It’s been shown by brain scans that the areas of the male brain associated with danger are activiated in the presence of ANY male, and very rarely a female.
Ever notice that men that really get along with other men tend to be “beer dudes”? You very rarely see large groups of men co-existing without beer nearby.
It’s WELL known that it’s hard to get drunk or even get a buzz from beer, especially if you drink it several times a week. Yet it’s the most popular social drink amongst men on the planet.
“Beer dudes” are well known have a “fat tire” - lots of belly fat.
Beer contains many plant estrogens from the hops used.
Peanuts, a popular bar food, are also supposed to contain phytoestrogens.
Estrogens, perhaps both from the phytoestrogens in beer and natural estrogens produced by fat cells, empirically seem to increase production of androstenols.
Androstenol also reduce seeming aggression, and seem to round off the rough edges of masculinity… perhaps allowing for greater male to male friendliness.
Maybe it’s the phytoestrogens and the internal (hormonal) and external (pheromonal) effects of beer that matter more in the social realm than the alcohol content?
I’ve also noticed that I, personally, don’t seem to feel the slightest bit of male aggression towards fellow males who eat a vegetarian diet rich in soy. Soy is full of phytoestrogens.
So is wheat germ, and a number of other plants.
It’s almost as if I treat these males as female strangers, more than male strangers, even if they seem perfectly heterosexual. They don’t seem to pose any threat or any competition to me whatsoever.
If there’s a pretty woman around, for instance, and I want her attention.. and I’m in a room full of soy eating men… so what? I’ll get that woman’s attention, and she’ll like me more than anyone else there. I know it. There’s no question in my mind about it. It’s not even an issue of confidence, it’s more subjective impression.
Now if it was a room full of bodybuilders or even normal “guys”, maybe even “normal” blue collar guys who get a little physical for a living and eat steak & potatoes every night, well… I won’t feel the same about it. I may not even try to get her attention.
That’s just my subjective experience, if I really tune into it. Anyone else?
I think your thinking is great. Really what has to be looked at is how much androstenone those who have a vegetarian diet rich and soy can handle.
I think it’s partly because maybe their skin gets “better” and they have less of the lipids and c. form bacteria that converts a metabolite to -none. Kohl wrote that it was the bacteria difference that decided whether somethign became -none or -nol.
I’ve always heard -nol came from t-rone, but it never jived right. I see here your talking about it come from estrogen, which certainly is what intuition would tell you.
Skin differences, yes, that may play a part, too. I don’t know if their skin is getting “better”, but there should certainly be skin differences. I’ll hit a health food store today and take a look… realllly stare.
“What you are looking at?”
“Your potential to convert pheromones… just hold still!”
I just wanted to present some alternative “clues” to the paths. The actual studies on metabolic pathways are incomplete, and sometimes fly in the face of actual, testable experience.
I’ve provided some other observational cues in my other posts.
Slow and sure science is very important, as it provides a substational amount of that elusive quality called certainty… but it’s always playing “catch up” to the truly interested in a subject and perceptually aware.
Think about this: It’s WE who can provide the hypothesis to prove or disapprove for the next study.
And, in my case, I also happen to provide the androgens.
I think Androtics is doing important work; for mankind. All of us in this phero-world really, to different degrees. There’s something to be said about being the ones to fuel the process of accumulating knowledge regarding the human race, especially with all the other intelligent human beings who have lived.
Well, thank you! That’s very kind of you. I appreciate that.
Humans are fascinating creatures.
It’s kind of “funny” that externally applied pheromones are important at all. It’s really a side effect of modern hygiene, you know (at least in part). All of the countries with less stringest hygiene have a much more organic social flow.
In general, they seem more “human”.
Modern hygiene (using soap) without pheromone supplementation, makes us very “machine” like. Less than human. Pheromone replacement could be considered a process of rehumanization.
Of course, you can pick and choose, too.
