Good to hear that
Good to hear that
I do not know how much more content there is in the Ph.D. videos, but it would make sense to really gather some more "signs" on how to classify girls. Asking directly is fine, but I still think it is better for some rapport before asking "do you normally only sleep with guys you like or is it no big deal for you?" and get an honest answer.
One of my hypothesis: Good indicator if a girl is more J or D. If she does not like to be photographed she is much more likely a D. Especially if she is actually quite outgoing/flirty (T).
bill as soon as i get some extra cash ill test it and let you know what i think.
Keep in mind that what ive posted about this program or others is mainly constructive criticism.
It is also very intersting to analyse the girls in movies on the different types.
I just watched Vicky Cristina Barcelona.
I would say Vicky is NDR (Coinesseur). Cristina is NJI (Cinderella).
Maria Elena, I donīt know: Maybe also NJI.
My impression: both I and R have romantic inclinations. R type just tend to cover it up with more cynism.
One interesting add-on to the program would be to map the different types and letters to simple term like sexual openness, flirtyness, romantic inclanation.
So NDI would be ultimate romantic, because N and D and I have all tendency to romance
(long lasting relationship + special moment for sex + prince on a white horse)
And TJR would be ultimate realist almost cynist.
(pick guy on the "dating market" + get the sex when she needs it + can care for herself)
Makes sense? Please give comments.
How is it that there is such tremendous content and no discussions on it ???????
One other topic: The videos are good...
the hopefull romantic is not the kind of girl i want but it seems its the girl i do better with.
i think that some connoiseurs should be cool girls to have around. i dont like testers, i think that any kind thats Investor/justifier is good for me. i believe those are the cinderella and the other one would be... modern woman?
we need to put a lot into this to grasp all this and make it part of ourselves.
lets keep this discusssion going to see if by discussing it, it becomes like a review and we get to learn it faster and dominate the material.
Yes, Vin says clearly in his material J are not bad girls. I think as well. Actually T are bad girls, because they flirt with a lot of guys, get them emotional, make them fall in love and the disappoint them.
TD is an especially difficult combination I find, but I think a lot of hot/quality girls have it.
i would say the worse relationship wise is the sexual butterfly, too much fucking could lead to very bad things, right now in my life, i want a lot of these girls in my life.
My ex was a tester/denier/idealist. i find it a weird combo, many of our problems came from her Denier trait, she was fucked up with religion and we didnt fuck as muchas we should. the tester part was transformed as soon as we got serious. Because of how she was raised and religion she was a realist. She was faithfull as soon as it got serious.
To me IJ also seems like very good combination (opposite of TD above)
I = they do not fool around
J = you can sexually escalate easier, she will accept Kino, sex talk, speedseduction on sex, ...
To me it seems like almost all girls I meet are D. None I meet is very cool to talk about sex. Most like to change subject.
This whole thing is still difficult to grasp. I mean most basic distinction for me
J girls you can escalate DNA aggressive, dance floor game style and have a ONS with the girl
D girls you cannnot
Hopeful romantic and connoiseurs both more romantic and shy. Connoiseurs a bit more cynic as well.
I think they are cool types.
The thing is. If you go out to clubs you probably get to know more T, because they are outgoing, they give IOIs. Probably they are more attractive as well.
Sorry I mean NJ not IJ