611»

How to Make a Happy Husband, or a Husband Happy

On Sunday, as I was preparing the Coq au Vin for our annual tree-trimming, Mr. HUS sauntered into the room with the New York Times magazine in his hand and a grin on his face. 

“I’m a generous husband.”

“Yes, you are.”

“Yeah, but you know how I bring you coffee in bed every morning when you wake up? The Times says that is the key to a happy marriage.”

That’s a slight distortion, but his point was valid. My husband does indeed bring me coffee each day when I wake. That one small investment of his time each day – a minute or two – builds up considerable goodwill in our relationship. As I drink it, he shaves and tells me what’s new in the world, often mentioning some tidbit that he thinks I might want to use on the blog. More goodwill. I feel valued. Generally, I repay the kindness when he gets home in the evening, pouring him a glass of wine, asking about his day, careful to remember the details from ongoing workplace sagas that may require my input at a later time.

If I were to name just one thing that makes our marriage a standout, it would be this, the small gestures. It’s not the sex, it’s not the nice house, it’s not how smart or successful he is.

The Times article Is Generosity Better Than Sex?, by marriage expert Tara Parker-Pope reports a key finding about generosity from a study conducted by W. Bradford Wilcox at UVA.

Generosity was defined as “the virtue of giving good things to one’s spouse freely and abundantly” — like simply making them coffee in the morning — and researchers quizzed men and women on how often they behaved generously toward their partners. How often did they express affection? How willing were they to forgive?

The responses went right to the core of their unions. Men and women with the highest scores on the generosity scale were far more likely to report that they were “very happy” in their marriages. The benefits of generosity were particularly pronounced among couples with children. Among the parents who posted above-average scores for marital generosity, about 50 percent reported being “very happy” together. Among those with lower generosity scores, only about 14 percent claimed to be “very happy,” according to the latest “State of Our Unions” report from the National Marriage Project.

According to Wilcox, “Generosity is going above and beyond the ordinary expectations with small acts of service and making an extra effort to be affectionate. Living that spirit of generosity in a marriage does foster a virtuous cycle that leads to both spouses on average being happier in the marriage.”

The top three predictors of happy marriages among parents are:

  1. Sexual Intimacy
  2. Commitment
  3. Generosity

Sexual satisfaction is so important that only 7% of men and 6% of women with below-average scores described themselves as “very happy” in their marriages. But generosity plays a key role, one that is often overlooked in the contemporary SMP, setting up marriages to fail.

The quiz given in the study asks:

  1. How often you express affection or love 
  2. How often you express respect or admiration
  3. How often you perform small acts of kindness
  4. How often you forgive your partner for mistakes and failings

(You can take the quiz to find out how generous you are in a relationship here.)

The other aspect of generosity I’d like to highlight is #2, expressing respect or admiration. In my experience, this is absolutely key. For example, when my husband tells me about a difficult work situation, my default position is “You are in the right.” Of course, that may turn out to be untrue, but that’s my starting point. My other assumption is, “You are very good at what you do, you command the respect of your colleagues.” I wasn’t always so good at this – I would second guess my husband because any problem at his work made me feel nervous about his role as a provider. Over time I learned that granting him respect, even admiration, no matter what, yielded better results both at home and at his work. (For the record, I also found this to be a critical lesson in parenting. Always give your child the benefit of the doubt until you learn facts that prove otherwise.)

While everyone enjoys being treated with respect by their partner, respect seems especially important to men. According to Deborah Tannen, author of You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation:

Men see themselves as engaged in a hierarchical social order in which they are either “one up or one down” in relation to others. Their communication styles and reactions to others’ communications often stress the need to “preserve independence and avoid failure.” Women, on the other hand, tend to see the world as a “network of connections,” and their communications and interpretations of others’ communications seek to “preserve intimacy and avoid isolation.”

Others have characterized this as “men need respect, women need love.” Obviously, that’s a simplification but male readers will concur re respect. This recent comment by Gabriel earned praise from the guys:

For men, Respect isn’t just a necessary element of the relationship – it’s a heady aphrodisiac. I’ve seen marital affairs in the workplace start with little more than a woman saying to a man, “Wow. You’re such a hard worker.” It was all over after that. Nothing left but a broken family and two open positions at the office. My guess is that this man who put in long hours and produced solid work was never praised or valued for his work at home. He probably wasn’t praised or valued for much of anything now that I think about it. Along comes a woman who he wasn’t even attracted to initially, and draws him away from a stable life with a little Respect.

In my experience, women don’t really care as much about the idea of Respect as men. It’s lower on their list of priorities. The idea of Respect is to men what the idea of Love is to women – it’s vital, valuable, elusive. A man who feels disrespected is no more likely to hang tough through a relationship than a woman who feels unloved would be. If you want to keep a good man, here are a few suggestions.

Respect him for his positive traits and victories – even if they’re small. If you expect Love from him, be prepared to deliver Respect. You’d be amazed how committed a man will become to you if you make him feel like he’s the hero.

Take an active interest in his interests, BUT NOT IN THE TRADITIONAL SENSE. Trying to learn about cars to impress the hunky mechanic only works in Hollywood. What I mean is, take an interest in him as he’s doing the things he loves.

Those two things – respect and generosity – will set you apart from other women. Give them abundantly. (In fact, remember how I told you in A Drunk Man Never Lies that I would tell you how to win the guy for keeps in the next post? This is it.)

A few caveats:

  •  Respect must be earned. Don’t give it to anyone who doesn’t deserve it, just because you think they’re hot. You’ll just be rewarding bad behavior and it won’t get you love.
  • Generosity should be unconditional, but calibrated to the circumstances. Don’t be showing up unannounced at his apartment after one date with homemade chocolate chip cookies. That screams Stage V Clinger. Don’t get more than one step ahead of anyone in the early days. A more appropriate gesture might be texting to ask how his presentation went.
  • Women will get better results with men if they offer deserved respect sooner rather than later. Ditto for generosity.
  • Men will get better results with women if they offer deserved respect a bit later. Ditto for generosity. Avoid the pedestal. If you make a gesture and it is not enthusiastically reciprocated, cease and desist.
  • In an established relationship, the more generosity, respect and love, the better. This is what makes “very happy” campers. 
  • Focus on the giving, the receiving will take care of itself. If it doesn’t, you’re giving to the wrong person.
  • Escoffier

    did you use a rooster? they are hard to find but delicious if done right.

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

      did you use a rooster? they are hard to find but delicious if done right.

      No, I didn’t have a real coq. Actually, I used a new recipe – Martha Stewart – and I was not happy with it. Back to Julia Child, never fails.

  • ozymandias

    Men and women more similar than they are different! Being nice to each other is extremely important! Roissy’s long-term relationship advice absolutely terrible! News at 11!

    My (happily married) parents took the quiz. My mom got a 16 and was very annoyed that she didn’t get in the best group. :)

    For me, personally, being respected is extremely important in a relationship, possibly because (as several psychological tests have shown) I’m a highly achievement-oriented person. Forgiveness is also important to me, because I beat myself up for doing things wrong a lot. I like doing small gestures of kindness for my partners… nothing like finding an article they’d like and sending it to them, or buying them a shirt you know they’d like. :)

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

      Roissy’s long-term relationship advice absolutely terrible!

      Cosign this with the fire of a thousand suns.

  • Escoffier

    Funny thing, this reminds me of an ex, the only one I seriously considered marrying (apart from the one I did marry). I was talking about her to a friend just recently in a similar context but the coffee point hit home.

    I used to go and get her a coffee every (weekend) morning from a little place very near her apt that had great coffee. I thought I was being very nice. It annoyed her. This mystified me.

    Now that I look back, I suppose it was (to her) a beta display of lower value. She was significantly better looking than I was.

  • Escoffier

    Julia’s is not bad. I don’t have my recipe binder handy but I can post the one from my restaurant, be warned, in restaurant recipes amounts are given by weight not volume and always metric.

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

      be warned, in restaurant recipes amounts are given by weight not volume and always metric.

      I once took a pastry-making class, and the French chef stated that Americans can never be good bakers because they do not weigh their ingredients. That makes sense to me, and I use an international kitchen scale, though of course most recipes here still use volume. I’d love to see your recipe! Coq au vin is one of my most favorite winter meals.

  • tvmunson

    One aspect not mentioned (or maybe I overlooked it): the doer is a ennobled as the giver. When I make my wife’s lunch, it is a physical manifestation of my love for her; I tell her I love her all the time, but here is a “doing” (Castaneda?). It reinforces my feelings for her. Love is a circuit. The one you love must return it, and they must see that that return,their love, matters to you, and you should look for ways to augment that, all the time. When I come home and announce (yell) “Hi Hon!” and I hear her respond (yell, usually from upstairs) “Hiiiii!!!” the lilt in her voice, her so apparent happiness in me being home, in her life-that represents what I love about her,us. I told her so, yesterday, but I’d been thinking it a long time. You need to get that kind of stuff out, then look for more. Guys tend to think the medium is the message (McLuhan); we go to work everyday because we love you, so it should be evident. Looking for ways to express it, and delving into its meaning, then expressing that, does more than simply recognize what’s there-it adds to it.

    Not sure how this matters to “hookingup”, but that’s my truth.

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

      Looking for ways to express it, and delving into its meaning, then expressing that, does more than simply recognize what’s there-it adds to it.

      Yes, it’s building something greater than the sum of its parts. It’s a sort of feeding back and forth, getting better and better. I think if my husband ignored me when he came home I would feel terribly rejected. There are nights when we do different things – one of us reads, one watches TV, one gets on the laptop and checks the blog…but even there we are connecting in small ways.

      Of course, here is nothing new – it’s The Gift of the Magi writ large.

  • tvmunson

    @Susan #all of the above

    I had to look up Coq au Vin (first time ever I had to google from here; first line of first sentence -(chagrin)).

  • Escoffier

    Coq au Vin is a classic way to take a rooster that isn’t exciting the hens any more, cook him, and make him so that he does not have the texture of an old shoe.

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

      Coq au Vin is a classic way to take a rooster that isn’t exciting the hens any more, cook him, and make him so that he does not have the texture of an old shoe.

      He could have avoided the stew pot with Rooster Game.

  • tvmunson

    American exceptionalism and the constant improvement society that propels us works to our disadvantage here. We over expect, and over want. If you find someone who loves you, respects you, “gets” you and, even when they don’t, they try to get you and, even when they fail at that they fall back on the fact that they love you-there is nothing more for us as humans. But the centrifugal force of a capitlist consumer driven culture and its concomitant narcissism depends on our loss of equilirium , a sense of incompleteness, to generate sales. Its no one’s fault, and it’s not a conspiracy; it just sells furniture. We can run out very easily of the things that hold us together by the time we find the pale replacement trinkets we exchanged for them hold no warmth it’s too late.

    Oh yeah-Merry Christmas!

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Great post Susan! Been thinking about this a lot lately, that a good relationship is largely based on what you have to give, not what you can get. Generosity is a huge part of the “giving” spirit.

  • Stingray

    I took the quiz and was surprised that “always” giving respect is somehow more generous. Let me try to explain. If I compare that to how much I display affection my displaying of that much respect would just become empty and annoying. If I displayed it that often I don’t think he would believe that I actually respected him, but was just blowing up his skirt.

  • Ted

    “Take an active interest in his interests, BUT NOT IN THE TRADITIONAL SENSE. Trying to learn about cars to impress the hunky mechanic only works in Hollywood. What I mean is, take an interest in him as he’s doing the things he loves.” ~OP

    I largely agree with this article (it makes a lot of sense that reciprocal generosity leads to happiness and I recall writing a paper on a similar vein during high school), but I disagree with this quote in particular.
    I think expressing a genuine interest in something that is a large part of the guy’s identity will earn you mad bonus points. Don’t fake it, but if you find something that is important to him that could interest you as well then go for it. Few things have made me as happy as when my current girlfriend (who wasn’t yet my girlfriend at the time) asked me to teach her to play Magic, a card game I’ve been playing for over 10 years. The biggest trekkie I know was turned on to a girl he would go on to date for a year when the two of them watched Star Trek together. Getting closer to the original quote, one of my closest female friends knows a lot about cars just because they interest her. I think that would be a large boon to her in catching any automotively minded guy she might want to date.
    So while expressing an interest in him as he’s doing something important to him is great, I think being able to join in might be better because it shows him that he means enough to you for you to learn something new.

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

      @College Ted

      So while expressing an interest in him as he’s doing something important to him is great, I think being able to join in might be better because it shows him that he means enough to you for you to learn something new.

      I think I agree with you, but I guess it’s for a man to say. My husband is a baseball nut, so back in the days when we could still afford to go to a Red Sox game, I asked him to help me learn to score a game, and I asked him lots of questions about rules, etc. He loved sharing that knowledge, I think men like being in the role of teacher, which is a form of leadership.

      The movie Fever Pitch portrays this very well, speaking of the Red Sox.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Giving is definitely awesome. I love giving massages, backrubs, etc., and I’m usually the one doing small acts of service for him. But he also does acts of service for me, like teaching me how to drive, swim and shoot. Also, when I fell down the stairs over the weekend and got some huge ouchies, he rubbed me for a good long while.

    A quote from Robert Heinlein, “Love is the condition in which the happiness of another person is essential to your own.” Making your beloved happy should make you happy, and vice versa. This happiness spirals and bounces back and forth, making a very happy couple together.

  • tvmunson

    You do not need to appreciate. like, understand etc. the OBJECT of his attention(car, football, guns yes guns); you do need to its meaning TO HIM, what he gets out of it, why. Don’t worry, he’ll tell you (maybe ad nauseum). But don’t nauseum; keep the cmaera on him.

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    On problem in American marriages is that American feminism has tended to make almost everything that a man might generously do or give to a woman, the minimum all wives should expect, and even then probably not really enough.

    Cooking him coq a vin and suck like on the regular I’m sure contributes to his happiness. From your occasional recipes here you’re obviously quite the cook. That’s become quite rare in American middle and esp. upper middle class wives it seems. Particularly among say gen Xers.

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

      On problem in American marriages is that American feminism has tended to make almost everything that a man might generously do or give to a woman, the minimum all wives should expect, and even then probably not really enough.

      I’ve written about female narcissism and entitlement, so I’ll agree, but there really is a disconnect re chores. I just saw another article saying that women do most of the household chores even when they work full time. They also tend to the children more. This is what feminism demanded – women “having it all.” Well, the women I know from my generation hate having it all. Nearly all the full-time working moms would have loved to work part-time. I think we’re telling our daughters not to make the same mistakes. It’s just too damned stressful. Of course, if you’re not UMC you probably don’t have a choice.

      When Kate Bolick came to dinner, she asked the girls whether career or family was their top priority. All five said family. That really surprised me – 30 years ago we all would have said career. This is one area where the pendulum is already swinging back.

  • Valentin

    I would first like state and ask: isn’t this a good attitude for relationships at all stages? From first approach, to escalation as well as in an actual established relationships?
    “generosity plays a key role, one that is often overlooked in the contemporary SMP, setting up marriages to fail.”
    Like I said above: I think generosity plays a key role in all aspects of romantic relationships from that first minute you’ve met someone to your shared golden years.

    Second: news at 11 – people like to be cared about and treated well rather than judged and used and men are people too. I’m slightly surprised we needed a blog post about this…

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

      @Valentin

      I would first like state and ask: isn’t this a good attitude for relationships at all stages? From first approach, to escalation as well as in an actual established relationships?

      Yes, but I do think it can be problematic for men. One of the worst things women can perceive about a guy is that he is “eager.” Eager is truly the kiss of death to the tingle. So guys must be careful about being too generous and affectionate before the woman feels she has earned it. It’s different with guys – you all seem to express that you love it when a woman is eager for you – and only you. So a woman should pursue a strategy of making her interest clear early.

      people like to be cared about and treated well rather than judged and used and men are people too. I’m slightly surprised we needed a blog post about this…

      Well, I’m surprised at how little common sense prevails in the SMP. Consider this – UVA spends the big bucks to study this stuff for the National Marriage Project. That project is the best research on marriage in America today – and it turns out that people who are unhappily married tend to take one another for granted and focus on their own needs. It’s not surprising that’s a fail – what is surprising is that people retreat to that, throw in the towel, lose the sexual intimacy, and then either divorce or live together like zombies. Growing up, most of my friends’ parents were like that.

  • Jennifer

    Awesome, Ozy!

    Good article, though this “Men will get better results with women if they offer deserved respect a bit later. Ditto for generosity” jived badly for me. Sounds like the whole “make them wait for it” Roissy crap.

  • Jennifer

    Unless it’s one of those “don’t pour too much attention/affection on women too soon” thing, but I don’t see giving deserved respect exactly when it’s earned as pedestalizing.

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

      @Jennifer

      I don’t see giving deserved respect exactly when it’s earned as pedestalizing.

      You’re right, of course. That was badly expressed on my part. I was thinking about respect mixed with admiration – as Gabriel said, respect is like an aphrodisiac for guys. I don’t think women look for that. When we say we demand respect, we usually mean either that the man is honoring our sexual boundaries, or that he is reliable and doesn’t flake. Obviously, women should expect both of those from the outset, and men should give it. But I think most women would hold it against a guy if he begged to accompany us shopping, or asked us to teach him to knit. :)

  • Stingray

    Questions: Are there certain words one should avoid to keep the moderation software happy?

    or

    Do I get sent there often because I don’t post often?

    or

    It just is and I should shut up about it?

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

      @Stingray

      The spam filter is bipolar as far as I can tell. Unpredictable from day to day. I try to keep an eye on it. Sorry for the delay. I’ll Whitelist you, which should help, but doesn’t always work. :(

  • Anacaona

    Wonderful advice. Generosity has become an status symbol IMO. Many people are that praise a volunteering work, would call a loving partner a pushover with no qualms for doing the same and not having a quick list of things the other person does. That is another thing that is wrong with this culture IMO.

    I love your coffee story hubby and I also talk in the mornings I’m the one that bring him coffee to bed because he is not a morning person and he is not really awake till he gets his first cup. But when I’m really tired he gets up first feed the cat and gives me coffee so it something we both do for the other, our little routine that hopefully we can always keep. I also always try to praise him when he does little things for me and try to tell him how good he is in his job specially when he is having a bad day. Had I mentioned that I love being married to my husband? I do. :)

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

      @Anacaona

      You and Hope are testimonials to how wonderful a wife can be. I’m sure that every guy reading here hopes to find a wife like you, if he doesn’t have one already. There are other very happily married women here too, but you two share the most detail. Such love and loyalty! It’s really a joy to witness.

      I should mention that our morning routine only really got established after the years when we were getting kids off to school. It’s an empty nester development. When we were under more stress, we were both less generous to be honest. I wrote this post with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.

  • tvmunson

    @Susan #20

    Sure, you’ve been together long enough you can riff in that manner. But in a LTR (acronym!) (mine’s 33 1/3) there are little, almost impercetible signifying things you do, gestures, even sighs that let the other know your presence registers, I am aware of you, we occupy this together. How can you tell people on a date, even people my age? They have to stay actively engage, they cannot rest in silence. A young couple would be in serious trouble if they acted like (my) Susan and me. As for your being ignored, I knwo when she’s preoccupied by something, and I don’t feel slighted. As Churchill said “even a dog knows when it’s been stepped on and when it’s been kicked”.

  • Stingray

    Susan,

    Thanks. I appreciate the Whitelist and understand about the moderation. Not a big deal at all but I just wanted to make sure it wasn’t something I was doing with my word choices!

  • Stingray

    I admit that I could be reading this wrong but it seams to me that the marriages where sexual satisfaction is high would most likely be ones where generosity is high as well. I would tend to think that these two things go hand in hand in “very happy” marriages.

  • Chris_in_CA

    Good advice here. I think I’ll send it to some women I know.

    (Wait, I’d prefer not being threatened with sharp objects this week. Better not.)

    Escoffier’s earlier point about Respect/DLV deserves more callout, methinks. If you’re doing something small, being considerate – generosity because you can – it still gets you walked on. Either it’s not enough of a gesture or it’s just not valued by the woman. That’s very, very sad.

    Even if you “have a lot to give” proverbially speaking, we men are apprehensive about actually giving it now.

    I think this is that depressing part about Game that’s sinking in.

    One of the worst things women can perceive about a guy is that he is “eager.” Eager is truly the kiss of death to the tingle.

    Yep, it is.

  • Jennifer

    No problem Susan, thanks for clarifying! I agree totally with your amended statement.

    “But I think most women would hold it against a guy if he begged to accompany us shopping, or asked us to teach him to knit.”

    I think I’d just be really, really scared.

  • Jennifer

    “I think this is that depressing part about Game that’s sinking in”

    No, it’s the depressing part about fallen man, especially in our me-culture now, that’s sinking in.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Thank you Susan. Hopefully the talking doesn’t come across as bragging. I think it’s a good to get the message out there, to treat your man better and make him happy.

    I do make it a point to tell my husband he doesn’t have to do stuff for me besides love me and give me attention (in and out of bedroom). I think it is probably better for the man to do fewer acts of service than the woman.

  • Sassy6519

    I totally agree with the thought that generosity is essential to the overall happiness of a couple. When I care about a man, I want to do things for him. I don’t do those things with the sole intent of potential future reciprocity. I do them because I cannot help but to manifest my feelings in tangible actions. I like cooking for a guy I care about, giving massages, listening and talking with him about his day, and a multitude of other things.

    This post reminded me of one of the times in my last most recent relationship where I didn’t feel appreciated for my generosity. I decided to go all out one day and cook spinach lasagna, light candles, dim the lights, play soft music, the whole shebang. I was expecting him to be really happy when he got home from work about the setup, but he wasn’t. Instead, he complained about the music, freaked out about the small pile of dishes in the sink (he had OCD), and he only ate one slice of the lasagna and never touched it again. It sat in the fridge untouched for a week, so I finally decided to eat the rest of it over the next several days so that it wouldn’t go to waste. You can’t blame a girl for trying at least.

  • http://www.thoughtsfromtheboonies.blogspot.com Jason

    I got an 11 in that test. Sounds about right.

    Don’t give too much away, it robs you of something to give when it’s deserved.

  • Doug1

    Cosign this with the fire of a thousand suns.

    Susan’s gone all Anacaona on us!

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier’s earlier point about Respect/DLV deserves more callout, methinks. If you’re doing something small, being considerate – generosity because you can – it still gets you walked on. Either it’s not enough of a gesture or it’s just not valued by the woman. That’s very, very sad.

    Even if you “have a lot to give” proverbially speaking, we men are apprehensive about actually giving it now.

    Why be apprehensive about giving? What’s the worst thing that could happen–someone doesn’t appreciate it? Small price to pay on the path toward someone who will.

  • tvmunson

    Susan #31

    Everyone gets a pass when you’re raising kids. You didn’t go insane, you’re still together.

  • WarmWoman

    A woman (or a man)appreciating the gesture pays a long way. A man wants to feel appreciated and trusted.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I used to go and get her a coffee every (weekend) morning from a little place very near her apt that had great coffee. I thought I was being very nice. It annoyed her. This mystified me.

    Now that I look back, I suppose it was (to her) a beta display of lower value. She was significantly better looking than I was.

    Hm. Interesting. Were you going out of your way for the coffee or were you picking her up a cup while there for yourself as well?

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    The hardest part about generosity, maybe, is not expecting some sort of recognition or appreciation in return, especially a particular type of appreciation that you’ve idealized in your mind.

    About a month or 2 ago, I knew my BF was coming home from school to work over the weekend, so I cleaned his room and washed his work clothes (the room was really messy before). He barely said anything about it, maybe a simple “well thanks” and I had to check myself to not be annoyed. In that case, it was important to remember the purpose for the generosity. It wasn’t so I could get something out of my BF, whether praise or a free dinner or something. It was for him, not for me. It’s hard to maintain that mindset, I’m not sure why. Maybe because we’ve been trained to expect rewards from our “hard work.”

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

      @Olive

      I don’t know – that’s more than a small gesture. Cleaning up a really messy room is serious work. I think it’s normal to expect some expression of appreciation. Then again, maybe he felt it was presumptuous? Invading his space? A woman once told me that she did some serious cleaning of her mother’s house while she was in the hospital, threw out all sorts of useless crap. When her mother came home, she was furious – and devastated. People get attached to their junk, or just a sense of comfort from the mess, I guess.

  • ozymandias

    I dunno, I like it when my partners take an interest in stuff I’m interested in: music, feminism, fantasy novels (I’m a total fantasy novel hipster). I like sharing things I love with people I love; I don’t think that’s uncommon for women OR men.

    Also, I am fairly certain that admiration, reliability and respecting boundaries are also good traits for both genders. (Never date people who are more unreliable than you or don’t respect your boundaries. It’s just asking for trouble.)

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

      @Ozy

      Cosign. Sex differences don’t apply to character traits, or shouldn’t.

  • Orig.Anon.

    I like Susan’s advice for women to their spouse/significant other.

    The advice in the comments for men in relationships seems to be a misapplied golden rule or a shit-test (subconsiously weediing out men who don’t understand women):
    1. Sexual intimacy is more important than commitment or generosity (see, study).
    2. Too much generosity is a tingle killer under my understanding of both Roissy and Susan.
    3. Roissy recommends selfishness/dread/ritual-cannibalism to enhance attraction.
    4. Susan et. al diss Roissy while lauding tingle-killing activities.
    5. Susan is already attracted to her husband so he can afford to worry about priority 3.
    6. Marriage is one gigantic tingle-killer already and men have been taught by society to double-down on beta comfort-building exercises like generosity.
    7. Prioritize Roissy’s relationship advice on attraction over any advice on generosity, unless both a. your wife/girlfriend is threatening to leave you since you are, and I quote, “a selfish asshole” and b. all her friends hope she does so they can get a shot at you. Both.

    I was plenty generous and committed before I ever saw a PUA blog. Roissy’s advice on attraction upped the “sexual intimacy” in my marriage. You know, priority 1. I imagine any cads reading this will up their use of little generous gestures (as Roissy advocates!) since they will not offer any commitment. What man is it going to helped by “be more beta” advice?

    This seems

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

      @Orig. Anon

      3. Roissy recommends selfishness/dread/ritual-cannibalism to enhance attraction.

      Effective only in the short-term. Devastating loss of intimacy and trust in the long-term.

      4. Susan et. al diss Roissy while lauding tingle-killing activities.

      Which activities are you referring to?

      5. Susan is already attracted to her husband so he can afford to worry about priority 3.

      Agreed. Generosity in a marriage cannot work miracles if sexual attraction is absent.

      6. Marriage is one gigantic tingle-killer already

      Disagree. If I hadn’t married my husband, I would have walked away. Nothing more fatal to the tingle than that.

      7. Prioritize Roissy’s relationship advice on attraction over any advice on generosity

      Examining Roissy’s relationship history might be advisable here. He’s advocated cheating and deceit in all LTRs, and he’s never had one last more than a year or so. Be careful what you wish for.

      I do not think this post is beta advice. I think it is about how to love another human being. If Roissy knows what that is, he hasn’t written about it.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Susan,
    Good point, didn’t think about it that way. Highly possible he wasn’t all that excited about the gesture. It’s also possible (and probably likely) that he thanked me in a way he thought was appropriate (I think maybe I got a hug, but see here’s the thing, I tend to write off appreciation if it’s not what I was hoping for, which is bad) and I was expecting “You’re so wonderful/best person ever/let me pick you up and take you to the bedroom” lol. I’ve always had the bad habit of idealizing how people will respond and then getting mad when they don’t do what I wanted them to do. My dad does that to my mom, I think I get it from him. Something to work on.

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

      /let me pick you up and take you to the bedroom”

      HAHA this is hilarious! You thought a clean room would give him a boner…

  • Jennifer

    That’s just brilliant, Orig. Roissy spoils some fo the best parts of men in the name of sex; it’s like watching Screwtape.

  • Chris_in_CA

    @Olive

    I can’t speak for your BF of course. But I’m very protective of my personal space. If my girlfriend had cleaned my room while I wasn’t there, my first reaction would be unwelcome violation.

    I’m with Susan. This was a case of ‘invading space’ and he went with his immediate reaction. On the bright side, now you know where to be stingy!

  • Orig.Anon.

    The most important thing is the most important thing. If your spouse is attracted to you focus some attention on 2 and 3. Never totally ignore 2 and 3. But, sexual intimacy is the most important thing, so if there is lack of attraction focus almost fully on that. If your lack of relationship comfort can be addressed by generosity or commitment and is limiting your sexual intimacy, focus on that. Don’t up your game where you are already competent, focus on your weakness. This applies equally to men and women.

    Not being beta enough is not the typical male problem, but your mileage may vary. I doubt that more foot rubs for your man will be as productive as watching your diet and regular trips to the gym for most ladies. If you are the exception, then be exceptional.

  • Chris_in_CA

    @Jesus Mahoney

    Why be apprehensive about giving? What’s the worst thing that could happen–someone doesn’t appreciate it? Small price to pay on the path toward someone who will.

    No, the worst thing that could happen is a woman taking advantage of your generosity and bleeding your wallet. Rapidly becomes expensive, even if you curb yourself.

    We’re talking about women respecting men, and men feeling generous and appreciated by this respect. It IS a fairly equitable exchange. But feigning respect in anticipation of further generosity is not so hard to pull off…at least for a while.

  • Emily

    Aww… I really like this post. So full of warm fuzzies! :)

    I think guys who are worried about seeming too “Beta” should just remember Susan’s first point:
    * ” Respect must be earned. Don’t give it to anyone who doesn’t deserve it, just because you think they’re hot. You’ll just be rewarding bad behavior and it won’t get you love.”

    I like it when my boyfriend does random nice things for me, but I also do stuff for him as well so it all balances out. I think it only becomes a “pedestal” issue when you’re constantly going out of your way for somebody who isn’t reciprocating.

  • Orig.Anon.

    Jennifer:

    “That’s just brilliant, Orig. Roissy spoils some fo the best parts of men in the name of sex; it’s like watching Screwtape.”

    Roissy didn’t create women. Neither did Satan so I don’t see the relevance of Screwtape. You think men are little demons in training?

    Beta behaviors are what women want from a man they are already attracted to. If a woman is not attracted, they are repelled by or contemptuous of the man offerring commitment/favors/etc. Do you deny this?

    Men want respect and sex from women they are attracted to. Do you deny this?

    Sexual intimacy is #1 in the study for men and women. Don’t jeopardize that.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    No, the worst thing that could happen is a woman taking advantage of your generosity and bleeding your wallet. Rapidly becomes expensive, even if you curb yourself.

    Yikes, you’re jaded.

    Bleeding your wallet? You don’t have to spend much money to be generous. Giving should be about giving love… giving of yourself. You can give lots without spending a dime. Mr. HUS isn’t shelling out any extra change by bringing Sue a cup of coffee in the morning. He’s probably brewing a pot so he can have some for himself anyway. It’s the thought. You can serve coffee in bed, give a massage, bring her home a big beautiful pine cone you found while out on a walk, write a poem for her after making love for the first time, or suggest a ride to the beach at night so you can gaze at the stars and watch the deer grazing in the dunes because you know she likes that.

    That said, nobody can really “bleed your wallet dry.” If you choose to give, it’s on you.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I think it only becomes a “pedestal” issue when you’re constantly going out of your way for somebody who isn’t reciprocating.

    Yes. It also becomes a pedestal issue if you’re sacrificing too much of yourself in order to accommodate your girlfriend or boyfriend. You should still value yourself and the things you’ve developed in your own life.

  • ozymandias

    I am slightly amused by the reaction of a guy who takes the advice of peer-reviewed scientific research with a sound methodology, and the advice of an anonymous pick-up blogger, and decides that the anonymous pick-up blogger is clearly the most credible source.

    That said, I wouldn’t say that roissy’s tactics don’t work, for a given definition of work. They’re classic emotional abuse, from the gaslighting to the breaking down of self-esteem.

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

      @Ozy

      So good to see you, you’re batting 1000 today.

      am slightly amused by the reaction of a guy who takes the advice of peer-reviewed scientific research with a sound methodology, and the advice of an anonymous pick-up blogger, and decides that the anonymous pick-up blogger is clearly the most credible source.

