How Does a Woman Solve a Riddle With No Answer?

November 18, 2011

I’m currently reading Tony and Susan by Austin Wright. Originally published in 1993 to critical acclaim but low sales, the novel has been rereleased, this time with better results. Wright was a professor at the University of Cincinnatti, who died 1n 2003. He was 70 when he wrote this novel.

The following quote struck me. It encapsulates, I think, the real dilemma of the contemporary woman.

Sex is Natural was Susan’s pre-feminist feminism: It turned her against big breasts, pornographic beer and cigarettes, the double standard for men and women, the equation of romance with lust, and Jake’s notion that there was a difference between good (dark) and bad (blonde) women. (What Jake’s belief meant for Susan was that while romantic love required her to yield to him, her doing so constituted a flaw in her character which relieved him of obligation.)

It’s the puzzle with no solution, the Catch 22 of the contemporary American SMP. It infects every aspect of male-female relations.

  • Ramble

    Sex is Natural was Susan’s pre-feminist feminism: It turned her against big breasts, pornographic beer and cigarettes, the double standard for men and women, the equation of romance with lust, and Jake’s notion that there was a difference between good (dark) and bad (blonde) women. (What Jake’s belief meant for Susan was that while romantic love required her to yield to him, her doing so constituted a flaw in her character which relieved him of obligation.)

    Can someone dumb this down for me?

  • Sassy6519

    I am guessing that this is the riddle.

    What Jake’s belief meant for Susan was that while romantic love required her to yield to him, her doing so constituted a flaw in her character which relieved him of obligation.

     

    If so, then I don’t understand how yielding to a man in a relationship or romantic love could be seen as a character flaw.  I think it depends on how much power she concedes vs how much power he also concedes.

    I guess the flaw of her yielding to him allowed him the power to make all the decisions in their lives. It also relieved him of any possible consequences from bad decisions he made because he could always rest the blame with her by reminding her that she let him make the decisions.

  • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

    @Sassy

    Yes, that is the conundrum.

    I am not addressing the ongoing relationship dominance dynamic though, only the sexual one.

    The contemporary male believes that if a woman is attracted to him (a far lower standard than feeling romantic love) she will yield.

    Her yielding proves her weakness, her lack of selectivity, and disqualifies her as the potential mother of his children. All at a very subconscious level, you understand.

    Once she has disqualified herself, he is relieved of the burden of obligation. He owes her nothing, certainly not respect.

    This is the underbelly of today’s SMP. We go round and round, but this is the essence of the dilemma. It reflects the incompatibility, the null set, of feminism and biological imperative.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Ramble,

    It’s Susan’s role as the woman to succumb to Jake’s “love”. But when she does that, she’s seen as a slut and that fact absolves Jake of any obligation to her.

    That’s the riddle Sue is posing.

  • J.

    I haven’t left a comment before but this is something I think a lot about so thought I would! Been reading for months.

    @Ramble & Sassy –

    The riddle is this, I believe –

    “What Jake’s belief meant for Susan was that while romantic love required her to yield to him, her doing so constituted a flaw in her character which relieved him of obligation.”

    If she has feelings for him, she wants to have sex with him. Maybe she does this within a timeframe that can be seen as “putting out too quickly.” Maybe he thinks about this and starts seeing her as a slut. He doesn’t need to respect a slut or stick around and no one would blame him for pumping and dumping her. And yet if she wants to wait to have sex, she’s seen as a girl on a power trip who wants the guy to chase her, who thinks she’s too good for him. Quite a riddle I would say.

    Also – if a man approaches a woman with confidence and negs her, qualifies her, etc, and it works and she becomes interested – maybe she’s already lost a little bit. He already sees her as a girl who will fall for game. A girl whose rationalization hamster is getting a workout, a girl who loves assholes, and how can he respect a girl who loves assholes?

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @J
      Welcome, thanks for leaving a comment. It certainly is clear you’ve been reading here for a while! You took it even a bit further, which is valid. When a man swallows the red pill, how can a woman earn his total love, devotion and respect? He has already “settled,” she is not what he really hoped for. She is now someone inexplicably drawn to Dark Triad traits, requiring the male to embrace sociopathy in his own personality. Not all males take it that far, but they may – the road map is certainly there.

      It strikes me that this is the Catch 22 for men.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sue,

    My guess is that previous generations dealt with it by the woman leading the man on, yielding to him incrementally, until she knew “his intentions were honorable.” Since this was SOP, men hung around with one interesting woman. Why bother starting over with another and having to wait even longer? they probably figured.

    It can’t work like that today, because:

    a. Price discrimination. The moment a girl lets it go easily, there’s a suspicion on the part of the man that he must not rate as high if he waits.

    b. Lack of SOP. Even if a woman does stick to her guns and take it slow with every man, the man has options and doesn’t have to wait. And since relatively quick sex is the norm (or at least the perceived norm), men are getting suspicious of price discrimination even in cases in which women really are “chaste.”

    And then, of course, some men just don’t want to wait if they don’t have to.

  • Ramble

    It’s Susan’s role as the woman to succumb to Jake’s “love”. But when she does that, she’s seen as a slut and that fact absolves Jake of any obligation to her.

    That’s the riddle Sue is posing.

    Thank You.

    With that said, I thought the role for Susan was to be a virtuous young lady?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    The solution of this riddle is:

    1) The woman yields by showing affection, honesty, maturity and emotional investment in him, but waits for sex until he shows the same.

    2) The man is discerning and judges her carefully, and since she shows good character and emotional investment, he waits and soon becomes emotionally invested.

    3) Both parties, after mutual agreement to solve the riddle, end the waiting period.

    This can only work between men and women of quality, but a marriage between two such individuals has a strong likelihood of lasting.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Hope
      That is a solution, but it is rejected in today’s SMP, by men and women alike. It requires two people of the same mindset, unaffected by the culture. You have found that, but it evades most people.

      • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

        ON BEHALF OF MIKE C., WHOSE MEAN EMPLOYER FILTERS OUT HUS:

        Also – if a man approaches a woman with confidence and negs her, qualifies her, etc,

        and it works and she becomes interested – maybe she’s already lost a little bit. He

        already sees her as a girl who will fall for game. A girl whose rationalization hamster is

        getting a workout, a girl who loves assholes, and how can he respect a girl who loves

        assholes?*

        by J. on Nov 18, 2011 at 11:11 am

        @J,

        Interesting that you point this out as a riddle as well. I think there is something there, but not as much as you might think. Your comment here *IMMEDIATELY* made me think of a comment I recently read that I’ll link to below.

        Firstly, and most importantly, having some Game does not equal being an asshole. A girl isn’t going to lose respect from a guy (at least not me) for responding to a strong masculine frame, but could and probably will for responding to “asshole” game because it speaks directly to what she values and her judgement.

        Here is the comment I was referring to, and I’m pretty sure this is a woman commenting:

        http://theprivateman.wordpress.com/2011/10/13/woman-up/#comment-2988

        If they women up, they wouldn’t pursue sex with assholes. That happens when women have too much masculine energy. ***I’ve never met a truly feminine woman who responded to asshole game. Alpha confidence and strength yes, asshole no.***As for the 80%, display enough masculinity, and your odds increase. Though, it would be interesting to see how pua would change if women did embrace femininity.

        Quick personal story that I think highlights the above perfectly. I’ve mentioned my player cad co-worker here previously who has had sex with 200+ women. In my view, he is the archetype/quintessential example of running “asshole game”. And that works great on party girls and Hooters skanks (also younger girls 19-22 seem more susceptible to asshole game than 25-30 year old women). Over a year ago, he and I along with some other co-workers had a training seminar we attended, and my GF came up to visit, and we all met up for dinner and hung out for a few hours. The rest of the group went out partying after that and my GF and I walked back to my hotel room for some cardio activity :) On the way back, she told me she had really disliked him and “couldn’t see what girls would see in a guy like that”. I actually sort of weakly defended him (as a guy’s guy), but I was really glad to see she perceived him that way. In contrast, he has been playing a co-worker like a fiddle, and the texts I’ve seen, stories I know, etc. Actually, she seems like a somewhat nice girl and not too bad on the eyes, but do I have any respect for her at all knowing what I know, knowing what she has fallen for. Heck no.

        So I think the comment above is spot on in that a quality feminine woman with good character isn’t going to fall for asshole game and thus isn’t at risk for losing respect. Now if a girl does respond to assholes, she definitely loses respect in my mind. If I were single again, and looking for a serious LTR, one of my screening filters would definitely be what types of guys she has previously been involved with.

  • Sassy6519

    1) The woman yields by showing affection, honesty, maturity and emotional investment in him, but waits for sex until he shows the same.

    2) The man is discerning and judges her carefully, and since she shows good character and emotional investment, he waits and soon becomes emotionally invested.

    3) Both parties, after mutual agreement to solve the riddle, end the waiting period.

     

    This seems like how things should be, in all honesty. If only, in today’s culture, it were easy to implement.

  • Passer_By

    “Her yielding proves her weakness, her lack of selectivity, and disqualifies her as the potential mother of his children. All at a very subconscious level, you understand. Once she has disqualified herself, he is relieved of the burden of obligation. He owes her nothing, certainly not respect.”

    A lot of men don’t feel that way.  In fact, part of feels what  you are describing is mostly a composite man based on the feelings of one set of guys who take an early no as a sign of disinterest and a (generally) separate set of guys who disqualify her for a relationship based on early sex.  There may be some overlap (guys who feel both ways), but I don’t think they are anywhere close to a majority.  But maybe I don’t have a handle on the mind of the today’s 20 year old guy.  Part of me thinks the first group is probably more betas and the second more alphaish (combined with some betaish guys who have weird conflicting feelings about women).  These alphas are just looking for  reason not to commit, so they will grasp at whatever they can. The answer is to pick the beta guy, sex him up good (assuming you want sex), and make him feel like your sex god.  Riddle solved.

    Also, part of the problem is this concept of “obligation”, as in sex obligates him to her.  Shouldn’t he be in the relationship because he wants to?   If you frame it as an “obligation”, it’s a loser proposal in today’s SMP,  because he hasn’t really taken anything from her when they have sex (assuming she’s not a virgin), and guys also understand that women feel zero obligation to them once they no longer have a use for them.

  • Passer_By

    Also, that parenthetical about Jake seems like a bit of a non sequitur based on what came before.  What do blonde and dark women have anything to do with this?  And who actually feels this way about blonde women?  Is Jake a middle eastern guy or something?  Was this woman blonde and therefore doomed to be deemed bad? Might explain a lot.

    Though I realize that you are focusing on the later part as indicative of the SMP generally, even if the author didn’t mean it that way.

     

  • Escoffier

    Very simple solution to this!  But of course it’s the one everyone will say “That has no chance of working in this day and age” even though it is the ONLY think that has any chance.

  • Wayfinder

    The answer is to pick the beta guy, sex him up good (assuming you want sex), and make him feel like your sex god.  Riddle solved.

    But women don’t want betas/less appealing guys. (And if she says she does, she is disbelieved by many around here.)

    I think the last bit is key, here. A girl can go a long way if she sincerely and authentically can make a guy feel like he is her hero.

    Also, part of the problem is this concept of “obligation”, as in sex obligates him to her.  Shouldn’t he be in the relationship because he wants to?   If you frame it as an “obligation”, it’s a loser proposal in today’s SMP,  because he hasn’t really taken anything from her when they have sex (assuming she’s not a virgin), and guys also understand that women feel zero obligation to them once they no longer have a use for them.

    I think this is central to the problem; the old social contract has been torn up, so neither side has a real obligation. Creating huge problems when both sides act like the obligation exists.

    Consider the beta guy: he’s nice to girls because he’s told that’s what they want. In a previous environment they’d be expected to either reciprocate or turn him down, not punish him for trying or string him along with a lets-just-be-friends. The stakes have been raised so that every trivial interaction can rapidly lead to sex; the old defense mechanisms and social niceities don’t work. Not that the girls are (or were) obligated to have sex just because he was nice (there were huge barriers to try and prevent that) but that they actually have to treat him like a human being.

    For the girls; sleeping with a guy and expecting him to stay with you is a reversion to a very old practice: get pregnant and he has to marry you, right? They probably aren’t consciously thinking of it in those terms, but that’s what their behavior amounts to. And so they’re shocked when he doesn’t live up to his obligations, even though those obligations only existed in her subconscious.

    In his case, he wasn’t told that his old obligation (being nice and providing) doesn’t apply, and that the things that the old obligations assumed (confidence and leadership) are what he really needs.

    In her case, she’s not following her old obligation (virginity), and she lacks the social structure that would have picked up the pieces when she ignored them (a father with a shotgun).

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @Susan, the same strategy has worked on a number of guys, from 15 to 30 year olds. It’s not rare to find guys who respond to affection, honesty, and emotional investment. The SMP has not changed guys’ fundamental attraction to a cute girl paying him attention, talking to him a lot, and telling him, “you’re really cool. I like you a lot.” No sex needed. I guarantee it.

  • Ramble

    It requires two people of the same mindset, unaffected by the culture.

    Or, by choosing to step to the beat of a different culture. Our culture was not always this way, nor will it remain this way.

    Just as some people are choosing to live closer to the land, or drinking raw milk, or whatever, people can also choose to live more modest lives.

    And it is important to understand those that choose to watch the Kardashians, or listen to Brittany, or major in Communications versus those that choose to listen to Otis Redding, or read The Federalist Papers, or major in Mathematics.

    Our culture is a set of our choices.

    Hollywood and Madison Avenue try like hell to get us to watch all sorts of Movies and TV Shows that just bomb. And, often, they overlook shows and books that sell like wildfire. Some powerful people attempt to influence us, but, ultimately, we make choices.

    Susan is free to act like a modest girl and there will very likely be at least a few guys out there that wil respect that.

    The productive path is not always the easiest to travel.

  • http://gravatar.com/weezul Chris

    @Hope

    It’s not rare to find guys who respond to affection, honesty, and emotional investment.

    This is true.  It’s a good point to make, and very helpful to keep in mind.

    However it’s clashing against three very large SMP issues:

    1. Kicking betas to the curb vs. giving in to cads is the public perception.
    2. Women no longer have incentives to be honest or invest emotionally (or more importantly, no consequences when they don’t).
    3. Men who desire relationships are treated poorly in the SMP, and either stop indicating this or retreat.

    Got to finish up some work; I’ll check back later.  Interesting discussion already.

  • Orig. Anon.

    Susan:

    “When a man swallows the red pill, how can a woman earn his total love, devotion and respect? He has already “settled,” she is not what he really hoped for. She is now someone inexplicably drawn to Dark Triad traits, requiring the male to embrace sociopathy in his own personality. Not all males take it that far, but they may – the road map is certainly there.

    It strikes me that this is the Catch 22 for men.”

    This seems true enough. Of course he settled. How can you not notice your wife isn’t as hot as she used to be? She’s not. How can you not notice that she treats you better now that she’s worse? When you treat her worse? That you get more ioi’s now than before? This experience is perfectly normal for 30s men. Every day one, or both, are settling. Grow up. The truth; deal with it. No living woman could ever be as good as I dreamed you to be in my ignorance.

    Game has explained the inexplainable. Having a game framework actually makes most negatives in my spouse something to be worked around not get butthurt over.

    Women earn respect by being respectable and respectful, e.g., don’t take me for granted like you own me. Love by being loving. Commitment by by being committed. God knows society is doing everything it can to discourage women from being any of those things to any one man so I respect those things, more.

    “Total love and devotion” is a happy delusion anyway. I see no commitment in the average 20’s woman, in an LTR or not. I see them using their high SMV to their own advantage, to get what they imagine they want at the time. Selfishness. No commitment. Therefore, what respect is required from men in return? I’m supposed to clap because you’re looking out for number 1?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Orig. Anon.

      Of course he settled. How can you not notice your wife isn’t as hot as she used to be? She’s not. How can you not notice that she treats you better now that she’s worse? When you treat her worse? That you get more ioi’s now than before? This experience is perfectly normal for 30s men. Every day one, or both, are settling. Grow up.

      That wasn’t what I meant by settling. I’m talking about men who swallow whole such a compromised view of female nature that real admiration, love and respect is hardly possible. I have personally witnessed men speaking this way, while at the same time claiming to be happily married. I don’t understand it.

      In terms of “settling” as a matter of course as we grow older, I disagree. This post can say it better than I can:

      http://solomonreborn.wordpress.com/2011/03/25/proverb-28-women-can-age-beautifully/

      I have never felt that I was settling in my marriage. It seems to me that you are viewing the dynamic through a lens of scarcity rather than abundance.

      I see no commitment in the average 20′s woman, in an LTR or not. I see them using their high SMV to their own advantage, to get what they imagine they want at the time.

      I’m confused. I had the impression you were married and years out from the singles scene. Are you in your 20s and seeking a life partner? What is your sample size?

      As you know, and like to say over at Dalrock’s, I do not buy the argument that LTRs are a form of promiscuity. I believe they are an inevitable byproduct of a society with an unprecedented number of years between puberty and marriage. The alternative, which is marriage at a young age, has very few takers, male or female. LTRs are not an act in selfishness, but the opposite. They are, or can be, loving relationships which may indeed lead to marriage, but do not necessarily do so. They are an important and valuable way to assess compatibility and develop relationship skills.

  • Ted D

    I agree that there certainly are a subset of women that “asshole game” does not work on.  I knew only one in my younger years, and looking back she was a very feminine young women.  In fact, I would say she was probably many years ahead of her peers in maturity, so it falls in line with the comment made that younger women tend to fall for it more often.

    But here is the thing.  This comment actually supports the statement made by many women that they often switch strategy once they realize what they are doing won’t get them what they want.  I know men here often cry foul or “price discrimination”, but this seems to make it clear that in many cases it is not discrimination, but a shift in strategy that causes this.

    As a man looking at a particular women as a possible LTR candidate, there is a difference between a promiscuous woman, and a formerly promiscuous woman that has had a change of heart.  Given the choice between the two, the obvious choice is the latter.  And, in addition, I can even see how this women might actually appreciate a “good man” more because they clearly learned what the assholes are really like.

    The problem for the guy is, how can you tell the difference?

    @ Hope – once again I think you are spot on.  I cannot understand why young women feel that sex is the only way to keep a guy interested.  Sex will certainly keep a guy around, for as long as you are the best sex he can get.  But, if you want a guy to be interested in YOU, you’ll have to really show them your good side.  I don’t mean by faking, I mean by being genuinely interested in him.  Any man looking for a LTR would see the kind of attention you described as a VERY good indication that he is on the right track.  Sure, a player may not care, and probably won’t stick around if you don’t put out quickly, but that isn’t the goal here, is it?

  • DerHahn

    @Susan #3

    The contemporary male believes that if a woman is attracted to him (a far lower standard than feeling romantic love) she will yield.

    I don’t see this as quite so black and white.  I’d say you’re right if you’re talking about the sterotypical player or embittered beta turned cad, but less so if you’re talking about a guy who taking some of the better parts of Game to increase his attractiveness.  It also supposes that the woman is thowing out standard party-girl shit tests (flaking on dates, cock teasing, etc), not being realistic and honest about her qualifications (Hope #8).

    I like what Chris said at #19.  His first point, to me, is what really drives your condundrum.  Reverse the perception that women give in easily to cads, and it pretty much disappears.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Reverse the perception that women give in easily to cads, and it pretty much disappears.

      Well, it’s the truth, so I see no way of reversing the perception to embrace an untruth.

      By the way, the passage in the book is written by a middle aged woman of three children, looking back on her 20s, when she left her boyfriend Jake to pursue a graduate degree at Northwestern. Doing some simple math, I’d say that puts the time at around the late 70s. This is when the Sexual Revolution was really getting underway, so it’s unlikely that female hypergamy was unleashed as it is today. That’s when I graduated from college, and certainly we were not hypergamous to this degree – we still practiced assortive mating for the most part.

  • Escoffier

    This is just a restatement of the madonna/whore complex.  Men want to marry a madonna but they want to screw whores.  However, it’s more complicated than that.  Men who want to marry actually want to marry a madonna AND a whore.  Sorry to be sleazy, so maybe we should at this point substitute “whore” for “sexually energetic woman.”  The thing is, they want her to be energetic ONLY FOR HIM.  Showing such energy is indeed a sign that “she might be a slut” and “Can I really trust her?”  Plus it makes him wonder, “Wow, who else has she done THAT with?” and that is not a pleasant thought.  But he also doesn’t want a lifetime of no sex or boring sex.

    It may sound very unfair to you, girls, but there are ways in which you are unfair to us.  And in any case, the way around this problem is obvious.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Escoffier

      The thing is, they want her to be energetic ONLY FOR HIM. Showing such energy is indeed a sign that “she might be a slut” and “Can I really trust her?” Plus it makes him wonder, “Wow, who else has she done THAT with?” and that is not a pleasant thought. But he also doesn’t want a lifetime of no sex or boring sex.

      Exactly, and that’s the conundrum. Of course women are unfair to men. We don’t appreciate good character as much as we do social dominance.

      And in any case, the way around this problem is obvious.

      I’m with Jesus on this one. If very few agree with you, and virtually none under the age of 30 (2%?) then what exactly is the route – the way – to a solution?

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Escoffier

    Very simple solution to this!  But of course it’s the one everyone will say “That has no chance of working in this day and age” even though it is the ONLY think that has any chance.

    Okay, I’ll bite . . . No Sex Before Marriage?

  • Escoffier

    At the very least, no sex until you know you have found the person you are going to marry and he agrees.  Yeah, you might still get burned if he walks, but marriages end in divorce too.  So, waiting until marriage is safer, but since I am so often told that I am unrealistic, how about just waiting until the engagement?

    You’re all so damned miserable now (with good reason), both the players and celibates, that I don’t see how this could possibly hurt.

  • Escoffier

    In other words, the puzzle HAS a solution, which was one-lifetime-partner monagamy.  We did away with that but we did not do away with the underlying psychological issue identified by the novelist.  And we can’t because it is natural.  It’s also at least partially rational.

    I’ve written this elsewhere but it’s worth repeating: one of THE major goals of feminism and the SR has been to smash and shame the male desire for a virgin or at least very low count GF/wife.  They have blasted away at it for fifty years and haven’t been able to kill it.  All they have done is made it too embarassing to acknowledge and speak aloud.  But men still feel it, even today.

    Someone posted a link to a forum somewhere in which a guy starts off (in 2005, IIRC) saying “My GF has had a lot of partners and I can’t get over it.”  Here we are in 2011 and the thread is still going.  The responses were a mix of feminists, sluts and “sensetive males” saying “Get over it, dude, grow up, join the 21st century, other guys saying “Me too and I thought I was the only one!!” and players saying “Why tie yourself down in this market anyway?  Just play around and then you won’t care how many lays your partner-for-the-evening has had.”

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I think the startling thing for a lot of beta men is that asshole game has any effect at all on women.

    The asshole’s female counterpart, the bitch, holds no sway with me at least. Bitchiness doesn’t trigger any of my attraction cues. And in fact, I’d say it has the opposite effect. Bitchiness overrides any other attraction cues that a woman may have otherwise set off.

    I’ve known girls who’ve actually identified guys as assholes that they couldn’t stand and yet ended up messing around with those guys. Of course, not all women are like this.

    But I’d wager that there are many women who have never given in to asshole game who still find that the assholes trigger their attraction cues, and I think it’s understandable that this rubs some men the wrong way. They’re bitter about that.

    At the root of that bitterness is probably the fact that those men don’t feel attractive themselves. Ultimately, I think that’s what it was for me.

    Ideally, there’ll be a special woman for whom asshole game is absolute kryptonite in the same way that bitchiness is kryptonite for me, because it’s fun for a couple to bond with each other over private jokes at other people’s expense. But in the meantime, I don’t let it bother me anymore.

    I think ultimately the way out of the catch 22 for men is to work on themselves so that they can get to the point at which coming up with an answer is no longer that important.

  • DerHahn

    Interesting discussion of a speed dating study at heartiste

    http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2011/11/17/study-proves-the-validity-of-game/

    Key finding for this discussion (quoting from the study)

    Conversely, men had a preference for relating with women who pursued more a long-term mating tactics but did not tend to have sex with them…

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    I can only speak from personal experience, but the short amount of time I spent on the planet being a “player” helped me to gain some much needed context about women, sex, and relationships.

    I think it can benefit a man to learn to play around a bit. And I believe that it can be particularly helpful in helping men come to terms with the women in this SMP who have slept around a bit.

  • Escoffier

    JM, you may be right.  However, there is no comparable benefit for women.  Hence, the double standard.  Which means we may have to accept its return.

  • Passer_By

    Also, it would be a mistake to assume all situations are the same.  For example, if you just met somebody for the first time at a party, and then start going out, it might seem more reasonable to wait (and might be more likely to seem to odd to the guy if you “yield”, as susan says, although it would depend on a lot of factors).   On the other hand, if you’ve already known each other for a while, and there is sexual tension that finally leads to somebody making a move, the whole “wait a while to prove you aren’t a slut” approach seems totally misguided.

    All of this, of course, assumes you aren’t taking the Escoffier approach of “no sex until engagement”, which I think is unavailable to women who already have a sexual history.  As a practical matter, it may also be unavailable to most women without a sexual history due to their own psychology – i.e., in this SMV, if a guy waits that long for you, even if he is doing so out of respect for your religious views and/or your virginity, he may have committed such a DLV that you no longer find him attractive by that time, even if you don’t realize why.  Honestly, that’s pretty much what happened to me with my first wife. YMMV.

  • Ramble

    I have personally witnessed men speaking this way, while at the same time claiming to be happily married. I don’t understand it.

    Compartmentalization

  • Wudang

    “If they women up, they wouldn’t pursue sex with assholes. That happens when women have too much masculine energy. ***I’ve never met a truly feminine woman who responded to asshole game. Alpha confidence and strength yes, asshole no.***As for the 80%, display enough masculinity, and your odds increase. Though, it would be interesting to see how pua would change if women did embrace femininity.”

     

    I found that very interesting. The PUA Franco, who actually coined the term betaiszation, says that he has noticed a trend in recent years were women respond less to traditional strong masculine game and he needs to add in something bad or destructive to make them hook. More specifically he says that in the wealthiest countries in Europe with the most modern values this has been the case for quite some time but has gotten worse. In less prosperous and less culturally modern European countries there has been a marked change in the last ten years in the direction a need for asshole game.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sue,

    We don’t appreciate good character as much as we do social dominance.

    I think this is at the crux of everything. Men want character and women want dominance. Women who choose dominance over character display a lack of character in themselves.

  • Anonymous

    “That wasn’t what I meant by settling. I’m talking about men who swallow whole such a compromised view of female nature that real admiration, love and respect is hardly possible. I have personally witnessed men speaking this way, while at the same time claiming to be happily married. I don’t understand it.”

    If you believe your spouse is the best possible women, no matter women’s nature, for you, what’s the problem? It’s just more settling. The Salomon II link is great with nothing for me to argue with. Doesn’t change the fact that my wife was far hotter at 20. I was there. And thanks for calling me a beta (scarcity). I am beta since I’m not cheating or looking to replace my wife even though my smv is up and her’s down. She has loved me, I love her. I commited. I just didn’t lose my memory or my eyesight.

    I envy you not believing you settled. I can’t imagine a life without billions of dollars and a revolving set of 20 year olds that doesn’t involve settling. Bill Gates settled in my opinion. Monogamy is settling. Even if I married the most beautiful woman in the world as she won’t stay that way.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Orig. Anon.

      And thanks for calling me a beta (scarcity).

      That’s a stretch. Please don’t put words in my mouth and twist my meaning. I don’t agree in any case. Let’s call it optimism vs. pessimism. Why would one’s outlook be entirely based on one’s SMV? In the case of low SMV, that would be a death sentence. Game is one of the most optimistic approaches to life that I’ve seen. It required abandoning the scarcity mentality to find a constructive solution. Mystery spend 6-7 years codifying the principles of Game IIRC, observing, taking notes, going to nightspots by himself. I admire that.

      I am beta since I’m not cheating or looking to replace my wife even though my smv is up and her’s down.

      That’s the most twisted and depressing definition of beta male I’ve ever seen.

      I can’t imagine a life without billions of dollars and a revolving set of 20 year olds that doesn’t involve settling.

      It must be very painful to live with so much unfulfilled want.

  • Orig. Anon.

    Anonymous at 2:41 was me.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    ….AND, men who compromise their dominance for the sake of character turn women off a bit.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      ….AND, men who compromise their dominance for the sake of character turn women off a bit.

      But so do men who compromise their character for the sake of dominance. Not strangers, but the women who know them, who see them make pussy the Holy Grail. A man’s ability to get it is attractive, but his decision to dedicate his life to it is repugnant.

  • Ramble

    If very few agree with you, and virtually none under the age of 30 (2%?) then what exactly is the route – the way – to a solution?

    Susan, this is not that hard.

    • Stop telling girls that there are a lot of fish in the sea (this is a general message, not necessarily aimed at you). Most of them have been sullied by the Ho Juice of you average co-ed.
    • Start telling them that the more sluts there are in any given society, the harder it will be for modest girls to get married.
    • Start shaming sluts.

    If your average Lacrosse player and wanna-be rockstar do not have access to easy blowjobs, then they will need to change their act to get any any.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Stop telling girls that there are a lot of fish in the sea (this is a general message, not necessarily aimed at you). Most of them have been sullied by the Ho Juice of you average co-ed.
      Start telling them that the more sluts there are in any given society, the harder it will be for modest girls to get married.
      Start shaming sluts.
      If your average Lacrosse player and wanna-be rockstar do not have access to easy blowjobs, then they will need to change their act to get any any.

      That’s the cartel approach, and it won’t work. The few women who remain virgins until marriage already have a very difficult time in this SMP. That’s even been clear on the threads here. We’ve heard reports of men recoiling at this news, because it spells celibacy for him, and sexual cluelessness for her.

      Every woman who wants to marry needs a strategy to minimize her risks, not eliminate them. The more rigid one’s policy, the smaller the pool of potential mates. As we’ve seen here in the last few weeks of posts I’ve been writing, there are many men of good character who will not wait. There is a real and quantifiable (roughly) opportunity cost to avoiding them. The woman who is the lone holdout in NYC doesn’t change male expectations, she just stays single.

  • Sassy6519

    If you believe your spouse is the best possible women, no matter women’s nature, for you, what’s the problem? It’s just more settling. The Salomon II link is great with nothing for me to argue with. Doesn’t change the fact that my wife was far hotter at 20. I was there. And thanks for calling me a beta (scarcity). I am beta since I’m not cheating or looking to replace my wife even though my smv is up and her’s down. She has loved me, I love her. I commited. I just didn’t lose my memory or my eyesight.

    I envy you not believing you settled. I can’t imagine a life without billions of dollars and a revolving set of 20 year olds that doesn’t involve settling. Bill Gates settled in my opinion. Monogamy is settling. Even if I married the most beautiful woman in the world as she won’t stay that way.

    I don’t see what point you are trying to make. What do you think people should do in a quest to never settle?

    Just because a person changes or becomes more/less attractive down the road does not mean that their partner settled. Unless you know a way to stop time, stop the aging process, and keep people in their 20s indefinitely, there is no way we all don’t settle by your definition, which seems a bit off.

    If a person finds a partner that they love, how is that settling?

     

  • Escoffier

    “I’m with Jesus on this one. If very few agree with you, and virtually none under the age of 30 (2%?) then what exactly is the route – the way – to a solution?”

    Well, I’m trying to think logically. What are people getting out of the current system?  Early sex.  And only the alphas-by-nature and betas-who-learn game, and who dedicate their lives to sex, seem to be enjoying that.  Most everyone else is either miserable or disappointed.  Except 1) those who marry early and/or to their sole partner or 2) those who just get lucky and find a real spouse despite the carousel.

    Early sex with someone you don’t marry offers nothing but transitory pleasure; the concommitant transitory emotional connection can be had without the sex.  Unless you believe with JM that sleeping around helps men understand women.  Fine, maybe.  What’s indipsutable is that early sex with people you don’t marry hurts men far less than it hurts women.  (Can’t say it doesn’t hurt them at all, given those studies showing how boys are more effected by break-ups.)  All this early sex for women not only lowers their SMV, it raises their likelihood of divorce, the transitory pleasure doesn’t last as long as it does for men (who will have fond memories of a casual lay far longer than the average woman will), and it often is very quickly admixed with feelings of shame and loathing, all the things I’ve read about here.

    So, it does not seem to be doing anyone any good.  Yet the constant refrain is “it’s unrealistic to expect anyone to stop.” OK, I agree, it is unrealistic.  It’s unrealistic to expect the drunk to put down the bottle.  Yet that is still what he needs to do.  Maybe if we focused less on the supposed impossiblity of the solution and more on its desirabilty, it would start to seem less unrealistic.

    And how unrealistic is it given that we have all these female virgins in their ’20s here?  Who even knew they existed?  I’ve encountered more here than I would have expected to find in the Temple of the Vestals.

    Maybe it’s unrealistic for the broader culture in the near or mid-term, but it’s not unrealistic for a sub-cutlure, and it’s certainly not unrealistic for anyone’s own individual life, which is the only thing we can directly control.  Choose to do it and you’ve made it realistic for yourself.

  • Escoffier

    This: “It’s just more settling” does not seem to follow from this: “If you believe your spouse is the best possible women, no matter women’s nature, for you, what’s the problem?”

    Seems like the exact opposite of settling.

  • Escoffier

    Sorry, should have said “lowers their MMV,” which is more apt (not that what I wrote is not true).

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

     

     

    Kinda makes me think of that old Woody Allen quote (though I think it appears originally in Freud’s “Wit and Its Relation to the Unconscious” ):

     

    “I would never belong to any club that would have someone like me as a member.”

     

     

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Byron

    I would have attributed that quote to Groucho Marx! How interesting to read that it originated with Freud.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Escoffier

    At the very least, no sex until you know you have found the person you are going to marry and he agrees.  Yeah, you might still get burned if he walks, but marriages end in divorce too.  So, waiting until marriage is safer, but since I am so often told that I am unrealistic, how about just waiting until the engagement?

    I actually already agree with you, but I get that this is going to be a hard sell to those who don’t.

  • Orig. Anon.

    Susan:
    “I’m confused. I had the impression you were married and years out from the singles scene. Are you in your 20s and seeking a life partner? What is your sample size?”

    I am years out of the singles scene. Happily married 2 kids. Knew I settled before I popped the question. Happily settled, not blind or delusional.

    I have two unmarried younger sisters to talk to personally, older one barely into her 30’s. She’s a professional who had a long term serious relationship with an asshole. Still hasn’t gotten over the one who got away in her early 20’s. She still doesn’t get “why” on either of those things as far as I can tell no matter how I’ve tried to help. Lived her 20s like “she needed a man like a fish needed a bicycle” never would admit that, of course.

    My sample includes an early 30s friend of my female relative, our families hung together, who dumped her husband after an “emotional affair” and married the other dude. She already had two kids. Maybe she is a poor example of the dating scene having gone directly from one marriage to the next without hitting the ground. Exactly confirming my view of women being able to be totally selfish in a relationship. Still great friends with the relative, just grafted in the new dude like nothing happened. Switched churches ‘cuz they were judgmental over the whole thing.

    As I’ve said before, reading the comments here (I lurked off and on for months before I ever posted) confirmed the depressing reality of the truth of game. Your commenters were the nail in the coffin of my beta delusions, not Roissy. Look at marriage stats. Look at LTR’s and the dumped or never-ran betas in college (when I was there or now). Women use or squander their power, sometimes doing good, sometimes totally selfishly, in the smp and legally. They always think it in their own interest. So do men. Morality only comes in so far as necessary to erase the doubts far too often.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Women use or squander their power, sometimes doing good, sometimes totally selfishly, in the smp and legally. They always think it in their own interest. So do men.

      That’s the most balanced thing I’ve heard you say.

  • Escoffier

    yeah, quote is originally groucho

  • Ted D

    @ Orig. Anon. – If you are new to the “red pill”, don’t let all the negativity in the manosphere get you down.  I still struggle with it sometimes, and on those days you can tell by the negative slant on my posts here.

    The thing is, lots of guys are pissed off.  I was REALLY pissed off because I found all of this after my separation and divorce.  It truly sucks to realize that I was as much at fault as my ex-wife, even though I truly believed I had done everything correctly and in my power to save my marriage. I was actually working very hard at destroying it.  To make matters worse, my ex-wife even acknowledged at one point that she did not understand why we were drifting apart despite the fact that we were following “conventional wisdom” down to marriage counselling with no positive results.

    As far as settling goes, I think I get where you are coming from.  Yes, to marry and commit to “better or worse as long as you live”, you are settling on that one person. (provided you follow the “rules” and don’t have an open marriage or swing.  I for one cannot grasp how that would work.)

    But, the difference is: you are settling because you WANT to be with that person.  Around these parts, the word “settling” is more often used for a women that marries a beta because she can’t get the alphas she really wants to commit.  That kind of settling results in unhappy marriages and more often than not divorces.

    So lets say this:  Settling for exactly what you want is good.  Settling for less than you truly want because you are afraid you can’t get exactly what you want is bad for everyone.

  • Passer_By

    A few other good Groucho quotes for a manosphere (or, in this case, manosphere-adjacent) site:

    A man’s only as old as the woman he feels.
    A woman is an occasional pleasure but a cigar is always a smoke.
    Alimony is like buying hay for a dead horse.
    I was married by a judge. I should have asked for a jury.
    Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him.
    Marriage is a wonderful institution, but who wants to live in an institution?

  • Passer_By

    @Ted

    “So lets say this:  Settling for exactly what you want is good.  Settling for less than you truly want because you are afraid you can’t get exactly what you want is bad for everyone.”

    What if what you truly want is patently unrealistic and unattainable?

  • Orig. Anon.

    Sassy,
    “If a person finds a partner that they love, how is that settling?”

    That is to my mind inherently a womenly view of the world. You can be satisfied with one you view as the best. Nothing wrong with that.

    I could never be totally satisfied with any, one, woman. Or really anything or anyone. Call it drive if you want to be complimentary. Call it envy if you don’t. Truth either way. I’m perfectly happy with the settling I’ve done. But one, alone, is major settling. Judging by the divorce stats, even many women agree.

    Do you think of settling as meaning you don’t love your man? I can love my wife and still feel I settled.

  • Passer_By

    @orig anon

    “I envy you not believing you settled. I can’t imagine a life without billions of dollars and a revolving set of 20 year olds that doesn’t involve settling”

    Don’t forget the great drugs and booze, the golf game like Tiger in his prime and all the platinum records.  Oh, wait, that’s not enough. Now your kids have to achieve comparably as well. :)

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sue,

    But so do men who compromise their character for the sake of dominance. Not strangers, but the women who know them, who see them make pussy the Holy Grail. A man’s ability to get it is attractive, but his decision to dedicate his life to it is repugnant.

    Sure, but making pussy the Holy Grail is not dominance. If pussy is the Grail, then pussy is the in the position of dominance.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      If pussy is the Grail, then pussy is the in the position of dominance.

      Oh, I like that. That’s about Inner Game.

  • http://gravatar.com/weezul Chris

    Just to toss something in here, since some people are advocating no sex before marriage again…

    What about men who don’t want to get married?  Presuming they wanted a relationship – but not marriage – and they’re already up against the beta wall, doesn’t that just leave them high and dry?

    Assuming everyone wants marriage is one more SMP behavior gone by the wayside.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan:

    But so do men who compromise their character for the sake of dominance. Not strangers, but the women who know them, who see them make pussy the Holy Grail. A man’s ability to get it is attractive, but his decision to dedicate his life to it is repugnant.

    That’s because dedicating your life to external validation in the extreme (i.e. bowing down to pussy as a life advocation above almost all else) isn’t dominant. That’s a compromise of both your character and your dominance.

  • BroHamlet

    Looks like Jesus Mahoney beat me to it.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Orig. Anon

    I think the two attitudes are at a crossroads, so to speak.

    To love someone is to want and accept them for who they are, accolades and faults included. It seems counterintuitive to me to say that you love someone, yet that you settled for them. By settling, it refers to not being fully invested in what you currently have because you covet something else that you have not obtained. You are never fully satisfied with what you have because it isn’t what you truly want. In short, how can anyone love someone and also claim that they are not what they truly want?

    It doesn’t add up to me. If I love, want, and marry someone, I don’t see how I could also say I merely settled for them in the same breathe. I chose who I thought was best for me, regardless of the other options out there in the world.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Chris

    What about men who don’t want to get married? Presuming they wanted a relationship – but not marriage – and they’re already up against the beta wall, doesn’t that just leave them high and dry?

    I may be misreading you, since it seems that you’re saying they’re entitled to a share of the action. I don’t think anyone is entitled to anything–be it sex or marriage.

    But to answer your question, If “no sex before marriage” becomes the rule rather than the exception (and for the record, I don’t think that will ever happen again), then these men will have to play by that rule. We currently have different rules that a lot of other people are unhappy with, but we’re all making do the best we can. I don’t mean to come across as unsympathetic, but a man who is “high and dry” because he doesn’t want to get married is in virtually the same boat as a woman who is similarly “high and dry” because she wants to have sex only after marriage. No one is getting a break here.

  • Ramble

    That’s the cartel approach, and it won’t work. The few women who remain virgins until marriage already have a very difficult time in this SMP. That’s even been clear on the threads here. We’ve heard reports of men recoiling at this news, because it spells celibacy for him, and sexual cluelessness for her.

    Who said that they had to be virgins?

    The more rigid one’s policy, the smaller the pool of potential mates.

    The higher her standards, the fewer options she will have…that is correct.

    As we’ve seen here in the last few weeks of posts I’ve been writing, there are many men of good character who will not wait, because there are so many sluts girls out there willing to give them what they want. There is a real and quantifiable (roughly) opportunity cost to avoiding them. The woman who is the lone holdout in NYC doesn’t change male expectations, she just stays single.

    Susan, then we are in complete agreement. If you care about the modest girls then you must start shaming the sluts.

     

  • Escoffier

    “sexual cluelessness for her”

    I don’t want to go into detail but let me just say that this meme is not rational (or true).  I gather that some men are worried about it, and it would make sense for him to be if he knows he’s never going to see her again after the first night, then, yeah, experience is a plus.  However, for a woman with little or no experience, what needs to be learned can be leared effectively and quickly with one man alone.  The advantage of experience, while relavant in the short term market, disappears in the long term market and is in fact a disadvantage.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      However, for a woman with little or no experience, what needs to be learned can be leared effectively and quickly with one man alone.

      I agree completely. I really am addressing male preference here. Obviously, they prefer sexual experience in short-term rather than long-term mating.

  • tmunson

    @ EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU

    I was feeling pretty confident about commenting on this site, then read today’s rather cryptic (to me anyway)essay and the 62 (62!-and counting) comments that followed and realized….I don’t really have that much of a clue. I knew being married for 30 years, my last date having  occurred in the middle of the Carter administration, and my complete lack of computer skills and nomenclature (beta guys? Who’s gviing out pills?) would be a drawback. But I’m playing standard chess, y’all are playing 3 dimensional. It’s the rhetorical equivalent of the scence in “Raiders of the Lost Ark”: I pull out a broad sword, you shoot me in the head with a .44 Magnum.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @tmunson
      I have a new Glossary page which might help :-)

  • Dogsquat

    Escoffier said:
    “You’re all so damned miserable now (with good reason), both the players and celibates, that I don’t see how this could possibly hurt.”

    and

    “only the alphas-by-nature and betas-who-learn game, and who dedicate their lives to sex, seem to be enjoying that.  Most everyone else is either miserable or disappointed.  Except 1) those who marry early and/or to their sole partner or 2) those who just get lucky and find a real spouse despite the carousel.”

    I’m not miserable at all. Quite the opposite, as a matter of fact.   I’m in a perfect storm  – in a good way.  I’m not super-attractive, especially when one considers my career choices.  I’m okay looking, but there are a lot of guys who are better looking.  I’m smart, but not a genius.  I have no idea if I am alpha or beta, charlie or delta – nor do I care.

    However, the way I conduct myself allows me to be very attractive to a rather large subset of women.  From these, I get to take my pick.  It’s awesome for me, and I’m punching way above my weight.

    I firmly believe that the average guy can do as I have done – if he’s willing to drop the male version of the Cinderella myth, do the work, cultivate some patience, and develop some discipline.

    Escoffier, I am the cockroach crawling across the nuclear wasteland of the SMV, and I love it here.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @Escoffier, times are different. The progression is no longer date -> kiss -> heavy petting -> engagement -> marriage -> sex. Now it goes kiss -> sex -> cohabitation -> engagement -> marriage (if all goes well).

    You say that the virgin girls have high value for marriage. Let’s see a show of hands. How many good men are willing to do the old progression and wait for sex after marriage? Let’s hear from the single guys who want to sign up for no sex until marriage, with the 20-something HUS virgin girls.

    Virgin girls are very precious and rare, and thus they play their hand like an Ace of Spades. But those girls are looking for husbands with a “high bid,” while girls like me are “weak bidders” holding maybe a Jack of Hearts. I can afford to take a chance on a man. I wasn’t a virgin, although I never had casual sex. I had a few LTRs. I was a cute 20-something with a sweet demeanor and demonstrated loyalty to this guy with great husband potential.

    I was going all in with my weaker hand. I was willing to have lots of sex, live with him, cook and clean, and take care of little things for him. After a while he sees that I’m easy to live with, I’m fiscally responsible, I don’t fight with him, I’m pretty good wife material, and I make life better for him in general in this “trial marriage.” So he asks me to marry him for real.

    Don’t forget that marriages take two people, a man and a woman. These days, even marriage-minded men want to test the girl out, see if she’s for real, and weed her out if she’s not good marriage material. The virgin strategy is seen as too big of a risk in most cases, and so it is no longer widely practiced.

    The biggest risk for the woman is that she won’t pass the wife test, but that is why I think we should educate young women on how to be wife-worthy rather than tell them “being a virgin will solve everything.” Men aren’t stupid, and they are no longer operating under the old assumption that virginity automatically qualifies a girl for a lifetime commitment.

    @Chris, most men who don’t want to get married can still get plenty of sex (see: Clooney, George). There’s also Vegas, for the guys who are omegas. Most true betas do get married, although many regret it. What I want is for women to behave better so that men actually want to get married and are happy to be married. My husband seems pretty happy. :P

  • Passer_By

    @Chris

    “What about men who don’t want to get married?  Presuming they wanted a relationship – but not marriage – and they’re already up against the beta wall, doesn’t that just leave them high and dry?”

     

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Dogsquat

    I’m not miserable at all. Quite the opposite, as a matter of fact.   I’m in a perfect storm  – in a good way.  I’m not super-attractive, especially when one considers my career choices.  I’m okay looking, but there are a lot of guys who are better looking.  I’m smart, but not a genius.  I have no idea if I am alpha or beta, charlie or delta – nor do I care.

    With some rewriting and polishing, so that they’d scan better, these could be song lyrics. :)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      With some rewriting and polishing, so that they’d scan better, these could be song lyrics. :)


      Guitar Game!

  • Orig. Anon.

    Susan:

    You claim I feel pain in “want” when I call myself happily married. You just see it as stating “truth” not insulting which is funny. Truth has never been a defense before when it comes to whether or not it’s insulting or putting worlds in another’s mouth .

    Beta makes society possible. Commitment is beta. You only want it IF you already find me attractive. So is loyalty. So is honor. Beta is required to be a good person. Beta is just assumed by society, which acts like it takes no effort at all.

    Alphas cheat. Break rules. Take what they want. Of course staying with an older wife is beta! That’s why it is a go-to accusation against men that we will trade in for a younger model. The man many women actually want, would.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      You claim I feel pain in “want” when I call myself happily married.

      Just my take on it – it doesn’t scan. I’m with Sassy on this.

