How to Flip a Player
Tim Riggins is a Beta at heart.
Yeah, I know. Why would I tell you how to flip a player, turn a cad, tame an asshole? I spend much of my time telling you not to put out for these types. I write at great length about how miserable these men make women. How they can have tons of casual sex with tons of women at the same time and not get emotionally attached to any of them. I write about how dirty they are, how STD-ridden. And yet.
I know you still pine for these guys. Successfully taming one is considered by many women to be the brass ring on the mating carousel. Even women who fully understand the risks will shut their eyes tight, hold their noses, and jump off the high dive for the dangerous thrill of it.
Wait, you say. Some of these guys do settle down! I know women who have players for boyfriends!
To those women I say, “How’s that working out? Does he cheat? Are you sure? Does he flirt with other women? Is he in touch with the previous girl who flipped him into monogamy? Do you check his texts? Do you wish you had his Facebook password? Do you rest easy when he’s not with you? Do you know that you are loved unconditionally?”
That’s what I thought.
Still, the dream survives. Like the person who buys one lottery ticket when the jackpot reaches a gazillion dollars, and then is shocked, shocked! when they don’t win, women continue to take a crack at the emotionally unavailable man that every woman wants and none can tame.
First a disclaimer. I don’t have a magic potion, can’t tell you how to bring a wild beast to heel.
The secret to flipping a player is finding one who wants to be flipped.
A pretend asshole. A guy who’s gone from beta to bastard and back again. The truth is, a very high percentage of males understand that assholes get laid. Many don’t know what to do about it. Others work hard to acquire skills with women via Game. But many, many young men just flip into acting like jerks. When in doubt, insult her. Walk away. Never show you care. This is surprisingly effective, and it really doesn’t require a bootcamp to role-play this way. Some of these guys will like the action so much, they won’t ever come back from the Dark side. Some will. You gotta figure about 20% of guys getting laid are jerks. The rest are just acting like jerks. That doesn’t make them fun to be around, but it does mean they are susceptible to being poached.
What does a girl have to do to flip a Pretend Player?
I’ll illustrate with a case study of our own regular reader and commenter Escarondito. I first heard from him in the Spring of 2009, when he was just 21. Here was the first comment he ever left:
What do you do with the girls who, when asked out on a date, look at you nicely and never talk to you again? LOL when my girl friends ask me, “You always have a new girl, do you just hook up or do you want something serious?” I can only respond based on my experience. “If I asked you on a date, treated you well, communicated with you during the week, and acted like a gentleman, you wouldn’t talk to me ’cause you’d think i was a punk.” None of those girls has disagreed with me yet.
At which point I made some remark about the plight of the Nice Guy. To which he responded:
Oh trust me, I understand I am supposed to be “molded” into a nice boy. But, LOL I was nice already. And I am still nice. You see I went to an all-boys boarding school, and I noticed I was gettin no play while the dudes who I heard dogging their girls out all week and sometimes to their faces were getting tail all the time. So when I got to college, I flipped the script and guess what happened? Girls galore. Now my issue is that I’m a graduating senior about to leave college with a strong sense of HFS (hook-up fatigue syndrome) and when I get a girl who I honestly have feelings for I’m constantly battling to keep up my image of bad boy to not let her see my good boy….I know that sounds soooo retarded but I’m telling you with so many girls today that is the case. Plus tbh i do like getting ass every once in awhile, and good boy Me doesn’t cut it in that department, so bad boy Me is what usually has to be shown. But this boy just wants to be good if you know what I mean?
On beta males:
Trust me, I was one too. So then I just started acting like an ass/ stepping my game up/ douching to an almighty level, and I got the sexual relationships I wanted. Great stinking piles of meaningless crap. And then the inner Beta kicked in and I just thought “Hey that was fun, but let’s get back to real life”. Now I’m a graduate watching my friends going through the same transition…[but a man] has to own that part of himself. See it to it’s fullest extent, and then make a decision on how he wishes to be.
On getting flipped into a boyfriend:
The hottest girl I’ve had as a girlfriend did it so simply. We were making out and I wanted to take her back to my room. She said, “No. You can take my number” (then gave a sexy wink), ”But I’m not fucking you tonight”. That let me know, “Hey you gotta invest time with me buddy, but don’t worry – I’m interested, and you aren’t going to want anyone else cause I am SSAAASSYYYY!!!! You better believe I called her during the week, texted her jokes during class, and made plans to hang out with her the next weekend. Not every girl might have the sass to pull that off, but if you’re making out stop yourself before it goes further. You can make out with a boy the first night and he could become your boyfriend, but never after sex. Take out his phone, put your number in it, say “Call me” and walk away. He will think of no one else for the next three nights.
Show relationship skills like loyalty and kindness. Answer your phone when he calls. So many girls only respond by text these days. I’m a call type of guy. If he calls you and you don’t respond and your text doesn’t say something like “in class ttyl”, what’s the point in talking to you? And if he calls you, call him back. When a girl texts me her response instead of calling me back after I called her, she is officially deleted from my contact list. I think girls get hung up on the guy that they are currently seeing and try to make it work. Guys know that if she doesn’t hit the standards I’m looking for someone else will. As my Jamaican family says, we “Cut our eyes and pass it”.
The next weekend we did more than make out but still didn’t have sex. Then I took her out to dinner, and again she was a flat-out person. She asked me “Do you just hook up with girls or do you actually hang out with them more than a couple of nights?” She never explicitly said “Let’s be exclusive,” but she let me know flat out that she wasn’t going to be just another girl. She wasn’t snobby or a bitch about it, she was honest with herself, and what the situation was regarding her and me. And most importantly, she was honest with me. A lot of girls know what the situation is, and know what they want, but if she never told me what she wanted out of the whole thing I still would have had the opportunity to get some and dump her. But she let me know that to get some is to stay with her. If a guy is truly an asshole he could hear all that and still try to pump and dump her but she was a smart girl to realize actions matter more than words. Plus, I’m not an asshole so I saw what standard she wanted, and to be honest, I WANTED to live up to her standard.
[There's a] difference between snobbery and self-respect. A snobby girl has an aura about her telling guys “You better start jumping obstacles to get to me.” A girl with self-respect meets me on even ground and when she spots an area of my game where my action might show an idea that I don’t value her, she put up an obstacle letting me know “Hey I am a woman of value.” I know it sounds like training a dog, but I was only a dog because I was trained to be. That whole courtship with her was eye-opening.
On how to be that girl:
Women often say that men treat women as objects. Here’s a hint: You let us. We use negs to shut down your human defenses. When you follow them you’re only helping us out in doing what we want to do. For example, when you complain that we don’t talk to you enough we say you’re nagging. No one wants to be called a nag so you stop. What you’re really saying is “I want more time with you in our relationship.” What we’re saying is “I want to have time with you when I want it to happen.” You backed down and now I can spend time with you when I want to. Just say, “Fuck that, I’m not nagging, I’m being upfront and serious.” If he doesn’t respect that he doesn’t respect you. That’s an example of what I believe everybody needs to jack them out of their illusions as to what a relationship entails. I call it “g’ing” someone up. He only calls you at 2 a.m.? Next time he calls g’em up and say, “You know, if we spend time together during the day and talk, we could hook up as well.”
But that’s only if you wanna take it past pure hook-up level to friendship and possibly a relationship. But hey, these are just the words of a 21yr old former FWB guy looking for something deeper.
I think Escarondito is wise beyond his years.
Inspired by his use of the word SASSY, here are Escarondito’s tips for flipping a player:
- State interest clearly.
- Say no in the early days.
- Sexily suggest future rewards.
- Set standards.
- Say it straight, preferably with sass.
- Show relationship skills.
Of course, this only works if the guy is looking for something deeper. It’s worth a shot. Even if you don’t get the Player, at least you won’t get Played.
Related posts:
I may not be what you have in mind because I plan to continue banging other chicks, but I can definitely be flipped into a husband/boyfriend. I pretty much lay it out in my latest post.
Haha, Vincent, you rogue, you know you are a player to the core! Actually, I’ll qualify that – to me playing someone involves deceit. Neil Strauss had multiple LTRs going at once, but he was honest with all of them. He gave them up for Lisa, but if he had wanted to add Lisa to the harem, he would have needed to be open about that, IMO. After all, Roissy et al say that a woman will choose 5 minutes with Alpha over 5 years with Beta. In that case, telling her she’s part of the harem should be no problem, right?
.
But no, I don’t think your entering an open relationship, or even worse, cheating, would constitute flipping.
I’m curious as to what ended up happening to that sexy girlfriend….
We broke up. She left Boston. I stayed throughout the summer. Good things come in bad timing.
“Lasciate ogne speranza, voi ch’intrate”
Yes, definitely playing with fire here. Personally, I never recommend that a woman enter those gates.
Susan, my dear Susan—your best post yet.
Easily the best bit of practical advice on this topic. Get rid of “The Rules”, Dear Abby, How To Spot a Player and all that other bullshit—you don’t have to “spot a player” if you follow the advice given here, because you’ll weed out 90 percent of them as a matter of course.
Let’s call this what it really is— “Mode One” behavior for women who are looking for relationships. By putting your needs out there in a calm, straightforward, and self-assured manner, you eliminate equivocating, bullshitting and dishonest behavior, perforce.
This is really as close as it gets to “Girl Game”, in my opinion and it’s how my girlfriend managed to tie me down sophomore year (we stayed together almost 4 years) after my wild freshman year. The one caveat is that younger a girl is, the more likely this will work. A woman 18-25 yrs old has a lot of sexual power and hence a lot of leverage—it will be easier for her to pull this off. A 35 year old just doesn’t have the same leverage, even if it’s not nice to say as much.
Whew, Dragnet, I am relieved that this passes muster with a guy who knows the deal! I always say that Girl Game is an oxymoron, because we can’t really control whether we are sexually attractive to a man – we either press his buttons or we don’t. But it stands to reason that once a man is attracted, a woman’s behavior and personality will greatly influence whether he remains interested, and wants something more than sex.
.
I agree about the usefulness of weeding out the players. I’ve seen several women do this successfully, and of course the drama in their lives goes waaaayyyy down. Sometimes they miss it. When you’re walking away from a lot of the guys who are indicating interest, life can get pretty lonely on the weekends. I understand how that sucks, but it is better than the alternative. The women who can hold out are often the ones who have been burned and are determined not to repeat it.
.
I think he is brilliant in his last paragraph “On How to be that Girl”. It’s chalk full of in your face truth and women need to read it and take it to heart.
And just my two cents on the following!
State interest clearly. <– A lot of women cannot do this, because they think it makes them look needy or desperate. However, it's really not a hard thing to do. Women need to own their confidence and project it.
Say no in the early days. <– This cannot be more true. I see this over and over when my girlfriend jump in the sack with every new guy they meet and they wonder why he is not calling them anymore.
Sexily suggest future rewards. <– It's called feminie wiles ladies. It's an age old practice, and it is sexy as hell when employed correctly.
Set standards. <– I believe I made comments about this a few weeks ago. You have to have areas in your personal dating life that you will not compromise on. It's not being a bitch or too picky. It's knowing what you want and not settling for less.
Say it straight, preferably with sass. <– Guys respond well to direct statements. No beating around the bush. Do with confidence, eye contact and some female swag and you're in.
Show relationship skills. <– And practice them.
Almost. Women need to own their needs and project confidence—that they are worth having their needs met. If the aim is a relationship, that is.
And “female swag”? Girl, please.
I don’t have a problem with this—but it matters how long she spent getting burned before she got wise. If a women spent her entire 20s getting burned and then, miraculously, upon her 30th birthday decides that she deserves better—odds are I wouldn’t even give her a chance to work her magic. My ex (the one I talked about above) had one boyfriend in high school for 2 years who was a something of a douche and one other boyfriend in college who was actually a pretty nice guy, just a bit to squishy. Was it important to me that she’d only been “burned” once before?
You betcha.
“A woman 18-25 yrs old has a lot of sexual power and hence a lot of leverage—it will be easier for her to pull this off. A 35 year old just doesn’t have the same leverage, even if it’s not nice to say as much.”
This is a good lesson in “Life is not Fair, Volume 1.” I feel very bad for girls who lacked guidance and were somewhat slow learning the realities of men. Poor things, even if it is their fault for being dense. How many 35 year old women are shocked–shocked!–that men are far more interested in a woman 10 years younger with less than 3/4 her vaunted “accomplishments”? We live in a society too fixated on fairness, not understanding that the unfairness of the world must be accepted wholesale and dealt with. Not to be too pedantic*, but the Greeks understood this:
“The gifts the gods bestow we mortals must endure; perforce, though filled with grief.”
*I am of course being a little pedantic, aren’t I?
Agreed. The women who will ultimately attract a quality man are women who figured out those lessons very, very quickly. Once is really all it takes to learn the lesson if women are paying attention. The worst thing a woman can do is, as you say, spend a decade with dead-end guys and then try to convert to someone with different values. It won’t help, because aside from the fact that she is now ten years older, she is still the woman who went for all those jerks, entered one bad relationship after another, and allowed herself to be used every step of the way. Most of these women are probably no longer emotionally fit for an LTR or marriage. Whether they’re physically attractive enough then is another question.
OK, seriously, your intellectualism is such a turnon. The college girls lurking here should be all over you.
.
Someone said somewhere (was it my blog? which thread? another blog? a different thread? – it all runs together!) that a woman should not date a man she wouldn’t marry. Although it sounds creepy to be looking at every guy as baby daddy material, it’s quite sensible. The guitarist in the punk pop band has very little chance of becoming a good husband and father. Who knows – he may become a stable homebody in time, but women need to work with the data they have NOW. If women would look at men through this lens more often, and combine that with the knowledge they should be heeding re their own waning beauty and fertility, things would go a lot better for them.
Re stating interest clearly, I think it’s the opposite of needy and desperate, but it is definitely a mistake that many women make. I’ve written before about “saying what you need to say.” The key to pulling this off is in being able to say:
I like you. I’m interested. In fact, I think you’re great, so I don’t want to blow it by moving too fast. We’ll both appreciate that in the long run, believe me.
.
If a guy then disappears, or says, “Um, no thanks,” a woman should just think, “Hmmm, pity.” And move on. This is not weakness! She knew her own worth – I loved how Escarondito said he WANTED to live up to her standard.
.
Re having sex in the early days, one of the things that made me start thinking, then reading, then writing about relationships, was a friend of my daughter’s. After I had established myself as a “cool mom” who wouldn’t judge, she asked me why a guy she had given a blowjob had never called. Actually, she asked why guys don’t ever call, and when I asked for details I learned she’d gone down on him at a school dance. He was the Big Man on Campus, and she felt privileged, singled out. She couldn’t understand why, with her awesome oral skills, he didn’t want to make her his girlfriend.
.
Re being sassy, this is definitely effective with certain guys. Not all guys want the backtalk, but I have definitely ratcheted up sexual tension with witty banter, teasing, and standing up for myself. In fact, I’d say that when men have been a bit obsessed with me, it was down to that. In this way, women do have Game.
Blowjob at a school dance. Nuff said.
escarondito´s last blog ..New Design- New Initiative
It’s like fast food fulfilled my appetite, but I’ll always be better filled from a full course meal.
escarondito´s last blog ..New Design- New Initiative
Yep—I know this feeling, and I rarely get it which tells you about the overall quality of women out there. When a girl is worth it, I want to treat her differently. I’m much more willing to invest my time, energy, wait for sex, etc. But the key here is that’s she’s actually high value/relationship material. Stating her needs and worth are necessary, but not sufficient (for me, at least). A savvy guy has ways of sussing out relationship value. If she is direct about her needs AND is relationship material according to my personal rubric then, and only then, can she continue to “Girl Game” me, as it were.
And none of this diminshes the need for guys to show leadership and to pace the courtship & the relationship. In fact, if she’s setting the standards more than a quarter of the time then either, 1) your Game needs work, IMHO or 2) the guy is overpursuing and is still very much a player.
I’m glad you inserted “certain” as a qualifier. Too many girls make the mistake of thinking guys are into this. And a lot of them are…but a lot of us aren’t. For me, sass is like wasabi—a little bit is perfect, but even a little more is just too much. I wouldn’t classify it as “backtalk” as that has a negative connotation, but it mostly doesn’t do anything for me. I suggest the ladies try a little at first, and if the guy is into it and can handle himself then slowly ratchet it up.
Yeah, seriously. And yet, this poor girl, who was around 18 at the time, didn’t get it at all. Anyway, I can say it a million times, but your words here, as a man with considerable experience, say it so much better, and carry Y chromosome credibility.
Haha, I love the wasabi analogy! Fair enough, it’s all about reading signals, and seeing what works for different people. It’s also about personal taste, or the match, as you say. Some men find sass unfeminine, preferring a demure woman. Some men go for a bit of a challenge to their authority. And some men can’t resist the completely psycho women who are just a mess! (That one I really don’t understand.)
Yes, the psychology is interesting. I think guys are driven to conquer and tame—to plant flags in shit, whether it’s the New World, the moon, or his woman. I also think that men have a natural tendency to self-sacrifice, but among weaker men (i.e., men who put up with psycho women) this can be manipulated into masochism. I don’t know, maybe I’m overreaching.
With regards to my personal feelings, I don’t mind challenges to my authority here and there in my relationships. And with the way women have been socially engineered these days, I expect—and embrace—these challenges from time to time. The important question is: what is she trying to accomplish with her (conscious) shit tests? Is she trying to strip away my authority or is she trying to inspire me? Those are very different things and garner two very different reactions from me. Or does she just need to be reassured that I am who she thinks I am? In any event, this is why it’s important to have your Inner Game right inasmuch as you don’t let her moods & emotions disturb your equanimity—that you are incentivizing calm, trusting behavior on her part and discouraging less worthwhile behavior.
This is illustrated by a relationship I was in about two years ago. She was a generally demure woman—but she wouldn’t just yield to any man. She went through a couple of would-be players and Gamers like a knife through hot butter. I knew she was attracted to me from the jump, but she didn’t make it easy for me. She challenged a fair amount early on, but after I’d weathered the storm she’d decided that I was strong enough to submit to and her frequent testing/sass became relatively rare. For me, this is where the attraction further deepened—the idea that once my character and mental state proved congruent with my initial disposition, she gave herself to me. Just enough sass to see if her would-be conqueror was for real.
Well, I see the gang’s all here.
Can’t really say that I relate to what has been presented by Ms. Walsh or by her “guinea pig” Esco, since I never attended university and of course, am not White. But what I will say is this – really, Women know the deal. They are far and away more socially saavy than the vast majority of them let on, or the vast majority of Men even know about. In fact, only those Men who have considerable Game knowledge and skill will know what I’m talking about. The rest of the poor saps don’t even have a blessed clue.
I say all this because really, at some point, we gotta stop the charade. The vast majority of the ladies reading this knows the deal. They know exactly where to go to get those “nice boys” – THEY SIMPLY DON’T WANT THEM. Why? Because they don’t make them wet, and in our time today, that is what matters most.
So, being that this is the case, guys like Esco do what they must to get laid, as all Men who are able do and have done sime time immemorial, and this won’t stop anytime soon. This is because Women, as a block, will not change their selection criteria anytime soon.
Simply put, there really isn’t a pragmatic reason as to why the Escos and Dragnets of the world shouldn’t stop doing what they do. It works. Period. And the dirty little secret is, that’s just the way most Women out there, including a goodly portion of those reading this as we I type this, likes it.
Women LOVE drama. Please do not attempt to debate me on this, deny it, etc, et al. The entirety of Hollywood is built on this. Soap operas that have been running for DECADES, have been built on this. Barbara Cartland and a truckload of other novelists and the like, have made their mark on history, based on this.
Dragnet is 100% – so long as a Woman is able, she can and will do all she can to snag Mr. Big. I’m not saying that’s right or wrong, only keeping it brutally real. Years of life on the streets will do that to you. No dis to Ms. Walsh or her many nice readers here, but I really don’t have the time or inclination to indulge in what I often see here and so many other internet venues (that are populated by, in the main, middle class and above, White and White Collar folk who are largely insulated from the rough and tumble of the real world) to be dangerously close masturbatory sessions that so occasions the neurotica of White folk, especially their females. Bottomline, there is a reason that so many guys are going douche, because it works. If you don’t like it, get the nice boy who more resembles dweeby Clark Kent.