      Seriously. It doesn’t get any more prestigious than the UVA National Marriage Project. People may say “so what, that’s common sense” but the truth is it’s absent in many marriages. Any man who seeks to improve his marriage by following Roissy’s advice is a fool.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Off topic, but I found this amusing:

    http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/tradition.png

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    :-P don’t make fun….

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

      @Olive

      Sorry, didn’t mean to offend. I have a funny story about cleaning. When my husband and I moved to Boston, I was about 4 months pregnant. I was still wearing my regular jeans, but they were sort of unbuttoned and I looked porky. On the weekend we moved into our condo, we went to the local hardware store for supplies. As we were leaving, I was carrying a mop and bucket, jeans popping, and who should we run into but my husband’s ex. The ex who dumped him because she needed to “explore her sexual identity.” I was truly mortified, as she stood there, all edgy and lesbo looking, in her leather bomber jacket and her spiky hair.

  • Orig.Anon.

    Susan:

    Roissy knows little to nothing on love. Betas know too little on how to love without looking like a weak, unattractive schlub. You love betas, so throw em a bone.

    Does frequency of sex go up or down after 2 years of marriage, no matter the age of the couple? Tingle killer it is, even if it is required.

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

      @Orig. Anon.

      Does frequency of sex go up or down after 2 years of marriage, no matter the age of the couple? Tingle killer it is, even if it is required.

      That’s a complicated question. First, limerence lasts a couple of years. Sex may decrease after that. In my case, sex decreased when I had a kid, nearly five years after we got together. Which brings me to the second point. Oxytocin drives down sex drive for both partners with the birth of a child. So that’s totally normal, and people shouldn’t freak out about it.

  • Orig.Anon.

    Ozy

    Again,
    “The top three predictors of happy marriages among parents are:
    ‪1.‬Sexual Intimacy
    ‪2.‬Commitment
    ‪3.‬Generosity

    Sexual satisfaction is so important that only 7% of men and 6% of women with below-average scores described themselves as “very happy” in their marriages.”

    Who cares about anything else if sexual satisfaction isn’t high? I don’t see what you have told me about sexual satisfaction? A hot cup o joe makes you hot for joe? If it doesn’t, joe should find something else to do. Daily connections help feelings of intimacy; good.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    You’ve made it clear before how you love the coq.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “I don’t know – that’s more than a small gesture. Cleaning up a really messy room is serious work. I think it’s normal to expect some expression of appreciation. Then again, maybe he felt it was presumptuous? Invading his space? A woman once told me that she did some serious cleaning of her mother’s house while she was in the hospital, threw out all sorts of useless crap. When her mother came home, she was furious – and devastated. People get attached to their junk, or just a sense of comfort from the mess, I guess.”

    Hoarding is one thing that needs to be taken care of, but there is a class of people who lack basic respect for other people’s preferences wrt how things are physically arranged. In this sense they are narcissistic. I have a file organizer in my entryway. My previous girlfriend spontaneously reorganized this one night while I was making dinner. I wouldn’t say I was livid, but I was definitely pissed off – as she had completely destroyed my task management system (inbox, to-do box, to be mailed, etc), the setup by which I keep my bills paid and my life organized.

    I’m sure she saw that as helping, but what she communicated to me was “I know better than you how you should organize your life” and it was a big turn-off.

    There’s also a factor that when a woman starts cleaning a man’s space as if it was her own, she may be mentally husbanding him and pre-committing the arrangement to a level he may not be comfortable with. And as we’re discussing now, naturally expects a reciprocation for something he didn’t necessarily ask nor want her to do. You just gotta know how to be generous. Use the Platinum Rule.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “No, I didn’t have a real coq.”

    Coq envy rides again.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    You just gotta know how to be generous. Use the Platinum Rule.

    Had to google the Platinum Rule. Nice little rule to know.

    To give context to my situation, it’s not really a room, it’s more of a basement living area where we sleep/I keep all my crap (and where I will no longer have my crap once I move out in a week…. so excited, living with your SO’s mom is not advisable, kids). Half the mess was mine, and usually I’m pretty messy. Thought it’d be nice not to come home to a mess for once. Though I see how it was more of me fulfilling an expectation, not really generosity. Oh well. Hopefully next time I’ll do something legitimately generous. :-/

  • Anacaona

    Thanks for the compliments Susan Half the reason I can afford being nice and generous is that I married a nice and generous guy.
    I think marrying a good person is half the battle.
    Not level of loyalty is appreciated by people that believe that they are entitled to it because they are OH GOD SO AWESOME!
    I read once that another important thing is to be thankful for your spouse I’m sure you and Mr HUS are thankful of having found each other as my hubby and I are of finding each other and the way things look we are going to be thankful for the rest of eternity. Sadly for the single crowd of course, that still need to find their “thankful to had found them” type.

    @Olive
    Cleaning someone’s room can be seen as a nice touch, but can be seen as a critique “She cleaned the room as a way to point out that I’m a mess” depending on many things. I had to get over that feeling with my very nice husband doing the dishes once in a while because that was what my mother used to do, “do the cleaning because mine was not good enough” (Had I mentioned that I hate cleaning with a fire of two thousand suns?)
    I do clean as much as I can and hubby knew before we married that I was a shitty house keeper (but a dedicated wonderful cook I love cooking ;)). So careful with that, paying attention of how people react to your “acts of kindness” is an important part of relationship calibration. Read the Languages of love too for references.

    Also your boyfriend could be slow or low appreciation type. Most men don’t go all “OMG you are the best woman on the face of earth!” once you do something nice for them. But they will have it in mind in their general behaviour. I remember cooking some pork chops for my hubby (and you know I hate pork but hubby loves so I cook it for him as much as I can which his mother finds very remarkable of me BTW) and he ate them in silence and barely say thanks that nigh. But then that all that week he called me to pick me up at some errands I had to do (I take the bus) because it was rainy and windy and he knew my throat had been bothering me and drove a whole hour just to get me to home and he is always making sure I’m warm and safe during winter because he knows I hate the cold, so in a few words do I feel he is generous to me? YES! do I have a notebook keeping track to make sure he is doing tit for tat? NO.
    I do believe the whole “egalitarian” thing does more harm than good instead of focusing in the idea that you have a good man with you so chances are he is not trying to cheat you our of having a fair relationship they focus on the things the woman wants to do get done RIGHT NOW! and not in the average of the situation.
    Don’t make that mistake.
    If your man is bad for you it will come out clearly out of many things, nitpicking usually ends up being a problem. Like someone said don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good, YMMV.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    I visited the Smithsonian history museum last time I was in Washington DC. They have Julia Child’s kitchen reconstructed; it’s adjacent to the birth control exhibit. I wonder if the message is, have fewer children and you can have time to make great pies?

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

      @Badger

      Hmmm, interesting question. Since Julia lost her virginity at 40, I’m assuming children were never part of the plan. But no question, children will have you shifting from coq au vin to chicken fingers in no time.

  • Xcess

    This reads more like a Cosmo article then a post with serious advice

    Walsh rides the carousel in her prime, instead of rewarding her husband for overlooking her carousel riding days, by bringing him coffee everyday …

    Instead she lets him bring her coffee everyday as a reward for her carousel riding … & then labels his beta behaviour as …. generosity ….

    The hamster hits a new low …

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

      Beware the manosphere, for it can impart Xcess bitterness and cynicism, rendering you unsuitable for any interaction with a person of the opposite sex.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    A player on love:

    http://dangerandplay.wordpress.com/2011/11/22/the-true-test-of-alpha/

    “The modern “game” thinking on love is beta. If you listen to most men who claim to run game, you’ll hear them say, “All women are fungible. If you elevate one woman above all others, you’re beta.” Those guys have clearly never been in love.

    More than most, I am an advocate of love. I hope everyone reading this falls deeply in love. I have been in love twice.

    Psychotic, possessive, scary love. Drug love where you feel high when you’re with your girl, and feel low when she’s away. Gay love where you hug the pillow she slept on last night. Patronly love where you want her to call you when her flight lands, and insist on having her tell you when she made it home safely.”

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

      Badger’s poetic description of love is amazing. Swoon.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    They have Julia Child’s kitchen reconstructed; it’s adjacent to the birth control exhibit. I wonder if the message is, have fewer children and you can have time to make great pies?

    Sex and Julia Child? The all-things-related-to-pie wing of the Smithsonian.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Badger,

    That player you linked to seems a bit like a douche bag, but I like the message about love anyway. Love’s awesome. Nothing compares to it. Though I think he meant to say “patriarchal” instead of “patronly.” Patron love sounds like the love a john would have for a hooker.

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

      That player you linked to seems a bit like a douche bag, but I like the message about love anyway.

      Agreed. I just spent some time going through his archives and I was torn. Some are incredibly douchey and some are quite good. He’s definitely in the player camp, though.

      Badger, were you aware that someone has started a blog called The Badger Hunt?

  • WarmWoman

    Can someone clarify what manosphere is?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    The manosphere is a network of blogs by men, for men.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Susan,

    Sorry, didn’t mean to offend.

    No worries, wasn’t offended! Also your cleaning story makes me giggle. Only because the spiky hair “I need to explore my sexuality” ex clearly has nothing on you. ;-) My mom has some really funny stories about running into my dad’s ex. A few years ago she got some mailing from some sort of non-profit insurance company (she runs a non-profit) and there in the staff pictures was my dad’s ex, looking all done up and wealthy. She kept making comments about how rich this woman probably is. My dad was like “throw that thing away.” I guess women still have their little insecurities after 25+ years of marriage. Anyway, sorry for that really OT story.

    Anacaona,

    I remember cooking some pork chops for my hubby (and you know I hate pork but hubby loves so I cook it for him as much as I can which his mother finds very remarkable of me BTW) and he ate them in silence and barely say thanks that nigh. But then that all that week he called me to pick me up at some errands I had to do (I take the bus) because it was rainy and windy and he knew my throat had been bothering me and drove a whole hour just to get me to home

    A precious story. :-) Thanks for your advice, always appreciated and worthwhile to read!

  • ozymandias

    Awww, you all don’t like edgy, lesbo-looking people in bomber jackets and spiky hair, who want to explore their sexuality? :(

    *puts away combat boots sadly*

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

      @Ozy

      Awww, you all don’t like edgy, lesbo-looking people in bomber jackets and spiky hair, who want to explore their sexuality?

      *puts away combat boots sadly*

      Ha, she intimidated the hell out of me! I couldn’t offer such a rich and nuanced form of sexual identity.

      I have a pair of vintage Doc Maarten boots size 7. Way too old to pull it off any longer. Do you want them?

  • Xcess

    lol the usual cliche’s … bitter etc… at least I dont bring coffee to a carousel rider every morning …

    GL with the love thing, your addiction to oxcytocin & hormonal stupidity works wonders with women …

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

      @Xcess

      “It’s like you’re dreamin’ about Gorgonzola cheese when it’s clearly Brie time, baby.”

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “I used to go and get her a coffee every (weekend) morning from a little place very near her apt that had great coffee. I thought I was being very nice. It annoyed her. This mystified me.

    Now that I look back, I suppose it was (to her) a beta display of lower value. She was significantly better looking than I was.”

    There’s a simpler possibility – it could have simply been she didn’t fancy the idea of you getting her coffee for whatever reason, and so you doing it repeatedly was just something that illustrated a lack of communication. Kind of like giving someone a present they don’t really want – one time they’ll smile and thank you, but after a while it grates on them that you keep doing this thing they don’t care for.

    It’s really important that we don’t project our own ideas of what someone else “should” want (or that we want to think ourselves as giving to them) over their real wants. This is a classic a-ha moment for beta guys, when they realize that instead of the barrage of “nice” that a lot of women want you to be kind of a jerk every now and then, and that acting the jerk is actually being “nice” in that it’s giving them what they really want.

  • Escoffier

    Maybe but I doubt it. She loved the coffee from that place and she was a total coffee addict.

  • Jennifer

    No Orig, I’m saying Roissy is like Screwtape. I suggest you carefully heed what Susan’s said in regards to him.

  • tvmunson

    @Orig.Anon. #55
    A second reference to C.S. Lewis’ book-could it be related to the “Wormwood” bomb on Dexter?

    @Susan #62
    “Boner”? Haven’t heard it called that since Moses had one.

  • SayWhaat

    “He loved sharing that knowledge, I think men like being in the role of teacher, which is a form of leadership.”

    So a bit of “Girl Game” I’ve picked up on is asking questions. Not questions of the “so what do you do?” variety, but more questions along the lines of “how does that make you feel?” I’ve gone on a couple dates with this guy who is training to be an opera singer, and I just asked him a ton of questions about opera, what got him started on that path, how often does he go, what’s the difference between this and that, etc. Demonstrating interest goes a long way.

  • ozymandias

    Escoffier: There’s lots of reasons she could have not wanted it that have nothing to do with her desire for the coffee. Maybe she felt uncomfortable receiving gifts; maybe she felt like you were expecting something from her in return; maybe she felt bad that she wasn’t able to give you anything back; maybe she felt like, by giving her favors, you were pushing the relationship to an emotional level she didn’t feel comfortable at; hell, maybe she thought it made you look weak and she prefers a totally dominant man. I don’t know why she didn’t like it– that’s the kind of question you should have asked her.

    As the friendly neighborhood sex-pozzie, I recommend communication to everyone! Open and honest communication makes relationships much better!

    I admit that I have often been uncomfortable trying to acknowledge the sweetness and generosity of someone’s gift/favor/whatever while simultaneously making it clear that they really shouldn’t, say, buy me jewelry…

    Susan: I always end up taking out the trash and doing the dishes for my partners, because apparently they are completely incapable of seeing mess (although, to their credit, they usually help once I start). Thank you for reminding me that being generous is part of what makes a relationship functional, and that getting bitter and resentful about it will just poison my relationships.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “So a bit of “Girl Game” I’ve picked up on is asking questions. Not questions of the “so what do you do?” variety, but more questions along the lines of “how does that make you feel?” I’ve gone on a couple dates with this guy who is training to be an opera singer, and I just asked him a ton of questions about opera, what got him started on that path, how often does he go, what’s the difference between this and that, etc. Demonstrating interest goes a long way.”

    Mmm hmm. One of the most effective parts of (guy) game I’ve learned is how to connect emotionally by asking the right questions, probing in a way that emotionally activates another person (woman’s) emotional center. People generally like to talk about themselves and stuff they are passionate about, so giving them a platform for that means they associate you with good feelings. Feminists bitch that this is “playing dumb;” it’s just being interested in someone else’s passion.

    And I think this is a thing that’s hard for guys to hone in their game, because we’re taught (and it IS important) to not demonstrate too much interest or be too eager.

    My mother is spectacularly bad at this, asking us detailed questions about uncomfortable stuff we don’t want to talk about.

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

      My mother is spectacularly bad at this, asking us detailed questions about uncomfortable stuff we don’t want to talk about.

      I’ve been guilty of this at times, as you can imagine. My kids generally respond with “It’s none of your business.”

  • SayWhaat

    “My mother is spectacularly bad at this, asking us detailed questions about uncomfortable stuff we don’t want to talk about.”

    This might just be something Mothers do. :P

  • GudEnuf

    Ozymandias: I always end up taking out the trash and doing the dishes for my partners, because apparently they are completely incapable of seeing mess (although, to their credit, they usually help once I start).

    Ozy, you are such a sweetheart but I hope people do not take advantage of you. A lot times people will just pretend not to to notice a chore so that someone else will do it.

  • Anacaona

    “This might just be something Mothers do.”

    I’m convinced that future studies will reveal that as soon as their kids reach puberty parents activate the “embarrassing genes” to screw them and their dates. Is too much of an universal phenomenon to be just coincidence, IMO.

  • ozymandias

    GudEnuf: Eh. I tested this and they let the trash build up for like a month, at which point I decided that I would prefer to have an unfair chore distribution than the Leaning Tower of Trash-Pisa.

    Besides, I keep eating their food and stealing their books and wandering in their rooms at midnight to demand cuddles, so it all works out. :)

  • Jhane Sez

    @Susan… Significant Other prefers the Chicago cousin of Coq Au Vin… Chicken Vesuvio.

    If you are interested let me know and I will share the secret recipe ~JS

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

      @Jhane Sez

      Chicken Vesuvio! I’ve never heard of it, but if it’s better than Coq au Vin I need to try it!

  • Jhane Sez

    “On problem in American marriages is that American feminism has tended to make almost everything that a man might generously do or give to a woman, the minimum all wives should expect, and even then probably not really enough.

    Cooking him coq a vin and suck like on the regular I’m sure contributes to his happiness. From your occasional recipes here you’re obviously quite the cook. That’s become quite rare in American middle and esp. upper middle class wives it seems. Particularly among say gen Xers.”

    @Doug1…

    Proud Gen X chiming in.

    I think the real problem with American relationships and marriage is narcissistic entitlement on both sides of the fence… and this in my opinion is not a result of feminism but allowing our culture to become one where we value what we can buy over what we can make.

    But that’s a tangent for another time.

    Real talk… on this very blog men have chimed in to marginalize a woman considering cooking and other domestic duties as something that she brings to the table in a relationship as laughable or of little or no consequence.

    I was personally dinged for saying that while I wouldn’t pay for dinner, I would prepare meals for a man in my home or bake him something in appreciation for a nice date. While there were those gentlemen who said that they would love to have that type of treatment, there was a vocal group who felt that it wasn’t enough.

    So you can’t assume that a man is going to be appreciative and reciprocate quality cooking and sucking, and not just consider those acts of love things to which he is entitled just because he walks the planet.

    You have to give to get on both sides… all good relationships are based on reciprocity.

    It is the people who walk around with their fist clenched to protect what they are holding who don’t realize that you have to let go to make room for new gifts and have an open hand to receive what you are being given. ~JS

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

      It is the people who walk around with their fist clenched to protect what they are holding who don’t realize that you have to let go to make room for new gifts and have an open hand to receive what you are being given.

      +1

      OMG when Doug1 said:

      Cooking him coq a vin and suck like on the regular I’m sure contributes to his happiness.

      I thought suck was a typo. I thought he meant to say such.

  • Jhane Sez

    “Beware the manosphere, for it can impart Xcess bitterness and cynicism, rendering you unsuitable for any interaction with a person of the opposite sex.”

    @Susan…

    I finally get it… for a moment I thought I was on glue and hadn’t read your post with comprehension

    These guys are the male equivalent of bitter chicks who cuss guys out for holding doors open or think a man picking up the tab for dinner is akin to prostitution.

    Very amusing ~JS

  • Jhane Sez

    “It’s really important that we don’t project our own ideas of what someone else “should” want (or that we want to think ourselves as giving to them) over their real wants. This is a classic a-ha moment for beta guys, when they realize that instead of the barrage of “nice” that a lot of women want you to be kind of a jerk every now and then, and that acting the jerk is actually being “nice” in that it’s giving them what they really want.”

    @Badger…

    I have done this myself. I was dating a meat and potatoes guy and the first night I had him over I made pork loin and lyonnaise potatoes. While I considered this a very simple meat and potatoes meal it was way too fancy for him.

    Meat = Beef and Potatoes – anything but ketchup… so even though in my mind it was a lovely meal to him it was a fail.

    I do think however that a reoccurring gesture needs a bit of guidance if it isn’t hitting the sweet spot. So after the second cup of coffee, she should have first acknowledged the gesture for the thoughtful act that it was and offered suggestions that would make it more enjoyable for her if he was missing the mark…

    i.e… the coffee from starbucks is good but the caribou around the corner makes a chi soy latte to die for…

    “Maybe but I doubt it. She loved the coffee from that place and she was a total coffee addict.”

    @Escoffer… well then never mind and good riddance to her… Badger’s advice is still sound though.

    And maybe I should rethink my blog reading and commenting strategy ~JS

  • Escoffier

    “maybe she felt like, by giving her favors, you were pushing the relationship to an emotional level she didn’t feel comfortable at; hell, maybe she thought it made you look weak and she prefers a totally dominant man.”

    I think it was one or both of these. No way to know now, though. This was a long time ago.

  • Escoffier

    Julia Child, IIRC, wanted children but couldn’t have any.

  • http://natewinchester.wordpress.com/ Nate Winchester

    I agree with this post very much.

    Though I couldn’t help but laugh at the thought that the Times was… well behind the times.

    Humanity’s known about the love/respect thing for over 2000 years.

    From the bible:
    Ephesians chapter 5

    Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord.

    Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church …In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.

    Or in Colossians chapter 3

    Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives, and do not be harsh with them.

    Submit = show respect.

    And this does explain a lot of relationship difficulties. Men want respect so they treat a woman the way the man would want to be treated: respecting her. Women want love so they treat a man the way the woman would want to be treated: loving him. And both end up finding themselves a little dissatisfied with the relationship (for men do want some love and women do want some respect).

    (Sometimes I think that today’s “science” is just rediscovering what our great-grandparents knew already.)

  • Jesus Mahoney

    My mother is spectacularly bad at this, asking us detailed questions about uncomfortable stuff we don’t want to talk about.

    Appreciate this. Beats having the only thing your mother asks when you visit is whether you’d to go up to the liquor store to pick her up a bottle of Chivas. :P

  • Emily

    Haha even if it’s a typo, it’s not bad advice. ;P

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Agreed. I just spent some time going through his archives and I was torn. Some are incredibly douchey and some are quite good. He’s definitely in the player camp, though.

    Yea. The overall message of the post Badger linked to was good. Love’s awesome. Loving someone doesn’t make you weak. The test of your character strength is HOW you love when in a relationship.

    Of course, smacking the woman you love when she gives you back-talk or demanding that she obey you doesn’t seem like a display of strength, but of weakness.

  • tvmunson

    Christmas Questions from Uncle Tom

    Actually, more like Nativity ones. Did Joseph know lamaze? Can you picture him going “hee hee hoo hoo” to Mary? Did he need to? Or did the infant Jesus miracle away her contractions and pain? And, if not, when she was in a particularly intense spasm and yelled “Christ!” did she have to apologize to Him? I suppose she could’ve yelled “God!”-she was carrying His Baby, so I suppose They were on a First Name basis.

    Did Jesus as a Jewish boy get circumcised, or did He come without foreskin? Where did they get a mohl on short notice in Bethlehem? When Jesus was resurrected on Easter Sunday, did the foreskin come alive too?

    Jesus was born on December 25th. As the Son of God, did that mean Joseph could not claim a deduction for him on his taxes for that year?

    Seasons Greetings!

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

      Did Jesus as a Jewish boy get circumcised, or did He come without foreskin?

      And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb.

      Luke 2:21

  • Stingray

    Love’s awesome. Loving someone doesn’t make you weak. The test of your character strength is HOW you love when in a relationship.

    This is one thing about the PUA’s that I have always found interesting. I have very often seen them write that to marry automatically shows beta weakness and I have no doubt that for some men it can, depending on how they carry themselves up to and after the wedding. However, I think falling in love and marrying (I know that marriage 2.0 is different with all the legal crap going on. Let’s just forget that for a moment and just go with the love thing) takes a great deal of courage and is a big part of what defines a man. If he maintains himself, as a man, yet allows himself to love and trust another, this is a truly courageous act. It does not display weakness, but should be considered great strength. And this strength can either continue or abate depending on how the man continues in his marriage and in his relationship with his wife. Obviously, some of this will depend on whether or not he made a good choice in a wife and if he can command her respect.

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

      @Stingray

      Let’s just forget that for a moment and just go with the love thing) takes a great deal of courage and is a big part of what defines a man. If he maintains himself, as a man, yet allows himself to love and trust another, this is a truly courageous act. It does not display weakness, but should be considered great strength.

      This is interesting, because it calls into question who gets to define masculinity, or what defines a man. Men can obviously decide what works best for them, but if female response is part of the calculation then what we think also matters, even if it’s just about what makes a man sexy.

      I’m with you on the question of real strength. To me, a player is a man of weak character. Poor impulse control, high in novelty-seeking, low conscientiousness. These are the personality traits associated with promiscuity for either sex. They are also associated with high neuroticism. Lastly, I find it juvenile for a man to make the pursuit of pussy his life’s mission. It amounts to being stuck at age 16.

      Epitaph:

      Spilled a lotta seed. None took.

  • Stingray

    Holy crap. Lamaze is a waste of time. Any woman who can actually control her breathing during the pain of child birth is a beast. Just trying to breath at all is difficult let alone breathing any certain way.

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

      Any woman who can actually control her breathing during the pain of child birth is a beast.

      I was in so much pain during labor that I started screaming for meds and the nurse slapped me across the face. She would argue I was a beast. The only value in Lamaze, IMO, was the guys’ involvement. It gave them something to do. And we made good friends in that class, we’re still in touch with one of those couples.

  • Esau

    Lamaze is a waste of time.

    I thought it was understood, that the purpose of Lamaze practice is to give the imminent father something to do to feel he’s being useful, rather than simply biting his nails for ten hours.

  • Escoffier

    One of the things that I have noticed trolling through some of the really old Roissy posts is that he is, or claims to be, very “pro-love.” Kind of hard to square with the rest of what he writes.

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

      One of the things that I have noticed trolling through some of the really old Roissy posts is that he is, or claims to be, very “pro-love.

      That surprises me. I’d be interested to hear how he defines that. Any links?

  • Stingray

    I thought it was understood, that the purpose of Lamaze practice is to give the imminent father something to do to feel he’s being useful, rather than simply biting his nails for ten hours.

    Now, this makes more sense. Thank God for my husband because he told the nurses to shut the hell up when they tried to correct my breathing. He was so useful in that regard. I needed to be left the hell alone and he made sure I was. I am not sure I would have come out of childbirth a sane woman without him there to do that for me. He ran interference for me through each birth. He. Was. Awesome.

  • Doug1

    Susan Walsh–

    That’s a complicated question. First, limerence lasts a couple of years. Sex may decrease after that. In my case, sex decreased when I had a kid, nearly five years after we got together. Which brings me to the second point. Oxytocin drives down sex drive for both partners with the birth of a child. So that’s totally normal, and people shouldn’t freak out about it.

    Yeah it’s normal for women’s sex DRIVE to go down for some time after the birth of a child, especially if/while she’s nursing. However it used to be the wisdom of many American and Anglosphere women that good wives let their husbands have sex with them during these low drive times anyway, out of a sense of duty and wisdom in keeping the marriage strong. Often enough even thought the drive wasn’t there to begin with, women who do feel bonded affection for their husbands do in fact enjoy the actual sex once foreplay and sex itself has begun, if their husband has some skills.

    We should bring that back, contra whatever wave current feminism.

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

      However it used to be the wisdom of many American and Anglosphere women that good wives let their husbands have sex with them during these low drive times anyway, out of a sense of duty and wisdom in keeping the marriage strong.

      Most women I know did this. If nothing else, we know we’re gross, smelling like sour milk and baby vomit. It’s a time when a lot of men cheat. A woman who refuses sex at this time is asking for trouble.

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    I thought suck was a typo. I thought he meant to say such.

    It was a tipo and “such” was what I meant to say.

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

      It was a tipo and “such” was what I meant to say.

      Haha, OK. Let’s just consider it a Freudian slip.

  • tvmunson

    @Susan #115

    One down, 8 more to go! BTW I knew the answer to the mohl question, just wanted to get that shot in.

    Did you hear about the advetisement for an opearator of the circimcision machine at St. Luke’s here in Boise? “Guaranteed 40 skins a week, and a good chance to get a head!”

    Plus, the one about the mohl who goes to the taxidermist with all the foreskins he’s collected over the past ten years. The mohl says “Make me somehing practical”. Comesback 6 weeks later, and the taxidermist hands him a wallett.

    “What” says the mohl”you used all that skin to make this crummy little wallett?”

    “Well” replies the mohl “rub it and it turns into a suitcase.”

    BTW if Jesus was Jewish, how come He has a Puerto Rican Name?

  • Doug1

    Susan Walsh–

    I just saw another article saying that women do most of the household chores even when they work full time.

    Those regularly occurring articles are exagg. Feminist lie a lot, or just make things up a lot ’cause it feels right to them. Actual studies done on the hours spent on housework and child care in American families where both spouse work for pay full time show that men only do a few hours a week less on those things than their wives did.

    As well women tend to care way more about and have higher standards of clean and tidy than men do. Since that’s so, and since after a point the only one who cares is her, shouldn’t she have to spend more time on really clean and tidy than him, if she has such high standards on that? I say yes she should, or shut up about it.

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    That surprises me. I’d be interested to hear how he defines that. Any links?

    He has said that a number of times, especially in his heyday, 2008-2009. I read every one of his blog posts during that period, and actually went back and read all of his 2007 ones as well from his archives. Started in April 2007.

    No links for you, that would be work. Heh.

  • Doug1

    He’s said being in love is the best for him a number of times.

    I also have inside info (same sources as earlier inside info I’ve alluded to) that he has in fact been in at least two long lasting LTR’s during the 4 year course of his blog. Maybe half or most of the time. My huntch is that is diapearance from it most of the time from 2010-recently coincided with the second of such during the course of the blog. No inside info as to whether than means he’s recently broken up.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Roissy is pro-love the same way a drug addict is pro-drug. New love produces the same cocktail of neurochemicals as potent drugs, and those players keep seeking the next new high from “love.” In these cases, “love” is more about seeking their own pleasure than truly loving and giving to another person.

    Certainly they don’t believe in a lifetime of “loving” only one person, and they will always search for younger, hotter and more physically pleasurable versions of the “love object” to fulfill the emptiness within themselves. They probably fall in love many times, but ditch as soon as the “in-love” feeling fades. They do not care to keep what they have, because to them, it has become “old, stale and boring.”

    Some women do this, too, when they are unbalanced and immature. This can lead to the “promiscuous serial monogamy” that Dalrock has mentioned. The “love” (drug)-seeker goes for the feeling of dopamine high when newly in love, milks the relationship for a few years, hardly ever giving anything in the process, then leaves in search of another victim.

    Genuine love can be renewed by being introspective, emotionally balanced, allowing yourself to be trusting and vulnerable, and by giving, truly giving yourself and doing acts of service for another. This is why the message to women to act entitled and treat their men like servants is so harmful; not only does it render men less attractive, it stops women from renewing their own wellspring of love.

    Also, what one focuses on matters. When a woman directs her sexual energy to flirting with other men, when a man directs his energy to being sexual with other women and getting attention from other women, those actions diminish the romantic bond with one’s partner. One could argue that polyamory is fine so long as everyone consents, but often poly folks are primarily after their own pleasure rather than doing it with the intention of truly loving multiple people.

    Most people struggle with love, believing it to be a fleeting set of neurochemicals that bring pleasure and ecstasy as much as torment and pain. Most people have terrible relationships because most people are not balanced, not emotionally receptive, and not able to have good relationships. They believe that happiness comes from an external source that brings them pleasure, and this leaves a gaping hole inside their spiritual bodies that can never be filled, except perhaps temporarily.

    To truly love, one must be whole, must be content with what one already has, and must truly love oneself. Then he or she can give that contentment and love to another, a person who is also whole. Instead of taking from each other, they give to each other. Instead of fighting against each other, they fight on the same team for each other. Instead of causing each other hurt and suffering, they bring each other joy, harmony, peace, balance, support, and abundant, awesome, sublime love.

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

      Epic comment by Hope there on love. I couldn’t possibly add to it.

  • Jennifer

    Susan, awesome response to Stingray!

  • Escoffier

    Hope, that more or less jibes with my impression, esp. the first graph.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    No offense Doug, but saying he had 2 “lasting” LTRs in 4 years is like saying my 2 high school relationships of 1.5 years during those 4 years were “lasting.” That’s not lasting. That’s fleeting in the grand scheme of life.

    I’m 27 and don’t have experience with a 20+ year romantic relationship, so I’m not saying that I’m an authority on the truly long-term. What I have written I learned from people who have stayed happily through multiple decades together. Susan also has authority on this subject.