You can not only replace your mones, but design them. You can promote social effects you may not have been able to achieve otherwise. That’s where the real fun comes in… that’s where it goes beyond simply replacing what is washed away.
More than ever, you can design how people “feel” about and around you. You can be a conscious participant in the design social experiences, and ultimately, social outcomes.
Having control over your pheromone signature makes the subliminal… liminal. The unsconscious… conscious.
I’ve had far greater effects from my own natural pheromones (during extreme times of sweating, stress (dhea increase) etc, etc.)
Obviously, we product a ton of different pheromones. Perhaps control on a consistent, nearly never fail basis, in group social interactions involves a greater diversity of synthetics than the average synthetic user is used to using?
Which brings us to the next issue: complicated mixes.
Obviously you pulled it off with a314, though it’s 80 percent rone.
With complicated mixes, things get difficult because of the way mones counteract each other’s effects. The purpose of adding each pheromone is to draw a unique contribution from that chemical.
Because pheromones can work against each other (maybe it’s something as clear as causing an LH spike and suppressing an LH release), it’s difficult to optimize that unique contribution that one can get on it’s own.
We know that a person can only wear so many synthetic mones on themselves. Perhaps it’s because of the smell, or simply because others need to be able to localize the source of the phero-cloud.
So, how do we can many different unique contributions while still maintaining a strong signal, particularly if we’re talking a sexual signal, which is perhaps requires the most precision in terms of dosages because of the nature of things like none and other masculine mones?
It’s quite the challenge and sometimes it makes you think it’s easier to optimize with simple mixes.
Many of the mixes from A300 to A319 were bombs. A couple tested well on multiple testers, including A314. It was an enormous undertaking to zero in on a mix that both young and old people could use to good effect, which was one of the design goals.
It’s also been tweaked over the years. I don’t think that’s anathema, like it is to some formulas.
I think most designers don’t tweak their formulas, because they don’t use their formulas, or listen to people who do. I use and listen, therefore I tweak.
Pheromones were my hobby before they were my business. I was, myself, looking for better pheromonal tools to use, tools that nobody else wanted to produce. They were content with their magic mixes that weren’t even magic.
I’m extremely passionate about new technology. Exploring the tehnology of tommorow is a a lot of fun to me, and that’s exactly what pheromones are… a technology of tommorow. We’re all early adopters. No matter how ‘finalized’ the advertising seems to be for some products, the last word has not been spoken!
Anyway, yes, complex mixes aren’t easy.
Ultimately, you really need to “go Edison” about the whole thing… TONS of different experiments.
It’s also good to go where the mix itself wants to go… this technology is too new to be able to easily go in and design around an effect. It’s best to mix first, identify and name it LATER. That’s the opposite of what many people do (not just formulators, but experimenters in forums as well), I think, and that in itself is a huge source of frustration, I’m sure.
Now, it’s NOT simple to roll out beta mixes to testers, unfortunately. People who are already familiar with pheromones want to use whatever has been giving them good results, PLUS your mix. They never want to potentially waste a few hours or a whole day with a “bad mix”.
So they report back bunk results. I’ve had better luck rolling out beta testers to people who are completely ignorant of pheromone phenom.
If you want something sexually intense, you’re mixing pheromone colored paint not just into your own pheromonal colors, but those of your target.
One mix will never translate perfectly from wearer to wearer, or target to target.
I’ve never had the problem finding ‘sexual’ mixes, though, that some seem to have. I think it depends largely on your POV, and your own actions.
If you want to get blatantly sexual responses from unknown women on the street, sure, it’s a little ‘complex’. What you’re looking for is what I all “special effects”, whereas most good pheromone mixes that people like long term are more like a meaty drama.
Anyway, sexual effects from a date? A bonafide women you somehow obtain a date with, and spend several hours with live, close and in the flesh?
Almost any decent masuline pheromone mix is going to lead to some kind of intimacy, or sex, as long as you don’t overapply and creep them out or scare them.
