>>16914819
you don't. just have sex with her. if time comes tbat she wants more dump her

>>16914819
Why would you want to do that? Bad idea. Make it unambiguous that you only want a fuckbuddy, and then if she's still into it you're golden. Make it sound like you're going to be her boyfriend down the road and you're just buying grief for both of you.

Makes it sounds like you have a real issue building a serious relationship with someone but you want to try with her bc you think she worths it
Then some weeks later tell her, the thing doesn't work but you kinda want to be sexfriends if she agrees

>>16914819
Why not just tell her what you want?

>>16914842
Risky but might work if OP has the guts

"Just to be clear, I'm not looking for anything romantic. This is a purely sexual relationship."

>>16914824
grill here. better to state intentions from the beginning

>>16914828
what the fuck is wrong with you
this is why you're alone

>>16914854
???
am i being trolled???????????????

>>16914867
Well ...my ex kinda that to me it worked we are sexfrind since september

But maybe it's easier in one way than another

>>16914867
>am i being trolled??
Well, it IS risky. You're right that it's also the best way, by far, every time, no exceptions. But acknowledging the risk involved is only prudent.

>>16914867
>better to share intentions
No. Better for you maybe. But you're a fucking asshole who comes to /adv/ to benefit yourself when others are asking questions.

It's a terrible idea to say. You should gauge if your contact is mainly personal or sexual appeal op. Then you got a good guess.

>>16914932
>No. Better for you maybe.
Better for everyone. No exceptions. Ever.

>>16914938
Not for everyone definitely. If you don't care about others and just want sex regardless then it's better not to say generally. Assuming you don't have other potential mates atm.

>better for everyone no exceptions
Sure I agree that if every social interaction everyone had started with "hi, would you want to have sex with me?" and answered with "yes/no" honestly, and it didn't much change how people dealt with the situation beyond these cases we'd all be better off. But that's not reality. And lying gets you further sometimes.

>>16914819
>Hey baby, I'm only into you for sex. You're not a jerk or stupid or anything, I just don't want a long-term relationship with anyone right now because I'm kind of a dick to people

Result A) she walks away happy. Result B) you're just what she wanted and lets you bone her. Both are great.

>Hey baby I'm not sure if you're right for me but let's keep having sex while I find out
>Her: "He really likes me he's just afraid to say it"
Two weeks later she realizes
>"He was only in it for the sex and he led me on with the hope of a relationship. Now I'm going to scream at him on the phone, bawl into my pillow, and tell all of our mutual acquaintances what a manipulative, selfish asshole he is"

She won't fault you for full disclosure up front, trust me.

>>16914949
>And lying gets you further sometimes.

You're a stupid dick. Sure it gets you further, and it also gets you into a huge shitty mess when it becomes apparent to everyone around you that you're a lying asshole.

You will have taken a step towards maturity when you realize that being honest is actually better for everyone, including you.

>>16914951
>She won't fault you for full disclosure up front, trust me.
Asking redpillers to trust women is usually not a useful thing to do. They're too scared and too bitter.

>>16914961
>doesn't motivate claim
Anon really now. Be reasonable. I know you have your moral qualms but we're not here for that. I also dislike the idea of lying but that's exactly why I don't spew the garbage you spew here. Lying is just too easy in this situation. Say op has a "relationship" with a girl where they hang out and have lots of sex. He likes it. She wanted a relationship. When she's too attached for him he can just say the spark is gone. He can even end it before that.

How does this blow back on you? Not in many ways. If she gets mad she accuses you of things but seriously the reputation of being a sex-only guy as op would be if he told every woman he just wants sex is far worse than an ex that wasn't the right for you and freaked out.

This is basic stuff. Are you underaged or something? Surely you've met people who have had this pattern if you've been dating actively. They don't do bad really. Perhaps your small circle of friends get ruined but really if you've had relationships that went poorly you can't actually know what the disposition they had towards you were.

All of this goes both ways of course. Women get shamed for being sluts. But for some reason there's no effort for manwhoring being more accepted.
>but it is
Only among very small groups. Pretty much only friends and friends of friends of that person. At best. There's secret resentment a lot of the time.