      As for your alpha/beta definitions, I’m not on board there at all. Badger just wrote a fabulous post on this. I’ve made a section for these definitions on the Glossary page, linking to Badger, Athol Kay and Vox Day.

      It’s just way too simplistic to say beta = good and alpha = bad. If that were true I wouldn’t support any beta guys acquiring alpha traits. Both are necessary for a healthy relationship.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sue,

    PUAs are every bit as smitten by the Holy Grail of pussy as the whitest white knight.

    However, there are plenty of dominant men of low character who do not put women on a pedestal and I think it’s the suspicion of a lot of nice beta men that even the women who choose healthy relationships with decent guys are still struck by sudden shocks to their attraction switches in the face of such guys. They may be going home every night to their arugula salads, but they’re still yearning for White Castle when they pass it on the way.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      They may be going home every night to their arugula salads, but they’re still yearning for White Castle when they pass it on the way.

      Dude, I hope you’re a writer.

  • http://gravatar.com/weezul Chris

    Hmmm.  Point out that the SMP fracture has created a “third path” some men are taking.  Honestly curious about thoughts.

    Result: People belittling the notion.

    Consider that this is devolving into men’s perspective vs. women’s perspective.

    Shrug and go do something else.

  • Escoffier

    Dog, in other words, you are either one of the happy alphas or one of the betas-who-learned-game.  So you are doing fine, for now.  What happens when you want to get married?  Who will you have to choose from?  Former carousel riders?  Or you can try to pluck a younger one.  Or you can go for one of the (rare) virgins or near-virgins.  In other words, either someone you likely won’t want or someone who will be hard to find and land.

    Or you can keep doing what you are doing, which is fun.  For now.  But for how long?  A 40 y/o alpha player is plausible in that he can still be getting 32 y/os.  But at that point you still have likely 40 more years to live. What then?  At some point the pussy is not that interested any more (or interesting to you, at least not the ones you can get).

  • Escoffier

    Hope, IIRC, you are the one who said you wished you were a virgin at marriage.

    I don’t see why it’s impossible to do what I’m suggesting.  yes, it’s certainly true that a lot of guys are going to run away, especially the ones with more options. But here’s the thing: you have to admit that you got lucky. For this SMP/MMP, from what I read, a lot of girls try what you did and get burned.  A lot MORE are actually the ones to end it and leave (hypergamy).  That you didn’t speaks well of you (though for all we know you ditched the earlier guys for basically that reason; not insulting, just saying we don’t know).

    I’m talking about long term change, which begins with lots of individual change.  I repeat, the only people happy now are the guys who have game or learn game–and that is, quite literally, a young man’s game.  Even Roissy says that the SMV of the most badass alpha begins to decline at 35.

    None of the girls seem happy, except the ones like you who luck out.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Chris

    Consider that this is devolving into men’s perspective vs. women’s perspective.

    Isn’t that the way this whole discussion was framed from the beginning? One theme of HUS is that men want one thing and women want another thing (and that this is ingrained in both culture and biology), but there can be a way for individual men and women to reach a compromise.

    What exactly was the response you were hoping for?

  • Dogsquat

    Passer By said:

    “What if what you truly want is patently unrealistic and unattainable?”

    In my opinion, this is part of growing up – realizing that things are not the rose-colored fantasies of youth.

    Look at work, for example.  I’ve had some cool jobs, but they aren’t what I thought they would be when I was a kid.  Being an infantryman is more about walking a lot and being uncomfortable than shooting machineguns and blowing stuff up 24/7.  Being a paramedic is more about holding a dying old lady’s hand so she’s not so scared than running into a burning building and rescuing babies and kittens.

    Look at the kids horrified at the drudgery of cubicle jobs these days – the endless, grueling work in climate controlled comfort, clean surroundings, and with a flush toilet mere steps away.  They’ve actually got to put a dollar into a machine to get an ice-cold Coke whenever they want….IT’S NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THIS WAYYYYYYYY….

    Being so fixed on “the way it should be” is akin to blinding yourself.  People who live in this mode aren’t open to unexpected pleasures and satisfactions that pop up randomly – because those things don’t fit their preconceptions.  That’s a shame, because those unexpected pleasures balance out (quite nicely, in my experience) the sting from not living the fantasy.

    This dichotomy is what fuels much of the MGTOW movement, I think.  There are a bunch of dudes out there who reject women because real life women are not as good as their fantasy.  It’s a big, angry letdown for many men.

    So what?  Be pissed off.  I’ll be over here enjoying myself.  More women for me!

    It’s a waste of energy to throw a temper tantrum.  Life is what it is, and you’ve got to take your joys where you can find them.  You can only control so much.

    The funny, counter-intuitive thing (to some dudes, anyway) is that if you are smart and disciplined (control what you can), you can land pretty goddamned close to a “fantasy” girl.  You may find you enjoy the real one more, because she’s more three-dimensional than any fantasy woman you’ve ever thought of.

    Of course, if your fantasy is that you’ll be attractive to her living in mom’s basement and sporting a severe case of perioral cheetosis  – well, I can’t help you.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @Chris, I don’t mean to offend you. There are lots of men and women who never marry and only have “relationships.” I have known a number of people who don’t believe in marriage or even cohabitation. I know a woman in her 40s who never married, whose boyfriend wanted to live together, and she refused. She has 11 siblings and tons of relatives, so she doesn’t feel the urge to have children either.

    Being left “high and dry” has nothing to do with marriage being the default option. There are tons of non-mainstream ideas out there that have widespread support, and well, it’s almost 2012. Not wanting to get married is really not that radical anymore. If a man really doesn’t want to get married, why does he care that there are some virgins who wait for marriage before sex? He can find other like-minded women to have non-marriage sexual relationships.

  • Anonymous

    Susan,

    If you read my post as alpha traits v beta traits i don’t see where citing Athol and Badger contradicts?

    Male alpha traits are overwhelmingly selfish. Self preservation is inherently selfish and i’m all for continuing my existence.

    Commitment and loyalty (even to wives) are beta traits in Athol-land. I don’t get where the disagreement with my post comes in. Saying I’ll stay with my wife is a DLV. Not alpha. Saying I want to get married is a DLV. Not alpha.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Orig, Anon.

      Saying I’ll stay with my wife is a DLV. Not alpha. Saying I want to get married is a DLV. Not alpha.

      I was out last night and throughout the evening kept thinking back on your comment. I’m marinating it for a post.

  • Olive

    @Escoffier,

    Here’s my thought on the no sex before engagement bit. And BTW this is coming from someone who used to buy into No Sex Before Marriage and waited a year to have sex in her current relationship (though I don’t think I could wait a year if my BF and I broke up and I started dating someone else. I don’t think that someone else would want to wait a year, knowing that I’m not a virgin).

    Sex is happening outside of marriage because marriage is happening later. Biologically, people are ready to have sex when they hit puberty around 14, and logistically speaking, it’s easier to have sex around 18, when the average middle class American leaves his/her vigilant, helicopter parents and goes to college.

    It’s a fact we need to accept: marriage will not be happening earlier. The vast majority of people are not going to college married, but most people in the demographic at which HUS is aimed have gone or will go to college. That’s just the way it is in a society that encourages higher education. My grandmother didn’t get married at 19 because she was madly in love and committed to my grandfather… she wanted to get the hell off the farm, where she was obligated to obey her parents. In the past, people gained independence and left their parents by marrying. Now they do it by going to college.

    Meanwhile, sex won’t be happening later. People are not going to ignore their biological urges, as “moral” as that might be. Take my high school friends. All of them rode the No Sex Before Marriage train in early high school, then all of them had sex before 20, many of them before we graduated high school. I was the last one to lose my virginity, and I wasn’t even a religious zealot like they were.

    I honestly agree with you; I really like the idea of waiting to have sex until you think you want to marry someone, and that’s actually what I did. But other people won’t. I don’t think sex outside of marriage is a product of “amoral society.” It’s a product of the changed expectations for young adults.

  • Dogsquat

    Escoffier said:

    Dog, in other words, you are either one of the happy alphas or one of the betas-who-learned-game.

    I don’t think it’s that simple. I’ve been “alpha” since I was the captain of the football team at age 17 (no shit) but I was hit-or-miss with women until age 27 or so. Can a guy be a squad leader in combat, in charge of life-or-death for 12 other guys, but still be beta because he doesn’t know what women really like?

    I’m still thinking about this and don’t have an opinion, really, other than: I think it’s more complicated than we sometimes make it out to be. I’ll be haunting Master Badger’s post on the matter for awhile, methinks.

    “Or you can keep doing what you are doing, which is fun. For now. ”

    I’m on the record here as not enjoying promiscuity, either in myself or in my partners. I’ve never had a one night stand, and I lose a lot of attraction for women who have a past I deem promiscuous. I’ve dumped otherwise very nice women for getting too confessional with me about that stuff.

    I’m like most guys, I think, except perhaps I focus more on quality vs quantity.

    That’s what I mean about this being a perfect storm for guys like me. There is a dearth of relationship-minded, attractive men out there. Do the work to make yourself attractive. Figure out the best ways to communicate that you’re looking for a relationship with a badass girl (there are a lot of ways to screw this up, BTW), and odds are you’ll end up very happy. There is no way I could be this selective 40 years ago – no way in hell.

  • Athlone McGinnis

    @ Susan:

    “The contemporary male believes that if a woman is attracted to him (a far lower standard than feeling romantic love) she will yield.

    Her yielding proves her weakness, her lack of selectivity, and disqualifies her as the potential mother of his children. All at a very subconscious level, you understand.

    Once she has disqualified herself, he is relieved of the burden of obligation. He owes her nothing, certainly not respect.”

    She solves this riddle by demonstrating complete loyalty to him, and making clear that he is the only one special enough to deserve said loyalty.

    I didn’t bother reading this whole thread so I do not know if this was already said, but men have a latent maddonna/whore complex. They want a woman who will be madonna to everyone else and a whore only for him. Like Ludacris said, “A lady in the streets and a freak in the bed”.

    If she is too easy to get (read: yields quickly at the sign of an attractive guy), then men will start to suspect that she will not be only his whore, but also other guy’s as well. He values her sexual loyalty, and can thus disqualify her for this. Why commit when there is a risk that any other attractive guy can get into her pants just as easily as you can? No guy wants a girl that every other guy gets to be with (or has already been with) as well.

    This is what a girl has to go up against when trying to secure any guy, and she must attack this perception in her man directly. Her goal must be to go above and beyond and demonstrate clearly to him that she will offer him sexual loyalty, and that her act of yielding to him is not a sign that just any other guy she is attracted to can get into her pants. She must show him that he is in fact, not just another “hot guy” to her, and clearly demonstrate that her actions in yielding to him are a result of her particular attraction to him, and him alone.

    She has to dispel the fear that any other attractive dude could get the same results, and show that he will get more from her than any other guy could because he is himself, not just “another hot guy”. Her goal must be to build certainty in his mind that the results he is getting from her yielding to him cannot be easily repeated by any given good looking bro coming along down the line.

    How exactly is a girl to do this? That’s the challenge.

    Just my two cents.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Athlone McGinnis
      I am so happy to see you! Thanks so much for stopping by. I know you’re doing well, writing and getting published all over the manosphere, and I’m very happy for you.

      How exactly is a girl to do this? That’s the challenge.

      I don’t disagree with your take on the matter, but I think the real problem we’ve got here is the timeline. How long will a man give a woman to demonstrate this loyalty and interest before she yields to sex? How can a woman feel sure that the man is indeed special enough when she’s known him for a short period of time, perhaps just seven hours?

  • Orig. Anon.

    Dammit, 5:18 was me. Really, if people think it is an alpha trait to get or stay married I’ll need to go back through a bunch of steps for the class.

  • Orig. Anon.

    5:01, that is. Is this where I claim I haven’t been drinking?

  • Johnny Milfquest

    Susan wrote:

    “The contemporary male believes that if a woman is attracted to him (a far lower standard than feeling romantic love) she will yield.

    Her yielding proves her weakness, her lack of selectivity, and disqualifies her as the potential mother of his children. All at a very subconscious level, you understand.

    Once she has disqualified herself, he is relieved of the burden of obligation. He owes her nothing, certainly not respect.

    This is the underbelly of today’s SMP. We go round and round, but this is the essence of the dilemma. It reflects the incompatibility, the null set, of feminism and biological imperative.”

    Susan, I’m sure you are well aware that the social contract that used to exist in the west has already been destroyed.

    The old social order put tremendous pressure on both sexes.

    1. Women were expected to marry humble good providers they felt no romantic or sexual attraction to and stay with them for life.

    2. Most men had to marry if they didn’t want to be celibate or rely on prostitutes.

    Those pressures no longer exist. Rejoice!

    Fear not. The population of western countries will continue to grow.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2007/dec/23/communities.population

     

  • Ramble

    I don’t think it’s that simple. I’ve been “alpha” since I was the captain of the football team at age 17 (no shit) but I was hit-or-miss with women until age 27 or so. Can a guy be a squad leader in combat, in charge of life-or-death for 12 other guys, but still be beta because he doesn’t know what women really like?

    Of course, which is why the Alpha/Beta stuff, while helpful, is far too simplistic for the kinds of discussions we have here.

  • Ramble

    Fear not. The population of western countries will continue to grow.

    Yes, but as they grow, they may not remain all that “western”.

  • Olive

    @Escoffier,

    Actually, my parents are a really good example of what I just described in #88. My dad is 12 years older than my mom. He got married very late, at 32, and he often says his father used to tell him to “just get it over with already.” I remember my mom once said “he was no virgin” when he married her. BTW not gonna ask how many partners he had, not something I want to know. :-P

    Meanwhile, if you did the math correctly, you’re right: my mom got married at 20. She started dating my dad when she was 18. She had one partner. (Annnd not gonna ask when they started doing it, also something I don’t need to know).

    The point is that you’re right: marriage age has a lot to do with lifetime partner count. But it just doesn’t make sense for most people to get married in college, while they’re in the process of being crushed by debt. After all, weddings, engagement rings, honeymoons… all the “stuff” that’s assumed to come with marriage these days.. well, it costs money. Not easy to come by when you’re paying off student loans.

  • Rum

    It just occurred to me that Hope is a really smart woman.

  • Emily

    Escoffier,

    I like your model!  :D

    I do agree that it’s a difficult one to pull off though.

    I think the trick for girls who want to go that route is that they need to target the guys who are actively seeking a future wife.  Most college-aged guys don’t have marriage in mind at this point though, so in most cases it’s likely that this strategy will require a frustrating waiting period.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Emily

      Most college-aged guys don’t have marriage in mind at this point though, so in most cases it’s likely that this strategy will require a frustrating waiting period.

      That waiting period is about 10 years for a college freshman.

  • Johnny Milfquest

    Ramble wrote:

    “Yes, but as they grow, they may not remain all that “western”.”

    That’s true!

    Most Muslim girls don’t obey the dictates of the vag tingle. They obey their parents before they get married and their husbands after they get married.

  • Johnny Milfquest

    As far as the “changing face” of western society is concerned (colour and creed) its likely to be a slow process.

    Whatever the prevailing social norms are, I’m sure I’ll adapt to them.

    If they introduce Sharia Law over here I might consider getting married.

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/3718799/London-suburb-put-under-Sharia-law.html

  • http://bbsezmore.wordpress.com Bb

    “I could never be totally satisfied with any, one, woman. Or really anything or anyone.”

    @Orig.Anon, if you could, would you be in a non-monogamous relationship? I think there are some people who prefer such arrangements.

    “After all, weddings, engagement rings, honeymoons… all the “stuff” that’s assumed to come with marriage these days.. well, it costs money. Not easy to come by when you’re paying off student loans.”

    @Olive, and yet none of that matters at all to the real nitty-gritty reality of marriage. I wish more people realized that—could save quite a bit of money and hassle!

  • lovelost

    @Chris #19

    3. Men who desire relationships are treated poorly in the SMP, and either stop indicating this or retreat.

    Even if they haven’t been mistreated, the information gained on HUS and CH, make it highly discouraging to put yourself out there for relationship. i have joined MGTOW.

  • Olive

    @Bb,

    LOL fully agree! I actually don’t want an engagement ring… I don’t really wear jewelry and let’s be honest, I’d probably lose it in a bathroom somewhere. I’m terrible.

    Also I’d be totally fine getting married outside, with 20 people in attendance. In 1981 my parents had their wedding reception in the basement of my great-grandparents’ farm house (they also got married outside and skipped the whole engagement thing). That sounds like the bomb. I mean, I’m a total romantic, but I really don’t care about all this material stuff.

    Most of my friends are obsessed though. They talk about having 20 people in their wedding parties or whatever. Geez.

  • lovelost

    @Jesus Mahoney

    I think ultimately the way out of the catch 22 for men is to work on themselves so that they can get to the point at which coming up with an answer is no longer that important.

    Sounds like the David DeAngelo 77 laws of dating. Work on Yourself, rather than trying to change women.

     

  • lovelost

    @Susan Walsh #34

    Of course women are unfair to men. We don’t appreciate good character as much as we do social dominance.

    Thanks for being considerate of Men’s issues.

  • lovelost

    @ Orig. Anon #49

    Morality only comes in so far as necessary to erase the doubts far too often.

    and

    Roissy Maxims
    Moralism and megalomania is never a good combination.
    So very true, i kind of think both are saying the same thing with different words.
  • Anacaona

    Taking a break from Twilight heaven…

    The riddle is probably as old as the civilization and we all know how was solved. Heavy penalties for sex before marriage, early marriage and make divorce hard to obtain.

    Like Susan said no one in this time and day will be willing to accept this compromises in order to have the security of sex and relationship with one person and being able to dedicate our spare time and money into more noble pursuits (like a time machine or flying cars).

    Like we had stated above HUS is more about exposing or the high risks of the modern SMP and the few benefits, but in the end we are all children of our culture. In the same vein the beta that spent all college with scarcity of female companionship is three time as bitter about it because he saw how other men could get away with murder and get regularly laid, the same phenomenon is found on the good girl that sees her bitchy and slutty friends getting all the male attention while they spent friday nights at home. The big difference is that is easy  for a good girl to just stop being good and start getting the attention she craves, while for the beta man is almost impossible because he doesn’t have any idea what to do and he if doesn’t do it perfectly the penalties are huge, nuclear rejections and sexual harrassment accusations.

    We need a big wave of change, but there is a lot to change, the hook up culture, the price discrimination, the PC language, the misandry culture….I really think that Susan is right about working in a one on one basis. But I think we should start to make some more steps to grow it a bit more, like the forum for this site but also some sort of compromise like telling other people about the manosphere and spreading the idea that there is an explanation for so much misery in their love lives and is not mainstream or PC approved. Slowly waking up people, I know the guys are trying to do simmilar things for their friends. I do wonder how many of us (and I include myself) had pointed out to this sites full of information about the genders to others? Anyone?

    As for Susan’s dilemma is what she wants more Jake? Love? Sex?

    If she wants Jake she needs to take some time to find out what kind of man he is, some men can overcome the slut behaviour with other qualities the woman bears so putting out early can be the hook, while she has other things to keep him. If he is the wants that wants a nice girl and she doesn’t have any dark past (or is so far behind her that it doesn’t affect her) taking her time while demonstrating real interest with heavy make up sesions, paying for some dinners or/and cooking some food for him can work wonders as long as she doesn’t overplay it and consummates before he starts to lose interest for not getting a sexual reward.

    If she wants love then she needs to take time for both getting to know him, but also getting to know herself finding out exactly what she wants and what she can offer evaluate Jake to find out if he is the kind of man she can truly love and commit to him if he is and/or letting him go if he is not. In this case sex delation should be till she is convinced of this being love and risking losing him if he is not in the same page about this, but considering the risk worth having it and being willing to move on fast to a new man till she finds someone that matches her expectations and who she matches his expectations.

    If she want’s sex all she has to do is ask.

    So the short answer is that there is not an easy answer, every woman needs to make an evaluation, choose an strategy and stick to it for better or worse. Can Susan commit to anything? That is a good question to start, YMMV.

  • tmunson

    @Chris

    She looks like Barbara Eden by way of Elizabeth Montgomery with a Body by Fisher. As a baby boomer, I have something to say to the next  generation (x2):

    I am sorry-we fucked up. Growing up I hear how tough my dad had it, and I know he heard from his dad how hard he had had it, and probably so on. So when I was around 18 or so, looking at the history, I figured if I ever had a kid I’d lecture him about how the tough times etc. I went through, how easy he had it, blah blah yada yada my fave “Seinfeld”). No way. When I was ready to go to college, you had to be an idiot not to be able to find $, most of it Nat’l Defense Student Loans that everyone scammed (assuming mom & dad couldn’t’ pay-mine did for a while). When my parents got pissed and refused, i put myself through school; ok not Harvard, but I did it on minimum wage, ate ok, had laughs AND got out of undergrad debt free. You could do that because my fees and costs per semester were less than one book costs now, and I know adjusted for inflation it was still a real deal. Reading here, I know this is supposed to be about guys/gals etc,, but underneath it is this terrible economic fix we created. You’re so casual and accepting of it you don’t even comment; one of you said getting married in college “while you’re being crushed by debt”-it was said in passing. No one talked like that in my day-NO ONE! I ahve no opportunity to address en masse this group you belong to-accept this apologia from an old man. And you’re taking this very well-Occupy Wall Street? hell, you should grab all these rental storage buildings, convert them to concentration camps, and throw us all in (many already have concertina wire). You’re to young to remember “Wild in the Streets” but rent it it has a nice interlude where the kids do this. Don’t give us LSD though-I think X would keep us calmer plus we might get laid. Spare me though-I’m on your side. Use me for the Potemkin village you set up to keep the geezers (I know-that means me) calm. Deal?

  • Orig. Anon.

    BB:
    “Orig.Anon, if you could, would you be in a non-monogamous relationship? I think there are some people who prefer such arrangements.”

    Who can really know? You don’t get to change the rules after the fact. A “coerced” change would be as big a douche move as divorce.

    I’m still attracted to the same type of woman today as 20 years ago. There is nothing magical about variety but it will always be attractive. “I can imagine a lot.” “Grass is always greener…” is a cliche for a reason.

    It’s also that goals reached are no longer enough. You need new things to do. New heights to reach. You can’t just turn off your drive for more, you have to control it. Recognize it. And I do. I expect everyone to. I’m cruel like that.

    My latent wish for more is there, ignored. I expect my spouse’s wish for better to be there, ignored.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Orig Anon

      I’m still attracted to the same type of woman today as 20 years ago. There is nothing magical about variety but it will always be attractive. “I can imagine a lot.” “Grass is always greener…” is a cliche for a reason.

      Me too. The hottest guy ever is my husband at 28. Now he is twice that, on paper. But when I look at him I see the 28 year old man. I really do. And in my own head, in the way I think of myself, I too am 28. Of course, reality intrudes every day – I understand that the many smiles and friendly overtures I get from males happen only because I am of a certain age, and therefore no threat – there is no possibility of misunderstanding. But at home? We’re two 28 year olds when he hit the sack.

  • SayWhaat

    Hope,

    The SMP has not changed guys’ fundamental attraction to a cute girl paying him attention, talking to him a lot, and telling him, “you’re really cool. I like you a lot.” No sex needed. I guarantee it.

    You are right. It does not change fundamental attraction to the girl.

    Deciding on a relationship with said girl, however…

  • http://bbsezmore.wordpress.com Bb

    “It’s also that goals reached are no longer enough. You need new things to do. New heights to reach. You can’t just turn off your drive for more, you have to control it. Recognize it. And I do. I expect everyone to. I’m cruel like that.”

     

    @Orig. Anon. That’s interesting, because once I got married and got that “settled”, I could take all the energy I had invested in finding a man and funnel it to other areas with other goals. It gave me a foundation from which I worked to other heights. And it helped to have a partner with me. Hopefully, for him too. At the point I am in my life, the thought of choice and variety stresses me out. I froze in the line at the cafeteria yesterday, trying to figure out what to eat. Too many choices!

     

    @Anacaona, I wondered if you had stood in line all week! Have you seen your movie yet?

     

    @Olive, I had a radical proposal for weddings, here.

  • Olive

    @tmunson,

    LOL don’t worry, I don’t blame the average baby boomer for what my generation has to deal with. We’re just a nation switching from a manufacturing economy to a service economy; couple that shift with an economic recession and it’s a painful transition.

    I read somewhere that the workforce will hire more new grads from the class of 2012 than the class of 2011. That sounds to me like 2011 was the low point for new grads; it’s also the year I graduated from college. Grad school was a no-brainer… where the hell else was I going to go? It’s not like my Bachelor’s alone would get me a well-paying job, not in this economy.

    One of my best friends, who warned me against grad school debt, is the whole package. Phi Beta Kappa (a prestigious honors society), 4.0, double major, tons of work experience during college. She’s now doing a part-time unpaid internship and working for minimum wage at Staples. She has a host family arrangement (so not even her own apartment), and her parents and grandparents help with money for food and other stuff. She spent the entire summer applying for jobs, and this is what she got.

    …Trying to avoid all those New York Times articles that periodically hint that my generation will be permanently screwed from this recession…

  • Olive

    @Bb,

    Fantastic post! I actually don’t find it too radical, but then again, big weddings aren’t exactly a thing in my family. If my parents had a small wedding, my grandparents had a smaller wedding: they eloped.

  • Anacaona

    @Bb

    Heh no just four hours and yes I already saw it! :)

    @Olive

    I seriously would like to get a PHD but it seems that every thinking person tells me that is a waste of money. Many of them think the educational bubble will pop anytime now. I’m waiting to see what happens.

  • lovelost

    @DogSquat #85

    This dichotomy is what fuels much of the MGTOW movement, I think.  There are a bunch of dudes out there who reject women because real life women are not as good as their fantasy.  It’s a big, angry letdown for many men.

    So what?  Be pissed off.  I’ll be over here enjoying myself.  More women for me!

    It’s a waste of energy to throw a temper tantrum.  Life is what it is, and you’ve got to take your joys where you can find them.  You can only control so much.

     

    I agree with you on this, On a previous post on HUS, I had vented out a lot, and realise that I am using up my energy to change others, rather than focusing on my passion and developing and promoting myself to higher levels of achievement in life. if the woman comes along while pursuing these goals, i will utilize the knowledge and wisdom gained from HUS and CH, badger in order to do the filtering,  till then I am MGTOW.

  • Olive

    @Ana,

    I’ve heard that too, and have considered a PhD as well (though not right now. I don’t want to prolong real life by staying in school til I’m 30, though there’s a woman in some of my classes who has done just that. Like seriously, she just turned 30 and has never had a real job).

    There are certain educational decisions I’d never make. Like going to law school. It’s outrageously expensive, and so many people are going to law school these days, then graduating with monumental debt and struggling to find jobs. That’s probably a good example of the educational bubble already popping. Getting just an MSW is a pretty bad idea too; social workers get paid very little, but grad school can be costly. Luckily I’m doing a dual degree program with a partial scholarship, and I’m going to a state school/paying in-state tuition. My dad says I’ll have no trouble finding a job… I hope he’s right!

  • lovelost

    @Anacaona #114

    I seriously would like to get a PHD but it seems that every thinking person tells me that is a waste of money. Many of them think the educational bubble will pop anytime now. I’m waiting to see what happens.

    That depends upon subject, if STEM you can get out of graduate school with debt free.

  • Anacaona

    @lovelost

    That is one of the issues I like everything I enjoy studying people and I have many theories I would like to proof, but then I love physics and I always wanted to be an astrophysic, then I’m a writer already getting a PHD in writing seems the way to go, but then maybe not many writers had have success with no so much education, so yeah I have no idea….

  • http://gravatar.com/weezul Chris

    @Bellita

    Its very simple.  (I know this is coming late, but I really did go do something else.  Novels don’t write themselves.)

    The discussion’s trying to solve a riddle – how to correct the slut-for-having-sex, tease-for-holding-out dichotomy.  What’s the intended goal?  From what I can tell, it’s to produce more marriages.  More happy women, (presumably) more happy men.

    But what if the man’s not made happy by marriage?  What if he’s perfectly happy with an LTR?  What if the whole prospect of marriage (not necessarily the woman with whom he seeks a relationship) is the problem?

    All the solved riddles in the world won’t make a difference if you fix only one part of the equation.

    What happens then?  Do we force men into marriages at gunpoint?  That dog won’t hunt.  And it’d take an apocalypse to wipe out the knowledge of hypergamy.

    The key part of my previous statement was the “VS.”  As in, adversarial.  Separate interest *opposed* to separate interest.  I could have misread, but this discussion’s overtones suggested that was taking shape.  It seems to have wandered a bit since then, so I might be off.

    The discussions here at HUS focus on social relationship dynamics for women.  That’s great; it produces some extremely valid points and lots of thoughtful content on the topic.  Thing is, social dynamics are not the only factor in modern society.  Economics and law are two more.

    In fact, they’re more important historically than the social dynamics!  What were marriages in centuries past?  Ways of allying groups, securing profitable lands.  Survival.  They didn’t become “about love” until much more recently.  And for most of that time, the assortative mating process kept a degree of equity.

    Some betas learn Game to get laid.  Some will use it to get into a relationship.  Nothing says they won’t be content to stop there.

    I threw this question out in case it might provide some extra-social hooks we could use in assembling a compromise.  I’m not suggesting that we shift the focus here.  That’s not my purview, and I’d be insulting Susan if I tried.  If Susan desires me to stick to discussing social dynamics only, then I will do so.

    @Hope – No worries.  I appreciate the concern, but I’m not offended.  A bit disheartened at the discussion’s tenor, maybe.  Still think you had very good advice earlier.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Chris
      You are free to wander in any direction you like here, and if others join in, that’s fine with me. Obviously, abiding by the Rules of Engagement.

      But what if the man’s not made happy by marriage? What if he’s perfectly happy with an LTR? What if the whole prospect of marriage (not necessarily the woman with whom he seeks a relationship) is the problem?

      This is a very interesting point. It’s been stated that men prefer harems, that LTRs are strictly a compromise that are in effect caving to female ultimatums. However, it seems reasonable and logical to me that most men doing a simple C/B analysis will conclude that a harem is either out of reach, not worth the effort, or not in keeping with his character (because promiscuity is not in keeping with his nature). Therefore, an LTR might be the perfect solution for a man who does not wish to marry.

  • Escoffier

    I got a PhD.  It wasn’t a waste of money because I didn’t pay for it.  :-P

    Seriously, there are not that many good reasons for getting one.  The most obvious is to become a professor, which is what I thought I was going to do but did not.  The degree certainly did not hurt me later though it’s an open question how much it helped.  I cherish what I learned but I seperate that from the degree since all the important work must be done by you alone and much of the actual work for the degree was drudgeristic crap that I pushed out of my head as soon as I could.  Idiotic course requirements and reading lists are frustrating.  Learning important things for their own sake is priceless but you can do that without graduate school.  Then again, a critical mass of good profs and students is also priceless.

    So, I have no firm advice either way except DON’T PAY ONE THIN DIME FOR IT, INCRUE NO DEBT, FINISH ON TIME, and HAVE ANOTHER CREDIBLE PLAN IF ACADEMIA TURNS OUT TO BE A PIPE DREAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Escoffier

    “Incrue” is not a word of course, I think I crossed up “accrue” with “incur.”

    Etiher way, NO DEBT FOR GRAD SCHOOL!!!!!!!!

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      “Incrue” is not a word of course, I think I crossed up “accrue” with “incur.”

      I like it though! Language is a living thing!

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @Bb, Olive, I didn’t have an engagement ring, had a courthouse wedding, and my wedding band is a plain simple one. I’m totally on board with rebelling against the wedding industry.

    Also, yeah, my husband graduated with a masters in mathematics this year. He got really lucky and found a good job. We also live in Utah, which has a relatively low unemployment rate compared to the rest of the country at 7%.

  • lovelost

    @Anacoana #118

    You’ve answered your own question. You love Physics and writing, sounds like a career in Science Writing. Get a PhD and you can science reporter with major publishing house in your area of expertise. network with these folks as you start out

    http://www.nasw.org/

    in addition patents law are good too.

    plus regulatory science

    in addition Science fellow and public policy sounds like internship in DC.

    hi how about Tech Transfer at University http://autm.net/Home.htm

  • tmunson

    @Olive

    (Munson throws a kiss!) Like I said you kids are taking this much, much more gracefully than we would, the most self-absorbed (“Me Decade”) , least productive (the entire ’80s). piggishly consumptive (’90s) and foolhardily reckless (ex. real estate boom 2000-which takes us to now) in the entire history of the planet. Our entire myth of the 60s is crap; very very few of us were in the civil rights movement, we only protested Viet Nam ‘cuz we might get drafted (and lots of pretty braless chicks we’re behind us; if they had cajoled us into ‘Nam the way their mothers did our dads in WWII we’d have flattened southeast Asia like Berlin/Tokyo), and at Woodstock we sat around like a bunch of old folks at a nursing home bingo night and it took Sly Stone’s cajoling to get us to even raise our right hand in a Hitler salute. I know it will ultimately be allright; heck, even once us lawyers die off the surplus will be sucked off like the G-string of a pole stripper on Masonic night-we’ve created so much litigation potential it’ll take years to clear. I’m just suggesting you kids could hurry it along, but don’t be too obvious, no bumper stickers with “Save Social Security-Kill a  Baby Boomer” or anything like that. Boomers still retain ’60s paranoia and this will alarm them. Start slow, with things like relocation to areas with good health care, casinos (Boomers like to play cheap slots and eat shitty food), public transportation to get them to same, and overall aura of cheerfulness to throw them off guard. Plus praise them all the time for their supposed self sacrifice which is a load of shit as they all simply smoked dope and listened to (mostly) fucked up music like the Moody Blues and those King Crimson assholes. Then, when they are sufficiently concentrated (good ideas always come back around: the Brits created it, the Krauts refined it,  and we, or rather you, as Americans, will perfect it) grab them all, every goddamn one. Yeah, I mean mom & dad; trust me if you think long and hard about their transgressions you’ll steel yourself to “do what’s necessary” (ref Wm. Hurt “Body Heat”) . The most important thing in implementing physical execution is to remain dispassionate, to follow protcol rigorously and thus avoid the psychic impact of the slaughter I’m suggesting. Be thorough though, and pitiless: get them all.Extermination ain’t for sissies. Boomers, like crab lice, are determined low life (Al Pacino as Roy Cohn in “Angels in America”) and will cling and claw to survive. I guess that means me too. Rats.

    So Susan, we havin’ fun yet?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @tmunson

      Your colorful commentary is fun – but throw in a few paragraph breaks, will ya?

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    Anacaona….if you’re interested in physics, and you like writing (which you’re good at!), then maybe you could do something with one of the companies which is trying to promote increased interest in science among kids. Two that come to mind are GE and Intel.

     

     

  • Lokland

    @ Susan. Escoffier

    Anecdotal evidence for virgins not being a bad thing. My fiance was a virgin when we met I have “trained” her to do exactly what I like. The training took all of a month really wasn’t that difficult and was actually quite fun.

    Her strategy, she slept with me on the first date. I was looking for a relationship at the time so it was probably a lucky gamble.

    @ The article.

    Its not just women who have an unbeatble riddle.

    Men who want a relationships have to figure out the most ridculously perfect balance of alpha and beta traits to have a “good” relationship.

    That being said, its not so much that either group has some horrid disadvantage. The entire SMP is rigged against relationships not one specific sex finding relationships.

    @ Susan, Orig.Anon

    Swallowing the red pill can be either good or bad depending on how you use the knowledge. I chose to use it to

    a) find a better LTR partner (this is what I have always gone after)

    b) eliminate LTR issues using game

    c) about a zillion other benefits that have nothing to do with women and everything to do with inner-game and confidence.

    That being said theres a few issues that make it hard difficult to make “real love and admiration” possible.

    1. Hypergamy, every women wants to trade up. Makes it very hard to trust that someone actually loves you.

    2. A carousel rider finally giving up and settling.

    3. Most divorces intiated by women not men.

    I see red pill/game as map to navigate sexual dynamics and not get my dick clipped off along the way. Game used properly can enhance a relationship by fulfilling a womans hypergamic(?) urges. Screen the number twos. Number 3 is similar to number one now that I think about it.

    That being said the hardest thing I have had reconciling is the hypergamy thing. Knowing you have a plan to beat the system doesn’t mean I love the system.

    Any suggestions on that one?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lokland
      That’s a great testimonial from a man who has used Game to benefit his relationship, and thereby more people than himself. Though I heartily endorse Inner Game as well.

      As for hypergamy, that’s on a spectrum. A few women write to men on Death Row – they are turned on by the extreme Dark Triad traits. Other women like the class clown. We all have differing attraction cues for status and social dominance. The challenge for men is to find a woman whose attraction cues are healthy and relationship-oriented. Then make sure those cylinders are firing, and don’t skip the maintenance. When a man has anxiety about whether a woman will stick around, it’s a poor match, and he should look elsewhere, work on his Inner Game, or both.

  • Anacaona

    You’ve answered your own question. You love Physics and writing, sounds like a career in Science Writing. Get a PhD and you can science reporter with major publishing house in your area of expertise. network with these folks as you start out

    http://www.nasw.org/

    in addition patents law are good too.

    plus regulatory science

    in addition Science fellow and public policy sounds like internship in DC.

    hi how about Tech Transfer at University http://autm.net/Home.htm\

    Thansk for the suggestion I was mostly thinking that I should try to become a sci-fi writer, but this sounds like fun.

     

    Anacaona….if you’re interested in physics, and you like writing (which you’re good at!), then maybe you could do something with one of the companies which is trying to promote increased interest in science among kids. Two that come to mind are GE and Intel.

    I’m good at writing??! I don’t remember ever posting anything I had written. Thanks for the faith though.

    I had though about it I was a reading promoter among the youth as well in my country but then the feminists are so all over that kind of programs that I’m not sure how would they receive it. What if I slip and they find out that I love babies and men and read Twilight? I’m sure they have secret caves to punish women like me and brainwash them into submission ala Clockwork Orange…*getstinhatfirmlyinhead*

    Any suggestions on that one?

    Read Athol’s book he has a section on how a man can select a wife.http://www.marriedmansexlife.com/

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Ms. Olive

    Fantastic post! I actually don’t find it too radical, but then again, big weddings aren’t exactly a thing in my family. If my parents had a small wedding, my grandparents had a smaller wedding: they eloped.

    Reading the comments on weddings being cost-prohibitive, I was going to suggest this. You can never go wrong with eloping. That’s my personal endorsement. It worked marvelously for us.

  • Orig. Anon.

    Lokland:
    ” That being said the hardest thing I have had reconciling is the hypergamy thing. Knowing you have a plan to beat the system doesn’t mean I love the system”

    You don’t have to love it, or like it. Hypergamy just is. I don’t necessarily like that i have to force my head not to turn when the .7 h/w walks by. I’m far happier just understanding. The unknown is what bites you. Understanding women also helps you understand you, making your a, b and c more likely. You like women…no, worse, you like a particular woman ;) You’ve the right idea.

    That the current marriage system is something of a bad joke is hard to stomach. Still, the unknown is what bites you.

    The marriage situation, knowing that the world didn’t do jack to help me when my smv was low, but makes sure to limit me now that its high (well, higher) induces bitter thoughts, which are pointless and mostly counterproductive. Biology is a bit cruel giving women the most power when they are young. But women were a bit cruel when I was young…what was I saying about bitterness? My spouse was never cruel to me and she deserves none from me. Best of luck to you and yours.

  • mgambale

    This concept is not, in fact, a Catch–22.  My loss of respect for a girl who yields quickly is the result of a probabilistic assumption that she either has little self-control or too little sense to exercise it.  I don’t make that assumption if I have better information.  And that, you see, is the way out.

    Marriage-minded girls ought to drop their unproductive preoccupation with numbers.  How many partners, how many dates, etc.  Instead, they should endeavor to make their character known as quickly and convincingly as possible.  One way to do that is to date very perceptive guys.  Another way to do that is to engage in activities and behaviors that unmistakably project self-discipline, reliability, competence, etc.  Perhaps the most important way, and one that’s often overlooked around here, is to talk earnestly and openly with the guy(s) they’re dating.*  A number of posters who are cheerleaders for virginity have raised the “where did she learn how to do that” risk.  My practice is to take the extraordinary and unprecedented step of . . . wait for it . . . asking her to tell me.  You’d be surprised how much you can learn about a person’s character by a simple question like that, even, and perhaps especially, if they evade answering it.  Other posters have discussed this, too.
    *This means that you should tell the whole truth without exception, and that you shouldn’t beat around the bush about what you really want out of dating, relationships, sex, and life.  It does not mean that you shouldn’t be thoughtful about what you say or how you say it.
    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @mgambale

      Perhaps the most important way, and one that’s often overlooked around here, is to talk earnestly and openly with the guy(s) they’re dating.*

      *This means that you should tell the whole truth without exception, and that you shouldn’t beat around the bush about what you really want out of dating, relationships, sex, and life. It does not mean that you shouldn’t be thoughtful about what you say or how you say it.

      +1 That’s a great comment. It is too often overlooked around here, even by me. It’s probably time for a post on this.

  • anonymous

    Susan: “But so do men who compromise their character for the sake of dominance. Not strangers, but the women who know them, who see them make pussy the Holy Grail. A man’s ability to get it is attractive, but his decision to dedicate his life to it is repugnant.”

    Apparently this view isn’t limited to women. Check out “Elam vs Frost” over at avoiceformen.com (a debate regarding PUAs).

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    Once she has disqualified herself, he is relieved of the burden of obligation. He owes her nothing, certainly not respect. This is the underbelly of today’s SMP. We go round and round, but this is the essence of the dilemma.

    Sorry, late to the discussion tonight. Very thought-provoking quote that really sums up the dilemma. A woman will never know exactly what a man’s intentions are unless they level with each other before intimacy. Many young guys actually start out assuming the relationship will be short term, probably because they’ve been burned in the past. They’re already planning their exit before things even get serious. I found this quote about a certain character that captures this mindset perfectly:

    With most women his manner was a mixture of taciturnity and passion. The lengthy approaches to a seduction bored him almost as much as the subsequent mess of disentanglement. He found something grisly in the inevitability of the pattern of each affair. (Casino Royale, 1953)

    They like women, but are too cynical or jaded to want them for very long. Any romantic qualities are pretty much gone. They’ve been replaced by utilitarianism run amok.

    Every woman who wants to marry needs a strategy to minimize her risks, not eliminate them. The more rigid one’s policy, the smaller the pool of potential mates. As we’ve seen here in the last few weeks of posts I’ve been writing, there are many men of good character who will not wait. There is a real and quantifiable (roughly) opportunity cost to avoiding them

    Enough men (maybe 1/3) are much less willing to commit, let alone marry, than used to be the case, and they’re expecting early sex. It’s a problem for the ladies who want to settle down. So, how happy will women be assuming they can corral these kinds of guys into relationships? I only ask because, for the guys looking to hookup and check out, their actions speak for themselves. But these men of good character aren’t distinguishing themselves from the rest of the hyena pack. If everyone had honest intentions, all it would take is for a man to announce, “I’m willing to commit to the relationship if we have sex right now.”

    I’m not saying these guys aren’t good catches, but there’s nothing stopping them from deciding sometime after doing the deed: “You’re a great person, and the sex was great, but we’re really not that compatible. Good luck in life.” If women are writing off the majority of guys willing to wait and build compatibility first, that seems like a much bigger opportunity cost than gambling for love in the niche market.

    Part of the problem is that marriage and family have declined in importance in the U.S. I’ve read that Israeli society (by and large secular but still traditional) still views dating as a more or less logical way to find a marriage partner to raise a family with. There doesn’t seem to be a hookup scene there at all.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Megaman

      If everyone had honest intentions, all it would take is for a man to announce, “I’m willing to commit to the relationship if we have sex right now.”

      I’m not saying these guys aren’t good catches, but there’s nothing stopping them from deciding sometime after doing the deed: “You’re a great person, and the sex was great, but we’re really not that compatible. Good luck in life.” If women are writing off the majority of guys willing to wait and build compatibility first, that seems like a much bigger opportunity cost than gambling for love in the niche market.

      Excellent point. Dueling opportunity costs.

  • anonymous

    Ramble: “If you care about the modest girls then you must start shaming the sluts.”

    I bet there are anti-slut laws (slander?) in place that prohibit slut-shaming. Has anyone looked into the repercussions for slut-shaming?

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Chris

    But what if the man’s not made happy by marriage?  What if he’s perfectly happy with an LTR?  What if the whole prospect of marriage (not necessarily the woman with whom he seeks a relationship) is the problem?

    All the solved riddles in the world won’t make a difference if you fix only one part of the equation.

    It should probably be Escoffier addressing you now because although I agree with his prescription for myself and for many women I personally know, I have been saying that I don’t think it could apply to absolutely everyone. At least not with the way society has changed.

    That’s why I think your worry that the men who’d rather not get married (however good their reasons) will suddenly lack for partners if a small fraction of women suddenly decide to stay virgins until marriage. (Here I’m assuming that the “virgin strategy” will be adopted by only a few women.. Are you saying that it will be more popular than that?) At this point of history, I think there will always be women with similar views about LTRs with respect to marriage, so the men won’t be doomed to loneliness. (See Hope’s comment @ #86.)

    Anyway, I hope the novel is going well. (NaNoWriMo, I presume?)

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Chris

    Arrggh! I should proofread better before I publish. The first sentence of the second paragraph of #134 should read:

    That’s why I don’t share your worry that the men who’d rather not get married (however good their reasons) will suddenly lack for partners if a small fraction of women suddenly decide to stay virgins until marriage.

  • anonymous

    Chris @  9:02

    Do we force men into marriages at gunpoint?  That dog won’t hunt.  ”

    It’s illegal to force someone to wed and it’s supposedly one of the reasons why there are more children born out-of-wedlock. Shotgun weddings are out.

  • anonymous

    Lokland : ““The entire SMP is rigged against relationships not one specific sex finding relationships.”

    Yes, this seems to be the crux of it. All relationships including marriage.

  • anonymous

    Megaman : “Part of the problem is that marriage and family have declined in importance in the U.S. I’ve read that Israeli society (by and large secular but still traditional) still views dating as a more or less logical way to find a marriage partner to raise a family with. There doesn’t seem to be a hookup scene there at all.

    I wonder if gender segregation plays a role. ?? I’m convinced that the more the genders spend every waking hour in each others company, the more likely they are to a) lose their gender identity b) not appreciate each other for anything besides sexual encounters.

  • anonymous

    Ugh submitted too soon.

    I wonder if gender segregation plays a role.  I’m wondering if the genders in Israel are interacting on a daily basis to the level that they are in the States and if that plays a role with regards to dating.

  • Emily

    3. Most divorces intiated by women not men.

    I keep hearing this, but I have a question.  In this statistic, are situations where the women files for divorce because her husband is caught cheating being counted as a female-initiated divorce?  Because if so, that’s WAY different than an Eat/Pray/Love type situation.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      In this statistic, are situations where the women files for divorce because her husband is caught cheating being counted as a female-initiated divorce?

      Yes, I believe the stat (approx. 70%) applies to divorce filings, period. We don’t know the background. Men do cheat more than women do, though women are closing the gap.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

     

     

    I can’t believe no-one picked up on the Annie Hall reference. Shame on you all!

     

     

     

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    Anacaona…”’m good at writing??! I don’t remember ever posting anything I had written”

    I was referring to the comments here themselves.

     

     

  • Escoffier

    Emily, from what I have read, the stat is 2/3s of divorces are formally initated by women.  But scholars believe that UNDERCOUNTS because often when the filer is a man, it’s because the woman has cheated/withdrawn/witheld/made clear it’s over but waited for him to actually file the papers.

  • lovelost

    @HUS,

    You know it seems to me guys out on HUS (i am guy, that’s reason) are afraid of living a life completely as single. That’s the message I am receiving, there is the hug desire to get into a relationship. May be I am misinterpreting, but somehow I feel guys on HUS  afraid of living a single’s life for the rest of their lives.