    Parental love is such a salve for the kids. When parents stay together lovingly until old age it is one of the greatest things for producing emotionally healthy children. Even adults often say they are devastated when their much older parents divorce, so staying together for the long haul has real impacts through the generations.

    At least most players state that they never want kids.

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    You and Hope are testimonials to how wonderful a wife can be. I’m sure that every guy reading here hopes to find a wife like you, if he doesn’t have one already. There are other very happily married women here too, but you two share the most detail. Such love and loyalty! It’s really a joy to witness.

    I think you should add Stingray to the list. She shared enough detail in the “Why are you here” thread in your forum to merit that, seems to me.

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

      I think you should add Stingray to the list. She shared enough detail in the “Why are you here” thread in your forum to merit that, seems to me.

      Yes, I will happily add Stingray to the list. Her marriage is clearly working on every level. I hadn’t considered the forum, that’s a good point.

  • Jennifer

    “Of course, smacking the woman you love when she gives you back-talk or demanding that she obey you doesn’t seem like a display of strength, but of weakness”

    You are awesome, Jesus.

    Susan, I’ve gotten that cognitive dissonance when reading blogs from as*holes that have some good advice too, more times than I can count!

    Jhane, your words are wonderful; I don’t think you need to worry about rethinking your commenting strategy at all.

    Hope, beautifully said about love, and Stingray, your husband’s just wonderful! I’ll need a man too who tells off any pushy medical worker while I’m trying to deliver a human being into the world: “She said she wants a FEMALE doctor! No exceptions, or we’ll deliver this baby ourselves! Nurse, stop that cheerleader stuff, you want to give her an ulcer? No, there will not be ANY medical students in here!” Now that’s my kind of alpha.

  • Doug1

    We tend to like “The New Basics” pretty big cookbook by Rousso and Lukins. Gen X cookbook. Actually I introduced M to it. You know who introduced me to it,and in fact made it a present to me when she went off to law school outside NYC? My long legged “Texas Stripper” blonde live in girl friend. Go figure.

    Though we, well mostly but not entirely M, get a lot of recipes off the internet. We cook together a good bit, esp. but not only in the summer on weekends.

  • Stingray

    I think you should add Stingray to the list. She shared enough detail in the “Why are you here” thread in your forum to merit that, seems to me.

    Yes, I will happily add Stingray to the list. Her marriage is clearly working on every level.

    Wow. Thanks. Both of you. Would it be too cheesy to say I feel honored by that?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Most people struggle with love, believing it to be a fleeting set of neurochemicals that bring pleasure and ecstasy as much as torment and pain. Most people have terrible relationships because most people are not balanced, not emotionally receptive, and not able to have good relationships. They believe that happiness comes from an external source that brings them pleasure, and this leaves a gaping hole inside their spiritual bodies that can never be filled, except perhaps temporarily.

    To truly love, one must be whole, must be content with what one already has, and must truly love oneself. Then he or she can give that contentment and love to another, a person who is also whole. Instead of taking from each other, they give to each other. Instead of fighting against each other, they fight on the same team for each other. Instead of causing each other hurt and suffering, they bring each other joy, harmony, peace, balance, support, and abundant, awesome, sublime love.

    I love this, Hope. One of the things that I find sad is that so many people–PUAs, self-professed alphas who feel justified in cheating, entitlement princesses, sluts who let their hypergamous instincts run amok, and many others besides–so many of them are looking for fulfillment in what they can get, when one of the most basic truths (and one of the most interesting paradoxes of life) is that most of what you need can be gotten by giving. “He who loses himself, finds himself” and all that.

    The only thing I’d change is this: you say that in order to give, one must first be whole. I’m not sure that’s true. I think that the very act of giving can make one whole.

  • Doug1

    Hope–

    At least most players state that they never want kids.

    A lot of players state that when they’re young, but then eventually want to settle down and have kids. I’d bet that Flyfreshandyoung will follow that pattern. Yeah he’s saying now he doesn’t ever want to get married. He’s 22. He happily had a steady very pretty (a 9) gf during two years in the middle of college. Then he learned about game and anti-feminism mostly from reading a ton of Roissy archives. Well he was a natural basically but had inhibiting beliefs. He only went player, very successfully, in the second half of this junior year.

    I’d say by 30-35 he’ll be married to a wife 10 years younger who’ll be popping out a kid or two.

  • Doug1

    There’s a lot of alpha hateraide around here, esp. since I spilled on my occasionally open relationship with M on the epically long thread that had as it’s subject the nature of male sexuality.

    What I’d say is that for their own good girls should stick to guys at their own SMV or at most one point above, who want to be in a relationship with her, and that she not kid herself about that. Guys two or more SMV’s above her who are some kind of alpha won’t actually want to (though some will fake it) – she needs to take the Susan Walsh red pill on that and get realistic. Guy’s one SMV higher are dicey. Half of one is likely to be ok, though precision on this is an illusion.

    Considerably older (7 to 10 years older) alphas are a safer bet that about same age ones for mid 20s hot enough girls (7’s or 8’s for lesser alphas, 8’s or 9’s for alphas), since many do want to settle down, go monogamous, build a life together, and have kids by that age. Mid 20s girls are a good bet for older alphas as well since it’s more likely they haven’t really slutified themselves at that age, if they’re tried hard to be good girls. Anna from the forum at 21 (8.5-9) is early 20s but an example of what I mean. If she has one bf from now until she’s 24, she’ll seem like a real good catch to many alphas in their early to mid thirties who want to settle down and build a life with a woman

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

      @Doug1

      Many women don’t want a man after he’s ridden the vag carousel for 15 years. Now all of a sudden he wants a fresh girl with a low number to be the mother of his children? When he’ll undoubtedly cheat in short order? The divorce stats rise dramatically for both sexes based on number of partners, and a guy with a high number is a very bad bet for co-parenting.

      You may hate hearing that, but it’s factual, not haterade.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Doug, fair enough. A lot of us were very different when younger. I know I was, and I’ve changed (hopefully for the better) over the years. The biggest difference is if I look at who I was at 15 vs. 20 vs. 25. I did always want kids though.

    Jesus Mahoney, there’s a reason I said to be whole first. If you give and give and martyr yourself without taking care of yourself at all, that can also turn into unhealthy behavior. I’ve been told when I was younger that I could be “too” self-sacrificing. I put up with things that I shouldn’t have to satisfy my idealistic concept of being “loving.” I had very low self-esteem, didn’t set good boundaries, and stayed in a bad relationship for way too long. Now that I am more “whole” and healthier, I can give more “wholesome” love. Happiness is contagious, too. When I’m happy, the energy behind my touch and smile and actions toward others is more positive.

    My husband likes to use the analogy of the oxygen mask on the airplane: put the mask on yourself first before you help others put it on, because you are able to give better service to others when you are strong and whole, as opposed to passed out on the ground, gasping for air. :P

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com MuleChewingBriars

    Susan, Badger – concerning the “player’s ode to love” @76,80

    I read that paean to love before. I checked the blog where it was posted, reviewing some of the blogger’s other posts. The language didn’t match the post on love. The same post showed up on a young technocrat’s blog.

    Neither blogger listed a source, but I knew I had read it before, years ago.

    I believe the author is none other than Roissy. It has all the earmarks of his lyrical, almost Nietzchean, prose.

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

      @Mule

      Wow, the plagiarism is just mind-blowing. Even more mind-blowing is the idea that Roissy wrote it.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Doug,

    I think Sue’s always been pro-beta/anti-alpha. Personally I think the terms are useless. That said, I don’t think there’s a lot of alpha “hateraide” here. Personally, I have no problem with leaders and people with strong personalities.

    I think a lot of people are repulsed by people with low character. I dislike people with no character. Most people who harp on their own alpha-ness have no character. Those people are assholes. But there are many assholes with no character who wouldn’t identify themselves as alpha, also.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jesus Mahoney, there’s a reason I said to be whole first. If you give and give and martyr yourself without taking care of yourself at all, that can also turn into unhealthy behavior.

    That’s true. You need to love and give to yourself as well.

  • Jennifer

    Guys who whore around in their younger years deserve the same consequences as female sluts. And will get them, if they don’t seriously change their tunes.

  • Jennifer

    “I think Sue’s always been pro-beta/anti-alpha. Personally I think the terms are useless. That said, I don’t think there’s a lot of alpha “hateraide” here. Personally, I have no problem with leaders and people with strong personalities.

    I think a lot of people are repulsed by people with low character. I dislike people with no character. Most people who harp on their own alpha-ness have no character. Those people are assholes. But there are many assholes with no character who wouldn’t identify themselves as alpha, also.”

    Do you have a blog? I agree that, outside basic observations of the SMP, those terms are usually useless. Alpha’s the only term that even has any scientific grounding.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    37 Hope December 13, 2011 at 7:59 pm wrote:

    Hopefully the talking doesn’t come across as bragging.

    Looks like that thread is lot what can be looked as bragging.

    Better that I do not participate on that thread.

    / Kari Hurtta

    ( Go a after sauna cider. )

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

      @Kari

      Ah, you have a sauna and cider every day? I thought that was just for weekends.

  • Jennifer

    Bravo, Susan! Great to know.

    Dang, I need more cider. They should still be selling caramel apples too. Never been to a sauna, but I’m fairly intolerant to heat, anyway.

  • lurksy

    Hi :).

    I see no one has mentioned the five love languages (or something similar). Finding this out is one of my top priorities when dating someone. Personally, I appreciate touch and acts of service–I’m bilingual :). I admit that a hug or topping off my gas tank goes further than something from the jewelry store. Don’t worry, I still express my gratitude either way!

    And I’m glad to find other women who love to make their way around the kitchen. Most other women I know around my age (I’m 24) either don’t care or don’t know enough to care. I’m currently trying to re-craft the perfect biscuit for my strawberry shortcake recipe, almost there!

    *Ahem* Okay I’m done, lol.

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

      @lurksy

      Ooooh, when you perfect that biscuit recipe please share it with us! The forum is good for that.

  • tvmunson

    @Hope #135
    When a couple divorce, the children lose the family. It may be less disruptive for adult children, but that only modifies the quanity of the loss, not its quality.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Well, Doug, there’s no “alpha” hate from me. But my idea of “alpha” is a bit different. I don’t think the number of women a guy sleeps with determines his status. I believe more in the internal frame of alpha as well as the head of family alpha. My husband said last night he is more on the “alpha” side, and at least to me he’s absolutely right.

    I love the fact that my husband is the manly, strong, leader-type alpha but in a loving, kind, giving, and generous way. I do things for him happily because I love him and look up to him. I know you’ve mentioned and endorsed this type of alpha behavior previously. But also his background (Utah) means he doesn’t want to have anything on the side, whereas your coastal cohort would be more likely to not get married until much later and have lots of different women (New York, Boston, DC, etc.).

    It’s a different sexual culture in Utah; people marry young and have lots of kids. Just about everyone I know married some time in their 20s, and all the leaders across different industries are married. So a married man is not seen as beta here, but often very much respected and looked up to, because this area preserves and cultivates a more traditional family culture. Also because it’s so close to Vegas, California and the West coast, those who want to explore a sexually open environment can easily do so, leaving a somewhat self-selected population of family-minded people.

  • Isabel

    The global age difference on average between married couples is 3 years; the high outlier being 7 years in one (non-monogamous) African country. Men who reach their mid-thirties single have a greatly diminished chance of ever marrying at all. And married men with a high number of sexual partners are more likely to cheat and less likely to report high levels of marital and sexual satisfaction. So that’s your havemycakeandeatit theory gone out of the window.

    Hope, you’re lovely. +1 for everything you’ve said.

  • ozymandias

    I have no idea how to assess SMV, my own or others’. I suppose I’ll have to go with the “compatibility” method of picking partners…

    Susan: The last time a friend of mine borrowed someone else’s Doc Martens, she took a tumble down the stairs and got a concussion she couldn’t afford to treat. That shit is bad luck. :)

    Hope: Your bit about the neurochemicals reminds me of what polyfolk call New Relationship Energy (polyfolk are notoriously bad at coming up with names for things. See also “compersion”). You know, you just start dating someone and they’re PERFECT and SHINY and NEW and you want to spend ALL YOUR TIME WITH THEM. Most wise polyfolk counsel to make an active effort to value and spend time with your old partners. I think Roissy is what some people call a NRE addict: he jumps from relationship to relationship insttead of learning to appreciate the subtler and richer pleasures of Old Relationship Energy. :)

    And the “polyfolk are out for their own pleasure” thing is not entirely true: one of the big memes around the community is the idea of an “intentional family”– that is, having your partners and partners’ partners create a family that, even though it isn’t related by blood, is no less real.

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com MuleChewingBriars

    @Susan – 152

    Many women don’t want a man after he’s ridden the vag carousel for 15 years.

    Ah, but neither do they want one who never got invited to get on. What they want, like Anne Shirley, is a man who could have, but didn’t.

    There is shaken free just under the level of my conscious by your epitaph for the player: “Spilled seed. None took.” For some reason it reminded me of the complaint of one of your female posters that, although she was very attractive, she faced competition from less attractive girls who “dripped sex”. That statement brought to mind a certain type of girl:

    A girl who looks like that looks awfully easy, but she doesn’t look particularly fertile. She looks like Nicholas Cage describing Holly Hunter’s character in Raising Arizona; “a rocky shore upon which my seed could find no purchase.”

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

      @Mule

      Ah, but neither do they want one who never got invited to get on. What they want, like Anne Shirley, is a man who could have, but didn’t.

      Very true. Olive said in a different thread that this quality is a turnon for her. I think it speaks to the fact that women get really turned on by being desired. It’s a mirror of male desire. The more “special” that desire feels, the more of a turnon it is. Getting a player to want you is no work at all. He wants everybody, so his desire is diminished, more of a bio response than anything that might engage his brain.

      Obviously, women expect men with options to exercise them, particularly in this SMP. Most women won’t deem a guy a manwhore for 10, 15, maybe 20 partners. Anything north of 50 will repulse many women. The player types never believe me when I say this, which is fine. It is what it is, YMMV.

      A girl who looks like that looks awfully easy, but she doesn’t look particularly fertile. She looks like Nicholas Cage describing Holly Hunter’s character in Raising Arizona; “a rocky shore upon which my seed could find no purchase.”

      That’s really interesting. The idea that a woman of vast sexual experience might look infertile. There certainly is a much higher chance that she is, in fact, infertile. Do you think men can read this at some subconscious level? Or that they display this message in their dress, makeup, etc?

  • Anacaona

    “Or did the infant Jesus miracle away her contractions and pain?”

    Well Buddha did it for his mother so the lord surely won’t like to be bested.

    Jesus was born on December 25th. As the Son of God, did that mean Joseph could not claim a deduction for him on his taxes for that year?

    Actually Jesus was born around August, the December 25th was picked over Saturn’s birth party to displace the pagan ritual of winter’s solstice and Christianize everything, old christian love recycling rituals. *theologyhatoff*

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Susan (126)

    Spilled a lotta seed. None took.

    I love six-word memoirs, so this one immediately jumped out at me! Did you intend to make one or was it a happy coincidence? :)

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

      I love six-word memoirs, so this one immediately jumped out at me! Did you intend to make one or was it a happy coincidence?

      Haha, a coincidence, I didn’t even think of that! How about we start a forum thread on that?

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    The divorce stats rise dramatically for both sexes based on number of partners, and a guy with a high number is a very bad bet for co-parenting.

    They rise a lot more rapidly with numbers for females than for males.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @ozymandias, yes, I’ve heard of the phrase new relationship energy, NRE. I’ve read up on jealousy in polyamory, how to deal with it/suppress it, and the other common issues that arise in this process. I’ve also researched polygamous cults and sister-wives of Mormonism, and the various derivatives thereof.

    My conclusion? Not worth the trouble. First, children need stability, and such arrangements are inherently unstable, with “new” people coming and going all the time. Second, while it’s noble to see all these people as “intentional family,” the more people you welcome into your life, the more potential issues there are. Third, the state of “flow” and “high energy” can happen via intellectual and non-sexual relationships, which also produce a rush of mental but not sexual arousal.

    Sexual arousal, if allowed to flourish and be consummated, is deeply bonding and simultaneously extremely disruptive to existing bonding. Playing with these powerful, primal forces while not completely understanding them is very dangerous. I’m not naive to think that I’m spiritually developed and advanced enough for this kind of sex play. Sex is sacred for me, and I do not want to touch, kiss or get naked with someone with whom there isn’t sufficient and genuine love. The man I have bonded with is on the same wavelength, and he also does not separate sex and love.

    I’ve read all the arguments about how biologically speaking humans are still in the hunter-gatherer stage, and basically have lots of polyamorous instincts. I understand those arguments, but I’m living in a world where there are laws, rules and constraints on those instincts. These rules are in place to save most of us from our own foolish selves. This is why religions often have prohibitions against over-eating, over-greeding and over-sexing. You can try to convince people that you know exactly what you’re doing and that you can do better than the ancient proscriptions passed down through the ages. I’m not personally convinced, but I’m not going to tell you that you’re wrong either.

    For us, one person to love and to hold is quite enough. We know the alternatives, and we choose this. Every single day, I consciously choose my husband, and I internalize this all the time, with every deliberate action or choice I make.

  • Stingray

    Or that they display this message in their dress, makeup, etc?

    Women like this age differently and it shows. I wish I could be more specific than that. It’s like porn. You know it when you see it.

    To quote a funny but nasty turn of phrase “She was ridden hard and left out wet.”

  • Escoffier

    I can’t be sure but I don’t think roissy wrote that.

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com MuleChewingBriars

    Mind you, this is not about whether you want a girl to be the mother of your children or not. Most men don’t even start to think about children until their late twenties, and a flashy, over-displayed girl who looks like she’s built for recreational sex would be just the ticket.

    On the other hand, there are other women, actually even more beautiful, who look like they’re ready to swell on demand and fill a house with little rugrunners.

    Obviously, it doesn’t have anything to do with a woman’s actual fertility, or even about her attitude towards children and motherhood, but I think that the first girl and Ms. Vergara are sending different messages about the teleology of their sexuality.

  • GudEnuf

    “one of the big memes around the community is the idea of an “intentional family”– that is, having your partners and partners’ partners create a family that, even though it isn’t related by blood, is no less real.”

    Do you think that actually happens? How many poly relationships last more than five years? Will your partners be there for you when you need a babysitter or a shoulder to cry on?

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

      Will your partners be there for you when you need a babysitter or a shoulder to cry on?

      Will your poly partner want you to babysit while he or she has a “night out” with another partner? I’m pretty sure the answer is yes.

  • tomTom

    I believe in the 60/40 rule. Both people in the relationship should give 60% and expect 40% in return. That way no one feels taken for granted in or out of the bed room. That old saying, the couple that lays together stays together is true more often than not.

  • Isabel

    Jodie Marsh (Mule’s first example) is now a bodybuilder and brimming with testosterone. I don’t know why I know this. =__=

  • Sassy6519

    Susan Walsh said:

    “Many women don’t want a man after he’s ridden the vag carousel for 15 years. Now all of a sudden he wants a fresh girl with a low number to be the mother of his children? When he’ll undoubtedly cheat in short order? The divorce stats rise dramatically for both sexes based on number of partners, and a guy with a high number is a very bad bet for co-parenting.

    You may hate hearing that, but it’s factual, not haterade.”

    I agree with Susan on this. Women like me who have not ridden the alpha cock carousel (discerning, prudish) are oftentimes wary of men who have had a lot of casual sex. I think I’d be suspicious of any man who has slept with more than 20 women, especially if he is still in his 20s. Banging that many girls or more signifies to me that he is incapable of either building or maintaining a bond with a girl for a long period of time. If a guys is banging a new girl or more every month or two, that means that there are several women that he either didn’t want to or couldn’t form/maintain a relationship with. That’s a scary thought to women who want long-term relationships.

  • Doug1

    Isabel–

    Just about any 35yo alpha or lesser alpha (or super alpha) who wants to get married to a lot younger woman his own smv or one point lower can. The odds stats are probably largely reflecting omegas and lower betas. Warren Betty didn’t have any trouble at a lot older than 35 marrying a lot younger woman, nor Michael Douglas.

    Whether said some kind of alpha can stay married for very long tends to depend on whether he can also tone down his asshole side if he’s got a lot of that, and amp up his comfort, “beta skills” side a fair bit.

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

      @Doug1

      It makes no sense to use celebrities as examples of what alphas can and cannot do. Hell, Steve Buscemi can probably marry a younger, hot woman.

      Whether said some kind of alpha can stay married for very long tends to depend on whether he can also tone down his asshole side if he’s got a lot of that, and amp up his comfort, “beta skills” side a fair bit.

      No, it depends on his need for sexual variety, which is stronger than in other men. No man who has had a lot of partners is going to be satisfied in a monogamous relationship. As you well know. I recommend against it in any case, but it’s most important if there are children. There’s some evidence that the most promiscuous women are high T and products of divorce. That generally means an alpha dad.

  • ozymandias

    GudEnuf: Yes, I’ve witnessed it happening. The only other poly network I know in meatspace has been extremely stable in composition for the last ~five years (they’ve added one new partner, my former roommate). They all live in a house full of books together. It’s pretty adorable. :)

    Hope: I have absolutely no intentions of saying that poly is better than monogamy: some people are best-suited for some relationship styles, other people are best-suited for other relationship styles. So I’m very happy for you that you’ve found a relationship that fulfills you. :)

    Poly relationships are not inherently unstable– I know quite a few couples that have been together for over a decade. Nor is sex inherently bonding for everyone (although it does tend to make you feel more affectionately towards your partner, I’ve found, for even the most casual of casual sex lovers), nor are new relationships inherently destructive to old relationships (although they can be).

    However, one thing that is definitely true about poly is that it is a lot harder than monogamy. Things like open communication, honesty, wise partner selection, security, generosity, and being able to get along with your exes are important for any relationship. But if you don’t have them in monogamy, your relationship will be suboptimal; if you don’t have them in poly, your relationship will be a giant screaming bloody mess.

  • Doug1

    Susan Walsh—

    Most women won’t deem a guy a manwhore for 10, 15, maybe 20 partners. Anything north of 50 will repulse many women. The player types never believe me when I say this, which is fine. It is what it is, YMMV.

    Because our experience is different.

    Some women do feel that way in truth as opposed to for discussion and hoping to shape behavior purposes, but not all that many in my experience. I think those sentiments are mostly a way that girls who aren’t hot enough to land an alpha or lesser alpha for relationship exclusivity commitment, convince themselves that they wouldn’t want a player alpha even if now reformed anyway. That is 7’s and lower feel that way about alpha’s sometimes or talk themselves into that esp. at places like this, as do 6’s and lower with respect to lesser alpha reformed players.

    Since that helps to keep them from sluttifying themselves on the alpha cock carousel that’s very much part of the blog’s mission, and really I don’t object. I just don’t think it’s much the truth for girls of the same or one SMV lower than an alpha or lesser alpha – IF they believe he has reformed.

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

      I just don’t think it’s much the truth for girls of the same or one SMV lower than an alpha or lesser alpha – IF they believe he has reformed.

      The hottest girls are the least willing to compromise. They want what they would have had a generation ago – the hottest guy all to themselves. They are the most discriminating for long-term mating, and the research bears this out. They will maximize the combination of looks, status, etc. (short-term cues) with beta traits (long-term cues). That generally means a good looking guy of lesser dominance, i.e. greater beta.

      Your personal experience is just anecdotal, and by definition you and any other alpha would have experience with women who returned your interest. You don’t even know how many you turned off.

      I am willing to say this is probably primarily an American phenomenon. While feminism didn’t eradicate the double standard, it did create the reverse double standard.

  • Doug1

    Mule–

    That first girl is a little much. She looks built or rather made into someone for recreational paid sex.

    The second, Sofia is a Latin hottie, yes.

  • http://www.decoybetty.com Deidre

    Last week, Inspector Climate had a cold and was really busy and so I made him oatmeal raison cookies as a surprise (particularly loving as I’m allergic to them). He is still mentioning them to me and saying how much I take care of him.

    I got an 18 on the quiz (and I took it for IC as well because he isn’t here which is probably a more accurate way of doing it anyway, and he got at 18 as well).

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

      @Deidre

      Your blog has been an exemplary account of generosity in a relationship. I’m not the least bit surprised by your scores.

  • Ted D

    Ozy – I’ve really tried my best to mentally figure out how poly relationships work, and I think I’m just incapable of the state of mind necessary. I would NEVER be so confident and comfortable in my romantic relationships (and my ability to keep them intact) that I would not be threatened by my SO having sex with another man. As it is, there is always a chance things will fail. Adding extra sex partners just seems like asking for it.

    Maybe since I was an only child, I am simply too selfish. It might be an adult form of “I don’t like to share my toys”, but I honestly don’t know. I am friends with a couple that used to swing regularly (before they had their first child) and as far as I can tell it had no ill effects on their relationship.

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com MuleChewingBriars

    Doug1 @178

    I agree with you.

    I am an Internet correspondent with a remarkable young woman, a Catholic revert With A Past. She is in her early thirties, and in the last three years, returned to the Church after having pursued a rather vigorous career as a music journalist, with all the, uh, perks of that job. She would like nothing better than to find a nice Catholic boy, settle down, and fulfill the mandate of Genesis 1:28, but the young men seem to be intimidated by the number and celebrity of her past paramours.

    On the other hand, a young man entered my sister’s [Evangelical] Church after having racked up a very impressive count as a mid level drug dealer and enforcer for one of the local brigand groups. He was immediately awash in Churchly vag and married the pick of the herd. I have no doubt that his mending of his ways was as serious as hers, but oh what a difference gender makes.

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

      @Doug1, @Mule

      Yes, the sexual double standard is rooted in biology. Gender makes a big difference.

  • Isabel

    Doug,

    Just about any 35yo alpha or lesser alpha(or super alpha) who wants to get married to a lot younger woman his own smv or one point lower can. The odds stats are probably largely reflecting omegas and lower betas. Warren Betty didn’t have any trouble at a lot older than 35 marrying a lot younger woman, nor Michael Douglas.

    You know my stance on ramdom celebrity examples. :P

    Not every guy is Douglas or Beatty. And you’ve misunderstood me, I think. The age difference part is all- inclusive whilst the latter two are talking almost exclusively about alphas. Omegas and lower betas typically aren’t the main subjects in studies about men with a high number of sexual partners. Ditto studies about men who deliberately delay marriage (as opposed to for circumstantial reasons.)

    I can think of more drawbacks than benefits so it’s a bum deal tbh. But then, there’s an unusually wide pool of conventionally attractive “good” guys where I am currently so my expectations are fairly skewed.

    Whether said some kind of alpha can stay married for very long tends to depend on whether he can also tone down his asshole side if he’s got a lot of that, and amp up his comfort, “beta skills” side a fair bit.

    Well, yes but that’s something else. The reason those marriages fail is not because there’s a lack of intimacy or generosity on his behalf. They fail because the husband cannot subsist on a one-woman diet after a few decades of feasting. Not a value judgement or anything; statististics just say that there’s better men to marry and be generous towards than aged players. Anyway. We tell marriage-minded men to scrutinise and appraise their partners before committing in this hostile environment, so it’s only fitting that we tell marriage-minded women to be similarly discriminating and select on character. High impulsivity and low self-control plus an aversion to commitment aren’t usually signs of good character.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Ozymandias, I won’t argue with your most unassailable points, as the essential ingredients for healthy relationships are open communication, honesty, generosity, as well as intelligent, emotionally receptive, wise, self-aware and balanced individuals. Possessing all of these traits and dispositions can make any type relationship hum along beautifully. As an example, I and my mother-in-law do not have the typical adversarial in-law relationship. We can talk deeply and at length about many topics, and we are very dear to the other.

    However, most people are barely able to make a monogamous relationship function smoothly, and evangelizing them toward polyamory while they are already unbalanced will most certainly cause an explosive mess. Most people’s jealous responses are deep and primal. Channeling jealousy into sexual energy could work for a while, but eventually the feeling of love becomes corrupted into a fear and jealous response, eroticized negativity like getting a high off cutting one’s wrists or autoerotic asphyxiation. If the channel shuts down instead, then the feeling turns into low-level loathing and indifference.

    If there is a group of people, and you may be among them, who have an entirely different set of wiring, do not experience jealousy or possessiveness, and can be loving, positive, wise, honest and ethical in being polyamorous, with all of the necessarily medical and reproductive precautions, then more power to you. But what I have seen and experienced tend toward dysfunction and destruction, and I cannot in good faith advocate it.

    My husband and I know a young married couple about a year older than us, with a young baby. The wife is frequenty flirting with and seeking attention from other men. They do not seem to be very loving toward each other. The husband privately told my husband last night that he thinks she is leaving him “again.” If this continues, things will only degenerate into chaos. My feeling is that she is seeking the high of feeling sexually desirable and the excitement of new crushes. She is also a bit overweight after the baby and approaching 30, so this is her way of clinging onto the belief that she still is relevant in the sexual market. The man is not dumb and knows what’s going on, and he is disgusted with her behavior and probably on the verge of just letting her leave. I have asked my husband to pass along Athol Kay’s website to the guy. I can only hope that it does something to save their marriage. An open “arrangement” would only hasten its demise.

  • Sassy6519

    Doug1 said:

    “Some women do feel that way in truth as opposed to for discussion and hoping to shape behavior purposes, but not all that many in my experience. I think those sentiments are mostly a way that girls who aren’t hot enough to land an alpha or lesser alpha for relationship exclusivity commitment, convince themselves that they wouldn’t want a player alpha even if now reformed anyway. That is 7’s and lower feel that way about alpha’s sometimes or talk themselves into that esp. at places like this, as do 6’s and lower with respect to lesser alpha reformed players.”

    Plenty of women, attractive or not, have turned down alpha men for various reasons. I have done it on numerous occasions because they seemed like a disaster waiting to happen. I knew of their sexual and relationship histories and they turned me off. Being one in a number is not something I have sought after. Saying that less attractive women claim to not want alphas because they really can’t land the alphas seems a bit simplistic. It also implies that all women want alpha men, which certainly isn’t the case. Just because a woman can attract alpha men doesn’t necessarily mean that they are what she ultimately wants.

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com MuleChewingBriars

    PS – It’s nice to hear about Mr. HUS here.

  • tvmunson

    @Susan #190 “gender makes a BIG difference”

    I wish ( I know you did that (more or less) reassuring article a while back; not convinced. Did pick up a suggestion of a predilection but my gentlemanly discretion prevents me from mentioning it now.)

  • Doug1

    Susan Walsh–

    The hottest girls are the least willing to compromise. They want what they would have had a generation ago – the hottest guy all to themselves. They are the most discriminating for long-term mating, and the research bears this out. They will maximize the combination of looks, status, etc. (short-term cues) with beta traits (long-term cues). That generally means a good looking guy of lesser dominance, i.e. greater beta.

    9’s and 10’s marry greater betas? That’s a hoot. Doesn’t happen. Once in a blue moon maybe.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Doug,

    I think you just know some really lousy women with low character.

    That’s my take.

    Why you think attractive, sane, confident women would want horny guys with no character is beyond me.

  • Stingray

    Why you think attractive, sane, confident women would want horny guys with no character is beyond me.

    So, I’m confused. Is the official definition of an alpha on this site only men who are able to sleep around a lot and do? Also that they have no character? I have known (what I would deem) very alpha men who made very conscious decisions to not sleep around even though they were perfectly able to. Is that so rare these days that it is not even a consideration for alpha any more? This is not the only site I have heard this and continue to be shocked by it.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Stingray,

    I think that Doug has his own definition of alpha. Most people here do, actually. I think that it’s entirely possible to be alpha and have character.
    I’m pretty sure Doug thinks he has character, btw.

  • ozymandias

    Susan: You know I’m poly because my reaction was “yes, why wouldn’t you?” :)

    Ted: You sound monogamous! :) Good for you.

    Hope: I would never evangelize someone towards poly. I’m just saying that poly is not just about people seeking their own pleasure; it can be as loving and committed as monogamy.