>>16914949
>Not for everyone definitely.
Yes. For everyone. Definitely.

>If you don't care about others and just want sex regardless
Then you should be with other people who don't care about others and just want sex regardless.

Oh, wait. I forgot. You don't want them. Because you judge them. And you're right to judge them, actually. Where you're wrong is in failing to judge yourself the same. They are all you deserve, because they are all you are.

>>better for everyone no exceptions
>Sure I agree that if every social interaction everyone had started with "hi, would you want to have sex with me?" and answered with "yes/no" honestly, and it didn't much change how people dealt with the situation beyond these cases we'd all be better off. But that's not reality.
It's not the reality because of cowards like you who are too afraid of -horror of horrors- being told no. You don't deserve sex that you cannot get honestly. Grow the fuck up, manchild.

>Lying gets you further sometimes.
Yeah, by making you a bad person. Do the decent thing. It's a longer game, but the endings are way better.

>>16914983
>advocating out of self interest
How is this justifiable in your mind if you're not just more rotten than what I've depicted? Frankly wouldn't surprise me if you were a sociopath. They would certainly take your stance. They know they're easier to manipulate than others usually because they're preoccupied with manipulating you.

I'm telling op what's what using reasoning and anecdotal experiences I've had about people who have been seen this way. Sure it's not perfect. But it's a lot better than encouraging op to have an unrealistic worldview because that's YOUR preference.

I find it sickening. It's like lying to political activists about how to further their cause. No tolerance for others opinions. When you're actively subverting them.

>>16914819
Just fuck sluts who don't care man. When you pull that shit on a girl who's 'nice', she ends up becoming a bitter shell - the kind of woman who everyone here complains about. You're just going to ruin her for everyone else.

and you guys say shit about women. youre no different

>>16914819
OP how do you know if you do fuck her you would be able to detach? In my experience soon as you fuck a guy he becomes attached and won't let go.

>>16915025
So far the only one that has expressed that they just want to have sex is op pretty much. I'm not sure what your complaining about but the current situation makes dishonesty the best option for op if he doesn't care about others.

>>16914951
>tell all of our mutual acquaintances what a manipulative, selfish asshole he is"

Pfft not even him but if I was my boys would laugh it off with me and i wouldn't care what some of her friends say, always new chicks wherever.

>>16915025
There's a reason why men are a superior gender.

>>16914819
you are ignoring the fact that if she wants to fuck you bad enough she will accept a bad lie. Most women know bullshit when they hear it but still fuck. You need to at least make an attempt to tell her what she wants to hear.

>>16915061

we arent superior . we're all slaves to our emotions in some way or another.

>>16915064
>most women can tell when you lie
Paranoid as fuck. I'm autistic. I've trained hard not to seem that way. It's been the main focus of my life since 12 (got my diagnose) and I'm now 23. I've lied a lot and nobody seems to know unless it's inconsistent. I certainly don't see any reason why women would be better at seeing through lies. Men are often more suspicious in my experience which would probably make them harder to lie to. But I don't really have anything to back that up. But if suspicion makes you better at seeing through lies I'd say men are favored.

>>16915079
>we aren't superior
Someone has to be superior in a given situation. Because surely you can't be saying that on a real number axis of aptitude for a situation men and women place the same. It would have to be on the extremes really. Literally anyone can do whatever it is they're supposed to or literally nobody can.

>>16915080
my point is women have had guys trying to talk their panties off since they hit puberty and have heard every conceivable lie and twisted truth. The probability she can spot your lie is high but you have to lie just make it sound sincere so if she wants to fuck you she can justify the risk.

>>16915088
Yeah fair enough (dunno about the lie vs risk part though). That's how I'd learn too. Guess I haven't had enough experience where my lies are stuff I've heard other people say I tend to avoid that for very good reason. There's so much to take into account if you're gonna copy a lie.

>>16915001
>How is this justifiable in your mind if you're not just more rotten than what I've depicted?
Judging sexual con artists makes me worse than a sexual con artist? What are you, a Nietzchean or something? I don't know of any system of morality, other than outright nihilism, in which that is true. Enlighten me.