  • tmunson

    @Susan (ref “colorful commentary”)

    “If black is a color, he (is) colorful”. (ref “I, Claudius”, Herod the Tetrarch of Galilee desrcibing his grandfather Herod the Great, who killed not only his father but all of his uncles and 7 or 8 wives; he killed one wife so quickly historians can’t be sure she even existed at all)

     

  • lovelost

    @Susan #148

    Therefore, an LTR might be the perfect solution for a man who does not wish to marry.

    The solution seems to be surfacing finally.

  • lovelost

    @HUS

    I heard that you’re settled down
    That you found a girl and you’re married now.
    I heard that your dreams came true.
    Guess she gave you things I didn’t give to you.

    Adele- Someone Like You

    I guess the song starts out by stating the current SMP.

  • lovelost

    @HUS,

    I have said, the last couple of months have been a soul searching experience for me. I pulled out an email i had written to “myself” when my relationship had failed back in 2005. I posting the email, I think life is coming back to me in full circle. Here is what I wrote to cope up with the breakup.

    ________________________________________________________________

    I think this is what you should do. go to Wal-Mart or any other departmental store and buy yourself a  mirror. If you have all her emails then pick the one that you love the most. that could be or should be the most romantic of all of your email exchanges that must have taken place between you and her. pick another of her email that you hate the most , which obviously involves you and her in a big fight where you have ended up saying bad things to each other. if you don’t have any emails then try recollecting both of those incidents. sit down on a table ,place the mirror in front of you, and grab a blue pen , a red pen and 2-3 sheets of paper. Don’t use her picture; in fact at this point you shouldn’t be having any pictures of her. Otherwise the face will emerge in front of your eyes and you will start to look for that face in the crowd. And that is not something you want.

    Divide the paper into two halves and on the left write with the blue pen STRENGTH and on the right with the red pen write WEAKNESS.

    now read the email which has most romantic moments exchanged between you and her and write down the good aspect of your relationship. When you find the first one STOP. Now read the bad email and do the same i.e. the bad aspect of it. For every good thing try to see if there exists any bad points and there will be some and that is ok. In the end you may/maynot have equal numbers but that’s fine.

     

    Put it into perspective

    The Best Case – all strength and no weakness

    The Worst Case – all weakness and no strength

    The Average Case – equal number of both.

    the point that i am trying to make here is that look whether the good aspects of your relationship can outweigh the bad aspects, i.e. did you optimize the good aspects i.e. did you optimize the strength of your relationship so that the weakness were negated to the maximum possible level, if yes then there is no reason why the relationship failed, however if that is not the case you should be in a position to do decipher what went wrong.

     

    In life one must do a RUTHLESS, CRITICAL, OBJECTIVE Analysis, of his/her own personality, it gives us the wisdom to differentiate between

    what we appreciate (weakness) vs what we admire (strength)

    what we can compromise (weakness) vs what we can adjust(strength)

    what we like (weakness) vs what we LOVE (the Ultimate strength).

    _________________________________________________________________

  • tmunson

    @EVERYONE ONE OF YOU WHO IS GEN X, MILLENNIAL, OR WHATEVER THE HELL ELSE YOU CALL PEOPLE MUCH YOUNGER THAN I BUT WHO ARE ALREADY APPEARING TO TAKE OVER

    I was surprised, and frankly disappointed, that no one took up my call to arms to wage war on us Boomers. Susan called my remarks “colorful”, which is the new “interesting”, which is the old way of telling someone their novel, music, art etc. is neither interesting nor colorful, that they not only have no talent, and that their “wannabe” gestures in those directions are not only going to be entirely fruitless, but also tedious, for them and for their supposed target “audience” i e people who cannot avoid ignoring them, usually family and friends.

    So be it. I now realize that perhaps I went a little too far in encouraging the roundup and annihilation of the entire Baby Boom generation. So I have an even  better idea, and with some work I think it’s win/win. So “Let’s run it up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes” as they used to say on Madison Avenue (why do you kids watch “Mad Men”? I am more than familiar with that generation, and once they got done with WWII (a singular accomplishment, and I do mean that reverently) they were jerks; what is so interesting about martini glasses, red lipstick, and cigarettes in recycled “Edge of Night” scripts?)

     

    Real estate: its Boomer heroin. Like James Taylor, they always relapse. Now, I’ve scouted dozens of places out west and there must be hundreds nationwide that fit the bill. Areas with access to medical care, close (reasonably) to gambling, and prospects for passable golf courses.Voila! All we need is cable tv (a cinch) and we have everything they want /need.

    Gambling: Boomers will gamble in anything; I’ve seen it. Lewiston Idaho has the sorriest casino this side of Somalia and they pack it. Kids, at some point in your life eating becomes “partying”-it’s sad but true. Feed ‘em lots of cheap food priced accordingly and they’re in heaven.

    As for cable, I’ll handle that. We’ll install 15 history/military channels for the men with several devoted JUST to WWII, and the European theater at that (Boomer guys can’t get enough of German military uniforms and Nazi/SS regalia). And the gals? I’ll have great cable shows for them:”Those Shoes Make You Look Like A Slut”, “Who’s the Biggest Bitch in New Hampshire”, and my piece d’ resistance “Does This Make My Butt Look Big?” where a gaggle of desperately lonely discarded Baby Boom hags(CFBs-“clueless fat bitches”) choose one of their number for a “makeover” designed, you guessed it, to disguise the fact that her ass dimensions are somewhere between a washing machine and a medium-sized assault tank. She then matches up with others in a “Queen for a Day” style applause-o-meter, and the winner gets to go on to our next show:”Is He Good Enough for You?” We match our contestants up with the biggest jerks we can find (Boomers of course-it’ll be easy) and have their girlfriends tear them apart. I know this is what women do anyway but this will be for our isolated gals, allowing them to vicariously tear down other women (an impulse so universal among women they should formalize it, wear uniforms, and do it in stadiums) and give them something to talk about at the slot machines.

     

    I know it needs work , but even at this stage I like it. With so many of you unemployed but talented and highly educated (you tell us so-you occupy Wall Street for jobs, but then say you don’t want anyone telling you what to do: here’s news kids-that’s what a job is, until you’ve done it long enough or have enough $ to hire someone else and tell him what to do) kids around I’m sure we can improve on it.

    “Peace, love and Bobby Sherman” (Boomers never really said, bit I wanted to keep this light)

     

     

     

  • jack

    Men who are the type that can easily bed women are also the type to not hang around.

    Men who would commit are the type women do not allow to bed them.

    The apex fallacy is at work here.

    Overall, men want women who only give it up to them.

  • Rum

    I think it is a mistake to say that a young woman loses value in a mans eye when she yields to him. It is not that simple. I mean, if the only value she has to offer him is quick sexual release, once that has been yielded he will want to see her go away. However, if she has character qualities that strongly appeal to the guy, he would not want to see her go away at all just because they had had good sex together. He could become addicted to her rather quickly by quick sex if they are a good enough fit. I have seen to many same night lays turn into a good long term thing to be completely pessimistic about the female catch 22. Sometimes your gut is right.

    Young women need  desperately to have good instincts about men. In my observation, the only reliable way for these to develop is to have grown up around a good father to give her imprinted notions of what a good long term guy is like. Absent that, I have no idea how she would develop them, given that  everything in the culture is misleading.

    A smart young woman would go to the top of any quality guys marriage list if she found a way to let the guy know directly and consciously that 1. She knows that it is dumb for a wife to turn away her husband sexually no matter whether she is at that instant feeling it or not and that she is not dumb. 2. She understands how much guys hate fattness on their women and does not judge men because of it. 3. If she has a complicated past, just tell him that you were young and stupid with a naturally high libido but you have learned how bad it felt when did not respect the guys she was with. And she respects him.

    I doubt that many young women would think of this on their own. It would most likely seem strange and un-important to them. It is pretty unlikely her dad or relatives would say it.

  • Orig. Anon.

    T:

    “I was surprised, and frankly disappointed, that no one took up my call to arms to wage war on us Boomers. Susan called my remarks ‘colorful’…”

    Whining about your parents generation with no understanding at all at the tradeoffs they had to make is a boomer thing to do. The opposite of love is not hate. It’s indifference. Coldness. What us genx’ers are doing to your posts ;)

  • Desiderius

    “May be I am misinterpreting, but somehow I feel guys on HUS  afraid of living a single’s life for the rest of their lives.”

    I’m not. I just want healthy grandkids. That takes being non-single.

    “Lokland : ““The entire SMP is rigged against relationships not one specific sex finding relationships.”Yes, this seems to be the crux of it. All relationships including marriage.”

    That’s how it appears on the surface. The reality is likely more complicated. Marriage has been on the rocks for awhile. More likely the current SMP is an allergic reaction against the damage serial monogamy was doing to marriage.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      More likely the current SMP is an allergic reaction against the damage serial monogamy was doing to marriage.

      Serial monogamy is the result of delayed marriage, not the cause.

  • tmunson

    @Orig. Anon.

    Ouch! Are you telling me you are relegating me to the coldest inner circle of Hell, as in Dante’s “Inferno”, where Satan at Hell’s center is encased in ice, with three heads each munching respectively Judas, Brutus and Cassius (the latter 2 BTW were trying to fight for a democracy, or as they would style it a republic, and in Cassius’s case I think he gets somewhat of a bum rap as he had a lot to lose if Julius took over) in the coldest of the cold for all eternity?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @Escoffier, I probably would have never met my husband if I went back and changed my entire life history so that I was a virgin. Yes, having one lifetime partner IS the ideal, and I do wish that I could have been a virgin for him. I know I’m not perfect, but I try hard each day to be a good woman and a good wife.

    With regard to my single digit past, I never really changed my ways. I always went deep. I didn’t even kiss any guy who didn’t love me. I knew their stories, their lives, their hopes and fears, and they knew mine. I didn’t want them to give me anything except knowledge and love. They helped shaped me into the person that I am, because their interests like coding, D&D and video games rubbed off on me.

    Sometimes I left the guy, other times the guy left me. Young relationships often don’t work out. It always sucked. I always felt so guilty for hurting others. I went for guys who were lonely, sad and had many issues. At first that drew me to them, but then it became too much. Some of them lied to me while I remained naive.

    I wanted to give these guys sex, love and affection because they seemed so starved for it. It was about me giving the smart, nerdy outcast what other girls didn’t, and genuinely loving them for being smart and nerdy and outcast. Even though it often hurt or was very uncomfortable, I was fine because it was good for them. Making other people made me happy. I didn’t think about myself, or how it would affect my “value” as a potential wife.

    I didn’t really start thinking about me and what I really wanted until I was approaching my mid-20s, when I met my husband. My husband was a lot like those other guys. He wanted a woman who would see him for who he truly was and love the real man, flaws and all. The difference from our past failures (he had girls reject him and also rejected a few girls) was that we were mutually in love, compatible, honest and emotionally mature enough for a lifelong commitment.

    Finally, am I happy now? Yes. But that is because I consciously choose to be happy. Hypergamy is all about trading up in status via changing the man to make her happier. I learned to be happy with who I am, just as I am, alone if need be. I went through a terrible year with a stillbirth, a miscarriage and a life-threatening hospital stay. I almost succumbed to depression. But I fought and won back my happiness. That was the key for me. Happiness is a choice, and I can make that choice.

  • Orig. Anon.

    Susan:

    “Me too. The hottest guy ever is my husband at 28. Now he is twice that, on paper. But when I look at him I see the 28 year old man. I really do. And in my own head, in the way I think of myself, I too am 28.”

    To try to help you understand and explain my “settling” description/discussion/ explanation. Beauty matters to men. I have heard men (married, engaged, dating and wanting to date) say the equivalent of “she’s the hottest chick ever” and I’ve always mentally “rolled my eyes.” Knowing how bad I am at keeping the Red Foreman, “dumbass!” look off my face, I’m sure some of them noticed. Even in my striking out with women always stage, I still thought, “are you blind?” It, today, seems to me a loser thing for a man to say. Omega even. I get a visceral yuck! even more today than when I was younger. It’s just seems delusional when I try to place myself in the man’s shoes.

    As to my marriage, I am still very sexually attracted to my wife. She is very much “my type.” We apparently have always had more sex than average, and I still want more. I married her at her peak, read young. She has, at times, asked the affirmation type questions and I tell her I love her, that i love/lust/want to look at her face (i do), that she is beautiful, that I want to make love to her and I prove that (ewww ;)). I have never said that she is the most beautiful woman in the world to me. I don’t think I can lie that well.

    I’m not a 10, and neither was she when we met. Look at the OK cupid survey where the men view the beauty of the women on a normal, bell curve while the women called 80% of men ugly. Men know! how hot their partner is. My wife has never been the hottest woman in the world. And never has been to me. I doubt there are even a couple women on ok cupid remotely in the running. I envy the men above, who I sneered at, if they honestly feel that way. I never, ever, have.

    The aging well as a woman, like in that Solomon ii post, is what my spouse is doing and it is spectacular. I know! she is more beautiful to me than objective fact would indicate. It is a gift. Maybe others just have a gift where the other potential partners “don’t exist” at all?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Orig. Anon.
      Thank you for explaining how you feel about your wife. She is obviously fortunate and your marriage sounds like a good one. If you are troubled by some vague sense of not having it all, then I’m sorry for you. I don’t mean that in a snarky or patronizing way. Like most people, I have had the experience of longing for something I couldn’t or wouldn’t ever have, and that is painful. That’s why I used the word pain with you before, but perhaps longing is too strong a word. Maybe it’s more like an undercurrent of discontent.

      It does sound like you and your wife are around the same SMV. Of course, hers was highest when young, so she “settled” before you were at your peak. Yours is higher now and you “settle” because she is past hers. However, the real question – would a middle aged man leave his middle aged wife for young poon? – is not so easily answered. Your SMV among young, hot women is demonstrated by how many of them would be willing to have sex with you, and for what “price” (general effort and expenditure of any kind of resources). You might be able to snag a woman several years younger than you, but there are other considerations. Does she have characteristics beyond her looks that make her less attractive as a mate? Etc.

  • Orig. Anon.

    T:
    “Are you telling me you are relegating me to the coldest inner circle of Hell…”

    No, no, no. We’re just rebelling from our parents. ;)

    You are viewing it as a boomer with your “what would I do since I’m not my parent’s generation” viewpoint. You raised us to do the same, but You Are the Parents. Anything you would do or suggest is suspect. At least that much is your fault. ;)

  • Orig. Anon.

    Susan:
    “Orig, Anon.

    Saying I’ll stay with my wife is a DLV. Not alpha. Saying I want to get married is a DLV. Not alpha.

    I was out last night and throughout the evening kept thinking back on your comment. I’m marinating it for a post.”

    I’m looking forward to your post. I pushed and got into a relationship with my wife by saying, I couldn’t and wouldn’t be friends. We could be more or nothing. (She doesn’t remember it that way. ;) ) So, alpha to push/force a beta relationship? I don’t know how to explain this as well as it should be and hope you do. How you balance? What women should do if they want a beta trait from a man? Or is that just the old why won’t he commit question already done to death?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      So, alpha to push/force a beta relationship? I don’t know how to explain this as well as it should be and hope you do. How you balance? What women should do if they want a beta trait from a man?

      All good questions to ponder. My quick take:

      Very alpha to push for a relationship, because I don’t believe relationships are beta. I see no reason why an alpha male cannot be a loving husband and father. You’re equating alpha with bad again here. To me, alpha is a man going after what he wants. Why can’t that be the love of a good woman?

      A balance of alpha and beta traits is ideal. Women select alpha traits for short-term mating and prioritize beta traits for long-term mating. Because Game has traditionally focused on the short-term goal of “getting beautiful women into bed” the relationship aspect is often neglected. However, bloggers such as Keoni Galt, Athol Kay, and Vox Day write about Game in marriage. Badger has made it clear he is using Game to find a life partner. To me, all that is very alpha.

      As for what women should do if they want a beta trait in a man? That’s easy. Reward it. There are women here who have rewarded men of good character and nurturing traits. I’ve never gone for a single cad in my life, or at least I walked away at the first sign of it. Though hypergamy has run amok, there are still plenty of women who are really not wired that way and still want the traditional model of romantic love founded on respect and admiration for another. Hypergamy doesn’t get one to love. It’s a detour, or even a derailing.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    Most college-aged guys don’t have marriage in mind at this point though, so in most cases it’s likely that this strategy will require a frustrating waiting period.

    That waiting period is about 10 years for a college freshman.

    I don’t know about this. About 1/4 of guys are married between 20-24, and these guys tend to be from more traditional areas of the country. The culture there is still heavily focused on marriage + family + career (balancing act). I’m guessing since they’re marriage-minded, they really haven’t played the field much. Some hack musician in another discussion post tried to argue that these guys make the worst partners due to their limited experience and options. What a joke that was.

    While the median age is now 28 for men, I suspect that a lot of guys would have liked to get married much sooner. A big part of the problem seems to be the SMP game playing and a lack of quality mates, at least in the large urban areas. Guys looking for commitment and marriage in these places strike me as pilgrims in an unfriendly land. Instead of compromising on when to have sex with men who aren’t marriage-minded, maybe women should think about relocating to places where men are marriage-minded?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Guys looking for commitment and marriage in these places strike me as pilgrims in an unfriendly land. Instead of compromising on when to have sex with men who aren’t marriage-minded, maybe women should think about relocating to places where men are marriage-minded?

      Yes, I’ve written about this. I think it’s a totally worthwhile thing to consider, but few people will do it, for a variety of reasons. For women not tied down to one geographic area, though, it should be easier to find a mate in TX or CO, for starters.

  • lovelost

    @Megaman #170

    Instead of compromising on when to have sex with men who aren’t marriage-minded, maybe women should think about relocating to places where men are marriage-minded?

    Do you suggest any particular geographical area in the US?

  • tmunson

    @Orig.Anon.

    Ah, I see. So my attempt to rouse the “Xers”, Millennials et al is doomed to failure? Rats. I was hoping to be the El Cid of the movement. Ok then. I guess it’ll be more bovine passivity or misguided  nonsense, street theater, faux revolution, while the Boomers use Soc Sec/Medicare to remove the last remaining wealth of the American post WWII accumulation. BTW this latest recession will do for the service economy what the 1981 one did for manufacturing with one major difference. Service jobs are harder to relocate (although it’s tried i e call centers). So the way it will play out is that the service jobs will more or less remain, but because there isn’t much value added (we cannot have an economy based on doing each other’s laundry, selling insurance, and suing each other) so you’ll get a paycheck but won’t be able to buy much (ref old Soviet Union-“We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us”). You’ll get a very real example of this when the inflation hits and OPEC raises oil prices to reflect the watered down nature of our currency. All of this is having an impact on your relationships, romances etc. A stable economy provides a backdrop against which healthy relationships have a chance to develop. Anyway thanks for giving us Boomers a pass, not that we needed it. Doonesbury calls us the most self absorbed generation in history and I agree.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    Yes, I’ve written about this. I think it’s a totally worthwhile thing to consider, but few people will do it, for a variety of reasons. For women not tied down to one geographic area, though, it should be easier to find a mate in TX or CO, for starters.

    Well, with the economy in the dumps, relocating for love where there are no jobs is a non-starter. But I’m not even sure it’s necessary to move to another state. I don’t know how it is in New England, but out here there are literally dozens of small cities and towns amidst the suburbs around the Bay Area outside of S.F. I know a fair number of hard-working single guys who tend to stay where the cost of living is lower. Some even own their own homes already. It seems like a lot of women believe that the most eligible bachelors can only be found in the big metropolitan areas. These guys are only eligible for STRs (if that), from what I’ve seen.

    I’m ignorant of the geography, but maybe Ms. SayWhaat should seek her fortunes in upstate New York?

  • Orig. Anon.

    Susan:
    “Maybe it’s more like an undercurrent of discontent.”

    That’s about right. Call it my midlife crisis. I’m not a buying a sports car or chasing skirt. Am religious about the gym for the last ~2 years. Can’t seem to shut up here. It’s a couple years of nagging feelings that I’m running out of time and wasting my life. I’m not as miserable as that sounds.

    “Alpha is bad” is the way I was raised when it comes to women and I don’t think that idea helped my sister any. Do the right thing. Be respectful. “Treat her like you would like to be treated” golden rule crap is by far the worst advice I got. I just wanted to punch my sister’s ex but he wrapped her around his finger.

    I’m an introspective and not a party type. Don’t “own the room” so the Roissy dating market value test has me a classic beta; attractive “usually to the ones you don’t want”, which sounds about right. I’ve ditched a lot of antigame, but occasionally it still slips out. Where I feel guilty getting what I want. You pointed it out along with the alpha bad vibe. I’ll just have to deal with the guilt ;)

    /end TMI

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Orig. Anon.

      Hey, I give you credit – working through your midlife crisis online instead of chasing skirt is highly commendable. Yes, it sucks coming to grips with the fact that we’re all going to die and disappear. At 55, I’ve been through that process and come out the other side. I am at peace about that. Every one of us has to make that journey, and hopefully we don’t destroy ourselves and the ones we love in the process.

      The way you were raised – the lies you were told? You’ve already discovered you have a lot of company. Not just among men either – I think that feminism has separated women from their feminine nature, and with it their attraction triggers. The reason women run on the hamster wheel and deny liking assholes is because that is something none of us wants to admit. Like you, we are disgusted by our own nature. We have been fed the same anti-alpha pablum, only for women it gets thrown out the window when puberty hits. Imagine the cognitive dissonance the female teenager must embrace, just to feel normal.

      FWIW, as I said earlier, I think Roissy is way too hard on betas. In fact, Roissy deals in hyperbole. I have learned from the men here that they recognize this and take what’s useful, without embracing the full menu of misogyny, sadism, etc. Roissy’s disdain of betas includes more than a little self-loathing.

      My position is this: It is much easier to add alpha behaviors to the beta male than the reverse. And both sets of traits are desired by women. In and out of the bedroom. Therefore, I endorse Game and encourage beta guys who were raised in the era of feminism to apply it as a corrective measure.

  • anonymous

    Desiderius: “That’s how it appears on the surface. The reality is likely more complicated. Marriage has been on the rocks for awhile. More likely the current SMP is an allergic reaction against the damage serial monogamy was doing to marriage.

    So they continue to expose themselves to the allergens because they enjoy the inflammation?  Makes no sense, right?

  • Dogsquat

    Lovelost said:
    “You know it seems to me guys out on HUS (i am guy, that’s reason) are afraid of living a life completely as single. That’s the message I am receiving, there is the hug desire to get into a relationship. May be I am misinterpreting, but somehow I feel guys on HUS  afraid of living a single’s life for the rest of their lives.”

    That’s an interesting point.

    I’m certainly not afraid of being single – I’ve been single for years at a stretch before. I’m fairly self contained.  I’m not worried about getting old alone – I have no compunctions about offing myself Hunter S. Thompson style if it comes to that.  I don’t particularly care if I have children (I like little kids but I effing hate babies), either.  None of those hoary, formulaic admonitions causes the tiniest uptick in my heart rate.

    For me, being single is kind of my “average” state.  I have a good life.  I do good work, I have a few good friends, and many interesting acquaintances.  There are still many things I want to learn, see, and do that don’t require any sort of relationship at all.  Hell, I’m content with a good glass of scotch and a semi-readable sci-fi novel, anyway.  I intend to happily finish many of each in my old age, single or not.

    But being in a bad relationship sucks.  It’s worse than being single.  If I had a choice to be single or paired with some degenerate soul-sucking harridan – well, chum…that’s no choice at all.

    A good relationship, though…even one at which you have to work from time to time – that is sublime.  I’m happy as hell right now.  Stuff that would send me into a rage a year ago barely registers now.  This time of year is the anniversary of some of the worst days of my life, the crucible in which so much ugliness I grok was formed – and I don’t care so much.  I get laid all the time.  Somebody laughs at my jokes and listens to my stories.  Somebody gives me backrubs after I spend a shift on the bariatric ambulance.  Somebody makes me laugh and gives me warm fuzzies.  Somebody inspires me to achieve, and many doors are opening as a result.  My average daily grin-to-scowl ratio is heavily weighted towards the toothy side.  It’s nice here.

    Am I afraid to be single?  Not at all.  It’s fine.  Where I am now is better, though – and if things don’t work out for whatever reason, I will work to get back to where I am.

    To be honest, I’m more afraid of being stuck in a bad relationship than I am being single.  I can’t imagine being stuck for very long, though.  I’ve learned better than that.

    To put it another way:

    I’m not working to avoid something by being in a relationship.  I’m working to achieve/maintain something I like.

  • Escoffier

    Olive, on this question of timing, I am not convinced.

    What have here are a bunch of girls who either are in, were in, or want(ed) to be in a serious, exclusive LTR by their early 20s at the latest.  In fact, from what I can tell, a major purpose of Susan’s blog is to help college age girls (i.e., younger than early 20s) find a LT BF.  So none of you are too young for a pseudo-marriage.  In fact that is what you all (most of you) desperately want.

    However, you keep coming back to the “fact” that marriages happen later than ever.  OK, that’s true.  Why?  For a number of reasons that are completely under our control.  Nearly everyone I have read on this and related blogs seems to agree that, espically in the UMC, people are getting married too LATE, not too early.  30 is too late, or at least it is too late to finally get serious and expect things to work out for the best.  28 seems to be everyone else’s idea.  And if course if you are getting married at 28, it means you’ve probably been with your partner for at least two years prior on average, maybe longer.

    In any case, would anyone say that 25 is “too young”? Especially when there are evident benefits?

    My point is, if all of you are ready for marriage-like (with sex) at age 21, why are you necessarily not ready for marriage?  Not marriage right then, perhaps, but marriage eventually with that LTR partner?  I’m not hearing any good reasons.  The only real reason seems to be “he might not be the one.”  To which I repeat, “Then why are you sleeping with him?”  Implicit answer: “Because I don’t want to wait.”

    I suggest that what’s going on here is that the cultural expectation against early marriage subconciously prompts everyone to view anyone they meet and establish an LTR with at a young age as “not marriage material.”  You just “know” going in that this is not the guy because … well … because you’re too young to be looking for a husband at that age.  Your friends and family might make remarks about “Poor girl getting tied down so young, doesn’t know what she’s missing out on,” etc. So culturally it’s OK–desirable even–to have that LTR but to consider that LTR partner as a potential mate, well, no, that’s not OK because you’re “too young.”

    So why don’t we try this.  Go ahead and hunt for a LTR in your early 20s.  But think of him first and foremost as a potential husband.  Purge the “I’m too young” meme from your brain.  Since you’re going to treat him more or less like a husband anyway as long as the relationship lasts, this seems reasonable to me.  Then you might not only choose better, you might actually get married to someone you love and be happy.  if it takes 3-4 years from first date to wedding, so what.  And to all the friends and relatives who urge you to not be tied down and to play around while you can, tell them to buzz off.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Go ahead and hunt for a LTR in your early 20s. But think of him first and foremost as a potential husband. Purge the “I’m too young” meme from your brain. Since you’re going to treat him more or less like a husband anyway as long as the relationship lasts, this seems reasonable to me. Then you might not only choose better, you might actually get married to someone you love and be happy. if it takes 3-4 years from first date to wedding, so what. And to all the friends and relatives who urge you to not be tied down and to play around while you can, tell them to buzz off.

      Cosign this. Start searching for a life partner by age 21, and be prepared to hold onto them come what may.

  • Desiderius

    “Serial monogamy is the result of delayed marriage, not the cause.”

    That is the assumption that’s made an ass of you, me, and the whole SMP.

    (Non-delayed) marriage allows a woman to exchange her most valuable commodity (exclusive access to her at the height of her power) for that which is most valuable to her (exclusive access to the male at the height of his). This was the deal struck, to their great advantage, by my grandmothers.

    Serial monogamy involves her giving away her most valuable commodity too cheaply, leaving her some day past her prime asking “Why won’t he commit?” He likely would have five years earlier. Dal says serial monogamy is woman’s preferred form of promiscuity, which is true as far as it goes. The problem with his take is that women, as a team, don’t prefer promiscuity at all.

  • Desiderius

    Esc,

    As usual, you’ve said it better than I.

    This is what the 1% are already doing. If the 2-20% would follow, assortive mating all the way down would become much easier.

  • Desiderius

    “So they continue to expose themselves to the allergens because they enjoy the inflammation?  Makes no sense, right?”

    The allergens were the fake commitments, not the sex. Serial monogamy, especially the slumming with herbs/looking to trade up division, created all sorts of problems.

    Before marriage, it screened out good marriage prospects (women looking to trade up are not attractive to savvy men) and screened in the bad ones (providing fodder for the Ro’s chump-shaming campaigns – the allergic reaction) who knew how to manipulate her IHAB’s (read the game blogs for details – not pretty).

    After marriage, the trading-up mentality undermined the trust necessary to make a marriage work – i.e. to help that beta become a pillar of his community his wife could admire and respect, earning her the admiration and respect of her peers, and, not coincidentally, a truly fulfilling sex life such as the one our host enjoys.

    There are no short cuts to that.

  • lovelost

    @DogSquat #181

    That’s an interesting point.

    I’m certainly not afraid of being single – I’ve been single for years at a stretch before.

    Same here, I have been single since my relationship broke down at 1st year of my grad school. Since I never had much time and  my focus was on establishing my career. I not yet satisfied in terms of where I am since I want to move up the chain.

    In fact what I am yet to convince myself is that I will be somewhat happier if I am in a relationship. My late 20s has been some of the toughest time in my life in all aspects professionally, financially and family wise. I never had a woman then standing besides me, thus I don’t see a reason why I need it now. I had vented a lot on HUS in prior article and I realized I am making a huge mistake of trying to change women instead of changing and improving myself. As I have said before I don’t hate alphas or women, in fact thanks to alphas for pointing out the reality. I mean it thank you.

    I’m fairly self contained.  I’m not worried about getting old alone – I have no compunctions about offing myself Hunter S. Thompson style if it comes to that. 

    I concur as along as I work I know I will have a paycheck and I can survive, I am aggressive saver and thus should be fine financially.

    I don’t particularly care if I have children (I like little kids but I effing hate babies), either.  None of those hoary, formulaic admonitions causes the tiniest uptick in my heart rate.

    I don’t think I can have one, I am 32, the possibility of me getting married is remote, taken into consideration that I live in big east coast city, experiencing the SMP here, my chances of getting married is to faithful wife is next to impossible. Additionally I don’t want to marry right a away which means the longer I wait for the girl, difficult. I have given up on my being a father, not to mention if 8-10 years into marriage our relationship sours, she can take me to cleaners using DL.

    For me, being single is kind of my “average” state.  I have a good life.  I do good work, I have a few good friends, and many interesting acquaintances.  There are still many things I want to learn, see, and do that don’t require any sort of relationship at all.  Hell, I’m content with a good glass of scotch and a semi-readable sci-fi novel, anyway.  I intend to happily finish many of each in my old age, single or not.

    For me it’s an above average state, no commitments no drama. I like this “few good friends”, my PhD advisor is one of my best friends. Cool person to talk to always, always provides a sound perspective and practical advice. I want to travel a lot, being a STEM major one of the limitations is the company expects you to be in the lab all the time, I am building bridges with marketing team so that I can travel, which allows you to meet more people. Scotch, my favorite is Johnny Walker Black Label, blue is too expensive thus only for special occasions. What’s your favorite?

    But being in a bad relationship sucks.  It’s worse than being single.  If I had a choice to be single or paired with some degenerate soul-sucking harridan – well, chum…that’s no choice at all.

    I can’t even add more comments to that, what you just said is like the sermon from god.

    A good relationship, though…even one at which you have to work from time to time – that is sublime.  I’m happy as hell right now. 

    I realized after venting on HUS, I asked myself am I unhappy about life? No, I’m happy as hell.

    Stuff that would send me into a rage a year ago barely registers now. 

    Yes, I believe it is part of growing up, the last 3 months have been quite a soul searching experience for me, the more I think about it, I find I am putting too much emphasis of not having a woman in my life, rather than enjoying my freedom and independence.

    This time of year is the anniversary of some of the worst days of my life, the crucible in which so much ugliness I grok was formed – and I don’t care so much.  I get laid all the time. 

    I need to change that about my life about getting laid. The transition from beta to alpha will eventually happen.  

     Somebody laughs at my jokes and listens to my stories.  Somebody gives me backrubs after I spend a shift on the bariatric ambulance.  Somebody makes me laugh and gives me warm fuzzies.  Somebody inspires me to achieve, and many doors are opening as a result.  My average daily grin-to-scowl ratio is heavily weighted towards the toothy side.  It’s nice here.

    Am I afraid to be single?  Not at all.  It’s fine.  Where I am now is better, though – and if things don’t work out for whatever reason, I will work to get back to where I am.

    To be honest, I’m more afraid of being stuck in a bad relationship than I am being single.  I can’t imagine being stuck for very long, though.  I’ve learned better than that.

    To put it another way:

    I’m not working to avoid something by being in a relationship.  I’m working to achieve/maintain something I like.

    I agree, in fact it is reassuring that men like us exists out there who belives in MGTOW. I have joined the movement, need to get laid will complete the picture. Marriage word will be written out off from English dictionary by 2030.  

  • lovelost

    @Susan #180

    FWIW, as I said earlier, I think Roissy is way too hard on betas. In fact, Roissy deals in hyperbole. I have learned from the men here that they recognize this and take what’s useful, without embracing the full menu of misogyny, sadism, etc. Roissy’s disdain of betas includes more than a little self-loathing.

    My position is this: It is much easier to add alpha behaviors to the beta male than the reverse. And both sets of traits are desired by women. In and out of the bedroom. Therefore, I endorse Game and encourage beta guys who were raised in the era of feminism to apply it as a corrective measure.

    I can’t get hold of Rossiy posts since it has been removed. However there is much evidence that CH is the Roissy. Anyhow leaving that aside as well, Hawaiian libertarian has complied the list of Roissy Maxims, and they really apply on women. Here is the one on beta delusion

     

    Maxim #37: High IQ is no inoculation against beta delusion. If anything, high IQ obstructs clear thinking about women’s nature.

     

    I can’t speak for others, however I am that beta who suffered from this beta delusion, and now when I am enlighten and aware I see women in a different light. Roissy and/or CH is asking beta guys to man up, get smart and get very critical of women hypergamy, otherwise beta should prepare to taken for a ride, some of those examples would be women having a higher count settling down after having fun, raising a child that not yours, so on and so forth.

     

    It’s not Roissy disdain, I believe it’s his frustration towards beta guys, kind of saying Damn it Can’t you see it, she is taking you for a ride. Can’t you see it she is making a joke out of you, fooling you and robbing you of respect, love and affection? That’s what Roissy is saying. Roissy is saying to guys “You go guys”, you can have it all and all on your terms. You need to learn that and use it your advantage. He is asking all the beta guys to join him and turn the feminism movement in their favor, one of the best examples of doing that is P & D. Another, ask for sex in the first date, otherwise walk away, women want to have fun and then let’s have fun. Roissy, is doesn’t bear disrespect to beta, he is providing information which is and will place beta to get most out of women and relationship.

     

    Now comes the most important question, Are Women on HUS getting afraid of the Beta becoming Aware, Enlightened, joining the MGTOW, seeking sex before commitment, making women do all the work for getting dates? I have feeling that is happening, especially as more and more men are coming out and saying it they are happy being single.

     

     

     

     

  • I thought *I* was Bob

    I agree that women should be open to marriage possibilities early. I think I startled TheFemalePerspective on an earlier comment section with my “Do you want to have his babies?” question. That is really the Gold Standard of attraction. If a women isn’t open to the possibility of marriage I bet most will shy away from using it.

  • Sassy6519

    Now comes the most important question, Are Women on HUS getting afraid of the Beta becoming Aware, Enlightened, joining the MGTOW, seeking sex before commitment, making women do all the work for getting dates? I have feeling that is happening, especially as more and more men are coming out and saying it they are happy being single.

     

    Not really. What would we need to be afraid of? It wouldn’t change our game plans really. Women like me have already been trying our hardest to screen out and filter out men who aren’t compatible with us, for whatever the reason may be. If a man takes on the MGTOW attitude, that’s his prerogative. If a man wants to seek sex before commitment, I have no problem with that. If a man wants women to do all the work to get dates, that’s his decision. I also have the right to avoid men with those attitudes like the plague.

    Like I have said before, nothing is attractive about a man interacting with me like I’m the enemy when I haven’t done anything wrong to him personally. If a man wants to view me as guilty until proven innocent, that’s on him. I won’t tolerate it though. If I’ve made a concerted effort not to treat all men as scum despite the fact that I’ve been hurt in the past, I expect that same behavior from a man. I don’t have time to be crucified for the past grievances he may have experienced with women. I shouldn’t have to pay for their sins against him, so to speak.

    That’s why I suggest people who haven’t fully gotten over past grievances with romantic partners to take a time out from the dating scene. There is no point in putting bitterness and resentment onto an unsuspecting human being just because they happen to be the same gender as a past relationship partner.

     

  • lovelost

    @Sassy6519

    There is no point in putting bitterness and resentment onto an unsuspecting human being just because they happen to be the same gender as a past relationship partner.

     

    I am not putting out bitterness, i am in the same boat, of trying to use the information to screen out bad stuff.

  • lovelost

    @Sassy6519,

    I afraid was not the best word, next time i will come up with positive synonyms.

  • lovelost

    @Sassy6519

    That’s why I suggest people who haven’t fully gotten over past grievances with romantic partners to take a time out from the dating scene.

    how much time do you suggest?

  • Desiderius

    “Cosign this. Start searching for a life partner by age 21, and be prepared to hold onto them come what may.”

    Cosign here. With enthusiasm. This is real progress over what young men and women have now.

    It is not unlikely that my grandmothers had counts over one at the time they were married, but if they were getting it on, they were doing so in the context of finding a life partner. Mr. (potentially) Right, not Mr. Right Now. No P in V for men who want to be Fathers but not Husbands. Less “accidents”, and by all evidence, the sex is better that way too.

    Also no exclusivity without a ring and the work required to convince her to accept it.  For a woman with options, her exclusive attention is a very valuable thing. Maybe we’ll have to agree to disagree there, but young women need to know that alternatives exist, and that they have a decent track record. Where to find the men? The 80%. His value won’t be as high as yours yet.

    My mother pursued a similar strategy, but, you know, Vietnam. Didn’t work out. Aunts had better luck, and now cousins too.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Prof. Escoffier

    So why don’t we try this. Go ahead and hunt for a LTR in your early 20s.  But think of him first and foremost as a potential husband. Purge the “I’m too young” meme from your brain. Since you’re going to treat him more or less like a husband anyway as long as the relationship lasts, this seems reasonable to me. Then you might not only choose better, you might actually get married to someone you love and be happy. If it takes 3-4 years from first date to wedding, so what.

    Astute and excellent advice. This really is the best strategy for young women. And half of them know this and have already gone through the motions. ~ 30% are married by age 24. Another ~ 20% are married by age 26 (median). I’m betting most of them are from suburban and rural parts of the country, with much more traditional priorities. Good luck preaching to the other half, mainly professional urbanites. They’re swimming in a shrinking pool of men who will be extremely reluctant to commit for any length of time.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Lovelost

    I would suggest that people take a long enough time out for destructive behavior and malice to go away. I’ve found that when most people experience heartbreak, they enter into a period filled with rage and abandon. They are sad, hurt, and angry about their recent split, so they engage in behaviors to try to cover up or wash over the pain they may be feeling. These activities include, but are not limited to:

    1. Excessive drinking or substance abuse

    2. Quickly trying to find a rebound. (This is the worst thing to do, in my opinion. By doing so, a person brings an unsuspecting person into an emotional typhoon. The main person isn’t over their ex, so they try to fill the holes they have with another warm body. Most of the time, it doesn’t fill the emptiness and the other person feels used.)

    3. Causing physical or collateral damage (Ex: slashing an ex’s tires, burning their clothes or objects, slandering their name, breaking things, etc).

    4. Becoming bitter and resentful, which translates to acting bitter and resentful towards other people

    I broke up with my ex 3 months ago. I also graduated with a degree in psychology. I knew I didn’t want any of these things to happen and I also wanted the healing process to be quick. Want to know what I did to speed it along? I allowed myself all the time I needed to really grieve the loss I felt. I wrote in my diary, I cried as much as I wanted to without feeling shameful about it, I talked with friends, and I focused myself heavily on my career. I didn’t try to run from or escape from the pain I was feeling. I wanted it to hit me like a tidal wave, and it did. Once I weathered the storm fully instead of running from it, I found that my sadness passed and that I’m now ready to wholeheartedly get back out in the dating scene.

    I don’t see the point in getting back out in the dating scene without fully coming to terms with a past relationship ending. Doing so without fully healing is like getting behind the wheel of a car while drunk. You can physically drive in that state of mind, but that sure as hell doesn’t mean that you should. If people don’t come to terms with how they feel about their last relationships, I think they are doomed to hurt themselves and other people again.

     

  • lovelost

    @Sassy6519

    Thank you putting a good list of options. Somehow these don’t apply since i stayed away from it. However thats’ not the point, the reason i ask for time, is to get a measurable idea. Some people idea of time is 3 months and for some 3 years. My previous relationship ended back in 2006. After that never had an opportunity for dating. Was completely focused on career and went through some tough time. I am not bitter or resentful, but i realize my writing comes off that way, will there you go an opportunity and reason to improve my writing skills.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Ms. Sassy6519

    That’s why I suggest people who haven’t fully gotten over past grievances with romantic partners to take a time out from the dating scene. There is no point in putting bitterness and resentment onto an unsuspecting human being just because they happen to be the same gender as a past relationship partner.

    So many people could benefit from this advice. I was reading your followup on destructive behaviors, and have seen this kind of stuff play out numerous times right after a breakup. Men seem especially prone to it.

    You mentioned a degree in psychology, so correct me if I’m wrong. I think this is called transference. When you take all of your negative emotions and experiences and project them onto another person who has done you no wrong. For guys, it’s the “use ‘em and lose ‘em” treatment for women. The reasoning being, they’re all probably as rotten as the girls who broke their hearts. For women looking for commitment, these guys are as dangerous as players, but with malice aforethought thrown into the mix.

  • Olive

    Good luck preaching to the other half, mainly professional urbanites. They’re swimming in a shrinking pool of men who will be extremely reluctant to commit for any length of time.

    LOL speaking of which, I met THE MOST hypergamous girl last night. She’s not all that attractive (maybe a 5 or 6, plus she’s the obnoxious kind of outgoing) and she actually admitted she’s picky about guys (something I’ve been hearing a lot lately). She also talked about how she wants to join the Peace Corps, then go live in a developing country, so she doesn’t think she’s headed towards marriage anytime soon. And THEN she said this: “But I feel like if I’ve done the Peace Corps and [done all of this glorious shit] by the time I’m 35, I’ll be quite the marketable woman.” HA.

    To which I replied “Actually I read this article by Kate Bolick, a woman who thought she’d get married but probably waited too long and she might never find a hubby now….”

    Her reaction? “I don’t think I want to hear this….”. It’s the cold truth girl. If you want to get married, better find a husband, then do the Peace Corps with him. But seriously, if she’s looking to fuck around (literally) in Tanzania or whatever, she’ll be shit out of luck when she returns.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Ms. Olive

    Her reaction? “I don’t think I want to hear this….”. It’s the cold truth girl. If you want to get married, better find a husband, then do the Peace Corps with him. But seriously, if she’s looking to fuck around (literally) in Tanzania or whatever, she’ll be shit out of luck when she returns.

    Yikes. You probably ticked her off by describing reality. Some people never let facts get in the way of his or her preconceived idea of how the world works.

    Also, going overseas and having sex with strangers in other countries, that’s a very scary proposition. Safe sex in the U.S. should go without saying. Elsewhere, it’s absolutely essential.

  • Olive

    Yikes. You probably ticked her off by describing reality. Some people never let facts get in the way of his or her preconceived idea of how the world works.

    Haha yeah I have a bad habit of speaking the truth no one wants to hear. Oh well, I didn’t have much to lose. Judging from other things she said, she’s not to be trusted, and certainly not to be sought out as a friend.

    Also, going overseas and having sex with strangers in other countries, that’s a very scary proposition. Safe sex in the U.S. should go without saying. Elsewhere, it’s absolutely essential.

    Yeah this is interesting. Actually I’ve been hearing a lot of American girls say they loooove foreign guys. It used to be limited to Europeans (you know, hot French/British accents) but now I often hear Latin American and African guys are catches as well. There’s a racial component, of course: many girls say they’ll go for white Africans (like, in South Africa) over black Africans. I wonder if it’s another case of going crazy over something you can’t have/something rare.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    Actually I’ve been hearing a lot of American girls say they loooove foreign guys.

    For stereotypical guys, it’s places like Brazil, the Netherlands, and Thailand. I think the phenomenon is called sex tourism. However, some guys go looking for underage girls where the laws are pretty lax. Sends a chill up my spine just thinking about it.

    On the slipside, some guys go the route of flying in Eastern European mail-order brides. I don’t know if this is because they’re cynical, desperate, or just wealthy. Most of these women are trying to get green cards and escape poverty. But from what I’ve read, they also study up on U.S. divorce laws in advance : (

  • Anacaona

    Actually I’ve been hearing a lot of American girls say they loooove foreign guys.

    Compare how many of them actually marry foreign guys with success and stay long with them. Men are men, there is a reason American women are considered sluts pretty much everywhere they go, aside maybe in France.

  • Lokland

    @ Olive, Megamen

    Just my two cents on the foreign thing.

    I dated a lot of Asian girls in uni. Most of them foreign on a student visa.

    The difference in respect between them and North American women (regardless of race) was incredible. Probably also explains why I chose to ask one of them to marry me.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @lovelost

    Now comes the most important question, Are Women on HUS getting afraid of the Beta becoming Aware, Enlightened, joining the MGTOW, seeking sex before commitment, making women do all the work for getting dates? I have feeling that is happening, especially as more and more men are coming out and saying it they are happy being single.

    The point you raise reminds me about the time the beloved dog of an acquaintance died and he started wondering whether he would see his dog again in heaven. His wife said (and I paraphrase), “I won’t care if we never see Buckley again, but if that’s the case, then I want to know now.” It was the uncertainty, more than the arguments that animals don’t have souls, that was really stressing her out.

    I’m the same way about my marriage prospects. I won’t be devastated if I never get married, but if that is to be the case, then I’d like to know now so that I stop stressing out looking for someone who isn’t there.

    Like Dogsquat, I’d say that being single is my average state. In fact, a few years ago, I was committed to being single forever (if nuns who live in community count as “singles”). Now that that door is closed, I feel a little guilty to be among those women for whom finding a good husband is “Plan B”. I may not have messed around in my youth, but the convent got some of my “best” years, and there’s nothing to be done about that.

  • lovelost

    @Bellita

    Now that that door is closed, I feel a little guilty to be among those women for whom finding a good husband is “Plan B”.

    Now that the door is closed or closing at my end, i don’t know whether as to i should feel guilty about it or just embrace it. :)

  • Olive

    @Lokland,

    The difference in respect between them and North American women (regardless of race) was incredible. Probably also explains why I chose to ask one of them to marry me.

    Could you elaborate on what was different? I’m really just curious.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Megaman

    You are correct. It is called transference. Nothing good can come from it really.

    I’ve seen some pretty nasty breakups unfold, and it’s more motivation for me to handle them with care.

  • Dogsquat

    Lovelost said:

    “However thats’ not the point, the reason i ask for time, is to get a measurable idea. Some people idea of time is 3 months and for some 3 years. My previous relationship ended back in 2006. After that never had an opportunity for dating. Was completely focused on career and went through some tough time. I am not bitter or resentful, but i realize my writing comes off that way, will there you go an opportunity and reason to improve my writing skills.”