    It’s always funny that people think the big problem with poly is jealousy. Jealousy is actually pretty easy to get rid of for a lot of people (I’d explain how, but poor Susan’s comment thread has been derailed enough). The biggest problem is time management! :)

    Any remotely intelligent poly person would tell that couple not to open up their relationship. One, that woman does not respect her partner’s wishes, which is pretty much the #1 red flag in a relationship. Two, the husband doesn’t want to be poly, and a relationship in which one person wants to be poly and the other is not okay with it is pretty much doomed to failure. Three, the wife’s desires appear to be based in insecurity and a desire for attention, instead of a genuine affection for multiple people, which is a recipe for drama and fail

  • Doug1

    Stingray–

    So, I’m confused. Is the official definition of an alpha on this site only men who are able to sleep around a lot and do? Also that they have no character? I have known (what I would deem) very alpha men who made very conscious decisions to not sleep around even though they were perfectly able to.

    Heartiste / Roissy is the guy who defined alphas versus betas in quite an extensive way. See this (but remember it’s partly being humorous and is a bit exagg, as part of that):

    http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2007/09/19/defining-the-alpha-male/

    He subsequently said that the man doesn’t have to actually have racked up that large a number, just be capable of it. As well for lesser alphas on up, on cute, pretty and hot girls count, below 6’s don’t.

    Remember his alpha / beta is largely a measure of the amount of vajajay tingle or pull the guy has on cute and and hot girls(and hence his ability to get fling and casual sex with them), not necessarily the average girl’s evaluation of him as a marriage mate all things considered.

    I think myself and I believe he’s also said, that another way of measuring it is the hottest level of girl he’s able to get have sex with not just once in a blue moon as a sort of fluke, but several at least – which might have required his relationship commitment. So if an alpha with some numbers has never managed to pull a 9, or only one, he’s probably really a lesser alpha.

    Susan has more or less adopted this definition though she emphasizes number of girls actually obtained even less.

    Alpha versus beta as used by both Roissy and Susan has nothing to do with character or worth to society, though strong leaders tend to be at least greater betas, and often lesser alpha or alphas, if they don’t white knight or bye feminist interpersonal relations dogma too much.

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

      Susan has more or less adopted this definition though she emphasizes number of girls actually obtained even less.

      That’s incorrect. I tend to break along cads vs. dads lines, but the schematic I like best is Vox Day’s:

      Here’s an excerpt:

      Alpha: The alpha is the tall, good-looking guy who is the center of both male and female attention. The classic star of the football team who is dating the prettiest cheerleader. The successful business executive with the beautiful, stylish, blonde, size zero wife. All the women are attracted to him, while all the men want to be him, or at least be his friend. At a social gathering like a party, he’s usually the loud, charismatic guy telling self-flattering stories to a group of attractive women who are listening with interest. However, alphas are only interested in women to the extent that they exist for the alpha’s gratification, physical and psychological, they are actually more concerned with their overall group status.

      Beta: Betas are the good-looking guys who aren’t as uniformly attractive or socially dominant as the Alpha, but are nevertheless confident, attractive to women, and do well with them. At the party, they are the loud guy’s friends who showed up with the alcohol and who are flirting with the tier one women and cheerfully pairing up with the tier two women. Betas tend to genuinely like women and view them in a somewhat optimistic manner, but they don’t have a lot of illusions about them either. Betas tend to be happy, secure in themselves, and are up for anything their alpha wants to do. When they marry, it is not infrequently to a woman who was one of the alpha’s former girlfriends.

      There are several other classifications. You can read it here: http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2011/03/socio-sexual-hierarchy.html

      I would also like to offer the opinion that looks are mostly unrelated to alpha/beta distinctions. There are many ugly alphas who do well with women, often described by women as “sexy ugly.” There are also very good looking beta guys who are more introverted and do not seek the limelight.

  • Megaman

    @SW
    “Obviously, women expect men with options to exercise them, particularly in this SMP. Most women won’t deem a guy a manwhore for 10, 15, maybe 20 partners.”

    I’m not so sure this is strictly a men vs. women perception issue. The only person I’ve ever heard of who’s done any serious research on the SDS is Michael J. Marks at NMSU. His conclusion: most everybody agrees there is a double standard, but nobody admits to actually practicing it. His research indicated that people with low partner counts (men and women) preferred to settle down with other low partner count people : )

    People with higher partner counts were o.k. with settling down with other high count people, but they could go either way. It’s when the two groups mixed where problems occurred. The low count folks couldn’t really stomach partners who were “out of the box” so to speak. I think gender plays a role in this. Obviously, how much sleeping around someone has done will have a direct impact on how many/what type of people will want to commit to him or her.

    I’ve also heard anecdotally of some women practicing their own reverse SDS. No comment on that one…

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

      @Megaman

      Thanks for that info. I’ll have to check out Marks’ work. I’ve heard the same thing, actually. I once read that a man with 50 or 100 partners is going to consider 25 for a woman “rounding error.” This is what led me to suggest that we just let the sluts all get with each other and leave the SMP in peace :)

      Kidding aside, women with high partner counts are most likely to marry men with high partner counts. I think it makes sense that people who have low partner counts, whether by choice or not, are going to prefer others with similar experience for marriage.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Ozymandias, I did not say “all” poly folks are after their own pleasure over love, merely “often” that this is the case. If this is untrue among those you know, that speaks well of them. You should be careful in generalizing their motives to all those who advocate “poly” lifestyles. What “can be” is not often what “is.”

    I do agree with what you have said about that couple. There are other issues, but I would rather not say more so as to not disclose too much personal information.

    Time management is tough even with one partner and no kids! I have to cook tonight, and I haven’t vacuumed in over a week (/hangs head in shame). We both work full-time and don’t even have an exciting social life. We also are hosting the family Christmas dinner as first-year homeowners — 14 people and 4 kids! Normal families are quite enough for us, I think. :P

  • Stingray

    but remember it’s partly being humorous and is a bit exagg, as part of that):

    Heh, don’t worry. I actually spend quite a bit of time over there and have posted several times as well. I am aware of his sense of humor.

    Thank you for explaining it. That is exactly what I thought the definition was but became confused as it seemed during the discussion today that it was simply assumed that an alpha had no character and was only looking to add notches to his bed post. This is also true of many of the posters over at Roissy, though the no character part is rarely said. As I am sure you know this tends to be celebrated there and (obviously) not here.

  • Jennifer

    “Churchly vag”? Nice, Mules. If you mean he was having sex with those women, clearly his turn-around wasn’t very sincere. Those women are foolish, pouncing on him before he’s had any time to really prove his change.

    Megaman, thanks for that encouraging fact. Jesus, I find your observations quite sharp.

    “Getting a player to want you is no work at all. He wants everybody, so his desire is diminished, more of a bio response than anything that might engage his brain”

    Exactly.

  • Jennifer

    Yes Sting, many define alpha and even game differently.

  • GudEnuf

    When I think of poly-relationships all I can think about is Steve Pavlina’s experiments. Eventually, “the universe” told him to divorce his wife for a woman who was suspiciously thin and young. The universe also told him to give his ex-wife full custody of the kids and not even bother to try and be involved in their life.

    So maybe I’m biased. I am not against consenting adults doing what they want with each other, but once you have children you have a responsibility to make sure they have a healthy family life. Kids need to be looked after for a couple decades or more and you can’t just put them to sleep like a pet.

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

      @GudEnuf

      Steve Pavlina is just horrible. He gave his wife an ultimatum to open up to poly, then proceeded to act like a tomcat. Sure enough, soon he found even the technical marriage an encumbrance. I have read only a few accounts of families practicing polyamory, mostly in the MSM, and the men were clearly the driving force behind it. In fact, one account in the Boston Globe included a woman who felt guilty for not wanting to add a male partner. Her husband was peeved that she wasn’t holding up her end of the bargain. Meanwhile, another woman moved into their house, and their 10 year-old son asked, “Why is Daddy not sleeping in Mommy’s bed anymore? Why is he sleeping with this other lady?” Honestly, it was heartbreaking. Only the man was somewhat satisfied with the arrangement.

      Polyamorists should not have children, and should not turn poly if they have them already.

  • Olive

    I think those sentiments are mostly a way that girls who aren’t hot enough to land an alpha or lesser alpha for relationship exclusivity commitment, convince themselves that they wouldn’t want a player alpha even if now reformed anyway. That is 7’s and lower feel that way about alpha’s sometimes or talk themselves into that esp. at places like this

    As someone who probably falls in the 6/7 range, I object!
    I said it to Ramble the other day, and now I’ll say it to you. Beta traits are hot, and I’m attracted to guys with a mix, heavier on the beta. If you don’t believe me, then you never will, no matter what I say. But it’s not something I just “convinced myself of.” And as Sassy said, some people who could get alphas turn them down. So, in sum, all alpha all the time is not attractive to me at all, and if it was, I would make an effort to attract alphas. Turns out that I’m not interested, and if I end up on the market again, I still won’t be interested.

    Also your emphasis on the PUA rating system is getting on my nerves. Not because I don’t fall in the female alpha range, just because it seems to be your main indicator of “relationship-worthy.” And there are many things that make a person attractive besides looks. I’ve dated two “not classically attractive” guys and fell hard for both of them.

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

      Beta traits are hot, and I’m attracted to guys with a mix, heavier on the beta. If you don’t believe me, then you never will, no matter what I say. But it’s not something I just “convinced myself of.”

      When feminists decry the sexual double standard, men retort that they can use any selection criteria they wish in choosing a partner. I have supported that claim many times. Women have no right to tell men who to wife up, and we also can’t fully comprehend the male mindset.

      The same is true here. There’s no point in arguing whether alphas make good partners. Some women will go for them regardless, others will not. It’s not one size fits all. In any case, men don’t get to say who’s attractive and desirable for long-term mating with women. Women will decide that.

      Obviously, far more than 20% of men get married, so most women are marrying betas. The notion that they’re settling for second best is just absurd.

      Also, a word about looks. I can only speak to the female POV. I have dated gorgeous guys who pedestalized me, and unattractive guys who didn’t. There’s a certain kind of pretty boy look that I don’t care for at all in a man. I’ve always liked guys with runner’s bodies, other women like their men very muscular. Female sexuality includes many more attraction cues than male sexuality does. We can fall hard for a 3 and be turned off by a 9. I’ve lived it, I’ve seen it, I know this to be true. (BTW, this is why women are so disappointed to learn that for men, it is all about looks. It gives us less to work with.)

  • Escoffier

    OK, susan, here is one of the love posts:

    http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2007/07/06/love/

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

      @Escoffier

      Re the Roissy love post. I knew it! This is passionate:

      A man can be all alpha but if he doesn’t cash it in for the ultimate prize he’s revealed the beta at his core.
      I once lost a girl I loved.  The rush of pain was so intense even a fight club pummeling couldn’t have distracted me from it.  But I didn’t stoically shrug it off.  I threw glasses at the wall.  I broke things.  I smashed up my apartment.
      If you aren’t smashing stuff after losing a lover you don’t know the pleasure of relinquishing everything for love.

      For anyone who missed it the first time around, here is my Roissy fantasy, which just got a bit closer to reality.

      In my fantasy Roissy finally finds the woman he can be vulnerable with, the only woman he could ever trust. He tests her, sets up opportunities for her to cheat and betray him. But she sees a kernel of good in that damaged psyche, and she wants to nurture it. She proves her loyalty, and Roissy finally cries like a baby in her arms.

      Realizing that his heart is no longer in Heartiste, that it would in fact be total hypocrisy to blog there, he finds another blogger to take the reins. He knows the quality will suffer, but his blog has been his truest friend, the only place where he could be terrible and flawed and still be loved. He cannot kill it.

      In truth, Roissy wouldn’t mind a nice sadistic anonymous fuck now and again, but he’s approaching 50 and he finds that although women still smile at him, they do not hunger for him. He seems to have passed into some harmless state. This is too painful to contemplate. The woman who loves him is no longer nubile, but she is a well-preserved 34. The old pecker hasn’t failed him yet.

      She wants a child, he has promised her that. Roissy cannot picture himself as a father, he is nagged by some poorly defined worry that she will love the child more. And yet he finds himself thinking of a son, a son who will learn from the start what it means to be a man. He will not allow his son to grow up as he did – a sensitive beta boy rejected and shamed by the only girl he has ever loved, until now.

      He could make it right with a son. She will stay, he knows this. He is the Master. He will take her in hand and she will stay.

  • Olive
    The divorce stats rise dramatically for both sexes based on number of partners, and a guy with a high number is a very bad bet for co-parenting.

    They rise a lot more rapidly with numbers for females than for males.

    Do you have a source for that? Or is it an inference?

    Very true. Olive said in a different thread that this quality is a turnon for her. I think it speaks to the fact that women get really turned on by being desired. It’s a mirror of male desire. The more “special” that desire feels, the more of a turnon it is. Getting a player to want you is no work at all. He wants everybody, so his desire is diminished, more of a bio response than anything that might engage his brain.

    Bingo! Exactly why I find the alpha playa cads repulsive. Not interested in being another number, thanks.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Stingray,

    Thank you for explaining it. That is exactly what I thought the definition was but became confused as it seemed during the discussion today that it was simply assumed that an alpha had no character and was only looking to add notches to his bed post. This is also true of many of the posters over at Roissy, though the no character part is rarely said. As I am sure you know this tends to be celebrated there and (obviously) not here.

    Doug has said numerous times that alphas will either cheat occasionally or else look to open the relationship on one end (the male end). My point is that Doug is describing people with low character, not people with social dominance.

    People with social dominance have options in society because they have power. They MAY have options with the opposite sex, or they may have options in other areas of life. That doesn’t mean that they’ll take the low road, like Roissy.

    Doug (and even Roissy) doesn’t strike me as particularly alpha. If what Doug alleges about his life is true, then okay, he’s a “learned alpha” in one area of his life–I mean, if you consider sleeping with sluts with low self-esteem “power.”

    But, idk, most PUAs in general seem to be lacking something serious on the inside. I mean, what else could motivate a man to bang innumerable women, to dedicate huge chunks of life to it? So, idk, do we call people who use success to cover up emptiness and self-hatred “alpha?”

    If so, then who would want to be alpha?

  • Someguy

    I suppose she could’ve yelled “God!”-she was carrying His Baby, so I suppose They were on a First Name basis.

    —–

    tvmunson too funny!

  • http://oldtimemoviereview.blogspot.com Jamie

    Ozy said:
    “I have no idea how to assess SMV, my own or others’. I suppose I’ll have to go with the “compatibility” method of picking partners…”

    Ok seriously, how does a person figure out their own SMV? I’d say I’m a 3 on a good day, maybe a 5 if I wear a paper bag on my head. Who do you ask if you want an honest answer?

    Roissy has an assessment tool but considering the source, I wouldn’t take it seriously.

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

      @Jamie

      Here’s an idea. Why don’t we just forget about our SMV? If you don’t have casual sex, you find your level in normal social (not sexual) intercourse. Women with inflated SMV can only get that way if they got sex from hot guys and convinced themselves that was meaningful. Who do you flirt with? Who flirts back? Why do we have to put a number on it? I don’t want to be told my number. I found a guy I was attracted to and he reciprocated. That’s really all I need to know. Also, there is no absolute scale. Even re weight, which is a constant reference point. One man’s curvy is another man’s fat. One man’s slender is another man’s anorexic. I say be yourself, get out there and talk to people and make connections. If you’re having trouble doing that, the funnel is too narrow and you need to widen it.

  • deti

    Doug1:

    “9′s and 10′s marry greater betas? That’s a hoot. Doesn’t happen. Once in a blue moon maybe.”

    And then that 9-10 divorces her greater beta when an alpha swinging di*k comes along; or she just cheats on him.

    .

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

      @deti

      And then that 9-10 divorces her greater beta when an alpha swinging di*k comes along; or she just cheats on him.

      Wow, you’ve changed a lot in a few months. You’ve become hard. I strongly disagree with your statement. You really drank the MRA kool-aid.

  • http://oldtimemoviereview.blogspot.com Jamie

    @ lurksy & Susan

    nearly ANY biscuit recipe will make good biscuits. It’s all about technique. When you incorporate the butter/crisco/lard into the dry ingredients, leave the chunks BIG, about the size of a quarter. It will look lumpy and gross. It’s supposed to. When you add the buttermilk/milk/cream, mix gently, just so the mixture sticks together. It will finish mixing when you roll it out on a floured surface. If you want the super flaky kind with lots of layers, roll it out, fold it like a letter (tri-fold), roll it out again and repeat about 3-5 times.

    I love this little online community of well-read foodies. It’s why I keep coming back.

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

      @Jamie

      Awesome biscuit advice! How about sharing your favorite recipe or two? Either a guest post or in the forum? What do you say?

  • deti

    Olive:

    “Beta traits are hot, and I’m attracted to guys with a mix, heavier on the beta. If you don’t believe me, then you never will, no matter what I say. But it’s not something I just “convinced myself of.” ”

    Girls like you are difficult to find. A true diamond in the rough; a rare gold nugget found after a lot of mining.

  • Olive

    But, idk, most PUAs in general seem to be lacking something serious on the inside. I mean, what else could motivate a man to bang innumerable women, to dedicate huge chunks of life to it? So, idk, do we call people who use success to cover up emptiness and self-hatred “alpha?”

    If so, then who would want to be alpha?

    Cosign! I remember we had a convo about this once, and I think this is exactly what I was trying to say.

  • Emily

    >> Ok seriously, how does a person figure out their own SMV?

    That’s something that I’d love to know as well (without having to post pictures of myself on the internet haha). I just sort of assume that the guys I date have a similar “market value” to me.

    I do know that I’m not a 9-10 though, so all this talk of Alphas is pretty irrelevant for me. :P

  • Olive

    And then that 9-10 divorces her greater beta when an alpha swinging di*k comes along; or she just cheats on him.

    Or she knocks it off with the “I deserve a really hot guy!” crap and looks for someone who she meshes with. Or she decides not to get married.

    The point is, most girls know deep down that the cock carousel doesn’t feel good, it feels like crap. Even the hot ones know this. And then the feminists tell the girl that it’s OK, she can get divorced, get back on that carousel.

    Girls like you are difficult to find. A true diamond in the rough; a rare gold nugget found after a lot of mining.

    Well thanks deti! But nah, I honestly think most girls are attracted to a mix, they’ve just been lead down the wrong path. I happen to have not been lead down that path (thanks mom and dad!).

  • Olive

    Emily,
    Lol I asked my BF his honest opinion, he said 6/7, which I pretty much guessed already. Then I took Roissy’s quiz the other day, just out of curiosity, and fell right into greater beta, even when I subtracted 10 points from myself (as Roissy recommends). So. That sounds about right.

  • Doug1

    Olive–

    As someone who probably falls in the 6/7 range, I object!
    I said it to Ramble the other day, and now I’ll say it to you. Beta traits are hot, and I’m attracted to guys with a mix, heavier on the beta. If you don’t believe me, then you never will, no matter what I say. But it’s not something I just “convinced myself of.” And as Sassy said, some people who could get alphas turn them down.

    No I believe you. There are exceptions. As well the more a girl only wants sex in a full on relationship the more likely she is to want a beta or greater beta and avoid full on alphas who likely won’t commit, once she realizes that. Takes some / many girls quite a while to, partly out of kidding themselves of their SMV rank. Well most don’t even think in those red pill terms.

    Also your emphasis on the PUA rating system is getting on my nerves. Not because I don’t fall in the female alpha range, just because it seems to be your main indicator of “relationship-worthy.”

    That’s pretty unfair Olive. She asked someone to explain what alpha means in men, whether it includes character and so on. I specifically said it doesn’t, and also said women are by no means always most attracted to alphas for marriage. (They’ll tend to be attracted to alphas they do think have good character and who they think won’t cheat though if they find and can attract that.)

  • Emily

    Haha I suspect that my BF would either give me too high a score or just make fun of me if I asked him. My guess is that I’m easily a 6, maybe a 7, but definitely not an 8. I got Greater Beta on Roissy’s quiz even after subtracting 10, and I’d describe my boyfriend as a Greater Beta (although I’m admittedly *very* biased). I guess it doesn’t matter as much for people who are off the market though.

  • Anacaona

    “No offense Doug, but saying he had 2 “lasting” LTRs in 4 years is like saying my 2 high school relationships of 1.5 years during those 4 years were “lasting.” That’s not lasting. That’s fleeting in the grand scheme of life.”

    Interestingly enough this is another feminist reform trying to pass relationships as successful not matter how little they lasted. Taking away the shaming of not having had a partner longer than a pair of jeans so people won’t take breaking up for a better deal too seriously. So I agree no one can claim being successful in a LTR till it becomes something truly long and it ended for uncontrollable reasons, YMMV.

    “I think a lot of people are repulsed by people with low character. I dislike people with no character. Most people who harp on their own alpha-ness have no character. Those people are assholes. But there are many assholes with no character who wouldn’t identify themselves as alpha, also. ”
    Cosign!

    “On the other hand, there are other women, actually even more beautiful, who look like they’re ready to swell on demand and fill a house with little rugrunners.”

    Err I had known Sofia career for a while since she started in Mexico and I can tell you that she might look like that she is not a nice girl at all I know some stories and take in account that she already divorced so yeah…

    “Saying that less attractive women claim to not want alphas because they really can’t land the alphas seems a bit simplistic.”

    No to mention that this will only be true if the 6 in question slept with the Alpha already if she is not interested in even trying maybe she is not interested at all.

    “As someone who probably falls in the 6/7 range, I object!”
    Another good thing about reading here is that I feel a lot better of not being an 8. Imagine how many asshole they have to deal constantly when us only have to deal with them occasionally, no to mention that even so they get a shitty half deal offer. I rather drive a Volvo all my life than share a Ferrari for a few years, maybe is my ugliness talking of course ;)

    “That’s something that I’d love to know as well (without having to post pictures of myself on the internet haha). I just sort of assume that the guys I date have a similar “market value” to me.”

    I suggested Susan to have a thread for pics. We could do it anonimously with Susan serving as a host. You sent the pictures to her she will get a random number or name for the subject the guys rate and that will be a good way see market value from the guys eyes. Of course it will be fun for us to do it too, just to show how different men and women judge.

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

      I suggested Susan to have a thread for pics. We could do it anonimously with Susan serving as a host. You sent the pictures to her she will get a random number or name for the subject the guys rate and that will be a good way see market value from the guys eyes. Of course it will be fun for us to do it too, just to show how different men and women judge.

      Oh, I think that could be rough. I wouldn’t be able to control who says what. If even one person got hurt feelings, that would be terrible.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Anacanoa, I’ve shown my picture around these parts before and also on my blog, but nobody actually gave me a rating. I’d probably put myself at a 7. I rely on my other qualities to boost my “overall” rating. Delicious cooking is a fast way to a man’s heart. :P

  • Jennifer

    ” I honestly think most girls are attracted to a mix, they’ve just been lead down the wrong path”

    Exactly. I don’t know who the crazy women and men I hear about online are.

  • Emily

    I’d love to see a picture thread, although I wouldn’t actually post one. I’m so paranoid that somebody I know is secretly lurking around. …Emily isn’t even my real name! (*shifty eyes*)

  • Jesus Mahoney

    It’s so hard to rate yourself or someone you like or care about. Strangers are easy.

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

      It’s so hard to rate yourself or someone you like or care about.

      And that’s why it’s not valuable, IMO.

  • tvmunson

    ON PANTIES

    My favorite word in any language, fun to look at, fun to say-“panties”. The first four letters do nothing; the magic comes with last 3, transforming it, setting off balloons, nay, fireworks. Noticing that word anywhere on a page is a near guarantee that something, something, good is happening there. Note the plural; what does it refer to ? Trousers have two legs; panties-two holes? See, it is impossible to discuss them without turning immediately salacious.

    No man is indifferent to panties. It’s why they are thrown on stages. Panties are sexy in a playful, healthy way. Even in the uptight 50s “panty raids” raids occurred. For some women, a panty line is something to be avoided; for all men, they are a source of contemplation and reverie.

    Panties can be divided into two broad classes: 1) “battle underwear” (often referred to as lingerie and 2) regular panties. We shall explore each.

    BATTLE UNDERWEAR
    The panty as part of a lingerie ensemble is evidence of some sort of planning, hence the term “battle underwear”. This is worn in contemplation of effect, both on the potential observer as well as the wearer. It inspires arousal in the male due to its self-conscious admission of sexuality by the female which plays (subtly) against type. The saying “less is more” may been coined in homage to the battle panty (applies to its price, as well as its effect).

    PANTY PANTIES
    The quotidian, “Jockey for Her” panty is, for the cognoscenti, ever bit as arousing, and perhaps more arousing, than the battle panty. First of all, regular panties contain a feature curiously missing in the battle version-the “sniff guard”. This is a white strip located at the very bottom of the panty that fits snug against her pussy and collects all day her essences. The white strip is convenient for the older male who’s olfactory senses have diminished by allowing him to identify its location in the dark. One of my raps against Victoria’s Secret is so many versions don’t contain this. (Not my only rap: why no stuff for guys? What?Well, how ’bout candles made from the wax from 10 Vicki’s models brazilians? Or make those Halloween teeth-sign me up for 20 sets right now!)

    OK smart asses-I know what you’re filthy little minds are thinking. You’re so hung up on them, do you wear them a la Oscar de LaHoya?(BTW if I saw him in drag I’d say “Oscar, not many guys can pull off spaghetti straps-but you can! And those shoes are to DIE!”) No, I’m fetishistic, but like the shoe guys-I want to sniff, lick etc. but not wear. If I tried to put on my wife’s (first thing she’d be is pissed I though they’d fit) no way. Buying them-then there’s nothing to sniff, lick etc. Hey, I’d tell ya’-just this week alone I talked about deflowering 72 virgins, jerkin’ off in a mayo jar, licking a girl’s ass like a sno-cone, dressing in drag like Georgia O’ Keefe (she didn’t wear panties)-I’m forgetting something. I think the Perv Train done left Munsonville a long time ago.

    Perversion-that reminds me. All panties are edible-it’s only a question of how long you’re willing to chew. I really see no need for such an affectation as “edible” panties when dealing with what is already a work of art.

    Whence my fetish? Easy. “The Parent Trap” 1961. Scene where Hailey Mills’ skirt is cut, revealing her nubile pert butt framed in gleaming white panties, looking like an inverted white heart, perfect “tuck”, “roll”, the cheek line present but(t) barely suggested, full, sensual yet prim, an innocent display of budding pubescent vitality. Made me an ex-Catholic, asss man, and panty fetishist in one fell swoop. Walt old oy-I owe ya’ one.

  • lovelost

    @HUS
    When they marry, it is not infrequently to a woman who was one of the alpha’s former girlfriends.

    The highlight of beta definition, should have been typed in bold and red color.

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

      When they marry, it is not infrequently to a woman who was one of the alpha’s former girlfriends.

      Oh pish posh, alphas have hardly any girlfriends. What percentage of women could this possibly be?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sue,

    Men probably are more visually inclined, but I don’t think it’s all about looks for us.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    In any case, men don’t get to say who’s attractive and desirable for long-term mating with women. Women will decide that.

    It’s that “long-term” qualifier that betas aren’t happy with.

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

      @Jesus

      It’s that “long-term” qualifier that betas aren’t happy with.

      ? Not sure what you mean by this.

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

    @SW
    “I think it makes sense that people who have low partner counts, whether by choice or not, are going to prefer others with similar experience for marriage.”

    As someone who’s been rejected in the past a couple of times (while dating) for not having “enough” experience in this department, I do find that some women have their relationship priorities ass-backwards. That is, if they even want to settle down. So much for sexual selectivity being a good thing! Validation, or lack thereof, probably steers some people in the wrong direction.

    Regarding the topic at hand, though, I’m a generous person by nature. Altruism is a quality I’ve reserved for my SO, family, close friends and co-workers (not counting random acts of charity). However, this is something I never displayed while initially dating someone. Why go out of your way and waste the effort on someone if she doesn’t appreciate it? Once the Big 3 (trust, respect, love) have been earned and established, I think this quality is not only appropriate but probably necessary to grow the relationship…

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

      @Megaman

      Why go out of your way and waste the effort on someone if she doesn’t appreciate it?

      Indeed. This is why I say never get more than one step ahead of the other person. You made a caring gesture. You got nothing back, not even appreciation. Major red flag! Cut your losses! Whatever you do, don’t double down. Both sexes make this mistake a lot.

  • Jennifer

    Agree on just about everyone of your posts, Susan. The stuff about normal guys marrying especially; some people speak as though men desperately need online assistance from strangers, and I remind them that men date and marry and father kids and die without Internet help, thank you.

    My Roissy-vision is less romantic; basically, a woman ravages him with love, and he finds that there’s not a game he can play that will either control her, or his feelings. Things either crash due to his messy style or they very, very slowly start to get real for him. OR, he keeps aging until he realizes he just ain’t got it anymore the way he used to, so he grows up and one way or another, for romance or not, gives up the games and starts to show genuine, calm, interest in human connections.

  • Jennifer

    Redneck and his, well, “Deliverance” ideas of humanity again.

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

      Redneck and his, well, “Deliverance” ideas of humanity again.

      Saying that women are poor drivers was the last straw. So unimaginative. I believe we may have seen the last of Redneck.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Oh pish posh, alphas have hardly any girlfriends. What percentage of women could this possibly be?

    I’m pretty sure he was thinking that the beta is the one marrying the gal that the alpha fucked and chucked.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    @Jesus

    It’s that “long-term” qualifier that betas aren’t happy with.

    ? Not sure what you mean by this.

    Well, I know that for me, in my moment of disillusionment, the thing that got me down most was the idea that someone I was “long-term” goods and that I was ignored by girls when they were looking for short-term fun.

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

      Well, I know that for me, in my moment of disillusionment, the thing that got me down most was the idea that someone I was “long-term” goods and that I was ignored by girls when they were looking for short-term fun.

      Betas need to avoid girls looking for short-term fun. They’re not cut out for it.

  • Stingray

    Delicious cooking is a fast way to a man’s heart.

    Seriously. When did this little factoid go by the wayside?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    *Well, I know that for me, in my moment of disillusionment, the thing that got me down most was the idea that I was “long-term” goods and that I was ignored by girls when they were looking for short-term fun.

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

    @SW

    Although there’s probably such a thing as being too accomodating, I’m also not a fan of unconditional forgiveness. Love, yes, but not forgiveness. I’ve seen relationships that should have ended for one reason or another continue to creep along because one person just won’t walk away despite the magnitude of the betrayal. It’s the equivalent of someone hanging a sign around his or her neck that says: “Will forgive anything. Do your worst.”

    But that’s another topic : )

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

      @Megaman

      Good point. I didn’t focus on that part of the quiz, but I’d say by all means forgive the little stuff. Like you don’t like the way he squeezes the toothpaste tube. The big stuff – forgiveness is inappropriate without true desire for redemption on the part of the offender. How many stories have we all heard where someone forgave a partner when they cried like a baby, only to go out and commit the same offense again?

      Also, people vary in their capacity for forgiveness. I’ve stated here that I would not stay married in case of the betrayal of infidelity. I might actually forgive it, but I would not stay married. The marriage would be irrevocably broken.

  • Doug1

    Emily–

    I’d love to see a picture thread, although I wouldn’t actually post one. I’m so paranoid that somebody I know is secretly lurking around. …Emily isn’t even my real name! (*shifty eyes*)

    I wouldn’t think this was a blog you’d have to be worried about people knowing you participate on, especially as a girl commenter. Unless you revealed some very outre things about yourself here.

  • Stingray

    Susan,

    As Vox Day is where I was first introduced to game and that definition is always what I thought of as extremely attractive to myself (though I’ll just leave the life of the party guy to others) that is why I get so flummoxed. I fully understand that an asshole can be alpha and sleep with scores of women. But I tend to think of the guy whom all the women want, yet he chooses, shall we say, to be particular and the man with great character as being the most alpha. Think Atticus Finch.

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

      @Stingray

      Think Atticus Finch.