But we all know Hell will freeze over before that happens, right?
And yea, I would Esco’s Game needs a bit of tightening up. .;)
Carry on
O.
Obsidian´s last blog ..Why Is Mos Def So Damned WHACKED-
HAHAHAHA
1) obsidian. I’m Middle class, did go to university, but am black.
2) Will admit I slipped up there. She threw me off as most college girls are, fortunately or unfortunately easy depending on who’s reading, are easy and wouldn’t say something like that. I shouldv’e known though, chick was cuban.
3) Not gonna lie back in Jersey and really don’t want to put in the time and effort for a GF and maddd girls have been flocking to the shore this summer to find their own “situation” soooo….the game is coming back hard. Sorry susan. Maybe I’ll find a fling to hold me down but no LTR for me right now cause in the words of pauly d “God help me it summa!”.
escarondito´s last blog ..New Design- New Initiative
Hmmm, maybe I was unusual, but I got back out into the dating world at the advanced age of 39 and was astonished (in a good way) at the attention I got. Contrary to what most of the “manosphere” believes, life does not end at 30, even for women.
Esco,
Surely you don’t need me to spell this out for you – middle class Black folk and working class Black folk are quite different. What I was talking about extended beyond race alone, as your revelation above speaks to. Simply put, to be in middle class life is to live in a world where things are inferred, oblique. To live a working class life is to live in a world where very often, things are right in your face.
I trust you can take things from there.
O.
Obsidian´s last blog ..Why Is Mos Def So Damned WHACKED-
agreed. But it’s esca as a nickname not esco. Esca is a feared name in the videogame world and people actually know who I am when they see me post on anything considering this is the only name I ever use.
Don’t play me man, people will start cracking jokes before the halo match begins…
escarondito´s last blog ..New Design- New Initiative
Esca,
OK, whatever floats your boat, LOL. Can’t say I’m much of a videgamer myself.
Anywho…
O.
Obsidian´s last blog ..Why Is Mos Def So Damned WHACKED-
Says who? A lot of “nice girls” are hesitant to dress at all flashy. They almost seem afraid to display any kind of sexuality, perhaps because it has attracted negative attention in the past. I don’t mean you have to dress like a streetwalker either. But I could take an average girl and make her look like a movie star with the right clothes, hair and makeup.
Ah, this gave me goosebumps! This conquerer talk, planting flags and such, is good stuff. It’s very manly, and women like manly men.
.
One question – when you say the attraction further deepened, do you mean, your attraction for her deepened when her sass became rare? Or that her attraction deepened, which led to her giving herself to you?
Haha, I won’t call a foul on summer mischief. Plus you know I have no problem with any of the above if it is, as you say, flat out. Carpe diem and caveat emptor.
I am afraid I have to second dragnet’s skepticism of female swag. Speaking only for myself, sass and confidence may not be the best words to describe what Ms. Walsh is trying to get at. Think coy and coquettish and you may be better off. Though I imagine these amount to the same thing. Anyway, I don’t want to get into semantics–just two words that need to be out there, I think.
I mean that my attraction for her deepened once she acknowledged my worthiness by easing up. It was a signal that I’d overcome.
That was hot.
Agree googly eye chicks disgust me cause it implies god on a mountain status, but when a chick eases up and you can tell she has the mindset of “you’ve passed my tests I’ll let you in”. Great feeling. Then I actually start really caring about stuff in our relationship.
escarondito´s last blog ..New Design- New Initiative
Obsidian, honestly, I don’t know why you have your knickers in a twist. You know I don’t disagree with anything you’re saying here, least of all that women love drama. I said above that women who weed out players find that the drama in their lives disappears, and that can actually get boring and lonely. However, women like drama with a happy ending, as every Hollywood director and romance novelist can confirm. Once we get the message that we’re headed for a disappointing finale, we’ll walk. Pretty soon we learn the signs – nope, he’s really, truly not into me at all. The signs are obvious from the start once a woman knows what the right standards are.
.
As for women wanting a man who gets them wet, well duh. Of course Dragnet and Escarondito can keep doing what they’re doing indefinitely and get women. The whole point of this post is that Escarondito got tired of it. Big stinking piles of meaningless crap. Surely you can relate to that Obs? As much as you talk about Brown Sugah?
.
Why do you say that Esc’s game needs tightening, when both he and the girl got what they wanted? They had a successful relationship, based on mutual respect. Where’s the difficulty? Would you be happier if he’d found a way to pump and dump her?
.
As for your “no dis”, it most certainly is a dis. As a mildly neurotic white woman who has readers of all races, I don’t agree that HUS is a masturbatory exercise. Furthermore, since you dedicate a fair amount of your own time to calling out black women for their behavior, I don’t see what race has to do with it. At all.
No one is saying, Aldonza, that life ends for women at 30. The claim is that men tend to be more interested in younger women than older ones–as a general rule–and that they tend to care for youth, beauty and personality more than the accomplishments and confidence that comes with age. In order for your claim to have merit, we’d have to compare the attention you received at 29 with the attention you received at 39. Even then, we’d have to compare the type/quality of man and his desire to commit to you. Even then were you to, as I suspect come out on top, you’d just be one story.
…
Obviously nothing here is scientific. I can only extrapolate from my own experiences and thoughts and those of my friends. No, life doesn’t end; but would a 34 year old man prefer a 30 year old or 26 year old as a mate? The question answers itself, I think.
…
Just my two cents.
Wow—some strong medicine here.
Look, we all know the deal. Everyone here does. Personally, I don’t have a problem with women making the decision to chase “the tingle” to the exclusion of all else—as long as they are willing to accept the (likely) consequences of failure.
That said, it’s just not realisitc to just expect women to quit trying to snag and tame alphas. And I really don’t see a problem with Susan devoting the occassional post to it because it’s the reality that a lot of her readers live in. It really is part of what it means to be a sexually active woman these days, in some sense. And it’s not as if it’s the totality of her blog. Most times, she’s actually encouraging these young ladies to give the betas and dweebs a second look—to see the value in those guys while they’re young. I really don’t the problem if she devotes 1 of every 20 posts to snagging a player who is willing to settle down…
…if only because that describes me at the ripe old age of 26. Sex never gets old—but chasing it down definitely does. The LTRs I’ve been in have all been with girls who’ve done at least half of the things outlined in this post—and rest assured the next (and hopefully last) one will be, too. I fully support any efforts to give the ladies a road-map to the hearts of us reformable players.
Well, that’s certainly true. I guess what I meant was that a woman at her best will appeal to some men and not others. Men may be willing to have sex with just about anyone, but real attraction is something else – more chemical.
I think you’re 100% right. In fact the woman who doesn’t do what you say is looking for serious trouble: no one wants to have three kids and a mortgage *and* a deadbeat husband or poor, aloof father.
…
The key is to just not tell him that you’re jugding him as future father potential…I mean, marriage dating has an end, doesn’t it? That end is falling in love and marrying isn’t it? Then come the children, right? Best be self-aware about what you’re getting into.
Hmmm, coy and coquettish? That goes with simpering and silly. I think sassy is something else entirely, and it requires a certain boldness, as well as wit. Think of the screwball comedies of the 40s. Hepburn and Tracy, The Thin Man, even Mae West. I’m trying to think of a modern day example, but am coming up empty. Wow, that’s ridiculous. Either I’m stuck in an era before I was born, or they really don’t make them like they used to.
Ah, the planting of the pole. I can imagine.
Can’t lie little psycho, clearly emotionally disturbed, hipster girls make my pants tight. I know I am in for a shit night. Funny story there was a girl that I had relations with while in boston I’ll call her *camilla*. She was a model, sexy tall girl, jamaican too, and a crazy as a bat heroine user. Greatest up and downs of my life and it is weird for me to say that. But the downs were never even really bad cause I didn’t give a shit. Like she tried to get her ex bf to try and beat me up but I didn’t play that shit. Talked to him man to man, we agreed bitch was crazy, and I went to her place and got head.
Nothing like a crazy chick….sigh. I miss her.
escarondito´s last blog ..New Design- New Initiative
All things being equal, I agree wholeheartedly that the average guy would choose the younger woman. The thing is, things are *never* equal. The 30yo might have a kickin’ body, the 26yo might laugh like your hated aunt ethel, the 30yo might remind you of the social studies teacher you had when you went through puberty while the 26yo might be a selfish twit. Or, you might be a 36yo guy and have almost nothing in common with the 26yo.
People are individuals and age/relative attractiveness is just one factor of thousands that we use to evaluate one another for potential mate-worthiness.
And, for the record, I received tons more attention at 39 than I did at 29…or even 22 for that matter.
I couldn’t play “coy and coquettish” if my life depended on it. I’d argue that Mae West was far from coy about her charms.
I loved the sitcoms of the 80s like “Moonlighting” and “Remington Steele”. For more recent examples, Christina Applegate in Anchorman, very sassy, Reese Witherspoon in just about anything she does. And, of course, our own Bridget Jones.
Very few women even come close to realizing the potential of their attractiveness.
I think for an alpha male, there’s a very, very fine line a woman has to walk to be able to pull off sassy and high value. To put it bluntly, most men don’t buy a girl’s shit. If a girl is going to talk big, she needs to back it up big. That is, if a girl says, “Listen, I like you but I’m not putting out until you prove you’re worth it,” a good alpha guy who can be “flipped” will say to himself, “Ok… you get one chance to prove how awesome you are.” We can spot a poser.
So when we ask you out, we want to see the sexy, but we also want to see the character. (Great post a few days ago on female character, btw.) We want real, interesting conversation. We want you to be sexy and tantalize us with what you’d like to give us. We want to know that you’re not a golddigger. It’s ok to let us pay for dinner if we want, but you could foot for coffee and dessert later. It’s also ok to go dutch… a lot of alphas simply won’t pay for a date that hasn’t been consummated. If you’re trying to flip a player, you may have to invest a little in the beginning.
Above all, you may not flake on us. Not even once. We will drop you like a hot potato. If you have to cancel a date, we’ll understand — if you immediately set up a second date in the very near future and buy the first round of drinks. You don’t get out of social obligation because you’ve got boobs. When you put someone out, you make up for it. That shows character.
The line between narcissism and real self-confidence is fine, but the good guys can tell the difference. It’s about respecting what you’ve given so far and not expecting the guy to give more. It’s about being certain of what your worth without being haughty about it. You can be absolutely sweet and loving while still maintaining self-respect and boundaries.
Hambydammit´s last blog ..Can Science Talk About Morality
Sassy…oh boy. During my dumber pure beta years, oh how appealing the sassy girls were, dominant and independent. But the line between a “sassy” woman and “termagant” can be a fine line indeed. A little banter, cleverness and some wit, that’s good. But for some of the “sassy” women I knew, everything was an excuse for an argument. No matter how good-looking they might be, it wasn’t worth a LTR with them.
“Ah, this gave me goosebumps! This conquerer talk, planting flags and such, is good stuff. It’s very manly, and women like manly men.”
Do we? Personally, just reading it made me feel violated. I really don’t want to be with a man that thinks about women this way. But then, I’m not and never have tried to flip an alpha. I’m somewhat of an alpha woman, which may explain why I’m naturally attracted to betas
Would you agree that regardless of raw material, attitude and carriage plays an important role? Because that’s been my experience. And I daresay it’s one reason why you are reeling them in at 39….
I’d argue that it’s the same fine line between the easy, teasing banter that a true alpha will use, and the clumsy and even mean negs applied by the wannabes.
Aldonza,
Yea, but so what? We’re talking about Womken here, NOT Men. You want to do that, head to a discussion that is dealing with Men. I understand Lady Raine’s place has such discussions obtaining. Have at it.
O.
Obsidian´s last blog ..Why Is Mos Def So Damned WHACKED-
Yea, but Aldonza, so what? We’re not talking about Men, we’re talking about Women. If you want to discuss the bad things PUA guys do, head over to Lady Raine’s. Knock yourself out among fellow travelers.
O.
Obsidian´s last blog ..Why Is Mos Def So Damned WHACKED-
I’ll second Reese Witherspoon – love her. I adore Bridget Jones, in part because of the P&P ripoff, but she is not really sassy. She’s more of a lovable, bumbling goofball, and though I adore the happy ending, I never am able to suspend disbelief that Mark Darcy falls for her. Her best moment is when she tells Daniel Cleaver that his offer is not good enough for her. And I also like the moment when she tells Mark that if he ever wants to come round, that would be nice. In fact, more than nice. Sigh. I love the Brits (of course I know RZ isn’t British, she just plays one in the movies).
Oh God, that’s the dopamine rush, for sure. I don’t know what it is about hipsters – it’s like they’re all wearing a sign saying, “Unstable, unpredictable, unreliable.”
.
Yeah! Gimme some of that!
I have to say, I love the cocky here. How you slipped right into that “true alpha.” You make a really good point, and it gets back to a post of yours that I often come back to in my mind – what is the value you can add? What can you offer that makes you better than assorted random chicks?
.
Re paying, this is a pet peeve of mine. Women need to get over it. Now. Chivalry is off the table. Women should ALWAYS offer to split the bill. Ideally, the guy will decline, and if the date has gone well, she should pick up the tab for the next date. Same deal with drinks. Some men truly prefer to pay, but a woman should never assume that she is entitled to anything. I get it that some men will only pay after sex, but I don’t even think that should be the standard. Unless one person is hard up for cash, the expectation should be 50/50.
.
Re flaking: If someone does this once, they are on final, super serious, probation. If a woman or man needs to change plans, fine. The way they do that – IN ADVANCE – not hours after – and their earnest attempt to reschedule should make their intentions clear. If someone stands you up? Finito.
.
OK, I realize I sound like a real hardass here, haha, but women who pull this crap give all of us a bad name. The manipulative, entitled ones need to be put in their place.
Confession: I had to look up the meaning of termagant. All I can say is that if a woman is scolding and quarrelsome in the beginning, when she is most invested in making a good impression, well, let’s just say I don’t think it’s gets better from there.
.
Sassy is only sexy if there’s a smile and a wink behind it, IMO. It’s a technique for increasing sexual tension. Disagreement can also work this way – we all know when a man and a woman hate each other in a flick that they’re going to wind up canoodling…but it’s much more unusual, and only works if the parties are physically attracted.
Woah! “Termagant!” That’s a winner for the best word I’ve learned in a long time. Now.. what was it I wanted to say about your comment? Gee… I can’t even remember. I love learning new words.
Hambydammit´s last blog ..Can Science Talk About Morality
Agreed. “The Rules” were one of the worst things to happen to women in decades. They’re nothing but a blueprint for being a spoiled, flaky bitch. The moment I detect a hint of “Rules” in a girl, I hit the road.
The thing is, you can be a fair, grown up, responsible, self-respecting woman and still be a model of femininity. Guys will dig that. (Good guys.) You can pull out the Visa card from your cutesy little Coach clutch, and it won’t make you look too manly.
Oh, and one thing I forgot to mention: If you have to cancel, first of all, think of it as missing class when you’ve got no more absences available. If you don’t have a doctor’s excuse or something equally weighty, you shouldn’t cancel. You made the date. Be a grown up and keep it. If you’re feeling bloated or PMSing so hard you don’t think you can be nice, ask the guy very nicely if it’s ok to postpone. Don’t just flake. If you do cancel, don’t wait for him to say, “So do you want to go out again?” Jump right in there and say, “I’m so sorry… I’m free most of the rest of this week. Can we go out tomorrow? I’ll get the first round of drinks to say I’m sorry for cancelling.” That will display interest to the guy, which is very important, and it will also display good character and a sense of fairness and obligation.
Hambydammit´s last blog ..Can Science Talk About Morality
Well, the fact that a woman is a termagant isn’t necessarily obvious at first (similar to how cads can fool women early on). The playful side of “sassy” is more evident at first, and, particularly if the woman is physically attractive and making the guy fall head over heels, it’s easy for guy to ignore the warnings signs, and the scolding, quarrelsome part that becomes clearer later on. And yes, I speak from experience.
Hi Ms. Walsh,
Replies below:
SW: Obsidian, honestly, I don’t know why you have your knickers in a twist. You know I don’t disagree with anything you’re saying here, least of all that women love drama. I said above that women who weed out players find that the drama in their lives disappears, and that can actually get boring and lonely. However, women like drama with a happy ending, as every Hollywood director and romance novelist can confirm. Once we get the message that we’re headed for a disappointing finale, we’ll walk. Pretty soon we learn the signs – nope, he’s really, truly not into me at all. The signs are obvious from the start once a woman knows what the right standards are.
O: Well, if your blog and the many, many others like it, are any indication, I would beg to differ. I think Dragnet summed up my view on the matter very well – I have no problem with the ladies chasing the tingle, I just want them to Man the f*ck Up about it and accept that it comes at a price. No way in hell could a Man whine and complain as much as the ladies do in this regard, I know the homies in the circles I rolled in couldn’t. Our motto was that you can’t make a Ho into a Housewife, and any Man who tries deserves to get got. You took it like a Man. I don’t think it’s too much to ask the same of the ladies, hmm?
.
SW: As for women wanting a man who gets them wet, well duh. Of course Dragnet and Escarondito can keep doing what they’re doing indefinitely and get women. The whole point of this post is that Escarondito got tired of it. Big stinking piles of meaningless crap. Surely you can relate to that Obs? As much as you talk about Brown Sugah?
O: Completely different situation. For one thing, I set out with a totally different objective that Esca.
.
SW: Why do you say that Esc’s game needs tightening, when both he and the girl got what they wanted? They had a successful relationship, based on mutual respect. Where’s the difficulty? Would you be happier if he’d found a way to pump and dump her?
O: Based on what I read, it sounded like he was a bit shaky in some respects. For example, he didn’t seem to me to have exceuted Solid Game, in fact it sounded more like a variant of Fool’s Mate. As for the pump and dump thing, I really don’t have a view one way or another on that one. That’s something each Man has to decide for himself.
.
SW: As for your “no dis”, it most certainly is a dis. As a mildly neurotic white woman who has readers of all races, I don’t agree that HUS is a masturbatory exercise. Furthermore, since you dedicate a fair amount of your own time to calling out black women for their behavior, I don’t see what race has to do with it. At all.
O: I wasn’t singling out only your blog, Ms. Walsh. You have to understand that I’m very much an “alien”, even in comparison to fellow African Americans like Athlone, Dragnet or Esca. They can explain to you why. And that is why I said what I did, and I maintain that view. so much of it all comes off to me as a kind of navel gazing session.
As for my writing about and on Black Women, as I’ve said many times before, Black Women simply don’t perceive issues of Race in the same way that Black Men do. This is either because their experiences are so vastly different from that of Black Men in the main, and/or because like all Women, they’re more willing to go along to get along. Whatever the case, the bottomline is that Black Women simply don’t discuss these things out in the open in the waysa Brotha can and will.
Bottomline: Women know where the nice boys are. They simply don’t want them. Coolbeans – then kindly shut up and take your tradeoffs in life just like the rest of us.
Problem. Solved.
O.
Obsidian´s last blog ..Why Is Mos Def So Damned WHACKED-
Oh boy, that sounds brutal, and like it probably is accompanied by a lot of nagging. So I guess a synonym for termagant might be harridan…Actually, this makes me wonder about something – do you think women like this go after betas specifically, in order to browbeat and dominate them? Are they looking for the man who will make the perfect henpecked husband? If so, beta guys need some serious schooling in what NOT to go for. Sounds like you got that via life experience.
From what I hear, true alphas are capable of terrible cruelty. Forget teasing banter, these guys are brutal. Remember Paolo, who texted Tara “forget it” when she didn’t indicate that she was DTF for their first meetup?
.