    I used to travel a lot – sometimes for a year or more at a time. There is a tendency people (myself included) have to imagine that time stops at home while you are gone. It was almost an affront to my sense of reality to come home and discover a new shopping mall, or that my favorite restaurant closed, or the new stoplight at a familiar intersection. On some level, I expected everything to be just the same as I left it.

    In a way, relationships are like that. If you have a shitty breakup, and then nothing happens in your love life for years, you’re right back where you started emotionally when you think about getting back on the horse o’ bajingoes.

    Sure, you’re older and wiser, and you’ve advanced in other areas, but as far as “Lovelost and Women” goes – well, that context hasn’t changed at all. Don’t focus so much on time limits and defined end-points for stuff. Look at the context of your life in that area. If you wall off an area of life that’s particularly painful, you aren’t changing the context, you’re just ignoring it.

    I put tourniquets on people who are bleeding to death quite frequently. Tourniquets are great – sometimes I don’t even go “lights and sirens” to the hospital after a tourniquet if the patient is stable – they’re going to live and the added risk of hauling ass isn’t worth it.

    I didn’t fix them, though. They’re still fucked up, just not actively dying. I kicked the can down the road a bit. Focusing entirely on work/family/school/model trains/whatever and avoiding relationships is like using a tourniquet on your emotions.

    I agree with Sassy that it’s unfair to rebound on someone. You should try not to, but that’s a risk we all take when we get close to another human being. Goes with the territory.

    A good interim step is to make friends with a cute girl. Decide before hand that you’re never, ever going to see her naked. Put that possibility out of your mind forever, then just enjoy her company. Go do stuff together – little “pseudo-dates”. That will go a long way toward changing your context WRT women. It’s not perfect, and at some point you ought to just take the plunge, but it does help.

    I just read over that and I sound like a fucking hippie. Feelings, context, emotional tourniquets…..Kum Bah Ya, my Lord….Kum Bah Yahhhhh…..Let’s all hug each other and project LOVE into the WORLD.

  • Dogsquat

    Olive said:

    “But seriously, if she’s looking to fuck around (literally) in Tanzania or whatever, she’ll be shit out of luck when she returns.”

    Not necessarily. 

    She could always get The AIDS and die, you know.  She’ll never get old!

  • Dogsquat

    Hey, Sassy Brainshrinker!

    I’ve been bugging Susan about exploring transference and counter-transference since I started posting here.

    I use those concepts as tools daily.  When I’m dealing with a drug-seeking patient, there’s no more reliable tool/indicator for me than how I “feel” about them.  Not what they say, how they look, how they act – nothing has proven more accurate than listening to that accumulation of subconscious cues that add up to elicit certain feelings in me.

    I’ve learned to do the same thing with women, as I used to be quite the Sergeant Save-A-Ho.

    I think a basic understanding of those concepts would help a lot of people avoid a lot of dumb decisions.  If you have the time, perhaps you’d post a primer?

  • Jennifer

    Oh, THAT’S the riddle: the sex thing. In regular relationships, both need to yield at different points, modern me-ism crap on both gender sides regardless. But in the sex thing, for me it’s simple: the asshole wants your vagina, not you, and once he has it he’ll dump the person attached to it. Roosh already explained this: you have to make men see that you’re a woman to work for. Some gamers like to describe women as children, but men are often like kids too: if they’re given something too easily, they won’t appreciate it. All people are like this, and there’s a practical side to it; while both men and women have times they’d love to have sex and nothing else, men know instinctively that a woman who gives it too easily is not marriage material.

  • Jennifer

    Save-a-ho. This is why people need God: He requires real change, and doesn’t see people as charity cases or hopelessly broken products.

  • Lokland

    @ Olive

    It was really just more of a general feeling I got when with them. It felt more right. The only word I can think of to describe it.

    (I want to say now not all of the foreign women I dated were like this nor were all the NA women not respectful.)

    Thinking on it more they acted more feminine. Femininists can begin preparing their bombing runs now.

    Of my lets say MTR with NA women (~10ish) some of them made me feel like I was dating another man. Agressive, assertive, wouldn’t listen, arrogant. Possibly I just have horrible choice in women but at the same time I picked a few that were the defintion of feminine so I don’t think it was entirely my selection process.

     (My defintion of feminine is cute, cute looks good when I wake up. Sexy tends to run a bit in the morning.)

    Now lets go over to the foreign side (~20ish), most came from traditional cultures, including my fiance. They embodied cute. Some were still the above but far less.

    I’ve tried explaining this to people before and I am not saying my girlfriend or any of the other women were in anyway submissive or something idiotic like that. When my fiance digs her heels in compromise is the only option. (I also tend to be stubborn as a mule tied to a cement pole.)

    At the same time, I’ve never heard her swear, get obsensely drunk, do anything I would consider to be slutty. All around she is a good girl. Ya that works well, most of the foreign women were good girls. Most of the NA’s seemed to be trying to play the bad ass bitch role. No clue why.

    (Note: There were women in both groups on both sides of the fence. Just the groups tended to cluster on one side.)

     

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @M. Lokland

    The difference in respect between them and North American women (regardless of race) was incredible. Probably also explains why I chose to ask one of them to marry me.

    I think I understand what you’re getting at. I had a number of Asian and Asian-American friends in college. Some were foreign students, some first generation, some not. Women who aren’t significantly removed from their traditional cultural roots tend to have much more honest and realistic views of men, marriage, family, etc. And they’re not forgoing their career paths, just trying to balance it with other considerations. However, some of the third generation Asian girls I ran into from L.A. and the O.C. were indistinguishable from the standard airheads and bimbos (I use those terms with affection).

    FWIW, when I was trying to date (with little success) in college and shortly thereafter, the girls who gave me a chance more often than not tended to be Hispanic and African-American. And I was a thin, average-looking, white guy. Can’t really explain why that was the case. I ended up marrying a tall, fair-skinned, blonde a little younger than me. If there’s a pattern there, I don’t know what it is : )

  • Sassy6519

    @ Dogsquat

    I’d be happy to give my 2 cents on the matter one day, preferably when I’m not stuffing my face with pizza and watching mind numbing television. Being lazy sometimes feels awesome.

  • lovelost

    @DogSquat

    In a way, relationships are like that. If you have a shitty breakup, and then nothing happens in your love life for years, you’re right back where you started emotionally when you think about getting back on the horse o’ bajingoes.

    I am trying to kick start the process, but success is eluding me. let’s see how it goes.

    Sure, you’re older and wiser, and you’ve advanced in other areas, but as far as “Lovelost and Women” goes – well, that context hasn’t changed at all.

    That’s the reason it is ‘lovelost’, will change it too foundlove. :-) if i find it.

    I agree with Sassy that it’s unfair to rebound on someone. You should try not to, but that’s a risk we all take when we get close to another human being. Goes with the territory.

    i will tone it down, I am not being bitter or resentful but point taken.

  • Dogsquat

    Jennifer said:

    “Save-a-ho. This is why people need God: He requires real change, and doesn’t see people as charity cases or hopelessly broken products.”

    Some of the devout gain a tremendous amount of self-worth and self esteem from their faith. I’m not knocking that at all – good for them.

    I, on the other hand, am slightly less omnipotent than your deity of choice. I have to make judgements about people in order to stay safe, sane, and happy. Some of the women I’ve dated were, in fact, broken. I guess nobody’s hopeless, but I sure as hell couldn’t fix ‘em. Took me awhile to realize that’s way outside my scope of practice.

    Religion might have helped them, but in thinking about one girl in particular, I think it would have turned her into the worst kind of zealot. I can see her keying someone’s car or pressing false charges as revenge with no remorse, secure in the knowledge that God loves her no matter what, and if she says she’s sorry to God then she’ll go to Heaven with Grandma one day and everything will be peachy.

    Some folks aren’t responsible enough to be told about divine forgiveness, in my opinion. Assholes are bad enough to deal with – but assholes who believe that they’re being assholes with God’s express written consent and verbal approval scare/have scared the shit out of me.

    I vote for the God of Moses to take a page out of Zeus’s book and start chucking lightning bolts at assholes.

  • Dogsquat

    Lovelost, I wasn’t implying that you’re bitter or resentful.  I took your question to mean,”Hey, this sucks.  When does it usually stop?”

    I think you ought to go out and approach women.  Get into a relationship.  Get laid a whole bunch.  Don’t be a dick about it, and do your level best to treat each girl fairly.   Nothing fixes heartbreak quite like as falling in love again.

    Also, go read this post and comments over at Danny’s if you haven’t.

    Plus, I think there is a “sweet spot” for men WRT experience.  If you’ve only had one or two relationships and they ended badly, it’s easy to believe that “all women are like that”.  If you get to know several women very well, though, you can internalize the fact that every one is different.  There may be overarching themes and things that’ll torpedo your chances with every woman ever born, but there are good human beings with fallopian tubes out there.

     

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    Assholes are bad enough to deal with – but assholes who believe that they’re being assholes with God’s express written consent and verbal approval scare/have scared the shit out of me.

    I’m somewhere between deist and agnostic, but can appreciate the maxim, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” However, we all have to deal with people who aren’t as considerate. Maybe the Golden Rule should be coupled with, “Trust, but verify.”

    Not to get too religious, but my guess is the average player doesn’t spend much time worshipping the good lord. He’s more interested in women worshipping him. His next orgasm is probably the only thing he holds sacred. And he’s only looking to convert women who haven’t seen the light, not other guys : )

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Not to get too religious, but my guess is the average player doesn’t spend much time worshipping the good lord. He’s more interested in women worshipping him. His next orgasm is probably the only thing he holds sacred. And he’s only looking to convert women who haven’t seen the light, not other guys : )

      I’ve never thought of it before, but Game becomes a religion for some men. Only, they’re not followers, but one of the gods.

  • Jennifer

    I know you can’t fix everyone, or most people, Dog, and I respect you saying that. It was just that the term you used (save-a-ho) seemed harsh and all this was doubled by recent posts I’d seen elsewhere, that more or less advised people to avoid abuse victims. To think that a great deal of people would be denied a chance of love, because of crimes against them, is just awful.

    Believe me, I’ve seen many religious as*holes; oh boy. But most of the Christians I’ve come across, flawed as they are, are wonderful people. Everyone should be told about divine forgiveness; not a single one should be allowed to abuse or misunderstand it. It requires massive change, not a get-into-heaven-free ticket.

    “I vote for the God of Moses to take a page out of Zeus’s book and start chucking lightning bolts at assholes”

    Don’t tempt me to make an unholy wish, about devout and non-devout assholes. I do pray for justice, but not hell; I’ve never prayed hell on anyone. Or even wished for it on anyone. Until recently.

  • Anonymous

    Megaman:

    FWIW, when I was trying to date (with little success) in college and shortly thereafter, the girls who gave me a chance more often than not tended to be Hispanic and African-American. And I was a thin, average-looking, white guy.  I ended up marrying a tall, fair-skinned, blonde a little younger than me. If there’s a pattern there, I don’t know what it is : )

    My reply:

    Perhaps women Af-Am, Latina, who weren’t looking for alphas, but nice beta guys?  I was one–Af-Am woman married to (French-Canadian) beta husband, and I wasn’t a carousel rider chasing alphas who then settled for a beta.

  • pvw

    Oops-the last anonymous was me, pioneervalleywoman (pvw).

  • Dogsquat

    Jennifer said:
    I know you can’t fix everyone, or most people, Dog, and I respect you saying that. It was just that the term you used (save-a-ho) seemed harsh and all this was doubled by recent posts I’d seen elsewhere, that more or less advised people to avoid abuse victims.

    Jennifer, I was using “save-a-ho” as a colloquialism. It means a guy who is a fixer, somebody who pursues troubled women and tries to help them. The term (and the actions of the guy) says more about the guy than any girl he goes after.

    In my case, I think I’d subsume myself in their lives so I didn’t have to face my own crap. I was so busy dealing with her eating disorder/coke habit/alcoholism/crappy family that I never had to think about how fucked up I was. Looking back on it now, it seems really twisted – and it’s not the fault of the girls.

    I’m not so black and white about abuse victims, either. Everybody has crap to deal with in life. I’ve been fairly open about not being in the best mental shape when I got out of the military. I wouldn’t expect a woman to deal with my crap back then. Do the work and get healthy though, and you deserve a fair shake.

  • Jennifer

    Wow, I had no idea some guys actually see themselves that way; ugh.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @pvw

    Perhaps women Af-Am, Latina, who weren’t looking for alphas, but nice beta guys?  I was one–Af-Am woman married to (French-Canadian) beta husband, and I wasn’t a carousel rider chasing alphas who then settled for a beta.

    That could have been the case. I’m not one to generalize based on ethnicity. And although we never got physical (darn), they tended to be gentle in letting me know they weren’t interested. Probably kept me from getting too cynical. I stayed friends with a few, and they provided excellent tips that eventually worked on the wife once she came along. Some guys believe you can only learn about women (generally) by sleeping with them. That wasn’t the case for me at all. Advice and friendship helped out a lot more in the long run.

  • Anacaona

    This is why people need God: He requires real change, and doesn’t see people as charity cases or hopelessly broken products

    One guy ( a gay man just FYI) said that when people don’t believe in God they believe in everything else. I don’t believe absolutely everyone needs to believe in God to be a moral person, but I think the majority do and once removed from their lives they tend to follow their base instincts or the latest trend easier than a person that already have that place in the brain for “guidance” filled with a religion (and I mean any of them), YMMV.

  • pvw

    Megaman:

    That could have been the case. I’m not one to generalize based on ethnicity.

    My reply:

    I should have phrased it differently:  “Perhaps the women were Af-Am, Latina, who weren’t looking for alphas, but nice beta guys?” 

    Megaman:

    Some guys believe you can only learn about women (generally) by sleeping with them. That wasn’t the case for me at all. Advice and friendship helped out a lot more in the long run.

    My reply:

    I agree, and I’m glad to hear this view!

  • lovelost

    @DogSquat

    I think you ought to go out and approach women.  Get into a relationship.  Get laid a whole bunch.  Don’t be a dick about it, and do your level best to treat each girl fairly.   Nothing fixes heartbreak quite like as falling in love again.

    Yes, i realize this is what i ought to be doing, approach more women.

    There Will Always Be Another Woman (TWABAW) this needs to be added to the glossary list.

    I agree with the female abundance frame, hit on every woman.

  • Valentin

    How does a man solve a riddle with no answer?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jennifer,

    My advice would be to avoid personal relationships with any kind of victim. A victim isn’t someone who’s been knocked down by the hardships of life. That describes most people to one extent or another. A victim is someone who has been knocked down and won’t get back up.

  • Escoffier

    Anacaona: that quote is attributed to Chesterton except apparently he never said it.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Escoffier

    It’s very likely a paraphrase of something he wrote in Orthodoxy.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Escoffier

    I just double checked with the Internet and it looks as if I won’t be getting my PhD in Chestertonia any time soon. It’s actually someone else’s gloss of a Father Brown quote. D’oh!

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    The commonly-used Chesterton quote seems to actually come from the Belgian poet Emile Cammaerts, who was quoting and paraphrasing something Chesterton did say. In his book The Laughing Prophet, Cammaerts wrote:

    Its drowning all your old rationalism and scepticism, it’s coming in like a sea; and the name of it is superstition.” The first effect of not believing in God is to believe in anything: “And a dog is an omen and a cat is a mystery.”

    Note that the commonly-quoted epigram is not actually a Chesterton quote, but is sandwiched between two quotes, so it’s an easy mistake to make.

    (BTW, Emile Cammaerts was the father of Francis Cammaerts, who was initially a pacifist and conscienscious objector in WWII, but later joined the secret British sabotage organization called Special Operations Executive and became one of the most successful underground organizers in occupied Europe.)

     

     

     

     

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    Meant to include this link for the history of the Chesterton “quote.”

     

     

  • Jennifer

    Good point, Jesus.

    Wow lovelost, your name describes you perfectly.

  • redneck

    Let us turn this around and look at it from the male viewpoint.

    If I marry a woman and choose to have children by her, I am acting like a beta. Most woman don’t tolerate betas. So if I marry, I abandon what attracted her to me, and she sleeps with someone else, while demanding I continue to support her.

    So if I seduce women by becoming the asshole and cad that I am not naturally inclined to be, I can be pretty sure that any woman I successfully seduce by such means is not marriage material.

    The solution to this paradox is patriarchal marriage. Absent patriarchal marriage, women are not going to like their husbands, and men, realizing or suspecting that their girlfriends will like them if they behave well, will not marry. If they do marry, will soon become divorced.

    Now it is possible to maintain a patriarchal marriage by one’s own personal character – what players call long term relationship game, but it is difficult when the law and society have abolished marriage, in that they have abolished any legal and social penalties for bad female behavior. For Mormons and Orthodox Jews, it is a lot easier, for they are embedded in a society that still socially enforces marriage.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @redneck
      Unfortunately, for all of us, I can’t really disagree with your assessment of marriage. For those men who want it, and I realize your number is dwindling, then your best bet is women who not only tolerate betas, but prefer them. We don’t require too much dominance, but LTR Game keeps things humming.

  • Escoffier

    Another solution, from Athol Kay, is learn to combine alpha and beta quailites and dial up (or suppress) the one or the other as circumstances warrant.  Reminiscent of Machiavelli’s discussion in Prince 17 recommending that to be successful, a prince should combine the natures of the fox and the lion.

  • Jennifer

    If by patriarchal marriage you mean one where men make all the rules, forget it. You simplified things too much anyway: it’s ridiculous to claim that all women hate good husbands, for crying out loud. Nothing like the constant dilemma Susan presented.

  • lovelost

    @Jennifer #238

    Thanks for the compliment.

  • Jonny

    The dilemma does have implications to marriages and relationships.

    Women always reserve themselves the right to change their minds regardless of whatever version of feminism she holds. The double standards exists to serve women. The man will still have obligations and usually women blame the men for the disolution of a marriage or relationship. At the most trivial level, this means men are to blame for the breakup that she decides to set in motion because she felt she was insulted, disrespected, or her loss of affection for her man.

    She will find someone to blame. She never takes responsibility.

  • Dogsquat

    Lovelost, if you start reading some Game, using it, and seeing it work, please be careful.  This, of course, is my opinion only.  Others may disagree – hell, even you might after awhile.  I hope not.

    Some of the mindsets can be taken too far.  It’s helpful to realize that 99.9999% of women have some common, overarching attraction triggers.  It’s not realistic to conclude that 99.9999% of women are amoral, dirty sluts that put out for anyone, anytime, all the time, if you just hit some magic combination of techniques.  Stuff is more complicated than that.

    The other thing about Game I think hurts men in the long run is a male version of the Cock Carousel.  It’s tempting to ditch a girl as soon as she turns out to be imperfect.  If you’re in shape, have a good frame, are semi-interesting, and understand a bit of Game, it’s pretty easy to meet new girls.  There’s always that cute nurse in the Pediatric Emergency Department, or your buddy’s new secretary who are making eyes at you.  Maybe they won’t drool on your chest while they sleep like your current main squeeze does….

    Just so you know – all girls are imperfect.  No girl ever born will live up to the society issued fantasy you had in your head at age 18.  Figure out what your dealbreakers are and stick to those.  If you’re generally happy with a girl, don’t be afraid to do a little work on the relationship.

    I know that seems like advice to settle, and in a way I guess it is.  It’s also about looking at what is, rather than what you wish it was.  It’s not as bad as it sounds, though.  My preference is for tall, leggy/lanky blonde women.  I’m “settling” for a shorter, dark-haired girl – who has everything else I value and expect.  Perhaps a true Player would keep looking for that blonde who’s just like my girlfriend in all other ways, but I think that’d be wasted effort.

    Paying attention to the balance between TWABAW vs. being realistic and giving your relationship an honest effort is very important.  Start thinking about it now, even as you get better at your Game and learn what makes women tick.

    I’ve already recommended Dannyfrom504 to you.  Take a look at some of his stuff – see how he’s always out there flirting?  I think that should be your first step.  Take a look at Badger for a more cerebral look at the mechanics of Game, and Athol for how it’s done in a relationship.  The Private Man is good for the older ladies, and Byron will larn’ you about things to watch out for.  I also enjoy Kane and The Tao of Dirt.  Use Roissy only sparingly.  I think of Roissy like I do epinepherine – it’s powerful and undeniably saves lives, but will kill you very easily if you get too much.  Some of the MGTOW and MRA sites are like that, too.  Reading them too much affects your outlook, and I think those guys will end up miserable. They have a lot invested in being victims – a sure way to end up a victim.

    Good luck, dude!  I think you’re about to have a shitload of fun. I think this is a good place to get advice. There are some really smart guys (I do not count myself among them) with all different viewpoints who post here. Lots of us have been in your shoes.

  • Dogsquat

    Johnny said:

    “Women always reserve themselves the right to change their minds regardless of whatever version of feminism she holds. ”

    A good way to avoid/mitigate this unfortunate tendency is to screen women by occupation.  I’ve had better compatibility with women who must be accountable in their work.  If doctors and nurses screw up, people die.  Engineering screw ups kill tons of people.  A landscape architect must come in on time and under budget.  Even a saleswoman must meet a quota.  Those types (and others) are used to being held accountable for things.

    Lawyers, HR types, marketers, and artists deal daily in an altogether fuzzier logic.  Brutal accountability, i.e. “This is your fault.  You are responsible, and no one else.” is sometimes a foreign concept to them.  They’re used to managing and dealing with perceptions.  Often, who can be convinced of something is more important than what actually happened.  And if they refuse to be convinced, well, it obviously wasn’t like that, was it?

    Obviously, this is a gross generalization.  It doesn’t fit everybody.  It’s just one goofball on the internet sharing a tell that works for him.

  • El Marqués

    The way Susan presents this, the riddle really seems not to have a solution… but that’s not true.

    The contemporary male believes that if a woman is attracted to him (a far lower standard than feeling romantic love) she will yield.

    You’re talking about alphas and higher betas here. The rest do not have the luxury of this thinking.

    Her yielding proves her weakness, her lack of selectivity, and disqualifies her as the potential mother of his children. All at a very subconscious level, you understand.

    There’s nothing subconscious about it, it’s the standard male fitness test. Most men will test women on this, so females better learn how to pass: It’s not about the fact, that she yields, this is what complicates your thinking, Susan, it’s about how* she yields. There’s no weakness in yielding from a male point of view, it’s how you do it, that get’s you thrown in the slut pile as described in this:

    Once she has disqualified herself, he is relieved of the burden of obligation. He owes her nothing, certainly not respect.

    *How, of course, is about a reasonable timeframe. And about what she brings to the table during that timeframe before sex. It’s realy not that hard, and certainly no riddle with no answer.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @El Marques

      *How, of course, is about a reasonable timeframe. And about what she brings to the table during that timeframe before sex. It’s realy not that hard, and certainly no riddle with no answer.

      I’m cool with that if we can agree on what is a reasonable timeframe.

  • Jennifer

    Dog is right, and beware what you take from the “game” sites too. As far as I’m concerned, Roissy’s more harmful than good, but he’s not the only one with glass and grain mixed together.

  • Jennifer

    It’s not too hard, El? Each guy has a different demand, and level of pressure he’ll put on her. Susan’s talking about early sex, but the whole problem is very potent.

    Her experience could benefit her, Olive, if she doesn’t sleep around. But finding a husband isn’t that easy; maybe she’ll find one on her travels. I’m glad you gave Ms. Hypergamy a dose of reality regarding sex and men.

  • lovelost

    @Dogsquat

    Thank you for the advice, too some extent some of the resentment i had brewed from what i had read on Game sites, which was seduce a woman like this. most of them i don’t like, e.g. start with a neg. my ethics don’t guide me to say something neg to someone. I am keeping an optimistic outlook on women, but will be careful and use the information to screen out non-sense. As i have said before i am using this knowledge and wisdom to strategically position myself in the SMP.  Thank you to all of you for providing such insights, and guidance.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    Another solution, from Athol Kay, is learn to combine alpha and beta quailites and dial up (or suppress) the one or the other as circumstances warrant.  Reminiscent of Machiavelli’s discussion in Prince 17 recommending that to be successful, a prince should combine the natures of the fox and the lion.

    Mr. Kay has my respect for the advice he’s given, but I thought he was suggesting this in the context of marriage or a relationship?

    Your mention of the Prince conjures up the Dark Triad, which I only recently learned about. Don’t we have enough people out there already employing this kind of thing in the SMP? Seeking power over the opposite sex, never compromising from a position of strength, etc.

    What’s wrong with a Light Triad, if there is such a thing? I’m thinking off the top of my head, but something like Kindness + Empathy + Strength. Maybe less Machiavelli and more Burke or Tocqueville would be a good thing.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      What’s wrong with a Light Triad, if there is such a thing? I’m thinking off the top of my head, but something like Kindness + Empathy + Strength. Maybe less Machiavelli and more Burke or Tocqueville would be a good thing.

      Oooohhh, I love this!

  • lovelost

    @DogSquat

    could you post the Byron blog link? Thank you.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    lovelost,

    Byron posts here often and his name links to his site. But its: http://triggeralert.blogspot.com/

    Listen to Dogsquat. He knows whereof he speaks.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Megaman,

    I’m confused by the phrase “never compromising from a position of strength.” Are you criticizing men who refuse to compromise some of their strength or are you criticizing men who refuse to compromise even when it doesn’t affect the integrity of their strength?

    Kindness and empathy are good traits to develop. They are also an important aspect of relationship game. That said, kindness and empathy on their own aren’t going to do much to moisten a woman’s nether regions. Too much empathy in a man is a dangerous thing. A man has to be able to act in spite of his kindness and empathy. Sometimes being a man means being ruthless. And while not every woman will acknowledge the fact that she wants a bit of ruthlessness in her man, I think her attraction triggers show that she finds it desirable.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    I’ve never thought of it before, but Game becomes a religion for some men. Only, they’re not followers, but one of the gods.

    Just taking the mindset to its logical conclusion. It’s ironic that cult leaders tend to have prodigious sexual compulsions (Jonestown comes to mind). Every woman in the group has to submit to him at one time or another.

    Something else you mentioned here a few days ago…

    But so do men who compromise their character for the sake of dominance. Not strangers, but the women who know them, who see them make pussy the Holy Grail. A man’s ability to get it is attractive, but his decision to dedicate his life to it is repugnant.

    Judgmental, but I like it anyway. I suppose women need to think very hard about how much of this they’re willing to accept and tolerate from men. After all, it’s having an effect on whether men will ever commit to monogamy. I remember reading somewhere that, while women prefer some sexual experience in the men they marry, they also prefer fewer past partners for him, as well. In that sense, they’re idential to men. If only people would apply the standards they expect of others to themselves.

    Admittedly, I’m not too clear on what “game” is all about. But you seem to endorse it to some degree. From what I’ve read, I’m very ambivalent about blindly prescribing it to any guy who’s lonely for a girlfriend. It seems like a very double-edged sword, almost like walking a tightrope. That’s very difficult for sensitive human beings to balance. We’re not talking about some quantifiable formula that’s guaranteed to work every time. If it was, we’d probably see a lot more guys transforming from Dr. Jekyll into Mr. Hyde and running amok throughout the SMP (maybe we’re already there).

    That being said, I’m a strong proponent of building up some confidence, staying optimistic, and learning from one’s failures. I don’t like the term “game” to describe this. Self-improvement combined with a better attitude worked for me. I didn’t have to radically change my personality or how I viewed women. 90% of me stayed the same, but after years of failure, 10% needed refinement. Maybe “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” describes this best.

    My main concern about trumpeting “game” as the solution to all men’s ills is the unintended consequences. For every passive, shy, or non-aggressive guy that is able to land the girl of his dreams, how many end up going down the player route? And there’s an opportunity cost for that, too. I’ve run into numerous women in their late 20s and early 30s who completely write those guys off for relationships. They’re as harsh on guys for sleeping around as guys are on women in general.

  • Olive

    @Jennifer,

    Her experience could benefit her, Olive, if she doesn’t sleep around. But finding a husband isn’t that easy; maybe she’ll find one on her travels. I’m glad you gave Ms. Hypergamy a dose of reality regarding sex and men.

    Just to clarify, I’m totally in favor of traveling and Peace Corps work (I studied abroad twice during undergrad). I mainly took issue with this girl’s remark that she’d be a marketable woman at 35. Over and over again, we see this is not the case. According to most men here, women are in their prime in their early 20s, in terms of Sexual Market Value. From there, it’s a downward spiral.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    The only problem I have with kindness+empathy+strength is that it can very easily lead a man onto the path of the white knight. A man also needs principles and a purpose. Too much kindness and empathy without purpose and principles to balance it out and a man is liable to make his woman his purpose. And that’s bad.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    Jesus Mahoney says “Too much empathy in a man is a dangerous thing. A man has to be able to act in spite of his kindness and empathy”…reminds me of some lines in a poem by Leonard Cohen:

    When I’m with you
    I want to be
    the kind of man
    I wanted to be
    when I was six years old

    A perfect man, who kills.

     

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @david foster

      “Too much empathy in a man is a dangerous thing. A man has to be able to act in spite of his kindness and empathy”…reminds me of some lines in a poem by Leonard Cohen:

      I love Leonard Cohen. I almost put a video of Jeff Buckley singing Hallelujah in the Samson post, but it was too tangential a reference.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @J. Mahoney

    I’m confused by the phrase “never compromising from a position of strength.”  Are you criticizing men who refuse to compromise some of their strength or are you criticizing men who refuse to compromise even when it doesn’t affect the integrity of their strength?

    I’ll clarify. The Machiavelli reference got me thinking. In political history, when individual or nations have been in a position of strength, they have tended to take what they want without any concern for the weaker parties. When they’re in positions of weakness or parity, there is much more willingness to compromise. So I was merely relating that to the SMP. People who have strength (i.e. lots of options) tend to take what they want. I don’t think I was criticizing any particular behavior. But I actually think compromise is key to successful relationships. Nobody want’s to live in a constant back-and-forth game of gotcha.

    Kindness and empathy are good traits to develop. They are also an important aspect of relationship game. That said, kindness and empathy on their own aren’t going to do much to moisten a woman’s nether regions. Too much empathy in a man is a dangerous thing. A man has to be able to act in spite of his kindness and empathy. Sometimes being a man means being ruthless.  And while not every woman will acknowledge the fact that she wants a bit of ruthlessness in her man, I think her attraction triggers show that she finds it desirable.

    Well, that’s where we part company. I don’t endorse ruthlessness at all. That’s just me. I’ve seen a lot of damage done to friends who were seeking loving relationships with the wrong kinds of people. And I wasn’t suggesting any of these positive qualities should be practiced in a vacuum. That’s why I threw in strength, which includes confidence and honor. Maybe our definitions are different? I was able to stimulate my SO’s interest lo those many years ago without resorting to player-like behavior. I suspect the percentage of women this actually works on is rather overstated. At least, works on women who are relationship-material. Granted, I was never really that successful with women before I met my wife, but I only really need one women to love.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    david,

    Loved that quote. Thanks.

  • Jennifer

    Oh good God. the “measure some alpha here, some beta there, some empathy, some ruthlessness” schlock is going on again. Susan, I don’t think you’re correct about women not appreciating good men.

    “They are also an important aspect of relationship game”

    They’re an important aspect of relationships, full stop. Everyone needs to be ruthless about opposing evil, for ex, and this has nothing to do with how attractive it is to the opposite sex; ironically, if we focus on that as a reason for it, we ARE in fact making the opposite sex too much of a priority. If the opposite sex is attracted to hardness in the right places, it’s because as humans we’re not quite complete without it; we can’t tolerate everything.

    Megaman, what brilliant posts! You’re right-on all the way.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jennifer

      Susan, I don’t think you’re correct about women not appreciating good men.

      I don’t believe that at all! What did I say to make you think otherwise?

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    Sorry for the bad grammar in that last post. I’ve been running around tonight trying to deal with a pipe that was ready to bust upstairs. Is that alpha behavior? : )

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    David Foster,

    You can’t go wrong with a little Leonard. Mahoney’s line

    The only problem I have with kindness+empathy+strength is that it can very easily lead a man onto the path of the white knight. .. Too much kindness and empathy without purpose and principles to balance it out and a man is liable to make his woman his purpose. And that’s bad.

    makes me think of his entire book ‘Death Of A Ladies Man’. The pull between following your calling & the shackles of domestic love is a major theme in Cohen’s 70’s & 80’s work.

    You saw her [Bathsheba] bathing on the roof
    Her beauty & the moonlight overthrew you
    She tied you to a kitchen chair
    She broke your [King David’s] throne & she cut your [Samson’s] hair
    And from your lips she drew the Hallelujah.

    Don’t come any better than that.
    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      OMG, Byron cited Halleluhah! I referenced it above not even realizing it. That is truly one of the great ones.

  • Jennifer

    Hmm, so you strut while you do it?

  • Jennifer

    Going to fix the pipe, I mean :)

    I meant to say, the Light Triad is what every man needs. That’s the image women fell in love with for centuries, and we still dig Russel Crowe, Bruce Willis, Mel Gibson and Harrison Ford in their hero roles.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Here’s a wrench in the works:

      Edward Cullen of Twilight is Light Triad all the way. The men who think that Twilight is about women liking dangerous, ruthless men have got it totally upside down.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Ms. Jennifer

    Megaman, what brilliant posts! You’re right-on all the way.

    Whenever I hear this, it means I probably got something wrong : )

    P.S. I don’t think Mel is as popular now as his “Lethal Weapon” days…

  • anonymous

    Megama: “I’ve been running around tonight trying to deal with a pipe that was ready to bust upstairs. Is that alpha behavior? : )”

    Only if you were smoking it! ;-)

  • Jennifer

    ^ LOL

    Seriously Mega, I agree with you totally there.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Megaman,

    Here’s a simple game:

    Girl says something innocent.

    You intentionally misinterpret it so that it sounds a bit dirty. “Hard?” you ask. You don’t say it lecherously. You just hone in on the word “hard.”

    She understands the joke, then giggles and blushes.

    You hint at a smile of approval.

    Or

    You: Cute purple eyes. What side of the family did you inherit those from?

    Her: (Laughs) My mom’s of course.

    You: And you’ve got those pretty little eye liner wings at the ends of each eye. You’re so vain. How do you stand it?

    Her: ……

    Nobody was manipulated. You haven’t resorted to dark triads. You’re happy. She’s happy. You move on to another game. Or play another round of that one. If she’s really fun, she’ll come up with a few games of her own.

    Confidence, integrity, honor and all that will help you maintain a dominant frame throughout the conversation. People like to play games. Nothing wrong with it.

    Now, let’s say you fall head over heels for this chick with the purple eyes right away.

    1. You might feel the urge to agree with everything she says. She’s great so everything she says sounds great. Resist that urge, game will tell you. Not because you want to be disagreeable, but because a. a little tension is good and fun, and b. if you’re too agreeable, the subtext of all those little agreements is going to be that you’re willing to defer to her opinion; i.e. that you’re not dominant.

    2. You might feel like she merits a dozen roses and a 5 star restaurant right away. Game will teach you to ignore that impulse. Keep things casual in the beginning. NOT because you want to get her into bed faster (though it could help that) but because a. she hasn’t merited that investment yet and you’ll look like a chump spending that dough on her, and b. she’ll feel super awkward if you do.

    Game will also teach guys about shit tests and how to pass them. This isn’t manipulation either. If anything, the shit tests themselves are more manipulative than what gamers teach guys in order to get past them. Getting past them is just a matter of having the confidence to make a decision to keep your self respect.

    I could go on, but it’s late… Point is, game itself isn’t bad.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I missed the late night convo re Game, but Jesus spelled out precisely why I think it’s useful and helpful to both sexes. Why? Because it increases the pool of men that women find attractive. That’s good for men, women, and society as a whole.

      Females are attracted to dominance. It’s well demonstrated in the research. We are on a spectrum, though. The biggest shortcoming of Game that I have found is the assumption that all women will respond in identical ways to it. I don’t believe that’s true. Everything from Indicators of Interest to Anti-Slut Defense to Last Minute Resistance – it all varies a great deal by individual. So does the taste for preselection, while I’m at it.

      The delivery of Game will be most effective when it is calibrated to the particular female and circumstance. It was developed for use in nightclubs and bars, with the goal of getting laid. There’s been more attention recently on Day Game, still with the same intention, but reworked to include a friendlier vibe while the sun is up.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    I could go on, but it’s late…  Point is, game itself isn’t bad.

    No, I understand your points. It’s just a different style of flirting. Not my style, but that’s o.k. I agree that coming on too strong will scare off most women. Too bad the same thing isn’t true for certain guys. Maintaining a calm, cool composure is a good idea in general. For me, it probably happened subconsiously with the wife. I didn’t plan to act a certain way going in. I felt like I was being myself, with some added confidence sprinkled in.

  • anonymous

    Desiderius >>“So they continue to expose themselves to the allergens because they enjoy the inflammation?  Makes no sense, right?”<<

    The allergens were the fake commitments, not the sex. Serial monogamy, especially the slumming with herbs/looking to trade up division, created all sorts of problems.

    The allergens I referred to was serial monogamy, not sex.  Not even marriage is immune. People are reacting to the lack of commitment by increasingly not committing. ? It doesn’t make any sense.

    If marriage-minded people were looking for a spouse instead of wasting time *having fun* with a bunch of mismatches, there would be no need to keep dumping them to chase the ever elusive unicorn. I realize that it’s happened because people have been misled and given dumb advice.

     

  • Jennifer

    Problem is, “game” advice can blur and become layered and increasingly heavy from different sites. Some define it differently even if they repeat the same rules; others add superflous “rules” and swear by them. Many define game as simply having a set of social skills, while others include the additional tiers of simple self-control, discernment, and good frame. The integral stuff is maintaining confidence, social skills and common sense over lust-emotion, and I don’t consider this “game”. I wish more saw it like you, Jesus, as fun cleverness and useful communication skills, but not everyone does. I’m glad many like you, Mega, are simply raised to be intelligent men unafraid of their masculinity and with confidence and morals in life; that’s what we all need.

  • Jennifer

    Brilliant, anon.

  • Jennifer

    “intelligent men unafraid of their masculinity and with confidence and morals in life; that’s what we all need”

    We all need the latter, I mean, not all the former :P

    Olive, agreed. Better to marry sooner than later unless there’s a big reason.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    <i>In fact what I am yet to convince myself is that I will be somewhat happier if I am in a relationship. My late 20s has been some of the toughest time in my life in all aspects professionally, financially and family wise. I never had a woman then standing besides me, thus I don’t see a reason why I need it now.</i>

    If this paragraph didn’t make every woman shart herself, it should have. This is the real consequence of delaying marriage to live it up in your 20’s – every major life struggle a man goes through without a woman by his side is another piece of evidence that he doesn’t really need one.

    So for all those Mayas out there who are waiting for men to get established before you’ll date them because “why should I hang around while he gets it together?,” you’re just letting your SMV decline while said men accumulate personal knowledge of life without women. And even if you do land such a man, you got him after a long period in which you could have been earning his loyalty.

     

  • Jennifer

    Interesting observation, Badger. It is a wonderful thing for men and women to learn in life together.

  • Jennifer

    His words don’t terrify me, since I’ve learned most major lessons in life myself without a man. But, this hasn’t made me want one any less.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Jennifer

    I see what Badger means because I have a parallel way of thinking about being single. It’s not just about surviving the crises, but also about going through the good times. The more I go through without a man in my life (and the more this hypothetical fellow goes through without me in his), the more I wonder whether we will be able “to catch up” with each other’s lives by entering them so late. He might not “get” me . . . but I might not “get” him, either–and in this case, it would be nobody’s fault, just really bad timing.

  • Ramble

    Edward Cullen of Twilight is Light Triad all the way. The men who think that Twilight is about women liking dangerous, ruthless men have got it totally upside down.

    I have never read a word of Twilight or see a single second of the movie, but…

    1. That character is a vampire who has a basic instinct to suck blood, and
    2. He looks like that guy that cost cast for the movie (there have been a billion commercials for that movie and I have never sen him smile in any of them)

    Regardless of whether he is acting in a Dark Triad way, they most definitely made him a DT Panty Dropper on at least the visual, instinctual way…and apparently made his principles beta. Otherwise, he is the perfect archetype for those girls.

    But, however you slice it, that Utah mom is relying on the Dark Triad to make herself wet.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Regardless of whether he is acting in a Dark Triad way, they most definitely made him a DT Panty Dropper on at least the visual, instinctual way…and apparently made his principles beta.

      Yes, the vampire is a very sexual creature, and there is always an undercurrent of rape fantasy. In the case of Twilight, that is the only nod to DT traits. In reality, Edward is totally beta, though he is also handsome. I read an interview the other day where RPatz complains about what a pussy Edward is (his word). He didn’t want to perform some of the scripted actions and lines.

      The bottom line is that Edward Cullen is a sexy beta by virtue of having been turned when he was on his deathbed. It’s the juxtaposition of those traits that women find so intoxicating. Exactly like the hero in the romance novel who is physically alpha and sexual but falls head over heels in love and starts every sexual encounter by bringing the woman to orgasm first.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    Susan…” it (Game)  increases the pool of men that women find attractive”

    But isn’t dominance, unlike physical attractiveness, inherently a zero-sum game? One could imaging a wonderful pill that makes all women exquisitely beautiful, but it’s hard to imagine anything that would make all men dominant…at least, dominant over other men.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      But isn’t dominance, unlike physical attractiveness, inherently a zero-sum game? One could imaging a wonderful pill that makes all women exquisitely beautiful, but it’s hard to imagine anything that would make all men dominant…at least, dominant over other men.

      Game doesn’t give men dominance over other men, and cannot, because it appeals to the female, and females do not confer dominance. However, it gives men the opportunity to look a lot like the men who have had dominance conferred on them by other males. It is a proxy. This is not to diminish inner game, which is really an entirely different process, one that Mystery never addressed, to my knowledge.

      We’ve debated the zero sum question here before, using the desert island metaphor. If you could put 100 males on a desert island, all with Brad Pitt/George Clooney levels of attractiveness, and 100 women, of various levels of attractiveness, would the apex fallacy hold? Over time, would the men sort into the 20% most dominant (the consensus was yes)? Would women only want those 20% (the jury is out on this one)?

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @David Foster

    Someone pointed out on another blog (Bb’s, I think) that “even nerdy women like their nerdy alphas.” The practical application for a man is to find a field in which he can be dominant. (This was in response to someone’s comment on male dynamics, which was that even the dominant male in a group of friends will not be the “alpha” of the group when at the workplace of another of the friends.)

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Yea, I’m with Ramble. I don’t buy Edward from Twilight being Light Triads all the way. I’m not familiar with the book or movie, but… I mean, the dude’s a vampire, right?

    Vampires are ruthless. And dangerous. And exciting. They’re dark and mysterious. They’re loners. They’re bad boys. Would Light Triads work the same for Edward the Vampire and Edward the STEM guy or Edward the English teacher? I doubt it. While Light Triads would definitely be desirable in a long term mate, I doubt many women would find them sexually stimulating.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      . I don’t buy Edward from Twilight being Light Triads all the way. I’m not familiar with the book or movie, but… I mean, the dude’s a vampire, right?

      You gotta read the books and see the movie to understand. The Twilight series is unique. Not worth a male’s time, surely, but still an interesting look at why women go crazy for him. I saw the movie last weekend with my daughter, and the average age of girl in the audience was 11-13.

      Edward Cullen is neither dangerous, ruthless, exciting or particularly mysterious, after the novelty wears off. He is not a loner, he has a close knit vampire family, and he’s more pussy whipped than any character in history. He’s an incredibly good boy, only taking blood from animals in the forest, never people. His appeal is that he could be all of those things, but rises above his nature to be good.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    And it’s settled, Leonard Cohen has jumped to the top of my must-read pile.

  • Jennifer

    Sorry if I misread you Susan, but I thought you agreed with Redneck, that the number of women disliking maritable men was a pretty big problem.

    Bellita, I totally understand those feelings, and I think I’ve basically gotten past them; I want a husband, but I don’t dread the days until I meet him.

    Jesus, you got it: Edward’s a strange mixture of danger and mush. And wrong about thye Light Triad thing, I think; the number of women needing men to actually be wicked to get excited is grossly exaggerated.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jennifer,

    I’m not saying women need men to have a measure of wickedness. I’m saying that Light Triads on their own aren’t sexually attractive. That’s all.

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com MuleChewingBriars

    I remember a line from, of all things, Anne Of Green Gables, when Anne Shirley was asked if she found the idea of a wicked man exciting:

    I don't think I'd want him to actually be wicked, but I think it would be exciting if he could be, but wasn't.

    And that from a Canadian!

  • Escoffier

    My Machiavelli reference wasn’t to indict “game”, just to point out that one of the reasons I am interested in game is that I see in it a reflection of lots of things I’ve read in various philsophers over the years.  So the idea that this is all new I do find somewhat amusing.

    I dunno, I sympathize with some of these guys who say that the PC culture brainwashed them and they had to learn the Terrible Truth from Roissy et al because no one else would tell them.  And yet.  If anyone should have been brainwashed to be a feminist it should have been me.  I grew in a lib town, lib state, lib part of the world, working mother, reasonably high-powered in her profession, etc.  Also, it was the age of the “sensetive male” and everyone was talking about Alan Alda as the ideal.  But it was plainly obvious to me that actual women held men like that in total contempt.  My mother certainly did (and does).

    I’m all for Burke and Tocqueville.  What I’m really for is The Truth, which is inconveniently spread around a lot of sources.  If you focus on Burke and never read Nick, you will insufficiently understand the seamier side of life.  As Nick says, “one who wishes to make a profession of good in every respect must of necessity come to ruin among so many who are not good.”  But if you only read Nick, you will become jaded and a cynic.

    BTW, he wrote two plays, Mandragola and Clizia and both are about “love”, or at least sex.  I still think Measure for Measure should be the Official Play of HUS, and I may write something about that at some point.  So, so apt.

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com MuleChewingBriars
    "He certainly isn't the wild, dashing, wicked, young man Diana once
    wanted to marry," smiled Anne. "Fred is extremely good."
    
    "That's just what he ought to be. Would you want Diana to marry a wicked
    man? Or marry one yourself?"
    
    "Oh, no. I wouldn't want to marry anybody who was wicked, but I think
    I'd like it if he COULD be wicked and WOULDN'T. Now, Fred is HOPELESSLY
    good."
    
    "You'll have more sense some day, I hope," said Marilla.
    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mule
      What a great scene from AOGG! I adored those books as a kid. One of my disappointments as a mother is that my daughter didn’t take to them as I had.

      I think I’m the modern day Marilla.

  • tmunson

    TO THE MILLENIALS: AGAINST DEFAULT MODE PESSIMISM

    Impracticus the Cynic lived in 100 B.C. Cynic has come to mean, for us, a craven, almost effete negativity, but back then it was something entirely different. Cynics eschewed all manner of worldly accumulation, wealth, rank, prestige and in so doing were free to call ‘em as they saw ‘em. The term cynic derives from the word for dog and refers to their inclination to do exactly as they chose, when they chose, on their own terms. When Diogenes was called this he would lift his leg and pee on whoever said it (he was an extreme example).

    One of the concepts Impracticus discussed I’ll translate here as “default mode pessimism”. He posited that our ancestors as hunter/gatherers needed a certain mental state for survival. Anyone who has ever hunted know that failure is his lot more often than not. “Gathering” too when done for survival reaches a point of depletion and the tribe must move on to “greener” a pastures.In order to survive the tribe, collectively and individually, would have to be psychologically preconditioned to lowered expectations so as not to despair when the hunters returned empty handed or the new locale yielded no edible flora. We thus inherited default mode pessimism: our natural state is to expect the worst, be joyful when we get more, confirmed but not despairing when we receive less. We focus on what we want (food) ,not what we have (shelter,family) and in this way conserve our energy for its most efficient use. Impracticus taught many problems arise when this hunter/gatherer mental state confronts the “modern world” (which for him was 2,100 years ago).