      That’s so funny, I was thinking of him yesterday! We were talking about whether displays of good character can be sexy, and I thought of him. Gregory Peck was not sexy per se – but he had a gravitas that few other actors could pull off. A bit of trivia: he attended the same church as we did in LA. He was a very religious Catholic, and went to Mass every morning. I believe he was married to just one woman, and faithful throughout their marriage. So he really was Atticus Finch.

      My favorite Gregory Peck movie is Roman Holiday.

  • Doug1

    Jesus–

    M is very far from being a slut and does not have low self esteem, regardless of your theories about that.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Doug,

    M is very far from being a slut and does not have low self esteem, regardless of your theories about that.

    Dude, you haven’t heard my real theories about that. I was being generous.

  • Doug1

    Vox Day’s description of beta is really puffed up. About no game sites would agree with that. Betas do not tend to be real confidant with women. Greater betas aren’t bad at that, but not great either, especially with hotter and more popular women. Looks have some effect and women think it does more than it does, and esp. say that, but really fitness, height and looking strong and masculine are the main things in practice. Status and game or psychosocialsexual dominance is more important.

  • Stingray

    Doug1,

    You’ve got to read Vox’s entire socio-sexual hierarchy to get an idea of what he is talking about. It is very different than any place else. Click on the link and you will see that his definition of Delta is usually Roissy’s definition of beta.

  • Anacaona

    “Oh, I think that could be rough. I wouldn’t be able to control who says what. If even one person got hurt feelings, that would be terrible. ”

    It seems to be a real need for that, given how many women are asking for it. How about a rule numbers not comments? And really what is worst, hurt feelings or having a woman inflating her market value and not having a clue about it? I think you should at least consider it. Not sure how others feel.

    “It’s the equivalent of someone hanging a sign around his or her neck that says: “Will forgive anything. Do your worst.””

    I’m not a forgiving person so yeah I love unconditionally but forgiveness it has to be something really big and totally out of control, since I consider that sex is in our control cheating is totally out of the question in forgiveness, YMMV.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sue,

    Could be. But it’s difficult for them to avoid girls who’ve never looked for short-term fun. Or, at least, seems so to most guys.

  • Emily

    >>Gregory Peck was not sexy per se

    Ooooh I beg to differ… *swoons*

  • Stingray

    Gregory Peck was not sexy per se

    Really?! I find him very sexy.

    A man’s sexiness, I think, is in direct correlation to his character, though. Though I find him terrible handsome, knowing he is a good man ups his sexiness a great deal.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    A man’s sexiness, I think, is in direct correlation to his character, though.

    That’s awesome.

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

    @SW
    “He was a very religious Catholic, and went to Mass every morning. I believe he was married to just one woman, and faithful throughout their marriage. So he really was Atticus Finch.”

    That’s why fiction is often much more satisfying than reality. However, Peck was the real deal. Cape Fear is my favorite of his films. Even I’ll admit he was pretty good looking compared to other Hollywood celebrities of his day. But that was another time in American culture.

    In the modern age, a man that is handsome, charismatic, and popular has no tangible incentive not to sleep around. There’s no longer any pressure to marry and have kids. Unless the man is truly sensitive and introverted (qualities that can disappear), or he has a strong ethical center, women hoping for a lifelong monogamous commitment are out of luck with the really good looking guys.

    I’m not trying to sound pessimistic, just realistic. I mean, the writing has been on that wall for the last 20 years. The kinds of guys who are monogamous and willing to commit these days are pretty easy to spot. Women just have to warm up to them first. I’ve probably said that too many times in multiple discussions : )

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

      @Megaman

      Unless the man is truly sensitive and introverted (qualities that can disappear), or he has a strong ethical center, women hoping for a lifelong monogamous commitment are out of luck with the really good looking guys.

      Yes, that’s why I’m fond of promoting introverts. They’re the male bargains in the SMP.

      Women need to objectively assess the conditions in the SMP. Get real and find a man of good character or start with the cats. There are plenty of attractive men with good character, maybe not male models, but hey, they tend to be gay anyway.

  • Anacaona

    I was going to jump into Gregory Peck’s love wagon till I found his wikipage. Not as good as we though…sadly.

    “In October 1942 Peck married Finnish-born Greta Kukkonen, with whom he had three sons, Jonathan (1944–1975), Stephen (b. 1946), and Carey Paul (b. 1949). They were divorced on December 30, 1955, but maintained a very good relationship. Jonathan Peck, a television news reporter, committed suicide in 1975. Stephen Peck is active in support of American veterans from the Vietnam War; his first wife is screenwriter Kimi Peck, who co-wrote Little Darlings with Dalene Young. Carey Peck had political ambitions, running for Congress in California in 1978 and again in 1980 with the support of his father and family. He narrowly lost to conservative Republican Bob Dornan.

    On December 31, 1955, the day after his divorce was finalized, Peck married Veronique Passani, a Paris news reporter who had interviewed him in 1953 before he went to Italy to film Roman Holiday. He asked her to lunch six months later and they became inseparable. They had a son, Anthony, and a daughter Cecilia Peck. The couple remained married until Gregory Peck’s death.
    Peck was a practicing Roman Catholic, although he disagreed with the Church’s positions on abortion and the ordination of women.[27]“

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Megaman,

    Idk about you, but I wouldn’t want to be with a woman that needed to “warm” up to me. “Warm up” evokes tupperware containers being tossed into the microwave.

  • Jennifer

    Abortion needs a lot of caution, but yeah for Peck disagreeing about the ordination of women!

  • Anacaona

    “Abortion needs a lot of caution, but yeah for Peck disagreeing about the ordination of women!”

    Yeah that is what I meant I totally think he was right with the ordination of women but abortion? I can buy a catholic not believing in not using birth control but once they know the existence of the baby in their womb or their’s partner deciding to end his/her life? Sorry that is too much “practicality” for a person of faith, YMMV.

  • http://oldtimemoviereview.blogspot.com jamie

    Re: SMV Ratings
    “It seems to be a real need for that, given how many women are asking for it. How about a rule numbers not comments? And really what is worst, hurt feelings or having a woman inflating her market value and not having a clue about it?”

    Yeah, I’m on the fence about the HUS Hot or Not idea. On one hand, knowing your number would be useful information so we know what league we’re playing in. On the other hand, I probably wouldn’t submit a picture for evaluation. In a truly anonymous forum, maybe, but I *sort of* know these people and generally like them. But I think things would be different if I saw their comments bashing my photo a la Kate Bolick.

    @ Susan
    I love the idea of a guest post. I haven’t been cooking anything special lately since I don’t have roommates to help me eat it anymore. Also, I don’t really use recipes unless I’m baking. I kinda just make thing up as I go along, based on what I have on hand. I’ll think of something though. If nothing else, I can re-create a pork pot roast with crispy baked potatoes that I used to make at the ranch when it was my turn to do staff meal. Everyone liked it so I made it a lot there.

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

      @Jamie

      But I think things would be different if I saw their comments bashing my photo a la Kate Bolick.

      That was truly ridiculous, a shameful episode in HUS history. There were men here who have described themselves as 5s or 6s slamming her looks. I can’t speak for men, but I had dinner with the woman and found her very attractive physically. She was also very feminine. That cover photo didn’t do her justice, but man, the guys were ruthless. That’s it. No photos here.

      Oooh, I love the pork roast with crispy potatoes idea. Let me know. Tomorrow I’m making a pork roast in the slow cooker with hard cider and prunes. There are very few things that smell better than roasting pork!

  • Stingray

    Regarding the Coq au Vin and using a rooster: a capon is a rooster, correct?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sue,

    Start with the “cats”? I think that might need translation for people under 50.

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

      @Jesus

      Start with the “cats”? I think that might need translation for people under 50.

      Are you not familiar with the aging spinster surrounded by 40 cats scenario?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Oh…. I’m slow. I’m familiar with those. Nevermind.

  • Candide

    This feels like taking the Blue Pill all over again…

  • Jesus Mahoney

    This feels like taking the Blue Pill all over again…

    How so?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Yes, that’s why I’m fond of promoting introverts. They’re the male bargains in the SMP.

    lol. Store brand boyfriend. Not sure many men would relish being in that position.

  • Anacaona

    “Yes, that’s why I’m fond of promoting introverts.”

    I’m married to an introvert and I approve this comment :)

  • http://oldtimemoviereview.blogspot.com jamie

    @ Susan

    To be fair, those were all things that the photographer and whoever designed the cover needed to hear.

    mmmm…pork and apples. We didn’t have any cider there so I used apple juice and the wild sage that grew EVERYWHERE in that part of Idaho. And a little duck demi glace if Chef had a portion he needed to use up. Email me regarding the guest post. I’d want to do some food porn pictures for it.

  • Esau

    I’d like to put in a word about how I have found the alpha-beta distinction useful rather than confounding.

    First, it’s not very interesting IMO to simply equate “alpha” with “attractive”, which is what some of these definitions boil down to; it doesn’t add any new information to just have another label. What does, potentially, add information is to identify an alpha class of correlated, closely-related behaviors, which have the result that exhibiting them is attractive; and the corresponding class of beta behaviors that winds up being less attractive.

    So what’s in these boxes? Here’s a short list of the basics, from what I’ve seen and read, that go into an “alpha cluster” and “beta cluster” of behaviors; everyone could add or subtract or fine-tune, but I think this captures most of the mainstream idea. (Note that I’m not distinguishing between behaviors per se, and attitudes that are revealed by behaviors.)

    Beta cluster
    Values getting approval of others; other-directed
    Feels better getting agreement/permission before acting
    Desires others to be happy; feels responsible for their outcomes
    Respectful, tries not to offend
    Generous, gratified by giving & helping

    Alpha cluster:
    Does not seek approval of others; self-centered
    Self-sufficient, comfortable alone
    Manifestly non-needy, willing to walk away
    Aloof, uncaring/insensitive
    Judgmental, reflexive posture of superiority

    One can tilt or spin either cluster to make a man with those traits seem naturally more, or less, attractive; neither is wholly one or the other. The beta can be seen as a weakling supplicator or as a generative provider; the alpha can be seen as strong and leaderly or as a selfish sociopath. But to do so is to miss the point. Each cluster is a basic “thing” which can show both attractive and non-attractive facets; as Susan always says, what a woman would prefer is a mix of both, meaning the attractive parts of each. This is true, but sort of trivial when you put it that way. Saying “I only want the good parts of each cluster” is content-free, sort of like saying “I only want to do the easy parts of a religion or a job”. Who wouldn’t? but that’s not the choice we usually get.

    The important point — not that I’m a psychologist, but I’ll imitate one anyway — is that the clusters tend to, well, cluster. It may be that few (or no) people are entirely in one or the other cluster; but if you tend toward one cluster then you will tend to have all/most of its traits, both the attractive and the unattractive. It’s much easier and more natural for a person to adopt one cluster primarily, than to develop a pick-and-choose mix between them.

    With this in mind, the important observation that comes out of the whole PUA industry is that, overall, balancing the attractive against the unattractive in each, the alpha cluster of behaviors in men is much more viscerally attractive to young women than is the beta cluster. It’s not a 100% rule (see Olive), but it’s a very strong tendency. And since, in a post-feminist age, women are free to follow their limbic system, it’s the alpha cluster that wins the day if you’re a man looking to sexually attract younger women.

    Again, I don’t dispute that the optimal presentation for a man to have will be a mix of the best of each cluster. But that’s very hard, even unnatural, for most men to achieve at a young age. The practical choice, to the extent that anyone even has a choice beyond their natural inclinations, is to either “go alpha” or “go beta”; and the implications of that choice have now been brought out into the sun for all to see.

    (Note that my breakdown here is along somewhat similar lines to Badger’s, quote: “alphas impress themselves upon their environment, and betas react to their environment”, in his post http://badgerhut.wordpress.com/2011/11/14/stop-denying-the-alpha-beta-paradigm/ which I recommend to anyone who’s interested in the terminology, or remains in denial of its reality.)

  • Lokland

    @ lovelost

    “When they marry, it is not infrequently to a woman who was one of the alpha’s former girlfriends.

    The highlight of beta definition, should have been typed in bold and red color.”

    I noticed the exact same thing. I was reading through it and thought both descriptions were pretty decent. Then I hit that line and I’m like oh well at least they tried.

    In the end the beta, takes the used hoe and marries her. Even in this the most generous description I have ever seen of beta its still the same thing.

    I don’t know if Sue gets this but that line there is actually the single most insulting thing a person could throw at me. Now or previously.
    It makes my stomach clench up and I feel physically sick.

    It might sound good from a womans pov (I don’t know) but getting the LTR is third place, getting laid is second whereas getting both would be first. Nothing like being thrid choice.

  • Escoffier

    capon is a castrated rooster. the traditional prep is different.

  • Jennifer

    That’s a great explanation, Esau, but I maintain that the alpha/beta thing, or at least the beta thing, is very limited outside the SMP, and especially that men don’t need to take a list of traits, or two lists and try to paste them on themselves; most people find the balance between self-sufficiency and selflessness on their own, one way or another.

  • tvmunson

    @Susan #260

    I once saw a comparison of infidelity in a marriage to a plate of rare china that had been broken but perfectly restored. No way to see that it had been broken. It remained on the shelf for a long while until one day, with no warning, it completely shattered. Coincidentally, George Burns cheated on Gracie, one time. He told her she said nothing. Then went out and spent every dime he had on new china. Decades later she said to a friend (according to George) “It’s time for George to have an affair-I need new china.”

  • ozymandias

    I’d love an anonymous HUS Hot or Not, mostly because my body image is largely based on “You don’t like the way I look? Well, fuck you then.” :)

    I’ve decided to skip being Ozy Defender of Poly atm… I’d just like to register my disagreement with most of what people said in response to me, and to point out that Steve Pavlina is an asshole.

    As regards the “casual sex changing your SMV assessment” question: I generally have casual sex with people less hot (to me) the people I date; if they were hot, I’d be trying to date them! :) Is this common, do you think?

    Susan: I really think you can’t overestimate the importance of good character in a life partner. Courage in difficult decisions, dealing with fears and insecurities with grace, intellectual curiosity/rigor/growth, joyfulness, dignity and compassion in ending relationships, a commitment to self-knowledge, reliability, decisiveness, energy and enthusiasm in pursuing passions, personal integrity, open communication even when it’s difficult… all this is way more important, IMO, than whether he’s 6′ or merely 5’9″.

    A wise friend of mine once said that, while sometimes it’s smart to settle, you should never compromise on finding someone who shares your values.

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

      @Ozy

      Susan: I really think you can’t overestimate the importance of good character in a life partner. Courage in difficult decisions, dealing with fears and insecurities with grace, intellectual curiosity/rigor/growth, joyfulness, dignity and compassion in ending relationships, a commitment to self-knowledge, reliability, decisiveness, energy and enthusiasm in pursuing passions, personal integrity, open communication even when it’s difficult… all this is way more important, IMO, than whether he’s 6′ or merely 5’9″.

      Amen to that.

      I generally have casual sex with people less hot (to me) the people I date; if they were hot, I’d be trying to date them! Is this common, do you think?

      Interesting question. I think the guys would say yes, it’s very common for men, or at least for men with options. For women, I’m afraid many have casual sex in hopes of getting to date the guy. They believe that a regular hookup, if the sex is good, will lead to commitment. And occasionally it does.

      I wasn’t going to say this, but since you brought it up, I have noticed in media photos of poly people that they tend to be physically unattractive. It’s like the nude beach always being full of fat, old folks. I’ve also read the the average swingers club in NYC is filled with ugly people. I’m not sure what to make of this, exactly. Perhaps we should rejoice that people with fewer options are finding some.

  • http://oldtimemoviereview.blogspot.com jamie

    “Coincidentally, George Burns cheated on Gracie, one time.”

    So…..tvmunson is 90 years old?

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    Several thoughts…

    1) Esau nailed it.

    2) I personally agree with everyone here on the importance of selecting character traits… but the fact of the matter is: out in the real world most attractive 18-25 year old girls choose alpha traits over character traits nearly every time. I’ve been to big schools, small schools, public schools, private schools, schools in every region of the US… and it’s the same everywhere.

    3) I don’t buy this idea that the most attractive girls only select guys with demonstrated long-term potential. General wisdom (and my experience) say that the more attractive the girl, the more alpha behavior is necessary. And the less attractive the girl, the more beta leeway a guy has.

    4) I’ve never met a player that suddenly found himself in a difficult position to score poon (or a relationship, if he felt like it at the time) because of his number or reputation. Sure, I’ve heard girls talk a big game about avoiding players, but there are enough that give in (including “good girls”) that players really don’t have anything to worry about.

    I don’t really like the way these observations are playing out, but it’s what I’ve been seeing with my own eyes for years.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    But on the note of the original post…

    I couldn’t agree more about the importance of respect. Particularly the importance of respecting a guy’s passion/mission in life.

    That’s easily become the #1 quality I use to evaluate relationship prospects these days.

    Anything less than 100% support (doesn’t necessarily have to be interest, although that’s a plus) for my passion/career means a relationship ain’t gonna happen.

  • http://hookingupsmart.com GudEnuf

    Ozy: I’d love an anonymous HUS Hot or Not, mostly because my body image is largely based on “You don’t like the way I look? Well, fuck you then.”

    Reminds me how you reacted when The Spearhead critiqued your nude pics. I’m still a registered member of the Ozymandias-has-a-fine-ass party.

  • Jennifer

    That has to do generally with the ego level of attractive girls, Jimmy, and girls of school age tend to be particularly drawn to lesser things. But, regular guys in school, and regular girls, tend to have partners too. What would be nice would be if we stopped spoiling the damn alphas and beauty queens.

  • Höllenhund

    “Ah, but neither do they want one who never got invited to get on. What they want, like Anne Shirley, is a man who could have, but didn’t.”

    Exactly. And this type of man is a rapidly dying breed, for reasons that I don’t believe need explaining here.

  • Höllenhund

    From Roissy’s Love post:

    “What is unique about love is that it alone among all the human desires defines by its absence the utterly meaningless life.”

    Words from a weakling.

  • Höllenhund

    Your fantasy about Roissy is bizarre. The very fact that you have such a fantasy about him is also bizarre.

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

      @Hollenhund

      Your fantasy about Roissy is bizarre. The very fact that you have such a fantasy about him is also bizarre.

      It’s a typical female response to extreme alpha, which is how he has usually presented. Personally I am heartened by this love post by Roissy. It’s one of the few posts that doesn’t make him sound like a deranged sociopath.

  • Jennifer

    You call Roissy a weakling because of one of the few times he says something decent about love? Seriously? I swear, you and several others really are drinking the ultimate anti-femaleosphere Kool-Aide.

  • Höllenhund

    Yes, I do. Well, another possibility is that he was simply lying to present himself as more acceptable. It seems Roissy lacks the necessary level of self-discipline in his life. His silly feud with Lady Raine seems to prove the same. He cannot imagine a productive life without romantic love, which is a mentality of dependence. Did Isaac Newton have an “utterly meaningless life”? What about the millions and millions of young men throughout history who sacrificed themselves for worthy causes, in war or elsewhere, before they even had the chance to experience romantic love?

  • Höllenhund

    Not to mention that he seems to be contradicting himself in the last paragraphs of that post. Or maybe my reading comprehension isn’t that great (English is not my mother language).

  • Emily

    *shudder* I forgot about the Kate Bolick thread. Okay, no pictures of me over here!

    I see conflicting viewpoints re: female beauty around the manosphere. On the one hand, I’ve seen the POV expressed that most guys find most girls reasonably attractive. But then I’ve seen people post pictures of completely gorgeous girls, and then all these comments pop up that are all:
    “You call that a 9??? She’s probably a 6 on a good day!”
    “She’s not hot! I’m so alpha! You should see the girls that I bang! My soft harem is made up five 9s, and a 10!”
    etc. etc.

    HUS is generally kinder than most places, but still. My skin’s not thick enough to handle it.

  • Valentin

    “What would be nice would be if we stopped spoiling the damn alphas and beauty queens.”

    A-friggin-men to that Jen.

    On a slightly unrelated note: where the heck did all the commen functions go/hide!? You know bold, italic and so on? All I get is “logged in as” and submit…

  • Höllenhund

    Emily,

    there’s no contradiction. Most men would find a 6 attractive in the sense that they’d not refuse to have casual sex with her if the conditions are right.

  • Tom (not the lurker)

    I think some people think all people who have casual sex are people of low character.(especially women) That tells me they think casuual sex is something borderline evil. If they see casual sex as something more normal then they would not see casual sex participants as low character. I do agree there are low character people who do have casual sex, as there are chaste people of low character.

  • lovelost

    @HUS
    I really don’t understand, whether at HUS people love Roissy or love to hate him?

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

      I really don’t understand, whether at HUS people love Roissy or love to hate him?

      Let’s just say his fans are all male.

  • BroHamlet

    @Jesus Mahoney
    “But, idk, most PUAs in general seem to be lacking something serious on the inside. I mean, what else could motivate a man to bang innumerable women, to dedicate huge chunks of life to it? So, idk, do we call people who use success to cover up emptiness and self-hatred “alpha?”

    In my opinion, doing what you want to do because you want to do it in life is the definition of alpha. Promiscuity (or lack thereof) isn’t of that much consequence to that definition unless you’re pathological about it (which some PUAs clearly are). I have seen alphas who are always sleeping around without trying very hard, and some for whom their moral code doesn’t include sleeping around, but both firmly focused on doing what they want to do in life and defining their own path.

    Really, I don’t think most projections of honor or morals onto the concept of alpha are all that valid. Hence the reason there are alphas in the boardroom and also alphas serving prison stints.

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

      I think what Jesus, was getting at was that we can judge a man by his mission or purpose in life. And if that mission is getting a lot of sex with a variety of women, well, many people are going to find that shallow and hedonistic, to say the least. And that’s fair. It says a lot about a man if he spends months in another country as a poon critic. In some ways, he’s not all that different from a travel writer, or a food critic, except that sex doesn’t work that way. Women are generally emotionally present for sex, which means that the poon critic inflicts considerable collateral damage wherever he goes.

      He may be a success according to his own standards, but I consider him a parasite.

  • Ted D

    @ Ozy – Would you consider posting about jealousy in the forum? I’d honestly like to hear it. I’m not by any means so jealous that it is uncontrollable, but I do have a pretty good jealous streak. But, I’m not really interested for my own benefit. It is as much an intellectual curiosity, and I don’t know any poly folks to ask.

    @ Jesus M. – Yep. I’ve heard my entire life: “You’ll make some women happy some day”. (well other than when I was married. LOL) I guess it wasn’t such a shock for me. I figured out years ago that I was simply not offering what the party girls wanted. It didn’t make it sting any less that I knew it, but at least there was no surprise.

    The Alpha/Beta cluster theory is interesting. Looking at the lists, I fall in between.
    Beta side:
    Other directed (not so much approval though.)
    Getting agreement/permission first – yep that is how you play by the rules
    Desires others to be happy, feels responsible for their outcomes – ALL THE TIME :(
    Respectful – yep, raised that way
    Alpha side:
    Does not seek approval – other than a few key people in my life, I don’t care what anyone things of me.
    Self-sufficient – yep. But I’m not fond of being alone for long unless I’m recharging from some social event I had to attend.
    Judgmental – OH yeah. But I am an ISTJ, guess what the J is for?

    I will also add that depending on my situation and who I’m dealing with, these traits tend to flex a bit.

    So, does this make me a beta-plus?

  • Jennifer

    Hmm. I stand corrected. You have a point there, Hollenhund.

  • Jennifer

    Heh, thanks Valentin.

    “I figured out years ago that I was simply not offering what the party girls wanted”

    A HUGE plus for you, my friend. Beta-plus, eh; needless terms.

    Doing what you want in life, if it’s nothing but self-gratification, is no definition of alpha for me.

    Love, there are some folks here who appreciate Roissy, but Susan and many of the female posters don’t like him at all.

  • Stingray

    Let’s just say his fans are all male.

    Ummmmmmmm . . . . No.

    I am a fan, though not in the same way that I find the men over there are.

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

      I am a fan, though not in the same way that I find the men over there are.

      OK, thanks for clarifying. I have a question though – are you a fan of Roissy, or of who is currently writing Heartiste? Because he has only contributed occasionally in the last year and a half, unless his writing skills and style suddenly changed dramatically. I saw that you were featured not long ago over there – the real Roissy wouldn’t have quoted a woman in that way.

  • tom

    Someone above had a question about jealously. In my opinion one of tbe worst and most destructive emotions a person can experience, similar to grief. It is based in two thought processes. First is the fear of loss. This fear is deeply seeded in insecurity that is brought about by negative thoughts causing negative emotion. Most of the time there is no real basis for the emotion. It is caused by thought process that only sees the worst senerio. Again this is brought on by insecurity. I see my girlfriend talking to a nice looking man and I have a choice. I can remember that she loves me dearly and is only having a conversation about something totally innocent…..Or I can immediately think the worst, think he is trying to move in on her and that she might be interested in him romantically. Thought process # 1 is from a confident knowing perspective while #2 is swimming in insecurity.

  • Ramble

    Susan, I tried to post this yesterday…

    There is a very popular Marriage book written by clinical psychologist Willard F. Harley, Jr., Ph.D. from Minnesota some years ago called His Needs, Her Needs.

    In it, he lists the top 10 “needs” that he has seen over the years. They generally fall like this:
    Top 5 Needs of Men and Women:
    Men
    Sexual fulfillment
    Recreational companionship
    An attractive spouse
    Domestic support
    Admiration

    Women
    Affection
    Conversation
    Honesty and openness
    Financial support
    Family commitment

    There is also a pretty popular forum for readers of the book: MarriageBuilders.com

    I mention all of this because it is pretty closely related to what you have written here.

    BTW, in the MarriageBuilders forum, 1 of those 10 needs is much more “controversial” than the other 9 and it is not “Sexual fulfillment”. I will let you guess which one it is.

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

      @Ramble

      Let me guess – the women don’t want to have to be attractive?

      I’m very surprised sexual fulfillment doesn’t even make the women’s top 5.

  • Stingray

    Really, I don’t think most projections of honor or morals onto the concept of alpha are all that valid. Hence the reason there are alphas in the boardroom and also alphas serving prison stints.

    I’m not trying to project honor and morals onto the concept of alpha. I think I am trying to put some order (caste?) to the alpha definition itself. There is the prison alpha at the bottom and the honorable, moral, high character alpha at the top. I believe that the average woman strive for the top alpha but obviously settles for any and/or all alpha’s beneath this level.

    I also believe there is an order of beta’s though more difficult to define. I have seen betas that or so horrible beta that they can barely make even the simplest decisions for themselves. I have seen high betas that are very admiral men who mostly are strong men but try just a little bit too hard to please others.

  • Jennifer

    “I will let you guess which one it is”

    My guess is, financial support?

  • tom

    @ Jennifer. …. Personally I think Roissy is clueless most of the time. He comes from a perspective of seeing women as inferior and as objects. Many men are of the same opinion. The double standard is a perfect example. Men are heros for sleeping around and women are sluts. Totally ridiculous in todays society. We men have had it good for a long time and now that women arewanting an equal playing field it plays against the male ego and insecurities. This is totally different than an in experienced man wanting a mate of similar experience..that is totally understandable. But a male whore who now wants to settle down and looks down on women who lived the same life style he lived is hypocritical to say the least. SURE he wants an inexperienced woman, his ego and insecurity can’t handle an experienced woman because he KNOWS that she has experienced what he has, meaning all kinds of sex and sexual partners.

  • http://4stargazer.wordpress.com/ Anacaona

    “What would be nice would be if we stopped spoiling the damn alphas and beauty queens.”

    I participated in a pageant and although just a runner up I can say that IME the really top girls (the beauty queens) didn’t had an Alpha fixation it was mostly the ones that were close to the top that went after the guys that looked more like just got out of jail. Susan is right about after certain level beauty repels assholesness and seek for comfort the problem is how many of this top women are around to create a difference. I think someone said here that is better to have 3 7’s or 8’s that JUST one 9 or 10. So yeah the effect doesn’t really register. I will make a post about it in the near future.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Ramble

    BTW, in the MarriageBuilders forum, 1 of those 10 needs is much more “controversial” than the other 9 and it is not “Sexual fulfillment”. I will let you guess which one it is.

    My guess is “An attractive spouse” . . . but it could also be “Domestic support.”

  • tom

    I would say attractive spouse also. Looks fade bitchiness lives on…..lol. it would be nice to have an attractive spouse but in all honestly it is way down on my priority list. Attractive enough is what most men strive for. Besides beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I’ve been with really attractive women. Some were relationship material and some were not. I didn’t base it on their past but on how we interacted. Physical attraction may have been there but the chemistry was not. I broke a couple hearts but their beauty just was not enough…..my fiance is a 6/7 in the looks department but a 10 in the personality department. Some of you know her past. We met as a one night stand and I was intrieged with this wonderful, intelligent, successful, and funny woman. She pursued me and I her. We kept seeing each other and fell in love.. She had been looking for love( in all the wrong places I might add..lol) I was not. But I guess it is true what “they” say, “when you least expect it.” Neither of us judged the other based on our pasts because we did not see what it had to do with “our” future.

  • FeralEmployee

    I assume one of the next topics on this blog will involve the PEW latest social trend: only half of Americans are married. The same trend is said to be observed in Europe (so this affects me), though I don’t know where the statistics for that.

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

      @FeralEmployee

      Ha, we were cross posting! You anticipated my move exactly, though I didn’t know I’d write the new post until I read the paper this morning.

  • deti

    Tom @ 317:

    “Personally I think Roissy is clueless most of the time.”

    Roissy’s blog’s greatest value was probably explaining human nature and the nature of sexual imperatives. He explained how we are, not how feminist theory explained it, and not as we thought we should be or would like to be. There are female sexual imperatives: hypergamy, getting the best genes for reproductive purposes, securing resources for her offspring. There are male sexual imperatives: impregnating as many young, attractive women as possible, ensuring the survival of offspring. As human beings we are much more than that, of course. But sexual imperatives underpin how men and women couple, mate and form LTRs and marriages, and we ignore them at our peril.

    The Game principles he outlines and explains throughout his blog have been shown by anecdotal report to work when applied in the field numerous times, on all kinds of women of all ages, cultural backgrounds, and socioeconomic status. They’ve been shown to work in posts and comments on this blog and others. His blog also points out Game arose in specific response to rapidly changing SMP conditions (mostly unrestrained hypergamy and the discarding of social restrictions and expectations on LTRs and marriages). IOW, the SMP we have now is nothing like the SMP as it existed in 1986, or in 1956.

    Early on he and his commenters recognized Game’s application to LTRs and marriages. The Dave from Hawaii posts are famous and might well be the origin of Game’s application to marriages.

    Finally, the blog is one of the best-written blogs of any kind, IMO.

  • deti

    @Susan:

    I was feeling cynical yesterday. I’ve worked it out of my system.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    I think what Jesus, was getting at was that we can judge a man by his mission or purpose in life. And if that mission is getting a lot of sex with a variety of women, well, many people are going to find that shallow and hedonistic, to say the least. And that’s fair. It says a lot about a man if he spends months in another country as a poon critic. In some ways, he’s not all that different from a travel writer, or a food critic, except that sex doesn’t work that way. Women are generally emotionally present for sex, which means that the poon critic inflicts considerable collateral damage wherever he goes.

    He may be a success according to his own standards, but I consider him a parasite.

    See, that’s what I’m saying by using the term “pathological”. A lot of these would-be PUAs aren’t living their own life mission in their quest to slay poon at any cost, they’re trying to measure up to the caricature of manhood that that they have painted for themselves as “Alpha”. Those types of people are heading down the same road as people I’d call beta. They still have no mission…Except they now know how to push a girl’s buttons and maintain the image of individuality. A few teach that those changes come from the inside, and those are the ones I can find some common ground with.

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

      A few teach that those changes come from the inside, and those are the ones I can find some common ground with.

