respond to the chimp model, and those who don't, respond to the bonobo model.

I'm not using the alpha/chimp model in DMSI. I'm using a model that is closer to the bonobo one, but still is it's own approach. It is closer not in that it is matriarchal in paradigm, but in that it is not presenting sex as a reproductive "threat". In other words, DMSI focuses on making sex the goal, but the sex is not specified as reproductive, so it can be taken by each female according to her desires, and therefore affects both types. But, since it is not specified, it seems to be more effective for "sex for fun" than "sex for procreation".

This is awesome! Now that you bring that up, I remember a 45-50+ GILF (seriously, hot as f*ck. grey hair was the only indicator of her age) who was flirting with me when I was in construction one time (she was the home owner's wife). Anyhow, I remember in conversation she asked if I ever wanted kids, and I said no. To which she replied "That's good." lol. At the time I thought maybe it's because she wanted my kind out of the gene pool, but with her flirting it's probably because she didn't want to get pregnant but wanted to f*ck.

So yeah, very interesting indeed. Glad you've been thinking of this stuff too. I have no doubt you'll achieve DMSI's results with such an open mind.

I like this shift in your thinking Sarge. You're searching for proof why things ARE working. In the past, you had this destructive skepticism where you were always searching for proof why things would NOT work out.

Really? Wow, I hadn't even noticed.

Thanks.