+- Subliminal Talk (https://subliminal-talk.com)
+-- Forum: Men's Journals (18+ NSFW) (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals-18-NSFW)
+--- Forum: Men's Journals (https://subliminal-talk.com/Forum-Men-s-Journals)
+--- Thread: DMSI 3.1 - The Journal (/Thread-DMSI-3-1-The-Journal)
RE: DMSI 3.1 - The Journal - DarkPlouf - 09-29-2017
Quote:Yes it has been brought up before today. in your thread, actually, by Mr. Anderson.On DMSI thread too, some weeks ago. Maybe he didn't read it at that time.
RE: DMSI 3.1 - The Journal - CatMan - 09-29-2017
(09-29-2017, 02:08 PM)Mr. Anderson Wrote:(09-29-2017, 01:33 PM)RTBoss Wrote:(09-28-2017, 01:19 PM)Mr. Anderson Wrote: 1. Re-check the goal wording: I brought this up because the last known candidate for the wording was "...people of the gender I am attracted to which also want to have sex with you". And we don't know the exact goal but IF it is something that relies so much on the woman already wanting you then there can be issues when the woman changes her mind IMHO.
I was thinking about how this would actually be awesome goal-phrasing for a sniper if the phrase was worded to read:
"...people of the gender I am sexually attracted -whom I already know - and who are already interested in having sex with me."
In other words, a sniper that would constantly snipe women you are sexually attracted to (who you already have an established rapport/connection with) that also already want to have sex with you. So while it wouldn't be the main goal-phrasing for the program, there would at least be a portion of the program "outing" women in your life that you've always wanted to **** by getting them to seduce and **** you! It would be just a little extra push, because the sniper can tell that they already had fantasies about fuckin' ya anyway!
This may be a great way to utilize the LDS.
Would be defintely an interesting alternative to the current LDS and I think more likely to succeed than one for a woman you encountered at some point in your life and found her most attractive. Of course, the other snipers should work independent of the fact if she already want to sleep with you.
(09-29-2017, 01:43 PM)CatMan Wrote: What if none of the girls you find sexually attractive want to have sex with you and aren't attracted? I know that feel. That statement may not work well for people in that boat.
This concerns me, but is that single post about a possible phrase the only instance of Shannon saying the program apparently may only attract women that are already attracted to you? I agree with others it'd be pointless to use the program if that was the case. I know I'd stop immediately because I don't seem to get attraction from girls I want and if I did I wouldn't need the program, so it wouldn't be useful to me anymore. As it seems none of the hot girls I know find me attractive or else I wouldn't have been rejected by them or they may have made moves or whatever. The whole point of me using this is to get girls I want that I wasn't able to get before the program. I highly doubt this is the focus of the program, only going for girls that already are attracted to you, is there a post I can be directed to for this to put this to rest?
Thanks guys!
Unfortunately Shannon has to clarify what the current statement is or at least if it is dependent on the woman be already attracted to you. Here what I wrote in RTB's thread:
Quote:It was the last known candidate for the goal statement. I brought it up because IF the current statement relies on the woman already wanting you then it could cause problems. But actually we don't know what the current statement is, just wanted to make sure it has been thought of. It is in the first Shannon's discussion journal, somewhere around page 250 I believe, but not completely sure about the page.
But, CatMan, RTB is right. You already get IOI's but it is one thing to get initial interest and another thing to bring this to the next base - to speak so. So you not succeeding in seduce her doesn't mean there are no IOI's.
Thanks Mr. Anderson for the clarification.
Well, I still doubt that it will be the case, but if it is, I see little point in continuing with the program and I'd know then I wasn't "resisting" all along like I've often suspected I wasn't. Just no interest from girls I want. Could explain Swisston's issues on it too. And also how guys who are good with women seem to do very well on it with little issue. Hmm. Still...I doubt such a phase would be in there, because only guys good with women would benefit, all others would still fail due to low or no interest existing from women. Would make it unprofitable due to refunds. So I doubt the phrasing is there.
And an IOI is very different from wanting to have sex with me. I said the girls I'm attracted to don't seem to have attraction for me or want to have sex with me. Due to rejection and friend zoning and what not, which don't seem to be behaviours females do when sexually attracted to a male, lol.
More importantly, I'm sure Shannon will clarify this and explain that kind of phrasing isn't used. I wouldn't be too worried about it.
RE: DMSI 3.1 - The Journal - DarkPlouf - 09-29-2017
Quote:And an IOI is very different from wanting to have sex with me. I said the girls I'm attracted to don't seem to have attraction for me or want to have sex with me. Due to rejection and friend zoning and what not, which don't seem to be behaviours females do when sexually attracted to a male, lol.I don't know your story CatMan but I agree with you.
IOIs don't mean anything. Really. If a girl wants to fuck you you'll know it. As long as she's comfortable and feels safe she'll be obvious with that.
Sometimes I wonder if DMSI shouldn't just have a "fall in love with me" module. Look at all these girls enslaved by love (or a strong attraction) willing to do anything and everything for their crush.