It is true that guys trying to learn Game can come up with very clumsy negs. One woman reported that after she rejected a guy’s opening at a bar, he told her she had gross teeth. However, she wasn’t offended – she was amused and ridiculed him. I am on record as being neg-unfriendly in general, but I understand why men learn how to do it. Because it works. Every guy who sasses a woman makes himself more desirable in that woman’s eyes, provided he knows enough to push the right buttons.
.
It doesn’t always work in reverse. For sass to work on a guy, it can’t be a neg. It has to have a built-in reinforcement. The message that “you can have this if you play for a bit.” Sassy attitude is a way of providing incentive, but the woman has to calibrate the degree of attitude to the man’s preferred type.
Well, it gets back to what Escarondito said. If a woman is interested, she needs to indicate that. Clearly. So if a guy says how about Friday, and she can’t, but she’s interested, she needs to say that. She needs to specifically state that she wishes she were available and would love to plan for another time. Forget all this hard-to-get nonsense. Once you go down that road, it’s nothing but the Principle of Least Interest for as long as the relationship lasts.
.
Men risk most of the rejection. Therefore, they should get most of the positive reinforcement when initiating. If a woman digs a guy but doesn’t say so when he asks her out, she runs the risk of sending him away forever. That is not a good strategy.
Well, there you go! The truth is, there are an infinite number of complementary mixes. If you’re attracted to betas, YAAAAAYYYYYY!, OK sorry, if you’re attracted to betas, that’s awesome. That brings up an interesting question – in this era of female accomplishment, perhaps the answer is in opposites attracting. Alpha women with beta men. Educated women with blue collar men. There’s no question that the population will be lopsided in this way for your generation. It will be interesting to see how matches get made.
Obs: Our motto was that you can’t make a Ho into a Housewife, and any Man who tries deserves to get got. You took it like a Man. I don’t think it’s too much to ask the same of the ladies, hmm?
.
SW: Yes it is too much to ask. We take things like a Woman, and that is a very different thing. Women learn through experience that chasing the tingle comes at a price. Some women will continue to spend emotional capital in their attempts to tame the player. Some will write off a bad investment once and be more risk averse in future. Either way, we’re bound to be emotional and dramatic about it.
.
I state clearly in this post that I don’t recommend that women try to flip a player, but I’m being realistic. There are many, many players and pretend players out there. And they’re the most likely guys to be making moves. As you noted many times, the STEM guys are not in the mix as much. My point is that real players are not relationship material, but pretend, or temporary players are. They’re the guys who will apply Game to make a LTR successful.
.
I understand why you feel that I do a lot of navel gazing here. Certainly, there are more pressing matters in the world than whose heart gets broken this week. Please keep in mind that I’m writing from my kitchen in the world I live in. I’m a middle class white woman, that’s what I know. I write about what I know. I hope, and believe, that these issues transcend age (that’s essential, in my case) and race. I get that you are in a different place than the Ivy educated black guys who come to both our blogs – but as long as we’re talking about the human condition, I don’t see how that matters much when it comes to what the heart wants.
.
Yup, women know where the nice boys are. And they do not want them. Is that what you want to hear? They want a man who demonstrates social dominance and understanding of what makes women tick. It’s not even a conscious choice – it is just simply what works. You imply that men are either nice or good with women, and that those things are mutually exclusive. Game says otherwise. The brutal truth is that if a beta guy can’t adopt dominant behaviors, he will not succeed. If an alpha guy can’t adopt provider behaviors, he will not succeed. Of course, this depends on how one defines success.
Yes, many definitions of success here are possible. So in the example cited? Boy game meets girl game, girl games wins on points for the short term victory. Further, the GG was likely consciously conducted Disregarding (or suppressing) any sort of long term possibilities or thought. (She knew she was leaving) But it’s all pretty common actually. So here, again, ‘flipping a player’ was seemingly done for short term entertainment & little real ‘gain’, other than some needed attention perhaps and some dinners out.
And yes, the script could have been written 70 or 50 years ago too. So nothing wrong with ‘old games’, they might work in the proper contexts. But here? Seems like was most likely strictly for entertainment purposes. Which again is fine. But my thought here is that eventually, like O & others are constantly noting, ‘female desires’, have to meet the paradox of modern mating fairly & squarely. If you want the dads? They’re in one part of the Venn diagram. The good looking & ever so deliciously tingly feeling cads? Are mostly, reliably in a separate category. They do share some membership in common, but it’s an ever changing cast of characters as a few ‘cads’ do grow up somehow (it happens, mainly in their 40′s tho), and the population is filled by new entrants from ‘below’ or ‘sideways’ migration (divorce, immigration, whatever). And yes guys have their own Separate Paradoxes. (Youth is not forever, beauty & fertility is not a given & is ever unreliable at many ages).
But waiting ever diligently to ‘flip a player’ with your ‘feminine whiles’ & ‘sassy charm’ is perhaps really done best when in that special region of your upper 30′s & 40′s when you know just enough about yourself & your potential targets that they now know you by your proper hunting cat name. Wisdom comes late to most, and as ever youth is wasted on the young. So perhaps not as long as the odds of making it to the NBA, but we’re still talking fairly long odds. And yes, for most ‘average looking’ folks of ‘mean talents’? You might aim for ‘the stars’ and still come up with mere mud. The most likely outcome actually? Single motherhood. Cheers & Good Luck, ‘VJ’
Re being sassy, this is definitely effective with certain guys. Not all guys want the backtalk, but I have definitely ratcheted up sexual tension with witty banter, teasing, and standing up for myself. In fact, I’d say that when men have been a bit obsessed with me, it was down to that. In this way, women do have Game.
I think this can work, but it depends on the delivery and subtlety. My GF will get sassy with me, We are getting ready to move in together and lately she has joked with me “about being in charge of this operation”. I’ll usually come back with “I’ll show you who is in charge of this operation” and smack her on the ass.
And some men can’t resist the completely psycho women who are just a mess! (That one I really don’t understand.)
My sample size MIGHT be too small to say anything here definitive, but my experience is the “psycho” women are usually the freakiest sexually. They are often into trying all sorts of crazy stuff, and will take you places the more demure type simply will not. One example, my ex-wife was psycho, but very adventuresome. The first time we went to a strip club together was on her suggestion. We did that quite often. Either consciously or subconsciously she knew about the male desire for sexual variety, and would say stuff during sex to create the fantasies of other women.
Ultimately though, not worth the other problems, and fact of the matter there are other things just as important or more important in a LTR then super crazy intense sex.
“And none of this diminshes the need for guys to show leadership and to pace the courtship & the relationship. In fact, if she’s setting the standards more than a quarter of the time then either, 1) your Game needs work, IMHO or 2) the guy is overpursuing and is still very much a player.”
Eh. Disagree. I think a lot of guys want to see you ALL THE TIME in the beginning, and I definitely cool things out a bit — make them miss you. If a guy is trying to spend a lot of time with you, it probably just means he wants to spend time with you, not that he doesn’t have game or is a player (he could be either, or neither). In my experience, women have to set the timing of seeing one another so you can slowly build because a lot of guys would just see you a ton until the relationship burns out quickly.
In my opinion, the best way is to see the person a lot (not too much that they don’t look forward to seeing you) in the beginning. The more people are exposed to a stimulus, the more they like it (like that song Sexyback. I hated it when I first heard it, but after 1,000 radio plays, it became my favorite song). Once you’re sure they like you a lot, you stop seeing them so often, claiming you are busy. A lot of times, this seals their attraction for you — the scarcity / rarity principle. This sounds manipulative, and you’re right, it is. Just think about it like I do: it’s for their own good
A lot of really great couples I’ve seen have crashed & burned in their infancy because they had an issue with this “building attraction” phase — one person called too much or they spent too much time together, or not enough. So that’s what I’d recommend from my own experience.
I’ve negged guys (jokingly, with a smile) with varying degrees of success. Some were instantly smitten, some were really intimidated & basically shrank from interaction from that point forward. Some seemed very turned off. So I think it’s a high-risk venture, but when it works, it works big. The couple of guys it worked on were very alpha-ish, so maybe they like having the game spat back at them? It kind of raises your value in their eyes I think, since you’re basically saying, ‘you’re not that great, I’ve had better.’ I think maybe it doesn’t work as well on betas, who think you’re making fun of them.
I always offer to pay, but I can’t help liking the guys who never let me do so much more than those who like to split things. In fact, I haven’t really ever dated someone long-term who liked to split things. Maybe that says bad things about me as a person, but we didn’t always do expensive things — many walks in the park or bike rides, and I hardly ever got more than a glass of wine when out, so I didn’t feel like I was being ridiculous. I also cooked for them, so I felt like I was contributing something.
I’ve seen a few of these women, strangely enough. They tend to prefer betas who are laid back and manageable, but aren’t slackers. That way, they can wear the pants in the family, but not feel they are with some moocher. The ones I knew were perfectly reasonable seeming with their partners, as long as they had their way, but if not, look out! A bunch of the long-term marriages I am friends with have this dynamic, with the dominant wife running things, and giving the husband some occasional freedom (a once a month golf or video game outing or similar harmless geek vice with friends). Also strangely enough, these are among the few women who seemed most immune to the cads, probably because of the clash of personalities. Some are worse than others, the worst being the ones that will berate the poor guy in front of everyone, while the more diplomatic ones will turn quiet, and you won’t see your buddy for weeks until he’s out of the dog house.
Indubitally true. But the point is also, is it not, that if you want three children, a dog, and a husband then you’d better learn to pick and settle on men (relatively) quickly. Silly dating choices well into your thirties makes that life dream impossible.
…
It depends upon a woman’s goals. So long as she is honest about the costs of won goal over another. High powered career? Sure; but you won’t have a high powered family life unless you’re some sort of genius.
I was thinking more Scarlett O’Hara.
…
But this post isn’t meant for my preferences, since I’m not a player. I could never imagine using “sassy” in a complimentary fashion, but I’m not a player.
…
Just my 2 cents.
I hope they keep at it.
I hope they never give up and start looking for a “nice guy”.
The nice guys do not deserve to be joined to one of these women with their filthy hearts.
I hope they keep after the douchebags until they hit 50.
I want spinster tears deep enough to paddle a canoe in.
That’s the saddest point here Rick. You might get some regrets, some grumbling certainly, but ‘spinster tears’ let alone ‘deep enough to paddle’? Dream on Bud. Not going to happen. Not in our lifetimes. There’s an entire support system for singletons now. Hardly any stigma for remaining single forever. No one knows, let alone cares much anymore. There’s no reason to. We live & work differently today. Spinster tears? We’re hardly worth their weight in either gold or much concern in the 19th century, let alone ours. Lizzie Borden, the archetypal sad/ ‘killer’ New England spinster? Lived a mostly quiet trouble free life after, yes, being acquitted of killing her parents. Died with a relative fortune in the bank too. Then as now, ‘spinster tears’ are more obvious & evident in the imagination of some rather than reality. They’ll get along fine without us actually, and the economy is certainly now tilted that way to better support such decisions. From everyone actually. Cheers & Good Luck, ‘VJ’
Ms. Walsh,
Since you brought up Brown Sugah, I thought to offer a few observations she had on the matter since she read our exchange.
She understands where both of us are coming from, in that while she’s Black she’s also from a middle class and college educated background. She says that my differing perceptions of White/Black folk have a great deal to do with the kinds of expectations each group has, and this is especially true wrt the Women of both groups-simply put, the main reason why there is a noted lack of the kinds of neuroticism that I notice with White Women who makeup the bulk and mass of the internet on the part of Black Women, is because the latter group has differing, some would even go so far as to say, lower expectations of the Men in their life.
I think that definitely plays a huge role here. A great deal of the White Women I read about it, and again it’s bigger than just this one venue, tend to come accross as having extremely high hopes. Then, when reality intrudes, all hell breaks loose. On the other hand, in the main, Black Women don’t do that. To be sure, they most certainly do have their own issues, but it’s different in kind and in scope from what I usually see here and elsewhere.
Anyway, my point is that much of what is discussed here or for that matter over at Roissy’s, simply isn’t a matter of concern in my world. Take the whole question of “female negging” – it’s a foolish thing for a gal to do, because anyone from the hood knows that NO ONE can play the dozens, “snap” or “bust on” another human being better than a guy. Put that together with the realworld potential for brutality on the part of many Brothas (a powerful ingredient of Game to be brutally frank), and we can now see how and why “Ms. Sassy” will get nowhere fast out on the dating market in Black USA. Those Black Women I tend to address? They come from this cohort. I talk about em because I can.
At the risk of getting the ire of some or more of your readers, or perhaps even yourself, I just felt the need to interject my own observations in this regard. My personal experience has been that people are rarely interested in seeing how the other half lives, so much as they are interested in finding those like themselves and giving the appearance that they are cosmopolitan. I truly like to mix it up.
Finally, let me say this – the reason why I said what I did in the first place was because Players wouldn’t be in such high demand if Women didn’t want them. And so long as this is gthe case, nothing any of us can do will make any difference. Like I said, Dragnet hit the nail on the head – so long as a Woman can do thus and so, she will. Usually, not always but more often than we’re willing to admit, Women get their heads on straight only when they’re forced to, usually owing to age, circumstance (one or more babies), etc. At any rate, as you know, Women drive the sexual marketplace. So long as they do, those with Game no matter how acquired, will win.
And we all know that tends to be a rather small number to begin with.
All of this I am cool with. I just want them to STFU about their choices and the all but certain consequences that flow therefrom.
O.
Obsidian´s last blog ..Why Is Mos Def So Damned WHACKED-
Oh, and Ms. Walsh,
No, I don’t necessarily want or need to hear what you relayed in your parting shot above – BUT THE WOMEN MOST CERTAINLY DO NEED TO HEAR IT. Because they’re the ones who have a vested interest in things here. Women no longer *need* a “provider” so what matters now is a Man having Game, and as others have so often noted, Asshole Game is arguably the crudest yet potentially effective variants out there. It’s also the quickest to learn and implement, don’t take my word for it, ask around. Hence why you see so many guys doing it. And they keep doing it for a reason, because it works.
And that’s just the way the vast majority of the ladies like it. Including quite a few who post/read here.
O.
Obsidian´s last blog ..Why Is Mos Def So Damned WHACKED-
On that score, the Question ‘How to flip a player’? Like this, one of the the most likely scenarios:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/01/mel-gibsons-new-racist-ra_n_632602.html
Cheers, ‘VJ’
That does seem to be the general explanation – psycho in bed is hot. Sounds like a business opportunity – bootcamps for “How to have sex like a psycho chick!” Seriously, there is probably something to be learned there – if women could let loose a bit more, get a bit more experimental, at least to the point where they surprise their men, many relationships would improve.
.
P.S. Mike, I don’t know if you caught it, but the Female Narcissism post was in response to your question about red flags for women.
Why not actually BE independent and busy some of the time, from the beginning? This strategy will make guys wonder why you’re cooling off suddenly. It may make them feel ardent, but it will also make them insecure. And that has a way of coming back to bite you. If you followed Esca’s recommendations, and were a woman with a full life and good relationships, you still wouldn’t be giving it all away up front.
You raise a good point – often women are sassy, talking back a bit, as an invitation to the guy to show dominant behavior. Men love it, women love it, it’s win-win. Men like taming a filly, and fillies ultimately like being corralled. That’s why the sexual tension gets ramped up.
I agree. Since the whole point of the neg is to mildly attack self-esteem, it’s going to be very threatening to a guy whose self-esteem, at least with women, is shaky. A guy with zero fear of rejection due to a history of pulling girls will likely be amused, and that becomes like a game of cat and mouse.
Ugh, there is nothing I hate more than being out with a couple where one party is putting down the other publicly. Humiliating one’s partner like that is sadistic. I don’t understand why the recipient of this treatment puts up with it. My husband is very laid back, and I am more talkative. Sometimes I interrupt him without even realizing it. If I do that in front of other people you can bet I will hear about it when we get home.
The truth is women do like to be paid for, and men often like to pay. When that’s the case, it’s all good. I think you’ve got it right – it’s about making the offer and not feeling entitled. Also, as you say, women can be generous in other ways. What’s important is that both parties feel they are being treated fairly, and not taken advantage of.
.
Re splitting checks, I don’t do that even with other women. We always take turns buying lunch, for example. Couples splitting checks is different, but I just always find it awkward, unless the meal is expensive.
I’m not suggesting that women go looking for cads and try to reform them. The truth is that a VERY high percentage of guys women meet out and about will be footloose and avoiding committed relationships. Players, players everywhere. So here’s a bit of advice on how to handle oneself – and as Dragnet says, weed out the true cads. Every single woman needs some Cad Management tools.
.
I like the hunting cat idea – perhaps that’s why older single women surround themselves with cats. It’s their “pride.”
OK, I hear you. I plead guilty to my own kind of myopia. The truth is, I have a fairly sizable (20+) group of college women I speak with frequently. They’re not all connected to one another, they’re from different schools, etc. They serve as my “boots on the ground” in many ways, and they definitely inform my understanding of the SMP as they experience it. The truth is, their experience will include guys exactly like Dragnet and Escarondito, but they’re all from the “chattering classes” as you like to say. I understand that it’s only one piece of the pie. Your blog is addressing a much larger set of issues, and is inclusive of a much larger spectrum of viewpoints, commenters, etc. It’s quite heterogeneous.
.
As for high hopes and entitled behavior, don’t miss my post on Female Narcissism
.
As for Game, you know that I have no problem with men using it attract women. From my perspective, it improves the lot of women by increasing the number of men who know what we want. The point of this post is that a man with tight Game who is by nature suited to an LTR might be a good relationship prospect if you catch him at the right time. There is no doubt in my mind that both Dragnet and Escarondito will acquire long-term mates and keep them invested, much the way that you and Athol Kay do.
.
You’ll get no argument from me re suffering consequences for bad choices. That’s life, and it’s the way human beings learn. One of the things my generation did so badly is not letting our kids figure that out for themselves. We shielded them failure and disappointment and created quite a few entitled and narcissistic young adults. Now they’ll learn those lessons as adults, with women wasting precious fertile years.
.
As for Brown Sugah, I wish she would come around, at least on your blog! I can tell she is a smart AND wise woman. And obviously not sassy
I agree completely re asshole game. As I said in the post, young men can literally turn it on overnight once they decide. They start getting lucky, and at the same time start resenting and disrespecting the women who like them now that they’re jerks. It makes them cynical and jaded about women, and many of them never do come back. There are not that many men who can truly understand female nature and still love women
Jeez, I wish Mel Gibson would get hit by a bus. What a terrible human being. You know what surprises me the most? That he was married for so many years to the same woman. He was often held up as the model family man. I don’t know if he went crazy, or always was. Certainly, his bigotry has to have been there all along.
Mel Gibson and many other actors get held up as family men because they are white. The “true” family men like Samuel L. Jackson, Will Smith, Denzel Washington, never get the media play they deserve being absolute family men in an area which always deems to destroy families. Hollywood. Some of the most messed up families in hollywood always have the patriarcs held up as some quintiseential modern ‘good guy’ till he cheats(too many to name), marries his daughter (woody allen), or curses his spouse or children out on tape(Mel, Alec Balwin). Lionel Richie aside. Alot of Black hollywood families live life and you never hear of them in trouble, that is until one fucks up and CNN does an expose on the “death of the black family”……sidenote: Fuck Soledad O’Brien
escarondito´s last blog ..New Design- New Initiative
Hi Ms. Walsh,
Coolbeans; and, just so everyone knows, I am no means a one string guitar either; indeed, I’m an equal opportunity offender, LOL. Just got finished addressing the general readership over at The Spearhead in reaction to my recent article over there: http://theobsidianfiles.wordpress.com/2010/07/02/an-open-letter-to-the-spearhead-readership/
You and/or your readers are more than free to comment, reply, whaever.
O.
Obsidian´s last blog ..Why Is Mos Def So Damned WHACKED-
I had to chuckle a bit here. As much as I like Susan’s blog, I’ll admit it’s like stepping into some weird, divorced-from-reality dimension, at times. Apparently, alpha women are attracted to betas—because hypergamy is so obviously bunk…aaaaand slavery is freedom, black is white, war is peace, etc etc. Oh good grief.