    What is the significance here? Plenty. I detect an undertow of default mode pessimism in many posts. DMP is seductive; it is easier to maintain a workable mental state, even a depressive one,than risk disappointment. Impracticus taught that our minds are like ourselves:they like to appear to be working when they aren’t. A lot of cogitating is merely our minds playing around in idleness, and DMP flourishes where it has no rival. We see the “glass have empty” without examining that there IS a glass-we should be grateful to have one. It explains why “you don’t need a seminar to learn how to worry”. DMP has several associated emotional state, all dreary, but remember it exists because it  is a useful survival mechanism, and thus branded into our DNA.

     

    To what practical purpose have I raised it here? So you can overcome it. How? Ok, first of all: examine your precepts and decide if DMP exists. If not, you’re done-finis. But if you agree it exists, the next step is to recognize it at work in your reaction to stimuli. If you agree it exists and see it at work, the next step is to challenge it. REMEMBER: just as the opposite of love is not hate but indifference, the opposite of pessimism is NOT optimism but (also) indifference, at least to outcomes. “I’ll survive if he doesn’t call me”; “She doesn’t have to be attracted to me-I’ll live.” Don’t resist DMP too vigorously either; it makes it stronger. Your resistance should be measured in energy like holding a wet, slippery bar of soap in a shower, firmly but without gripping. At all times remember you are fighting your DNA which helps neutralize the normative baggage we tend to bring in addressing our psychological states.

     

    I’ll caution this ain’t for everybody, and even for those for whom it is it may not work. This is a “setpoint” and as such in difficulty lies somewhere between your themostat (easy) and your body/fat content (hard). But it’s worth a try. Pessimism amy win in the end; don’t let it win by default.

     

    Impracticus would be proud.

     

     

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Susan

    I’ve been thinking about rereading Twilight now that I know more about Game, and this discussion seals the deal for me!

  • Jennifer

    Exactly, Escoffier. People spoke of the red pill like it was some huge mystery, a great revelation, and game like it was a new freaking cure-all for non-attraction; needless to say I was wary. Then I discovered the big secret: women like masculine men who are confident and thrive in their given spheres. Women don’t like feminine men; we’re not invalids that need to be asked, “Are you ok?” every few seconds and handled like flowers; we like to be pursued; and many young women have a bad boy addiction. My reaction was, “What, this is news? Ever been to highschool, sweeties?” Of course, many spouting these truths added some of their own for their own convenience, grossly exaggerating certain factors and basically twisting things to an unnatural level, which I take issue with. But for the most part, yeah; I was aware of this. Any guy taught good social skills and communication, and raised without feministic dogma, will typically do just fine; every single one of my male cousins grew up healthy boys who didn’t need the all-important tips from online strangers; they romped, rough-housed, teased, cracked jokes. Thank God even liberal parents are not all tainted by the insanity of feminism.

    “I’m saying that Light Triads on their own aren’t sexually attractive”

    I disagree; the Light Triads I’m talking about are the tough princes and soldiers of old who fight for goodness. Being a good man doesn’t mean being a “nice guy”.

    Mule: yes, I remember that Anne Shirley line very well, from her young and overly-passionate fantasy years.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    Re: Anne Shirley

    I’ve only read as far as Anne of Avonlea, but shouldn’t anything Anne says about the appeal of “wicked” men be weighed against the type of man she chose to marry? Perhaps I need to reread the whole series, but Gilbert Blythe never struck me as someone who could be wicked without a debilitating helping of guilt to bring him back from the dark side.

  • Jennifer

    Like I said, Bellita, that was during Anne’s “mountains of the moon”, “dark languid tones”, and “Avril’s Atonement” years :)

  • Esau

    Jennifer at 301: “Any guy taught good social skills and communication, and raised without feministic dogma, will typically do just fine”

    [Emphasis added.]  I’m intrigued here.  Can you take a moment to expand on what you have in mind with the phrase “feministic dogma”?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jennifer,
    Tough princes and soldiers require a degree of ruthlessness. Not that they’re necessarily ruthless towards their women, but as I’m sure Dogsquat can tell you, a soldier (or in his case, a Marine) requires a certain degree of ruthlessness in order to survive in a war.

    “Toughness” is what’s needed to balance out the empathy. All I’m saying is that kindness and empathy without a bit of that “toughness”=nice guy. The light triads need some principles and purpose to balance things out.

  • A.

    I assume that Edward’s alpha cred is helped by an omniscient narrator who knows he *could* be bad.

    In real life, there is no omniscient narrator, and if you’re not overt in your ability to be bad, women will assume you have no possibility for it.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megman

    @Escoffier

    I’m all for Burke and Tocqueville. What I’m really for is The Truth, which is inconveniently spread around a lot of sources. If you focus on Burke and never read Nick, you will insufficiently understand the seamier side of life.

    No, I understand what you’re getting at. Kind of sounds like something Nietzsche would argue, too. That’s why I suggested less of one and more of the others. Seems like the SMP pendulum has been swung in the direction of power instead equity (or fairness?) for some time.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sue,

    Edward Cullen is neither dangerous, ruthless, exciting or particularly mysterious, after the novelty wears off. He is not a loner, he has a close knit vampire family, and he’s more pussy whipped than any character in history. He’s an incredibly good boy, only taking blood from animals in the forest, never people. His appeal is that he could be all of those things, but rises above his nature to be good.

    Women are strange creatures.

    I get the appeal of choosing good over evil. When someone has the power to do what he wants but chooses good, that’s a great quality.

    I don’t get the appeal of being pussy whipped. Whatever the case, it’s not a quality I would advise men to emulate. I don’t think it would win many women over. And more importantly, it doesn’t seem like a good strategy for happiness.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jesus

      I don’t get the appeal of being pussy whipped. Whatever the case, it’s not a quality I would advise men to emulate. I don’t think it would win many women over. And more importantly, it doesn’t seem like a good strategy for happiness.

      You know how men want a girl to be a slut for him alone? It’s kind of like that. We want a guy who has never met a woman before who whipped him, but now he’s powerless to do anything but fall heads over heels for us. However, there is a caveat….we will disrespect this pussy behavior in anything more than very small glimpses. We like: I’ve never felt this way before. That one statement is more than enough to keep us going for a few weeks.

      In truth, I find Edward unappealing as a mate for this exact reason. Hell, he doesn’t even get upset when Bella kisses Jacob the werewolf. :-)

      Anacaona is going to be sorry she missed this.

  • Ramble

    Edward is totally beta

    Is he? Again, I have never seen a single scene.

    Think of a Total Beta.

    • The smiling
    • The Head Nodding
    • The Deference
    • The Compliance
    • The “Yes, sir…Thank you, sir…No, you first…etc”

    Is he “totally beta”?

    Without having read a word, I am guessing that he isn’t. I am guessing that he has the Alpha Looks, Alpha Frame (i.e. Vampire) and Beta traits (i.e. Loyal and Understanding). IOW, the prefect High School boyfriend.

    Again, I have never read a single word…pure guessing.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Ramble
      Edward does indeed have the smiling, nodding, deference and compliance, in everything related to Bella. He is alpha when fighting against those who want to harm her. It’s all about her, all the time.

      Re Alpha looks, he definitely has the jaw, cleft chin, heavy eyebrows, etc. And the Beta traits. So no, not “totally” beta – I generally don’t include looks when talking about alpha and beta, as I find that many alphas are ugly and many betas are handsome, but there is the high T vs. pretty boy question, I guess.

      Yes, Edward is perfect. A sparkly vampire = unicorn.

  • http://bbsezmore.wordpress.com Bb

    Bellita, Gilbert at least was “wicked” enough to call her names and pull her hair when they were young, thus sowing the seed for a lifetime of push/pull. Fred was just too placid for Anne, but perfect for Diana. They were a match made in heaven. I think L.M. Montgomery really tamed Gilbert down, giving him responsibilities early on so he could be mature for Anne when she herself was ready.

    Although I liked AOGG, I loved Mongtomery’s Emily series. Has anyone here read them? It’s not as famous. I think they are better—shorter, only in three books. I prefer Emily to Anne. She is sharper, more focused and her running pals more interesting (both male and female).

  • Ramble

    Ed Cullen, as far as I can tell, is the nicest, most pony-like Secretariat in the history of the world.

    He has all of Secretariat’s genes but without any Silverback behavior. So, the girls get to feel all of that power and size and strength between their legs, while keeping their natural vulnerability at bay.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megman

    @SW

    His appeal is that he could be all of those things, but rises above his nature to be good.

    I’m ignorant of the “Twilight” franchise, beyond it’s money-making capabilities. This does sound like one of the old romance novel archetypes except for teens. Dangerous attraction, and all that. Kind of like Buffy and Angel when I was younger. I’m leery about using fictional characters as real world role models, but I completely understand why young people do this.

    Again, it seems like a very difficult balance for a sensitive human being to maintain. How close to you tread towards the darkness before you’re in it? That’s why this “game”, at least as a conscious strategy of behavior, seems like a double-edged sword. Too much success with enough women, and pretty soon no single woman is worth the time or the effort for a long-term commitment.

    I’m sure there’s something comparable for women, but can’t think of it right now.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Bb

    That was quite a legendary prank, but hardly the romantic sort of “wicked.” And Gilbert was almost immediately contrite, only to have Anne shoot him down for years afterwards. I really think he was just being playful.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Bb

    I think L.M. Montgomery really tamed Gilbert down, giving him responsibilities early on so he could be mature for Anne when she herself was ready.

    This is apparently the day where I comment on books and authors I’ve never read. In our day and age, “when she herself was ready” all too often means, “after she’s dated and mated with enough real bad boys to know she wants a decent man.”

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      This is apparently the day where I comment on books and authors I’ve never read. In our day and age, “when she herself was ready” all too often means, “after she’s dated and mated with enough real bad boys to know she wants a decent man.”

      Ha, and your ignorance is showing! Anne of Green Gables was set in the 1870s. No question Anne was a virgin at marriage. Though she did get a friend drunk on raspberry cordial.

  • Esau

    Susan: “We are on a spectrum, though. The biggest shortcoming of Game that I have found is the assumption that all women will respond in identical ways to it. I don’t believe that’s true. Everything from Indicators of Interest to Anti-Slut Defense to Last Minute Resistance – it all varies a great deal by individual. So does the taste for preselection, while I’m at it.”

    Umm, why is this a shortcoming of Game, per se?  Even if what you say is true, that there’s a great deal of variance by individual, how is this information actionable?  I’m not a Gamer and never have been, so I’m not an authority here; but it was my understanding that, while it may be technically incorrect to believe that AWALT, it is _useful_ to do so in that it will most quickly bring the Game student into “productive” habits that get results (unlike, presumably, what he was getting before).

    Yes, after the basic orientation is in place, then one could argue that recognizing the differences between individuals can lead one to being even more effective; but as a matter of technique this is just a refinement, no?  Seems to me that the basic comes before the advanced, and the general before the specific; and AWALT is the basic and the general, a useful first approximation even if it’s not the whole truth.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      while it may be technically incorrect to believe that AWALT, it is _useful_ to do so in that it will most quickly bring the Game student into “productive” habits that get results (unlike, presumably, what he was getting before).

      This is true, Mystery codified Game to work on women drinking in nightspots. He himself was partial to “hired guns” – cocktail waitresses, bartenders and strippers. These were the women he ran Game on. PUA tactics generally apply to this environment. So there’s a strong element of self-selection involved, unless you believe that all women are equally likely to go out clubbing, drinking, or even work in nighttime entertainment. Apparently, men who prefer women with different sensibilities must adjust and calibrate very significantly for other environments, hence the rise of Day Game. Perhaps that is not a shortcoming of Game, but a limitation of the Mystery Method.

  • Esau

    @307: “In real life, there is no omniscient narrator, and if you’re not overt in your ability to be bad, women will assume you have no possibility for it.”

    Pretty much nails it.  A+ for A.

  • Esau

    Bellita at 288: “The practical application for a man is to find a field in which he can be dominant.”

    And, how many men can do this?  Unless men are switching fields and venues six times a day, taking turns being on top, then it should be obvious that only a small fraction can actually be dominant.  What’s your advice for the rest, beyond further scratching and clawing?

    Bit of a math fail, I would say, if you had in mind that a “practical application” is something that the main run of people can all simultaneously employ.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    “Toughness” is what’s needed to balance out the empathy. All I’m saying is that kindness and empathy without a bit of that “toughness”=nice guy. The light triads need some principles and purpose to balance things out.

    I think a little strength and toughness can go a long way in a relationship. Too much, and you can find yourself in a very controlling situation. Or abandoned out of the blue. Just something I’ve noticed. I think relationships operate best with a kind of harmonious balance, but not necessarily equal parts this + equal parts that. As for principles and goals, I try to be the best husband possible, but also to advance and excel in my career. Two different environments, but I think strength and toughness help out more in the workplace.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Esau

    I certainly don’t have specific advice, and I phrased that awkwardly to begin with. (If I had to edit it, I’d probably change “dominant'” to “competent.”) All I meant was that I got what the people on the thread were saying about what women are attracted to and how a man can put himself in a setting that works to his advantage. But what an individual man does is up to him.

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com MuleChewingBriars

    The female members of my family are great Anne Shirley fans (my son preferred RE Howard’s Conan stories and John Carter of Mars).  They are just the sorts of stories I want to fill of the furniture of my daughters’ minds, to steer them away from deceiving themselves with handsome, man-shaped shadows like Roy Gardner and appreciate the tough-enough Beta goodness of young men like Gilbert Blythe.

    BTW, my eldest was Twilighted for a while, but she was Team Jacob.  That gave me some nervous nights (“He’s dumber than pond scum, but ZOMG those abs!”)

  • Isabel

    I don’t like defending Twilight but dangerous…? Since when? Edward Cullen couldn’t bite his way out of a wet paper bag. Dude’s a sparkly poof.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Isabel
      I’ve missed you, good to see you in the thread. Your particular brand of British irreverence is the best.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Megaman,

    I think a little strength and toughness can go a long way in a relationship. Too much, and you can find yourself in a very controlling situation. Or abandoned out of the blue. Just something I’ve noticed. I think relationships operate best with a kind of harmonious balance, but not necessarily equal parts this + equal parts that. As for principles and goals, I try to be the best husband possible, but also to advance and excel in my career. Two different environments, but I think strength and toughness help out more in the workplace.

    I’m not a controlling person and I’m not a tough guy. I’m not suggesting that men play the tough guy either. Or that they try to control their women. I’m simply saying that there needs to be limits to one’s kindness and empathy. Too much kindness and empathy and one can easily find himself trying to fix all his woman’s problems. OR… one can easily find himself compromising his principles and/or boundaries in a relationship. Having a purpose and having principles can balance this out. A man shouldn’t compromise his purpose and his career in order to please his woman. And a man shouldn’t compromise his principles.

    Example of holding to one’s principles: You have a guy’s day or night out. It might be poker, it might be a sports game, it might be fly fishing. Maybe you’re going to check out a band you all like. Whatever. Your woman doesn’t want you to go. Who knows why? Maybe she’s jealous and insecure, or maybe she’s just shit testing you. But leading up to the time you have to go, she’s clearly trying to tempt you with some sex. She’s wearing something sexy, she rubs your cock, hints to you what you could have if you stayed behind. Or maybe she’s trying to guilt you. You don’t spend enough time with her, she says. Or, she’s not feeling well. Or, she was hoping you would…. blah blah blah.

    Your ability to empathize with her at this moment could be useful. For example, maybe you really aren’t spending enough time with her. Or, maybe you’re not doing enough of what you can be doing to make her feel secure.

    However, if you’re governed primarily by your empathy at this moment, you’re probably going to hand over your nuts to your woman. If you have principles, though, and you know that one of your principles is that male camaraderie is important to you and that you want to nurture your friendships on a regular basis, then you’re far more likely to make a decision that may not make her happy at that given moment, but that she can respect nonetheless.

    And what’s more, if you know what those principles are, you’re more likely to be happy in the relationship. Too much compromise and you begin to resent your woman.

    Giving in to that empathy too much is a formula for disaster. For the above reasons, but also because it’s ultimately not going to satisfy her. She’s going to shit test you next time and next time and next time. And the more you give in to your empathy, the less she’s going to respect you. She’ll feel secure in one sense, because she’s got her man under her thumb, but very unhappy in the long run.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @J. Mahoney

    All your advice is generally good. The example seems a little contrived, but maybe that’s because I’ve never been “tested” like that by a woman. My wife isn’t the transparent seductress type. That’s probably a benefit of being married to a tomboy. Our bedroom activities don’t involve game playing like that (no point, IMO). When I think of sticking to one’s principles, poker night with the boys doesn’t come to mind, though I enjoy those kinds of things (board games, too). I think of things like, putting in the time to finish that big project on the house or at work. Making time to visit with good friends who are visiting from out of town. Everybody should have a life outside of his or her relationship. Reminds me of the that Seinfeld episode where George’s “two worlds” were colliding : )

    I probably place a little more importance on empathy because it seems so rare these days. Conspicuous displays of strength and aggression are everywhere. Trying to understand how other people feel from their own perspective, that’s what I mean by empathy. Maybe there’s a better word for it. I’ll never be able to walk in someone else’s shoes, but that doesn’t mean I can’t try to see things from their POV. That doesn’t make me a spineless pushover.

  • Anacaona

    *lesigh*

    Okay I will bite (no pun intended) I will decode Twilight from the Game POV. Pay attention Nate.

    Chapter 1 First Sight: Bella meets Edward

    Chapter 13 Confessions. Bella finds out that Edward is not only a vampire he actually craves for her blood stronger than a normal vampire would, her singer.

    Now between those chapters Edward singles out Bella as the most interesting person in the school, he tells her that he usually is good at reading people but she is specially hard to read, he pays attention to her and realizes (unlike everyone else) that she is miserable in Forks, he helps her when she faints at Biology class and she realizes they have similar  taste in music and he also makes her life with a wry sense of humour again something they both share. Then he saves her life, revealing that he is not just a cute boy but a supernatural creature, but he is incapable of harming her not even threatening her to protect his secret, he pretty much let her go on with her life and gives his secret to her to share or keep. He saves her life again and by the time he does it, she knows he and his family had been good vampires long before she was even born so the moment she hears  the truth the level of comfort is high enough that his confession doesn’t make the impact of fear Edward was hoping for and after the confession he makes a heartfelt promise not to harm her no matter what. Isn’t this Mystery method comfort and Alpha traits mix to get that girl eating out of your boxers? By the time she finds out about the “creepy” side of Edward she has more than enough comfort to not consider it creepy or even dangerous and it doesn’t help that he spent 95% of his relationship pleasing her and trying to make her happy, while discussing the classics, composing her lullabies, cooking for her, learning and remembering every inane detail of her teenager existence and making friends with the kids at school so she wouldn’t miss her high school experience. Really Edward is a pussy but he has to be a pussy he is too strong, hot and rich to get away with being an unsensitive bastard for a long relationship, even PUA’s know that being an asshole doesn’t work forever.

    If anything Edward is a greater beta.

    And for the ones asking why Edward is not using his seductive tecniques in supermodels, first Edward might look like he has many options but he doesn’t human girls would want him but the moment they realize he is a vampire they will run from the hills accusing him with the authorities and his own species only have a few vegetarians two of them were Rosalie and Tanya Rosalie although a good girl is vane entitled princess and Tanya although nice is a mega slut with thousands of lovers. The truth is that he doesn’t has as many options and vampire in this books pair bond forever so once a pretty and nice enough girl willing to keep the secret came along with a couple of traits they had in common he was pretty much doomed to fall for her.

    Since we are here I would like to mention that this is why feminists call Edward creepy he is a suplicating beta with poor social skills offering commitment few hours into the relationship (really the guy asked Bella to call him boyfriend the same day chapter 13 happens and he proposes before they are even together for a year) inside a hot and rich vampire body so everything he does is creepy and wrong and no woman should had to endure this. I think most of them like Jacob because he is an alpha who clearly shows he would be sexing up Bella in no time if she only say yes but is not the type they would forsake their education, career or social life for, so Bella would broke up with him at some point and move on to college to start a slut lifestyle not getting married and having a baby at 18, and what is worst as a vampire she will commit to him forever no cheating or divorce as a choice horror of horrors!

    YMMV as usual.

  • Jennifer

    Bellita is right-on, the term is competent, not necessarily dominant of all others in the field.

    You know Esau, the kind of feminist dogma that says men should be in touch with their feminine side, really sensitive like women are, not REALLY different from women, and put women on pedestals? That kind of dogma.

    “In real life, there is no omniscient narrator, and if you’re not overt in your ability to be bad, women will assume you have no possibility for it.”

    Oh for God’s sake.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sue,

    I knew that AOGG was 19th century. Just saying that that is the same mindset many people take today (let the woman mature a bit and realize what a good man really is), only today they’re not maintaining their chastity in the meantime. In the meantime many girls are sowing wild oats with ass hats.

  • Anacaona

    Anacaona is going to be sorry she missed this.

    I would for sure. I never expected this discussion here. But I guess it makes sense it will happen at some point.

  • Jennifer

    Good grief, fitting game this way and that to tru and make it applicable to everything, or bending something else to make it applicable to game. Ana, I don’t think Edward was going Mystery Method on purpose to attract Bella. I think femmies call him creepy because he’s a vamp who beats her up in sex. But I love that people disagree whether he’s beta or not; shows we don’t live in boxes.

  • Jennifer

    Jesus, Anne did need her own time. But Gilbert wasn’t quiet in his needs either.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jennifer,

    I’ll take your word for it.

  • Anacaona

    Ana, I don’t think Edward was going Mystery Method on purpose to attract Bella.

     

    Well I never meant he knows what he is doing when I say he has to be a pussy I meant Smeyer writing him.

    I think femmies call him creepy because he’s a vamp who beats her up in sex. But I love that people disagree whether he’s beta or not; shows we don’t live in boxes.

    Mm no they don’t have sex till BD feminists were hating on him since book one and he doesn’t beat her up in sex, she gets some bruises but she felt no pain at all, she is pale she bruises easily and always did they just exagerated this for proselitism purposes, YMMV.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    I would for sure. I never expected this discussion here. But I guess it makes sense it will happen at some point.

    Yeah, this “Twilight” phenomenon seems to have the magic female formula that translates into big buck at the box office. The last time I saw something like this was “Titanic”. I was working at a department store c. 1997, and boy did I get tired of hearing Celine Dion music piped in 24-7.

    So, anybody want to apply Wes Anderson films to the SMP? : )

  • Ramble

    However, there is a caveat….we will disrespect this pussy behavior in anything more than very small glimpses.

    Which is not being pussy whipped at all. Dedicated? Loyal? Attentive? Possibly all of those things? But not pussy whipped.

  • tmunson

    TO THE MILLENNIALS: ON PRESENTIMENT

    An associated  concept Impracticus discussed was “presentiment”. Default mode pessimism was universal, and similar individual to individual. Presentiments are uniquely tailored to each of us and describe a near instinctual reaction to the objective world evoking a preconditioned response based on an emotional conclusion or stance we adopted through experience without consciously being aware that we were doing so. He used it exclusively in the political context; he would not have understood modern concepts of “love”, and a union predicated upon the emotional interchange between a man and a woman,formed out of sexual attraction and based on its continuing more or less extant, resulting in a commingling of property, status, producing children and lasting for decades would have astonished him. His first thought would have been “Where the hell did they get that?” and then he’d have blamed the competing schools of philosophy.

    So I’m adapting something in a way he did not intend, but I think contains some truth useful to the readership at this site. I’ll use myself for an example. I moved around a lot  as a youngster. In each move I was forced to say goodbye, forever, to a close friend. I then made new ones, and the process repeated,hurting me each time. The presentiment that was formed was as follows: relationships are wonderful, joyous, but fleeting and ulitmately devastatingly painful. You must form a bond quickly, intensely, rush headlong into it,get all you can out of it while it’s there, and then self-fulfillingly destroy it and luxuriate in the loss. (I’m being dramatic to highlight, but this is close). I acted that out a long time before I became aware of it. No I did not “cure” myself, had no epiphanous sudden illumination which screewriters seem to think arises from psychaitric sessions (“Ordinary People”). But once I recognized it, I got a handle on it. I did a little better at moderating its tendencies, and then I enjoyed the journey more. Still do.

    So you’re expecting maybe a pitch for a self-help book? Nah. And you smart people here can endlessly deconstruct the concept, cavil like first year law students until you’ve leached all the minerals from this dog bone.But for those of you who want to play,see if you don’t find something about your relaionship rythmns that “clicks” (not just romantic; familial, friends, co-workers). Don’t go Sigmund Freud on me; this ain’t psychotherapy. It’ll be subtle, near indistinct, an ineffable “certain sense of it all” that will come very gently to you if at all. Remember it’s “pre”-sentiment, so occurs before the conscious mind can rummage through its emotional closet and find a print dress and shoes to go with it (I’m not a cross dresser, but as a guy I wear the same thing day after day so a male analogy wouldn’t fit).

    Yours in presentimental fond regard

    Thomas V. Munson

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • Ramble

    Edward does indeed have the smiling, nodding, deference and compliance, in everything related to Bella.

    No, in relation to Men. Again, “Yes sir… no sir…right away sir… Thank you”. Is he smiling and nodding to Men?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Ramble

      No, in relation to Men. Again, “Yes sir… no sir…right away sir… Thank you”. Is he smiling and nodding to Men?

      Are you saying that deference and compliance with a woman is not a problem in sustaining attraction?

  • Jennifer

    Amen, Ramble.

  • Jennifer

    Really, Ana? He didn’t hurt her? Well well, I guess Vox Day exaggerated. No surprise.

  • Desiderius

    Susan,

    “His appeal is that he could be all of those things, but rises above his nature to be good.”

    When all female choices are validated (i.e. not judged), she is robbed of the opportunity to do so with her own life.

    So she lives vicariously through a man, even an imaginary one.

  • SayWhaat

    Just wanted to say that I LOVED Anne of Green Gables as a kid. : ) although L.M. Montgomery basically turned her into Michelle Duggar at the end. -__-

  • anonymous

    Jennifer  : ” Being a good man doesn’t mean being a “nice guy”.

    Nice =/ Good. It’s important to make the distinction between the two.

    Nice- a strategy of social interaction to convince people to like or trust you.

    Good- a character trait. Acting on principles regardless of whether people will like you for it or not.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    When all female choices are validated (i.e. not judged), she is robbed of the opportunity to do so with her own life.

    Wow. That’s hitting the nail squarely on the head.

    When it comes to relationships, fantasy and reality are poles apart.

  • SayWhaat

    Re: Wes Anderson films…it’s a certain kind of guy whose favorite is “The Royal Tenenbaums”. I’ve dated a few of them. : /

  • Jennifer

    Damn, Desid!

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SayWhaat

    Re: Wes Anderson films…it’s a certain kind of guy whose favorite is “The Royal Tenenbaums”. I’ve dated a few of them. : /

    That wasn’t one of his best IMO. My favorite is Rushmore. Max Fischer, the eccentric overachiever I never was. Bill Murray was at his best : )

  • RachelAng34

    Yeah, you might still get burned if he walks, but marriages end in divorce too. So, waiting until marriage is safer.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Desiderius

    So she lives vicariously through a man, even an imaginary one.

    I did get the point you were making about Twilight, but this line stuck out for me for an additional reason. Someone once told me about an analysis of Romance novels that said that women don’t want to be the heroine as much as they want to be the hero. I shared that with a huge Twilight fan and was surprised when she agreed that, given a choice, she would rather have the chance to be Edward than the chance to be Bella. (Of course, she’s just one reader.)

  • Emily

    @ Anacaona

    Maybe the books are different, but based on the movies I would have pegged Jacob as the classic beta orbiter who gets LJBFed.  (Only in Twilight fantasy land would beta orbiters come with those abs though.)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Emily

      (Only in Twilight fantasy land would beta orbiters come with those abs though.)

      In the new movie, Jacob is shirtless most of the time. It’s as if the script was written around his physique. Meanwhile, we never see Edward’s naked torso, even during the honeymoon sex scene!

  • Olive

    although L.M. Montgomery basically turned her into Michelle Duggar at the end. -__-

    HAHA! Saddest part by far was when Walter (I think that was his name?) died in the war. If I remember correctly I wasn’t a huge fan of the last book, with Anne’s youngest daughter as the heroine. But I haven’t read the books since middle or early high school. Must reread them.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    I haven’t read the Twilight series…but re alpha and beta, ruthlessness and kindness, I recommend an essay by C S Lewis on the idealized medieval concept of chivalry:

    The important thing about this ideal is, of course, the double demand it makes on human nature. The knight is a man of blood and iron, a man familiar with the sight of smashed faces and the ragged stumps of lopped-off limbs; he is also a demure, almost a maidenlike, guest in hall, a gentle, modest, unobtrusive man. He is not a compromise or happy mean between ferocity and meekness; he is fierce to the nth and meek to the nth…The medieval ideal brought together two things which have no natural tendency to gravitate towards one another. It brought them together for that very reason. It taught humility and forbearance to the great warrior because everyone knew by experience how much he usually needed that lesson. It demanded valour of the urbane and modest man because everyone knew that he was as likely as not to be a milksop.

    The whole thing can be found here.

     

     

     

     

  • Jennifer

    David Foster, awesome essay!! Lewis was brilliant, and this is what God demands: warriors who are kind when we need to be. The lion and the lamb should reside in all of us, and rise accordingly.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @david foster

    I haven’t read the Twilight series…but re alpha and beta, ruthlessness and kindness, I recommend an essay by C S Lewis on the idealized medieval concept of chivalry

    Very interesting stuff from one of literature’s greats. That takes a supremely balanced personality to pull off. I would have been a ho-hum farmer in the Middle Ages most likely.

    From what I’ve read, J.K. and Pullman really dislike old C.S. for obvious reasons.

    Here’s some more wisdom of his that’s still relevant these days:

    “There is, hidden or flaunted, a sword between the sexes till an entire marriage reconciles them.”
  • Jennifer

    No surprise, I don’t like all of Lewis’s beliefs either. But he was a genuis.

    Olive, don’t give away anything that happens in the Anne books! :S I loved the “Emily” ones too.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    Best Wes Anderson for me would most likely be The Life Aquatic, with The Darjeeling Ltd not far behind. I love his films.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    Best Wes Anderson for me would most likely be The Life Aquatic, with The Darjeeling Ltd not far behind. I love his films.

    I heard he wants to make a film set in space. I’m not sure Bill Murray can convincingly play an astronaut, but he’ll sure try.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    “His appeal is that he could be all of those things, but rises above his nature to be good.”

    When all female choices are validated (i.e. not judged), she is robbed of the opportunity to do so with her own life.

    So she lives vicariously through a man, even an imaginary one.

    Interesting stuff. Something I’ve been pondering lately is how all the ‘girls kick-ass’ movies are almost entirely created by men – all Joss Whedon’s stuff, Kill Bill, Kick-Ass, all the superheroey ones. These are often sold to us as ‘empowering role models’ etc for girls & yet it’s not women that are writing & directing them, it’s men. The women  would much rather be home watching Twilight.

    So I puzzled over this & the conclusion I came to is that, under the system we have had the past 30 years or so, which denigrates masculinity so much, male creators have resorted to using female protagonists to play out their heroic ideals, ideals which, in the real world women would not think to carry out (think army, police, fire service).

    In the Alien films, Ripley – the first real female action hero – sacrifices herself to save the human race in a very chivalric, christlike way. I find it hard to imagine a female author coming up with that, a woman laying down her life for strangers. It just wouldn’t occur to them. And in the past it would never have occurred to a male writer either. Women’s bodies are a precious rare resource to be protected at all costs by the men, even at the cost of the mens own lives. That sacrificial role is a male burden, & a male fantasy, but one is now rather strangely being projected onto a female canvas.

    Feminism has really messed with our heads.

     

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    I heard he wants to make a film set in space. I’m not sure Bill Murray can convincingly play an astronaut, but he’ll sure try.

    That would be grand, I can just see it now. Lots of silver.

     

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    In the Alien films, Ripley – the first real female action hero – sacrifices herself to save the human race in a very chivalric, christlike way. I find it hard to imagine a female author coming up with that, a woman laying down her life for strangers.

    The only real world example I can think of is Joan of Arc. One tough lady. It’s funny you mention Sigourney, I kind of had a thing for her when she was younger. Something about the voice. My favorite of hers was “Gorillas in the Mist”. Not a typical guy film, but moving nonetheless.

    There’s a big chunk of women’s lit that’s focused on action/adventure/fantasy. I always spot Anita Blake in the bookstore (fewer and fewer these days). Not my cup of tea, but I leaf through them once in awhile. They do seem derivative, though, with the usual romantic angles and subplots. One of my all-time favorite authors is (the late) Patricia Highsmith. She seemed to be one of the few women who could write male characters really well. Of course, she was bisexual, so maybe that had something to do with it : )

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    The only real world example I can think of is Joan of Arc.

    True, but that was more the voices telling her to do all that, rather than some benevolent care for strangers. And she didn’t actually sacrifice herself, she was caught & then sentenced to death. She was fucked over, basically. No choice in the matter.

     

  • Jennifer

    Actually a lot of smart women appreciate strong femaale role models and protagonists, myself included; I know of three wonderful women in the military. Immature women tend to be the ones who become obsessed (not who merely like, but are obsessed) with Twilight.

  • Jennifer

    Joan chose to risk her life every day, like every soldier, and she did it willingly each time; she wasn’t dragged against her will by angels.

  • Anacaona

    The last time I saw something like this was “Titanic”. I was working at a department store c. 1997, and boy did I get tired of hearing Celine Dion music piped in 24-7.

    Heh and is getting a re-release next year. Can Jack reclaim his place in female fantasies from Edward Cullen? The world can’t wait! Or care! :p

    No, in relation to Men. Again, “Yes sir… no sir…right away sir… Thank you”. Is he smiling and nodding to Men?

    Well he worships the ground that Carlisle stands to and he is probably aside from Bella and Alice the only one that can change his mind and he respect, Bella changes his mind being humble, demure and sweet (crying also) Alice annoys the hell out of him but Carlisle just say “son I don’t think we should do this” And he just does it. In fact he is his role model but Carlisle is the type of man who commands respect just by showing up.

    Really, Ana? He didn’t hurt her? Well well, I guess Vox Day exaggerated. No surprise.

    Heh I’m starting to think that American reading skills are worst than I heard off. Edward did a good show of guilt over the bruises but Bella spent at least four pages remembering everything to try to find any moment she felt pain or uncomfortably (and they both agreed that if she felt any pain she will stop him at once she didn’t) For some reason no one remembers those pages, the whole meme is that she passed out and woke up bruised but unless they received edited copies I have my Spanish and English books who probe otherwise. So I have no idea why this image keeps lingering around in the interwebs, is not true.

    Just wanted to say that I LOVED Anne of Green Gables as a kid. : ) although L.M. Montgomery basically turned her into Michelle Duggar at the end. -__-

    What is with people that hate lots of babies in this country? Having lots of kids was a blessing less than 50 years ago. She was blessed with a big family.

    I did get the point you were making about Twilight, but this line stuck out for me for an additional reason. Someone once told me about an analysis of Romance novels that said that women don’t want to be the heroine as much as they want to be the hero. I shared that with a huge Twilight fan and was surprised when she agreed that, given a choice, she would rather have the chance to be Edward than the chance to be Bella. (Of course, she’s just one reader.)

    Interesting idea I really think is more complicated than that, I ship both because I identify with both. Bella’s stubbornness and willingness to start a life with the man she loves away from her world (says the expat bride) and Edward because it took me what it looked like centuries to find a person I could truly love and I would protect him for as long as I live. But I think women in general want to be loved by the hero. Look at that abomination called Lost in Austen and you can see where the fantasy is steal poor Lizzie’s happiness for her own, stupid bitch that I hate whoever her name is…Sorry shipper rant.

    Maybe the books are different, but based on the movies I would have pegged Jacob as the classic beta orbiter who gets LJBFed.  (Only in Twilight fantasy land would beta orbiters come with those abs though.)

    The thing is that Smeyer used two tropes Jacob starts as the beta orbiter trying to win Bella during the rebound in New Moon, but he could afford be like that because he didn’t had any competition, the moment Mike showed to the movie theater he was willing to sent him to the hospital and once Alice was around he also was peeing testosterone like rain in May. Then of course Edward’s name was mentioned and came and full Alphadom arrived with forced kisses and manipulation included. The typical beta orbiter keeps orbiting till he gets sick of it or the girl does, regardless of the suitors. He attacked like an Alpha not taking a no for an answer and bashing Edward and the Cullens as much as he could even after she was married. Smeyer kind of used both traits but in different ways there are moments of betadom and alphadom and even Bella has a “my jacob” his sweet friend and the other in wich he is willing to manhandle her in her wedding dress because she dares to have sex with her husband, of course some say it was the wolf transformation and could be, but the level of jerkiness reached levels that no Beta could resist. This is one of the few fictional examples were the Alpha loses the girl to the Greater Beta, but don’t confuse underdog (no pun intended) with Beta that is like calling Wolverine a Beta because Jean Grey still loves Cyclops or Mary Jane didn’t cheated on Spiderman with him.

    The difference with Edward is that he looks Alpha out of the vampire traits and because he said Bella right away his feelings, but then he again couldn’t just pretend that he saved her life all this times just because he wanted be friends could he? No to mention Bella was panting over him, he had to be an Omega to say no to a IOI’s the size of Jupiter. In any case trust me if I can’t stand him chances are he is an Alpha. :D

    Best Wes Anderson for me would most likely be The Life Aquatic, with The Darjeeling Ltd not far behind. I love his films.

    Oh my that is a wonderful movie and Murray was amazing in it. Isn’t it could when an actor gets better with age? I don’t think he ever convinced me in any character till he got older.

     

    Actually a lot of smart women appreciate strong femaale role models and protagonists, myself included; I know of three wonderful women in the military. Immature women tend to be the ones who become obsessed (not who merely like, but are obsessed) with Twilight.

    I’m obsessed with Twilight, like midnight premiere four hour lines, I cosplayed as Bella at the convention in L.A (which I’m going with gold tickets next year and I want to go to Tent City too). Ask Susan and SayWhaat they had seen the pics at Facebook. But then I dressed up as Buffy, and as Callisto (I was pissed of at Xena I dressed up as her later), then I wanted a Star Ttrek wedding, and a Pushing Daisies civil ceremony (Hubby didn’t approved) Obsession is my middle name. The thing is when I say that I have a low level of cattiness I’m not kidding I love women of all size and shapes and I don’t have this “for my to like a woman she has to be strong in this fixed set of ways”. I consider Bella strong in her own way (I’m actually quite proud of her, ovaries of steel she has), and she is in my gallery of favorite females along with the other mentioned, Scully (which make me buy my first power suit to dress like her and a crucifix), Ripley, Agatha Heterodine, Chloe Sullivan… I don’t really have “standard strong woman” trope in my fandom likes, I’m mostly want my female characters to be passionate, whatever is it (a career, a dream,a mission, a man…) I don’t care. Maybe that makes me immature but I’m happy with being like that.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    It appears that Joan of Arc could have saved her life had she been willing to recant her beliefs early in the proceedings against her. Eventually, under tremendous psychological pressure, she did sign a partial recantation, but then reversed herself, un-recanted, and was burned.

    A 20th century woman who shared some of the characteristics of Joan was  Noor Inayat Khan.

     

     

     

     

     

  • Esau

    Bellita at 320 above: “I certainly don’t have specific advice, and I phrased that awkwardly to begin with. (If I had to edit it, I’d probably change “dominant’” to “competent.”) All I meant was that I got what the people on the thread were saying about what women are attracted to and how a man can put himself in a setting that works to his advantage.”

    Sorry, even as re-stated I think you’re just digging yourself in deeper.  The idea that competence in a man is a primary attractor for women is false, a “pretty lie”, and really just so much hamster chow.  There are patches, swaths, concentrations and entire inland seas of competent men to be found everywhere in the world — MIT is my favorite example, but you don’t have to go that far; even middle management at any successful company will have a good proportion of people (including men) who are extremely good at their jobs.  And yet it is clear that these women aren’t particularly interested in mining these rich veins of competence at all.  When was the last time, as you imagine it, that one toothsome young woman said to another, “I’m tired of jocks and pretty emo boys; let’s go find some men who are good at their jobs!”, to which the other replied “Yeah, that’ll be hot!”?

    Admit it: plain competence, even mastery, is not generally an attractor in itself: it depends strongly on the field of endeavor — competence in some fields is actually a net negative — which means, definitively, that “competence” is not the right concept that you’re trying to home in on.  Really, I think the much better explanation is that women keep saying they are attracted to competence is either to make themselves look better by appearing less shallow, or to rationalize their attraction to dominance in a better light (and *squeak* goes the wheel).

    So, what’s really going on here?  I don’t claim to have all the answers, but the sainted Yohami wrote a good deal recently as to how male competence was attractive to women if and only if it allowed the man to demonstrate dominance over other men; competence in a solo performance or in a non-competitive environment didn’t do the trick at all.  I’m not certain I agree; but if you differ strongly then you can take it up with The Yohamster directly.

     

  • Jennifer

    You’re awesome David :)

    Ana, I love you too :P And Vox Day said, “So much for women wanting men to be gentle the first time”. Wrong again pal, looks like Edward was quite worried about her. Love that.

    You know Ana, I have dreams of various natures; some include men who rescue me, others have me leading men in danger off somewhere safe (both scenarios physically end the same, heh). But a lot of dreams have me fighting something, me as an immortal force that no one can kill, who protects her loved ones. I learned to control my nightmares thus years ago, and it’s a great psychological tool; I now fly in more dreams than not, and sometimes my flight includes either fleeing or fighting an evil force, or just flight for the sheer joy of it.

    Anne Shirley as Michelle Duggar? Please, she only had seven kids.

  • Jennifer

    Maybe Bellita’s speaking of her own preferences, Esau; please don’t obnoxiously write that off as hamsterizing, or imply that another man knows her better than she knows herself. Of course women love captains in a job workforce, but mastery at a job can be a BIG attraction; majorly. Susan wrote a post on it, how a man she didn’t even generally find attractive turned her on when she saw him working his craft. A man who’s master of his craft is a huge plus.

  • Esau

    Jennifer at 373: “Maybe Bellita’s speaking of her own preferences,”

    Ahem, if you actually go back and read — more carefully — my remark just above at 371, or the earlier comment by Bellita at 320, you will see she states ” I got what the people on the thread were saying about what women are attracted to”, ie she’s generalizing about women and not just her own preferences.  Really, it was clear on the page.

    Of course women love captains in a job workforce, but mastery at a job can be a BIG attraction; majorly.

    And a point that’s to the north can also be to the east, and a point that’s south can also be west; majorly, if you visit the right spots on the map.  But, clue: north/south are not the same thing as east/west.  They can related, or not, depending on what landmass you’re living on and where you travel on it.  The question is not whether mastery can be a big attractor, the question is to whether as a general rule it actually is an attractor; ie are they generally correlated across all situations?  In my experience, the correlation is no better than very weak, and may even be negative.  To look only at the cases where they do run together is an apex fallacy, like thinking that north and east must be correlated because you spend so much time at your nice vacation house in Maine.

    Susan wrote a post on it

    Yes, I recall.  But she was just as wrong then as you are now, and for the same reason: deliberate refusal to look at most of the world, and instead ignoring the (large) parts that don’t agree with your view.

  • Jennifer

    You are making as big an assumption about women as the two WOMEN here are, Esau, and that can be a tiring thing to see men do. If you went by the manosphere or even the uglier gamospheres, you’d think most women wanted rude men, rough men, men who bossed them and other men/women around, and snubbed good men like ugly harpy bitches, but actually, that’s a grossly exaggerated factor, like the one you’re describing now. I, and generally Bellita, speak of not only ourselves but the women we actually know, which may or may not be what you’re doing as well. In MY experience, of course, women dig, say, the army general. But the grand majority are every bit as happy to go with one of the hot, clearly strong and masculine regular soldiers as well.

  • Esau

    You are making as big an assumption about women as the two WOMEN here are

    First, why is WOMEN capitalized here?  Do you think women are somehow more reliable in making assumptions about women’s attraction behaviors?  I thought it was pretty well established, that science had proven otherwise.

    Second, no.  I’m not making an assumption, I’m making a generalization based on data and experience, same as Bellita was doing and you are doing.  Difference is, that I’m right and you’re both wrong.  (Sorry, did you want me to sugar-coat that?)

    If you went by the manosphere or even the uglier gamospheres, you’d think most women wanted rude men, rough men, men who bossed them and other men/women around, and snubbed good men like ugly harpy bitches, but actually, that’s a grossly exaggerated factor

    Can you quantify “grossly exaggerated”?  If not, then what does it mean?

    But the grand majority are every bit as happy to go with one of the hot, clearly strong and masculine regular soldiers as well.

    I may be slow, but I fail to see how this relates at all to the previous exchange.  Yes, hot, strong and masculine are attractive, and enough of those ingredients could easily outweigh a man’s lack of status in other dimensions.  That doesn’t prove anything one way or the other about whether competence is generally an attractor or not, which was the point I’m taking Bellita to task over.  Or, have you (wisely, if silently) conceded that argument and are now just fantasizing?  If so, don’t let me stop you, I’m very pro-daydreaming (as my boss will tell you).

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Ms. Jennifer

    In MY experience, of course, women dig, say, the army general. But the grand majority are every bit as happy to go with one of the hot, clearly strong and masculine regular soldiers as well.

    Let’s not forget guys like Audie Murphy. 5′ 5″ 110 lbs. and a bit baby-faced. He got the Medal of Honor for taking out a whole bunch of German soldiers after being ambushed in WW2. And he was enlisted. Not all “manly” men look like Robert Redford…

  • Jennifer

    I’ll ignore your first few comments, since I see them as inaccurate and they just annoy me. But although I think your summation is faulty, we may agree on the basic rules of attraction factors.

    “That doesn’t prove anything one way or the other about whether competence is generally an attractor or not, which was the point I’m taking Bellita to task over.”

    The point is this: the general is the top dog, which women love. But the soldier who’s good at his craft yet lower on the rung is STILL attractive.

    Let me put this way: If you’re saying that a nerd doing well at office work isn’t generally as hot as a prime weight lifter, then I agree. But a perfectly manly guy that noticeably thrives at his job, whether it’s a pilot or a chef? Plenty of women wouldn’t need the extra bonus of him being the boss to be drawn to him on some level.

    “Can you quantify “grossly exaggerated”?”

    As in, they claim that just about every woman’s like the kind they’ve had experience with.

  • Jennifer

    I know, Megaman; a guy doesn’t need to look like Micky Rourke or the polished Colin Firth to have a good, healthy manhood.

  • Anacaona

    Vox Day said, “So much for women wanting men to be gentle the first time”. Wrong again pal, looks like Edward was quite worried about her. Love that.

    Haha I often call Twilight a  Rorschach book you can ask 25 people what happened in it or was all about and get 25 different responses. For some reason the canon of the books is hard to grasp for nonfans. No idea why…yet. :)

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Esau

    Sorry, even as re-stated I think you’re just digging yourself in deeper.

    You know what? I think you’re right. I’m going to go back to what I said about dominance. But in that case, I don’t know what to say to make you feel better.

    Honestly, I only restated my original comment because of what you said about the men who have to scratch and claw. Don’t you think I feel bad for them, too? But I can’t control other women’s attractors any more than my own. A few months ago, when I hinted on my blog that I was considering (as a strategy) staying with a man whom I felt only strong platonic affection for because I didn’t want to be the shallow girl who dumped someone because he didn’t make her “tingle,” I was told (by Dogsquat) that “martyring myself” for a man because I don’t want to hurt him will only cheat both of us out of real love.

