(05-24-2016, 10:15 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-24-2016, 09:06 PM)Darkness Wrote:

(05-24-2016, 08:46 PM)apollolux Wrote:

(05-24-2016, 05:53 PM)Shannon Wrote:

(05-24-2016, 05:45 PM)apollolux Wrote: I'm also not a fan of AOS+BIABWS 5.5G being "gender neutral" since that might dilute its efficacy over something more direct.

Yeah, because you aren't smart enough to know the difference, right? lol

Let's see how hard this really is.

Gender specific version:

Quote:I now make myself irresistibly attractive sexually to beautiful women.

Gender neutral version:

Quote:I now make myself irresistibly attractive sexually to beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to.

They mean and say exactly the same thing, except that doing a gender specific version takes 2-3 times more time. Gender neutral works for any gender and any sexual preference in just one program.

Oh ye of little faith. Or in this case, common sense. When are you guys going to figure out that yes, I actually do know what I'm doing?

My concern isn't over your knowledge or skill set, it's about processing. I know that you insist the subconscious mind can process a much larger and denser amount of data than the conscious mind can, and I know that consciously "beautiful women" can be equivalent to "beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to," but "women" is objectively simpler to understand (i.e. takes less energy and effort to process successfully) than "people of the gender I am sexually attracted to," takes less time to input which allows the space that would have been occupied by the longer statement to be instead occupied with other script, and there's less likelihood of the qualifiers after "people" being ignored or downplayed by a potentially lazy subconscious.

Also, with another processing analogy, "beautiful women" may result in one set of neural pathways firing to associate the prompt with the mind's recollection of beautiful women, while "beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to" may take more time and/or effort to process because it may process in parts, drilling down like the more general "beautiful people" first then having to expend effort (however significant or insignificant) to filter to those "of the gender I am sexually attracted to," potentially processing that in parts like "of the gender I am" (which is male in this example) then having to process "sexually attracted to" and expend more effort linking the two clauses together to make the proper filter.

I'm not trying to belittle your efforts, Shannon, I'm simply looking to present an alternative argument for simpler, more overt and obvious wording based on the fact that it's not quite conclusive how the subconscious definitively and undisputedly processes data, though you without question seem to have come the closest of anyone I've encountered so far to finding out that answer. Also, I would think the trade off of writing a shorter script that would only need a Find & Replace All to change "women" to "men" would be more beneficial than writing a longer script that is gender neutral.

I agree

Is there a way to make the new AOS just focus on the goal of sexiness. With the Biatbw for all genders to use it, have the suggestion be : becoming irresistibly attractive sexually . Nothing else please.

Let's say that you are a heterosexual male, and we give you a program that generates an aura focused on becoming irresistibly attractive sexually".

This is relatively specific, but it allows for situations like:

* You attract gay men.
* You attract bisexual men.

This leads to a lot of unwanted and uncomfortable attention and we have already seen this happen in the past, which is why I specified "beautiful women" in the past, and will not leave the script ambiguous enough to achieve the same result, either way in the next version.

Quote:Let's say that you are a heterosexual male, and we give you a program that generates an aura focused on becoming irresistibly attractive sexually".

This is relatively specific, but it allows for situations like:

* You attract gay men.
* You attract bisexual men.

This leads to a lot of unwanted and uncomfortable attention and we have already seen this happen in the past, which is why I specified "beautiful women" in the past, and will not leave the script ambiguous enough to achieve the same result, either way in the next version.

(05-24-2016, 09:03 PM)wolverine_i_am Wrote: I am very excited for the AOS+BIATBWS 5.5G. I'll be using SM3 next, but I'd also like to run a single stage sub in between to try out new things, so I am seriously considering buying this.

My concern is that I am also not too sure about the gender neutral statements. I know "beautiful people of the gender I'm sexually attracted to" works, although wouldn't "beautiful women" be a lot more efficient for the subconscious to process? The other thing is that I'm assuming the majority of your customer base are heterosexual males (correct me if I'm wrong). Would it be possible to make two different versions catered for different genders / orientation types? Just like how there's alpha male, alpha male for gay men, and alpha female. Thanks in advance for considering.

Quote:It's going to basically bypass guilt, shame and fear on the one hand, and cause you to neutralize and outgrow any such that would prevent success on the other hand. It's not so much the number of goals, but how the primary goals and the implied goals interact within the script, and how I am achieving the goals.

Quote:beautiful people of the gender I am sexually attracted to

Quote:This thing is so powerful that it has to have to have an ego balancer.

Quote:It's going to basically bypass guilt, shame and fear on the one hand, and cause you to neutralize and outgrow any such that would prevent success on the other hand. It's not so much the number of goals, but how the primary goals and the implied goals interact within the script, and how I am achieving the goals.