To clarify: You, dear girl, are attracted to betas (if that is indeed the case) because that’s your personal preference—not because you are “alpha” or whatever. Hypergamy is still the order of the day for the vast majority of women—especially high-status females…which is why blogs like Susan’s are even necessary.
I don’t dispute this necessarily…but I think a girl’s physical attributes have more to do with whether or not a guy is into it than whether or not she tries to neg or spit Game, as it were. Sure, some of the guys who were “turned off” probably were insecure…and I bet some of them just didn’t find you very physically appealing. You should consider that, even if it makes you feel a little uncomfortable.
I’m not familiar with Samuel Jackson’s family life, but I think Denzel and Will Smith definitely get credit for being good husbands and fathers. They’re in the Tom Hanks mold. Also Bill Cosby. And let’s not forget POTUS (tho not an actor).
.
In Mel Gibson’s case it’s especially offensive, because he professes to be such a devout Catholic. Like, yeah, let’s take the Church back to the Spanish Inquisition.
Hi Obs, I just left a comment on your blog. I read the Spearhead comments, but honestly, I feel really uncomfortable over there. It’s the online equivalent of walking home alone late at night in a dark alley. Cue the scary music. I think your post is right on.
War is peace, slavery is freedom, black is white, up is down—you get the idea.
Accepting that this is true, this will absolutely not be true for the vast majority of women in existence. To the young women reading this blog: there is no way to know whether or not you will be the miraculous exception. Do you really want to wait until you’re 39 to find out?
“If a guy is trying to spend a lot of time with you, it probably just means he wants to spend time with you, not that he doesn’t have game or is a player (he could be either, or neither).”
You’ve just described a guy who doesn’t have Game. No guy with solid Game would try to spend too much time with a girl in the initial phase—he would know exactly how to handle this.
Please don’t opine about Game until you’ve read up on it a bit—thanks in advance.
For some of us males, paying gives us a provider buzz. My Dad was this way. Even if it was his birthday, if I tried to pay he would give me a look that said ‘Put your wallet back into that pocket, boy, or I am taking you out to the woodshed later!’. He liked displaying his ability to provide for his family. I am similar. The thing is, the Game community is not entirely off that alot of guys do it just because they think they must and don’t get anything out of it. However there are those of us who enjoy paying for an evening out because it gives us pleasure. In a way, for us, it is something of a display of dominance as we won’t let the woman pay.
And if she just wanted a free meal, well, I can pick up on whether or not she was there for the food or for me; there will be no other dates, I will have escaped dating a user, and she will be the ultimate loser for it.
I think women need to understand that when they find a guy like you, it’s very important to show appreciation. Paying is a form of dominance, a display of resources. And it’s gratifying to men when women acknowledge that.
Ms. Walsh,
Yea, I saw it, thanks, that’s what’s up. It hasnt appeared on the Spearhead site yet so we’ll see. Something tells me that it should be quite interesting.
As for Esca’s comments wrt Denzel, Samuel L. Jackson, etc, he’s definitely onto something there. Recall last year’s brouhaha over Chris Brown and Rihanna? Now, when’s the last time you saw Denzel, jackson, Smith, etc, getting that kind of attention?
Here’s another very important take on the matter:
http://abagond.wordpress.com/2010/06/23/zora-neale-hurston-what-white-publishers-wont-print/
And why I say that the Obamas are a powerful symbol for a host of very important reasons. They show the world that it is indeed possible to be Black and in love, too.
O.
PS: There are A LOT of White guys in the Manosphere who have what I consider an irrational hatred of Michelle Obama for some reason. They need therapy.
Obsidian´s last blog ..Why Is Mos Def So Damned WHACKED-
Exactly. I think if you a look at the set of skills here as a roadmap to tame a cad (or even a pretend alpha) then you’re probably going to be disappointed. A guy with solid Game isn’t going to let you tame him.
The set of skills outlined here are valuable because they dispel the ambiguity and mental gamesmanship that players need to thrive. Stating your needs & desires in a confident, self-assured and straightforward manner (coupled with a dogged determination to keep your legs closed until you are sure he can meet your needs) weeds out the vast majority of players as they will likely just move on to easier prey. The tools outlined here are really tools of self-mastery…which means they will be more or less inaccessible to 90 percent of the ladies reading this blog.
But one can hope.
I think Mel’s Dad finally wore him down. You know people often follow a pattern: They start off like an extension to their parents, then they start to rebel in order to develop their own individuality, then they spend years figuring out who they want to be besides Not-Dad or Not-Mom, and then finally they will settle into a belief system which is a hybridization of what was familiar (the parent’s beliefs) and the positive aspects of the experimental years. So Mel’s father’s beliefs are old and familiar and easy to fall back to.
I also suspect that, off camera, so to speak, Mel has had something tragic occur; he has been behaving the past few years like an angry, grief-stricken man. Or at least, that is the vibe I get from him.
And really, I hope he does not get hit by a bus because he puts more effort into making a period piece as authentic as possible than any other director I know. I kind of view him as a crazy, poo-flinging artist type. Kind of like Van Gogh. Sorta. Ok, maybe I am reaching here as he has not cut off any of his own appendages and given it to a hooker. At least, I have not heard of him doing so.
1) She is black and proud. ie. Bares those sexy, toned and smooth, chocolate arms that even white male commentators called buff (see: CNN’s morning host: forgot his name). Some people don’t like that. 2) She is fiercely intelligent. Some would find that ‘uppity’. I hope I don’t even have to explain that. And, 3) Which alot of people won’t admit. She is a butterface. She does not have the sexiest facial features let’s be honest. But I don’t think many white males like that no one comments on it. What they fail to realize that, atleast for me, I kinda right it off because who else do you know will have a body like that at 46. Let’s be honest obama is keeping fit ballin every day and I’m pretty sure michelle keeps it up and takes it to him in the bedroom.
For anyone who has had relations when your physically fit and your partner is too you know what I’m talking about. Nothing better than sex between athletic people.
escarondito´s last blog ..New Design- New Initiative
Esca,
Yea, but they don’t talk about how dowdy Nancy Reagan or Barbara Bush looked, Laura Bush for that matter. There is something else going on here, and I think you know what it is: Michelle Obama has transgressed on the idea of a hallowed place for American White Women, that of First Lady. And for quite a few White guys – usually those who inhaibit the “Roissysphere” – this is a serious point of pain and discomfort for them. Like I said, they need therapy.
I know this may not sound right to say, especially here, but I’m gonna anyway – White folks be on some other ish with their issues neuroses. There, I said it.
O.
Obsidian´s last blog ..Why Is Mos Def So Damned WHACKED-
My favorite Mel Gibson movie, though I don’t think he had a role other than acting in it, was Gallipoli. That was some period piece. It also had the effect of making Albinoni’s Adagio in G Minor, which became sort of a poor man’s Pachelbel’s Canon for a while.
I think you get it right, tho I don’t think she’s a butterface, I think she’s quite attractive. So did Barack when she mentored him at his first law internship. As for her body, it just doesn’t quit. She is long, lean and incredibly fit. I think she makes a lovely First Lady.
Of course attitude and carriage is part of it. But, everybody knows, when you think you look good, you carry yourself differently. Ask any woman coming out of the beauty salon with a hairstyle she loves. She even *moves* differently. I’d argue that it’s easier to start with appearance than it is to start with attitude.
I will just point out that as you have observed many times yourself, bad boys get lots more attention than nice guys.
White folks be on some other ish with their issues neuroses.
Haha! Oh yeah, we got neuroses in spades. And the more privileged we are, the more neurotic.
My favorite is Apocalypto. There are so very few movies in that time setting, and he did it so well by recruiting villagers from the area to be actors. And having them all speak the native tongue. It is the first time I really got a feel for what living in such a location might be like… which is pretty scary even without the slavers.
Ms. Walsh,
Yea, you make a good point and I realize that personally, I’m a bit odd in that I can thread the needle, and have always admired people who were “all that”.
for example, recently I was talking about Mos Def the rapper and actor, and how while I personally liked him, he always seems to maked whacked albums. Some tried to argue his “highbrow” appeal, and I simply shot it all down with the fact that the Wu has done what Mos has done and then some. For me, it’s important to be hot on the streets, get head nods for the Grammys, AND be critically acclaimed. Then, and only then, can you say that you are truly all that. The Wu Tang Clan can say that. Mos Def can’t.
In Game terms, this means a guy who has that hallowed Holy Grail of traits that you often talk about, and the truth is, very few guys have it or strive to cultivate it. For example, I’m generally known as a nice guy, but it would be a mistake that I am because I have no other choice but to be. Actually, it’s quite the reverse – I can be a ruthless and extremely violent MFer if I have to be, and coldy efficient at it to boot. So, when you see me going out of my way to be cool with folks, trust me, its for their own benefit, because usually, I’m about a nanosecond from taking their head off and pissing down their neck.
Those kind of “killer instinct” traits are what Women in general find so appealing in Men, but the trick is that a guy’s gotta find a balance between that and everything else in life. What i’m finding is that, in the Roissysphere for example, the main reason why find so much sheer virtiol vented at Women is because White Men have been neutered for the most part. I mean, take Roissy himself – he’s a desk jockey, a glorified cog in the wheel. Much of what he talks about doesn’t register for me, because all I’ve done is “Man’s Work” my life, plus I’ve been in quite a few firefights that broke out in bars, been in fights, etc. Roissy hasn’t, and he is by no means alone – millions of White guys are in his spot. Simply put, tere really aren`t many “Alpha Male” avenues left for the middle class White guy anymore. Theirs, in some ways much more profoundly than mine, is a Feminized World. And I think part of the bile that spews forth from Manosphere venues like Roissy, etc, is a reaction on the part of so many White guys in this regard.
Holla back
O.
Obsidian´s last blog ..Why Is Mos Def So Damned WHACKED-
That is, by far, one of the greatest chase movies of all time. The cinematography is unique and fucking beautiful, from the waterfall scene to the ending, to the sacrifice, my god this movie does tone and atmosphere in spades. Not to mention it’s funny as hell, packs an emotional wallop the whole movie, and is done by first time actors. Holy shit, the only reason this movie did not make more money than it did eas because Mel Gibson hates the world. If he learned to choose his words and shut the fuck up I’d let him direct every period piece ever made the way I want Chris Nolan to do every intelligent blockbuster. He has an amazing capability at authenticness that is rare in hollywood where they would rather do it on a movie set which lacks authenticity but is more controlled.
Jesus I’m going to bootleg apocalypto tonight now. That shit is so ill.
escarondito´s last blog ..New Design- New Initiative
I agree with Susan—show appreciation. Too many women act is if a guy paying is a law of nature. It no longer is.
Any beta who was taught to pedestalize women since he was 14 is bound to become bitter and jaded when he learns he was fed pure bullshit. IMO most reformed betas who learn Game are cynical and disrespectful towards women realized the hard way that they had been fed bullshit by their parents, teachers and society for years/decades, but deep down they would nevertheless prefer women to get wet for dutiful beta providers who pedestalize them and they get angry when they fail to do so.
Players who never bought all the bullshit about women in the first place don’t seem to be bitter and jaded towards them.
No, no, no, and no. Any player worth his salt—pretend or otherwise—is going to be permanently snagged by some woman who’s most attractive and fertile years (her 20s) are gone. What a woman “knows” about herself and her “potential targets” isn’t nearly as important as how attractive, young and fertile she is. This is to say, she most likely won’t even get an audition if she doesn’t have youth & beauty. It is everything…but it is about 75 percent. That’s huge.
With regards to Esca, I would say he’s good—but his Game could use a bit more work. There were definitely ways of sussing out how long she’d be around for.
“It is everything…but it is about 75 percent. That’s huge.”
Should read: It’s not everything…
Bah.
“They tend to prefer betas who are laid back and manageable, but aren’t slackers. That way, they can wear the pants in the family, but not feel they are with some moocher. The ones I knew were perfectly reasonable seeming with their partners, as long as they had their way, but if not, look out! A bunch of the long-term marriages I am friends with have this dynamic, with the dominant wife running things, and giving the husband some occasional freedom (a once a month golf or video game outing or similar harmless geek vice with friends). ”
This is EXACTLY what I want in a relationship…
.
No, they are completely indifferent towards them.
If you believe the way our economy and society are currently structured is sustainable, then you may have a point. But many people would disagree…
And just because pop culture is supportive older, single women doesn’t mean these women don’t shed a few tears in their quiet time. I’d bet half of everything I own that they do—even though it’s a fate I wouldn’t wish on anyone.
HAHAHA! LOL, Chili, this cracked me up. I think there are probably lots of guys who would go for it.
Because God forbid a man should want to be anything other than a housepet.
I’m pretty sure that would be a good bet, based on the number of spinster lit memoirs now being published. I think there are very, very few women who prefer to be alone. I know a couple who are fine with it, but even they wouldn’t say they prefer it. It’s just not the way we’re wired.
.
There have been several articles recently in the feminist media about how increasing numbers of women are staying single and childless. This is portrayed as a matter of choice. Which is just complete BS. If they bothered to talk to some of these women, they’d learn what’s really driving those numbers. Not good choices, but poor ones.
Yeah, I’ve definitely noticed this uptick in the mainstream media as well. The whole tone of this debate—defensive, somewhat hysterical, hand-wringing—really gives the lie to the notion that these women are oh-so satisfied with the current state of affairs.
What really worries me is that the outcome of this media attention will be an uproar that spurs legislation that will further encourage the worst female instincts/hypergamy, as opposed to taking the correct course—which would be to tell women to shut-up and make better decisions while reforming divorce/family court law to incentivize men to commit. Once the feminists are finished denying that this is even a problem, they will then suddenly embrace it as a “feminist issue” and then attempt to pass laws to make it easier for woman to pursue their reproductive goals—using the tax dollars of the very same betas they just couldn’t stand to settle down with.
It’s coming.
Best looking First Lady since Jackie-O, and just as stylish too. Cheers, ‘VJ’
Cooking for a man is a very good thing. I’m a traditionalist on paying–which means that the inviting party always always always pays for the invited; on dates or anything else. But this doesn’t mean that the man pays for every outing, because the woman can just as easily invite the man somewhere. If she’s “traditional” and doesn’t want to take him out, she can do what her grandmother did: treat him to home cooked meals, organize picnics, or, alternatively, have a “friend” cancel a theater outing at the last minute, leaving her with only two tickets–alas! What’s a girl to do? *
…
Sitting around over a bill at dinner splitting things up–even when amongst friends–is not a charming practice.
—
Especially amongst relations in which affection is mutual, you’ll find that most people eagerly take opportunities to “pay back” a friend by treating him in turn.
…
Dating should be 100/0 and 0/100. (Of course, btw, only a fool of a man invests in expensive dates in the beginning of the courtship).
…
*My grandparents wrote love letters to each other and kept journals each independently of the other during their courtship. My grandmother did all of these things to woo my hunk of a grandfather. This was in the 40′s. The journal entries are a lot of fun to read–even if they don’t like that I do so.
…
That’s my 2 cents on the “who’s paying” question, anyway!
In the same way that men signal provider when they pay, women signal LTR material when they cook. It’s very un-PC to say so – (remember how Hillary Clinton made fun of women who stay home and bake cookies?) but from the time I was about 16 I found that men were utterly charmed when I cooked for them. Cooking can be a pretty intensive process, so it communicates that you invested time, energy and resources in planning, purchasing and preparing food. Honestly, in my experience, the best dates I ever had involved cooking and eating together, followed by great sex. Nesting.
Hehe… Ok, someone needs to say it, so I’ll be that guy. Men would generally rather pay for dinner and be repaid in “alternative currency.” I heard a comedian recently talking about taking girls to dinner. He said, “Man, I love it when a girl orders the lobster and dom perignon. Cause later on, there ain’t gonna be none of that ‘I’m too tired’ bullshit. When I wake her up in the middle of the night for round three, it’s like… baby, you didn’t see this on the menu? It was a combo meal. Lobster and lots of fucking!”
Which… since we are talking about holding out on sex to try to flip a player, also gives women a reason for going dutch for the first couple of dinners.
Hambydammit´s last blog ..Can Science Talk About Morality
Oh come on, get over yourself. Some men enjoy being submissive husbands, just like many women enjoy being submissive wives (a concept you wouldn’t think twice about). I would never force anyone to be my “housepet” if that’s what you want to call it, because I’m not attracted to dominant males in the first place. Men who want to be dominant end up with women who are not me, it’s just that simple…
Haha, I guess that’s the surf and turf option. I do think this kind of “bartering” gets pretty tricky, especially in the early days. A woman told me this week that at the end of her first date with a guy she was pretty into, he expressed exasperation when she wanted to go home alone at the end of the evening. They went on a second date – also dinner, he paid again. They made out, and when she said it was time for her to leave, he said, “Jesus Christ, how many times I am going to have to hear this?!” At which point he grabbed her hand and put it on his erection. She made her apologies and left. They had already made plans for a third date, but over the next week he didn’t call. The day of the date, she called him to ask if they were still on. He said, “Yeah, I guess. I’m down to go for a run, but that’s it.” She said OK and spent the night with him. Now he’s as sweet as sugar. He question for me was, “Will he want to hang out with me more now?”
Douche, douche and douche. I don’t think this is going to end well.
Look, it’s fair to say that there are some submissive men who enjoy domineering wives. But it’s disingenuous to pretend as if this phenomenon is equal in quantity to men with more submissive wives—and your statement certainly makes the false equivalency. The former is pretty rare in the sense that’s naturally occuring—it’s only somewhat more common now because men have been socially engineered to reject their own self-interests…
My main objection to it is the simple fact that it leaves the submissive guy without any real compensation for the risks he assumes in marriage. A husband assumes risk in marriage—the very real risk presented by misandric divorce/family courts, and the physical risk that comes with being the protector of his family. The world is a very dangerous place, even in this day of professional armies and police forces. If a man attacked you on the street or tried to break into your house (a very real possibility these days) I don’t care how much of an ‘alpha woman’ you think you are, you would most certainly look to your husband to address the situation. Husbands gladly assume this risk to their bodies and lives in return for having a more dominant role in their homes—-their risk is compensated. I look at submissive men with disdain because they apparently don’t have enough self-respect to demand compensation for the risks they assume as husbands. It is pathetic.
Please note that I don’t have anything against the wives of submissive husbands—after all, life is about getting your needs and desires met. My contempt is only for the men who obviously don’t think they are worth more, and for the terrible lesson they pass on to their own sons.
Meh. That’s lame game. A good alpha would have had her begging him to let her touch his erection at the end of the third date. I mean, both approaches accomplish the same thing, but that guy’s approach plays on negative emotions. Bad way to start. That poor girl is in a bad situation either way. If he stays with her, she gets to babysit a petulant child. If he leaves, well… actually, she’s probably better off if he does leave.
Honestly, I’ve found that whenever I’ve made out with a girl and stopped it before she was ready to, the next time I saw her, it was “go time.”
Hambydammit´s last blog ..Can Science Talk About Morality
Not true. There are some girls (like myself) that like being pursued hard, and with whom the “cool” act doesn’t work as well — it’s a perception that the girl is in control so she feels more comfortable, which a guy can always turn on its head later on if they’re good at it. Also, I’ve read a lot more than you would think. I visit the attraction forums regularly, so please don’t condescend to me — thanks in advance. And I detect from your two comments a bit of attitude toward me, is there a reason for this? I’d honestly like to know — again, thanks in advance.
Funny, I didn’t even think of that. But in any case, since they initiated the conversation while I was out in NYC nightlife, I don’t really think the problem was that they were not physically attracted. Otherwise, why bother with the trouble of trying to have a conversation?
Faulty reasoning. You’re assuming by mentioning divorce risk that the husband makes more than the wife. What about husbands who marry into money & become stay at home dads? This is a likely scenario from the type of man who would want to be a submissive husband.