    So now what can men do? I have no idea. I don’t even know what women can do. On Badger’s blog, a woman recently admitted that she broke up with a good looking, intelligent, affectionate man with good career prospects and a desire to start a family in the near future because she wasn’t attracted to him. And a couple of male commenters agreed that she shouldn’t be with a man she’s not attracted to, no matter how much she knows, on an intellectual level, that he’s a real catch.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    Actually a lot of smart women appreciate strong femaale role models and protagonists, myself included; I know of three wonderful women in the military.

    My point was that although some women might be consumers of heroic violent action movies with female protagonists, they don’t choose to create them themselves. It’s not like Jane Campion or Miranda July are working on writing & directing a female Die Hard.

    I mentioned the military, police, fire service & police not to say that no women serve in such capacity, only that they are not serving under the same expectation to sacrifice themselves in the way their male counterparts are. Around 20% of the US armed forces are female, yet 97% of the troops that died in Iraq were male, & of the 3% of the troops that died that were female, more than a third of them died from other causes than combat. It has been said (with only a little exaggeration) that serving in Iraq is one of the safest places for an American woman to be.

    Same happens in the police force. Female police officers overwhelmingly take the safer day shifts & on the beat, particularly in less safe areas, are almost always accompanied by a male officer, who’s unspoken role is to protect her. This has been looked at with concern in the past as it doubles the danger of the male officer, who has no one along for the ride to protect him.

    In the fire service, again, there are female firefighters, but hardly any, in the US it’s about 2%. Women are not attracted to dangerous work generally, jobs in which they daily run the risk of death. Which is why, even though women now hold the majority of all jobs in the USA today, over 95% of all deaths at work, across the board, are male.

    I could go on but it’s been said many many times before & I’m sure many of the other readers & commentators here know all this stuff already.

    Joan chose to risk her life every day, like every soldier, and she did it willingly each time; she wasn’t dragged against her will by angels.

    Not to knock her place in history, or her power to inspire others, but she was also very likely insane.

     

  • 108spirits

    I don’t even know what women can do.

    Stop consuming female emo porn like Twilight and True Blood for a start. No living man can live up to the fictional ones served up to women in the MSM. That’s why most women can’t even tingle for men at similar SMV.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @108

      Stop consuming female emo porn like Twilight and True Blood for a start. No living man can live up to the fictional ones served up to women in the MSM. That’s why most women can’t even tingle for men at similar SMV.

      Even though I enjoy my emo porn, I think you’re right about this. Twilight is PG but on True Blood I’ve seen plenty of nude sex with incredibly hot guys. It has the exact same “numbing” effect on women that porn has on guys, IMO.

  • lovelost

    @Susan

    How about you post a blog entry “Happy Thanksgiving to all HUS Readers and Haters”

    and we all can comment how much we love and hate. all options available, let’s give the SMP discussion a break.

  • Ramble

    Are you saying that deference and compliance with a woman is not a problem in sustaining attraction?

    Susan, I am trying to say:
    1. if the dud is a Vampire and looks like that guy that plays him in the movie then he has got Alpha genes for miles.
    2. If he is completely beta to her, that is OK since she has already seen that he is very Alpha (i.e. he is a fucking bloodsucking vampire than can fly, or whatever…also, like I said before, he does not seem to smile)
    3. If he is not beta to other guys, or at least not being beta to other guys in her presence, then that can go a long way as well.

    But, no, I would not argue with that point you raised. Being really deferential and compliant with a girl can kill you.

    Again, everything I said should be taken with the understanding that I have never read a word of Twilight.

  • Ramble

    Well he worships the ground that Carlisle stands to and he is probably aside from Bella and Alice the only one that can change his mind and he respect, Bella changes his mind being humble, demure and sweet (crying also) Alice annoys the hell out of him but Carlisle just say “son I don’t think we should do this” And he just does it. In fact he is his role model but Carlisle is the type of man who commands respect just by showing up.

    Anacaona, I did not really follow any of that…I have never read or seen anything in relation to Twilight.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Bellita,

    So now what can men do? I have no idea.

    Here’s an idea: Men can stop complaining and start making themselves more attractive. Men can recognize that while women have it easier in the SMP in some ways, men have it a lot easier in others.

    A woman’s SMV has more to do with genes than anything. Sure, a woman can keep herself fit and healthy, but an ugly woman is an ugly woman, and unless she’s going to get some cosmetic surgery, there’s not much she can do about it.

    Once a man recognizes that social dominance is a major attractor for women, he’s in a position to make himself much more attractive to the opposite sex. In some ways, this is extremely easy, because the vast majority of men lack either the understanding or motivation to improve themselves. That, and those who HAVE done the work are capitalizing on their successes by writing books and creating blogs and running workshops on “game” and “self-improvement.” So the information on HOW to achieve this is easily accessible.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Esau,

    Really, I think the much better explanation is that women keep saying they are attracted to competence is either to make themselves look better by appearing less shallow, or to rationalize their attraction to dominance in a better light (and *squeak* goes the wheel).

    How is being attracted to dominance any more or less shallow than being attracted to competence?

    And, how many men can do this? Unless men are switching fields and venues six times a day, taking turns being on top, then it should be obvious that only a small fraction can actually be dominant. What’s your advice for the rest, beyond further scratching and clawing?

    Bit of a math fail, I would say, if you had in mind that a “practical application” is something that the main run of people can all simultaneously employ.

    Hm. I think Sue mentioned that the level of dominance a man must reach is different for each woman. If woman were only attracted to the men at the very very top, then they’d only be sexually attracted to like .00001 percent of the population.

    Take a look at men: Most men find women who are nurturing attractive. I know I do, anyway. Does that mean that the MOST nurturing woman in the world would be most attractive? No. In part because there are OTHER attractors involved, and in part because too much nurturing is oppressive and annoying. How nurturing should a woman be? That depends on the man.

  • Esau

    Bellita at 381: “… But in that case, I don’t know what to say to make you feel better.

    Honestly, I only restated my original comment because of what you said about the men who have to scratch and claw. Don’t you think I feel bad for them, too? “

    Of course I do believe that you feel bad for them too.  From your writing, especially at your own blog, you seem to me to be quite caring and empathic, even to an extent unmatched anywhere else that I’ve read on the ‘gendersphere’.

    My concern here is much cruder, not with your sympathy but simply with your accuracy.  If you want to hear it this way, I would say that you can make me feel better by not so lightly trafficking in incorrect, shaming generalizations.  For those joining our program late, here is my case from this exchange starting at 318, re-stated in a few sentences:

    1. You wrote at 288 that “The practical application for a man is to find a field in which he can be dominant.”; similar to David Foster at 287, I pointed out that it’s a mathematical impossibility for any majority of men to apply this simultaneously, and hence it can’t properly be called a “practical application”.

    2. At 320 you refined by saying “I phrased that awkwardly to begin with. (If I had to edit it, I’d probably change “dominant’” to “competent.”)”; the effect is to say “the practical application for a man is to find a field in which he can be competent,” which is an idea that Susan and others have expressed at HUS before.  However, I think as a general statement it’s plainly wrong, since competence as an attractor varies greatly, and can even go negative, depending on which field the man is in.

    There, that’s all I’m trying to say.  It’s pretty simple, I think.  Up to this point, do you disagree?

    Meanwhile,

    On Badger’s blog, a woman recently admitted that she broke up with a good looking, intelligent, affectionate man with good career prospects and a desire to start a family in the near future because she wasn’t attracted to him.

    Yes, I saw that piece.  If I recall the story correctly, she specifically found him unattractive because he wanted them to become BF/GF too quickly, after only a week or a few dates; Badger diagnosed this as a “massive DLV”.  Now that you’ve mentioned it here, it kind of completes a circle: Susan started HUS following the laments of younger women, that men wanted sex but not relationships; more recently she was dismayed to hear that young women wouldn’t respect a man unless he pushed for sex early; and now we have the living example, that pushing for a relationship early is a massively losing play!  It’s a circle forged of irony.

     

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      now we have the living example, that pushing for a relationship early is a massively losing play!

      Right. He asked her to be his gf after one date. This is indeed a massive fail. Why? Because she knows it’s not about liking her. As she put it, he’s got the scenario down, he’s just painting her in. I think they may have only gone on three dates, but he was already offering to move to another country if her work took her there. I don’t think anyone, of either sex, wants a declaration of commitment that is completely unfounded, from a person who doesn’t even know you. She was right to be taken aback – it’s absurd.

      What women want is for the process to work – let’s get to know each other, go on some dates, swap spit, etc. If compatibility and attraction is present for both parties, a relationship is generally the female preference.

  • Anacaona

    Anacaona, I did not really follow any of that…I have never read or seen anything in relation to Twilight.

    I meant that he does have a couple of males he respects and obey in the books, but is far more likely to hear a woman’s plea than a man’s. I think that is pretty beta, YMMV.

    Stop consuming female emo porn like Twilight and True Blood for a start. No living man can live up to the fictional ones served up to women in the MSM. That’s why most women can’t even tingle for men at similar SMV.

    I repeat the same thing I said about porn for this to affect a person that person had issues long before he/she started to consume it. Like lack of real role models about how a relationship an a man behave, 95% of the members of my Twilight sisterhood are happily married or dating so I don’t think they are looking for their own Bill and Edward. So this “let’s blame it on fiction ONLY” is not something I agree with, YMMV.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Esau,

    …competence as an attractor varies greatly, and can even go negative, depending on which field the man is in.

    Wouldn’t you say that that statement would be equally true if you substituted “dominance” for “competence”?

    Think about it. A man can totally dominate the klezmer music scene with his wicked clarinet playing, and yet for the average American women who doesn’t really give a rat’s ass about Yiddish music traditions, that wouldn’t be much of a DHV, and hence not much of an attractor.

    Probably dominance becomes a major factor in attraction when a woman can see herself operating as a part of the social community that the dominant man has mastered.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Esau

    If you want to hear it this way, I would say that you can make me feel better by not so lightly trafficking in incorrect, shaming generalizations.

    I had no idea I was shaming anyone, had no intention to do so, and am deeply sorry I hurt your feelings. When I wrote it, I believed I was trafficking in something else, namely hope and happiness.

    When that “practical application” first occurred to me, I was really happy about it because I have two teenage brothers and I thought it would be useful for them. One of them is good at wheeling and dealing; the other is good at cooking. My reasoning was that if they worked at what they already had an aptitude for, rather than fumble at what girls seem to be attracted to at the moment (e.g., sports, as neither of them is very athletic), they’d increase their mastery, confidence and other factors that go into attractiveness.

    Will it be a guarantee that they will attract the girls they like? Of course not. But it supports what they already love to do and certainly won’t hurt.

    competence as an attractor varies greatly, and can even go negative, depending on which field the man is in.

    Remember that we have regular women commenters here who met their husbands through video games. (And for what it’s worth, my mother didn’t feel attracted to my father until she heard him play the piano.) It’s obvious that some fields are going to be more widely attractive than others, but I don’t think it’s absolutely necessary to be in one of those fields. Knowing and appealing to your niche market seems like a decent strategy. (At least it’s standard HUS advice for women in our own context. I think it would work out for men, too, when it comes to competency’s weight as an attractor, but you can argue with me there.)

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Susan

    He asked her to be his gf after one date. This is indeed a massive fail. Why? Because she knows it’s not about liking her. As she put it, he’s got the scenario down, he’s just painting her in.

    A month ago, someone made an interesting comparison between men who are ready to be exclusive really quickly and women who are ready to sleep with a man really quickly. Individual cases aside, it just doesn’t seem sincere, as if the woman would be willing to sleep with any man who showed up and the man willing to commit to any woman who showed up.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    +1 on that last post, Bellita. And the one before that.

    Men who are willing to commit to the first interested woman really ARE the male equivalents of sluts.

    As for your brothers, I think telling them to develop their skills and to place themselves in contexts where they can be successful by displaying those skills is awesome advice.

  • Esau

    Susan: “Right. He asked her to be his gf after one date. This is indeed a massive fail. “

    But, by common consensus, asking her to be his sex partner after one date would be unremarkable, even recommended, right?  When you quote and agree that, “As she put it, he’s got the scenario down, he’s just painting her in.”, wouldn’t that be equally true if he were pushing for early sex, as much as for an early relationship?  And yet you think it should be obvious that the former is a likely win, while the latter should be a total loss.

    I don’t have a big point to make here, I just find it a bit head-spinning to see how much things have changed from the Pleistocene Era of my and Abe Simpson’s youth.  Back then, it was universally understood — at least during daylight hours — that having sex was a much bigger commitment than being in a relationship; boyfriends and girlfriends came and went, month by month, but sex was put off until you could be really, really sure about someone.  The complete inversion between that and the modern SMP — sex on a whim, relationship only if you’re serious — is still something I have a hard time getting used to.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Esau

      When you quote and agree that, “As she put it, he’s got the scenario down, he’s just painting her in.”, wouldn’t that be equally true if he were pushing for early sex, as much as for an early relationship?

      No, because in that case he’s pursuing the natural male impulse. She may say no, but will not be surprised a male is willing to have sex the first night. Similarly, a woman proposing sex the first night is going against what should be her natural inclination – so the male wonders what’s wrong with her, or at least may rule her out as a relationship prospect.

      A person of either sex who is behaving like the opposite sex is generally perceived as unattractive.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Jesus Mahoney

    Oh, wow! My first +1!!! Thanks. :D

  • Esau

    “A month ago, someone made an interesting comparison between men who are ready to be exclusive really quickly and women who are ready to sleep with a man really quickly.”

    Of course, the comparison doesn’t go all that far.  The female slut who’ll put out easily does actually get a lot of sex, as much as she wants; while the male slut who’ll “put out” for a relationship too easily will typically wind up getting nothing at all.  It just shows that, even if this female strategy is sub-optimal, the male side of this equation is a vastly worse strategy; and so one should not be surprised at the phenomenon of men erring on the side of not being eager for relationships.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Esau,

    But the male slut for commitment doesn’t usually get sex, which is what he wants. And the female slut doesn’t usually get a relationship, which is what SHE wants.

    They’re both losers.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Bellita,

    I had no idea I was your first. I would’ve made it more special for you had I known….

  • Jennifer

    I don’t think you’re right about female fighters or Joan of Arc, Byron, but whatever. Women do usually naturally avoid dangerous jobs because we have less strength; this doesn’t follow that the ones who do sign up for them are less prepared than men to sacrifice.

    “Knowing and appealing to your niche market seems like a decent strategy.”

    Exactly. Bellita, there’s no need for you to apologize. Are you saying then, that you dumped a guy because he didn’t turn you on by being the boss of other men?

  • Mike

    @108

    Stop consuming female emo porn like Twilight and True Blood for a start. No living man can live up to the fictional ones served up to women in the MSM. That’s why most women can’t even tingle for men at similar SMV.

    Couldn’t help but laugh at this comment. I have an eerie feeling that my marriage fell apart in no small part to my wife’s over infatuation with ALL things vampire. She was already into Twilight, i actually introduced her to True Blood, Buffy and Angel, and that became her dominant focus over the final year of our marriage. In the end i just couldn’t match the sheer awesomeness that was Damon Salvatore / Ian Somerhalder.

    le sigh.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike

      She was already into Twilight, i actually introduced her to True Blood, Buffy and Angel, and that became her dominant focus over the final year of our marriage.

      That is more than a little strange. I’m sorry your marriage ended, but I have to wonder just what is wrong with you ex. I think we can all agree that making vampires the focus of your life is not a healthy way to live. I think there’s been some study about vampire lore and its effect on women.

  • Jennifer

    “As for your brothers, I think telling them to develop their skills and to place themselves in contexts where they can be successful by displaying those skills is awesome advice”

    YES.

  • Desiderius

    Susan,

    “In the new movie, Jacob is shirtless most of the time. It’s as if the script was written around his physique. Meanwhile, we never see Edward’s naked torso, even during the honeymoon sex scene!”

    I’ve got a hammer and everything looks like a nail, but is this not a perfect example of the base female desire I’ve argued for?

    Alpha for the seed (or, post-birth-control, it’s stand-in hot sex/fantasies thereof), utterly emasculated beta for the need (for validation/support/protection). Is Adam player or beta? No other choices allowed; nor alas monogamous desire.

    It is unfortunate that I’ve gotten roped into condemning the former so often (as in the Jhane thread), as I believe the latter (the emasculation/slumming with the Herb) does far more damage overall.

  • Jennifer

    Jesus, brilliant first post.

  • Desiderius

    Esau,

    If one is determined to attract women with competence alone, with no help from her natural drives, then one should be content to find attractive competence in women, apart from her appeal to the natural drives of men.

    There is no shortage of frumpy women who would make good wives and are very much drawn to your competence.

    You want some hot sauce, bring some.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Jennifer

    Are you saying then, that you dumped a guy because he didn’t turn you on by being the boss of other men?

    The literal boss of other men? No. But I did once reject someone (whom I wasn’t in an official relationship yet) because he seemed to let his friends have all the power in their relationship. I’m really not proud of my reaction to him, but I can’t sugar coat what happened.

    One day, while we were talking, he shared with me how hard it was for him to grow up in a very rigid religious community, with two best friends who were secretly sexually active (good church boys by day, players by night–and with the same church girls, too). Not being a hypocrite like them, he watched a lot of girls he would have been a good boyfriend to reject him and fall for his friends every time. And so he spent years simultaneously loathing them and envying them, while remaining close to them and drinking in the stories of their conquests. I believe he told me all that because he knew I was religious like the girls who got played by his friends and thought I would sympathize with him for being the good guy.

    There were lots of other factors that led to the rejection, but I’d say that this was the last nail in the coffin. Again, I’m not proud of it and feel like a hypocrite myself now, but that’s what happened and it’s another of those circles of forged irony that Esau was talking about.

  • Desiderius

    Mike,

    “I have an eerie feeling that my marriage fell apart in no small part to my wife’s over infatuation with ALL things vampire.”

    Last month I observed a class of high school seniors watching the 1931 Dracula with Bela Lugosi.

    His Dracula is utterly unglamorous – his castle is a complete ruin, with cobwebs, rats crawling out of his coffin, etc… and he’s easily pushing 60 and shows it. The look on his face is more desperate/deranged than seductive. And yet when he goes to bite the innocent female lead (he raises his cape to cover the action, and the camera cuts away before he reaches her neck in any case), I noticed that the four most attractive girls in the class are all twirling their hair.

    The (by a good margin) most conventionally attractive girl, complete with skin-tight yoga pants and bare mid-drift, waist-length hair, perma-arched back, perfect face, the whole nine-yards, was twirling the most furiously, soon after joined by a bouncing knee and hand to inner thigh.

    It is a testament to the power of society’s control of male desire that I was not aroused myself, but the remarkable thing was that the boys around her seemed not to notice either. But that’s a topic for another thread. The subtext of the whole movie was the threat of (older) alphas to young women and their desire for their future life-partners (in the movie, the female lead’s desire for her fiance was understood to be ruined). It was a bit unnerving to have that alpha appeal so starkly illustrated.

     

  • Jennifer

    I don’t think that’s hypocritical at all, Bellita; it makes perfect sense, in fact, to be repelled by a guy who lets others walk over him. And is a kind of hypocrite himself, incidentally. Not to mention the company he keeps. This doesn’t even involve work, but a guy in general without much backbone; if you feel bad because he’s “good”, or even call him good, I think you’re missing the point. Those friends of his are worthless asshole hypocrites, and he just sits by and listens to their crappy behavior without doing a thing by himself or for himself. Being the good guy does’t count if you have no spine and no voice to put it in practice. Guys and girls like that in their teen years don’t have an ounce of respect from me either.

     

  • Mike

    Hi Susan, thanks for the comment. To be fair let me state:

    1. i do not hate my (ex)wife. We’re not divorced yet but i’ve paid enough in legal fees to feel comfy calling her my exwife.
    2. i just want to place it in the context that Vampire Diaries / True Blood were actually a big aspect of involvement in her career choice (which i initially supported wholeheartedly) so that has to be taken into consideration
    3. i’m not saying Vampire Diaries was the death of our marriage, of course it’s more complex than that. yet i do feel it played a role

    She would probably give you a different take and i don’t want you to assume what i say is correct because it’s very one sided hearing my side. I can only tell you that as the months dragged on before i finally got the ‘i love you but am not in love with you’ comment from her, i actually felt like i was being discarded for a tv show. I was never jealous or possessive of her around other men, i trusted her implicitly, and still believe to this day she didn’t/isn’t leaving me for another man (wishful thinking?) but i did feel a pronounced seething jealousy over a tv show. I feel stupid even saying it but that’s how i felt.

    It seemed to bring out the teenager in her and perhaps she’s in a midlife crisis and would rather remain in a state of youthful exuberance rather than slog it out in marriage in tough economic times. I can’t give you her reasons for ending it, only she knows. I just feel it in my core that she would ultimately tell you that the highlight of her life was getting her picture taken with Ian Sommerhaulder on the set of V.D… whereas the highlight of my life, even to this day, was my wedding day.

  • tmunson

    @Desidirius re vampire themes & romance

    I was intrigued by your comments re Bela’s portrayal of Dracula. The theme was introduced here by Susan as she related her experience when her coworker transferred the wine in his mouth to her’s,which she swallowed and, as she admitted to all of us, thinking of it still turns her on. I pointed out the reference to Bram Stoker’s Dracula where Dracula makes Mina drink HIS blood (which is of course someone else’s) and thus become his slave. Susan’s exchange has some of that quality.

    Leaving aside the obvious references to Christianity (resurrection, wine as blood/blood as wine), the vampire as portrayed contains images which provoke an erotic response. As you note, Bela (who was not 60-late 30s) is older than his victims. But he is old, decrepit;  his repellence becomes erotic when it is clear no resistance is available, that one must yield, and rather than male insemination a withdrawal is intended, a reversal of the biological imperative, a deflowering of sorts, not vaginal but still bloody, and his very musty nastiness enhances rather than detracts from the fantasy, which is part of  what made your female classmates stick to their seats. In “Nosferatu” (same story; Stoker’s widow litigated use of his title) he is an ugly deformed monster but still “gets some” (Klaus Kinski’s updated version nails it).

    Dracula has become progressively younger, more virile as opposed to decayed, through the years. Now we have barely post-pubescent  youngsters doin’ the bitin’. Dracula could be seen as the elder flowering the younger and made sense in those times. Leading men (and Dracula is a lead) have been becoming more boy like, less manly, for a long time. Steve McQueen, Clint Eastwood, Newman etc.-soem ahd boyish charm but these were men. We’re more into Dicaprio, Damon, etc. who are attractive but don’t exude the same menace, gravitas of the previous stars. The vampire myth, in cinema, has changed accordingly. We’ve gone from Maximum Leader style biter to a diffuse set of hard bodies, biting and bodice ripping (ok those aren’t bodices but c’mon) in a more democratic snaguine free for all.

     

    BTW my favorite explication of this theme is “The Hunger”. The incomparable Kaherine Deneuve plays the vamp, and she swings both ways, and she gets Susan Sarandon. Susan is seduced, female style-erotic.Themes of blood, eroticism, loss, immortality are explored at a thoughtful, measured pace. I watch “Twilight” and while my wife loves it, as an old ” Famous Monsters of Hollywood” fan (circa 1961) I can’t get into the series.

     

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    What women want is for the process to work – let’s get to know each other, go on some dates, swap spit, etc. If compatibility and attraction is present for both parties, a relationship is generally the female preference.

    My experience has been that this process takes about 1 ~ 3 months, with maybe 2 or so dates per week. I know people don’t like to arbitrarily assign time limits, but this is what I’ve seen work best. If two reasonable people can forgo commitment and sex, and still feel attracted to one another, that’s probably the formula for starting a successful relationship. Not a fairy tale happy ending, but a safe and realistic alternative to the prevailing SMP.

  • Anacaona

    @tmunson

    I do believe vampires have an special appeal to women that men don’t get even if the original vampires (that were indeed dead corpses animated by evil spirits) the vampiress was never depicted as erotic but destructive of males. I think there are many things at play women have a different relationship with blood, after all we bleed monthly through the same place sex and life are intertwined. Then the whole  surrender to the stronger man hindbrain training and I think that combo probably makes all of us fall into this spell to some degree (I for example watched and loved Buffy but I can’t stomach True Blood or Vampire Diaries and Gary Oldman playing Dracula was the only time I found him attractive no to mention that I love that movie). I think it was unavoidable that the myth of the vampire will ended up evolving to Twilight levels of romance, it started in Victorian times with Varney the vampire having a conscience, then Carmilla falling in love with Laura, then Dracula being a count and having help, Anne Rice also made her vampires very human like and conflicted with their nature (Louis and Edward could probably do an Emo off, well before he got married at least) and then Twilight were they are more like vampire gods than anything else if it makes you feel better I think Twilight was the top of the trend and probably the next big vampire thing will go back to the basics.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Desiderius

    Last month I observed a class of high school seniors watching the 1931 Dracula with Bela Lugosi.

    His Dracula is utterly unglamorous – his castle is a complete ruin, with cobwebs, rats crawling out of his coffin, etc… and he’s easily pushing 60 and shows it. The look on his face is more desperate/deranged than seductive.

    Interesting the reaction even an old movie like that had. Admittedly, I’m not a fan of the vampire genre and don’t understand the whole sexual allure. The one film that impressed me, though, was Werner Herzog’s “Nosferatu” from the 70s. It was a remake of the 20s silent version. I wonder what reaction you’d get from the kids with that one? Klaus Kinski’s Count Orlok was a bald, rat-like creature, probably the most unflattering depiction I’ve seen. He was tired of being immortal and longed for eternal sleep. Very little romantic angle to the story, but the female lead does “occupy” him long enough for the sun to rise.

  • tmunson

    @Anacona

    Ref “bleed monthly”; that was my first thought when Sarandon and Deneuve start mixing it up, naked-wow, things will get interesting ’round here once a month. Thought it was too crude to mention vampires and menstrual cycles-glad you gave me the opening. It is interesting to compare the vampire myth with the one concerning incubus (male) and succubus (female) demons who were thought to have sex with sleeping humans of the opposite sex.

    Bram Stoker’s “Dracula” has few women vampires. His daughters try to take Harker, but Dracula needs him; he gives them an infant he has stolen and they suck it dry. The baby’s mother wails in agony outside the castle until Dracula has the wolves devour her. Later one of his victims attacks little children until Vam Helsing et al kill her. A tough show; I’ve only seen one version play this out, a British one probably 35 years old.

    “Dark Shadows” showed the male vampire/female vampire dichotomy well. Males were power; they overwhelmed and bit. Gals (and there were some very very hot ones) were all guile, their victims tricked, thrown off by their sexuality until they could deliver their erotic, lascivious bites which were great.

    Men probably don’t relate as well to the vampire. Women are more receptive to the notion they will be “acted” upon; men make the moves, initiate the contact, explore taking it to the next “level” (you do know what I mean?) As “Seinfeld”‘s Elaine says: “we play defense”. The vampire is all about the move, although again in the original Dracula has Mina come to him before she drinks his blood making her complicit in the act. It’s what an interrogator once said: strip a man, but  make the woman undress. This takes the power from the former and underscores the compromising of the latter.

  • Jennifer

    That horrific part of Dracula with the infant was the most horrid aspect I’ve seen of vampire films. UGH! So glad I never wasted time with that trash.

  • Anacaona

    @tmunson

    My husband preffers zombies (not guilt in killing them because they are brainless undead like neonazis :)) and original werewolves since they are cursed and don’t enjoy killing humans. For him the vampire is a metaphor of the upper class sucking up the “average Jane and Joe” dry. I tried to explain him the nuances of the myth (really vampires are good for any metaphor) but Anne Rice got him first so yeah…

    The whole vampiress eating and killing babies is an evolution of the Madonna whore complex. A whore could never be a madonna so Dracula turning his women into his whores kills their motherly instinct. Interesting enough the sex positive movement is very anti maternity. I wonder if they get the irony that they fighting for the right to choose to have a baby or expel  it out of their bodies at will, is tied up to the notion that a woman that chooses to have all the sex she wants can’t truly love the fruit of that meaningless sex, which is the origin of the complex to start. Another interesting feminist take is that his brides were liberated women from the Victorian strict rules, yeah right because the count didn’t force them to do anything against their will I’m sure. I guess is better to be slave of a man that will let you have sex with anything or anyone and feed you babies (thus never have the fear of become a mother) than to follow a set of societal rules. Had I mention that I have a low opinion of feminist’s wits? Because I do oh so much…

    I think you are forgetting that woman incite they don’t act thus that is part of the appeal of the whole Mina going to him. She is inciting the event in a way, but subtlety is not a value asset for women to have anymore, so this is not something modern works could tolerate.

  • SayWhaat

    What is with people that hate lots of babies in this country? Having lots of kids was a blessing less than 50 years ago. She was blessed with a big family.

    I wouldn’t call it “hate”, more like disdain. And having a lot of kids wasn’t considered a blessing.

    There’s a reason families in lesser-developed, uneducated areas will tend to have more children; the likelihood of one child reaching adulthood is small due to disease and a harsh environment, so to ensure at least one child will grow up to provide for you when you’re old, you would play the odds and have multiple children. The cost of having and providing for children is low anyway.

    That’s not so in developed and educated areas. Children are an investment, and one child will cost about $250k until he/she turns 18. So it makes more economic sense to have fewer children and focus on their upbringing until they can take care of themselves (and you in old age). Having more children than you can afford to take care of is grossly irresponsible (not to mention that you’re contributing to an overpopulation problem). If you can afford to foot the cost of many children, you still run into the problem of dividing your finite time and personal resources among them. That’s a problem even if you are a SAHM. That’s why big families are considered to be a sign of lower class in the West; having many children means that taxpayers are footing the bill (as in the Duggars’ case).

    To illustrate this better, my father was one of 6 (the 7th died), and my mother was one of 3. When they immigrated to the US, they only had me and my sister. You’ll find a lot of Indian-Americans with humongous extended families (numerous cousins and in-laws), but usually only one other sibling max.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    If a family is engaged in (unmechanized or not-very-mechanized) agriculture, or in home-based industries, then having lots of kids is usually going to be a net economic plus. Once economic activity moves outside the home and the kids are expected to go to school instead of work, the equation changes.

    The above notwithstanding, the cost of having multiple kids has been made MUCH higher than it needs to be by the dysfunctional nature of so many public schools–which requires parents to either spend more housing $ to get into a better school district or pay for private school–and the wild and unjustifiable increases in the cost of college.

    My most recent post….Thanksgiving and temporal bigotry

  • Esau

    JM at 400: “But the male slut for commitment doesn’t usually get sex, which is what he wants. And the female slut doesn’t usually get a relationship, which is what SHE wants.”

    They’re both losers.”

    Technically correct, I suppose.  But it is also technically correct, to observe that the guy sleeping one night off in the drunk tank, and the guy doing 20 to life while bunking next to Big Louis, are both currently in prison.  A true statement, but a highly misleading one that obscures how incomparable the two situations really are.

    Personally I’m way past tired of having this argument over and over again; but it appears to be my burden to bear.  So, here it is again, in three-part harmony:

    1) The female “sex” slut who has little or nothing to offer besides pleasing-enough sexual access, gets sex but not commitment.  The male “relationship” slut who has little or nothing to offer but a willingness to commit, gets neither sex nor commitment.  Economically speaking, the person with the opportunity/means to obtain A but not B is strictly not worse off than the person who can obtain neither.  To the extent that A is at all useful to the first person (see below) then she is strictly better off than he, and their deprivations are not comparable — zero is not the same order of magnitude as any positive number.  (Put that in your book of aphorisms.)

    2) One way to judge between whether two classes of people are in comparable or incomparable situations is simply to ask them if they’d switch places with the other given the chance.  If people from one class answer yes and no in proportions similar to those in the other, then it’s reasonable to say that their situations are comparable; but if the switching preferences are very different, then it’s strong evidence of the contrary.  Now, if you offered the male “relationship sluts,” who, as described above are currently getting nothing, the chance to trade places with the female “sex sluts”, how many would take it?  I’m going to say most to all; do you differ?  And, if you offer the “sex sluts/relationship deprived” females the chance to switch to being a male loser who gets nothing at all, how many will take it?  I’m going here with few to none; do you differ?  So by this very simple, very natural and very unbiased test, it is clear that the two groups of “deprivees” are not  at all in comparable straits.  QED.

    3) I’ve had this argument before with Susan, and she has demonstrated a truly awesome degree of near-religious devotion, to defending the claim that young women have it at least as bad in the modern SMP as young men do (though when she’s losing the argument she’ll always fall back on saying that comparisons are impossible, or manifestly unhelpful). The “female slut” of our example here doesn’t get devotion or commitment, but what she does get includes (1) sex (duh), (2) some amount of human physical contact, (3) some degree of approval, (4) some degree of human involvement, even if it’s only Game plays and booty call texts.  Her “male slut” counterpart, however, gets NONE OF THIS; NOTHING: no sex, no physicality, no approval that he’s in any way better than an animal or a rock, and no human involvement or contact; he may as well live on the moon.  Do these two situations sound comparable to you?  Yet Susan, in her bottomless zealotry, went to the absurd lengths of claiming that women (yes, all women) get NO benefit WHATSOEVER from items (1)-(4) above if they’re not accompanied by a loving commitment.  Yes, you read that right: sex, physicality, approval and involvement have ZERO VALUE in themselves — not just low, but ZERO — for relationship-minded women.  I let the absurdity of this claim stand as its own refutation.

    Circling back to the poor boy described in the Badger thread, assuming you’ve done all the reading: aside from the original author Butterfly Flower and commenters Hope and Bellita, have you seen any female writer express a single iota of sympathy for the boy?  No; his crime of over-eagerness is punishable by celibacy and human isolation, sentence to be served on the moon until he learns better.  Really, he brought it on himself, you know, and so got what he deserved; why should anyone lose a wink of sleep, when justice was so obviously done?

     

  • Esau

    Sorry, typo: Butterfly Flower should be Ribbon Butterfly, obvs.

  • Jennifer

    I do feel terrible for the boy; he’s treated unfairly, and almost every over-eager person gets burned. Justice, my ass; I suppose men who have enough balls to not act like jerks in order to win sluts should be punished too? But I’ll still say that the woman who gets pumped and dumped is far worse off; what the hell did she gain? Some extra emotional baggage and one more notch against her in her sexual history? If she’s like most women, what the devil is a little extra confidence from a horny player when it gets blown up the next day? What’s an hour of physical contact (if that) if it becomes one more time she’s disappointed and rung out? There were plenty of times I could have lowered myself to sleep with jerks in my teen years, and had that temporary high. Instead I was without a boyfriend my whole highschool term, and I still greatly prefer that, sleeping alone, to sleeping with an unworthy bed mate.

  • 108spirits

    Had that beta lawyer kid pushed for sex first, Butterfly girl wouldn’t have been at all disgusted with him as she is now.

    The real winning move though is to delay revealing your relationship intention (be it serious one or sexual casual) to her as much as possible while amplifying attraction. Make her really desperate to find out (usually through sex first lol).

  • SayWhaat

    Had that beta lawyer kid pushed for sex first, Butterfly girl wouldn’t have been at all disgusted with him as she is now.

    I can’t speak for Ribbon Butterfly, but I would have gotten 10x more uncomfortable with a guy pushing for sex after the first date. That happened to me and I am quite glad he is gone.

     

  • Olive

    @Esau,

    I will admit I only read your post, and not the original Badger post/female commenters. Your argument is extremely compelling re: “relationship slut” guys being worse off than “sex slut” girls.

    I would only caution you on one point: sex for guys is very different from sex for girls. I can definitely see how it looks, to a guy who is getting no sex/physical contact, that the girl who gets the regular P&D routine at least gets something. But biologically speaking, most guys can have pure casual sex without any feelings at all; I would argue that most girls cannot. A P&D looks fantastic to a guy who’s getting nothing because he’s looking at the P&D from a guy’s point of view (which is, of course, understandable). He can’t see why anyone would choose nothing over at least a few casual sex encounters. But many girls will choose exactly that. Read what Jennifer wrote at #425:

    and I still greatly prefer that, sleeping alone, to sleeping with an unworthy bed mate.

    This is key. And this is exactly why Susan tells you that a P&D has zero value for most girls. While a P&D might boost a guy, who is biologically programmed to spread his seed, a P&D can kill a girl’s self-esteem if she’s rejected the next day. She can actually be worse off after banging a few guys than she was not having sex at all. And that is a HUGE difference between girls and guys when it comes to casual sex. Depends on the girl and guy, of course; we’re talking broad sweeping trends here.

    As a side note: this is also why advocating casual sex for girls as a form of “female empowerment” was probably a bad idea for feminists. As much as we like to say girls should be allowed to sleep around just as much as guys, we can’t deny the biological differences that predict our ability to tolerate casual sex.

  • Sassy6519

    Had that beta lawyer kid pushed for sex first, Butterfly girl wouldn’t have been at all disgusted with him as she is now.

    The real winning move though is to delay revealing your relationship intention (be it serious one or sexual casual) to her as much as possible while amplifying attraction. Make her really desperate to find out (usually through sex first lol).

    Oh for heaven’s sake. I’ll give my two cents about this situation.

    I have been in Butterfly girl’s situation before. I met a guy one day, and he asked me to be his girlfriend the very same day. Mind you, we hadn’t even been on a date before or even kissed. He simply met me, we hung out in a group setting later on that day, and he asked me. I turned him down. I told him that we could get to know each other better before jumping into such a commitment, but he became defensive about it.

    It creeped me out because we barely knew each other. His eagerness to jump into a relationship with me, a practical complete stranger, made me very wary. It seemed like he wanted a relationship, not necessarily me. To me, his extreme desperation came across as him having an open “girlfriend slot” and that he was merely trying to fit me into the premade vacant space. How could he want to commit himself so eagerly to a woman he barely knew at the time?

    I don’t want a man to offer me commitment right off the bat, just as I assume men would prefer women not sleep with them too quickly. I would rather the act of dating transpire naturally over time.

    Just because women generally want commitment doesn’t mean that they want it even when the situation doesn’t warrant it. If I am looking for a serious relationship partner, I expect him to be just as discerning as I am. If he is willing to throw caution to the wind so foolishly, I suspect that something isn’t right.

    Also, ditto with what Say Whaat said. If a guy pressures me to sleep with him after a few dates, it makes me want to pull back even further.

     

  • Jennifer

    “Make her really desperate to find out (usually through sex first lol)”

    Freaking hilarious.

  • Jennifer

    There you go, smart women sharing their feelings and POVs.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Jennifer

    I don’t think that’s hypocritical at all, Bellita; it makes perfect sense, in fact, to be repelled by a guy who lets others walk over him. And is a kind of hypocrite himself, incidentally. Not to mention the company he keeps. This doesn’t even involve work, but a guy in general without much backbone; if you feel bad because he’s “good”, or even call him good, I think you’re missing the point. Those friends of his are worthless asshole hypocrites, and he just sits by and listens to their crappy behavior without doing a thing by himself or for himself. Being the good guy does’t count if you have no spine and no voice to put it in practice. Guys and girls like that in their teen years don’t have an ounce of respect from me either.

    If I had known him as a teenager, then yes, I would have been repelled for the same reasons you’ve stated. He may not have been a player, but he chose to be close friends with boys who were. I’ve always thought that the “lackeys” were much worse than the actual mean kids whose status they both supported and fed from. But in fairness to him, that part of his life was over long before he met me. He just wanted to share stories from his past because he felt he could trust me.

    As I’ve said, there were other factors that went into my final decision. I still feel bad about this one, though, because I’m not certain whether it should have been one of them.

    Plus, to use Ribbon Butterfly’s metaphor from the Badger thread, I think I blew my “civic duty” in this case, doing something that might have made a guy think he has to be a complete jerk to get a woman.

  • Anacaona

    @SayWhaat

    I will state less agree to disagree in the matter of blessings and kids this disdain is cultural ingrained here. The reason people have less children now is true is because is considered low status so its not a practical reason is about “being in the winners” side. The whole population issue has been explained that is not the amount of people but how much they consume the same parents that are competing for having small families are also buying new dolls and spending money on vacations and toys, so a small first world family impacts the environment as big as a big one in the third world. As far as I know the Duggars make enough money to pay for all the children they have. They are not in welfare or asking for money so they are not a burden for society. Any proof of they burdening the tax payers with their family planning?

  • Jennifer

    Bellita, if he still had any kind of supplicating nature about him, that would have been a natural turn-off. So would those stories of him being spineless, had he told them to me; I mean c’mon, he’s telling me of the lousy friends he used to hang with, all the time, and expecting me to award him for being the “good guy” who never actually did anything? Any guy who tends to be more of a stump in life than an active member, and then tells stories like that to impress and get sympathy, would by default send a bad vibe, I think. You probably had the same instincts I would. And since you’re not the type to go for jerks, I doubt you in general are anywhere near a bad example.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    Re: large families

    I know some families with many children (five or more) that don’t depend on welfare at all. Perhaps they’re not completely self-supporting because the extended family chips in and the nuclear family can’t afford to stand on its own, but grandparents, uncles, aunts and cousins all helping out is very traditional, healthy and even fun.

    But I can see why it’s considered low status because larger families just won’t be able to afford the material things smaller families can easily pencil in. And I don’t just mean luxuries like a personal computer for every child, but increasingly reasonable investments like homes in “better” neighborhoods and private school tuition.

    The status thing is interesting, though. I know a woman who read something about letting young children go barefoot as much as possible for the first few years of their lives. (Too many details to explain.) To her surprise, she got a LOT of resistance from complete strangers when she took her toddler on the bus, or to the park, or to the library, or to church, or wherever, without shoes. Her husband’s interpretation is that their new neighborhood used to be very working class and the people there are still trying to be perceived as “gentry.” So the sight of a barefoot child would be extra uncomfortable for them . . . an implication that there was one family that in the neighborhood that couldn’t afford shoes. Not good for the neighborhood image.

    (I personally found it really odd because, In my experience, “no shoes” is the sort of “faddish” thinking that you’d expect from the upper classes, who have the leisure to do that sort of research.)

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Jennifer

    I mean c’mon, he’s telling me of the lousy friends he used to hang with, all the time, and expecting me to award him for being the “good guy” who never actually did anything?

    You have a point. He didn’t do anything in that area of his life for years.

    But rejection can suck just as much for the one doing the rejecting as it does for the one who gets rejected. I think I’ll always feel as if there was something I could have done better . . . Unless I run into him again in the future and see that he’s happy with someone who really loves him. And then I’ll know I was “right” to reject him after all. :P

  • Jennifer

    If there was nothing between you, Bellita, you were right anyway. In the long run, you both would have been unhappy. I think you’ll both end up fine :)

  • Isabel

    Esau,

    Her “male slut” counterpart, however, gets NONE OF THIS; NOTHING: no sex, no physicality, no approval that he’s in any way better than an animal or a rock, and no human involvement or contact; he may as well live on the moon.

    By offering ”commitment” (it actually isn’t anything of the sort) on the first date to a near stranger, he signalled that his exclusivity means little. 3 or 5 dates, I get it. But one? How could you possibly know enough about someone to GF them up in a few hours? Also, you’re projecting your imperative onto women. Most women don’t care about indefinite and plentiful casual sex. Even the sluts use sex to extract commitment from men who clearly won’t commit (to them, at least). Very, very few women actually enjoy being paralytic and underneath a randomer. “One off?” Maybe. Forever? Nope.

    You’ve also made the mistake of thinking that because nothing happens in the immediate aftermath to the female slut, it means that nothing will ever happen. The consequences of female promiscuity are staggered. In her 20s, she’ll feel insecure   and she might have a bad rep but her relatively high SMV/ego will act as a smoke screen and blur it all out. In her 30s, she’s facing spinsterhood, single motherhood, dramatically lowered fertility, a low SMV, a bad reputation and a reduced ability to bond. That’s if she doesn’t end up married to an unwitting victim that she’s planning on divorcing anyway.

    (1) sex

    Awkward, detached sex with a small chance of having an orgasm. And no cuddles.

    2) Some amount of human physical contact.

    True.

    (3) some degree of approval.

    Men don’t actually approve of sluts for longer than the 10 minutes it takes to bust a nut.  Where was his approval the next day?

    (4) some degree of human involvement, even if it’s only Game plays and booty call texts.

    Sometimes, nothing is far better than something. Especially when that something is going to make you feel shitty the next day and feck knows what the next decade.

     

    PS: Do you know where that post is? I looked on the side but I can’t find it. =/

  • LokLand

    @ Isabel, Jennifer, Esau

    You seem to be thinking down the line for the female slut. Lets do the same thing for the male slut.

    1. Sex- Still no.

    2. Physical contact- still no.

    3. Approval- quite the opposite virgin guys are not tolerated past a certain age.

    4. Human interaction- still nothing.

    So lets see the female slut down the line still gets 1(though poor quality),2 and 4. Whereas the male slut gets none of the above.

    Do I personally believe woman deserve any sympathy for being a slut? No.

    I grew up basically believing that woman controlled the SMP and even know after learning game they are the gatekeepers. If you fail at your job its your fault no one elses.

    Do I personally believe men deserve sympathy for being losers? No.

    If the man can’t learn game thats his own damn problem he doesn’t deserve anything better.

    Now which of the two groups that don’t learn form their mistakes have it worse?

    The man. Pretty simple the physical contact alone is more than enough of a reason to make his plight infinitely worse than the female sluts. (I went from the age of 16 to 19 without being physically touched by another human being talk about depressing.)

    I have yet to meet a woman complian she is not getting touched enough. When I meet a woman who has undergone the same problem that most men endure I will re-evaluate my judgement.

  • Mike

     

    (3) some degree of approval.

    Men don’t actually approve of sluts for longer than the 10 minutes it takes to bust a nut.  Where was his approval the next day?

    I believe the approval being implied is the fact that she feels validated that he chose to have sex with her, even if in his mind it was for a simple p&d, she made him choose to have her over any other woman at that moment.

    A single lonely guy with no human/physical contact throughout the entirety of highschool and early 20’s can literally want to kill to have a woman ‘choose’ him to have sex with, even if it’s for something as immature as getting revenge on her boyfriend or what have you.

    But the poor beta is NEVER chosen, hence never gets a degree of approval.

  • Mike

    @Esau November 23, 2011 at 11:45 pm #423

    +1

    I’ve had this same line of thought virtually my entire adolescent life and then some. Me and one of my lady friends discussed this at length years ago and i did get her to agree to the fact that life for guys would be harder. If a girl needs a pick me up or a fix for a dry spell, it’s not so hard, even if the consequences down the road aren’t worth it. For a guy trapped in a 10 year dry spell, (tens years of thinking you’re worthless, you’re ugly, no one wants to touch you, you’d be better off dead < real thoughts) breaking out of a vicious circle of desperation feels like climbing Mt. Everest using your bare hands while wearing only a speedo.

    It all boils down to the fact that our view of sex, it’s role, and the need to have it, along with all its social significance… are fundamentally viewed upon differently by the genders. And feminism sought to erase that view with all the turmoil it now brings to bear on women who feel they must do it like a guy to be empowered, only to end up feeling used by guys who have adapted to use their high status above all the cast aways to have a buffet at the trough of the sexual marketplace, leaving only the castaways to find something else to occupy their time in a sex driven world, or avoid the temptation to blow their brains out. Been there, done that.

  • Isabel

    Lokland, are we talking about Beta Lawyer Kid or your garden variety beta? If the former, BLK is attractive on paper and looks-wise but he was super slutty to have gone exclusive after a few hours. He also gave her a teddy bear, I think. Still, based on his description, he is going to go v. far if he learns even the smallest of Game. He doesn’t strike me as the involuntary celibate type at all. If the latter then, yeah, possibly.

