Recent comment: damn dude there is no way one guy can get this much action. I read the whole blog and you are either a real creative writer or I suck at picking up chicks.......

Thanks for the note. Probably neither, however.

The CS has answered this before, but some additional thoughts came oozing out of my fingertips when reading the above. Not specifically to the commenter, but in general.

First. Many feel that "hooking-up" with 7 or 8 women in as many months is somehow staggering. Granted, this frequency is not common in those that are married. But in this city it is not uncommon in any other respect. I just choose to write about it in detail. Somehow, I think, reading about those deatils gives a perception of it being more than it really is.

For the CS it has never been a "numbers game." There is no conscious desire for conquest, or satisfaction of ego. (to those who raise an eyebrow...yes, the CS recognizes that the subconscious can be a funny thing, however.) In one respect, I live in a way that works for me and is based on what I need, what I want and what I enjoy. I also specifically know what interests me and what attracts me. It is therefore easy for me to spot something that I want when it's in front of me. (I personally think that some people, both men and women, have no clue what they really want, despite their insistence to the contrary). The only question that remains for me is whether to pursue it or not. Otherwise, there is no confusion, anxiety or discomfort.

Second. Although I only mention them in passing, there are occasions where opportunities do not work out for the CS at all. Some woman may not be attracted, some are not willing to be with a married man, and some for other reasons. These situations do happen. And because they are less likely to be of interest, I haven't devoted too many words to them. (perhaps this may change in future posts, however).

Also, the key is not about being good at "..picking up chicks." Even if one is good at this, it can often be apparent what the intentions are. It's more about wit, charm, listening, teasing, watching and feeling - not only for whether you're really attracted and want someone, but whether they will be susceptible to your attributes to begin with. By this the CS does not mean to sound conceited, or to imply that he has some mystical powers or grandiose opposite sex theory. Hardly...just something that works for me.

Finally, the big issue with people not meeting whom they want has much to do with fear and lack of confidence. Both women and men seem to describe confidence as a super sexy and appealing quality. Yet most yield to their fear of rejection rather than to pursue what they want. They'll give it try, they'll get shot down...and then they're crushed and become afraid.

But if someone you approach is not interested in you, is that really rejection?
Someone once wrote something that makes good sense in this respect. The CS recalls it went something like this:

If you get the cold shoulder from someone you just met, can that really be rejection? They don't know you - they don't know your personality - or what you believe in - or how you think - or what you value - or how you live your life. On the other hand, if you lived with someone for many years and they send you packing because they do know your thoughts - your beliefs, and every other fiber and nook and cranny of your being...well...then that in fact is rejection.

So when someone's lack of interest in you is based on a first impression or a quick intro, that's not rejection...that's just life.

When one's "...fear of rejection is outweighed by his fear of regret, he will start doing what he really wants to do." Not my quote...but perhaps a motto to live by in any context.

Lustful men are little devils, but women are often tramps

All too common...

Boundaries

The CS is often fascinated with women's sexual activities, their wants, desires and dislikes. There is something that is so raw and genuine about such behavior. A far cry from the phony bullshit we present to one another daily.

Along similar lines as my April 7th post, there are certain women who struggle with their sexuality by erecting walls and boundaries that make little sense to the CS. These women may be quite sexual... in fact they may have a sexual kink that they deem quite hot and appropriate. But they get offended at another sexual act, even if it is objectively less kinky or intense.

On a few occasions, I have been in situations where a harmless sexual move or act was considered offensive, for no apparent reason. Something that you would never predict to be an issue...something that came out of the blue...something completely random and with seemingly no logic or reason. (The CS confirmed these by running them by a few male and female friends).

Now...everyone has his or her likes and dislikes, no doubt. But for whatever reason, some sexual experiences between men and women create the same type of confusion and misunderstanding that we have with one another in relationships in general. Must this type of drama carry on over into the bedroom? Why get offended (at least at something that most would consider harmless...we are not talking about pain or physical discomfort either).

For the CS, these experiences have been few and far between...yet still very noticeable. Perhaps, these type of women still struggle with issues of "control" and what they should or should not be doing in the bedroom. Perhaps, some have just had bad experiences that make them sensitive. Or, perhaps it is the guy's fault in any given situation. But whatever it is, must sex get so complicated? Isn't whatever "feels pleasurable," rather than what "mental images or hang-ups" are conjured up, a better guide to sexuality?

Guys have their own issues, much of which are socially engineered and created. So we dont entirely get a free pass on this one either. But for the most part, guys enjoy everything in the sexual arena--provided that it feels good, and that it does not involve their ass. A motto perhaps shared by many women as well. Apparently not quite that simple for some of the female persuasion, however.

Then again, maybe this rant makes sense only to the CS.