The physical risk? We no longer live in a brutal, vicious jungle society so men don’t have to know how to take physical risks like hunting or fishing, or killing other men who would rape their wives. Society acts as that alpha male proxy, so men don’t have to be as manly. I don’t see where men are taking on much, if any, physical risk to be the heads of their household.
On the off chance that someone broke into your home or attacked you, I don’t know many men that could do much against a .45 or a knife in any case. Again, we no longer live in the jungle so modern technology kills much more effectively.
So please, enlighten me as to what kind of risk men take on to be the head of the household.
Yes, because that’s what works. And what attitude could we expect from them anyway? After all, what is there to love about female hypergamy?
So you are essentially saying that the misogyny spreading among white betas is an unconscious reaction to their own feminization, or rather de-masculinization? That’s an interesting thought.
So many posters here accept unquestioningly the idea that Asshole Game is unfailingly successful. I guess I can believe that it is among a certain subset of women whom these types target: not gorgeous women, but gorgeous women whose self-esteem is bound up entirely in external validation. If they run across some guy who doesn’t validate them, and they absolutely crave external validation to feel good about themselves, I can buy Asshole Game being completely successful.
But for a good deal of women, even, I dunno, most of them, I’d argue that Asshole Game is either puzzling or the cause of outrage. If a woman is targeted by someone hoping to use Asshole Game on her, she’ll either be confused–”why is this guy bothering to talk to me if he’s just going to insult me?”–or angry at being treated like crap, because she doesn’t rest her worth on attention from guys and knows not to take crap from them.
Of course, when PUAs and the like say “women in general,” they mean “gorgeous women with self-esteem issues,” so maybe they’re not really interested in how the rest of the female populace would react to these tactics. After all, they’re not gorgeous and not likely to be swayed by such tactics, so they may not as well exist, right?
Eh, I tend to side with VJ on singleton life. It’s really not that straightforward as “single women are unhappily alone,” and it’s a little condescending to agonize about single women crying themselves to sleep when you know nothing about their choices or circumstances. Maybe some of these single women have been divorced already and have absolutely no intention of getting into that mess again. I would also bet a good portion of them, more than you might think, truly have no interest in settling down for whatever reason, just as there are guys who will happily go to their graves unattached. And maybe some of these women would, yeah, prefer to meet the perfect guy and settle down, but haven’t found him yet for whatever reason and aren’t letting that fact cripple them emotionally and are living large and having fun in the meantime.
Also, on Susan’s point, I think we are all wired to prefer companionship. It’s just that people prefer different forms of companionship. Some would feel stifled by anything less than an infinite series of short-term flings, others are absolutely fixated on the one-soulmate-forever fantasy. And yeah, that applies to both men /and/ women.
Susan, I made this point a bit downthread, but I think that while most of us are wired to need, say, companionship, and suffer greatly in the absence of companionship, companionship means different things to different people. For some (men /and/ women), it means one romantic relationship with your soulmate. For others (asexuals), it means great platonic friendships. For still others (men /and/ women), it means lots of hot sex with a variety of interesting partners. People want different things in a partner; heck, some people even prefer having multiple romantic partners (polyamorous types). Human sexuality is pretty interesting that way.
You mention “poor choices” driving women’s singleness and childlessness, by which I guess you mean women making poor choices that have led them to involuntary singleness and involuntary childlessness. I’m not really sure what those poor choices would entail, though. I can think of a few you might have in mind, but I don’t know how you can really condemn them for so choosing:
1. Focusing on career as opposed to pursuing a mate. Well, in this economy, it’s hard to blame women for attending to their own self-sufficiency rather than barreling after a man. Also, if you prioritize finding a partner over your career, land a man and give up your career or opt for something less demanding to make time for love, you place your economic survival entirely in another’s hands, another who could…maybe not leave you (thought that’s a possibility), but fall sick, be injured, die, etc. etc. It seem like a poor bet to take.
2. Settling, or choosing someone you’re not really that attracted to in order to have a partner. I’d think a marriage to someone to whom I wasn’t attracted would be a lot rougher than a corresponding period of singlehood. Also, it couldn’t be much fun for the guy in question, either; wouldn’t he prefer a mate 100% into him? A lid for every pot and all that.
The sad fact is, ultimately, that there is no guarantee of finding a good partner. You can do everything “right” and still come up involuntarily single. Being involuntarily single isn’t always about your good or bad choices, it’s about whether you can find someone you like who likes you back at the right time, and that’s a rarer thing than most are willing to acknowledge.
I’m kind of curious whether these betas would really want these women to settle down with them when these women weren’t interested enough to stick around in the first place.
I mean, wouldn’t it kind of suck to live your life knowing that the woman you settled down with only stuck around out of fear of winding up alone? Wouldn’t it be better to wind up with a woman who thought that you were awesome for yourself, rather than you were just preferable to the alternative?
If a woman isn’t interested in you, she won’t be persuaded into being interested by fear of dying alone. She may be persuaded to stick around in the relationship; heck, a lot of people do this already. Still, I have to think that those relationships kind of suck. Who wants to be with someone where the only thing keeping you together is fear of the alternative?
Men so rarely put the brakes on that this is an extremely effective tactic. She won’t know which end is up, and I agree, she’ll be trying to get sexually validated the next time.
I’ve wondered a lot about this myself. The beta males who are unhappy in the current sexual marketplace are effectively saying that they had it better when sexual and social mores forced women to commit to them due to lack of other options. I suppose if your two choices are involuntary celibacy or being second choice, you’ll take the latter. However, for all this talk of beta males struggling, most of the men I know are happily married betas. I’m not saying college isn’t hard, but I just don’t see evidence that most beta males are stuck in the sexual desert forever.
Lurker, I’m glad you asked me to clarify this point. By poor choices I DO NOT mean focusing on a career, or failing to settle for a man you are not attracted to. I am guilty of both of those choices myself. What I mean by poor choices is repeatedly going after men who telegraph their unavailability for the kind of companionship you desire. If you want casual sex, don’t go for the bible thumper. If you want to marry at some point, don’t go for the guy in the band who has left a trail of broken hearts. When Dragnet talks about female hypergamy, this is what he’s referring to. Research has shown that women are drawn to men with the “dark triad” of traits: narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. These guys get more women than anyone else. Not all women indulge this desire for the high-risk relationship, but quite a few of the women who have written memoirs recently about being unhappily single have confessed (often hilariously) stories of spending their 20s, or even their 30s, chasing after Mr. Wrong.
You raise a good point here. FWIW, I think women who have never married are under a different kind of pressure – family pressure, peer pressure and societal pressure. Once a woman has been married, even if she divorces, I think society gives her more leeway wrt her future. She may decide to stay single or not. I agree with VJ that there is far less stigma single women have to deal with today, but it’s not gone. We make them feel as if something is missing in their lives, and even if they don’t feel that way, they can get to feeling pretty worn down by everyone else’s not-very-tactful inquiries and pressure.
So are there any men who love women, and who earnestly desire a fulfilling long-term relationship with one, after the age of say, 25?
I think asshole Game is most effective in college, when women are hopeful and naive to some extent. Research shows that freshman girls hook up in high numbers, but by the time they’re juniors, many have stopped. Of course, the guys just keep looking to freshman. So the biggest jerks on campus often get the most girls. Keep in mind that Escarondito is only 22.
.
As women mature and figure out the terms of the sexual marketplace, most will avoid jerks. The ones who don’t have low self-esteem, as you say. Game was developed in nightspots, and focused on targeting “hired guns,” i.e. exotic dancers, cocktail waitresses, strippers, etc. I’ve always maintained that while Game gets a lot of female psychology right, there’s a spectrum, and the women found in these venues who will put out for some stranger PUA have low self-esteem by definition.
.
We know that men prefer younger women, but I wonder, when you see some 40 yo player with a woman in her early 20s, whether the high self-esteem women a bit older would even give him the time of day. He needs to always be going after very young bait, and at some point, he’s going to be too old to pull that off. If he’s 40, he’s just about there, assuming he isn’t George Clooney caliber.
I just find it hard to believe that having a woman who WOULDN’T OTHERWISE CHOOSE YOU shackled to you through social pressure or whatever is DESIRABLE for betas, or indeed anyone. I mean, I wouldn’t want a partner, no matter how gorgeous, if that person was only with me because of a lack of alternatives and not because that person wanted ME.
Hmm. For my part, and purely anecdotal, here, I don’t really see much evidence of this “hypergamy” business. Maybe in college, or in celebrity circles where male celebrities so inclined can find a lot of eager ladies, but everywhere else? Dragnet and co. make it sound as if /all/ women do this, as if they’d all opt for the “harem” experience in a heartbeat, and I gotta be honest, women getting willingly exploited by high-status alphas and signing on to be one of a harem or whatever sounds completely ridiculous, outside of the poly lifestyle (and even there it sounds a bit weird).
As for chasing unavailable men, well, unfortunately, it’s hard to know how good a guy is from the get-go unless he advertises his intentions/lack of availability. I can see a woman getting burned throughout her 20s and 30s not through poor choices or bad judgment, but just bad luck. You can have a string of failed relationships to your name not because you’ve had the bad judgment to choose poorly, but because guys who looked like great relationship material at the time turned out not to be, quite possibly because they misrepresented their intentions, disguised their sociopathic characteristics (which most sociopaths can do quite easily), and so on.
The whole Asshole Game is pretty funny, because I hear stories about women who get upset and insulted after being treated this way by a guy and then realize days, months, or even years later after the fact that he was probably trying to hit on her.
I tend to think that “taming” a player is one of the weirder female fantasies. It sure seems to pop up a lot in romantic fiction and the like. It’s kind of Victorian, in a way, sort of reforming the guy’s bad tendencies through the power of your love or something. Maybe it’s the fantasy of being chosen when so many women before you weren’t, or being loved when he never loved all the women who preceded you, because you’re just that special.
Like most fantasies, though, it’s probably more appealing in the imagination than in real life. In real life, unless you were the most secure person in the world, you’d be totally paranoid about him reverting to his old habits, which, let’s face it, he probably would do after the honeymoon period had ended. Also, once the “thrill” of taming someone has gone, you’d probably realize that your “prize” wasn’t worth the effort. (I’m reminded of something someone once told me: “Cute guys are never good in bed, because they never had to be.”) In addition to that, at the risk of armchair psychoanalysis, he might have some baggage in his past that had led him to this type of behaviour to begin with (maybe, maybe not), and you’d have to deal with that on top of everything else. I’m not saying someone with a high number is necessarily a head case, but once we get past double digits, it gets highly…suggestive.
Go back and read what I wrote—I made no assumption about the earning power of the husband. And family court is biased against fathers & husbands regardless of who made more in the family. Even if the the woman is the primary breadwinner, in the event of divorce she is still the overwhelming favorite to be awarded physical custody of the children, and hence child support as a matter of course. And even in cases where the husband isn’t the primary breadwinner, he is much, much less likely to be awarded spousal support than a woman in the same exact position. The law is biased against men, whether or not they are the primary breadwinner and this represents significant risk. Do some research.
Apparently my uncle didn’t get this memo when he was forced to defend my aunt with a pick axe from her attacker a few winters ago. Or those two women who were sexually assualted in Brookline earlier this summer. The truth is that my uncle would have had bury his wife if he’d waited for the ‘alpha male proxy’ to arrive (it’s good that you’ve read the The Rawness
). The physical risk is surely isn’t what it used to be, but it’s still significant. To pretend otherwise is just insulting.
Then there’s the issue of sexual dimorphism. As an example I’ll cite myself. I’m a fairly big guy—at 6’1 easily taller than the vast majority of the women I met and much stronger and heavier than even the woman who are taller. I—and the vast majority of men—really just can’t imagine submitting to someone much smaller than me, as most women are. It’s not so much revolting or off-putting as it is a non-existent thought process, for lack of eloquence. Believe, I’ve been with a few ballbreakers and ‘alpha’ women in my day who I know for a fact weren’t into domineering men—and I’m not domineering… I’m dominant, playfully, easily, unimposing—and that’s a really important distinction to make. They learned slowly that they weren’t “running things” and that I was going to have more than “occasional freedom” and they quickly learned to love that, despite what they thought they were into before. Like a mighty, rushing tidal wave…that nonetheless breaks against the immovable mountainside. And we were happy together.
In my opinion, men shouldn’t look for submission—I certainly don’t. It’s better to look for compliance if only because that’s a trait any decent man should have as well to some degree.
I never implied that the dominant wife-submissive husband scenario was a common one. I would estimate it’s about 20% of the population. I don’t really see why you see this as a threat to your personal dating pool or even society as a whole; you are not going to be interested in domineering women, and they are not going to be interested in you.
“it’s only somewhat more common now because men have been socially engineered to reject their own self-interests…”
Or women more encouraged to actually have interests. But you know, whatever. Men have every economic and social opportunity that women do, if not more. The very existence of this blog proves that the self interests of men are alive and well. I’m not really sure where your evidence for this statement is. And let’s face it, given the tendency of men to have violent urges (at least in comparison to women), a little social engineering literally never hurt anyone.
And this ties directly into your next point about violence. Verie is absolutely right. It is SO UNLIKELY in this day and age. Besides, I don’t imagine even the most submissive of husbands not at least trying to assist his wife if she were in imminent physical danger. That’s what you do when you love someone. It doesn’t necessarily have much to do your temperment-dynamic.
Besides, you act as if women assume no risk in marriage. No matter how submissive/supportive a husband may be, we still are largely expected to do, or willingly do, a significant proportion of household/childcare duties. Married women across the board report having less free time than their husbands, and that includes in households where the wife earns more. Marriage is really not the surrender of self respect for men you make it out to be. When marriage works, it’s a great deal for the guy.
Respecting a strong woman is not a horrible lesson to pass on to your son. There are certainly worse ones. So relax.
Not true. There are some girls (like myself) that like being pursued hard, and with whom the “cool” act doesn’t work as well — it’s a perception that the girl is in control so she feels more comfortable, which a guy can always turn on its head later on if they’re good at it.
This doesn’t disprove my point in the least. A skillful practitioner of Game would be an astute enough judge of people to know which women he should be pursuing strongly without turning them off, and which ones to allow a bit more space. And he would know exactly how to treat a girl needed to “feel” as if she was in control, and would act according…which of course makes him master of the situation. Your exact quote was:
A skilled practitioner of Game wouldn’t make this error.
It’s one thing to read about Game—it’s another thing entirely to deploy it.
Oh come on. There are any number of reasons why a guy who isn’t attracted to you might strike up a conversation with you while out in NYC at night—I’ve done it before. Perhaps he was after your hotter friend, thought you went to college with him, thought you worked in the same industry…the list goes on.
Not every guy who strikes up a conversation is attracted. But most them of them are so it’s a fairly safe bet
First of all, I’ll start by saying 20 percent seems a bit generous to me. But I won’t quibble over it—especially without any stats.
Not true in the least. My point has always been that the risks women assume in marriage are very effectively balanced by the enormous leverage & freedom of action they have obtained as a matter of law, culture and custom. These advantages formerly belonged to men, yes, but the situation has almost completely reversed itself.
Not at all, especially since my mother and grandmothers were very strong women, and all three of my LTRs—two of them more accomplished than I, to boot. But what you described here…
…is really just a bitch. I honestly can’t recall my grandmother ever behaving in this way toward her husband—but she had forgotten more strength and wisdom than you’ll ever know. The man described in your quote is really just a child at his mother’s beck and call. A man should really think better of himself, and any man who doesn’t has earned a certain amount ridicule and disrespect.
And I’m not against all social engineering, obviously. I just think that any social engineering that continues to move men & boys against their best interests is ultimately damaging to them.
I never said marriage was the surrender of self-respect. Ideally, one day I would be married. I said being a submissive husband to a domineering wife was to surrender self-respect. Re-read what I wrote.
And the existence of ‘alpha’ women doesn’t threaten my dating life. I went to an Ivy and now work in finance—I’ve dated a fair number of your ballbreaking sisters and, truth be told, they’re fairly easily defanged by the skillful practitioner.
When you put it that way, with no further qualifiers (other than the naturally implied “single”), then the answer is of course “yes”. Just go to any graduate department in a science or engineering specialty, and it will be filled with men over 25 who are reasonably mature, and likely still single having concentrated on their careers/education. Further, they will tend to be honest, decent, educated (duh), intelligent (duh), looking for a serious relationship, and have pretty good job prospects; and they’re much less likely to be players, fakers, or psychos compared to a bar crowd.
Of course, they’re also betas in high proportion. Overall I think this situation is covered well by Obsidian’s phrase, ” Bottomline: Women know where the nice boys are. They simply don’t want them.” So it’s strange that you should ask this question; you already know the answer.
Wow. Susan, have you seen this?
No Girl Left Behind ????
http://nogirlleftbehind.99k.org/
Dragnet, just to clarify – the quote about occasional freedom for husbands is from Ex New Yorker – a married male who successfully learned natural Game from his alpha brother to succeed with the woman of his choice.
Yes, this is very true. Deciphering a man’s true intentions can be extremely difficult, which is why I advise taking it slow enough to get a good handle on his character and his relationship goals.
.
As for hypergamy and women chasing alpha asshats, I’ll agree that this is way overstated in the Game community. Guys like this will generally have a pool of women to choose from, but I maintain, as you say, that many woman are simply not participating in this scene, either through choice, or lack of exposure to these “opportunties.”
.
If a woman has a string of failed relationships to her name (and many do), then I suggest that she take some time, take a break from the emotional turmoil of that. She needs to reflect on what she’s learned from those experiences, and identify her own susceptibilities, which should be her “red flags” when getting involved with someone.
Esau, I was responding specifically to this comment from Hollenhund:
I assumed that he was including those very guys you describe. We’ve discussed this before, but I’ll say this – I agree that there are plenty of excellent prospects in the graduate STEM programs. But how to access these men? We both know that women are not going to storm MIT in search of men, even if they believed that it contained the man of their dreams.
You’re right! I know of one woman who could not understand one guy’s motives. Every time he got drunk he would yell at her and wind up exclaiming, “Do what you want! I don’t give a f*ck!” It’s like the scene at the beginning of He’s Just Not That Into You when a young boy punches a girl on the playground. Why do they do it? Because they like you!
To quote a comment from the Spearhead: “most women have contempt for the very men who have the capacity to love them.”
Lurker, I agree that this fantasy, though common, rarely delivers when realized in life. Once you manage to snag a guy like this, what you’ve got is a relationship with a narcissist psychopath. Lucky you! It seems to mostly revolve around the challenge, and the validation one receives from the conquest.
.
I’ve also heard that the men who are the most successful at attracting women are bad in bed. Also the men with the largest penises. I can’t confirm or deny this, but in my own experience, casual hookups are lousy lovers, and in love lovers are amazing.
Whoa, that is some weird stuff. It also strikes me as a highly ineffective strategy. What are your thoughts on this?
I disagree. I think the notion of female contempt for beta males is grossly overstated. I spent the day at the beach today. It was a beautiful day and very crowded. There were many young families. A quick glance over the crowd made it clear that the overwhelming majority of the dads were not natural alphas. The marriage rate in the U.S. is declining, but it seems clear that at a minimum, that traditional 40% of the male population is still reproducing.
Women will have to learn to initiate. Betas who initiate but execute it terribly need to learn Game + women will need to have a bit more patience with them if they want that access. Betas who don’t even bother to initiate are probably a lost cause.
@ “most women have contempt for the very men who have the capacity to love them.”
Hmmmm. The commentariat over at the Spearhead seems to have contempt for a whole range of women themselves.
Susan, I think it’s somewhat satirical but what struck me is that these cries for a return to “traditional womanhood” are leaving a lot of women SINGLE in their 30s – who want to be married. It’s also mentioned there that certain women get several proposals while other certain women get none, therefore the interest is not evenly distributed. And the part about how ALL of these traditional “good girls”, regardless of their looks, skills, etc, DESERVE equal play.
Appearantly there is a real marriage crises in the conservative Christian homeschool movement, who ironically enough, raised their daughters to be good wives at a young age.
http://nogirlleftbehind.99k.org/
Damned if we do, damned if we don’t?