    And I’m not going to dispute 1, 2 and 4 because obviously, even the fattest and vilest of women can still get some sexual attention but 3 is just silly. Male virgins and female sluts are scorned whilst female virgins and male players are praised. 50:50 so that’s technically fair.  -__-

    I grew up basically believing that women controlled the SMP and even know after learning game they are the gatekeepers. If you fail at your job its your fault no one elses.

    Yep.

    I have yet to meet a woman complain she is not getting touched enough. When I meet a woman who has undergone the same problem that most men endure I will re-evaluate my judgement.

    Men and women don’t value the same things though. Young men want variety; young women want primacy. We’re never going to see eye to eye on that. For example, I could “get laid” by cute guys several times a week if I wanted to, just by virtue of being female and having a pulse. Some guys aren’t even that fussed on the pulse part tbh.  But … the catch is that casual sex means very little to me (and most women, I assume.) I’d honestly rather just stay in my room and watch a meerkat documentary or something because that touch is null and void – it doesn’t count at all. Most guys my age, however, would gleefully accept my ‘plight’. Bottom line: I’m not in a better position for having what I resent.

    @Mike

    I believe the approval being implied is the fact that she feels validated that he chose to have sex with her, even if in his mind it was for a simple p&d, she made him choose to have her over any other woman at that moment.

    What use is that approval if it lasts for a few minutes and is generally followed by a crushing sense of inadequacy and insecurity?

  • Mike

    @Isabel November 24, 2011 at 9:54 am #442

    I agree. You’re right that it’ll never be viewed ‘eye to eye’ or in the same way by the sexes.

    You’ll find it very hard for a poor individual scraping away to make their payments and find food at the end of the month feel much sympathy for the millionaire who has money to burn, who laments that his vast wealth is not bringing him happiness.

    Is the millionaire not entitled to happiness? Of course. But even if he isn’t finding happiness driving around in his Ferrari Enzo, filled with premium gas which he never has to worry about it going up 3 or 5 cents per litre/gallon, or where he’ll find the money for his next car insurance payment… i’m sure he will get very little sympathy from the guy who’s freaking out because his beater is in the shop and needs to go begging his immediate family for money or take out a loan just to survive.

    It’s not a perfect analogy, but it emotes the guys perception well.

  • Jennifer

    Right, betas NEVER get chosen. And the guys are obviously seeing it through different lenses; empty sex must be better than none. A slut is not like a millionaire; that’d be a better analogy for an unhappy wife. A slut’s more like the prostitute that visits the millionaire, and never really has him. Sluts are more likely to have a long-term unhappy life than a guy who needs some social skills.

  • Jennifer

    To reflect on this, I do know that a life of loneliness is a terrible thing, a horrible thing (sex aside, what about lack of companionship?). Maybe it is equal to false happiness. But I think that a man who requires social refinement has a softer road ahead of him than one who’s sexually lost and can never change her past. Not that she can’t change herself or have a good life, but that’s a lot of baggage.

  • Olive

    @Mike and Lokland,

    I generally disagree with what you’re saying about female sluts being better off (read what I wrote at #428, I’m in the same camp as Isabel). But I understand your resentment towards girls who are at least getting something. And you’re also right that women are the gatekeepers of the SMP, so it’s really their job to fix the current problems by forgoing casual sex (which is terrible for most of them anyway).

    With all due respect, I don’t think it’s really worth it to figure out who is suffering more; that just sets us up for a Grand Battle of the Sexes and it fuels resentment between them. Would it be enough for guys and girls to say that it sucks for everyone and work together to change this SMP? If girls are going to start forgoing casual sex, guys have to be ready for the grand change… otherwise it’s going to be a long painful process.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Ms. Olive

    But biologically speaking, most guys can have pure casual sex without any feelings at all; I would argue that most girls cannot. A P&D looks fantastic to a guy who’s getting nothing because he’s looking at the P&D from a guy’s point of view (which is, of course, understandable). He can’t see why anyone would choose nothing over at least a few casual sex encounters.

    My only disagreement here is that I don’t think biology trumps psychology in every case. Guys who only seek out casual encounters seem to have a very different mindset than guys who are looking for serious relationships. From my own POV, I didn’t want my first time to be casual (I turned a drunk girl down). I also didn’t want to become another one of those guys who could “use her and lose her” without any feelings at all. There are too many of those guys out there already. I may be an exception to the rule, but I suspect there are a lot of guys willing to wait for a serious relationship instead of just sleeping around. It’s a poor substitute, and men do feel regret about these things when they finally meet the girl of their dreams.

    The better question is, how much casual history are women willing to accept in the men they settle down with? My marriage-minded female friends seem to prefer guys with low partner counts, and they’re not particularly religious or anything. When I was single, I used to think “something” was better than nothing. But when “something” is nothing but drunk party girls or paid escorts (with all the risks involved), or having to deceive women to get them into bed, maybe doing without in the short-term makes you a better man in the long-term.

  • Isabel

    Mike,

    Saying that sluthood is like being an unfulfilled millionaire implies that she actually has *something* of value in the first place. Remember we’re measuring by female standards in this case – not male. So if she were to have any mode of transport, it definitely wouldn’t be a Ferrari. It would be a KFC bucket on wheels. And she’s renting it. The male slut is walking barefoot, granted, but I’d say he still has his dignity intact.

    Besides, betas are lucky to have Game because sluts can’t exactly revirginate themselves now, can they? Factor in the rising SMV discrepancy too and it’s probably the guy who’ll come up smelling of roses. I have more sympathy for the guy obvs because promiscuity is largely a choice but that’s still not an excuse to wallow in self-pity imo.

    Basically, my position is:

    1. The female brought it on herself and there’s no way out.

    2. The male didn’t bring it on himself but there’s several ways out.

    So #2 is ultimately better than #1. Not sure if that makes sense but there you go. >.>

  • Mike

    @Olive
    “If girls are going to start forgoing casual sex, guys have to be ready for the grand change… otherwise it’s going to be a long painful process.”

    I was prepared for that since my teens. All i ever wanted was lifelong LTR.. i even tried marraige. I was never part of the casual sex scene. I don’t think i had the stomach for it, nor felt compelled to attempt it, nor had the courage to try. Probably too late for me, but if the above change happened, I’d imagine there will be a lot more happy teens going through the old traditional courtship process without the pressure of having to have sex to be seen as socially acceptable.

    “that just sets us up for a Grand Battle of the Sexes”

    Not what i was attempting to do. I do realize there are cons from a womans point of view. I was only relaying the fact that my early years took me to the brink of suicide, so you can understand that from my point of view it was a very painful experience.

    @ Megamann
    “The better question is, how much casual history are women willing to accept in the men they settle down with?”

    PERSONALLY i think you can learn everything you need with only one partner, providing that you are willing to learn what your partner enjoys and willing to work and communicate with them. And also be aware that the if its the guys first time, you’ll have to be patient with him to build up some stamina. I don’t think anyone needs multiple partners to become ‘experienced’. All your experiences could end up being wrong for the person you end up with at the end so it’s vastly overrated.

    Women should be as discerning as men when it comes to promiscuity, but i think in a woman’s mind they think that because he’s been with more women, he knows what he’s doing in the sack (pump n dumpers thrive on this). If women started punishing the promiscuous men with the same standard, instead of trying to emulate them.. perhaps balance would return to the force. :P

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Mike

    PERSONALLY i think you can learn everything you need with only one partner, providing that you are willing to learn what your partner enjoys and willing to work and communicate with them.

    PERSONALLY I think you’re 100% correct. This really is a benefit for women if they’d be more willing to take a chance on limited or inexperienced men. I think a lot of them already realize this. Things might be awkward in the beginning, but eager people are very fast learners. That was the case with me. I’m “thankful” today (and every day) that my SO was open-minded about such things.

    Women should be as discerning as men when it comes to promiscuity, but i think in a woman’s mind they think that because he’s been with more women, he knows what he’s doing in the sack.

    Men who’ve been with more women know how to get them in the sack, not necessarily please them in the sack. Susan has posted on the “orgasm chasm” in casual encounters. It’s clear these guys are not so experienced in making the woman feel satisfied. Maybe a few professional casanovas, but probably not the bulk of them.

    Women deciding to be less promiscuous is fine, they’ll benefit the most from a change like that. But if women always expect men to have more experience in the bedroom, that’s tacit encouragement for men to sleep around. Or at least have a couple of girlfriends before they settle down. I actually think the latter is a better option. But how to get a girlfriend if you’re not already experienced? That’s a different Catch 22 for guys.

  • tmunson

    @Anacaona

    I must say reading class warfare into Bram’s classic seems a little off to me. The real Vlad the Impaler, upon whom Stoker based his character, would certainly fit as the nobility versus the people. His idea was of social welfare was to take the poor, invite them to a banquet, feed them, then close the doors and set the place on fire, burning them all to death, In “Dracula” the Count makes a veiled reference to his havign been cursed by the Church for his depredations, although the real Vlad’s father was appointed by the Pope to fight on the Church’s behalf. Indeed, it was Vlad’s father who bore the Papal insignia, which had a dragon, which to the peasants was synonymous with the Devil. “Dracul” means devil in their language; when they saw his father with the flag, they thought he was proclaiming his allegiance to the Devil, and began referring to his as Dracul. “Dracula” means “son of the devil”, and it was the name given to Vlad Tepes, the historical Count Dracula.

    Your analysis of the scene is a tad baroque. His daughters are unable to bring themselves to attack Harker; the female vampires are always weaker. They’d been with him a while when  Dracula finds them and scolds them when he finds them steeling themselves for the attack (Harker has discovered them as I recall; anyway, there’s 3 against one and they are immortal but haven’s taken the shot). Dracula then gives them the baby. By contrast, when Dracula is on board a ship on its way to England, he takes on and kills the entire crew. Whatsherface (I ain’t googling-I’m going from memory; his first female victim in England) is only able to bite children, just as Renfro starts with spiders and moves up to rats.

    Back to the girls: when Van Helsing et al arrive at the castle they first find the girls in their coffins. VH knows what to expect; he tells the young guys to back off before he opens. He is nearly overcome by their beauty and realizes no man except him could resist them. He imagines many have stood right where he is, transfixed, until they awoke and gang sucked them off. He, as the smartest man alive, is able to steel himself, and dispatches all 3.

     

    Zombies do have some real world connection. Read “The Serpent and the Rainbow”(the movie didn’t do it justice”. But zombies got no style, although as a kid I loved “The Zombies of Mara Tua”or something like that.

  • Jennifer
    “Guys who only seek out casual encounters seem to have a very different mindset than guys who are looking for serious relationships”
     
    “The better question is, how much casual history are women willing to accept in the men they settle down with?”
     
    You’re a rarity, Megaman. Very wise questions and statements.
     
    “I don’t think i had the stomach for it, nor felt compelled to attempt it, nor had the courage to try”
     
    Never had the shallowness, you mean.
     
    Mike, I’m so sorry you went through such pain; that’s why, upon reflection, I amended my comments about lonely men really having it bad. But your comment is one of the wisest ones I’ve seen yet; VERY impressed. And yes, yes, for pity’s sake, it’s time for women to wake up, put their big girl pants (back) on, and start shunning the man-whores!
     
    Great points, Olive. I’m bowing out, but I’m glad I stopped by one more time, what great comments. God bless you guys.
     
  • Jennifer

    Oh and Happy Thanksgiving! Enough of the mush, have a good evening..

  • LokLand

    @ Olive, Jennifer, Isabel

    I get what your saying about women having a different set of needs than men. Makes perfect sense.

    For the slut to become happy she would theoretically need a loving LTR. The other option is just quit alpha carousel and become a crazy cat lady. (I’m going  to work off the assumption that both sexs want companionship. And when I say happy im referring to the loss of the bad feelings from said previous situation.)

    So all slut has to do is stop being slutty and find a LTR. Believe it or not there are lots of guys who won’t give a second thought to it, I’m one of them. I do care if she lies to me though, that is unnacceptable. So there easily forgiven mistakes of the past. Although she doesn’t get a totally free pass I would be a least a little suspicous if it was the day after she hopped off the carousel and then started dating me. Kinda like a car accident and your car insurance goes up for a long while afterwards and eventually goes back to normal.

    Man is very similar. Learn game, problem solved.

    Conclusion, neither of these is extremely long term detrimental unless said people continue to keep poisoning themeselves. At which point all sympathy is lost.

    So now we’ve beaten the idea of whats worse in the current to death. I’ll for the sake of this argument assume that it comes out neutral though I personally believe the guy has it worse.

    The argument above highlights how the negative effects of said behavious can be overcome and both groups can eventually gain the happiness they want.

    So that leaves the transitionary phase.

    Woman needs to stop sleeping around.

    Man needs to learn game.

    Which is more difficult?

    Just not sleeping with people all the time is easy. Trust me I went from boy whore to relationship man in all of one year. So I conclude for the slut to stop sleeping around is simple. So the difficult part is finding a partner that both accepts her and meets her expectations.

    I honestly think the perception of all guys being cruel animals shunning every girl whose had casual sex is simply incorrect. What no man should accept is deciet about a lovers past.

    So the real difficulty comes in telling the truth to boyfriend material guy who might REJECT you outright. (Please note the word reject. I capitalized, italisized, bolded and underlined it for a reason.)

    Okay so now on to the man. All it takes for him is to learn game. Fairly easy in and of itself pick up a book and read for all of 6 hours and you can pretty much be good to do. Then theres the actual implementation, practice and learning. Thats where it gets messy. Said guy will need to be REJECTed multiple times to simply perfect the approaching a woman. Then comes the actual dating, relationship etc. face more rejections. More rejections and more rejection some more rejection. I had to run and grab my journal to get this but I kept a tally of the number of times I was rejected 1379. times. (Most of these were at the number stage. After the second date I only have 37 rejections. This was over a period of 5 years.) I didn’t actually keep the number of times I was accepted but I’ve lied to myself enough so they must be pretty similar :P)

    My point here is more that the general beta male has to put quite a bit more effort into the intial small rejection phase whereas most women get a free ride. The slut faces the major rejection point though which is the point where said person you care about rejects you as a person. I’ll admit I’d rather walk up to a million 10’s in broad daylight wearing a baby outfit and have a drink thrown in my face then have that have to face that once.

    Now this all has a point I swear it. Men probably have a tougher time intially getting nothing. Women tend to have a harder time getting around/over/through their past and it could potentially be quite painful. Conclusion both sexs have it bad in approximately equal amounts.

    However, its the opposite sex that has to accept you to make your problems go away ultimately. (Theres a lot of stuff on inner game that would say otherwise but hypothetically a guy could be put together inside and still get rejected so I’m not going to use that in this argument.)

    Slut needs guy to accept her. Man needs woman to accept him.

    So now we run into the problem. No woman will ever attempt to understand the problems a man faced. You can see it here in this thread. She will not get how he thinks it is the wose thing ever to not get human contact.

    The same runs true in the opposite for the man accepting the slut.  Men will just not be able to understand that her riding the carousel was not an enjoyable experience.

    So how do we fix this problem?

    By doing exactly what we are doing. Argue about it to see who has it worse so that both sides can see the others point of view. You see it creating some kind of battle of the sexs. I see understanding.  

    And I’m not gonna edit this.

  • Mike

    @Jennifer
    Thank you for the kind words of understanding. It is appreciated more than you know. Happy Turkey day to you as well :)

    @LokLand
    “Just not sleeping with people all the time is easy.”
    This is probably the one area  where I will disagree. It’s easy on paper to say that, BUT (and i don’t know how old you are but i do still remember the terrible days of highschool i endured) in a world that is consumed by sex, where it’s shoved in your face by media, ads, magazines, etc, where your hormones are raging, and where all your buddies are picking on you because you haven’t gotten laid yet, and the girls look at you like you’re a pariah because you’re a virgin OR you’re a girl and you want to be with the popular boy because it elevates your status and you know he’ll only see you if you put out, or all your peers are calling you a slut even if you never kissed a guy, so if they’re calling you it you feel compelled to act on it, or you believe in feminism where they bitch about a double standard and that you can sleep around (while at the same time calling men who sleep around pigs, dogs and assholes) etc….

    This world is just one big sex consumption pile where everyone thinks everyone is doing it and you’re lower than dirt if you’re not. No one has a proper sense of what should be done anymore because everyone is acting off false assumptions based on the crap we’re being sold. And we fall for it hook line and sinker, especially in the early years when we can’t help but think with our sausages and clams.

    I think i’m ready to shoot myself.. because i never thought i’d hear myself saying i agree with George Bush’s teach abstinence in school instead of sex ed. (snark)

    Feminism has to step up to the plate and admit to itself that it’s screwed up the SMP for all parties by throwing civilized courting practices under the bus and assuming both genders could swap evolutionary traits without so much as batting an eyelash.

    I will use a quote Jeff Goldblum from Jurassic Park which i will modify with one word to demonstrate:
    “Yeah, but your scientists feminists were so preoccupied with whether they could that they didn’t stop to think if they should. ”

    And yes, men everywhere need to man up too. I only did after my world fell apart and i had to choose between gassing myself in the garage or soldiering on to a new future. I chose the latter. It would also help if men had more real role models and father figures to look towards AND be told from an early age what real female behavior is instead of the pack of lies I was taught about being ‘nice’ and getting in touch with my feminine side.

  • Anacaona

    @Tmunson

    I think he got it because Louis was hight class and I think Anne Rice was the first humanized book about vampires he attempted to read. Like I said vampire is a metaphor good ofr everything is like the black shoes of psychology.

    I do get that female vampires are weaker but I meant the feminist reading of the brides as better off than Mina for example because Mina was read as sexually repressed by Victorian Standards and they read vampirism as empowering. Only God knows why but that is the interesting thing about reading interpretations depending on the time even the son of the devil can be read in a positive light.

    I meant the bastard Americanization of Zombies I’m Dominican so I know the original zombie was not a corpse yelling “brains!” I’m still a bit piss off about gringos stealing our myth and making it into what it is, just a bit I can respect a genre traits I just wish it wasn’t about deforming ours. The serpent and the rainbow is a great movie but I doubt many people know it or that you could had made the kind of fiction the zombies are known to in the horror genre.

    Heh this is one of the few times I can do a serious discussion about vampirism/horror that includes Twilight without someone calling me stupid/sexist or yelling that Twilight sucks/are faries/gays! Thanks for the interchange.

    Happy Thanksgiving!

  • Olive

    @Lokland,

    Honestly, you make excellent points. I’m glad we had this conversation; if anything, each side understands the other better.

    @Mike,

    I appreciate/understand the fact that you’ve always been more interested in a LTR than casual sex. Apparently I know a lot of guys who seem to deviate from the norm. My BF turned down a random hookup. My brother refuses to “practice his game” on girls he’s not interested in. I’ve been told time and time again that guys will always go for casual sex over nothing… maybe that isn’t true. It certainly isn’t true for all guys.

    I definitely agree that our culture is saturated in sex images. If anything, we need to have a real, healthy conversation about sex with our kids (one in which we acknowledge biological differences and explain the dangers of casual sex). Too many parents completely avoid the topic, so teens get their ideas about sex from music videos and TV shows. Apparently abstinence only education has made matters worse… teen pregnancy rates have increased in some schools with abstinence only sex ed.

    Side thought: it kinda seems like all the “role model” talk is aimed at women these days. Someone in one of my classes tried to say Sarah Palin is a good female role model the other day… ergh.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Mike

    You have my sympathies for having to go through what sounds like a truly rotten breakup. Some of my best buds had to dust themselves off after having their hearts broken. It’s not an easy thing to get over. I feel lucky in a way, even though I spent a *very* long time wandering in the desert single. It can be very lonely indeed. Hopefully, you can keep cynicism and bitterness in check, because those things can really distort one’s view of the opposite sex. I fell into that rut for awhile back in the day.

    I’m not sure how old you are, but there are good women out there still looking to settle down (I personally know a few). Though a lot of guys hate the friend zone, what kept me sane was having some good female friends who provided advice and reassurance that I’d find someone special eventually. After experiencing a lot of pain, too many good guys become understandably vindictive towards women. Maybe they use “game” to make the transformation. A pearl of wisdom from F.N. Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.

    It’s late, but hope you had a Happy Thanksgiving. More importantly, I hope you have a Happy Future.

  • tmunson

    @Anacaona

    I had a wonderful Thanksgiving, thank you, and hope you had the same.

    I think as a Dominican you would very much like the book “The Serpent and the Rainbow”. It is very deferential to the culture, and places the “loa” in a solid anthropological context, showing its richness and heritage and stripping it of the sensationalism that surrounds it in the Americanization of the concept (your terms, and good ones). The author is not into pop culture at all, is serious, and the implications from the issues he raises are also serious> I cannot do him justice and will not attempt to. But go read him. And also read Stoker’s “Dracula”. You will be surprised by the latter; it is challenging in ways far beyond the Friday Night Creepshow to which we have relegated it.

  • Anonymous

    Anacaona: ” The reason people have less children now is true is because is considered low status so its not a practical reason is about “being in the winners” side. The whole population issue has been explained that is not the amount of people but how much they consume the same parents that are competing for having small families are also buying new dolls and spending money on vacations and toys, so a small first world family impacts the environment as big as a big one in the third world.

    Other reasons people don’t have many children; they’re starting families later in life, they don’t have a village (extended family) to help raise the kids.

    About living a high consumption lifestyle, the culture expects that parents provide each of their children; their very OWN bedroom (bigger house), college savings account, lots of extracurricular classes (sport, music, dance, language), a car by age 16, an expensive wedding, all of the latest technological gadgets, and on and on and on.

     

  • Anacaona

    @Tmunson

    I’ll surely add that book to my reading list. But I already read Dracula the comments about it are the way modern culture read Dracula. not my personal reading of the novel. If you can get a hold to a miniseries call Great Gooks you should check their Dracula episode is more or less the accepted interpretation of the book in the 21th century. Again I don’t agree with many points but you will hardly find anyone not agreeing with it.

    I’m very glad you had a good thanksgiving I had a 50/50 one I got a nice dinner with my in laws and then I had to work :( Oh well they pay me double that is always good.

    Strong female characters

    I just remembered that the Hunger Games and Alice in wonderland warrior versions were created by women. So there is at least some women actually creating them for what is worth I have a couple of warrior princesses myself and they are very willing to die and kill for their beliefs or/and their freedom. I also have damsel in distress and all sorts of women so maybe it doesn’t count.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    Ana,

    What is the Alice In Wonderland Warrior thing? I’ve not read Hunger Games yet, will have to check it out.

    To restate my point perhaps more clearly, I am not addressing ‘strong female characters’ but rather female characters carrying out the traditional male heroic role of willingly sacrificing themselves for the tribe, for the greater good, for everyone else.

    These figures pretty much don’t exist (the only one I could think of was Ripley), but when they do they are written exclusively by men, who are, it seems to me, projecting their own innate set of heroic values somewhere where they do not occur in real life. Women do not, as a very strictly observed rule, sacrifice themselves for a bunch of strangers.

    There’s a case to be made about how this is because of the females greater biological imperative for self-preservation (Must Save Myself & My Child). If there are any instances of a woman writer portraying her female protagonist sacrificing herself it will almost certainly be for an immediate family member, a younger sibling or child, usually, rarely for her husband or lover & never for the greater good of all, for wider society. This is not a condemnation, it’s just the way things are: Neither men or women see women as being expendable in that way.

    The only exception to that rule I can think of is a Thelma & Louise type story where (spoiler!) two women would rather drive off a cliff than live in a world that has men in it. This, though, is obviously ideologically driven (like Joan of Arc, come to think of it, or the suffragette Emily Wilding Davison, foolishly throwing herself under the king’s horse to make her point) & shows us only how ideology can make us do strange, unhinged, fanatical things. Thelma & Louise’s actions are essentially self-serving – the best you could say is that they are a personal protest about how they feel about their situation in the world – they are not done to save anyone else, the people of their tribe or the world. Thelma & Louise are not, after all, sacrificing themselves to save the men of their community.

    This seems to me a fundamental natural difference between the sexes, but one which, due most likely to present day PC teachings of the interchangeability of the sexes, is increasingly obscured, giving us wildly unrealistic expectations of each of the sexes roles, motives & capabilities that aren’t based upon anything in nature or our daily reality.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    Anacaona…thought you might want to see this critique of Twilight and maybe respond to it there or here.

  • Mike

    @Megaman November 25, 2011 at 1:03 am #458

    “having to go through what sounds like a truly rotten breakup.”
    > thanks, but it’s true what everyone told me, i’d feel a whole lot better in 6 months, and sure enough they were right. in fact i am better in every way since, in mind, body, spirit, confidence and positive outlook, and i have a little more disposable income too ;)

    my only lingering wound regarding my split is that it’s not the path i wanted to travel, and i wish i had accomplished everything i have done in the last 10 months with a supportive wife by my side rather than having done it alone out of sheer survival instinct. such is life.

    “I spent a *very* long time wandering in the desert single.”
    >believe me when i say.. i totally, completely understand 110%.

    “Hopefully, you can keep cynicism and bitterness in check, because those things can really distort one’s view of the opposite sex.”
    >already over it. i didn’t start reading blogs about game or the SMP until maybe 3 months ago, starting with the google  search ‘why girls like assholes’ because i couldn’t understand why my exwife stayed in two 4+ year relationships with emotionally unavailable, aloof, and sociopathic individuals, but couldn’t even hold it together for 1 year of marriage with me. Once i started reading about how women react to game, and go for asshats which flies in the face of all logic, my immediate view that all women were crazy lying manipulative hypocrites. But through my time here i can see that the term NAWALT is really true. The bitterness and anger is gone and i really try not to use broad brush strokes anymore and instead only apply on a case by case basis. The fact that i’ve regained confidence and am picking up on mild game (don’t chase, act without cause to impress and the smell of desperation dissapears), and with everything i’ve read here on HUS and other modern dating sites will allow me to quickly weed out girls that will end up simply being problematic down the long term.  Basically, if i have to use serious game to keep a girl, that’s evidence enough that she’s not the one im looking for. Relationships should just be easy.

    “I’m not sure how old you are, but there are good women out there still looking to settle down”
    > i’m 35, so i’m at the tail end of picking up a woman of good breeding age lol. Here’s where we run into an issue. Before i got married, i said i NEVER would. I even told that to my exwife before we married. Secretly tho, i knew if anyone i’d marry her, but i carried a torch for her for 15 years prior (bad mistake). Now that i took the plunge into the marriage game and rolled snake eyes, i’ve seen the sham that marriage is. I’m not saying everyone shouldn’t get married, only that i couldn’t stomach the hypocrisy of saying marriage vows again knowing how hollow those words will sound. So what’s a guy to do? For me ‘settle down’ doesn’t mean marriage. I could live the rest of my life with one woman easily, and work through all the little bumps as they come. But it seems actually being married nowadays puts on some kind of undue pressure and responsibilities that end up killing what were perfect relationships prior to. And don’t even get me started about the way the system is stacked against men when it comes to nofault divorces, alimony, asset handling, child support, visitation, etc… it’s not in the cards for me. With most women equating ‘settling down’ with marriage, i’ve removed 95% of the market off my plate. Woe is me…

    Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.”
    > i’ve always tried to be the two wrongs don’t make a right type of guy, and it’s always been tough to pull of in a world where it seems like everyone else around you doesn’t want to play by the rules, justify wrong actions to get ahead, and look out for number 1 at any cost. I could never ‘screw over’ a woman with a p&d to spite her for the perceived actions of her entire gender. That would invalidate all my remarks in defense of men who are used by women who work on the perception that all men are dogs and assholes and deserve what they get for years of oppressing women through patriarchy etc…

    Happy Thanksgiving to you too my friend! My future’s looking bright so far, I hope yours is likewise. Cheers!

    And Happy Thanksgiving to everyone at HUS!

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Mike

    My future’s looking bright so far.

    Good to hear you’re back in the saddle. Monogamy and marriage don’t have to go hand in hand. But if you do want children down the line, that’s another discussion. I’m a couple of years younger than you, and my wife is couple of years younger than me. Women typically go for a guy a few years older than them. Some are mature enough for a 5+ year difference. Some may even share your view of marriage vows being hollow if they’ve been through the same thing. I don’t you’re restricted to the 5% club. Good luck!

  • Anacaona

    Anacaona…thought you might want to see this critique of Twilight and maybe respond to it there or here.

    Thanks for the link but as mentioned before I’m kind of done with explaining Twilight I mostly placed the timeline bit to add some real info about the books.It would be very shitty of me to pride myself of being a Twihard and ignore everyone HERE when addressing the issue.I do agree with the porn for women of course, but he is against totally missing the point about the triangle not that I blame him the movies make it look like it did existed. Now when some hater take over the threads my usual answer is. Instead of bashing Twilight why don’t you watch this video better? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3G1PFLuTrgM&feature=player_embedded  cuteness to fight hate!

    What is the Alice In Wonderland Warrior thing? I’ve not read Hunger Games yet, will have to check it out.

    In the new movie with Johnny Deep as the mad-hatter Alice ends up fighting the Jabberwocky sword and armor in hand, no to mention how rebellious she was against the oppresive Victorian society. That was the idea of a woman.

  • Anacaona

    Anacaona…thought you might want to see this critique of Twilight and maybe respond to it there or here.

    Thanks for the link but as mentioned before I’m kind of done with explaining Twilight I mostly placed the timeline bit to add some real info about the books.It would be very shitty of me to pride myself of being a Twihard and ignore everyone HERE when addressing the issue.I do agree with the porn for women of course, but he is against totally missing the point about the triangle not that I blame him the movies make it look like it did existed. Now when some hater take over the threads my usual answer is. Instead of bashing Twilight why don’t you watch this video better? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3G1PFLuTrgM&feature=player_embedded  cuteness to fight hate!

    What is the Alice In Wonderland Warrior thing? I’ve not read Hunger Games yet, will have to check it out.

    In the new movie with Johnny Deep as the mad-hatter Alice ends up fighting the Jabberwocky sword and armor in hand, no to mention how rebellious she was against the oppresive Victorian society. That was the idea of a woman.

  • Isabel

    Lokland,

    By doing exactly what we are doing. Argue about it to see who has it worse so that both sides can see the others point of view. You see it creating some kind of battle of the sexes. I see understanding.

    Yeah, it’s pretty obvious that we agree more than we disagree. It’s just the finicky little details that are getting in the way.

    I had to run and grab my journal to get this but I kept a tally of the number of times I was rejected 1379. times. (Most of these were at the number stage. After the second date I only have 37 rejections. This was over a period of 5 years.) I didn’t actually keep the number of times I was accepted but I’ve lied to myself enough so they must be pretty similar :P)

    Holy crap. T_T

    Are women really that flaky? And is this what the typical guy goes through in uni? Feck, there is no way I could stomach that many knockbacks and still remain heterosexual.

     

     

     

     

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    Isabel,

    “Are women really that flaky? And is this what the typical guy goes through in uni? Feck, there is no way I could stomach that many knockbacks and still remain heterosexual.”

    Believe it. Hypergamy and flaking have both skyrocketed in the past 5 years or so. I didn’t get many flakes when I was younger, I got mostly rejections or acceptances with a few date bombs (http://badgerhut.wordpress.com/2011/10/15/date-bombs/) which were indirect rejections. Lately I’ve been getting mad flaking and so have my friends. I think flaking is a reflection of attention-whore mindset, once the guy has stroked her ego enough she’ll let him go, and of course a princess complex where people are disposable means to her ends.

    And they are brutal to deal with. Women need to get on top of the self-policing and fast, because every time a woman flakes she comes close to creating another converted asshole who has decided women aren’t worth the time, or are only good for sex because they can’t be trusted to keep any kind of a commitment.

  • Isabel

    Badger,

    I think flaking is a reflection of attention-whore mindset, once the guy has stroked her ego enough she’ll let him go, and of course a princess complex where people are disposable means to her ends.

    I reckon it’s because they don’t want to commit to anything that’s less than perfect conditions; commitment reduces their choices and increases their responsibilities so it’s usually a risk. At least that’s how it is for my flaky flatmates. Also, I noticed that the only time they actually follow through is when there’s (a) a spark/tingle, (b) approval and c) the possibility of good drama to dissect. Normal guys generally only have one of those qualities – at best – so that’s probably why they get flaked on so much. =_= Tbh, college students have an excuse (albeit a really flimsy one) to chicken out because hook-up culture is dominant here but grown women don’t have a leg to stand on.

    And they are brutal to deal with. Women need to get on top of the self-policing and fast, because every time a woman flakes she comes close to creating another converted asshole who has decided women aren’t worth the time, or are only good for sex because they can’t be trusted to keep any kind of a commitment.

    What counts as indirect flaking?

  • Ribbon Butterfly

    Hello! I see that my story has percolated to HUS. Some notes for analysis:

    1) I am 23 and have had two sexual partners. When I say “sexual partner,” I mean someone’s genitalia came into contact with my bare skin. Both partners were LTRs.
    2) I do not and never have hooked up. Make out, maybe. But there ain’t no clothes coming off.

    Consequent to 1 and 2, I can confidently say that if he had pushed for sex first, he’d never even get the time of day from me. I don’t do casual sex. One may argue that if he had been “alpha enough,” my panties would have dropped on the first night. Sure, maybe, for David Tennant. But David Tennant is a major outlier. Most men are not David Tennant, and never could be no matter how much they dial up the alpha/dominance/whatever manosphere term. Since they are not David Tennant, most men therefore have zero chance of casual sex with me.

    Re: Beta Lawyer Kid. He is also 23. At the time we met, he had never done anything relationship-wise, by his own admission. (This includes first date, holding hands, and kissing. I gathered that everything with more physical investment than that was also a first.) He’s been in a desert of physical touch, and I did what I could to show him that he’s valuable in and of himself, that his work is valuable, and that there’s someone out there for him. It’s just not me. Entirely aside from the DLVs and overeagerness for a relationship, he wants to work in Big City, own a condo downtown, and eventually become a partner in his father’s practice in Major Suburb. I want to work in Smaller City, Different Province, live where I can actually see vibrant plant life, and eventually become a doctor in Small Tight-Knit Community. It’s really too bad for him. But it’s patently not my duty to have sex with him so that he can know he’s Gonna Be Okay.

    Re: Timeline. I met him 3 weeks ago. By the end of week 1 (after a coffee date, but on the way to our first dinner date), he had asked the girlfriend question. Long story short, I said yes when I should have said slow down. Over the next two weeks, in varying settings: he offers to go grocery shopping with me instead of meeting for coffee because he “doesn’t want to waste my time,” he wants to go to a third world country with me this summer and “be an orderly so I can walk you to work because it’s too dangerous for you there,” and he says that he’s going to skip a law-student house party because he’s “off the market now.”

    4 days ago: I break up with him. After I told him, he said he’d gathered the idea from how I asked to meet him. He reached into his bag and pulled out a teddy bear. He said, “I was going to give you this on Friday, but I guess I have no use for it now.” I thank him and apologize. By the time I get home, I’m pretty sure this is the Teddy Bear of Ultimate Guilt.

    This may seem to be all about what he did that diminished attraction. Counterpoint: I’ve spent a lot of time elsewhere analyzing my mistakes in this sequence of events, and I won’t rehash them here unless it becomes necessary.

    Happy Thanksgiving, you American folks!

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Ribbon Butterfly

      Thanks for sharing the details of your story. I’ll go on record as saying you dodged a bullet. That guy was the ebola virus to female attraction. I’m sorry for him, but hopefully he will toughen up. He’s just starting to date, so he has a lot to learn, and you have done him a service. You were kind and very open-minded.

      Pity, or even rooting for the underdog is no foundation for a relationship. That dog will not hunt.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    ( I think that I have missed what was that post about. )

    6 Jesus Mahoney wrote:

    b. Lack of SOP.

    SOP = Standing Operating Procedure ?

    / Kari Keeper-of-Acronyms

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @472 link should be: 6

  • LokLand

    @Badger, Isabel

    Okay so I went through all my journals and rehashed up some of the basic numbers.

    Over that span of 5 years was the day I first picked up to double your dating to the day I became exlusive with my now fiance.

    Intially I was scoring maybe a 1 in 10. By year 5 I was scoring 7-8 in 10, I think. And in year one I had never yet even talked to a female before so I was inventing basically inventing the wheel. Also, my physical appearance drastically improved over that time period so it porbably played a huge role.

    Most of those rejections were at the intial numbers stage, a few were date/hang out flakes.
    A lot of mutual rejection at the first date stage. After that I rejected more women than rejected me. (I make my argument that women choose whom to bed and men choose whom to wed.)

    Also I broke down between Canada and US.
    US came in the 3-4th years of this time period but I was running back and forth across the border fairly regularly.
    US I averaged 3 for 10 over that time period.
    Canada I was averaging 5 for 10 over the same time period.

    Also the farther I got into it the more I went from casual to LTR oriented so that probably has a lot to do with the decreased rejection rate later on.

    Still I got to the point where rejection became as familiar to me as breathing but there is no way I would want to go through it again.

    Last, I just know from some of my buddies and me that I would be on the lower typical avaerage end of approaching women. We could go to a club and one of my buddies would only show up for a drink because his throat hurt from talking so much, I tended to do 1 or 2 a night, though I also have my day game in better shape than anyone I know.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    10 Susan Walsh wrote:

    It strikes me that this is the Catch 22 for men.

    Catch 22 = A difficult situation from which there is no escape because it involves mutually conflicting or dependent conditions.

    Etymology

    Title of the novel by Joseph Heller (1961), in which the main character feigns madness in order to avoid dangerous combat missions, but his desire to avoid them is taken to prove his sanity.

    / Kari Keeper-of-Acronyms

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    475 Kari Hurtta; posting do not accept target-attribute on a-tag. It worked on preview. So I can’t longer force (some) links to open on new window. When previous editor plugin was active, it was accepted (and one alternative on plugin).

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    LolLand,

    Those stats are very interesting. A blogger has taken to giving himself a 100-approach challenge and blogging about it:

    http://approach100.wordpress.com/

    I posted a while back that the most important metric of a man’s game would be how many women he comes into contact with. Not meeting a lot of women = fundamentally limited option pool = oneitis and tension.

    http://badgerhut.wordpress.com/2011/08/17/the-1-game-question-for-guys/

  • Mike C

    This is key. And this is exactly why Susan tells you that a P&D has zero value for most girls.

    Jumping in way late after rapidly skimming comments…but this is interesting because either:

    1. It is inaccurate that it has ZERO value or

    2. Someone must be profoundly stupid to repeatedly engage in something that has ZERO value for them, or in fact actually has negative value

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Jumping in way late after rapidly skimming comments…but this is interesting because either:

      1. It is inaccurate that it has ZERO value or

      2. Someone must be profoundly stupid to repeatedly engage in something that has ZERO value for them, or in fact actually has negative value

      The “value” is a short-term buzz of feeling good, desired, wanted. The negative value kicks in afterwards, and is greater than the previous ST value.

      It’s not that different from other risky behaviors, like drug addiction, gambling, or even overeating.

  • Mike C

    One day, while we were talking, he shared with me how hard it was for him to grow up in a very rigid religious community, with two best friends who were secretly sexually active (good church boys by day, players by night–and with the same church girls, too). Not being a hypocrite like them, he watched a lot of girls he would have been a good boyfriend to reject him and fall for his friends every time. And so he spent years simultaneously loathing them and envying them, while remaining close to them and drinking in the stories of their conquests. I believe he told me all that because he knew I was religious like the girls who got played by his friends and thought I would sympathize with him for being the good guy.

    I”m somewhat surprised at the castigating this guy got in follow-up comments. There is alot going on in his psyche here. Firstly, bros are bros regardless of what they do short of maybe really heinous stuff. I think loyalty to friends is definitely more of a male thing that many women don’t get.

    Secondly, no doubt this guy’s base impulses were to emulate his friends. But he took his religious upbringing seriously and was perhaps very conflicted about what he was taught versus what he really wanted. It is disconcerting that doesn’t get any “credit” so to speak. Pile on top of that his confusion and negative feelings to seeing the “good churchgirls” respond to them.

    Anyways, the real moral of this anecdote is for guys to be particularly guarded about what the reveal especially in the initial getting to know you stages. Truth be told, most guys are too forthright and revealing….I know in my beta days I certainly was but once you understand women and female psychology better you get a better sense of how certain things you say could convey certain interpretations. The follow-up comments are testament to that.

  • Mike C

    How is being attracted to dominance any more or less shallow than being attracted to competence?

    IMO, debating what aspects of attraction are shallow and which are not ultimately serves no purpose. Who cares? The more important thing is getting the components of attraction right so you aren’t wasting your time developing something for the wrong reason. I do think this blurring of the line between competence and dominance is misleading though. A guy could be massively competent in a great number of things that would not be sexually attractive to 99.99% of women. A guy could be super competent at building super complex model train sets and tracks in his basement with a full working knowledge of the history of railroads but unless he meets a woman with Asperbergers with an obsession with trains that isn’t likely to be a tingle generator. Dominance is dominance and competence is competence. The overlap is minimal at best.

    Hm. I think Sue mentioned that the level of dominance a man must reach is different for each woman. If woman were only attracted to the men at the very very top, then they’d only be sexually attracted to like .00001 percent of the population.

    I had an absolutely fascinating, enlightening discussion with my sister where we discussed relationships and dating as she is back actively dating. She relayed to me some of the things her friends and peers told her over the years and some of the choices they had made. Now I am aware of and understand female hypergamy, but I think I’ve even underestimated just how deep that drive goes. The corollary to that though is most women probably don’t understand the polygamous drive either. Anyways, as a result of the conversation, I became even more convinced that most women generally find most men sexually unattractive. It really is only a minority that generate any sort of attraction. Another result of the conversation, and again, this isn’t speculation on my part, this is straight from the horses mouth so to speak, that some women/many women? ultimately do settle down with good provider types that they feel either little or no attraction to whatsover.

    Bottom line, as a guy, the onus really is on you to do the self-development to make yourself attractive. It means getting to the gym, learning to dress right, and at least learning the basics of Game.

  • lovelost

    @Mike C
    Another result of the conversation, and again, this isn’t speculation on my part, this is straight from the horses mouth so to speak, that some women/many women? ultimately do settle down with good provider types that they feel either little or no attraction to whatsover.

    You will not find many who will disagree with you on that.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    The value of overconfidence in investing and dating

    Link

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @david foster
      Interesting topic there, but I found his argument a little hard to follow. Maybe it’s just me…

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @MikeC

    I think loyalty to friends is definitely more of a male thing that many women don’t get.

    This is an unexpected statement coming at a time when several male bloggers have taken women to task for listening to their own (female) friends and leaving perfectly decent men if their friends don’t approve of them. Is this loyalty to friends “a female thing that men don’t get”? If not, why do men who keep bad company get a free pass? Isn’t there some sense in judging any person by the company he or she chooses to keep?

    Anyways, the real moral of this anecdote is for guys to be particularly guarded about what the reveal especially in the initial getting to know you stages

    I agree, but want to qualify my agreement to say (for what it’s worth) that even if this particular man had kept that story a secret forever, there were other aspects of his personality that just didn’t click with mine. That story was just the last nail in the coffin (and a terrible one)–but if it hadn’t done the trick, something else would have.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      FROM MIKE C:

      @ Bellita,

      This is an unexpected statement coming at a time when several male bloggers have taken women to task ****for listening to their own (female) friends and leaving perfectly decent men if their friends don’t approve of them.*** Is this loyalty to friends “a female thing that men don’t get”? If not, why do men who keep bad company get a free pass? Isn’t there some sense in judging any person by the company he or she chooses to keep?

      There is a *WORLD OF DIFFERENCE* between:

      A. Allowing your friends to have a *DIRECT* influence on your *OWN* behavior and choices such as dumping a guy and

      B. Not being friends with or shunning someone because of *THEIR* choices and behavior that doesn’t affect you or your life

      I would hope that distinction is fairly obvious. FWIW, when I was a teenager I hung out with some kids that were definitely bad news, not super close friends, but we played sports together, rode our bikes together, etc. I know of one who ended up in jail, and some were basically juvenile delinquents. I never got mixed up in any of their shadier behavior and was basically the well-behaved, honor-roll student, but I wasn’t about to avoid playing football or baseball with them because they were delinquents, but I wasn’t going to go out and shoplift if they told me to either. Both men and women are susceptible to peer pressue, but I think it is mostly accurate to say women are far more likely to allow their “herd” to directly influence their behavior.

      I agree, but want to qualify my agreement to say (for what it’s worth) that even if this particular man had kept that story a secret forever, there were other aspects of his personality that just didn’t click with mine. That story was just the last nail in the coffin (and a ****terrible*****one)–but if it hadn’t done the trick, something else would have.

      Terrible? Really? Seriously? I’ll admit I skimmed the 450+ comments super fast and I might have missed out on something specific of your story, but if I got it right, the guy basically had some church friends who were players hooking up with the “nice church girls” and he wasn’t going to directly berate/castigate/shun them for it, and was just telling a story to you to say “hey, I aint like that”. BFD. If that constitutes terrible behavior, I really don’t know what to say. I’ve had some friends who were major players who frankly did some things that border on revolting to me. I wasn’t about to take them to task on it. They are big boys with their own codes and they gotta live with it, and the women knew or should have known the types of guys they were dealing with. It’s not anyone’s role to be someone else’s conscience/compass and sometimes those guys have other redeeming qualities that make them good friends or guys cool to hang with/chill with.

      Ehhhh….bottom line…. a women has the prerogative/right to reject any guy for whatever reason any time she wants. Full stop. Just don’t be surprised at the end of the day when the guy shelf is laid bare.

  • Esau

    “That guy was the ebola virus to female attraction.”

    I’m not saying this is incorrect;I am saying that the casual, callous, unquestioning acceptance of the mentality behind it is stunning and, frankly, rather revolting.

    Behold! for your approval, the limbic value system of the American woman:

    Abuse, neglect, indifference by a man ==> Strength! the tingle still (sometimes) lingers.

    Man suggests an exclusive relationship too soon ==> Deadly, degenerative disease; out the airlock with him, stat.

    It may be the truth, and there may even be not-completely-ridiculous evo-psych reasons for it. But the fact that you’re not more shocked by this dichotomy is, itself, shocking. There may have been evo-psych reasons, too, for the crowd at the Roman coliseum to shout for blood, or for Jim Crow towns to throw parties at lynchings; should we just casually accept that behavior without comment? When you see a crowd of schoolboys picking on a weaker kid, is it your natural response to just stroll on by, saying “Ho hum, boys will be boys, won’t they.” Does everything with an evo-psych reason behind it need to be forgiven, just for that reason?

    No. Not every decision of the limbic system should be respected, or let pass without comment; that’s the path back to being lower animals and nothing more (see: spring break). Someone has to take a stand, and I’ll be glad to go first: utterly losing tingle for a man because he offers and gives too much, too soon — which is what we’re talking about here, beyond just RB’s specific case — may be understandable but that does not make it respectable. There is a difference, and it’s an important one to recognize.

    RB is admirable for doing the only thing she can do, which is introspection following an instinctual guilt feeling, which is also to her credit. You’re not doing her any favors by encouraging her to put aside introspection and put all the blame on the boy; I don’t think that will really help her in the long run.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Esau

      I believe your error is in assigning human instincts around value, effort, reward, incentives, etc. to women alone, when in fact, they are universal. Ribbon Butterfly did not choose an abusive, indifferent man instead of Beta Lawyer Kid. My guess is that she will very happily wind up with some other beta kid. This is not binary.

      Beta Lawyer Kid is in the long tail. His lack of information and knowledge about how to date is causing him grief and will continue to do so until he improves his skill. It’s like any other pursuit, and I don’t understand your insistence that only by accepting him as is, and finding him attractive as is, can one claim the moral high ground.

      Ribbon Butterfly should not feel guilty, though BLK certainly wants her to, clearly. She has not done anything wrong. Instead, she should feel empathic, which is what she is. She feels badly that she hurt someone’s feelings, and that is appropriate. Guilt is something else – implying that she should feel regret and would do it differently if she had another chance.