      Yes, I too appreciate inner game. This is the reason I am a proponent of game. I want more men to be able to attract women. That makes nearly everyone happier. What a man does with that knowledge is how he will be judged, and rightly so.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    Blockquote fail. You get the point though.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Maybe it’s the relatively less emphasis on genetic quality or “lineage” in America, but I find it interesting very few talk about those when discussing “alpha” vs. “beta.” Even when I was young (around 7 or 8), it was fairly clearly spelled out to me what kind of men are on top:

    – Height: at least 1m80cm, or about 6′
    – IQ: at least one standard deviation above average
    – Education: at least college graduate
    – Income: at least upper middle
    – Personality: dominant, confident, in charge
    – Talent: usually a musical instrument or artistic ability, or some other marker such as persuasive speaking ability, charismatic in groups, etc.

    My maternal grandfather, an uncle on my mother’s side, and my father had these traits. When you put all of these together you end up with less than 10% of men, basically alphas. These men have options, so they are more inclined to stray. When I look back at the men I’d been with, I had definitely (though perhaps subconsciously) tried to date away from the higher education, income and personality levels, because I didn’t want to risk ending up with the same fate as my mother. My family also told me I was too ugly to snag an alpha, so they really lowered my expectations.

    These traits don’t speak much to character traits like integrity, honesty, loyalty, kindness, discipline, self-awareness, etc. They are basically the equivalent of the silver spoon one is born with — I inherited my artistic abilities from my father, while my husband inherited his musical ear from his father. The education and income levels are perhaps indicative of ambition and drive as well as family expectations. All the rest don’t have any correlation to good or moral character.

    Luckily my husband has all of the above traits, but is also honest, loyal, faithful, ethical, kind, generous, warm, affectionate and loving. Men like him are extremely rare, so I hit the proverbial jackpot. However, normally he would have had to wait until his 30s to become big-time prized commodity for many women. I saw early on his quality, his character, and all of his other attributes, and I fell head over heels in love. We got married before he had finished graduate school and started working. He also knew he was quality and was very picky about girls, but he hadn’t gotten “established.” I was there for him when other girls (in his social class) didn’t want him yet.

    Doug’s advice from a man’s perspective is wait until he’s established to determine his maximum value, then snag a super hot younger girl. My advice to young women is to find the hidden gem younger man in his 20s, who hasn’t reached the top of his career yet and isn’t all that smooth with women, but who has good background, family values and moral character, so he won’t dump you mercilessly once he does reach there. However, my mother married my father when he was still poor and in grad school, but he divorced her (and left me as a baby) as soon as he became a doctor for a younger woman. So there are no guarantees in love.

    But I must also say that my mother had her own role to play in my father leaving her. Yes, she was very smart, physically attractive and grew up rather privileged for her era; she finished college and went to medical school in Beijing, late 70s and early 80s. But she was truly a nightmare to live with, and to this day I don’t really like talking to her. She was emotionally volatile, easy to anger, and prone to long ranting sessions. She would yell at me for over an hour and take out her frustrations out on me when I was a kid. She was clearly not a balanced person, and she probably believed she was entitled to being treated well because of her upbringing.

    I learned some good lessons from her about how not to treat the people I love. I defer to my husband, I never nag or raise my voice at him, and I am very nice, accomodating and easygoing with him and his family. I am very disciplined about staying thin and attractive for him, also cooking, cleaning and doing things for him. I admire him, respect him, listen to him, and make it a point to compliment him all the time. It’s much better to be kind, gracious, tender, considerate, understanding, affecionate and sweet than nasty, scornful, hostile, bitter, thoughtless and bitchy. A good woman can really set the tone of a relationship, keeping it healthy and loving.

  • Mike

    Essau 282 > nailed it.

    To the topic of this thread… i REALLY miss waking up to my wife bringing me a cup of coffee with a big smile on her face. Such a little act but it always made my day, followed up with big cheek kisses smwack (kisses before brushing teeth was forbidden lol) this was when she was working and woke up before me, so she’d already be up and be happy to make my coffee. Then when the employment situation switched, and i woke up before her, i’d make her coffee and follow the same routine. It was the best part of the day, to see her hair all messed up, groggy and lost, take her first sip, and have a huge smile develope. Magic!

    60/40… didn’t really apply at the beginning. It was about both of us doing things for the other just for the sake of because making her smile made me smile, and vice versa. The reward was greater than the act of giving because it was returned in kind with so much more.

    Eventually, my smile didn’t matter any more, and in turn, it made me not care to try because it felt like it was all take and no give.

    I always tried to tell her, it’s the little things in life, not the big grandiose ones that matter. If all you have are amazing accomplishments and memorable days every couple of weeks/months and the rest is filled with a dead void, then life itself really doesn’t matter, it’s just a mundane checklist. Every day needs the little things that make your day brighter.

    I miss those morning interactions.

  • BroHamlet

    @Stingray

    I’m not trying to project honor and morals onto the concept of alpha. I think I am trying to put some order (caste?) to the alpha definition itself. There is the prison alpha at the bottom and the honorable, moral, high character alpha at the top. I believe that the average woman strive for the top alpha but obviously settles for any and/or all alpha’s beneath this level.

    I think of alpha as a matter of your degree of self-direction and assertiveness independent of the moral context. And I mean REAL self-direction, not just delusion or dysfunction. As for what women choose, I would say that it’s more complicated than just “settling”. The most key deciding factor in what women will see as “alpha” is what society holds up as the standard for power and value, and by extension men that society gives a lot of attention to (good men and bad men). Also add to the equation that the average woman is also of varying character, has varying ability to judge character, and grows up around different male archetypes given her socioeconomic status. Those are all reasons why I think women follow both positive and negative alphas, and why for a moment in time a nationally known criminal can seem to have more pull with females than the president himself.

    I also believe there is an order of beta’s though more difficult to define. I have seen betas that or so horrible beta that they can barely make even the simplest decisions for themselves. I have seen high betas that are very admiral men who mostly are strong men but try just a little bit too hard to please others.

    Really, these days, the beta ladder is the last place any guy should want to be. Just seems to earn contempt from every angle. Even though Susan blogs about women wanting beta traits in a relationship or marriage, I think being a benevolent alpha is a much better route. If you strip down both extremes, Alpha has value in and of itself, Beta seems to have value mostly in what it offers in return. I’ll take the first one, thanks.

    Some would say alpha is a state of mind, and I think that’s largely true. I believe that all it takes to get out of a beta way of being is a simple (but sometimes really difficult) mental shift towards complete self-trust.

  • Stingray

    are you a fan of Roissy, or of who is currently writing Heartiste?

    Ah. Good question and one that I didn’t consider. I haven’t read the archives at Roissy as I simply don’t have time (and, frankly, there is enough stuff new written where I do spend time that I don’t see the point in me reading them). I have read a number of people say that they are convinced that Heartiste and Roissy are one and the same and I assumed they were right (one reason being that in the few archives that I have read all of the authors names are changed to Heartiste). So, I guess I am a fan of Heartiste. He is a callous asshole sometimes and other times seems to be incredibly thoughtful, yet direct. As I have a wicked sense of humor that asshole stuff doesn’t bother me at all and I find his thoughtful side . . . well . . . thoughtful (Dammit, I can’t find the right words. Deep thought there, I know.). I feel much the same way about Vox Day, though his style is quite different and doesn’t seem directly callous unless someone puts themselves under his radar. I have a great respect and penchant for directness and I think that is why I like them, even if I don’t agree with everything they say.

    So, I concede. I don’t have an opinion one way or the other if Heartiste is a different writer.

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

      @Stingray

      If you think Heartiste is callous, you must not have read the post where Roissy picks up a chick in a bar, takes her home to his place and proceeds to enjoy making her “wince with pain during anal sex.” He also stated in that post that the best sex he ever had was when he was degrading women.

      I think what’s gone on over there is analogous to the movie Dave. The real Roissy became incapacitated in some way, and some sub was found to take his place. Putting some his old posts side by side with the new ones provides a stark contrast. Also, it was the sadist that everyone loved so much. His traffic seems down dramatically, something the real Roissy would never have presided over.

      That said, it doesn’t matter who’s pulling the strings if you like the site. Just be aware that those of us who have been reading for years have witnessed some truly shocking accounts.

  • Ramble

    Let me guess – the women don’t want to have to be attractive?

    I’m very surprised sexual fulfillment doesn’t even make the women’s top 5.

    Susan, you were not the first to guess that, but, yes, to everyone that guessed Physical Attractiveness has been the most “controversial” need at MarriageBuilders.com was right.

    I’m very surprised sexual fulfillment doesn’t even make the women’s top 5.

    Again, he originally combined the 2 lists of 5 into a single list of 10 shared by all. And then clarified that, in general, the 5 listed for each was how it normally broke down.

    Also, I believe that list was compiled after interviewing hundreds, if not thousands, or husbands and wives in Minnesota during the 1970’s and early to mid 80’s (the book was initially published in 1988, I think).

    Oh, Bellita, you get a gold star for being the first to get the right answer.

  • Jennifer

    Amen, Tom. Roissy and his fellow cocks know nothing about how to make love flourish, to really nurture the human soul. It’s all about the animal, fallen outlines, and this damned culture of gratification has propelled things to cesspit level.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    I’m fairly certain Rollo Tomassi is one of the writers at the Chateau Heartiste, which is a different but evolved blog from Citizen Renegade, and previously Roissy in DC. Citizen Renegade is around the time that multiple contributors began writing there.

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

      I’m fairly certain Rollo Tomassi is one of the writers at the Chateau Heartiste,

      Well that explains a lot.

  • Stingray

    As for what women choose, I would say that it’s more complicated than just “settling”. </i

    Yes, you are correct here I think. I still tend to think of the average woman as being like the women I grew up with and this was before ONS were being pushed as ok and normal. When my female peers and I were looking for a LTR we typically looked for the alpha with moral character. My view is much too narrow for the way things are today.

    Really, these days, the beta ladder is the last place any guy should want to be. Just seems to earn contempt from every angle. Even though Susan blogs about women wanting beta traits in a relationship or marriage, I think being a benevolent alpha is a much better route. If you strip down both extremes, Alpha has value in and of itself, Beta seems to have value mostly in what it offers in return. I’ll take the first one, thanks.

    Some would say alpha is a state of mind, and I think that’s largely true. I believe that all it takes to get out of a beta way of being is a simple (but sometimes really difficult) mental shift towards complete self-trust.

    I fully agree that the benevolent alpha is the place to be and what men should strive for. I also agree that alpha is a state of mind that involves complete self trust. The strong betas I have met are strong in that they have at least some conviction. The problem lies in that they allow others (very often the women in their lives) to provide the basis for that conviction instead of seeking it out for themselves. That conviction is more easily malleable and those around him know it, (may) manipulate it, and then may even despise him for that.

  • Stingray

    DAMMIT. Blockquote fail.

    My comment start with “Yes, you are correct . . . and ends with that paragraph.

    Then is picks up again with “I fully agree . . .”

  • Stingray

    Susan,

    Understood and thank you for clearing that up.

    If the original Roissy was that callous, then you may count me among the women here who are not a fan. What you describe about the original Roissy is . . . disturbing.

    You may count me a fan of Heartiste, then. Apologies for the mix up and I will definitely keep that in mind when people here refer to him. If I bring him up in the comments I will be sure to clarify Heartiste and not the generic form of Roissy.

    Also, it was the sadist that everyone loved so much.

    Yikes. I should have kept my opinion to myself though I am grateful that it has been cleared up. Many of the commenters there now seem to at least being trying to better themselves and not just trying to get sex (though obviously many of these are still very much there). It is these men whom I like to converse with and have actually had some very meaningful conversations with. Even a couple of brief ones with Heartiste who was nothing but respectful to me.

  • Jennifer

    Totally agree, Susan. Some of even his less severe advice carries streaks of malice. I think it’s still him; he’s probably just become hardened by his own practices and beliefs. The women he’s with may have had sexual satisfaction, but they will not have received much if any long-term blessings, will not find their lives better because of it. This is where his advice is incredibly myopic; if he focuses on certain sexual imperatives, he ignores deeper needs or motives in what creates and necessitates marriage. So many of those men are fools; they were too passive, to the point of not even being able to pick a friggin’ restaurant to eat at, then their solution is to switch so strongly that now, they brag they don’t even let their women decide which restaurant to go to. They used to apologize too much, now they apologize once, shortly, and ignore their partners’ further responses. Jackasses and fools.

  • Jennifer

    Stingray, I hope none of those men continue to exhort any kind of manipulation, jerkiness, or dishonesty to women if they’re really trying to be better.

  • Stingray

    Jennifer,

    I get the sense that some of them are at least working their way towards that. Some of them absolutely do their best to be good men, but honestly don’t know what to do, at all, with women. And of course there are always the douchenozzles. I ignore them, unless they try to converse with me.

  • ozymandias

    I’m a lolfan of Heartiste, in much the same way that I’m a lolfan of Twilight or The Room.

    I find it interesting that the traits I find attractive in guys (determined through figuring out common traits in my partners, crushes, and celebrity crushes) are neither alpha nor beta traits. The single trait I find most viscerally attractive in any person is knowing things and being able to explain them. If anyone’s seen Numb3rs, whenever David Krumholtz is going on about some math thing, I end up with my panties soaked through. :) It doesn’t have to be academic: I’ve gotten turned on by people explaining Magic: the Gathering strategy, the techniques of famous con artists, or how to take bullets out of someone.

    I guess I have to stop calling myself a beta fetishist now! :)

    Susan: I don’t know about swingers; I’ve never hung out with one enough to say. However, for poly people, there are two reasons. One, poly people tend to be ordinary people, and ordinary people (esp. when compared to celebrities, Photoshopped models, or the sort of people whom one would expect to have multiple girlfriends) are kinda ugly. :) Two, poly people tend to be geeks, and geeks are not particularly well-known for their high levels of conventional attractiveness. I mean, even our hottest celebrities– Karen Gillian and Summer Glau for the girls, any of the Doctors and Neil Patrick Harris for the boys– are not Megan Fox/Brad Pitt levels of conventional hotness.

    Ted: Ugh, I can’t sign up for the forum! I have enough time-wasters as it is. :)

  • Escoffier

    I am slowly reading through the roissy archives, up through about Oct. ’08 now, and so far it all seems like the same author.

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

      @Escoffier

      I don’t recall exactly, I think the crisis happened in early 2010? When it happened, he actually deleted a lot of his earlier posts, possibly in hopes of containing the damage to his real life. The one I referred to is long gone. After that the blog began changing, both in name and authorship.

  • Jennifer

    That’s great, Stingray :) Good for them, they wisened up fast. Now things are opposite for some guys: they learned the tricks, but not the deep stuff.

  • Jennifer

    Not surprising, Ozy. People are a lot more complex than some let on. It’s assertiveness and confidence that universally attract women, and sometimes they don’t notice any more assholery traits for a while. Or, they just take the cream of Roissy’s advice and leave the nastier stuff. But it’s very insidious.

  • Höllenhund

    Excuse me but I find it so lame that you periodically have these girl talks about Roissy being some deranged psycho. Do you actually believe he himself or any of his readers, consciously or subconsciously, see him as someone with a “damaged psyche” who feels he has to accomplish something to “make it right”? Really? These attempts at pop psychology are, pardon me for repeating myself, lame. Roissy simply has better cognitive abilites than most men, that’s it. You speak to me nonchalantly about women’s rape fantasies and fascination with Twilight and then expect me to be shocked and disgusted by a man who likes rough anal sex and degrading women, even though it’s common knowledge that tons of women yearn for degrading rough sex? Come on. If you want to see someone who’s truly damaged psychologically, look no further than the tons of beta chumps and the trashy sluts spawned and brainwashed by feminism.

  • Olive

    Doug,

    That’s pretty unfair Olive. She asked someone to explain what alpha means in men, whether it includes character and so on. I specifically said it doesn’t, and also said women are by no means always most attracted to alphas for marriage. (They’ll tend to be attracted to alphas they do think have good character and who they think won’t cheat though if they find and can attract that.)

    Yeah but you added that thing about 6s and 7s knowing they aren’t hot enough to get alphas so they go for betas/greater betas, convincing themselves alphas are not attractive. Basically it seemed like you were saying 6s and 7s are kidding themselves if they think alphas don’t make them wet, alphas make all girls wet (which is not the same, by the way, as “being attracted for marriage”). Maybe I misinterpreted though.

    Also I know I’m an exception, but I think there are more “exceptions” than you realize. TBH I think tons of girls want to be with betas, but they have no idea how to spot them; they’ve been trained to look for the wrong qualities. I had a friend who really liked betas (she dated a beta guy for 2 years), but she didn’t seem to know where they were. I kept pointing certain guys out to her (like really nerdy ones who seemed like they’d never dated) and being like “hey, I bet he’d be a really great boyfriend.” Actually there’s one I would’ve gone for myself if I wasn’t off the market.

    Also I wasn’t just referring to your post, I was referring to your attitude in general. Yesterday I was pretty pissed off about your advice to Anna in the forum. The poor girl basically took it all to mean that she’s not as attractive as her sister because she doesn’t have big enough boobs, which is simply outrageous IMO. You’re fostering her discomfort with herself, which is stupid, because she already sounds like a total hottie. It’s the same reason I’d refuse to post my picture on here (my avatar is the only picture of me I’d ever consider posting, because you actually can’t even really see me lol). I’m perfectly comfortable with the way I look, and I don’t need to post my picture for validation, or for people to discuss how I can improve. I’m cool being a 6, it doesn’t make me a hottie, but doesn’t make me ugly either. I’ve always known I’m cute.

    The point, though, is that you don’t seem to value much in girls besides their hotness factor. I know attractive is important, but there are other things a girl can do to make herself “relationship-worthy” besides wearing makeup and getting implants, and I think you know that. And I didn’t see you discussing any of that with Anna.

    Anacaona,

    Another good thing about reading here is that I feel a lot better of not being an 8. Imagine how many asshole they have to deal constantly when us only have to deal with them occasionally, no to mention that even so they get a shitty half deal offer. I rather drive a Volvo all my life than share a Ferrari for a few years, maybe is my ugliness talking of course

    Hey! Who said 6s and 7s are ugly? I think I’m adorable and you probably are too. ;-)

    In all seriousness though, I totally agree. I’m happy to not be an 8, seems like a lot of baggage, plus it’d be harder to convince betas I’m actually attracted. Sassy has talked about this a lot, about how some guys she’s dated couldn’t believe a girl as attractive as her would go for guys like them. That sounds like a pain, I’m glad I don’t have to deal with that…

  • Jennifer

    There are things worse than chumps, Hollen. I don’t think Roissy’s a psycho, I think he’s just a malicious and devious player, and knows it. His damaged soul, I’m sure he knows nothing about. Cognitive abilities, huh; not enough. And btw, no one denied the fools who crave rape fantasies; obviously critics of Roissy would find such women sick as well.

  • http://badgerhut.wordpress.com Badger

    “Good article, though this “Men will get better results with women if they offer deserved respect a bit later. Ditto for generosity” jived badly for me. Sounds like the whole “make them wait for it” Roissy crap.”

    Hmm, interesting. So on one side we have a scientific study, at one of the top research institutions concerning marriage, and a corollary offered by a semi-professional relationship writer with a keen eye for common sense, which happens to line up with empirical results from guys of many ages all across the country.

    On the other side, someone is “uncomfortable” by that women might respond positively to this pattern of behavior, and so morally shames it and tells guys to do the opposite even though we know it’s a failing strategy.

    One study isn’t everything, but I’ll take a decently-designed social science experiment and the words of Susan Walsh over the admonitions of a woman who just wishes it weren’t so.

  • Jennifer

    Very apt, Olive.

  • Olive

    Susan,

    BTW, this is why women are so disappointed to learn that for men, it is all about looks. It gives us less to work with.

    Is it, though? I know that’s the first and foremost attraction trigger, that’s why when I used to go out I’d dress up and not wear glasses and whatnot (but I also never wore makeup, and as a tiny little peanut, people probably couldn’t even see me, as I’m a full head shorter than most average-sized women, let alone men lol).

    But even the guys have talked about other things that make a girl attractive that don’t have to do with physical appearance. For example, a girl who can’t hold an intelligent conversation… who wants to spend extensive amounts of time with a bimbo? It’s a turnoff for my BF anyway. He hated all my old college friends, thought they were idiots.

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

      @Olive

      I was exaggerating on that point about looks, and Jesus actually took issue with it right away.

      Awww, Peanut is one of my pet names for my daughter. :)

  • Ted D

    “I also agree that alpha is a state of mind that involves complete self trust. The strong betas I have met are strong in that they have at least some conviction.”

    Maybe for some, but this doesn’t sit well with me. I trust myself just fine, and don’t care too much about what people think of me in general. In truth, I think the primary reason I am not more “alpha” is I have manners. Yes, that’s right, manners. Just about every time I see a list of “alpha traits” it looks like someone is describing an asshole.

    Perhaps my ideal of manners is outdated, but here goes:
    It is RUDE to push your beliefs on to others simply because you can.
    It is obnoxious to talk or act like you know you are “the man”. It doesn’t matter if you are or are not, the fact that you feel the need to show it is the issue. (what happened to humility?)
    Wanting people to do what you want, the way you want all the time is very self-centered and selfish.
    Expecting people to do what you want, when you want is acting entitled.
    Making yourself the center of attention is either obnoxious (if you do it because you think your shit doesn’t stink) or needy (as in you NEED to be the center of attention to feel good about yourself)

    So, it may be a way of thinking, but I disagree that it is based on self trust and conviction. I have TONS of conviction. I simply refuse to impose my conviction on others. It is one of the things that pushed me out of the Catholic Church. (I don’t like their idea of pushing religion on others, among other things…)

  • Olive

    If you want to see someone who’s truly damaged psychologically, look no further than the tons of beta chumps

    That’s not fair. Not all betas are “chumps” and I happen to love betas and don’t think they’re psychologically damaged at all.

    (Maybe that’s why what I’ve heard of Roissy gives me the willies.)

  • Jennifer

    Ted, you are the man.

  • Stingray

    Ted D,

    I have thoughts about your post that are going to take some time to develop. Kids are being completely crazy right now and can’t think straight. Check back in a bit?

  • Olive

    JM,

    Well, I know that for me, in my moment of disillusionment, the thing that got me down most was the idea that I was “long-term” goods and that I was ignored by girls when they were looking for short-term fun.

    Interestingly a lot of girls get this too (I definitely did before I went through my short slutty phase). It’s a product of hookup culture IMO. Everyone would stop with that if hooking up wasn’t popular.

  • Jennifer

    Yes, people are like a herd of dumb animals right now.

  • ozymandias

    Hollenhund: I call roissy a fuckhead because he recommends emotionally abusive tactics in long-term relationships, reduces women’s worth to their BMI and cup size, reduces men’s worth to their ability to act like douchebags, and has no understanding of the basics of biology or sociology. In addition, he is homophobic, transphobic, sexist, and racist.

    I’m a kinkster. I have no problem with rough anal sex or degrading women during sex. What I have problems with in his sexual advice is that it is generally the equivalent of recommending people go skydiving without a parachute in its lack of concern for both physical and mental safety.

    1) He recommends men ignore women’s “no’s.” That is, quite simply, RAPE. While people often have rape fantasies, the only ethical way of fulfilling them is to establish a safeword beforehand, so that one can distinguish the faux-no’s from the legitimate no’s.
    2) He doesn’t mention negotiation once, even though it is of vital importance in kink. A gentle hand on my throat is capable of dropping me into subspace in one second flat; for other people, it will lead to them kneeing you in the balls. Some people love being pretend-punished; it will make me curl up in the fetal position in the corner of your bed and cry. You CAN’T know about that shit until you ask.
    3) He recommends anal but doesn’t discuss the importance of patience, relaxation, lube, and fingering first, which can cause serious pain and internal damage to the person being penetrated.
    4) He perpetrates the myth that women get looser the more people they’re fucked by. The vagina is a muscle (that’s why Kegels work) and how loose it is is a function of relaxation and arousal. Besides, even if his idea was true, you’d think a woman who fucked her one partner every day would be far looser than a slut who had a one-night-stand once a month.
    5) One time he recommended fucking women when their pussy was dry. YEEEOWCH!

    In short, Roissy is one of those assholes who gives honest perverts like me a bad name.

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

      @Ozy

      You said it so much better than I ever could! For the record, I’ve been stunned at how many men seem to buy into the idea that a woman’s stretched out vagina is a slut tell. It’s beyond preposterous. If that were true, CVS would have to carry tampons the size of grapefruits.

  • Olive

    One time he recommended fucking women when their pussy was dry. YEEEOWCH!

    Wtf? I actually laughed, the advice is so ludicrous.

  • tom

    Hollenhund it is clear Roissy doesn’t think highly of women nor does he respect them. To him they are just a piece of ass to be had. What a GREAT perspective to have about half the earths population.Most of us know there are women who deserve no respect (men as well) but it is a rare day Roissy shows any real respect to women in general. I have seen him respect womens opinions at times. But over a long period of time it is clear he sees women as second class.

  • Olive

    Ah ok. Sorry, still making my way through the comments from yesterday. Damn it, you just can’t leave HUS for a second without falling behind, can you? ;-)

  • Stingray

    1. It is RUDE to push your beliefs on to others simply because you can.

    I agree. I don’t see the alphas I know pushing their beliefs on anyone. That’s not alpha, rather, I would argue, omega. However, defending one’s position when being attacked or even simply having a heated argument for the fun of it is not pushing ones beliefs on anyone. It is simply standing by and standing up for one’s convictions.

    2. It is obnoxious to talk or act like you know you are “the man”. It doesn’t matter if you are or are not, the fact that you feel the need to show it is the issue. (what happened to humility?)

    Again, I see this as an omega trait, not an alpha one. One of the greatest traits an alpha with character can have is humility. The most alpha men I have known did not need to show that they are the man, they simply are.

    3. Wanting people to do what you want, the way you want all the time is very self-centered and selfish.

    Yes, it is. An asshole alpha tells people what to do and they usually do it. The people might be a little pissed about it, but they do it nonetheless. An alpha with character will ask, politely and directly. People will get it done and be happy about it.

    4. Expecting people to do what you want, when you want is acting entitled.

    Alpha asshole, eh, maybe yes. But people give an alpha what they want and entitle them to it. Again, an alpha with humility and character will ask and they will expect as well. However, the “expect” comes in the form of respect that the alpha has given and the people around him have earned. The expectations become welcome as it has become a sign of earned respect.

    5. Making yourself the center of attention is either obnoxious (if you do it because you think your shit doesn’t stink) or needy (as in you NEED to be the center of attention to feel good about yourself)

    I am not sure they do make themselves the center of attention. Rather it just happens to them. If they do make themselves the center of attention, yes it can be obnoxious, but they don’t care. And in all honesty how many people actually view him as obnoxious? Is it right for him not to care if he is being obnoxious? Possibly not. But if all he is doing is pulling attention his way in a harmless manner should other people find this obnoxious? Is that right?

    The other side of this is that there are plenty of alphas who have no desire to be the center of attention at all. They would rather just be.

    It is one of the things that pushed me out of the Catholic Church

    I applaud you standing by your convictions here. But it is the church standing by her conviction to spread the Word as God taught us to do that keep many of us there.

  • Olive

    Yes, I do. Well, another possibility is that he was simply lying to present himself as more acceptable. It seems Roissy lacks the necessary level of self-discipline in his life. His silly feud with Lady Raine seems to prove the same. He cannot imagine a productive life without romantic love, which is a mentality of dependence. Did Isaac Newton have an “utterly meaningless life”? What about the millions and millions of young men throughout history who sacrificed themselves for worthy causes, in war or elsewhere, before they even had the chance to experience romantic love?

    It’s not that people who never experience love have “utterly meaningless” lives, it’s that their lives must be damn miserable. I don’t give two shits if your number one male sexual imperative is to fuck a wide variety of attractive women. Every human is a human, every person benefits from experiencing attachment and love. It was argued by early-20th century psychologists (Mary Ainsworth, mostly) that attachment is rooted in biology. Scientists have since built on this argument with the help of new technology that allows them to study the brain.

    And now I’m going to be brutally honest, Höllenhund. Someone who thinks love is “weak” is a bitter person who hasn’t experienced it. IDK what that says about you, but some of the big bad alphas around the manosphere openly admit that love is a good thing. Yohami, for example… you can find an open description of his relationship on the forum, in which he admits that he loves his GF, even if he struggles to deal with her princess attitude. It’s not a sign of weakness, it’s a sign of being human. If Roissy mostly thought that love/attachment = weakness, then maybe he is a sociopath. I’m not saying that as a girl. I’m saying it as a human being who knows that attachment is important to every single person, regardless of gender. Scientists are realizing that it is a brain function that starts from infancy.

  • Olive

    Susan,
    Did you whitelist my new e-mail? When I first started using it I had no problem, and now every 4th or 5th post (usually the ones with three-letter acronyms) gets thrown into moderation. Maybe there’s something wrong with the whitelist setting? Something to check, anyway.

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

      @Olive

      Whoops, didn’t notice the new email! Done.

  • deti

    Ozy @ 361:

    I feel like I’ve just read a primer on gynecology.

  • Escoffier

    Eh, you’re both right.

    Love can indeed make you weak; that’s what great about it. I actually take it as a sign of Roissy’s humanity that he is so in love with feeling in love. It truly is one of the greatest feelings in the world, one praised with good reason by some of the greatest poets and philosophers. Socrates called eros “divine madness.”

    But it can also make you into a totally snivelling weakling pussy lunatic. Philip Pirrip (for example) is not enobled by his love for Estella Havisham. He is a made a fool by it. Ditto Anna Karenina and Emma Bovary.

    We should, none of us, forget to apply the principles of probability distribution to just about everything we analyze here. Newton was indeed a great man. I can’t say whether he was miserable or not but he was a crank and believer in all kinds of silly fictions and superstitions. He’s way out in one tail. Socrates was way out on the other tail–perfectly happy until the moment he died, perfectly capable of feeling (and enjoying) love without ever being mastered by it.

    Nearly all the rest of us are somewhere in the middle of the curve.

  • Olive

    Escoffier,
    Fair enough. I think it’s more how we react to the love feelings that determines whether it makes us weak or not. For example, as an insecure high school student I was an idiot in my first relationship. I’d like to think that’s not so now. Also, it’s about who we choose to fall in love with. And yes, I do believe it’s a choice to a certain extent… the type of people you spend time with determine the type of person you’ll fall in love with. For example, if Roissy only spends time with the bar ladies, chances are he’ll fall in love with a bar lady. Is that good? Maybe not.

    But Höllenhund really seems to look down on people who fall in love. That’s a mistake, IMO.

  • BroHamlet

    Maybe for some, but this doesn’t sit well with me. I trust myself just fine, and don’t care too much about what people think of me in general. In truth, I think the primary reason I am not more “alpha” is I have manners. Yes, that’s right, manners. Just about every time I see a list of “alpha traits” it looks like someone is describing an asshole.

    Alpha has very little to do with manners, although sometimes the presence or absence of them can be a telltale sign. The reason so many douchey traits are on the lists you read is because you are reading the thoughts of men who think that they can’t attract women without those douchey traits, and it’s a direct swing in the opposite direction for lots of beta men. Most guys would probably heed that advice and end up somewhere in the middle. When I started reading some of the PUA blogs and seeing so much talk about negging and snarky responses, I didn’t understand exactly why they had to focus on these things.

    Not being cocky, but I have rarely if ever had the problem of a girl trying to be flip with me. Why? Because I really never had the attitude that anyone was superior to me. Seems like most of the PUA advice up until recently was written for people with mild to serious inferiority complexes, i.e. the average dude who buys into the perception that women are somehow superhuman. People are people are people, point blank.

    Perhaps my ideal of manners is outdated, but here goes:
    It is RUDE to push your beliefs on to others simply because you can.
    It is obnoxious to talk or act like you know you are “the man”. It doesn’t matter if you are or are not, the fact that you feel the need to show it is the issue. (what happened to humility?)