Men need to stop acting like women with pheromones, and remember to keep acting like men. Pheromones don’t flip nature upside down and around. They make you more “attractive”, but not in the same way that women are “attractive”.
Women Attract with a capital A. Attraction is a verb for women. It’s a primary function, it’s something they actively do.
Men are attractive, and it’s very much a side effect of what they do and who they are. It’s almost always second to their actions. It’s reinforcement.
The meek shall inherit the earth, but meek men won’t inherit sexual love. There’s no eros for the passive man, except as a rare fluke, or what’s called a mercy ****
Pheromones on men don’t actually attract action from women as much as they help to “seal the deal”, after the man himself acts/initiates. They help women (or whomever) to accept your advances.
On a woman, it’s different. Women Attract. Attraction for a woman is their form of aggression. They’re meant to be approached.
Women attract, men act.
Put another way…
Women Attract Men, Men Act towards Attractive Women.
Another…
Women Attract Men and Inspire Men to Act Towards them (and then Accept or Deny those Actions based on that man’s appeal/“attractiveness”), and Men Act towards Attractive Women
I’m just saying, if you want to get the kind of attention and responses that women typically get from men, you have your job cut out for you. I don’t accept that job. However, I’ll give you the easy to use tools require to figure that out for yourself.
On the other hand, if you want to drastically reduce rejection, and increase compliance with your requests and advances… then I am your guy, and I already have some of those solutions premixed in a bottle.
That’s hardly “mission impossible”.
Complete sex reversal is tough, though. Genetic role reversal is a giant hurdle - it’s an intense, probably unrealistic goal.
I think it’s somewhat possible with pheromones when you have an ultra-tailored, individual mix, but not completely.
It’s all quite interesting. Some mixes, dosages under the right circumstances just seem to tap into something where it seems like it’s pushing all the right buttons.
It’s a mixed bag when testing. On one hand, being passive reduces variables, which is what any scientists tries to do in experiments. On the other hand, being active simply allows you to “test more” with the downside more variables being thrown into the picture (such as your personality, relationship with the person, looks, etc).
Scientists also deal with the Heisenberg theorem, although you have a be a pretty bright scientist to do so properly. Most scientists aren’t good at conceptual and metalevel thinking, physicists exempted. Most non-physicists tend to think too small to make big strides. Many tend to design very poor experiments that don’t translate well to the real world.
Fact is, if you’re being passive with a pheromone mix, and you’re a man, you’re not doing a scientific experiment whatsoever. You’ve introduced a new variable with “male passivity”, and a major error. You’re doing something very unusual and unnatural for a man to do while you test, something that goes far beyond the “boo boo” of observation that Heisenberg observed.
You’re doing sexual role reversal. It is more typical for female to play the role of a “watcher”.
Men should play the typical role of men while testing, and women should play the typical role of women while testing. If you don’t, you’re not so much testing pheromones, as much as you’re testing male/female sexual role reversal. You’re doing a bunk test set against itself as far as the pheromone component is concerned.
All a big reason why I like to give actives and controls to normal office workers who don’t understand pheromones, and not tell them a darn thing about what’s inside. They’ll think they’re looking for dermal effects or something - you know, irritation. The less inclined they are to “sit back” and “watch” for social effects, the better. A man playing the role of an observer, in a sexual context, is not a man, and ruins the whole experiment.
Yeah, the only real variable should be the pheromones, set up in the normal context of life, preferably. Life is actually a great lab for social experiments. Doing social experiments in a box is extremely unnatural, and hardly scientific. Social experiments are NOT easy to design because of this effect.
It’s also not as easy when you yourself as the pheromone experimenter. When you know what you’re putting on, and when you’ve been preprogrammed by ad copy and forum posts. When you have to virtually use psychological subterfuge on yourself so you don’t artificially enhance positives or negatives, and attribute them to the wrong variable.
A great way to test, though, is just go about your day normally, and FORGET about the pheromones.
