Become Irresistibly Attractive To Women Sexually Product

[Steve]

I have an issue with the word "single" one of the sentences in the script:

"I now act on all sexual interest from beautiful women in positive and effective ways, as well as all opportunities to escalate sexual interactions with single women I find sexually attractive."

First, I think it should be up to the user if they want to escalate sexually on a woman who's single or not. No one's morals about this should be imposed on anyone else.

Second, women are single, have boyfriends, and are married based on a wide scale. Some are happy and won't stray, some are not happy and looking to move on but haven't found someone to get them to make the change, some are "single" but they have just started dating someone regularly hoping it becomes more serious... all over the board. I think this word should be removed.

[LionKing]

I agree in the sense that women who are completely "single" can be pretty rare, at least they have some mating process going on.. so who's definition of single is the effective one here?

But on the other hand, think of how much trouble you'd get into in a year if you were attracting all sorts of married or otherwise committed women all the time... 12 angry boyfriends every year, or more? You couldn't really count on the women to tell you either.

[stratos]

It does seem puritanical and judgmental to make it be about "single". Plenty of attractive women are never without boyfriends and look to swing from one vine to the next. It's only nature - women feel they need a protector even when they're done with their current one and are just sticking around until someone better for them comes along. I recommend getting rid of "single" and let people sort it out themselves.

[Steve]

I recommend getting rid of "single" and let people sort it out themselves.

Yes. Absolutely.

[jennielee]

From a womans perspective single is also a mindset. I considered myself single when i walked out on my ex husband. Legally i was still married to him, but mentally i had moved on with no intent on going back. Single isnt so black and white. For me single is the mindset that i am looking or available to someone. The reverse can be true too. Like currently im single, but i dont consider myself as such because i haven't completely detached emotionally or decided im ready to move on. I think that when you take that into account the scripting is just fine. It should at least as far as i see attract women who mentally consider themselves available regardless of the technical part.

[stratos]

Good point jennielee. might be better to say "available" women then just to avoid language issues. but my pref would be just to remove that as a qualifier.

[Steve]

This really doesn't have anything to do with what's going on in a woman's mind about her situation. This is a man's product and has everything to with what he's thinking about the woman's situation. This really doesn't need to be ambiguous, grey (not black and white) or involve a debate in the guy's mind. I don't think it needs to be replaced with anything else. I feel it should just be removed.

[jennielee]

Well consider this point too then lets take a woman who under normal circumstances would have been faithful to who she's with, but now because of the sub she developed feelings she otherwise would not have had and it ended up destroying her relationship. Lets say you got the chance with her and it didnt work out. Now lets say she regrets leaving her previous relationship. If she or the guy found out it went south because of the sub, ot would raise some serious ethical questions and also make the sub look bad. So yeah while i can see the point of wanting more options for sex you also dont want to destroy people's existing relationships if it wasn't something due to happen anyway. I think there definately has to be something there that prevents taken women who wouldn't stray from doing what they wouldn't naturally do. Maybe available would be a good word choice, but removing it brings about serious ethics questions and could possibly cause IML big trouble if lets say the guy she left decides to sue IML for his "losses". While im sure we can all appreciate more options for sex we also have to think things out. Id hate to see IML get into a legal battle just so someone could get laid more. Is that really fair to Shannon and everyone else at IML? I know if i ended up leaving a relationship over a sub that i wouldn't have left naturally i would very much resent both the person using the sub and the person making the sub. Subs are supposed to make positive changes in the world not negative ones. Thats part of why Shannon's subs are so great. They actually make the world better a little at a time.

[MasterEnki]

Personally I would hate to attract taken / non-available women sexually, it would create all kinds of problems.

Maybe replacing the word 'beautiful' with 'available' in the script would be a useful idea.

For example,

I now focus the unlimited power of my subconscious mind upon making myself irresistible sexually attractive to available women.

I now make myself absolutely irresistible sexy at all levels of my mind, body and emotions and in all ways, to available women.

I now let go of, release, reject and disconnect from any and all negative beliefs about my own attractiveness and replace them with the stronger positive belief that I am irresistibly sexy and attractive to available women.

and so on.

Knowing that I'm only attracting available women would definitely give me peace of mind.


Though I do support freedom / free will, so leaving it open would be a good idea also, though the user would have to use wisdom / consideration,

Be careful what you wish for...

Affairs / cheating can have life destroying consequences.


Maybe having 2 4G programs, one that only attracts 'available women' / 'single women' sexually, and another that is left open, would be a good compromise.


Jennie has a decent point,

If you can use a sub to help escalate sexually with someone's serious girlfriend / wife, so can anyone / everyone else (and that may mean with your serious girlfriend / wife),


Regardless, the script (in the existing BIATBWS 4G) doesn't seem to stop one from going for non-single women.

It doesn't seem to have any specific suggestion(s) that stops and / or discourages the user / listener from going for non-single women / cheating / having affairs, etc.

It just focuses on escalating with 'single' women.


Personally, I plan on using BIATBWS 4G in 2015, likely mid-2015.

If Shannon did make one that focused specifically on available women only, I would go for that / prefer that.

[LionKing]

Well first of all, please don't replace the word 'beautiful' with anything! Maybe change it to "beautiful, sexy and vibrant", but that's it. Second, the notion that we'd need to attract unavailable women sounds to be originating from a scarcity mindset; if the sub actually works to provide abundant single/available women then you'd be fine without those unavailable women. I personally wouldn't want all that drama and quilt of constantly breaking relationships. Thirdly, I'm guessing when the (male) user's subconscious hears the word 'single', it'll probably fetch what that word means to the user and then start attracting exactly that. It wouldn't just start sending out the literal English word 'single' for women to interpret. But I agree that, to my mind at least, 'available' would seem more appropriate than 'single', because the former feels a bit looser.

[Shawn]

But I agree that, to my mind at least, 'available' would seem more appropriate than 'single', because the former feels a bit looser.

My mind seems to work the same way

[Steve]

If she or the guy found out it went south because of the sub, ot would raise some serious ethical questions and also make the sub look bad. So yeah while i can see the point of wanting more options for sex you also dont want to destroy people's existing relationships if it wasn't something due to happen anyway. I think there definately has to be something there that prevents taken women who wouldn't stray from doing what they wouldn't naturally do.

Seriously? Do you think my subconscious could force you, as a woman, to do something you'd never consider doing (happily married or otherwise)? And how would anyone in the world find out a guy listened to subliminal audio, got better at seducing women, and hypothetically broke up a happily married couple? Is he really going to tell anyone? All this over removing one word?

Again, no one's morals should be imposed on anyone else. Last weekend I had sex with an unhappily married woman (ironically overlooking the beach with the sounds of real crashing waves in the background) in less than an hour of meeting her. No one else should have previously made the decision for me whether I should have physically escalated on her or not. It should be left up to me to decide whether to do it or not.

She continues to want to see me. Whether she leaves that relationship or not has nothing to do with what's on the subliminal audio. If a woman is happy in a relationship with the love of her life and wouldn't ever consider cheating, there is no way in the world someone else's subconscious programming is going to make her cheat and leave him. Whether she strays or not, it's up to her and her alone. If I choose to be a part of that, it should be up to me and me alone because that's what I payed for... results I want.