    Alpha does not equal pushy or rude. In fact most alphas that I know are well-liked because they are friendly, well spoken, and don’t feel the need to puff their chests out to get noticed. They’re the type of guys who do as much walking the walk as talking the talk, and people follow.

    I really do believe I’m “the man” in my sphere of influence, and that belief is built on things that I have DONE and a solid confidence in my potential, not just talk. And I don’t need to tell that to anyone. The elite are proved on the field, and most of the time those are the guys who are willing to fail their way to success, which is another conversation entirely.

    Wanting people to do what you want, the way you want all the time is very self-centered and selfish.

    Again, beside the point. The Alpha mindset I am talking about is more inwardly focused, not about making high-handed demands.

    Expecting people to do what you want, when you want is acting entitled.
    Making yourself the center of attention is either obnoxious (if you do it because you think your shit doesn’t stink) or needy (as in you NEED to be the center of attention to feel good about yourself)

    When you are acting in line with your purpose and who you are, and you have completely accepted both of those things, often times you end up being the center of attention because people are drawn to your demeanor. It’s a powerful mindset, but power is not the goal, nor is attention.

    So, it may be a way of thinking, but I disagree that it is based on self trust and conviction. I have TONS of conviction. I simply refuse to impose my conviction on others. It is one of the things that pushed me out of the Catholic Church. (I don’t like their idea of pushing religion on others, among other things…)

    See above. Alpha is more about your relationship with yourself than any other relationship. The fact that you disagreed with the church and stuck to your guns is Alpha. Forcing your beliefs on others is not the definition of Alpha.

  • ozymandias

    Some people suspect that Isaac Newton was gay or asexual, which puts a new spin on his lifelong virginity…

    I personally believe that a life without love is empty, but a life without romantic love is not necessarily so.

    deti: Sorry. :) Sex education is one of my passions. That was the short version of the Roissy Sucks at Sex talk…

  • Anacaona

    - Height: at least 1m80cm, or about 6′
    – IQ: at least one standard deviation above average
    – Education: at least college graduate
    – Income: at least upper middle
    – Personality: dominant, confident, in charge
    – Talent: usually a musical instrument or artistic ability, or some other marker such as persuasive speaking ability, charismatic in groups, etc.

    In my culture is totally different the more uneducated and talentless are usually the more arrogant and have their share of chicks, of almost any background (I mean there is a point when a woman won’t touch a guy that is too low for her status no matter how confident he might be), so I guess Alpha’s come in different flavors? Not that the “good guys” are any better just less worst.

    You speak to me nonchalantly about women’s rape fantasies and fascination with Twilight and then expect me to be shocked and disgusted by a man who likes rough anal sex and degrading women, even though it’s common knowledge that tons of women yearn for degrading rough sex?

    I will say that Holle has a point there pornotube has been exploding with degrading sex lately (anyone else noticed it?) so my guess is that the sexual satisfaction threshold has been moved once again. I have a theory from my observations that the most sex people have the more new tricks need to incorporate to their sexual repertoire to get off. I might be wrong but my friends path to the dark side was clearly adding new and new and new stuff to feel satisfied. You know like a drug, YMMV.

    Hey! Who said 6s and 7s are ugly? I think I’m adorable and you probably are too.

    Heh I love myself and my body so I don’t feel bad for not being prettier at all, but guys that are into the chase of poon are very harsh with us non 8’s you should had seen some men complaining that Athol’s wife was not worth the effort he placed in his marriage, they assume that a guy with game like Athol deserve nothing short of a 9 I guess. I think that is probably the same crowd that think that Mark Zuckerberg is a sucker for keeping his old girlfriend after becoming a millionaire. So yeah we are safe from those types!

  • anonymous

    Doug1:
    “9?s and 10?s marry greater betas? That’s a hoot. Doesn’t happen. Once in a blue moon maybe.”
    Deti:
    “And then that 9-10 divorces her greater beta when an alpha swinging di*k comes along; or she just cheats on him.”

    Great!
    Then why are people making the SMP more difficult than it is when it’s as simple as deti and doug have proclaimed;

    All Young HB9/10s with character only go for cad “alpha” playas.
    All CAPs only go for YHB9/10 w/ch.

    The rest of the SMP lower-ranking participants are just bitter and miserable because they can’t get a HB9/10s with character nor cad alpha playas that they’re all pining for.

    If any sane lower-ranking participants want a relationship, then they’ll have to settle for a fellow low-ranking member.
    But since they’ll end up miserable in the long-run and dump their SOs for even the slightest chance at a YHB9/10 w/ch (if they don’t marry) or a CAP (even if they’re married to a good guy), they’re ALL better off forgetting about relationships and remaining single for life because they don’t stand a chance getting what the unicorn they all want.

    And
    since the CAPs are bad bets for LTRs >2 yrs., the YHB 9/10s w/ ch will eventually get P&Dd, so THEY’RE also better off skipping on relationships and remaining single.

    The only winners are CAPs, but wait, even they’ll have to eventually settle for banging merely 7s.
    Oh, the horror!

    Yep, the SMP is pretty f&*kd up!
    So go ride the carousel, go focus hard on a career or play video games all day……. you’ll never

  • ozymandias

    Anacaona: I think whether someone’s kinky or not is basically hardwired in early childhood (kinky sorts can very often recall tying up our dolls or reading the bit of our myth books where Loki gets poison dropped into his eye with GREAT attention). However, if you’re kinky, once you admit your kinkiness to yourself, you’ll often find yourself trying things you’d never dreamed of trying.

    (I got electrocuted! It was really fun! XD)

    anonymous: That world sounds terrible! Good thing it bears absolutely no relationship to real life!

  • Ted D

    Keep in mind I am going on the PUA version of “alpha” here. I have known many strong men that had none of the traits I mentioned earlier. If indeed we are talking about something else, then my rant is pointless. I have no issues being strong in conviction, I simply have no desire to emulate the kinds of behaviors tossed around in the manosphere to be “alpha”. If that is what it takes, I’m not interested.

    Singray – thanks for the reply. VERY good points. I am getting ready to head home, but I hope to reply in more detail later.

    Off topic a little – I certainly didn’t leave the Catholic Church for that reason alone. It was really two things:
    1. The Church is far more political machine than religious organization these days. I already have a government that tries to control me, I don’t need two.
    2. The absolutely ridiculous stand that birth control is a sin. We have WAY too many people on the planet now, and they are STILL forcing people to make more? Sex is just for procreation?!

    The pushing religion thing wouldn’t be so much of an issue for me if I actually believed in the Church. But, unlike a used car salesman that can sell a lemon and sleep at night, I was unwilling to pimp out a cause I didn’t believe in. And NONE of this changes my spirituality or belief in God. I simply choose to practice my way.

  • anonymous

    Doug1:
    “9?s and 10?s marry greater betas? That’s a hoot. Doesn’t happen. Once in a blue moon maybe.”
    Deti:
    “And then that 9-10 divorces her greater beta when an alpha swinging di*k comes along; or she just cheats on him.”

    Great!
    Then why are people making the SMP more difficult than it is when it’s as simple as deti and doug have proclaimed;

    All Young HB9/10s with character only go for cad “alpha” playas.
    All CAPs only go for YHB9/10 w/ch.

    The rest of the SMP lower-ranking participants are just bitter and miserable because they can’t get the HB9/10s with character nor cad alpha playas they’re all pining for.

    If any sane lower-ranking participants want a relationship, then they’ll have to settle for a fellow low-ranking member.
    But since most are of low character, they’ll end up miserable in the long-run and dump their SOs for even the slightest chance at a YHB9/10 w/ch (if they don’t marry) or a CAP (even if they’re married to a good guy), they’re ALL better off forgetting about relationships and remaining single for life because they don’t stand a chance getting what the unicorn they all want.

    And
    since the CAPs are bad bets for LTRs >2 yrs., the YHB 9/10s w/ ch will eventually get P&Dd, so THEY’RE also better off skipping on relationships and remaining single.

    The only winners are CAPs, but wait, even they’ll have to eventually settle for banging merely 7s.
    Oh, the horror!

    Yep, the SMP is pretty f&*kd up!
    Who needs to ride the carousel? I’m dizzy just reading this over and over and over again.

    Susan: “I am willing to say this is probably primarily an American phenomenon. While feminism didn’t eradicate the double standard, it did create the reverse double standard.”

    No, not an American phenomenon.
    This will happen anywhere were hedonism is prominent in either/both sexes.
    Intelligent foreign women are ALSO disgusted with playas. (See Anacaona)
    Why do you think Western men are so appealing to foreign women?
    One major reason is that the reputation of Western husbands contrasts that of many feral men in those foreign countries.

    When the number of decent marriage prospects declines, a small minority of smart decent people seek alternatives by opening up to other possibilities while the majority will join the carousel.

    It’s EXACTLY what has happened in the ghettos, but everyone thinks they’re so above that “element.”
    wishful thinking
    More men become playas (or more women become sluts) = more women will jump on the carousel and become single mothers, then more men will become playas….. and the decline continues.

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

      @anonymous

      This will happen anywhere were hedonism is prominent in either/both sexes.
      Intelligent foreign women are ALSO disgusted with playas. (See Anacaona)
      Why do you think Western men are so appealing to foreign women?
      One major reason is that the reputation of Western husbands contrasts that of many feral men in those foreign countries.

      Well then they must be pretty disappointed when Roosh takes off the next morning. :)

  • tom

    @ Susan……..incredible that there are a lot of guyss who think a woman who has had a lot of lovers has got to be loose in her vagina. Simple logic would say a married woman who has been married for 15 years and has had sex maybe1000 times would be more loose than a woman with 50 past lovers. But we both know neither is true. My late wife had sex with me over 20 years and stayed nice and tight even after my daughter was born. My fiance who has been around the block a time or two also is a perfect fit. I have experienced rather loose vaginas in the past but. I think that was just their size. Just like penis sizes vary, so too do vaginas.

  • Doug1

    Stingray–

    You’ve got to read Vox’s entire socio-sexual hierarchy to get an idea of what he is talking about. It is very different than any place else. Click on the link and you will see that his definition of Delta is usually Roissy’s definition of beta.

    I think Vox’s description of beta is much closer to lesser alpha, than beta.

  • Stingray

    Doug1,

    Agreed. In Vox’s Hierarchy there are FAR fewer alphas. Vox’s description of Delta more resemble’s the Chateau’s definition of beta.

  • Doug1

    ” I generally have casual sex with people less hot (to me) the people I date; if they were hot, I’d be trying to date them! Is this common, do you think?”

    Interesting question. I think the guys would say yes, it’s very common for men, or at least for men with options. For women, I’m afraid many have casual sex in hopes of getting to date the guy. They believe that a regular hookup, if the sex is good, will lead to commitment. And occasionally it does.

  • Doug1

    Mean to add a “yes”, as my comment to that quote from Susan above.

  • Doug1

    Stingray–

    Agreed. In Vox’s Hierarchy there are FAR fewer alphas. Vox’s description of Delta more resemble’s the Chateau’s definition of beta.

    Chateau’s definition of alpha, beta and omega, is what pretty much everyone in the game aware and accepting sphere uses. A definition that no one adopts in practice is pretty much useless.

    Despite what’s she’s said on this thread, Susan does not in practice use Vox Day’s definition as what’s beta. She does however seem to have in her mind as the ideal beta, a guy who’s pretty much on the greater beta/less alpha dividing line, and / but strongly inclined to be reliably faithful.

    My own preference which I’ve tried to promote with much luck, is to have two parallel scales. One for gina tingly male strictly sexual attractiveness to girls/women, and the other for good mate/dad qualities. There is a TENDENCY for more alpha guys to be less comforting, harder to live with, and less faithful than beta guys, since betas try to emphasize and advertise those things as their main selling points compared to alphas, but it’s not true that all betas really have those qualities much, or than no alphas do. I give a good lot of comfort, am loving and caring, am easy to live with, and don’t cheat for example (though I do have an arrangement that you will have read about and heard hotly declaimed if you read the comments in Susan’s longest thread ever by far, about the nature of male sexuality, which was mostly her publishing an email from a male reader and commenter on that).

  • Doug1

    anonymous–

    All Young HB9/10s with character only go for cad “alpha” playas.

    What they generally try to find is alphas who haven’t been players, or who they believe have truly reformed.

  • Doug1

    How many Hollywood hotties marry men who aren’t alphas?

    Close to zero is your answer. I’m just talking about them because people know about them. There’s data.

    Hollywood female 10s may and do sometimes marry male 9s or 8.5’s in stead of super alpha male 8’s like Warren Beatty or George Clooney to get the hope of fidelity at least for awhile. I think Scarlet Johannson married her ex whatshislessfamousname for that reason, yet that marriage only lasted the rather standard Hollywood 5-6 years innit? I’d be she was the one who cheated. She’s rumored to have been quite promiscuous when single.

  • Doug1

    Olive–

    (Maybe that’s why what I’ve heard of Roissy gives me the willies.)

    He mostly works at teaching game to all three levels of betas, and to lesser alphas too. I think he regards omegas as basicly hopeless in most cases.

  • Thrasymachus

    My dream is to set up Roissy and Amanda Marcotte on a blind date and observe the results (from a safe distance, of course).

  • Doug1

    ozymandias —

    Hollenhund: I call roissy a fuckhead because he recommends emotionally abusive tactics in long-term relationships, reduces women’s worth to their BMI and cup size, reduces men’s worth to their ability to act like douchebags, and has no understanding of the basics of biology or sociology. In addition, he is homophobic, transphobic, sexist, and racist.

    What utter rubbish. Roissy knows evolutionary psychology aka sociobiology backwards and forwards and probably majored in it. He doesn’t recommend emotionally abusive tactics in LTR’s but rather a combination of continuing push and pull, attraction from teasing and occasional negging, but more comfort and deep listening and understanding than when doing pick up. As for you last sentence, Roissy is not just a gender realist, he’s also a race realist, but not a race hater at all. I can’t remember him ever being homophobic or trans”phobic”, I think he just doesn’t care, though he doesn’t bow down to the PC alter of extolling them either.

    I agree he does promote assholery too much (rather than douchbaggery), I think mainly to shock betas immersed in nice guy, automatically respect all women, pedestalizing preaching current American culture, out of subscribing to that mindset.

  • Doug1

    Thrasymachus

    My dream is to set up Roissy and Amanda Marcotte on a blind date and observe the results (from a safe distance, of course).

    He’d never go out with her. She’s a 5.5-6 on a good day, with makeup and hair done just right.

  • Stingray

    There is a TENDENCY for more alpha guys to be less comforting, harder to live with, and less faithful than beta guys, since betas try to emphasize and advertise those things as their main selling points compared to alphas, but it’s not true that all betas really have those qualities much, or than no alphas do.

    I agree with this wholeheartedly. I hate that it has gotten into so many men and women’s heads that to be alpha is to be the asshole cad with no morals. Obviously, alphas can and do take this stance. But the polar opposite can also be true and the man can still be very alpha.

    I did not read any of that thread you are referring to as it took off so fast that there was no way I could have kept up.

  • Jennifer

    Ozy..ick. But at least you’re into honest stuff and consent.

    “That world sounds terrible! Good thing it bears absolutely no relationship to real life!”

    Hah! Indeed.

    “I might be wrong but my friends path to the dark side was clearly adding new and new and new stuff to feel satisfied”

    You are right. The book “Marketing of Evil” demonstrated perfectly how people keep getting more and more crazy to get highs.

    Sting and Bro, great posts. And yes, Roissy most certainly does promote emotional abuse, quite clearly.

  • Jennifer

    True, Sting; I’ve really come to respect your perspective since I saw you first :) A lot of things contribute to the terrible nasty-alpha acceptance epidemic: women have darker areas that are also drawn to darkness on different levels and our current society, with promotion of zero boundaries and sexual pain, encourages them to throw caution to the wind. Then the feminist movement hurt a lot of men, and women found themselves so miserable that many subconsciously reached for any sign of testasterone, of manhood and strength (thus the shit test was born, out of the unconscious desire to test his will). After the femmie explosion, for some the picture of manhood was torn up, and now some gamers try to piece it back together, some alpha here and some beta there. But as I said before, sticking traits to yourself like post-its doesn’t work for a person on the deepest levels; a man is more than the sum of his parts, to rephrase a quote, so while many online areas offer good advice, they should never be taken as the complete roadmaps to real life. Then there’s the fact that we have evolutionary tendencies for rough men, and are just fallen people from Eden. God predicted our altered and unhealthy minds. Even now, though, one size, and method, and even definition, doesn’t fit all, because people are complex and so are our experiences.

  • Jennifer

    Anon 4:20, I LIKE you!

  • Doug1

    Susan–

    Oh pish posh, alphas have hardly any girlfriends. What percentage of women could this possibly be?

    You’re starting to get really dogmatic. That’s just not true. At all.

    It’s true of Roosh, but not many others. flyfreshandyoung has a girl friend now. I’ve had a good number, who’ve usually ended up moving in with me since my marriage ended. Most alphas do.

    Most guys first learning game as betas or greater betas don’t, it’s true. They want to practice and hone their developed early seduction skillz.

  • Doug1

    Jennifer–

    And yes, Roissy most certainly does promote emotional abuse, quite clearly.

    Like what? He only teaches what he’s found attract most women to men who do it.

    Roissy is the best at teaching game on the net by far. He teaches it as a whole interconnected system and understanding the true sexual psychology of women, as well as with tones of real life examples.

    Betas here would do well by reading Heartiste/Roissy’s 2008-2009 heyday archives.

  • Jennifer

    Like making girlfriends live in dread of his intentions. Like cheating and then playing sorry. Like behaving as though she doesn’t matter as much. Roissy beneficial, my ass; most other gamers are just more humane (but not all). Others are Roissy fan-boys who outrightly deny he does anything actually harmful; embarassing.

  • Tom

    @ Doug
    Roissy is the best at teaching game on the net by far.

    _______________
    Roissy is best at teaching asshole game on the net by far

    There I fixed it for you Doug

  • Hope

    Athol Kay is the authority on married game. He’s given lots of advice to married men and turned at least a dozen marriages around. I’ve sent the husband of the couple I mentioned previously to marriedmansexlife.

  • Anacaona

    My dream is to set up Roissy and Amanda Marcotte on a blind date and observe the results (from a safe distance, of course).

    Ha we should start a petition also this should be recorded for antropologists and sociologists alike. The results could be a second sexual revolution

    Ozy
    I meant building resistance and needed new tricks to get off is completely different than discover a kink, IMO. My friends mentioned that bedding a new woman every week started to lost its shine and for the new woman being as exciting as it was before she needed to do something different, and from then on it was an spiral down to the pits of sex hell, again in my very vanilla opinion, is different to discover a kink than to not being able to get off without some new stuff added every year or so, YMMV.

  • Doug1

    Jennifer–

    Like making girlfriends live in dread of his intentions. … Like behaving as though she doesn’t matter as much.

    A slight amount of dread. Not quite as much as him is rather what he counsels. It all works to keep her highly attracted. I independently discovered most of what she teaches decades ago from noting what I natural did worked best and least, and from watching other guys who were good with girls and what they tended to have in common.

  • Jennifer

    No, it’s not a slight amount, and playing with emotions like that is crap-ploy.

    Even Athol Kay should only come with caution, Hope. He sometimes has advised game-playing too, to reel the other spouse in.

  • Doug1

    Well Jennifer it works, and works well, including on girls like you.

    So tough toogies. Male dominance, for the win.

  • Jennifer

    LOL Sure, jackass. Good luck making a real life with a woman.

  • Stingray

    Jennifer,

    Thanks.

    Even Athol Kay should only come with caution, Hope. He sometimes has advised game-playing too, to reel the other spouse in.

    A couple of thoughts about this. What Athol is promoting is only what a natural does without realizing it in his own marriage. A woman who marries an alpha is fully aware that he can find another woman without any difficulty whatsoever. He may not flaunt it but if she is at all observant she will simply know it. This is exciting and a bit disconcerting at the same time. Depending on the alpha dread may be too strong a word. This fully depends on how he treats his wife in other parts of their marriage.

    Now, I understand you may not like the concept of playing games, but I would be willing to bet that any man who might feel like he is playing games and might have a bit of guilt about this, would feel far worse if his marriage fell apart and he lost her because he did not try this. A broken marriage is far more devastating than finding out that ones husband did some things that his wife may not have approved of, but ultimately brought back her attraction and saved their marriage.

  • Tom

    I was happily married for over 20 years and never had to resort to game playing…Most marriages or relationships fail from a lack of communication. With good communication, resentment and a host of other relationship killers can be avoided.
    Trust me a man who tries to game a woman who is a control freak will go down in flames. That is where you must master give and take, not tell her YOU wear the pants in the family….or you might leave if you dont get your way…..that is like pouring gas on a fire to some female types. Yeah go ahead and try to totally dominate a first born woman…lol

  • Jennifer

    Sting, I don’t buy the pragmatic “playing games is better than being alone” crud for a second. Games and dread wreck marriages, not save them, and a woman’s attraction doesn’t necessarily say anything about what she needs. I’m talking about flirting with other women, changing your FB status to “single” so she’ll notice, telling her fine, get the hell out, just so she’ll look over her shoulder. This is crappy, ugly and stupid behavior. Your wife’s pushy, you stand up to her; she expects you to fold, don’t fold; you have boundaries, don’t give them up. Remaining firm is both important and attractive, and the honesty and integrity of it beats out dishonest string-pulling any day.

  • Jennifer

    Great points, Tom. The “if you don’t try this move, you could lose the marriage” is an infamous dread-advertising line of game sites.

  • Tom

    Someone mentioned kinky sex today and porn is like a drug. you have to go further and kinkier to get satisfaction. Not really sure I agree. I just think today, because of porn,people are willing just to go further than earlier generations. Now it is not all that uncommon to hear of more threesomes including mfm that includes double penetration, group sex (we used to call them orgies) etc. Nothing wrong with some kink if everyone is willing. I remember when anal was taboo, now it is pretty common place. If anything, porn has kind of taken the “dirty” out of sex. It is no longer the mysterious activity it once was. However that is a two edeged sword. Sex has become too easy and too casual because of porn. Sex is supposed to be fun and enjoyable, and porn definately helps get that across, maybe too well.

  • Doug1

    Jennifer–

    A very hot much younger woman has been living with me for 5.5 years now.

  • Stingray

    I’m talking about flirting with other women, changing your FB status to “single” so she’ll notice, telling her fine, get the hell out, just so she’ll look over her shoulder.

    Ok, admittedly these can seem like pretty crappy things for a husband to do. However, I get the impression from reading Athol that the women these men are married to have all but checked out of the marriage already and the men are resorting to these things as a last ditch effort to save their marriage. Is it pretty? No. Does it work sometimes? I have read some posts over there that say that it has and both the man and woman are completely happy in the marriage now. It’s not about being afraid of being alone. It’s about saving one of the most important commitments one makes in their life. For those marriages that fell apart anyway, one could argue that being stuck in a marriage that is not a marriage at all is life sucking and that ending it might be best for both (I am not taking kids at all into consideration and talking about the relationship of the male and female only. When kids are involved, it is a completely different ball game).

    BTW, are you married?

  • Doug1

    Here’s long clip from an early 60s movie demoing game before that work was invented for types of seduction. Krauser has good subtitled commentary on places where is game is weak and where it’s strong. It also involves a delish young Jane Fonda in one of her earliest roles.

    http://krauserpua.com/2011/11/28/1960s-day-game-in-new-york/

  • Jennifer

    Is that the same one who’s having the open relationship, Doug?

    You don’t save a commitment, Sting, by playing headgames. None of the men I read about, in fact, seemed at all assertive until they tried either being total jerks or playing games. One marriage, “saved” and resulting in rabbit-like sex because the woman threw out an ultimatum and deprived the husband of sex until he fulfilled it, ended up crumbling in the end. I don’t know any of these allegedly happy and healthy couples, they’re blanks on the Internet, but I know that what’s effective and what’s healthy are not always the same. I’ve seen extreme sects of my faith fill women with dread, the salvation kind, and you know what? It works; it keeps women loyal for years. Not all of them wake up and leave, or have their husbands wise up. And they’ll all swear by their methods and say they’re happy too. No, I’m not yet married, but it sure is good to learn what to embrace and what to avoid. I respect you, but I do not respect these moral-blurring, pragmatic, and ultimately selfish moves.

  • Stingray

    Jennifer,

    I do agree with you 100% that the standing up to her and all the other things you mentioned should absolutely be done first. With out a doubt.

    But, I ask you, what if it simply is not enough? Would you recommend giving up? I am not saying that the man should be an open, shameful flirt, by any stretch of the imagination. But if he goes to the gym, buffs up, starts talking to other women in a simple conversation, and these things bring his wife back to him, I don’t know. I would want my husband to fight for me tooth and nail before just calling quits on the marriage, even if that means in a single last ditch effort he told me to leave. If it saved our marriage and I understood why he did it, it would be utterly worth it.

  • Stingray

    Athol has written about several marriages that were saved on his blog and many commenters have written in thanking him and telling their stories. Athol will be the first to tell you that this will not always work and to be very careful. Take things step by step and I have only ever seen him advocate the things you are talking about as a single last ditch effort.

    I also do not see saving ones marriage as a selfish move. There are two people saved in the marriage if they can make it work and if there are kids involves one could truly argue that they end up better for it as well.

    What do you suggest for a marriage that is no longer working when the communication got now where. What do you suggest when his attempts to stand up to her fail (this could be argued to be a head game as well as it likely goes against his nature and he is trying it in an attempt to save his marriage). If the attraction comes back and the marriage becomes happy once again, I think it worth it.

    BTW, Keoni Galt is Dave in Hawaii. He applied game to his marriage and took up the dominant role and I believe applied some of what we are talking about here. They have a very happy marriage now and have a new baby as well. If these things can save a marriage that was on the verge on ending, I have a difficult time finding fault with it. Especially, when everything else conceivable has been tried.

    His blog is here:

    http://hawaiianlibertarian.blogspot.com/

  • Jennifer

    Oh, I have no problem with self-improvement, Sting! The gym stuff is good, and not at all dishonest, nor is simply talking to other women. Being fit is on the same plane as standing up for himself; it’s necessary for his health, success, and attraction. I’d feel more badly for a man who tried something like flirting once out of desperation, but the kind of men who have done so thus far online have gloated over it, and do it for apparent reasons of control. One guy talks about not taking his wife seriously on an almost constant level, and the game-playing thing is the sort he’d probably recommend immediately, inspite of the fact that he’s already more dominant than necessary. I can empathize with someone who tries flirting out of desperation, but those who plan out these moves, who rely on anonymous strangers online and celebrate that a dishonest ploy worked, are not acting in a good way; they seem to now have a taste for string-pulling. There’s also a difference between not making your partner the center of your universe, your reason for living, and letting them know or think you coul easily leave.

  • Jennifer

    I don’t respect Keoni’s methods at all, Sting; you may as well know that now. His tone is very selfish. Yes, he’s done all the game moves here and then some, and tells everyone of his severe rules. Once again, I’ve heard of many unhealthy living situations, and everyone saying they were happy. I don’t take domineering strangers seriously. And for pete’s sake, standing up for yourself is being honest, not playing a game; this is part of the term-blurring I hate.

    “What do you suggest for a marriage that is no longer working when the communication got now where. What do you suggest when his attempts to stand up to her fail”

    Every marriage is different, and there are no guarantees, so I can’t subscribe something to solve any and every marriage with this problem. All he can do is stick his ground, brace himself, not allow himself to be stepped on or step on her. Do you really think that playing games is the last result to save a marriage when being honest “fails”? I’m a Christian, and I believe in doing many things the world will say is weak, don’t work, blah blah. Since there are no guarantees, you might as well be decent. If my husband ever believes that making me dread him or even slightly doubt his fidelity is the way to fight for me, he will be terribly and harmfully deceived.

    “I also do not see saving ones marriage as a selfish move”

    Almost all of these sites are about taking control, getting what you want, though they all claim to be about love, even Roissy’s.

    “Take things step by step”

    I’ve seen the step by steps spelled out, and the generalizations are often huge; that one woman asked Athol for validation of practically every freaking move, even whether she should withhold sex, and updated him on every personal detail. That’s freaking nonsense, asinine. Once again, I don’t know these people and they’re not my examples of how to live. Just the opposite, in fact.

  • Jennifer

    We can also go by the what-ifs until we’re blue in the face, and in my experience that’s exactly when people tend to default to immoral behavior, to try and seize what control they can, even of just their own lives. What if the games don’t work? What if the flirting wins a much bigger alimony payment? What if the dominant stuff makes her uncomfortable and sad, because he’s gone from controlling himself to trying to control her? Certainly love is not the first thing they teach, except often to measure love out in careful doses. Good on Athol for presenting caution, but he still promotes it too often.

  • Jennifer

    On another note about religious people being unhealthy and claiming happiness: not all of them are that severe. Some do have loving husbands, but their views of women, of themselves, are still so limited. They have much better potential than what they’re doing presently.

  • lovelost

    @Doug1 #400

    Betas here would do well by reading Heartiste/Roissy’s 2008-2009 heyday archives.

    i picked up some of Roissy maxims from http://hawaiianlibertarian.blogspot.com/2011/01/compiled-maxims-of-chateau.html so of Rossiy maxims are like affirmations. use it in life when dealing with women, things falls in place, and also makes sense a lot too.

  • Jennifer

    Typical Roissy mixture of some truth and a lot of BS.

  • Stingray

    Jennifer,

    Then we are in agreement. I see no point in keeping a wife simply for self aggrandizement. That is not keeping the marriage together for anything but selfish reasons and I can see how the game playing from these men is just that.

  • Stingray

    His tone is very selfish

    This may be why we are not seeing eye to eye. If you read anything that my husband wrote I am sure that you would think the exact same thing about him. I can be sure of this as he writes much the same way as Keoni Galt. This probably has a GREAT deal to do with why I respect him as well.

    However, knowing what my husband would write and knowing how every bit of it would be true, yet also knowing how he treats me, dotes on me, how generous he is with me, respects me, and loves me behind the scenes; I tend to think the Keoni feels the same for his wife. I don’t think he would stay with her otherwise. I truly don’t. I would bet a great deal of money, based on living in a similar situation that he dotes on and loves his wife very much.

  • Jennifer

    I am glad you agree in one regard, Sting. But I find the advice to not take your wife too seriously, to neg her constantly (not always the same as mere teasing), to apologize briefly and without much if any remorse, to always choose where you eat regardless of what she thinks and to cosign Roissy’s ploys, as being very unloving. Keoni agrees, then, that it’s all right to cheat and make her think she did something wrong, that women shouldn’t vote, that they’re not capable of rational thought in many areas. Maybe Keoni’s wife does have him wrapped around her finger; a lot of men blow smoke in public, but it’s still pretty nasty smoke and it’s harmful to others. I have no problem with him keeping control of himself, but that’s not his only incentive. I hope you’re not too self-aggrandizing; one woman I know of brags about her alpha husband and what she calls his “asshole game” (I disagree with what she’s calling that) and happily speaks about how once, when they faced divorce, he reminded himself that there are plenty of girls on the girl-tree. That’s just sick; it’s like women like that accept that they’re inferior and brag that their husbands were jerks to keep them in order and aren’t they lucky, lucky. I hope your husband doesn’t talk that way. Is he a blogger I know? (Not asking for links).

  • Mac

    Susan you commented:

    “I’ve written about female narcissism and entitlement, so I’ll agree, but there really is a disconnect re chores. I just saw another article saying that women do most of the household chores even when they work full time. They also tend to the children more. This is what feminism demanded – women “having it all.” ”

    Feminism was about equality, last I checked, including the equal sharing of the chores. A relationship where both people work and bring in money but one shoulders most of the childcare is not going to survive. I fail to see why the one with the unfair burden also needs to do nice things for the slacker!

    I love doing things that make my husband happy. In part, that is because he is as responsible for the house and the kids as I am. If he wasn’t I would be too pissed off to make him coffee in the morning.

    If women are unhappy about doing it all, then find husbands who do their half.