I have a friend who keeps chasing the same man for 2 years. She basically does all the work. Isolating, giving gifts, ect. The man in question is just a jerk and uses her for sex. As soon as he discards of her she runs back at him the next few months with an excuse.
RE: DMSI 3.1 - The Journal - Sanbosay - 09-29-2017
Let's not forget this ver of DMSi is a test realise as it may not work for everybody. Also Mr. Catman how long have you been on the subs and what are you listening to A or B?!
RE: DMSI 3.1 - The Journal - Benjamin - 09-29-2017
It makes no sense at all that it would only target women who were attracted to you before doing DMSI, this definately sounds like a big misunderstanding you're all running off. Shannon will have to comment at some stage.
RE: DMSI 3.1 - The Journal - Shawn - 09-29-2017
(09-29-2017, 05:21 PM)Benjamin Wrote: It makes no sense at all that it would only target women who were attracted to you before doing DMSI, this definately sounds like a big misunderstanding you're all running off. Shannon will have to comment at some stage.
The idea Shannon had there was to take the "low hanging fruits" first, create as a result attraction from other women and repeat the cycle with more and more women. I linked the post in the DMSI discussion thread but I am on my phone now so cannot repost it here.
RE: DMSI 3.1 - The Journal - CatMan - 09-30-2017
(09-29-2017, 03:33 PM)Sanbosay Wrote: Let's not forget this ver of DMSi is a test realise as it may not work for everybody. Also Mr. Catman how long have you been on the subs and what are you listening to A or B?!
You must not have been active here for awhile after joining, I assume
.I used to be quite active with a very large journal for some time.
To answer your questions:
I've been listening to IML subs since September 11, 2014.
Been on DMSI since V2.2, starting July 13, 2016.
Been on DMSI V3.1 since March 2nd, 2017.
Been on A since then religiously. Barring a 1 week experiment of B asked for by Shannon. B felt like nothing to me strangely, the same as A maybe which surprised me given many reports of B. I prefer A. At least I get the possibility of clearing and healing stuff on it which may benefit my life in other areas even if I get nothing with women/sex. And I'd probably be told I'm resisting B outright and getting nothing from it if it was used, so I think A is a better use of my time. The whole "sex" thing seems a universe away. And I need real tangible attraction to get close to that. So I'm looking for merely actual signs of attraction from girls I'm attracted to around me that goes at least to a date. Which I have yet to see on this program of any version.
It's been more and more obvious that guys who struggled with girls before DMSI mostly continue to do so on it. And guys who had at least moderate success with girls, continue to do so on DMSI or even improve. That baseline of success and competence seems to be vital to determining if you'll succeed or fail on this. Barring an incident happening above and beyond the norm where you are "pushed" up a level somehow. Maybe that will change in future versions, I've found myself saying that to placate myself so often, but I'm unsure. We'll see I guess. I'm pleased a new version is FINALLY coming as naturally in theory it gives an opportunity to actually get results. But it's very guarded optimism. Because this will be the 7th version of this program I've used and I'm still struggling to get any dates or sex on it. Or even simply actual real attraction on it that goes beyond this "base niceness" phenomenon, which ends up being useless as it doesn't go anywhere, that I've written about elsewhere.
RE: DMSI 3.1 - The Journal - kalmah0804 - 09-30-2017
I couldn't agree more with what Catman said about guys' previous sexual experience having a huge output on the effectiveness of DMSI. I only just this year had my first kiss and lost my virginity (the latter of which I believe happened to me during the AM refresher and not during DMSI) and have had absolutely nothing since. On 3.01 I did receive a fair amount of eye contact, flirting, and other IOIs from girls I found attractive, but nothing led to any form of physical or romantic or sexual encounters. I got approached by an insanely hot girl at a party on New Years and we spent the whole night making out. The only reason it didn't lead to sex was becuase of my own nervousness, inexperience and overall incompetency with women in general. The time I lost my virginity was on AM6's refresher stage, but it was with a gross girl I did not like or find attractive--AM6 was just making me so miserable for still being a virgin that I jsut had sex with the very first girl I could match with on Tinder, regardless of how she was as a person or what she physically looked like. It wasn't a good experience, but a huge part of me wonders if running AM6 several times and then taking a look at something like WM or SM BEFORE running DMSI--just to build up those social skills and flirting skills and escalation skills and all of the other mindsets and techniques needed to build up experience with women in general--might be more beneficial to an inexperienced user before running DMSI, just because I do notice that people with little to no sexual experience suffer greatly while on DMSI with little to no results, while men who have had moderate or more success with women in the past do great almost instantaneously.
RE: DMSI 3.1 - The Journal - Benjamin - 09-30-2017
Quote:while men who have had moderate or more success with women in the past do great almost instantaneously.
I thought that too, but not necessarily. It's why I thought it would work pretty well for me.
Because i've been with alot of women, but on DMSI I was only with like 2. Less than E2 and other programs like AM/WM. Well one I met while on E2 and DMSI in the end, especially when switching to 3.1B made her go weird on me and it ended.