“This doesn’t disprove my point in the least.”
Yes, it does. Your point was that “No guy with solid Game would try to spend too much time with a girl in the initial phase—he would know exactly how to handle this.” And I gave you a situation in which a guy would spend a lot of time with a girl in the initial phase: when they were interacting with a girl like me for example. You even proved my point by explaining it further. Thus proving my original statement that “If a guy is trying to spend a lot of time with you, it doesn’t necessarily mean that he doesn’t have game or is a player (he could be either, or neither).” QED.
The point about couples who have crashed & burned is a completely separate point about another situation & topic in this thread, and it doesn’t relate to what we’re talking about here (whether guys who spend a lot of time with you early on have game or not), so I’m not sure why you’re bringing it up.
Also, it’s one thing to deploy game, but it’s entirely another be on the receiving end of it and to have dated not one but 2 PUAs and understand how they think. So again, please keep your condescension to yourself.
I define an alpha woman as one who is dominant to other women, which is indeed the case in my social circle. For the record, I enjoy reading Susan’s blog because I find it interesting, not because I need her advice. I’m innately aware of the vast majority of her biggest tenants. My ex was 100% beta (I doubt he’s ever even heard of game), and one of the things that I first found most irresistibly attractive about him was the major dad vibe he gave off–he just seemed like a really honest, trustworthy, respectful, stable guy. Most women, especially my age, probably would not call these qualities sexy, but I do. And this might stem from some desire I have to be able to have my way with people. I just enjoy leading.
So thanks, dear boy, for that poignant clarification, but I daresay I’m aware of my at least my own “order of the day.”
I loooved this post. I really think it has good ideas, but I”m not so sure it will work for every guy. It’s exactly how you say it–the player has to want a relationship deep down or else this will never work. I guess all the guys I go for are players who don’t want to change. I’m going to try out these tips and see if they work but a lot of guys will maybe respond to her advances while still seeing other girls, or will still play “the game” and only text back after a couple days and make her wait and guess. I don’t know…but I do really like these ideas and hope they do work for me in the future, because I’m a 21 yr old girl and all I’ve seemed to go for as of now are players.
Any beta who was taught to pedestalize women since he was 14 is bound to become bitter and jaded when he learns he was fed pure bullshit. IMO most reformed betas who learn Game are cynical and disrespectful towards women realized the hard way that they had been fed bullshit by their parents, teachers and society for years/decades, but deep down they would nevertheless prefer women to get wet for dutiful beta providers who pedestalize them and they get angry when they fail to do so.
Hey! That’s me! How do you know me that much? LOL
I wasted twenty years of my life pursuing the unicorn my parents, sisters, teachers, female friends, TV shows, movies and books told me that existed. That is, being a nice beta provider in order to attract a nice girl.
What I got in return for following the advice of all these people was twenty years of celibacy, contempt on women’s behalf, depression and loneliness.
These twenty years won’t come back. Now I am a middle-aged man and I can’t be young again. Time is gone and my life has been radically different than the one I would have had if my parents hadn’t lied to me.
I shudder to think how many men have had my same experience. We are a generation of people who have been cheated.
Am I disrespectful of women who say that they want a nice guy while banging the bad boy (and complaining about the bad boy to the nice guy)? Of course, I am. They had no need to lie. They could have banged the bad boy without lying to us.
Does I pity this women when they try to reform a bad boy or when, after bad boys are not interested in them anymore, they start whining: “Where have all the good men left”? No. But I don’t feel schadenfreude either.
Your goal is laudable, Susan, but you can’t go against female nature. Women are wired this way. The only thing that prevented them from self-inflicted harm was patriarchy.
It is not that women of yore didn’t want to have the bad boy, it is that they couldn’t: law and stigma kept them from doing what their hearts wanted. You want these patriarchal laws to be replaced by young women being rational when it comes to dating, going against all their instincts and hormones. This is not going to happen. It’s as if you wanted them to stop breathing.
I’m calling BS on it. It’s not from the ‘home schooling’ folks, nor the Christian right. I say it’s a MRA spoof of some sort. Mildly amusing, if wildly & tellingly sophomoric. I’m betting some dudes wrote it up for a prank of some sort. It’s certainly not what it seems, and it’s strangely just amazingly ill informed on all the points they seek to be making with the public. A middle school effort with a grade school pay off. Bottom line here. Cheers, ‘VJ’
http://nogirlleftbehind.99k.org/
This is insane. I haven’t had laughed so much for the last year. Are you sure that this is not a feminist parody to ridicule marriage and marriage-minded girls?
Of course, making a totalitarian state only because they are girls who cannot get married is too much. When were this pedestalizer socons when many men were unable to get a girlfriend?
All of our daughters are special. They have grown up knowing that they are precious flowers, worthy of knights in the shiniest armor, and expecting suitors and eventually marriage in God’s perfect timing. Most importantly: because marriage is the norm, all young women are naturally entitled to marriage.
Nobody is entitled to a marriage, a boyfriend, girlfriend or similar and even less to a kinght in the shiniest armor. Everything to be earned in this life. The entitlement of American people is amazing.
Many young men seem to choose wives according to a different standard than (overlooked) young ladies would like.
So, instead of these young ladies trying to make themselves attractives to suitors (the way men do), all the society has to change to force men to marry these women.
And then it comes the really insane paragraphs:
To ensure that young men who have not asked for a young lady by a designated matrimonial age will be subject to fines or penalties, as will young ladies who give more than the approved number of rejections.
To prevent any girl being left behind, no girl shall be asked for multiple times until each girl in her district has been asked for once. Every young lady asked shall be given 10 business days to respond (if she files late, it shall be assumed that she has accepted). If it is deemed that too many applications have been rejected, the young lady must wear a scarlet “P” to indicate to future suiters that she is picky.
To prevent some young people from attracting more attention than others, there shall be, A) Handicaps imposed on the unfairly advantaged, and B) Subsidies granted for the unfairly disadvantaged. (e.g. The inequitably attractive girls would be prohibited from wearing makeup; financially disadvantaged young men would be granted fiscal/fiduciary federal subsidies; etc.)
Nah, it must be a joke. I am falling asleep: this is why I didn’t realize this.
I will say that all other things being equal, in certain cultures it’s far more acceptable to exert a lot of pressure on women–and men!–to find a suitable spouse posthaste.
I think the pressure really sucks, though, when you are unhappily single and you’re trying as hard as you can, but you haven’t found anyone you like who likes you back. Then all the pressure can just make one feel defective; it’s not a fun place to be. If you’re happily single, though, all the pressure may not make you feel bad about being single, but it will make you resent the heck out of those pressuring you.
I don’t know, Obsidian. I think an “action” type with “killer instincts” might be attractive as a fantasy for some women, but in real life, for most women, if they saw a guy get violent or be ruthless/cold with others, they’d be wondering when that coldness/violence would be turned against them. Women in relationships with guys with “killer instincts” who could be “ruthless and violent” don’t find it sexy if they’re wondering about whether that cruelty will be directed at them. Fearing for your safety/life = not hot.
The kind of attitude you’re describing would throw up all kinds of red flags for me, just as a lot of women don’t get involved with military guys because they’re worried about said guys beating the shit out of them.
The point the commenter was trying to make is that women generally have no respect to men who display weakness and emotional vulnerability, which happen to be the betas who want to show their love of women by pedestalizing them.
The quote is from here:
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/05/22/over-the-mountains/
Yeah, I share this view. Ms. Walsh obviousy has good intentions, but she probably won’t achieve much.
My guess is that beta males benefit the least from sexual freedom among all social groups because they have the fewest options and they know it. It’s the same with the unskilled proletariat: they benefit the least from laissez faire capitalism among all social groups because they have the fewest options and therefore support socialism and the nanny state. And monogamous patriarchy is basically sexual socialism, or as I’d call it: pussy rationing.
“I suppose if your two choices are involuntary celibacy or being second choice, you’ll take the latter.”
Exactly. That explains why most betas supported the patriarchy.
And it is over-simplification to say that women were forced to commit to betas. The most beautiful women could get the alphas to commit because said alphas were expected to commit by society to women on the same level of attractiveness. And women were forced indirectly. What basically happens in the patriarchy is that average women and alphas aren’t allowed to have casual pre-marital sex and therefore they cannot ruin the sexual marketplace for everyone else. I don’t think it really disadvantages average women. It keeps them from getting pumped and dumped by men who wouldn’t commit to them anyway. But obviously they suffered from the lack of alpha sex – but that’s the price we had to pay for a functioning civilization.
My other guess is that most people in the patriarchy were cluelessly living in the Matrix, so to speak. Young girls were expected to be celibate, only commit to decent guys who would provide for them and were taught that cads are unscrupulous and only want them for casual sex. In other words, I don’t think most of them felt they were losing out on something when they gor married to a dutiful beta at 21. Yes, they obviously got wet for alphas, but endless social conditioning and indoctrination could overrule that. “He who never tries to move will never notice that he is in chains”, as Rosa Luxemburg said.
“However, for all this talk of beta males struggling, most of the men I know are happily married betas.”
Yes – most of the men YOU KNOW.
“I’m not saying college isn’t hard, but I just don’t see evidence that most beta males are stuck in the sexual desert forever.”
Well, of course you don’t see any evidence. Betas that are involuntarily celibate just put on a happy face in public, go ghost and never complain because they know they would be considered losers if they did so. They are invisible to women.
I think it’s true that there are some “players” who can be flipped – but they have to want to be flipped.
I suppose the question is – if they’re willing to be flipped are they even a true player?
reformed_tomboy´s last blog ..Sportssorta
Obsidian: in reaction to my recent article over there:….
=================================================
In fairness to the regular commenters at the Spearhead (and I’m quite irregular, fwiw), the initial piece, “LTR Game & The Great Recession”, was really, really weak. One commenter criticized the piece…
.
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/06/30/ltr-game-the-great-recession/#comment-26736
.
The gist of the critique was “This isn’t Game, it is anti-Game.”
.
Others chimed in with comments like “This is not game, this is how to be a mangina on a budget.” Another said, “why [should] those men make any effort to doll themselves up. Because Obsidian said so? Sorry, that’s not an argument. This self-identified gamer is being out-gamed by guys he looks down upon.”
.
Instead of responding in any substantive fashion to the criticisms of your piece, you went on an extended rant against “America’s Most Wanted & Preferred: White Guys…middle class, college educated, good money earning, White Guys. Take it from me, a Black Male Blue Collar “Prole”…”
.
Rather than take up the debate, rather than man-up and respond in a reasonable fashion, you pussied out and played the race card. Regardless of what one thinks of the readers and commenters at the Spearhead, your “Open Letter” was nothing more than a racially tinged, thin-skinned, knee-jerk, overreaction.
Obsidian wrote – “I have no problem with the ladies chasing the tingle, I just want them to Man the f*ck Up about it and accept that it comes at a price. No way in hell could a Man whine and complain as much as the ladies do in this regard, I know the homies in the circles I rolled in couldn’t. Our motto was that you can’t make a Ho into a Housewife, and any Man who tries deserves to get got. You took it like a Man. I don’t think it’s too much to ask the same of the ladies, hmm?”
It sounds like women “manning up” is important to you.
Why’s that?
Yes, I think this is realistic. I also think that the women who currently feel uncomfortable initiating are going to be better matches for betas in general. Shy with shy, sexually inexperienced with sexually inexperienced. I think there is much opportunity being wasted currently in this cohort.
Ah, well that’s different. Men displaying weakness will always be a non-starter. Emotional vulnerability is OK, even desirable, but it’s an advanced move – men must withhold a declaration of any kind until the woman is solidly invested.
VJ, I found the (spoof?) link at this website of homeschooled Christian women:
http://visionarydaughters.com/2010/07/why-am-i-not-married
There is appearantly a crisis going on in that cult.
Yes, Susan, but Chili stated flat that it was exactly what she wanted in a relationship. So I stand by my use of the quote.
Oh please. Fucking two PUAs isn’t the same as, well, being one. Based on what you’ve written, your knowledge of what Game is, what it’s aims are, and the methods and state of mind of the skilled practitioner is rather limited.
Which is fine, really. As a woman, you simply will never to understand Game on the level men do. You don’t need it to survive in dating world—but a man is nothing at all without it. This like a leisure fisherman trying to give instruction to someone who has fished all of his life just to survive. And it’s every bit as tired (and insulting) as you might think.
My point was—which I attempted to clarify in my later comments—was that a skilled practitioner of Game would be an astute enough judge of people to know exactly how to calibrate the quantity of time he spent with his targets in the early going of the relationship. His ability to calibrate this, and his ability to provide the illusion of control to someone of your profile would make him master of situation, your disagreement notwithstanding. A skilled practitioner would have picked up that you like the illusion of control, to be chased—and he would be more than capable of providing you with precisely that mirage if he were so inclined. But even for a girl who wanted a lot of attention in the early stages, there is still a point where a lot of attention becomes “too much”, which a skilled Gamesmen would know to avoid, as well.
Yes, it’s a spoof, and your pals at the cited site think so too:
“We were recently sent the link to a very humorous satirical website: No Girl Left Behind (The Solution to the Marriage Crisis). Though the website is a farce, it plays on a very real panic we have encountered: an anxiety that not enough homeschooled young people are getting married these days.”
The rest? Is as it’s ever been, only more so. There’s always been a marriage crisis seen in the ‘christian family’ wherein some desperately seeking marriage folks just never made it to the altar. These were the Missionaries who went abroad to spread the gospel, or sometimes to hold jobs pursue careers or start orphanages or other business ventures that they might not be otherwise able to as ‘marrieds’. It was not all that uncommon. Susan B. Anthony, was unmarried after all and was popular as a public speaker until her death practically. Cheers, ‘VJ’
“I agree with Susan—show appreciation. Too many women act is if a guy paying is a law of nature. It no longer is.”
Similarly, Dragnet, too many men act as if a guy being “dominant” is a law of nature. It no longer is. If it is, than man up and pay up!
Dragnet, Chili, Ex New Yorker, Verie, etc, what is this “dominant/submissive husband vs dominant/submissive wife” talk?
Most (functional) couples in this day and age are a TEAM working together.
Chili’s desire’s for a non-mooching, non-combative beta husband is NOT a desire for a “submissive house pet”. It’s simply a desire for PEACE.
Nothing is worse than a man who wants to compete, combat and argue with his wife all the time.
After a long day at work neither spouse wants to come home to drama or opinionated bullshit.
Silence is golden.
Your strong reaction to my personal opinion on game is really interesting. Check yourself on that — you might find that your anger at me is a reflection of something deeper. A stranger over the internet shouldn’t really be able to make you so upset, especially when my original aim was to state my opinion, not to get your panties in a twist.
Also, if you read my comments at susan’s page about “an american virgin,” or had followed this blog for any length of time at all, you’d find out how wrong you are about me ‘fucking PUAs.’ That’s the trouble with trying to insult people over the internet, you really don’t have the whole picture or all the information and sometimes make yourself look stupid because of it.
Also, not all men need game. You seem to divide the world into two kinds of people: men who know game & are thus set, and men who don’t & are thus screwed (as evidenced by your comment “a man is nothing at all without game”). There are some guys who don’t know game and who do just fine. Sorry you weren’t born one of them and have a chip on your shoulder about it, but stop using that as an excuse to find other people’s opinions and experiences “insulting.” Please. You need to take your self-righteous indignation & get over yourself. This is a blog for discussing opinions, and yours is just one of them. Try for once to be a little more respectful, it makes things much more pleasant. Thanks in advance.
And again, explaining it further does not negate the fact that you found fault with my statement that “If a guy is trying to spend a lot of time with you, it doesn’t necessarily mean that he doesn’t have game or is a player (he could be either, or neither).” You gave more explanations of how a guy could be a player or not be one by spending a lot of time with you early on, including one that I already mentioned (that he wants to give you the illusion of control). Again proving my initial statement and completely contradicting yours: “You’ve just described a guy who doesn’t have Game.”
So I suppose we’re both clueless as to why you were so adamantly attacking my original point.
Before I stop responding to this tedious argument (it’s 10pm in Cali, girl’s gotta get ready), I just have to say: you clearly weren’t on a debate team or anything in college, huh?
Hi Susan!
I think you’ll find this interesting:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1291921/Katy-Perry-tamed-Russell-Brand-making-wait-sex.html
So was Russell Brand a pretend player or is Katy Perry delusional?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1291921/Katy-Perry-tamed-Russell-Brand-making-wait-sex.html
I’m interested in why the betas I know are not representative of betas as a whole. In my experience most of the highly educated, professional men in the community are beta males – at least 80%. They’re all married, very few divorces. I have known very few intelligent, unmarried men either in the community or workplace.
.
Where are the betas that I don’t know or see? Where do they work? How many are there? Do they cluster within a certain age range? This is where I question the 80/20 rule – it just doesn’t seem possible that 80% of men are going without sex.
My goal is to provide support for young men and women trying to make sense of the sociosexual environment. I also strive to think strategically about what individuals can do to improve their own odds of getting what they want.
.
Based on the feedback I receive from readers, I am confident that I am consistently achieving my objectives. I never set out to change the nature of female sexuality. But neither do I agree that women are enslaved to their hindbrains. I see evidence to the contrary every day.
.
With all due respect, I don’t see why I should accept your view of what is difficult for women, or how they think, when you’ve described a life not spent with them.
Yes, you must be right. It’s just too out there to be legit.
Hi Amanda! I think that making guys wait for sex is one way of weeding the players out early. Some players will hang in for a long time just to make the conquest, but in general, most are too lazy, and will disappear if you don’t put out quickly. My advice to wait isn’t about morals – it’s about strategy. If you hold off, you can greatly decrease your chances of getting pumped and dumped. You also have the opportunity to build anticipation about the sex, and it’s bound to be better when you do have it. Women need to think about weeks, not days, or even hours, when it comes to hooking up.
No, I don’t think so. That’s why I said there are a lot of pretend assholes out there. I think a true player is someone who is looking for as much no-strings sex as possible, and they’re usually pretty immune to the feelings of the girls they hook up with. Some guys enjoy that for a period of time, but then want to try a relationship. In fact, most guys will flip into monogamy at some point. The ones who are easiest to flip are the ones who aren’t really players by nature – they’re faking it to get laid, and they would probably prefer a relationship with awesome sex, if they can find it.
I love it! I still wouldn’t bet my pension on their marriage succeeding, but man, that woman has cajones
Silence is golden? Spoken like a geezer HJL! Cheers, ‘VJ’
Russell Brand was obviously not a pretend player, but he was also obviously ready to be flipped. Katy Perry is the woman who bought one lottery ticket when the jackpot got high and wound up winning against huge odds. Of course, we might debate in this case just how terrific the prize is, but he apparently had 80 different women each month who thought he was pretty special.
P.S. Does anyone besides me see a striking similarity between Katy Perry and Zoe Deschanel?
Katy Perry and Zoe Deschanel have been compared for years, actually. I first saw Zoe’s “Why Do You Let Me Stay Here?” music video and thought it was Katy and got so confused when I looked it up and saw it wasn’t Katy, but Zoe. My friends have been comparing them too and then I looked online and there are a million message boards who compare them. Also, Katy and Zoe both realize this, and if you do some internet searching, they have both commented about how they realize they look like the other one and how other people realize this too. Haha I think it is too funny…and kind of creepy, actually.
Beat me by *that* much. Guess you’re cooler than me.
Yeah I think that might be a bit of an exaggeration. But even if was only like 40, I can’t understand the point of that. At some point, don’t they all feel the same?
Oh and when they divorce in 2013, remember that I totally called it.
Not to mention the effort required: the banter, small talk, morning after awkwardness. How could it not get tedious? I think the answer here lies in his addictive personality, and his apparent need for endless affirmation.
I’m not surprised to hear this – it’s pretty obvious. It might be interesting to see photos of each side by side. Whoa, I just found this quiz:
http://www.thegimcrackmiscellany.com/2008/07/katy-perry-looks-like-zooey-deschanel/
They look so much alike it is FREAKY!