      The stark reality is that he is going to be rejected by every woman until he learns how to calibrate and pace his interest and attention.

      Revolting is a strong word – but for me, a guy who insisted on grocery shopping instead of a date, so as not to waste my time, is repellent. Or one who offered to pick up and work as a hospital orderly on the other side of the world based on acquaintance of only three weeks. If he values himself, his own goals and his independence so little, how can anyone else value them more?

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Esau

    utterly losing tingle for a man because he offers and gives too much, too soon — which is what we’re talking about here, beyond just RB’s specific case — may be understandable but that does not make it respectable. There is a difference, and it’s an important one to recognize.

    This seems related to what we were discussing upthread, Esau, so I hope you don’t mind if I jump in here.

    I think a lot of women would agree that it’s not respectable. But because they do it anyway, they end up rationalizing it to themselves. So guys go from men who just “gave too much, too soon” to “creeps” or “emotionally needy basket cases” or whatever. Isn’t this worse? RB was honest and understanding about what happened, but apparently even that is not good enough.

    Which brings us back to the question of what you recommend instead. That RB martyr herself for this man? Are attraction triggers and killers so easy to control that we can shame people into wanting to be with those who turn them off? The tone of some commenters aside, I think everyone knows that this man’s chances with RB are dead in the water, which is why no one is telling her that all she needs to do is to try harder.

    This tension between what is understandable and what is respectable reminds me of a common argument some women make that a man shouldn’t be turned off by a woman who has had a lot of casual sex in the past. It’s certainly understandable that men are put off by high numbers, but women have been campaigning for decades to stop it from being respectable. I imagine that when research started revealing that women with high numbers have a compromised ability to bond with one man in long-term relationships, it came as a huge relief to men who couldn’t turn this attraction killer off but felt ashamed of it.

  • Mike

    Esau November 28, 2011 at 10:41 am #486

    Bravo. +1 Could not have said it better myself.

    For all the talk about how we’re civilized, it’s amazing how many people want to be the quickest in a race to the bottom back to the stone age.

    If biology is all that matters in the choices you make and how you accept, then welcome to the dark ages and don’t ask man to hold men back and ask them to remain monogamous. That goes against our biology.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com david foster

    Susan….yeah, it (the self-confidence piece) wasn’t the best-written thing in the world. What I THINK he is trying to say is that the advantages of a basically optimistic attitude toward life are so strong that they make up for the problems that excessive self-confidence can cause in specific situations.

    In reality, of course, excessive self-confidence can get you into situations from which there is no recovery.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Esau,

    Yea, I think you’re being a bit obtuse about this. We’re not talking about your average beta guy; we’re talking about a guy who was going to forsake everything going on in his life to travel around the world so that he could walk a girl he’d known for 3 weeks back and forth to work.

    That’s creepy. And pathetic. What do you think Ribbon’s responsibility is in this situation, to train this guy how to be more attractive… and… normal?

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @MikeC

    There is a *WORLD OF DIFFERENCE* between:

    A. Allowing your friends to have a *DIRECT* influence on your *OWN* behavior and choices such as dumping a guy and

    B. Not being friends with or shunning someone because of *THEIR* choices and behavior that doesn’t affect you or your life

    This seems to split the hairs rather finely. After becoming friends with someone, don’t their choices ultimately affect your life as well? Isn’t that the (pre-research) rationale for not committing to a “slut”?

    Terrible? Really? Seriously?

    If it makes you feel any better, what I meant was that if a potential relationship has to be nailed in a coffin, some nails are better than others. If during the courtship, for instance, he had been arrested while dealing drugs to minors and torturing puppies, that would have been a good nail. But it’s as clear to me as it was to you that I was turned off by something I shouldn’t have been turned off by. That’s why I acknowledge that the nail was terrible. Not his past, but what it meant to me.

  • lovelost
  • Mike

    ^^^from the above Huffpost article

    “– but they do leave me full of endorphins and also that warm, safe feeling you get from simply being held. Exactly what I needed.”
    “It’s not casual sex because it’s about more than sex — I’m looking to soothe myself emotionally as much as sexually. ”

    And the cries of millions of sexless beta’s could be heard throughout the kingdom.

    It’s articles like this that do 2 things to my psyche…

    1. It reminds me of my horribly deprived adolescence of no intimate contact
    2. It reinforces in me my perception (real or imagined) of a have vs. have not dichotomy at play, that women are having feel good casual sex, that it’s not the devastating to a woman long term, and that I really should be looking for a short term FWB style hook up to get my rocks off without having to risk or obligate myself to the rigors of a relationship.

    Or maybe my past still clouds my judgement..

  • lovelost

    @mIke
    And the cries of millions of sexless beta’s could be heard throughout the kingdom.

    Not the cries, awareness. I have said somewhere at HUS, by 2030 the marriage will be removed from English dictionary, when all the betas after a generation would have become aware.

  • Ted D

    For all the women here that find “early commitment” so repulsive, I’d like to toss in my $.02.

    Before taking the “red pill”, I used to fully believe that I should commit to be exclusive with a women early on if I had any intention of it working out. It wasn’t so much that I was desparate, but that I wanted to make sure she understood that I did NOT intend to see other women while we were getting to know each other. I know all the game guys are going to have a heart attack, but I would still hold to this if I was dating now. I simply wouldn’t tell the women involved so soon. I honestly don’t see how I could spend the correct amount of time and attention if I’m bouncing between several women at once. Sure, if sex is my goal, the more women I have dangling the more likely I am to get laid on any particular night. However, if my primary interest is getting to know a women, I’d rather concentrate all my efforts on her and not spread myself too thin.

    That being said, if I’m going to restrict myself to her for the time being, I kinda want the same from her, which is why I usually touched on the subject by date 3. So it isn’t that I wanted to be engaged and married quickly, it was that I wanted both of us to concentrate on our relationship without the extra complication of continued dating of others.

    I don’t see a problem with an early commitment to exclusive dating. That doesn’t mean we are in an LTR. It simply means we are going to refrain from dating others while we get to know each other.

    Now, this particular case is over the top. Offering to move with a women you hardly know is surely a sign of something bigger.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Ted

      I don’t see a problem with an early commitment to exclusive dating. That doesn’t mean we are in an LTR. It simply means we are going to refrain from dating others while we get to know each other.

      I think this is a good way to get to know one another, but as you recognize, putting these cards on the table too early is unwise. We’ve been discussing how it turns the other person off, but there’s also a self-protective element to it. I would tell anyone that until you’ve agreed to be exclusive, you’re on the market. You may not choose to act on that, but it’s a reasonable way to hedge one’s bets and prevent oneitis if you have no idea what the other person is thinking in the early days.

      Obviously, I do not condone having a sexual relationship with more than one person at a time. That requires an explicit declaration of non-exclusivity, IMO.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Mike,

    So just go and get your rocks off, already.

  • Malia

    Jumping in way late after rapidly skimming comments…but this is interesting because either:

    1. It is inaccurate that it has ZERO value or

    2. Someone must be profoundly stupid to repeatedly engage in something that has ZERO value for them, or in fact actually has negative value

    Susan gave a response, but that response was fitting for the person who knowingly goes into a P&D situation.

    However, there are a lot of women/girls who unknowingly get P&D-ed either naively, through deception, or through “lies of omission”. When a guy retells that story, often, he is not going to be completely honest about the ways he deceived to get sex, because it’s considered pretty crummy to do so. So there’s a lot of wordplay that makes someone seem like they understood the situation fully and agreed to it, when in reality, there was greater or lesser deceit involved.

    There will always be a minority of women who will be down for anything, but if guys straight out said “I just want sex now I have no intention of continuing contact afterwards” you’d see a drastic change.

  • LokLand

    @ Malia

    I disagree with you.
    If your tingle tells you to sleep with someone that is on you not him.
    He may have made you tingle, your the one that listened to it.

    He didn’t decieve you he turned you on and you didn’t stop to think.

    If he had promised to be your boyfriend and wuv you forever and all that nonsense he is a prick. I would think these kind of guys are rare.
    And even still you listened to your tingle, he just activated it.

    Don’t blame a guy for a lack of self control.

  • Mike

    @Jesus #499

    I’d love to. Is it too much to ask for that it be with someone I care about? If i just wanted to get my rox off, i will rub one out, or throw a bill at a woman to have her pull it out for me. More to the point, for me to really enjoy sex, i really need to care about who im with. The drive to please, to be a casanova if you will, is 50% of the appeal of sex for me. I don’t think i’ll get that from a hookup.

    Besides.. i’m still waiting to finalize my divorce. Counting down the weeks.

  • SayWhaat

    @ LokLand:

    The tingle is necessary for any successful relationship, don’t discount it. Why would anyone want to be in a relationship with someone they aren’t attracted to?

    If he had promised to be your boyfriend and wuv you forever and all that nonsense he is a prick. I would think these kind of guys are rare.

    They’re not as rare as you think.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Mike,

    Here’s the thing.

    1. Your soon-to-be ex sounds like a shit head. Why wait for the divorce papers? Show up at the house with a woman and have crazy sex while she’s alone watching David Letterman in the other room.

    2. If you really, really don’t want sex with a woman you don’t care about, then let sluts be sluts and be content with who you are. Don’t frame yourself as the one who was a “have not” when you were a kid. You were a “have.” You had decency and respect and integrity. If a girl was willing to blow some douche bag for attention, then she is the one who grew up as a “have not.” Long story short, value what you have (and had) rather than regretting the things you don’t (and didn’t).

  • Mike

    #SayWhaat November 28, 2011 at 2:24 pm #503

    “The tingle is necessary for any successful relationship, don’t discount it. Why would anyone want to be in a relationship with someone they aren’t attracted to?”

    I like ice cream. I get a tingle when i taste it. I eat healthy food, because i don’t want to turn into a cow.

    Attraction is important, but it seems that people are really skewing it in favor of 100% attraction skills and nothing on substance. Again.. the PUA scene thrives on this so count on seeing it continue.

    After reading the whole story about beta lawyer, yes he totally turtled way too soon and really doesn’t look appealing at all, even to me. But whenever tingle gets into the conversation, it seems that it rules over common sense and leads so many women off a cliff, and it’s not that they don’t know that they’re doing it, they simply justify it to themselves as something that shouldn’t be overcome.

    As if men shouldn’t overcome the tingle to want to bed the hotter woman when they’re in a monogamous relationship with a decent girl. It just seems way too easy to excuse everything on the tingle.

  • LokLand

    @ Saywhaaat

    I don’t discout the need for the tingle. It is very important for a relationship.

    Its also the ONLY thing thats important for a hook up. If you follow ONLY the tingle then expect to be P&D’d. You went for what you wanted (sex) and then blame the guy for not committing and call him a liar. Doesn’t make logical sense. Sex is not worthy of commitment.

    Maybe I run with a different crowd I don’t think most of my buds would stoop that low. They might do some stupid shit but outright lying is typically seen as next to hiring a prostitute.

  • Malia

    @MikeC

    Both men and women are susceptible to peer pressue, but I think it is mostly accurate to say women are far more likely to allow their “herd” to directly influence their behavior.

    Men are just as likely to allow their “herd” to directly influence their behavior, only they consider the choice of the herd a result of their behavior rather than the herd influencing their behavior.

    One should most definitely judge a person by the company they choose to keep. I find it to be a very strong indicator (male or female) of their beliefs and values that they may not directly express. It’s a more reliable indicator than what the person says. Often even if their friends engage in behavior they themselves don’t, they often harbor a wish that they could.

    The funny thing is most, if not nearly all, men think like you (BFD, they’re grown) and THIS is how I think their peer group influences their behaviors AND beliefs while going undetected.

    I’ll find the exact data and quote it later, but do you know a really big indicator as to whether or not a man will cheat is if his friends and close relatives have/do? That guy is never ever ever going to even consider that his peer group is a factor in that decision, but it’s those little things, the social conditioning, the tacit approval, the normalization of bad behaviors, that males don’t want to consider because their ego leads them to believe they are too strong and impervious to that type of influence.

    This seems to split the hairs rather finely. After becoming friends with someone, don’t their choices ultimately affect your life as well?

    I am totally and completely with you on that. It’s not just their choices, it’s how you grow comfortable with their choices and this adopt their behavior. The Power of Association at play.

  • Malia

    I would think these kind of guys are rare.

    I don’t know why men insist on stating what kind of men are rare. Unless you date men, you have no idea. You only know what the males you know decide to share, you don’t actually know what happens.

    If you’re going to lay the blame solely at the feet of women, then why do you expect anyone to have empathy for what men endure? Everyone for him/her self and whatever goes wrong is your own fault. Problem solved all around.

  • Mike

    @Jesus

    Dude, i take everything you say to heart.

    It’s still hard to hold onto your values and be helping women and children into lifeboats when all around you you see assholes holding women’s hands to get to the front of the line and then knocking the same women over to be the first ones off the Titanic, and then see those women blame me for the actions of those guys, while secretly wishing they were on the life-rafts with those guys but happy to see me go down with the ship.

    I may be happy with where i currently am in life, but it took me a long time to get here and the ghost of christmas past still haunts me, so i sometimes reel when i hear stories that so closely resemble what i went through in my late teens/early adolescence..

    As for my ex, i’m not holding back for her sake, i just want to be able to clearly have a conversation where i don’t have to lie about my marital status with a woman, maintain my ethical code, and prevent any legal issues from arising. I already have my game and my swag back, and have been taken under the wing of my new coworker chums on how to relax and interact, be playful with women. The women where i work are also giving me tips and pointers, and one girl from HR was going to lend me her copy of ‘the Game’ because she thinks it would be an invaluable resource for me :) needless to say everyone here is pulling for me to up my game, so who am i to disappoint?

  • SayWhaat

    I don’t know why men insist on stating what kind of men are rare. Unless you date men, you have no idea. You only know what the males you know decide to share, you don’t actually know what happens.

    If you’re going to lay the blame solely at the feet of women, then why do you expect anyone to have empathy for what men endure? Everyone for him/her self and whatever goes wrong is your own fault. Problem solved all around.

    +1 for Malia!

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I don’t know why men insist on stating what kind of men are rare. Unless you date men, you have no idea.

      Agree with the +1 for Malia here. And I’m glad Isabel cited the post about the survey of over 1,000 guys. A full third admitted to lying -by commision – to a girl’s face to get sex.

  • Malia

    Its also the ONLY thing thats important for a hook up. If you follow ONLY the tingle then expect to be P&D’d. You went for what you wanted (sex) and then blame the guy for not committing and call him a liar. Doesn’t make logical sense. Sex is not worthy of commitment.
    Maybe I run with a different crowd I don’t think most of my buds would stoop that low. They might do some stupid shit but outright lying is typically seen as next to hiring a prostitute.

    This is based on the assumption that P&Ds are exclusive to hookups and they are not. There are some guys for whom their MO for getting laid is to date, express interest in a relationship, and disappear after sex. And no, they are not apparent cads and may not even be considered as such by their peer group. However, if they were honest, they would not get laid by whom they (caliber of woman) want on their timeline, so they fudge a bit to get what they want, but don’t consider that lying.

    Back when Jhane’s post and subsequent conversation got out of control, she touched on it, but didn’t explore it deeply. I think men would (or maybe not) be surprised at the number of men who use “relationship intent” to get sex. And if sex is a pre-requisite to a relationship in this day and age, it leaves most women in a very, very bad place.

    That’s one of the things I can’t stand about this website is that certain “problems” are always assumed to be the result of bad female behavior and as a result no one cares about resolving them, only blaming women. Then when they find out there is no solution without addressing the actual problem (hence this riddle with no answer post) its all OMG, OMG what do we do!!!!

    There are core problems that need to resolved and without tackling those, all this other crap, these rules, and stuff, is just dancing around the issue while allowing it to grow and fester.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Malia

      That’s one of the things I can’t stand about this website is that certain “problems” are always assumed to be the result of bad female behavior and as a result no one cares about resolving them, only blaming women

      I take issue with this. Which “core problems” are you referring to?

      I have written many posts about players, douchebags and asshats. I have talked about what red flags to watch out for again and again. I have also written extensively about male promiscuity and urged women to reject men with a high partner count, as I believe that is problematic for LTRs.

      I also proactively urge women to clarify intent before having sex with anyone. Both their own, and the guy’s. Many women do fall victim to cads – a huge number of female college freshmen get burned every year. However, some learn quickly from those experiences, while others fall into the habit of no-strings sex. That’s fine if that’s what they’re after, but the question is always “How is that working for you?”

      The truth is, women are the gatekeepers of sex. Any time a woman has sex without feeling secure of her partner’s love and affection, she is taking a substantial risk with her physical, mental and emotional health. That’s why I supported Jhane’s strategy. If a woman goes into a sexual relationship with one eye closed and her fingers crossed, then I will have empathy for her. She may not be guilty of bad behavior, but she is certainly guilty of having made a poor choice – from her perspective, not mine.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Mike

    I like ice cream. I get a tingle when i taste it. I eat healthy food, because i don’t want to turn into a cow.

    Are you saying that attraction is no better than junk food? If you mean “attraction skills”–or the more gimmicky elements of pick up artistry (which women have their own version of as well)–then I’d agree with you. But attraction itself seems to be an entire food group in the nutrition pyramid of romantic relationships. Why else are women told to keep the weight down after marriage?

    whenever tingle gets into the conversation, it seems that it rules over common sense and leads so many women off a cliff, and it’s not that they don’t know that they’re doing it, they simply justify it to themselves as something that shouldn’t be overcome.

    If you mean women who choose sexy jerks over not-so-sexy decent guys (especially those they are married to), then, yes, they’re shallow and selfish. But the original scope of this digression was whether or not a woman should continue dating a man she has decided she is not attracted to. Would he want that?

    As I’ve said earlier, women likely feel just as guilty about rejecting a man for want of a “tingle” as the men here seem to think they should. That’s why we have rationalizations like, “He was too needy” or “He was acting like a creep” (obviously I can’t write good satire, sorry), when there was probably nothing wrong with the guy except that he wasn’t attractive to the woman he was courting. It just seems more honest for her to say that she just was not attracted to him. That’s a good enough reason in the dating stage, despite being the worst sort of excuse after a couple is already married.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Malia

    That’s one of the things I can’t stand about this website is that certain “problems” are always assumed to be the result of bad female behavior and as a result no one cares about resolving them, only blaming women.

    Blaming bad behavior, I can understand. I’m sure most of the readers of this site come here to learn what not to do. I just wonder what any woman is supposed to do when something as difficult to control as attraction also gets lumped under “behavior”–as something she can just “do.” Apparently, it’s okay to blame women for not being attracted to regular men because they read “emo porn” (a theory I don’t entirely dispute, by the way), but it’s shame trafficking to reveal that any man has been less than 100% percent attractive to any woman.

  • Isabel

    Malia,

    According to this post a few weeks back, 56% of guys in bars would fake interest in the girl and 44% of guys would fake interest in a relationship to secure sex, so not far. I’m lost on the “in bars” part though. I know it’s a key venue in the SMP but I don’t know if it’s actually a skanky place to meet someone (as opposed to clubs?). There’s a difference between bars and clubs right? IDK, I stick to social circles and avoid both so my word is shaky. Thought you’d find it interesting anyway.

  • Isabel

    Ugh. Never mind. I skimmed too quickly. =/ Turns out 41% and 33% of guys not in bars would lie about interest and/or exclusivity to get sex. People with good intentions in this SMP are fucked.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    I just wonder what any woman is supposed to do when something as difficult to control as attraction also gets lumped under “behavior”

    Perhaps accept her own nature, & the part it has to play in the equation. And the mans natue too, which is telling him to do whatever is necessary to briefly be with her. She knows that she herself is seeking a greater commitment, but that that is just her reality, so should not project those expectations onto him. A man or a woman understanding this should have no need to blame themselves or anyone else.

  • LokLand

    “If you’re going to lay the blame solely at the feet of women, then why do you expect anyone to have empathy for what men endure? Everyone for him/her self and whatever goes wrong is your own fault. Problem solved all around.”

    First, the generic advice for men who have problems with women is learn game. Aka fix it yourself. Not “ohh you poor thing did the big, bad woman steal your kids, house and car.” (Realistic with todays marriage laws and unsuprisingly divorce rates seem to be correlated.)

    Second, its not your fault if a guy lies to you. It is your fault if you fall for it.
    Blaming the guy for lying to you, reasonable.
    The girls who’ve slept with me and wanted an LTR were probably 99.99% positive I was going to stick around and I did. They were also the ones who thought I was a player to start off with. A healthy dose of suspision is a good thing.

  • SayWhaat

    @ LokLand:

    Second, its not your fault if a guy lies to you. It is your fault if you fall for it.

    Oh, honey, by the way, your three children? None of them are yours. The first two are with Lars from the gym. Johnny’s real daddy is Paul from work. It’s not your fault, I lied to you. You fell for it though, so it’s totally your fault.

  • LokLand

    @ Saywhaat

    Thank you perfect example.
    If he had been hot enough that would be a nonissue. Aka if had learned game he would be a father.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Byron 4:27

    I was actually referring to something entirely different, namely why it is so “wrong” for a woman to stop dating a man if she finds him unattractive. :P

  • LokLand

    Okay so now for the serious answer.

    Theres one big difference between your given situation and mine.

    If a woman sleeps with a man and then feels bad she has commited the action that lead to her unhapppy feeling. If she had not acted it would not have mattered if the guy was truthful or not because the action would never occur. Hence the reason for being suspicious initally in a relationship about the others intentions.

    In your example,

    the man could do nothing to change the outcome of said result. Wifey could have told him or not told him but the kids still wouldn’t be his. Being suspicious would only confirm the kids were not his there is nothing he can do about it.

  • http://triggeralert.blogspot.com Byron

    Ah.

  • SayWhaat

    Aka if had learned game he would be a father.

    So make yourself more attractive. Not my problem you’re unattractive as you are right now.

    I wouldn’t expect a well-groomed man to fall in love with me on sight while I’m standing in line at the convenience store with unwashed hair and grungy clothes because I needed to make an emergency run and buy toothpaste in the morning. I don’t understand why men take such umbrage at being told to improve themselves. If someone told me I’d need to buy nicer clothes and manicure my nails more regularly in order to improve my appearance, I’d do it (and for the record, I have).

  • SayWhaat

    LokLand,

    If a woman sleeps with a man and then feels bad she has commited the action that lead to her unhapppy feeling. If she had not acted it would not have mattered if the guy was truthful or not because the action would never occur.

    Even if she doesn’t sleep with him, she feels bad because she would then wonder if not putting out was what drove him away. Even if the action doesn’t occur, she doesn’t know if the guy was a good guy or not. This is the catch-22 we are facing.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Lokland

    Second, its not your fault if a guy lies to you. It is your fault if you fall for it.

    You’re basically telling women never to trust anything a man tells them ever again. It’s not that men can’t be trusted, but that women will always lose, no matter what.

  • SayWhaat

    In your example,

    the man could do nothing to change the outcome of said result. Wifey could have told him or not told him but the kids still wouldn’t be his. Being suspicious would only confirm the kids were not his there is nothing he can do about it.

    Similarly, the girl in your example is caught between two options, neither of which guarantees the outcome. She can put out and lose the man, or not put out and lose the man. Which one do you suggest?

  • Malia

    If he had been hot enough that would be a nonissue. Aka if had learned game he would be a father.

    Really bad assumption, and that’s why I think a wave of men will be disappointed that they learned game, improved their game, and things till fell to pieces.

    Susan: You took issue with what I wrote and this is a clear example of what I’m talking about.

    The core problem is not being dealt with. A guy sees an issue and believes the resolve is to get game. As a woman, speaking from a woman’s perspective, the level of deceit involved to lie about paternity has absolutely nothing to do with game, but the character of the person.

    But the focus is on game, because you see, there are ten flow charts and fifteen diagrams, eleven theories, two books, twenty three blogs to show how you can change a woman’s hormonal or physiological response with game and the right mix of alpha and beta qualities and this won’t happen to you.

    That’s why I feel like someone like Mike, in particular, is at a crossroads. Because guys want to tell him that yeah do this do that get game like it’s a force field or magical shield.

    As a woman, I can see that his wife is a really dishonorable person and no amount of game would have changed that about her. He probably could have changed the particulars of their relationship, but she would still be the same and the outcome probably would be the same (divorce) just under different circumstances (a different version of the you don’t do it for me speech) and at a different point in time.

    That’s what I don’t like. It’s like the lipstick on a pig, its still a pig. You can’t band aid over serious social and character problems with game or rules or whatever this stuff is all about. And then even if you do have two honestly, genuinely good people who get together, one or more of them playing silly games with each other is highly likely to mess up the dynamic because, no, a lot of mentally healthy and stable women do not find excessively aggressive male behavior “hot” they find it cause for concern. They do not get the “tingles” from being ignored though it may make them emotional, and get a reaction, it’s often one that has a negative consequence/effect.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Malia

      You can’t band aid over serious social and character problems with game or rules or whatever this stuff is all about.

      I agree with you. Character is separate from Game. Game itself is amoral. It’s nothing more than a treatise in female psychology. How it is deployed depends entirely on the character of the man. The more any of us knows, the greater the potential for using other people for personal gain. And that cuts both ways – one big reason guys have discovered Game is because they found that giving away too much interest/commitment too soon made them undesirable. Just as women have learned that giving away sex too soon often makes them undesirable as a relationship prospect.

      As for solving social problems, that’s a tough one. I believe that the Sexual Revolution affected the SMP so dramatically it’s changing everything about American life. Sex Rev = Pill + Feminism, so there’s no undoing that. Game is just one way that men are coping.

      And then even if you do have two honestly, genuinely good people who get together, one or more of them playing silly games with each other is highly likely to mess up the dynamic

      I agree with this too. There are so many potentially fulfilling relationships not happening because everyone is jockeying for the upper hand. Everyone is viewing dating and mating as zero sum, through a lens of scarcity rather than abundance. It’s as if we’re doomed before we even begin.

      a lot of mentally healthy and stable women do not find excessively aggressive male behavior “hot” they find it cause for concern. They do not get the “tingles” from being ignored though it may make them emotional, and get a reaction, it’s often one that has a negative consequence/effect.

      Three for three. I’ve long claimed that the women who seek the Dark Triad traits in men are more likely to be emotionally unhealthy and unstable. I have never found jerks or high T, aggressive men sexy. Plenty of other women here say the same thing. That said, every woman likes to be kept on her toes, wondering if a guy is feeling the same way she is. Most of us don’t want a man whose affection we can take for granted. There is a happy, healthy medium.

  • Mike

    @SayWhat

    “Similarly, the girl in your example is caught between two options, neither of which guarantees the outcome. She can put out and lose the man, or not put out and lose the man. Which one do you suggest?”

    Not put out, not get used, and be thankful he disappeared because it’s pretty obvious all he wanted was a p&d. Wait until you have sufficient information about him (what do his friends say about him, how’s he treat his own family, etc..) before you go on his word alone. It’s better than the alternative.

    If you think you have to sleep with a guy right away to keep him, you’re on the wrong train.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Malia

    Really bad assumption, and that’s why I think a wave of men will be disappointed that they learned game, improved their game, and things till fell to pieces.

    I think it was Dalrock (or perhaps Deti on Dalrock’s blog) who pointed out that Game may help you attract a girlfriend or keep your wife, but it can’t turn a deceitful, disloyal woman into an honest, faithful mate.

    I suppose a really hardcore Gamer would be able to enjoy the effects of honesty and faithfulness, anyway, by using jealousy, uncertainty and whatever other tricks he has, but at the end of the day, he’ll still be with a woman he can never trust. (Enter the school of thought that insists women are actually biologically untrustworthy and solipsistic.)

  • LokLand

    @ Bellita

    Ummmm no.
    I don’t assume my house will be robbed but I still lock the door. However I’m not paranoid about it either. I took a reasonable precaution and if bad things happen thats life.

    Take the same approach with dating. Don’t assume everyone has good intentions.
    Doesn’t mean you have to be paranoid about people screwing you (reading blogs about dating tend to skew you in this direction) but if your not taking reasonable precautions against it you deserve to be robbed.

    So casual sex, ya you forgot to lock the door to your house. Don’t expect sympathy or help.

    As for not trusting a man ever. Why?
    Trust him intially, yes but be suspicious. You don’t need to force him to declare his commitement but allowing him to display it while actively uping the physical side will work for both people. (Later in this post actually.) He gains your trust and v, you gain his commitement. (More on this later as well.)
    Can you get burned? Ya, welcome to the real world. If this scares you please go back to your play pen.

    @ Saywhaat

    In response to your first post.

    We agree. When I mentioned that men learn game it was in response to Malia saying that when women act badly they recieve no sympathy. My retort was in regards to her assuming men recieved some kind of sympathy. We don’t we are told to learn game. Women deserve no special treatment, learn how to get a relationship. I have seen Susan outline repeatedly how to do just that. Sympathy for a women who can’t read instructions to get what she wants is in short supply, same as it would be for a man who can’t figure out game.

    In response to your second post.

    Assuming you want a relationship (I’m going to direct this at you specifically, no offence itended but I’m not sorry if it does. I also believe your a virgin. Personal opinion, + 5 points you pretty much have your choice of men.)

    So a woman cannot sleep with a man right away or he walks or she waits to long and he walks.
    When presented like that its a catch 22 but thats not reality.

    Susan has given a step by step instruction, as well as other posters with different variations on what would be an acceptable level on physical escalation during the start of a relationship.
    Guys want sex more than commitement, women want commitement more than sex (generally). Having sex right away fulfills only the guys needs. Committing right away would fufill only the womans needs.
    If you seriously think these are the only two options availible please don’t get into a relationship until you go read the defintion of us, I and you and figure out their relative order of importance in a relationship.

    Simply put, you must offer a reasonable escaltion of physical intimacy while he offers a reasonable escaltion of commitement/emotional intimacy. If you expect exclusivity before sex your being selfish (red flag, run away, abort mission). If he expects sex before any type of commitement he is being selfsih(…).

    Now an interlude, my fiance was same as you. Vcard and all that and she pulled off this physical escaltion perfectly while also getting my commitement.

    Date 1- kiss in the park.
    Date 2- my house, rained on us, both soaked. Wears my clothes.
    Watch movie, heavy make out. Clothes down to underwear (no bra). Spends the night at my place with her head on my chest. (This is where I decided I wanted a relationship.)
    Dates-3 to something. Slow escaltion via hand, oral etc. No regression.
    Exactly 3 weeks into dating- sex.
    (I stopped dating other women after date 4, never in a million years will I tell her that.)

    Can you possibly get burned, ya. Is it likely if your careful, no. If the fact that you can get burned scares you in some way, please go back to your play pen.

    Last, if I were in a relationship with a woman whom for some reason had been through a situation with a guy lying to get into her pants and taken her v card and ran I would be completely understanding. Shit happens. (Assuming she didn’t have a victim mentallity.)

    If a women repeatedly kept burning herself, well stupid people don’t deserve help or sympathy.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @LokLand

      Now an interlude, my fiance was same as you. Vcard and all that and she pulled off this physical escaltion perfectly while also getting my commitement.

      Date 1- kiss in the park.
      Date 2- my house, rained on us, both soaked. Wears my clothes.
      Watch movie, heavy make out. Clothes down to underwear (no bra). Spends the night at my place with her head on my chest. (This is where I decided I wanted a relationship.)
      Dates-3 to something. Slow escaltion via hand, oral etc. No regression.
      Exactly 3 weeks into dating- sex.
      (I stopped dating other women after date 4, never in a million years will I tell her that.)

      Can you possibly get burned, ya. Is it likely if your careful, no. If the fact that you can get burned scares you in some way, please go back to your play pen.

      I actually really, really like this. No guarantees, but a woman isn’t going to do much better with a good man. And it’s highly likely that a bad man will reveal his character before this point.

  • Malia

    If a women repeatedly kept burning herself, well stupid people don’t deserve help or sympathy.

    I don’t think said woman is stupid anymore than Betalawyer is stupid (and he obviously will get burned many times also). There are people who have not been raised, or socially prepared, with the right info.

    And there is no widely known term to google to find it. I assume that for some men just learning that it is referred to as “game” opens a world of opportunities.

    While I totally understand your mentality, it’s cool, I just don’t agree. It’s like poor people who feel like nobody should have money because they don’t. Or wealthy people who don’t believe in social programs because they “pulled themselves up by their bootstraps”. I mean, I guess, it works on an individual level, but collectively it fails.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Lokland

    If the fact that you can get burned scares you in some way, please go back to your play pen.

    Well, of course the possibility of being burned is frightening. (I speak as someone who has a very literal burn scar on her leg.) It’s true that bad things happening are a part of life, but your own metaphor casts men as housebreakers and women as householders who are obligated to lock their doors.

    So no matter how much screening a woman does, even to the point that her own father will vouch for the man, if he still ends up deceiving her, her faith in him (supposedly a good thing) will be a mark against her while his lies to her (traditionally a bad thing) will not be a mark against him.

  • SayWhaat

    LokLand,

    Simply put, you must offer a reasonable escaltion of physical intimacy while he offers a reasonable escaltion of commitement/emotional intimacy.

    I’m not going to get into the details of the extent of my sexual experience, but suffice it to say that I have allowed escalation reasonably enough (and the men I was dating did not seem to have a single problem with the way things were going), up until the point where I mentioned the V-card. That was the watershed moment where they chose to leave. Pick of men? Hah.

  • Mike

    Query?

    “up until the point where I mentioned the V-card.”

    Are we talking a valentines day card or virginity?

    All kidding aside, I could only dream to end up going out with a virgin. I’d relish the opportunity to teach her about the wonders of her sexuality and all the pleasures to be derived from. Both for her own physical and emotional enjoyment, and as a blank canvas to learn everything about me that makes me tick sexually, with no preconceived ‘i thought all guys like that’ nonsense. Sex is about mutual exploration, not mindless assumptions.

    Why others are running away from it I haven’t the foggiest.

  • LokLand

    @ Mike

    Its good :)

    @ Saywhaat

    It depends when your telling them.
    If its anytime than right before you have sex its kinda creepy and puts a lot of pressure on us.
    How would you feel, “I’m a virgin… therefore the very first time we have sex I expect magical butter flies and unicorns to prace around the bed…”
    Again, we know this isn’t what you mean but guys egos/minds are crazy like that.

    Telling them I’d say somewhere between oral and p in v itself would be perfect. Just a little whisper nothing crazy. Let him prepeare any necessary functions to ensure cleanliness.

    You gotta understand that the vcard is valuable because it gives us god like status (at least in a guys mind). However being told before hand that we have to be a god… you can understand the freak out.

    Also, running around advertising your a virgin won’t get you lines of men. The one who gets it though it very likely to be more loyal/commited to you. Assuming he is interested in a relationship. You have given him the highest place of honour in your life (at least in his mind) after all.

  • Anacaona

    I think the issue is of balance a guy doesn’t want you around out of pity but he does wants a fair chance at winning your attraction. I think that is the key that more often than not a guy gets shuts down even before he has a chance to show any of his good side and that is probably the norm for a normal guy needing time and honing his skills to show his best. Betalawyer will have to learn the hard way but once upon a time a man had a lot more wiggle room to learn. The dating process was less brutal and he making the mistake of being too eager would had take longer for a woman to leave him and even some women would be patient enough to tell them to do things differently or at least try to show them how unpleased they were and even if they lost attraction they would be willing to work in that part while still in the relationship because the commitment was there and again once upon a time that was what the woman wanted. more commitment than attraction. Again that was our grandmother’s world we decided to change that.
    I’m not blaming Betalawyer or Butterfly they are both probably nice people trapped in this jungle of modern dating but I do think we need to clean out the jungle because individuals can only do so much, YMMV.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Betalawyer will have to learn the hard way but once upon a time a man had a lot more wiggle room to learn.

      Very true. It’s all hardball now.

  • Malia

    Telling them I’d say somewhere between oral and p in v itself would be perfect. Just a little whisper nothing crazy. Let him prepeare any necessary functions to ensure cleanliness.

    One of my friend’s favorite quotes is “I call shenanigans on that one”. You don’t date guys. This sounds like a hypothetical and idealistic run down of how things should work, or work with you, or work with what your friends tell you, but not how they play out in real life.
    You really need to preface this with a lot of “some guys” and in “some cases” and acknowledge that playing out like that is just uncommon.

    The one who gets it though it very likely to be more loyal/commited to you. Assuming he is interested in a relationship. You have given him the highest place of honour in your life (at least in his mind) after all.

    Again, SHENANIGANS! Ask former virgins. I suppose the flipside of AWALT is most guys are like me, or most guys like me really are like me.

    I swear, I don’t know if you really believe this or you just write it to get others to go along.

    Three for three. I’ve long claimed that the women who seek the Dark Triad traits in men are more likely to be emotionally unhealthy and unstable. I have never found jerks or high T, aggressive men sexy.

    Matter of perspective. There are some things I’ve seen you cosign, encourage, call “HOT” and say that “women like that” that I consider disturbing, troublesome or borderline abusive/controlling. So tomato, to-mah-to.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      There are some things I’ve seen you cosign, encourage, call “HOT” and say that “women like that” that I consider disturbing, troublesome or borderline abusive/controlling

      Like what? It would be very helpful for the purpose of discussion and debate if you could provide examples when you make judgments.

  • lovelost

    @Mike
    I’d relish the opportunity to teach her about the wonders of her sexuality and all the pleasures to be derived from. Both for her own physical and emotional enjoyment, and as a blank canvas to learn everything about me that makes me tick sexually, with no preconceived ‘i thought all guys like that’ nonsense. Sex is about mutual exploration, not mindless assumptions.

    This is one of those things men really enjoy with women, introducing her to sex, however they are rarity now. I always want to enjoy the emotional enjoyment of introducing my LTR to this, but i guess being a beta, the reverse will happen.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @lovelost

      I always want to enjoy the emotional enjoyment of introducing my LTR to this, but i guess being a beta, the reverse will happen.

      There are many female virgins, though not as many as male virgins, at least in college. Still, nearly 40%….

  • Malia

    @Susan

    Deti’s oversight of all his wife’s activities and correspondence because he found out she had sex with more men than she previously claimed.Not only did you call it hot or sexy, you said that women like that (WTDTA?).

    Also, I happened to be reading Athol Kay’s blog the other day and he has a post about tipping the mattress when the wife gets him riled up but won’t finish him off (and he didn’t even say that he did it, just that it was a suggestion) and “gently depositing her on the floor” and you said that was hot. I would venture to say that would scare most women, or at least give them great cause for concern, not turn them on.

    I get that works for you, it’s the statement that it just works for women in general that bothers me.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Malia

      Thanks that is helpful. To clarify, I believe what I said was that Deti’s wife obviously is finding his newfound dominance sexy, as evidenced by the fact that they are suddenly having a whole lot more sex. Also, IIRC, he said she is initiating sex now, something she had not done in ages. Also, I empathize with a man’s desire and need to know the facts about his partner’s sexual history. He found out after 10 years of marriage that she had lied (by a lot), presumably because she taunted him during an argument. Bottom Line? She risked their marriage by destroying the trust, and he appears to have saved it by asserting some control. Game set match to Deti.

      I don’t remember the Athol post you mention – being tipped off the bed doesn’t sound so sexy, but I guess it did back in 2009 or whatever. Eh, I’ve written > 550 posts here and heaven knows how many comments. I’ve never been shy about saying what I find sexy. I don’t presume to speak for all women. When I say, “that is hot” I speak for myself only. There is obviously no absolute truth. It’s all personal.

  • Malia

    @ Susan

    Totally get what you’re saying about dominance and female attraction. But the things you cosigned were things that could very easily cross over into controlling or abusive. When I look at “what makes sense” I think about how it would typically play out under most circumstances, not how it may play out under idealistic circumstances, with the right guy, who is great in all these other ways.

    Even if you say that is only for you and only your opinion, you have a platform and it is presumed that you speak for others (or else why would people bother reading). You’re, (based on your platform) giving tacit approval to certain behaviors in men that really end up playing out problematically rather than being attractive.

  • Mike C

    I was actually referring to something entirely different, namely why it is so “wrong” for a woman to stop dating a man if she finds him unattractive. :P

    Just curious, whose position is this? I know of only one commenter who has potentially implied this. This certainly isn’t my view. A woman should not date a man she finds unattractive. It isn’t fair to her OR the guy. The intractable math problem here though that I am growing increasingly convinced of is that female 5-6s basically don’t find their male counterpart 5-6s attractive at all. Not sure how you solve that one.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @Malia

    However, there are a lot of women/girls who unknowingly get P&D-ed either naively, through deception, or through “lies of omission”.

    There will always be a minority of women who will be down for anything, but if guys straight out said “I just want sex now I have no intention of continuing contact afterwards” you’d see a drastic change.

    Well said indeed. I was accused in another discussion of pedastalizing (?) women by making this same observation. I don’t even know the meaning of the word. I’ve seen this happen female friends who don’t sleep around. If everybody who’s having no-strings sex is clear on the situation, it makes one wonder why so much alcohol is required? Most likely it’s a vehicle to more easily get something that would be extremely difficult to accomplish while sober and in broad daylight.

  • tmunson

    @Susan in response to Malia
    So what do you find sexy? C’mon, don’t be shy.
    “raindrops on roses and whiskers on kiitens”

  • tmunson

    THEORETICAL QUESTION TOSSED OUT TO THE ORDER:

    How many onanisms equal a loss of virginity? C’mom, there has to e a formula. You people are so serious.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    Character is separate from Game. Game itself is amoral. It’s nothing more than a treatise in female psychology. How it is deployed depends entirely on the character of the man. The more any of us knows, the greater the potential for using other people for personal gain. And that cuts both ways – one big reason guys have discovered Game is because they found that giving away too much interest/commitment too soon made them undesirable. Just as women have learned that giving away sex too soon often makes them undesirable as a relationship prospect.

    My guess is that “game” was developed and is used far more for ill than for good. Reminds me of the old phrase “turning swords into plowshares”. How often does that really happen? I’m a fan of Mr. Kay and his website, but I recall reading his suggestion on the best kinds of relationships: both the man and woman should be sexually inexperienced going in. Not the most realistic expectation, but my impression is that “game” is almost exclusively used outside of relationships.

    Frankly, I think the whole idea of some winning “game” formula is kind of overhyped. The advice given seems like common sense. A little more old-fashioned confidence and a bit less shyness and anxiety worked for me. And I know a number of decent guys who didn’t show too much interest or commitment. The women they were dating just weren’t that interested in them. I think it’s true that at any one time, there will be far more men interested in a particular woman than vice versa.

    Regarding undesirability, at least a guy who’s rejected before sex hasn’t lost anything intrinsic. I feel for my guy friends, because it hurts to have to forget about a girl you felt feelings for. But for the women rejected after sex, how many strikes are they allowed before they’re considered “out” of the relationship market? Seems like there’s more for the ladies to lose. I’d rather be damned if I don’t, and I certainly was for awhile : )

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @MikeC

    Just curious, whose position is this? I know of only one commenter who has potentially implied this. This certainly isn’t my view. A woman should not date a man she finds unattractive. It isn’t fair to her OR the guy. The intractable math problem here though that I am growing increasingly convinced of is that female 5-6s basically don’t find their male counterpart 5-6s attractive at all. Not sure how you solve that one.

    It was my understanding of Esau’s comment at 486, reinforced by (the other) Mike at 505.

    The context was stories Ribbon Butterfly and I shared about men who killed attraction in the courtship stage by doing things that weren’t inherently bad. We both rejected them for it (and in case it wasn’t clear, both felt bad about it). Esau said that what we did wasn’t “respectable” and Mike said that the “tingle” is simply the worst excuse to use for bad behavior. This is where I took issue because I don’t think what RB and I did counts as bad behavior, while the only alternative, which was to continue seeing men we weren’t attracted to, would have been even less respectable.

    I believe there was also someone else who said that if we excused women for rejecting men who don’t get them attracted, then we should excuse men for betraying their partners whenever they feel attracted to someone else, but I can’t find that comment again. I thought that was a bit much, when RB only knew her guy for several weeks and I hadn’t even gone on a date with my own guy.

    Having said that, your question about whether she and I compounded our respective situations by holding men in our league to the standards of a league we’d never be able to play in, is fair. (I think Deti implied something similar in the Badger thread where RB first shared her story.) But even if we did, it’s as much an intractable math problem to me as it is to you–which I’ve admitted a couple of times in this thread as well.

  • lovelost

    @MIkeC

    The intractable math problem here though that I am growing increasingly convinced of is that female 5-6s basically don’t find their male counterpart 5-6s attractive at all. Not sure how you solve that one.

    The reason is simple, as someone said Women desire Men better then them, higher in socio-economic strata. Until and unless men who 5s-6s migrate to 7s and higher mating will not happen.

    The other side is how does a woman decides whether she is really 5s-6s.

  • lovelost

    @Susan
    There are many female virgins, though not as many as male virgins, at least in college. Still, nearly 40%….

    This is a real challenge for me since I am not in YP category, left college. The only thing that i accept the fact that I lost the opportunity to date while in grad school, can’t change that now.

  • Anonymous

    There is no riddle here. As you woman, you gotta get know yourself deeply and have sex when fully ready at that depth.

    A woman having sex before she is ready, having sex when unaligned with her “blueprint” not only hurts herself but also hurts the man she is having sex with. I would even theoritize that the whole “slut-hating” is a usual man’s projection of self-hatred for following his lower impulse and participating in something “unholy”.

    Unfortunately many women use sex as a bait, as their strongest “emergency” weapon to either attract a man or to keep his attention and by doing so they shoot themselves in the foot.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    26 Escoffier wrote:

    I’ve written this elsewhere but it’s worth repeating: one of THE major goals of feminism and the SR has been to smash and shame the male desire for a virgin or at least very low count GF/wife.

    SR = Sexual release ?

    / Kari Keeper-of-Acronyms

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Kari

      SR = Sexual Revolution

  • tomTom

    Here is the thing about male sexuality. Sure men have a high desire for sex. Some men become slaves to the little head and claim it is inate. It really does come down to which head they CHOOSE yes choose to listen to. It is much easier to listen to the little head, no effort at all. I compare it to thinking negative or positive. It is way easier to think negative than positive. But with a little effort one can easily think positive. This is what separates a good man for a relationship and a cad or player type. Which head he choosses to listen to. Booze doesn’t have to change

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    553 tmunson November 29, 2011 at 12:58 am wrote:

    THEORETICAL QUESTION TOSSED OUT TO THE ORDER:

    How many onanisms equal a loss of virginity? C’mom, there has to e a formula. You people are so serious.

    Hmm.

    onanism (usually uncountable; plural onanisms)

    1. ejaculating outside the vagina during intercourse; (the performing of) coitus interruptus
    2. masturbation

    Well. If there is intercourse, it is 1, otherwise I do not see how there can be equation.

    virgin

    (informal) Preceded by a noun, a person who has never used or experienced what is denoted by the noun.

    Or are you referring to this?

    / Kari Hurtta
    ( Waiting for a evening coffee. )

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Kari

      Hmm.

      onanism (usually uncountable; plural onanisms)

      1. ejaculating outside the vagina during intercourse; (the performing of) coitus interruptus
      2. masturbation

      I had no idea! I thought onanism referred strictly to masturbation. #1 is actually an excuse I’ve heard for “Not counting” a sex partner.

      “If he comes outside my body it doesn’t count.”

      I hope you will be switching soon from evening coffee to champagne :)

      Happy New Year, it will reach you first!

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    563 Susan Walsh December 31, 2011 at 11:44 am wrote:

    I hope you will be switching soon from evening coffee to champagne :)

    I just finished after-sauna cider.

    Missus tells that we do not have champagne, but we have cava.

    Happy New Year, it will reach you first!

    Thank you. 1 hour 45 minutes to New Year.

    Happy New Year also.

    / Kari Hurtta

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @ 564 Kari Hurtta December 31, 2011 at 3:16 pm ;

    New Year on here.

    Drinking cava.