Just push the pheromones completely out of your mind. Literally forget about the them. Put all pictures of them in your mind to your left, or wherever you sort your past to. Focus on something else, anything else… normal things, preferably. Deadlines, lunching with the secretary (but FORGET about “your little secret” if you’re after her), whatever. Then try to distinguish what was different that day as an after thought.
Maybe self-survey yourself every day after work or at night, as if you were trying to gauge the effects of the moon on social behavior, but not your own. That’s a good psychological trick. Put the focus on something else entirely.
“I don’t know… the 3/4 moon must have my name written all over it. People were so much friendlier than normal, and seemed to talk about just about anything. Some of the topics were so superficial and mundane, it was almost annoying. Good day, but maybe not as productive as it could’ve been, with all the chatter going on.”
“Formulas work in science, because you’re dealing with absolutes. But human beings and life are far too complex to be subjected to formulas.”
Robert Ringer, author of “Winning Through Intimidation” and “Action! Nothing Happens Until Something Moves”
A man who really knows human beings; known to “have his way” with people (a good way!)
This is exactly what happens to me, probably because I have been using pheromones for so long.
I’ll tell you a challenge: figuring out the baseline. When I get hits when I’m not wearing mones, and unlikely are riding the conversion wave, you start to wonder about your “mone hits.”
Yeah, you have to wonder about your “mone hits” in such a case, unless you used them recently and have “buildup”.
Your baseline can change over time, too.
A user may start off not very charismatic (using pheromones as a crutch), and get along better with more people with pheromones. Then eventually their behaviors change and they become more comfortable around people in general. Then they start should get better social flow even without pheromones. No longer will they need their “crutch”, although it may still be useful to get that extra 10%.
Most of the time, with pheromones, I’m only looking for that last 10 or 11%. Or that 1 out of 10 people that would’ve prematurely rejected me. I’m quite happy with a 10% gain, especially because pheromones are relatively painless in terms of time and money. Sometimes I get the crazy, amazing responses, but they’re not necessary. They’re icing on an already delicious cake.
Using pheromones for social enhancement is also great for working with difficult people who think they’re above everyone. The unfriendlies and the people haters, or those too wound up in their status to act human anymore.
I recently made friends with a semifamous lesbian artist who probably would’ve never spoken to me had it not been for the pheromones. She tells me that normally she “hates people like me” (as we couldn’t disagree more on most key issues, and she likes “yes” people in her life), but there’s just “something special about me”. Ha!
Part of the fun are the crazy responses. Sure, these things are used to improve life (ie 10 percent gaines), but they’re also toys, as you well know, and it’s enjoyable to play with them.
Yep, you’re 100% right! I didn’t mean to underplay that aspect to it.
They are definitely fun toys, as well, regardless of how soberly I speak of them. With me, I always want more and different pheromones, and easier, faster, more accurate was to mess around with them… The weird and crazy (especially “crazy good”) responses are thrilling.
I think it’s the tinkerer in all guys that make them play with their cars, bodies (bodybuilding goes to some crazy extremes), sports, pheromones and what have you. Whatever we’re into, we’re more fanatics than merely fans.
I don’t know if women care as much, although cosmetic forums are very active. They care in a different way, I just can’t fully put it into words. You won’t see them going to extremes with cars or bodybuilding usually. Attraction-wise, I think they do it for practical gains, a little less fun (but the fun component is still there).
I think it’s a little more “game” like for men? Dating/seduction forums for men only certainly seem to go in that direction. It becomes more of a game when taken to extremes for men.
That reminds me… Select women seem to take attraction to extremes by looking like a different women every day. I’ve known a couple of those. Their chameleon like powers never ceased to amaze me. I bet that kind of woman would like a flexible pheromone system to toy with.
And there’s nothing like conquering one mystery or challenge and then moving onto the next… learning, experiencing, playing. It’s what keeps my interest level as high as the day I started.