Amen.
What’s this “men’s studies” I’m hearing about?
We’ve learned “men’s studies” our entire lives from K-12. Ever heard of “history”? That’s “men’s studies”. Sociology? That’s “men’s studies”. Psychology? That’s “men’s studies”.
So now my tax dollars are going to be going to some new-age, flaky “men’s studies course” that is going to do what – try and prove that we haven’t been learning about the history of MEN throughout our entire educational lives afterall?
As a historical re-enactor, I can tell that women’s stories are told in history, though not as loud. Sociology? Given those who do the research, more people are looking at women. Psychology? More studies done on women then men.
As the great-granddaughter of a woman who graduated from a ag school because she wasn’t that fond of kids and that was her only other option, was too busy working and raising a family to be a suffragette,and ran a successful business in the depression, my grandmother was raised to know that she could do anything she wanted regardless of her gender, and passed that on to my mother. My family history places me a generation or two ahead of others. And because men are falling behind in educational achievement, economic gains, staying out of trouble, staying out of special ed, and are being punished by a system that is more and more designed by women to raise successful women, there is a need for Men’s studies.
Almost historical re-enactors: (but not quite):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWgFD6CgQyI&feature=player_embedded
Cheers, ‘VJ’
I work with many men post 40. From my personal experience my advice to young men is:
Get your act together and attract a compatible life partner BEFORE 35 (preferably way earlier).
Once you hit 40 you will start to age rapidly – hair loss, weight gain, saggy scrote, etc. Not pretty. If you think women shun you NOW – just wait.
I can’t tell you HOW MANY lonely dudes pushing 50 I know who are pining to meet their “soul mate”.
You won’t meet her post 40 unless you are very handsome or very rich – preferably both.
Get poppin’ boys!
(now that’s a “men’s study” I could put my name behind- LOL)
What I’m merely stating is that you seem to be drawing conclusions from a rather small sample. How can we surely say that the well-off, middle/upper-class older men you are sourrounded by represent all betas?
“This is where I question the 80/20 rule – it just doesn’t seem possible that 80% of men are going without sex.”
They are getting 20% of all the sex, mostly the leftovers of alphas. That’s what the 80/20 rule says.
More PR BS is my guess. Cheers, ‘VJ’
Sad but true. And this? ‘Age[ing] rapidly – hair loss, weight gain, saggy scrote, etc. Not pretty’. Likely All applies just to my ‘saggy scrote’ alone! Happily it’s also sagacious too. Not that it might matter much… Cheers, ‘VJ’
I’m not sure why this question popped up here in this thread, but you’ve got it right, Nisie. Just to clarify: Men’s Studies is an outgrowth of Women’s Studies – which is heavily feminist. Both fields look at gender as a social construct. Because young men are struggling according to nearly metric in American society today, some academics have come together to initiate a program of Male Studies. This will look at every aspect of being male, focusing on the biology of maleness. In my view, there is some interesting work that has come out of Men’s Studies, but they defer to the feminist establishment by and large. Since the Women’s Movement had a dramatic effect on American men, this is problematic. There is a need for apolitical study of both women and men, but addressing the problems of American men is urgent.
In the Game/MRA community, this reality is often overlooked. Men focus, naturally enough, on women’s declining fertility. It’s true that men do have more time – probably an extra 5-10 years. However, the notion that they can continue to attract fertile young women indefinitely is nonsense. I know for a fact that when young women (21-25) go out together, they are seeking men three to five years older. A really handsome 40 year old approaching young women signals: DAD, OLD, PERVY.
My original (full) quote:
The source of the tension here seems to be your use of the phrase “a lot of time” versus my use of the phrase “too much time”. To the extent that my language was imprecise, I should obviously be more careful. But more important is the fact that you keep referencing the first part of my statement and consistently excise the second, clarifying, part of it (I’ve italicized it above here).
I would like to make it clear that I didn’t butcher your quotes, excise pieces to strip away meaning, or willfully miscontrue your message. It seems as if that’s what you’ve consistently done here with me, and it’s incredibly dishonest.
Which is a shame. We clearly disagree on much, but in the final analysis our views on this particular issue really aren’t all that far apart.
Why so irritable?
To clarify, you consistently quoted “You’ve just described a guy who doesn’t have Game, while ignoring the follow-up, “No guy with solid game would try to spend too much time with a girl in the initial phase—he would know exactly how to handle this”.
Taking the first part and leaving the second is intellectually dishonest.
First of all I’ll start by saying that 5-10 years is very significant—and can be the difference between having several children an having none at all.
And the claim on MRA/Game type blogs is actually a bit more nuanced than this. The claim is that if you’re in your 40s and you want to date women in your 20s it will be difficult to do in anywhere in Western Civilization because feminist social engineering has brainwashed the young ladies into viewing you as too old. So the “real” solution is to go expat (Brazil, Eastern Europe, Russia, Southeast Asia, etc) where there is less of this. I’ve really only seen Roissy peddle the notion that Game makes able to attract young women indefinitely in the Western world.
From my personal experience I’ve known a few girls to be with guys 10-15 years their senior, but it’s definitely not commonplace. And expating is certainly not my cup of tea.
Susan, I was trying to respond to someone’s comments above, and there’s no option to reply (maybe the thread is too long?).
My point in arguing this whole time was to show you that your initial reaction was ridiculous and out of line. I took your original comments because they were just plain wrong & unneccessarily reactionary — especially considering I wasn’t trying to attack you in the least but state my own opinion. You expanded your opinion throughout and tried to change your initial statement. Through this whole long, tedious, boring convo that no one else on this blog cares about, you’re finally getting the point that we actually have the same opinion. Thank god. I get irritable when people in general are unpleasant to me & condescending. I also asked you nicely twice to stop doing it and you continued. Other people on here might deal well with it, but I don’t like disrespectful tone in person or on the internet.
And that is all I have to say about it.
As I stated before, to the extent that my word choice was imprecise then I obviously have been more careful. That really was an honest error. But as far as I’m concerend, my comment was only “out of line” if you reference and attack the first part of it while ignoring the second part of it, which you did consistently. That was, and remains, intellectually dishonest of you.
Nothing about my statement changed. Everything I said subsequently could have been gleaned from the first comment I’d written if you hadn’t butchered it for you own ends. s if If you had kept your irritability and easily bruised ego in check, you may have seen this.
Or perhaps not.
I think a lot has changed over time. I’m guessing the betas you know are you own age plus or minus 5 or 10 years. I think 20-30 years ago when people in your age demographic were getting married, the sexual marketplace hadn’t gone completely to hell just yet.
And it’s also important when those betas got married and who they married. The claim isn’t that betas never have access to women—it’s that they get access to women after their youngest, hottest and most fertile years have passed. From where I sit, that is absolutely true.
Don’t know, just thinking out loud.
The older guys I know with much younger women were either in the top 5% of wealth for the area and/or they looked and acted a lot younger than they were. I believe that in the ex-pat scenarios, this holds true too. The difference is that it’s a lot easier to be in the top 5% of wealth in those countries.
She’s delusional if she thinks she landed him because she didn’t sleep with him on the first date and threw a water bottle at him. Yeah, he was a very successful player, but she’s a *hugely* successful musical artist and most people didn’t even know his name until he got engaged to her. Seeing as there is no such thing as bad press, he gets press and fame now, and he’ll get all kinds of great PR when they spectacularly explode. And she gets in this bargain? Probably an STD.
This is definitely true from I’ve witnessed. The guys aren’t in the top 5% of wealth, but they make decent money and look young for their age without sacrificing the aura of experience/wisdom that comes with age. So if you don’t have good genes—and most people don’t—-this is a non-starter for you. The guys who fool around that late and hope to snag a 20 year old are playing with fire.
Then you might like “shrike” n. Any of various carnivorous oscine birds of the family Laniidae, having a screeching call and a strong hooked bill with a toothlike projection and often impaling its prey on sharp-pointed thorns or barbs of wire fencing.
I don’t think it’s feminist social engineering that tells women a guy in his 40s is too old. Maybe it does to the extent that feminists are suspicious of older men with younger women because it looks more patriarchal. In truth, women prefer youthful men to help them raise their young. We like the idea of the husband that can be a Little League coach, not a guy in the stands who looks like Grandpa and will throw his back out if he plays catch.
.
Just as women become less desirable physically as they age, so do men. Just a sampling:
.
Thinning hair on the head, thickening hair in ears and nose
White hair on the chest and in the beard
Sagging breasts and butt
Beer belly with thin arms and legs
and the biggie:
Little blue pill required to rock the bed
.
I thought all scrotes were saggy, so I won’t include that
.
For a woman to go this route, we have to be talking about one of two things:
1. She’s old enough to be worried that this is her big chance
2. $
When I was fifteen I got hold of a copy of the then-popular, “The Sensuous Man.” It clearly said that if a man acts like he expects sex after paying for a date, it means “I think you’re a prostitute.”
Times have changed so much since then that “I think you’re a prostitute” is the norm.
To avoid this, I don’t go anywhere expensive on a first, second, or however many date. I do split the bill.
About five years ago I got on a Rules board and read John Gray. (I know both are unpopular but I was having a hard time at the time and trying to figure out something different from what I had been doing.) The Rules girls were all *over* me for paying my way, because I didn’t want to be in a situation where I felt “obligated.” Interestingly, people think the Rules says to hold off on sex but it didn’t. The Rules said to hold off till the *fourth date* which is way too early for me. Anyway, the Rules said that men don’t think you’re feminine if you let him pay…but do not go someplace expensive (I think.) John Gray said if you pay you are depriving the man of something he needs in order to start liking you–the feeling of being successful and victorious etc. etc.
I decided to get around this by going no place expensive early on, and letting the guy pay early on, then offering drinks *in my 1910 porch swing* I cannot stress enough the importance of the old-timey porch swing.
However, the guy I’m with now, we split the bill, he feels victorious if I laugh at his jokes or compliment him on something he knew or said, and he hates the porch swing. He’s totally a creature of routine, and he has his chair and it’s not the porch swing. Any other chair and anything besides plopping into it at the precise time and he would get hives.
One more of my very few small insights into men–the “creature of habit” can be a very commitment-minded man by default. He breaks out into heart palps if the paper doesn’t arrive at precisely 6:07 a.m.? He will break out into heart palps if he doesn’t get you on the phone at precisely 8:30 each night.
Hmmm, yes this makes a lot of sense. I suspect the problem is overstated in general, but very real in the 18-25 age range. That’s plenty long enough for guys to get disillusioned, bitter, etc. When a beta is 25, he should pursue women fresh out of college, preferably ones who have been conservative in their sexual behavior.
But some men hate it. Some men, the woman offering to cook automatically means the woman is trying to take it to the next level.
I found that out the hard way, but I’m glad the guy is gone.
“If you want to discuss the bad things PUA guys do, head over to Lady Raine’s. Knock yourself out among fellow travelers.”
See, here’s one thing I don’t understand. I haven’t been on this blog long. I found it via a post by Susan on Salon. I was aware of the PUA community before. But I was *not* aware that Susan’s blog, actually was a bona fide PUA site. I thought Susan had a “women, hooking up is not getting us what we want” blog, and a lot of PUA’s happened to hang out here.
That statement sounds like Obsidian is saying point-blank, Susan’s blog is a PUA site.
Snowdrop I love that porch swing date! I also like your advice to look for a man who enjoys his routines, i.e. being predictable. That is the opposite of the unpredictable and volatile bad boy.
.
FWIW, I really like John Gray. He’s got it right re bio differences between men and women. Whether he is PC or not is another question. I will say that in his books he writes about people well into adulthood, so some of his conclusions need to be modified when thinking about a younger cohort.
That makes sense. A commitment phobe is going to balk at anything that smacks of nesting. It is a little creepy when women start acting wifey very early on, though. I would say the third date is the earliest a woman should cook for a guy – though sex at that stage may or may not be on the menu
Most of the world marries someone of an age within 3-4 years of their own. The exceptions are the mostly the very poor countries of western and middle Africa. I doubt those countries rank high on any aspiring ex-pat’s list of places to emigrate.
.
And at home? It’s a similar tale: Graph of relative attractiveness from OKCupid’s studies
.
Yes, men become more desirable at all ages past 26 for women…but the difference is smaller than men would like to believe and it stays pretty consistent or even grows smaller as they age (despite their belief otherwise). Men are, on average, 3-4 years “more attractive” then men. That means a “5″ guy at age 35 is equivalently attractive to a “5″ woman of 31-32. Not an “8″ woman of 23-25. And not an “8″ woman of “31-32″.
.
Women need to be aware of these basic facts…but so do men. Everyone has an individual “market value” that is influenced by “evo-psych”, but not completely controlled by it.
Gaaahhhhhh! No HUS is not a PUA site! However, I have taken a stand that I am friendly to Game, in that I think it gives the “dads” at shot at competing against the “cads.” In that sense, I think men getting some Game can be a good thing for women. Obviously, I’m not a fan of asshole Game, or any adaptation of Game that incorporates deceit. For the record, the guys who codified the concepts of female sexual psychology into what we call Game never promoted lying to get laid, although they were PUAs. My own bias is toward men using this knowledge of female nature to secure and maintain LTRs, as Athol Kay writes about in Married Man Sex Life:
http://www.marriedmansexlife.com/
Anyway, I do get Game types here, as well as some anti-feminism/MRA types. I enjoy and appreciate the dialog, as it encompasses a pretty wide spectrum of views.
I started writing because hooking up is not really getting women what they want, but my understanding of the problem has evolved considerably, as I’ve learned that many men are not getting what they want either.
I could go on at length about the problems with the OkCupid studies but I don’t trust them one iota and for a multitude of reasons—selection bias is the most relevant, in my opinion.
Who said anything about marriage?
Eh. We’ll have to agree to disagree here concerning the bolded portion.
Without a doubt. I’ve never said Game was all-powerful in the way some bloggers have asserted—only that it was much more powerful than most women are ready to acknowledge.
I fly in the face of the paying thing. When I first re-entered the dating arena, I was all about splitting and equitable. Then I figured it out…the good guys were actually a tad insulted by “equitable” and the bad guys loved it because it meant they could conserve their own resources for lots of targets. Further, there was no mistaking my own primitive response to “being taken care of” by a man, and that included him providing dinner/drinks/an ice cream cone.
Yeah, I think it’s both. I think it’s entirely legitimate that young mothers want younger fathers to raise their children with—I really liked being able to shoot hoops with my dad, etc.
I also think older, single feminists are suspicious of May-December relationships with young woman/older man because it further reinforces their loss of sexual power as time wears on. In the same vein, I’ve seen some MRA blogs railing on against ‘age of consent’ laws as attempting to dimish men’s reproductive options. Both views are creepy, as far as I’m concerned.
But if you’re not talking about marriage and/or having kids, settling down then I do think older guys have a shot if they have Game. I know a few girls who’ve had short-term flings with older men. They’re not the most attractive ladies, but hey everyone got to scratch an itch, so to speak…
Obsidian is trying to push me into the category of the extreme feminists that come and tussle with the PUAs on a regular basis. See, among many of the PUA followers, women are either “prey or enemy”. They have trouble rectifying that some of us don’t care if men learn or use Game, but that we do want to be strategic about our own choices in the dating marketplace.
I love how you own your primitive response! I think that’s a pretty interesting observation about good vs. bad guys. I think both men and women are all over the place on this issue. It’s obviously up to each pair to figure out what works best for them. I do think that on traditional dates, men pay 90% of the time. Women tend to reciprocate with gestures and effort. Once a couple is together and committed, I think they are more likely to pool their resources, or at least split expenses.
I have a theory about this, kinda.
I think a large percentage of what lonely singles want, is the social status of having someone on their arm. The validation.
So yes, having a person on their arm who validated them socially and added status, actually *would* satisfy a lot of what has them so unhappy, whether or not that person loved them.
Committed LTRs are the goal of most of the women here. So marriage is a valid measurement of that.
.
I agree that OKCupid studies are far from the best source of information, but the fact is, there hasn’t been a lot of studies done on relative attractiveness. And OKC (and other dating sites, like Chemistry.com) have probably some of the best data available on how people act as opposed to what they say they do.
.
Most women do scoff at the idea that Game works at all…to their own detriment. Then again, most men scoff at the idea that they are led by emotions as well…again…to their own detriment.
.
The way I see it is, we’re all human animals. It does not surprise me at all that we have instincts and pre-learned biases. Savvy people have been taking advantage of this for a long time (witness the use of fear as a voting motivator at election times.) I put Game into the same category as well-conceived and executed, modern marketing. Powerfully effective to people who aren’t putting that much conscious thought into their actions, but far from the mind-control device some would like it to be.
And then there are some women whose mates were older than them and died first. My guy is 11 years older than me, and would have been the right guy for me if he were my age. (I am totally not sure what would have happened if we had met when we were younger.) Right now he looks my age and is fitter than I am, but I do worry about a stroke or heart attack. I would rather have these years with him than anyone else, even if they are short (who knows?) I wouldn’t trade him for anyone else, or this relationship for a lifetime of a lesser relationship. I might be alone in the future, with happy memories I wouldn’t trade.
If you’re not reading OK Trends, you need to start.
http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/2009/11/17/your-looks-and-online-dating/
Looks are 2.5 times as important for women than for men. The things women care about (wit, status, confidence ect.) don’t really decrease with age. Haven’t we talked about this before?
By the way, remember the “girls are like apples” theory? Turn out the most attractive women actually get less messages than the “almost-the-most” attractive women get. A 4/6 girl actually gets 30% more messages than 6/6 girl! There’s a pep talk in there somewhere.
I could go on at length about the problems with the OkCupid studies but I don’t trust them one iota and for a multitude of reasons—selection bias is the most relevant, in my opinion.
What, you think OK Cupid users are more critical of older guys?
es, looks are definitely more important for women. Women do value other traits highly, and I’m forever repeating that point when debating whether women are capable of preferring beta to alpha males (they are). However, looks are part of the equation, and good looks signal good genes. Furthermore, women put a lot of importance on strength/stamina. This is the trait where high testosterone males really shine, and it’s a big advantage. However, as men age, even dominant alpha types, they lose both strength and stamina. A lot of men who flame out on online dating sites do so because they are 40 seeking 20, or even 50 seeking 30. Not gonna happen, except in the following instances:
The woman has a troubled history with her father, usually because he was missing physically or emotionally.
The woman is a narcissist, highly materialistic and will go with a rich older man. (Surely you don’t think anyone could actually fall in love with Donald Trump.)
The woman is a narcissist, power and status hungry, and the older man provides access to an elite social stratum.
.
The maximum age difference that will sustain sexual attraction is about 15 years, IMO. Of course, there are exceptions, but they’re uncommon. Many May-December marriages are second round for the man, first-time bride at 30+.
P.S. I love that blog, wish it was updated more often. Also, re the less attractive women getting more nibbles than the super attractive women, it’s not surprising. I’ve written about this before in http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2009/09/11/hookinguprealities/do-pretty-girls-have-it-harder/
This is what housewives said when I was growing up–being a good submissive homemaking wife does not necessarily win hubby’s love like we were taught it would. It is just as likely to earn his contempt while he falls in love with the confident, provocatively dressed woman with a mouth on her at the office.
I have said this a lot on this blog-sorry-but I grew up in a small very fundamentalist sect, and the guys said the girls they grew up with in that sect felt like their sister.
Some think the incest taboo kicks in when they have been raised together.
Not sure about the Amish, if the Amish go to other Amish communities to mix it up and find mates.
My guess is it’s a parody site done by a young man who grew up in that culture, and is sick of it.
I don’t know about sexual attraction, but I would love to hang out with Donald Trump.
And honestly, why do we have to judge people by what they’re sexually attracted to? And why is it so bad to want successful men? Do you think a woman would rather be admired because she has perky breasts and a tight butt, or because she started a successful business and has a PHD?
You’ve written about everything haven’t you? And yet, you always keep it fresh.