>Frankly wouldn't surprise me if you were a sociopath.
My bill of mental health is not clean, I will admit, but the worst they found was dysthymia. No trace of sociopathy.

>They would certainly take your stance.
A sociopath would demand honesty? Do you know what sociopathy is?

>I'm telling op what's what using reasoning and anecdotal experiences I've had about people who have been seen this way.
The plural of anecdote is not data. Even if it were, it fails to trump the moral repugnance and outright creepiness of the method you advocate.
>Sure it's not perfect. But it's a lot better than encouraging op to have an unrealistic worldview because that's YOUR preference.
Who's encouraging OP yo have an unrealistic worldview? I'm only telling OP to do the right thing.

>I find it sickening.
I find you sickening, so I guess we're even on that score. You're a disgrace to all men

>When you're actively subverting them.
You're accusing me of actively subverting the redpillers, MGTOWs, and other embittered misogynists who would lie, cheat, and steal just to get their dicks wet? No. OP. I am not subverting them. I am openly defying them; there's a difference. Subversion is a much subtler game, and against these freaks, I don't have the patience for it.

As I stated before, being a decent man is a longer game. But it's the only acceptable game to play, and it's a better game besides. Throw your game in the trash where it belongs, or get out to the fringe of the dating scene where you belong. Some things ought not to be tolerated, and your behavior is among them.

>>16915353
>arguing my point of view for what anon should do to achieve his goals
>makes me a bad person
No I think you misunderstood. I'm not for the idea. I'm just telling him how I think he can achieve his desired results and I've posted out the problems.
>judging a sexual con artist
See you say things like this. It makes you look stupid. I don't see why you have apply all your PUA prejudice here. Making A lie isn't being a con artist clearly. That'd be entirely unsustainable. People would be going to jail for fraud constantly.

Shame you can't seem to focus on what's being discussed without getting too emotional to contribute. You have some issues.

>>16915404
>See you say things like this. It makes you look stupid. I don't see why you have apply all your PUA prejudice here.
Because PUAs are literally the creepiest men alive short of actual rapists. They need to be shut down before they cross that line, and the only way to do that is to bring them to the (admittedly traumatic) realization that they are the problem, and they need to change.

>Making A lie isn't being a con artist clearly.
Making a lie for personal gain, however, is.

>That'd be entirely unsustainable. People would be going to jail for fraud constantly
Appeal to consequences. Who's being illogical now?

>You have some issues.
I believe I already admitted that.

>>16915428
>PUA are creepy
Ok so why are you pretending like me and OP are that? You're incredibly rude for little to no reason.
>PUA have to change
This claim is the equivalent of having an anarchy and complaining about how the Raiders aren't nice. You need to fix your system. Let people ask for casual sex without major consequence, and PUA will just be people who ask for sex. Sure some will continue. But they're easier to condemn then because there's options that don't get you ostracized.
>people lie for other reasons than self interest
Fairly certain that would mean they're pathological liars or whatever it's called. Involuntarily lie for no reason. The way I see it it's pointless to even consider those. You lie for yourself, nobody else. Even white lies you prioritize your connection to a person rather than their development. I don't know your background but it should start to get obvious when you look at the white lies you've been told. They didn't help you.
>appeal to consequences
Never heard of that. Phrased like a fallacy but it's just a conclusion made which points to an undesirable consequence. Regardless that's a clear misinterpretation of what was said. You were using terminology which assumed illegality. Rather than immorality.
>>16915353
>subverting is a more subtle game
You're in a thread were a single person is asking for specific advice. He's asking for one simple thing, 'how do I convey my intent without being ostracized' essentially (op isn't stupid, if he could just say it he would). Advocating the long game with no justification, you just claim it is, is certainly an attempt at subverting OP as an individual. It's like taking any advice on this board and deciding that you're gonna sabotage by giving poor advice. Except since your stance conflicts so much with what's being asked for you can't motivate.
>>you have issues
>i believe I said so
Didn't notice. Was it the entire argument you were having? Because I'm trying to be on topic.