I never noticed these things before I started to read MRA/PUA blogs, and of course, this blog here. However, now that it’s been brought to my attention, I’m practically analysing EVERY guy I see, and DEFINETLEY every guy I MEET.
What I see is a LOT of older, lonely guys. I feel sorry for them but I can see why women even their own age won’t date them. A woman, no matter how old or plain, can make herself “stand out” with a bright, flattering outfit, some nice dangly earrings and her hair wrapped up in a French twist.
Men just don’t have these options to make themselves stand out. What do they have? Lavender ties?
Maybe that’s why I know so many women dating and married to guys younger than them.
I’ve always been attracted to guys with long hair and come to think of it – it’s probably because they “stand out” and look “different”. If done right, long hair can boost up to 3 points on a guy. If. Done. Right. And that’s a big “if”.
I feel really sorry for these aging middle aged dudes but really, what can be done?
I’m so through telling them, “don’t worry, she’s out there”.
Let’s face it. She’s NOT.
There’s actually a lot to unpack here, GudEnuf. First, I wanted to make the point about age because lots of men focus on women losing their luster after 30, while acting like they can sail into their 40s without seeing any decline in their own ability to attract, and I’m just not buying it. It’s true that women have a smaller window of fertility/peak beauty, but men have another 5-10 years, not 25. Much older men can usually attract women via power or wealth. It’s not a judgment, just an observation.
.
I plead guilty to judging people pretty harshly for being attracted to certain types. I do that in the hope that readers can absorb and learn from the mistakes of others. On the other hand, I understand that we can’t control who we’re attracted to. The question is, what do we do with that attraction – do we indulge it? or do we overrule it?
.
Of course it’s not bad to want successful men. Ambition, drive, intelligence, financial success are all traits that women seek in a partner. My only point is that those traits have to be extraordinarily strong if the man lacks the strength and stamina of youth.
That’s one of the nicest things anyone has ever said to me. Thank you.
Interesting – you’ve just highlighted the PUA tactic of “peacocking.” Long hair, standing out from the crowd – that’s the definition of it. The good news for men is that they do age more gracefully than women – gray hair can look distinguished on a man. Hair loss is a problem, but a shaved head is often sexy. The best thing a man can do as he ages, IMO, is stay in shape physically. In fact, even if he’s never been the type to hit the gym, I’d say that’s essential after 40. A man can’t attract women without being reasonably fit. He doesn’t have to be a god, he just has to look healthy, and show pride in his appearance.
I guess I was just trying to say that a man would only have to be moderately strong in those traits. And that as a man grows older, his most important traits get stronger.
But let’s not fret the details. It’s unhealthy for men to constantly make fun of women for growing up.
This definition seems entirely reasonable to me.
First of all, I highly doubt that your ex was “100 percent” beta—simply because no one is all-or-nothing. I’m even willing to bet the Henrys Kissinger and VIII weren’t 100 percent alpha. Everyone’s a mix and the point of Game is to help men be the right combination of alpha & beta qualities. Although I totally believe that your ex had no Game.
I have no doubt that you “enjoy leading”—most queen bee type girls do. But that impulse doesn’t stop the vast majority of them from chasing to their natural hypergamous instincts. You’re an exception to this—fine. But that’s not very interesting, if only because it won’t help the vast majority of young women and men navigate the sexual marketplace. There just isn’t much insight to be had here.
Susan—these threads are waaaay too long to keep track of. I hadn’t even realized there was a reply until days after the fact…
This is pretty much the opposite of what I see in Boston. When I first got to Boston after college and before I’d read PUA sites or anything like that I defintiely noticed a LOT of single, lonely women in their early-30s to early-40s. I remember telling my grandparents about it and they were pretty surprised and was too because I didn’t know the story. The older single guys I knew were either gay, had no interest in children/marriage/family and were still playing the field, or had no social skills—and the three categories were in rougly equal proportions.
A few years later a few of these women have found guys but they are, to a man, the (relatively inexperienced) betas that they’ve decided to settle for after their cock-riding 20s, as per the cliche. Most of them are still waiting. And most of the guys with no social skills are still single too, FWIW.
Hey neighbor, I think Boston is unusual in light of the academic scene. Not just undergrad, but tons of grad students too. I also think that women who are ridiculously picky/entitled/narcissistic are found in Boston in pretty high numbers.
.
One thing that’s interesting is that MA has the lowest divorce rate in the country, despite alimony laws that favor women strongly.
Dragnet:
1. While you may or may not be right that the vast majority of women will indulge their alpha cravings, you’ll have to acknowledge that quite a few women here explicitly state they like less alpha men. I agree that no man is all one thing or another, but the truth is many women like the beta traits. Personally, I have never fallen for a true alpha male. My college boyfriend was one, and although he was a convenient and attractive accessory for three years, I never once felt in love with him. Way too much testosterone and dominant behavior. Minimal susceptibility to oxytocin. I know I crushed him when I broke it off, but it would have been impossible to tell if I didn’t know him so well. Lots of women want the pillow talk, spooning, and general cuddliness that comes with a good amount of beta.
2. Re the threads, yeah they are getting pretty long, which I love! Did you subscribe to the emails? Because you should be getting notified of any replies.
I think the amount of assholes out there is overstated, just as the amount of sexless beta-types may be. Maybe you can help explain this, Ms. Walsh. I get that these guys get around more, but I highly doubt the SMP is a veritable minefield for women as it seems to have been implied to be.
Also, I’ve heard women refer to guys as jerks and assholes plenty, only to find that they really weren’t such bad guys in the relationship. They were just given the label to rationalize the breakup/things not working out/them not being as interested as the girls were.
I know players, but I don’t think they’re *that* ubiquitous. I see a lot of guys *being* players because they’re simply not that interested in the women they’re hooking up with. Maybe they’re looking to trade up. Maybe both sexes are to blame here…as a 25 y/o in the dating scene, I can honestly say I’ve been disappointed with 90% of the girls I’ve actually gone on dates with, and would never consider seriously dating them. There’s definitely a female corollary to the boring-un-tingly-beta-male-dynamic that only PUA types like Roissy seem to talk about openly.
Hey, Sox, good to see you. I’m sure you’re right that there’s a lot of hyperbole in general when discussing modern sexual mores. I acknowledge that there are far fewer assholes around than one would think from a cursory look at blogs and relationship forums. I think the key here is that there are many guys, usually “nice guys” or beta males, who are not really visible in the mating scene at a young age. As ridiculous as it sounds, college women will swear up and down to me that every single guy at their school is a total jerk. Obviously, that cannot possibly be true, but what is very likely true is that the guys they meet while partying are jerks. So I think there’s a huge untapped supply of men that women are overlooking. It’s a difficult problem to solve because it’s a chicken or egg question: if women don’t know they exist, how can they give them a shot? If women overlook them, what’s the point in going out just to watch all the women gravitate to the assholes?
.
So I think it’s fair to say that the SMP basically sucks for less dominant males. It also sucks for women who are unwilling to do a lot of hooking up. HUS pretty much focuses on those two groups. The third group that loses big is extremely attractive women. Because they perceive their mating value as high, they don’t sell themselves cheaply. The men who would have courted them in the old paradigm now settle for no-strings sex with less attractive women. And the men who could probably date them now if they tried usually won’t risk the rejection.
.
As for the women who are not worthy of an LTR, yes, there are plenty of those around. I wrote about them in my recent post http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2010/06/28/relationshipstrategies/20-identifiable-traits-of-a-female-narcissist/
Ha! I knew one of the sort I think you’re describing. Had a lot going for him but had a bit of a sad sack personality. Clammed up completely around women. Had a negative vibe sort of. I would have thought she was not out there. But I advised him to pick a particular venue and start going to it regularly, such as an area of interest. He did and met someone wonderful in a matter of weeks. She saw something in him that I hadn’t seen, or he somehow didn’t clam up around her. She is a wonderful woman and now this guy is a first-time father at around 60 (his wife is around 42 I guess) and they have the most adorable kid ever. Seeing this taught me a lot. The right woman can bring those guys out of their shells.
Good grief. This is pretty much the opposite of what it means for a husband/boyfriend to be dominant. “Combative” is not synonymous with “dominant”. Susan, back me up here. And Heather, please read up on Game if you don’t mind.
Agree with everything else you said here.
First off, yes—I do think the vast majority of women can and will indulge their alpha craving in their youth. And I’m perfectly willing to acknowledge that there are a small minority of women who genuinely prefer the betas. And I definitely agree that women who were burned once can make different decisions the next time around (this blog’s raison d’etre), although you are definitely more sanguine about their chances than I.
That said, it’s time to get real. All over, guys are saying the same thing—betas aren’t getting much action from age 16 through their late 20s. 80 percent or so of the sex is being had by 20 percent or so of the guys. Even if this is doubles to 40 percent it still leaves a lot of guys enduring long stretches of celibacy and most girls unable to get what they really want—exclusive commitment from someone with a good combination of alpha and beta traits.
You are posting things that need to be said and I respect what you’re trying to accomplish but I find a fair amount of the things said by your female commentariat to just be insulting to the average man’s intelligence. Which is why I haven’t commented on your blog very much until recently. Any sentient young man has realized that women—especially young women—find alpha qualities attractive…but apparently, your blog is the one spot in the galaxy, where the young women are really into betas. Your blog is, apparently, the one hypergamy-free zone in the cosmos. Either that, or the ladies write posts here about being really into the beta chump of their dreams but then undergo the usual amazing transformation to Alpha Cock Rider in the 3 hours it takes them to get ready for happy hour. It’s laughable on its face, and it’s why savvy men don’t listen to things women say or write and instead just keep a watchful eye on what they do. That, and Game, are a man’s only salvation in this god awful shitty mess we call the SMP. Sweet Jesus, where are these hordes of young women with an unslakeable thrist for beta seed? If they existed, then your blog wouldn’t need to, Susan. And neither would Game, the manosphere, MRA, etc. Like Obsidian says, they know where these guys are at—they just ain’t interested. Until they’re 30ish. I’ve accept that words of your commenters at face value because you must if there is any dialogue at all to be had online…but I won’t deny there are times when I chuckle a bit while being snowed.
And I would never say that women don’t like beta traits. I certainly hope not, as I can—and have—ably displayed those. Those characteristics have survived throughout the course of human evolution, so obviously they are valuable to reproductive success. My contention has been that women want the right combination of alpha & beta, and that ideal combination is not 100% alpha (a la Roissy) or 100% beta (as per a fair significant of your commentariat). The reason why the manosphere stresses alpha traits so much is because so many men have been socially engineered into being far too beta for most of the women they will meet—leaving aside, of course, your
reality-hypergamy- free commentariat.And your dalliance with your college boyfriend really just illustrates my point. He was too much alpha to be a long-term investment—and you knew it the whole time—but you still sexed him up for three years. And other guys after him, I suspect— while hundreds of betas around you choked the chicken. Sure, he wasn’t happy to be dumped, but I bet he didn’t lack for female company after you’d cum and gone. I suspect your husband is a lot more beta—but you two got together after you were all done with the alphas. It’s really great that arrangement has stood the test of time, but that it would work isn’t a foregone conclusion and a lot of betas have become less willing to take the chance your hubby did in an increasingly misandric society that has made commitment/marriage a very dangerous business for men.
In any case, I’ve decided not to allow the naivete & eternal solipsism of some members of your commentariat prevent me from chiming in here and there. So you’ll be seeing a bit more of me as time wears on.
Just my $0.02.
One look at Susan B. Anthony will tell you why that woman never married.
I didn’t get the impression it was ‘cult’ so much as a site for Christians who prefer to homeschool. Although they do refer to a homeschool movement.
In any case, if you take out all the Jesus stuff the suggestions they have—focusing on personal strength, personal responsibility, self-examination—are what a large number of single women need to do.
OK, here to the rescue. First off, it’s not really fair to ask Heather to be reading up on Game, as this isn’t really a Game blog, per se. She is talking about human nature, and that’s fair enough. I personally have found it interesting and useful to understand the bio differences between men and women, which is what Game is predicated on.
.
Heather, a lot of what I write about is in line with evolutionary psychology. I’ve studied both that approach and the “gender as a social construct” approach to relations between the sexes, and personally I feel that the former captures a lot of truth, as it is rooted in chemical/bio/DNA study, as well as behavioral studies. The latter, on the other hand, is mostly crap, though people can certainly override their biology via “nurture” or culture.
.
In short, male dominance is a law of nature. The brains of men and women are very different, physiologically and hormonally, but the bottom line is that men seek dominance and control. Women seek collaboration and relationship. During mating, the most successful pairings are often a case of opposites attracting – dominant male with submissive female, or dominant female with submissive male. This post talks more about this, from the work of Helen Fisher:
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2010/06/14/relationshipstrategies/this-is-what-a-good-man-looks-like/
.
Dragnet is correct that a dominant male will not come home to compete, combat and argue with his wife, because they are not struggling for power, assuming he married a woman who liked his dominance. The worst combo, by the way, is when people with a high propensity for risk-taking and variety pair off. They make poor parents and have a high divorce rate. I imagine they can get quite combative – drama, drama everywhere.
.
The point is that successful couples are indeed teams working together, but they’re not the same. The combination of dominant/submissive is a spectrum. It’s about how they complement one another.
I keep thinking of that Mike Posner song. Do you know it? I love that song!
And you touched on one of the most important strategies ever, and one I know you’ve used to great effect:
pick a particular venue and start going to it regularly
This cannot be stated too frequently.
Great post dragnet. Have to say I feel the same way. Something’s gotta give- everywhere you go when it comes to these kinds of discussions, the women you’re talking to happen to be the exception to the rule. I think it’s understandable. I think many women hate that they’re attracted to “those guys” and will do anything to try to convince themselves its not what they’re looking for. Guys do it too, to an extent.
Not every “alpha” is a swaggering, testosterone-loaded douchebag…at least not as far as the PUA/roissysphere is concerned.
I thought it was a bit immature myself. But that’s just my opinion.
Seeing as most men want women at the peak of attractiveness (21-25), and prefer women younger than them by 3-5 years, that means most men aren’t even the right age for their *own* preferences until their mid-twenties at the earliest.
Exactly one commenter here has professed a desire for a 100% beta male. The rest of us seem to be in agreement with you that the best option is a guy with plenty of alpha and beta traits.
.
And maybe nobody else will admit it, but I have fallen for a true, nearly 100% alpha. He had the right physical look, the right career and background, and, above all, he had oodles of natural game. It was because of that experience that I’ve learned to be aware of alpha-appeal and to make better choices. Just like I crave the taste of creme brulee, but I choose to eat salads to the benefit of my ass.
That is a really great post. Tucking into it is like sitting down to a delicious meal, haha. I love it when you comment here, so I’m really happy you’ll be around. You are smart and level headed, and you demonstrate open-mindedness by virtue of your participation, which I appreciate. OK, I need to break this down into parts.
.
1. The whole alpha/beta nomenclature is extremely imprecise. I don’t think all alphas are bad, or jerks. I have known several good and kind alpha men. As an example that others can appreciate, Coach Taylor (Kyle Chandler) on Friday Night Lights is pretty much the perfect man. He is most definitely very alpha, but he also embraces his beta traits and has a very egalitarian marriage. He seems to embody Athol’s view of the right balance of traits, which I share:
.
The Alpha Traits are the more traditional and physically based traits. Size, strength, fitness, aggression, violence, dominance, beauty, health, confidence, fearlessness, daring, hand eye co-ordination, speed etc are all skills and abilities that are simply excellent for survival as a small tribal group on the ancient savannah. Display of these skills generates a seemingly hardwired sexual attraction response in women. On some level we are still approaching sex wired exactly the same as we were 10,000+ years ago.
The Beta Traits are the more modern and socially based traits. Size and strength matter less and less in the modern age. Skill with paperwork is the key to income in most fields. Violence is no longer a tool for social advancement, but results in becoming a social outcast or jailed. What matters in the modern age is the ability to keep calm, sociable, nice, patient, verbal, kind, clever, cuddly, soothing, diplomatic, kid friendly and emotionally available. It’s ideal for working in cubicles and service industries. This is what women need from a modern partner to establish a working relationship to create a home and have an income in order to raise children. Without this support, women become deeply uncomfortable and this can short circuit sexual desire.
http://www.marriedmansexlife.com/2010/01/little-more-on-alpha-and-beta-male.html
.
2. I think when a lot of women say they like beta males, they are saying they can’t live without those traits. We do want nice, patient, clever, cuddly, etc. Of course we also want sexual attraction. We don’t understand why we have to choose! The reality is, we do not have to choose. We can exert a preference for both. There are women who will bed cads with no strings, but I don’t believe they are the vast majority. I do believe the vast majority of women prefer men with some display of social dominance. You want to know where the women are who value beta traits and would choose those men. I would ask where are the men? Male commenters arrive here, e.g. Obs, and say,
Women don’t want men who spend all their time wandering around in a lab. If comp sci majors want to get laid, they’re going to have to go out and have a beer in a place that’s probably crawling with jocks and frat stars. And they’re going to have to approach. With confidence. Let’s keep it real about biological realities. Women will never don that mantle.
.
3. Re the 80/20 rule, I really want to get to the bottom of it. I’ve tried to research it before, only to find Roissy and The Fifth Horseman linking back and forth to each other. I accept the concept of female hypergamy, so I do think there’s a split, but I am not convinced it’s 80/20. You suggested that even if it’s 40% of guys getting sex, that’s still long stretches of celibacy. That’s true, but since the historical percentage of men who reproduced is 40%, perhaps that number is baseline. It obviously sucks for a man to be involuntarily celibate, but perhaps the social engineering done to males has falsely led them to believe that they would get their very own princess at the end of an exciting courtship. By the way, where were the fathers when all this social engineering went down?
.
4. HUS is hardly a hypergamy-free zone, LOL. It’s a given in most of my writings, obviously, and my readers rarely object to that principle. Women know what’s up – I hear them say all the time that “even though so-and-so is ugly, he’s an asshole, so he gets lots of girls.” Of course, you know that the percentage of readers who comment is small – on most blogs it’s less than one percent, and that is definitely true here. So I would guess that women who want to debate the issue are more likely to comment, while many women read my posts, take them as gospel, and go on to try and implement my ideas here and there. I do get a lot of offline emails from both girls and guys sharing how they’ve used different strategies, and asking for coaching.
.
5. Re the female commentariat, I couldn’t help but notice how you and Verie were at it like cats and dogs in this thread. I will say that I think you started out busting her lady balls with this remark:
Ouch.
. In any case, your comments make it clear that you attract a lot of women. So, yeah. Two really smart, hot young people with attitude. I’m going to pull up a chair.
Honestly, the two of you remind me of Kate and Petruchio, and we all know how that turns out (sorry Verie). Actually, on paper you two would be perfect for one another. Similar backgrounds. I’ve seen her, and she’s gorgeous. I haven’t seen you, but I am keeping my eyes open
Aldonza, that is a very interesting and astute observation about men’s preferences for age and age difference.
P.S. Just to clarify the context of my own views, I have only been with one true alpha male. He was my first boyfriend, and he was a very good guy. He was also extremely high status. I felt attracted to his status and dominance, though not so much to him. However, I was a very good girlfriend to him for three years. It was not a dalliance by any means. I just found him too reserved emotionally – it felt like we were different species.
.
My next boyfriend was an emo songwriter, much more my cup of tea. And every guy after that was pretty beta too. If I did ride a cock carousel, it was the beta variety. (How many cocks on a carousel?)
.
My husband is pretty beta, though very smart and successful. No way I would have dated him in college, probably, he was too geeky. However, by the time I met him in grad school, he was in his mid-20s and had come into his own. He got a lot of attention from female MBA students and undergrads as well. So, by virtue of his talent and good looks, (though not his forceful personality), he had acquired considerable social status by the time I met him. This speaks to what Athol was talking about wrt the economy and what skills are prized in contemporary American society.
[...] should be surprised that Obsidian got this level of disagreement. He’s obsessed with the idea that white guys in this part of the internet have an “irrati…. What he’s talking about does not exist. How many white guys around here even give that [...]