    Mac

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

      @Mac

      Thanks for your comment. I think a lot of couples get into habits where the mother naturally picks up more slack on childcare and chores. It’s not a deliberate selfishness on the part of the man, a refusing to help out. For example, in my experience, little kids will reach for mom over dad 9 times out of 10 when they need something. I think women also cook more overall, though there are many households where men do the cooking. So there’s a sort of gradual sliding into roles where the woman steps in and voluntarily takes on more than she should. And someone else mentioned that women are less tolerant of dirt and untidiness in general, so they clean, which is also true in my experience.

  • Jennifer

    Mac, feminism isn’t about equality. Hasn’t been for a long time, if ever.

  • Jennifer

    Sting, there are a few writers I know, namely Wayne Grudem, who write about women’s roles being limited and often sound domineering, but who love their wives completely (Grudem moved his job to another state for his wife’s health). Even a real jerk I know of, very patriocentric, always dotes on his wife. Maybe I’d see your husband as resembling Wayne Grudem more *shrugs* Reminded me of him.

  • Stingray

    I hope you’re not too self-aggrandizing;

    I don’t think I am. I honestly try very hard to not bring up the fact that I married an alpha unless I think it will help make a point. Most of the time the men don’t believe me and with this notion out there that *all* alphas are assholes I have have no desire to paint my husband in that light.

    No my husband does not talk to me that way. There are people out there that might say he is an asshole, but he’s not. He’s direct and he has expectations. But like I said before, those expectations come with respect and I mean that in the deepest sense of the word. I know most women don’t desire respect like men do, but I do. It means more than I could ever say that he truly respects me. He is never a jerk (that’s not to say that we don’t have our moments, but a jerk he is not). If he messes up, there is a brief apology that I know is sincere and then the matter is over. In short, he loves me and I have never, ever doubted that. I know quite well that he could be with another woman tonight if he wanted to. It is never thrown in my face but I would have to be a complete moron to not see it.

    He is not a blogger and has no interest in game beyond the fact that he sees the truth of it and to talk to me about it once in while because he knows how fascinating I find it.

  • Stingray

    I have never heard of Wayne Grudem but that sounds about right. He would come across as incredibly domineering to most of the people here. He’s not, at all. He is never anything but polite and respectful. He would move halfway around the world if it would benefit my health and he seriously considered it at one point as a couple of years ago I had allergies so bad that I would be bed ridden for days at a time. He was ready to pick up and leave, except for the fact that we found a medical treatment that has nearly put a stop to that. I can’t even begin to explain what moving away from where we are would mean for him.

  • Jennifer

    That’s wonderful :) Warms me to hear it. Respect is what I need too, like a man! So if he respects you, is loving, and direct and honest, he’s a winning package and you’re a blessed woman.

  • Stingray

    you’re a blessed woman

    I am and I thank God for it, too. I always knew I was, but I didn’t realize how truly blessed I am until I started to read about game. I think part of the reason that I enjoying posting so much is that I would like to see (and possibly help) other people find in a marriage what we have. It’s amazing.

    Dammit Jennifer, you made me cry. ; )

  • Jennifer

    :P Truth be told, I know I can seem very domineering too, and those who dislike me probably wouldn’t believe what an utter pussy cat I am to men I respect and care for. Plus, some people loosely apply the term asshole to almost anyone with strong personalities. I define it more as men who act superior, manipulate, mock, etc. I’m blessed too; the men in my family and friend circle are strong, Christian masculine men who respect women and are neither doormats nor dominators. The women I know are smart, loyal, open and loving, again neither dominant nor doormats. The uglier game stuff sure threw me for a loop partly because of my different experience.

  • anonymous

    Susan: “Well then they must be pretty disappointed when Roosh takes off the next morning””

    LOL
    And aren’t we disappointed that he’s back!

    I’d like to see what happens when word gets around globally that a growing number of Western men are becoming just like many of THEIR men.
    Perhaps then they’ll start targeting Asian herbs or
    Utahians! ha
    (was it Hope?? who mentioned men in Utah were marriage-minded?
    and while they’re still young?)

  • Esau

    Ozy at 345: “The single trait I find most viscerally attractive in any person is knowing things and being able to explain them. ….

    I guess I have to stop calling myself a beta fetishist now!”

    Perhaps, but don’t put away the membership certificate quite yet. If you go with the “alpha/beta cluster” idea, then it is true that knowing a lot of stuff is not strictly in either cluster, though good explaining will tend to benefit more from the beta set. However, I think knowing some stuff thoroughly tends to be well correlated with the beta cluster, and so appears kind of at second order in beta, as it were.

    This much is just an observation from experience. One idea for a direct causal relationship can be found in the old (2003) essay, “Why Nerds Are Unpopular” which you can still find here http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html
    Short version: establishing mastery over (some part of) the natural world, and establishing mastery over other people (peers), are both learned skills, and so those who put their time into one of these are very likely going to be deficient in the other. Other explanations can also be imagined! for an expert-beta correlation; perhaps someone on the internets will speculate about it.

  • OffTheCuff

    I know quite well that he could be with another woman tonight if he wanted to.

    Word. All game boils down to this.

    Rant: I’m starting to get tired reading about of all these flawless marriages, though. This is the only place where 100% of the married women all never argue about anything, have perfect husbands, and never are irrational or emotional, and so a man never has to ever deal with the darker aspects of women’s nature, even if she is a great person on balance.

    In real life, I have the inside scoop on plenty of marriages. All, repeat, all of them have some problems, disagreements, ups and down. The weak ones collapse, the strong ones make it through.

    I’m *very* suspicious about perfection.

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

      @OTC

      This is the only place where 100% of the married women all never argue about anything, have perfect husbands, and never are irrational or emotional, and so a man never has to ever deal with the darker aspects of women’s nature, even if she is a great person on balance.

      I hope I’ve been pretty open about being irrational and emotional at times. I know I’ve described myself as feisty and a handful. So I’m well aware that I can be difficult, and that my husband is good to put up with it.

      I’ve also been honest about periods where I didn’t desire my husband, found his gloom and doom about work overwhelming, etc.

      There will indeed be ups and downs in any marriage, but I would describe my marriage as being untroubled, and we disagree rarely. Then again, maybe my husband would say something different. Perhaps men give each other an inside scoop that would surprise their wives, I don’t know.

      Lastly, it’s human nature that people will put a good spin on their own marriages, kids, etc. We’re not solving marital problems here like Athol is, so people are by and large not going to disclose their problems in hopes of getting good advice. And we’re all subject to some cognitive dissonance.

  • http://4stargazer.wordpress.com/ Anacaona

    “Other explanations can also be imagined! for an expert-beta correlation; perhaps someone on the internets will speculate about it.”

    We discussed that a lot of self declared Betas are introverted, so is natural that they gravitate towards mastering skills that pertain the natural world instead of mastering their interactions with people, unless they are highly motivated like finding out about how game works and applying some principles which is probably the way men like Badger started their journey. I wish there was some study correlating introversion and nerdiness.

  • Jennifer

    No one said their marriage was perfect. And they sound far more realistic to me than the places where the husbands brag about keeping wives in line with game. The root of game is not planning or relying on the idea of getting another woman instantly if you wanted to flake, nor reminding yourself of this on a consistent basis. Stingray said she knew this instinctively, not that her husband behaves as though he’s always aware of it.

  • ozymandias

    All right, here goes, time for the Heartiste rant. Someone provoked me… :)

    Heartiste has recommended gaslighting your girlfriend– that is, doing something (such as flirting with her best friend) and claiming that you didn’t. He recommends giving women the “silent treatment”, another emotionally abusive technique. He recommends men order women to “shut the fuck up” when they say something that displeases him. He recommends ordering your girlfriend to do things instead of asking her. He had a post, now deleted, saying that women are aroused by domestic violence. I think the evidence is clear that he recommends abusive tactics in LTRs.

    Being a “race realist” is scientifically inaccurate, because the races do not exist as discrete categories. African-Americans, for instance, are far more genetically similar to white Americans than they are to Africans.

    Evolutionarily, he is prone to just-so stories with no evidence behind them and doesn’t seem to get that humans are adaptation-executors not fitness-maximizers (a gene doesn’t have to lead to the most offspring to survive, it just has to lead to some offspring). Sociologically, he completely ignores the well-attested effects of societal conditioning (do you like bound feet? If you lived in medieval China you would have!) and has very little understanding of the concepts of “confounding variable” or “sound methodology.”

  • Jennifer

    Whoa Ozy, you’re sharp on this.

  • Olive

    Doug,

    He mostly works at teaching game to all three levels of betas, and to lesser alphas too. I think he regards omegas as basicly hopeless in most cases.

    …are you insinuating my BF is an omega? Also Yohami has a fascinating post about omega and alpha. You should read it.

  • http://4stargazer.wordpress.com/ Anacaona

    Rant: I’m starting to get tired reading about of all these flawless marriages, though. This is the only place where 100% of the married women all never argue about anything, have perfect husbands, and never are irrational or emotional, and so a man never has to ever deal with the darker aspects of women’s nature, even if she is a great person on balance.

    Well my husband refuses to read or watch Twilight is that bad enough? :p.

    Seriously I think this is due to many factors, we probably talk about the good only because most men here come from such a dark place that in perspective our marriages are perfect and we want to make them now that we do exist and also you should be thankful for that nowadays it seems that marriage talk is about bitching about the hubby more than praising him so we are contributing for men to know that we also can appreciated a good man and finally we are outliers how many bitchy wives care enough to try and look for the male POV? I would guess not very many . But we do have our moments I also can be irrational sometimes but hubby usually laughs my “existential crisis” and I can’t help but laugh with him because I know I’m over thinking, because I know that is what I do “I’m Ana and I have a thinking problem…” So yeah. We don’t have perfect marriages but marriage is not supposed to be perfect anyway, so we have good ones and know it and love it and preach it,beats the alternative doesn’t it?, YMMV.

  • Doug1

    Ozymandias–

    Heartiste has recommended gaslighting your girlfriend– that is, doing something (such as flirting with her best friend) and claiming that you didn’t.

    Link me where he recommended claiming you didn’t. That’s totally not Roissy’s or general game philosophy. That’s qualifying yourself. That’s just you bullshiite.

    Being a “race realist” is scientifically inaccurate, because the races do not exist as discrete categories. African-Americans, for instance, are far more genetically similar to white Americans than they are to Africans.

    Completely wrong. You have swollowed leftist dogma. The races most certainly do exist genetically and can be determined so, in lesser or greater fine division with great precision by geneticist and are all the freaking time. You are a total ignoramous on this and have no idea what you are talking about. The vast majority of human geneticists agree on this, but most don’t want to put their heads on the leftist media and university chopping blocks to make big popular noise about this.

    It’s a remarkable amount of censorship by career destroying that goes on American and Western Europe these days.

  • Doug1

    Olive–

    …are you insinuating my BF is an omega? Also Yohami has a fascinating post about omega and alpha. You should read it.

    No to the first, and as to the second I have read it.

    He has an insight, that they’re both rather anti established order, but I don’t think it goes very deep, really.

  • Lokland

    @ Ozy, Doug

    I actually a geneticist. So I feel the need to chime in here.

    The human genome is almost entirely identical for every single person. ~99.9% ish area. However when your talking 3.2 billion base pairs that extra .1 is still large.

    The races are more closely related to one another. Duh. What idiot came up with that?
    Look at the rates of genetic diseases.
    CF- 1 in 25 Caucasians carry D5F08.
    Almost non-existent in Asian populations. (CF is both more rare and occurs via different mutations in different races.)
    Blacks have a higher incidence of sickle cell.
    PKU occurs at an incidence of 1 in 100,000ish in Japan but 1 in 1 000,000ish in Caucasian populations.

    Now, however true what I just said is the differences are atrociously minor. Even if you look at the differences between races humans are generally 99.99999999999% the same anyway (exagerated a bit).

    To say someone from one race is more closely related to another race is actually retarded. To say the difference is so minor to be inconsequential is correct.

    P.S When someone decides to come and tell me this is over-simplified. I know, not everyone cane be as awesome as us.

  • Doug1

    I mean arguably the most eminent American living scientist, and certainly geneticist, the co discoverer of the structure of DNA, James Watson, was forced to resign after making mildly non pc remarks to an English mass media reporter, which she published.

    That was a leftist disgrace.

    He was trying to be helpful to blacks, ok in the not most savvy way, rather than denigrating.

  • Jennifer

    “we probably talk about the good only because most men here come from such a dark place that in perspective our marriages are perfect and we want to make them now that we do exist and also you should be thankful for that nowadays it seems that marriage talk is about bitching about the hubby more than praising him”

    Amen! Exactly.

    All humans are part of one race. What we typically call different races are different ETHNIC groups.

  • Jennifer

    “Link me where he recommended claiming you didn’t. That’s totally not Roissy’s or general game philosophy”

    Is she right about what else she quoted from him?

  • Lokland

    @ Jennifer

    Race and ethnic group are synonyms. We are all homo sapiens though, a species.

  • http://4stargazer.wordpress.com/ Anacaona

    Being a “race realist” is scientifically inaccurate, because the races do not exist as discrete categories. African-Americans, for instance, are far more genetically similar to white Americans than they are to Africans.

    I took a test in 23 and me and I have a bit of all 3 races (60%,30% and 10%) while my hubby is 100% white boy (I will get him vampire sunblock from now on), so how did they do that if its none existent? Should I sue them for fraud?

  • Doug1

    Jennifer-

    All humans are part of one race. What we typically call different races are different ETHNIC groups.

    Wrong ignoramous. The same species but not the same races. I know VASTLY more about this than you do.

    Also I’ve come to really dislike you.

  • Doug1

    Anacaona-

    I took a test in 23 and me and I have a bit of all 3 races

    The three races present in the Dominican Republic, rather. In order of genetic frequency, whites of Spanish descent, blacks of west African descent, and Amerindians.

    As for the rest of the world there are the NE Asians, SE Asians, and Australians-Papuans-Micronesians. Much smaller numbers of very genetically distinct modern humans include the Koisans (Bushmen), African Pigmy’s ( see some Japanese games), and Negritos.

  • Jennifer

    lol I’m so hurt Doug. I haven’t respected you for some time. You’ve been wrong before, so I’m not really prone to taking you seriously now.

  • Doug1

    Jennifer-

    “All humans are part of one race. What we typically call different races are different ETHNIC groups.”

    Absurdly, completely, leftist creationist dogma wrong.

    You’re a JOKE.

    And an ignoramous.

    Leftist ideologue!!

    Complete ignorant leftie lies!

  • Doug1

    Yes one species, of course.

  • Jennifer

    Bluster insults all you want, Doug. Your ground has proven to be loose.

  • anonymous

    ozymandias: “African-Americans, for instance, are far more genetically similar to white Americans than they are to Africans.”

    You probably mean that
    African-Americans are far more genetically similar to white Americans than sub-Saharan Africans are to white Americans.

  • Jennifer

    I admit, I don’t know a lot about this, but I’ve heard more than one person call us all the same race, two in particular, one more liberal and one majorly conservative. Lokland, what exactly is the difference between ethnic groups and race, then?

  • Doug1

    Jennifer–

    You’ve been wrong before, so I’m not really prone to taking you seriously now.

    About what, ignoramous?

  • Doug1

    Jennifer–

    I admit, I don’t know a lot about this, but I’ve heard more than one person call us all the same race, two in particular, one more liberal and one majorly conservative.

    Ignoramous and leftist programmed fool, I know a TON about this

  • Jennifer

    About Roissy, who you were contradicted twice about. And is M the person you’re living with?

  • ozymandias

    Now, admittedly, I am not a geneticist and I bow to the geneticist’s superior knowledge, but according to my reading, because of how much interbreeding has occurred between white Americans and black Americans (from slaveowners having “mistresses” on down), the average African-American is more similar to the average white American than the average African-American is to the average sub-Saharan African. Therefore, it is (usually, with some exceptions, such as sickle-cell) not meaningful to generalize from sub-Saharan Africans to African Americans or vice versa in the way that calling them all “black” would imply that you’re doing. This shows that race is as much or more a sociological construct as it is a scientific reality.

    Also, an attempt to discuss race that doesn’t deal with stereotype threat, racism, the prison-industrial complex, and the tendency of people of color to be poor because of lingering side effects of legal discrimination, at the bare minimum, is hopelessly flawed.

    Doug: Look up “Dread.” About half the stuff there is classic gaslighting behavior: doing something and denying you’re doing it, which serves to break down your partner’s confidence in their own perceptions and makes them easier to control.

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

      @Ozy

      Remember when Skip Gates learned he was >50% European ancestry? So you’re correct in that case, at least.

      As for Dread, I wrote about that here:

      How to Destroy a Relationship

      It’s pure evil manipulation.

  • Jennifer

    That’s fascinating stuff, Ozy.

  • Stingray

    Rant: I’m starting to get tired reading about of all these flawless marriages, though. This is the only place where 100% of the married women all never argue about anything, have perfect husbands, and never are irrational or emotional, and so a man never has to ever deal with the darker aspects of women’s nature, even if she is a great person on balance.

    No, my marriage is not perfect, it has simply greatly improved over the years. We’ve worked hard at it. I’ve been irrational and emotional plenty of times. When we first married and would argue I used to go off on tangents that made absolutely no sense to my husband at all, but seemingly made perfect sense to me (I’d give you an example if I could remember one, but I was being so emotional that I can’t remember a good one). When I did this my husband would try to bring the argument back around and when it didn’t work he would walk away. After a couple of years of this happening and not changing my husband finally told me about it. Though he was smart and told me when I was thinking clearly. Once made aware of it I worked to change this. It took a while to recognize what I was doing, but he would point it out (always after the fact, when I has calmed down). It also helped a great deal when we bought a book about learning styles for our kids. I am a global learner and see the big picture. He is detail oriented. Now that we know how each other communicates, we adjusted and work even better together.

    It has not been perfect in any way. Good God how boring it would be if it was. (I simply did not bring this up before as it was irrelevant to the conversation.) He’s not perfect either and has worked just as hard over the years to better communicate as well. It’s been 12 years and we communicate better than ever, but we still argue and piss each other off royally. Then we get over it and just move on.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Did Doug neglect to take his meds?

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

      @Jesus

      You’re incorrigible.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    See, that’s what I’m saying by using the term “pathological”. A lot of these would-be PUAs aren’t living their own life mission in their quest to slay poon at any cost, they’re trying to measure up to the caricature of manhood that that they have painted for themselves as “Alpha”. Those types of people are heading down the same road as people I’d call beta. They still have no mission…Except they now know how to push a girl’s buttons and maintain the image of individuality. A few teach that those changes come from the inside, and those are the ones I can find some common ground with.

    I agree with this, 100%.

    I don’t believe in “natural” alphas or betas. I think that some people are assigned such roles at a young age and others create those roles for themselves when they’re older and have the “choice.” But essentially, anybody who identifies as alpha or beta is like an actor who’s been playing a role for so long that he begins to confuse his character with his true self. We’re all much more than who we believe we are, but I think that’s particularly true for people who lock themselves into such roles.

    I think the problem with both Alpha and Beta lies in the above. Whether they assume the roles of winners or losers in the game, both Alpha and Beta are slaves to the game itself. This is actually more true for Alpha than for Beta. Vox Day says that Alpha is primarly concerned with his social status. That is, once he’s become King of the Hill, he is too fixated on maintaining his reign to enjoy any other aspect of existence. But Beta is a slave as well, in that he accepts the rules of a game that define him as loser, or, at best, runner-up.

    I believe that every person is by nature Sigma. Sigma is like the Bodhisattva of game. The Bodhisattva is both in and out of the game. He’s larger than the game. He’s attained enlightenment but returns to the realm of samsara to participate joyfully in the world. He can take on any form–Alpha, Beta, Omega–because he is larger than all forms. We’re all like that, but we choose to only see the world with blinders on.

    The highest beings live out their purpose. They are the source of their own strength and their own meaning. Roles mean nothing to them. All else are slaves.

  • Escoffier

    Jesus, that is almost philosophy.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    JM is awesome (and not just because of the meds comment :-P).

    Also wtf happened to this conversation? Reminds me of that time the Thread That Must Not be Named turned into a discussion about Jews controlling Hollywood.

    In any case, Ozy is the most correct here. Yes, no doubt there are genetic differences between people of different races. But race is also a social construct, and we can’t ignore it.

    Race is not the same as ethnic group. Ethnic group is about cultural practices, race is about skin color. The two are often used interchangeably, which IMO is a bad idea. For example, my dad is Syrian, but he doesn’t consider himself to be of a different race (and frankly he’s not, he has black hair but he’s as white as any Englishman).

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jennifer,

    Do you have a blog? I agree that, outside basic observations of the SMP, those terms are usually useless. Alpha’s the only term that even has any scientific grounding.

    I don’t have a blog. I’ve been considering the possibility, because I think that my perspective on relationships and game is different than most other guys’, but I don’t know that I have the time to run a successful one like Sue’s.

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

      @Jesus

      FWIW, I think you’d be an awesome blogger. I agree that your perspective is uncommon, but I think it’s one that many young men could benefit from hearing. Just my .02.

  • lurksy

    @Olive

    Skin color is not an indicator of race. The illusion of race is nothing more than a collection of alleles for whatever reason (in America usually cultural differences and our country’s history of separation). This is also why some disorders and diseases are prevalent amongst some groups and not others–in America especially, people still generally marry amongst those who are similar, this perpetuating this idea. Most people don’t know that sickle cell, for example, is often found in Mediterranean areas (or near any bodies of water).

    Sorry, it’s just this is my domain. I’m a geneticist. :)

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    lurksy,
    Fair enough, I stand corrected. I guess my point was that race refers to biology, ethnic group refers to culture. Is that more accurate?

  • lurksy

    @Olive

    Ethnicity can refer to culture, yes. Biologically we can possess genes characteristic of a people, but usually because that group stays to themselves (especially in America). That’s how we get the illusion that race.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Olive,

    I could be wrong since I know absolutely nothing about genetics, but I don’t think that is what he’s saying. An allele is part of a gene, I think. Certain traits become common in particular geographic areas because people tend to fuck people who live nearby. Those alleles carry coding for traits (coarse hair/fine hair, dark skin/light skin, big nose/small nose, etc…) and when a group of people are isolated for long enough and only have each other to fuck, then certain traits begin to become associated with that group. Some, like sickle cell, are not visible to the eye, others, like eye color or the shape of one’s face, are visible.

    Some are very visible (i.e. skin color). But one’s skin color, though certainly one of the most visible differences, doesn’t have any more biological significance than eye color. The difference between black skin and white skin IS genetic, but no more so than the difference between brown eyes and green eyes, or curly hair and straight hair.

    If I’m wrong, I hope Lurksy tells me.

  • Tom

    Hiya Jesus, I have a comment and a question. You seem to be more enlightened now than a few months ago. Have you relaxed your requirments of a womans past before you will begin to start a relationship?. I`m just curious. Nothing wrong with a persons preferences as long as they are not hypocritical about it. I totally understand a low number person wanting another low number person for a relationship. As you know, my perspective is one where I find other important factors of the persons being more important than who they slept with (within “my” reason. What I mean is, if a person seems to be damaged Im not interested in them no matter the reason they are damaged.
    If a person has their shit together, their past doesnt really matter to me, because it is in the past. They are no worse for the wear. hey handled their trials and tribulations well.

  • lurksy

    @Olive

    That is correct.

    Skin tone is complicated genetics wise though. Genes and all that jazz are very sensitive. While a group may characteristically have darker skin for example, its ultimately meaningless in determining whether it can differentiate race. If another person or group comes and has offspring, the dynamics change immediately. This happened in the Caribbean at the beginning of the trans-Atlantic slave trade–Puerto Ricans, for example, are young bucks in terms of racial and ethnic groups.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Alright cool. Thanks for the enlightenment guys, I’m no biologist.

  • Doug1

    Ozy–

    Black Americans have about 20% white=Euro ancestry on average. However that’s a bit lumpy. Most African Americans have about 17% white ancestry, but 10% of those we call blacks due to the one drop rule, i.e. any physically noticeable amount of black ancestry makes the person black, these days almost entirely insisted upon by blacks (see Tiger Woods, who begged to differ), are more than half white.

    The amount of white ancestry in “black” African Americans can now be precisely determined at low cost by genetic methods.

  • Doug1

    The trope that there is no biological reality to different races is one of the stupidest and completely scientifically false leftist tropes ever invented.

    It positively amazes me that it has any currency whatsoever. That’s a measure of how completely leftists have taken over the public square in leading universities and the media in this country.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Tom,

    I think I’ve changed my perspective on that, yea. I do think that a person’s past is, in part, an indication of who they are in the present. Part of that past is how many people she’s slept with and what type of people they were. But, people make errors in judgment and grow.

    I’m not a fan of women who are into promiscuous or casual sex. However, I am understanding of the various twists and turns that people go through in the course of growing up.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Doug,

    Big Foot was sighted in the Colorado Rockies. Make sure to bring binoculars.

  • Doug1

    Jesus–

    Alleles are variations of genes, i.e. the same gene can come in different allele variations. These aren’t necessarily binary.

  • Tom

    Doug, we`re all pink on the inside….lol My brother is a surgeon. He tells me that there are no discernable differences to a human of any race. If he is doing a by pass or an apendectomy, or a colon section, he would not know if the person is black, white, yellow etc. We all know different races have small differences, such as height, length of levers (legs and arms) shape of external features(noses, lips, red hair, curley, kinky, straight hair etc.) But the internal organs, blood etc are basically identical. I can look at two houses that have different external features, but have identical floor plans. Basically the same house with a slightly different curb appeal.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Alleles are variations of genes, i.e. the same gene can come in different allele variations. These aren’t necessarily binary.

    Yea, bro. I googled it, too. I know.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @OTC, are you seriously saying that? Take a look at my blog, and you’ll see all kinds of problems we’re dealing with all the time. I just don’t try to add to those problems by overreacting to little things like him leaving his sock on the floor.

    Nobody’s life is perfect, and nobody on this blog has claimed to have flawless marriages and perfect husbands. Find me a quote of somebody who has said that. It is not even implied.

    Last night we both were sad again for a bit, but we cuddled in bed and talked for a good long while, and we both felt better. I’ve said that my husband is emotionally open, self-aware and loving, and THAT was a manifestation of it. Was it ideal? No. In an ideal situation our firstborn son would be alive, and my husband wouldn’t be depressy about the state of the world, and he wouldn’t have to be upset. But what happened has happened, and he is upset, and he recognizes it, and instead of bickering or fighting about it, we comforted each other and lifted each other’s spirits.

    I think it’s a message worth spreading. I was a hot-headed little bitchy girl who yelled and screamed at past boyfriends. I was not emotionally disciplined and did all manners of terrible things. I saw a different way and worked on my issues. That doesn’t mean I’m so awesome that I never feel those things I used to feel. It means I recognize my flaws and try to rise above these things, and do things differently.

    Self-improvement is a lifelong journey. It doesn’t stop once you get married. My husband believes the same. He wants to constantly improve himself, and while he is not and will never be perfect, he is awesome because he tries. When I hear other people talk about good things they do, I listen and take tips, because I know we’re not done learning. We’re never done learning.

  • Tom

    Jesus, cool…….Lots of wise old sayings. I like this one… don`t judge an indian before you have walked a mile in his moccasins. I do believe we are a sum total of our past experiences. Some messed up people are messed up because of their past, and some really cool people are that way because of their past.. Does that make any sense? My main interest is, are they a cool person, or are they not “NOW”. Doesnt matter to me how they became that way.

  • Escoffier

    The gamers have a dismissive term they like to use: “One-itis.” That is, excessive concern for/interest in one girl. Another word for this is “love.”

    According to game theory, one-itis is crippling. It makes you weak and needy, which women can sense the way dogs smell fear. You need to seem not to care about a girl and the best way to project that is genuinely not to care, and the best way to do that is to have at least two girls on the hook at any given time. That way you know that if you lose one, you always have another.

    This requires a lot of energy. But that aside, centuries of experience and literature have shown that men actually feel one-itis (aka “love”) quite keenly. Maybe not all men but it certainly seems plausible that that Casanovas of the world are vastly outnumbered by the Cyrano de Bergeracs.

    So what to do about this? Here we bump into a rather large problem. The more shallow gamers will respond that one-itis is simply feminine mangina weakness, nothing more. Squash it. The whole point is the poon (quality, quantity, variety) and the more indifferent you are, the more you will get.

    But the more profound thinkers (Roissy above all) profess that the point is more than poon. Poon is great, but the truly sublime pleasure comes from love—from loving and being loved.

    In a way, I admire or at least respect the humane impulse that leads him to admit this. Nihilists though he is, he is at least not a shallow nihilist. There is something noble, profound and human about a soul that can truly love. It’s one of the things that sets us above the animals.

    Now, I suspect he would say that this impulse in no way contradicts his nihilism. He is simply extending the pleasure principle up the chain. Sex is pleasant but love is more pleasant. Since the only point to life is hedonism, it makes more sense to pursue higher pleasures rather than solely the lower pleasures.

    However, this veers into the same problem that Nietzsche hit in his attempt to assert an order of rank to thinks while denying a natural order. Love is higher than sex in the same way that courage is higher than self-preservation. For Nietzsche at least this is not all reducible to personal preference, or to the “value creation” by which (super)man becomes the “legislator” of the new morality. I suspect Roissy would try to insist that, in fact, it is, as a way to escape the contradiction that Nietzsche embraced as necessary but that undermines his thought.

    At the very least then, it’s curious how despite his nihilism, Roissy’s own personal preference actually jibes pretty closely with what (non-nihilist) poets and philosophers for centuries praised as what is highest in man (eros). Coicidence, I guess.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Doug,
    Alright whatevs, cool. I’m not here to argue about the biological basis of race. I was mostly pointing out to Jennifer that, even if race and ethnic groups are purely social constructs, which many academics argue, they are not synonyms.

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

      I’m not here to argue about the biological basis of race.

      Me either. No human biodiversity blather here please. I’ve deleted the comment about the distribution of IQ.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    Where does Nietzsche deny a natural order?

  • Tom

    Lions and tigers are “genically” different too, but they can still mate.

  • Doug1

    Oxymandias–

    the average African-American is more similar to the average white American than the average African-American is to the average sub-Saharan African.

    Wrong, woman from Oz.

    See my comment above about the average white ancestry in “black” Americans being 20%.

  • Escoffier

    Jesus:

    everywhere.

  • Escoffier

    Ugh, some of you need to read more Nicholas Wade (science writer, NYT). He is the #1 genetics/dna reporter in the country. It’s amazing that the times actually publishes him.

    Anyway, the truth about these matters (from the current state of science) appears to be closer to the Doug view than the opposing view here.

    Sorry.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    And I don’t think that poets have extolled eros as what is highest in man. Eros is strictly libidinous. It’s worlds apart from “amor,” which is has been praised as the highest ideal of man. Eros is all about what you want from an object of desire. Amor is all about what you’d like to give to the woman you love.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    Then you must have misread Nietzsche.

  • Escoffier

    yeah, that must be it.

  • Escoffier

    Tell you what, why don’t you start with Genology of Morals III 24 and go from there.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    In Nietzsche’s view, the natural order of the universe is “the will to power.”

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    I’ve read everything that Nietzsche’s written.

  • lurksy

    @Olive

    I am positive there is a wealth of knowledge I can learn from you! I look forward to when I can be enlightened by you as well. :)

    @Doug1

    You are funny.

  • Doug1

    Olive–

    I was mostly pointing out to Jennifer that, even if race and ethnic groups are purely social constructs, which many academics argue, they are not synonyms.

    Yes they do, I’m well aware, but it’s complete leftist garbage with very little scientific validity. Cultural anthropologists who are almost to a person leftists usually say that (unlike physical or genetic anthropologist who aren’t so far over to the left anyway that they typically eschew scientific method and rigor).

    You will find damn few human geneticists who will, though the often keep shut so as to avoid leftist heat on them in universities and so as to not have trouble getting government funding for their research, which is mediated by panels of university academics saying yeah or nea.

  • Jennifer

    “Lastly, it’s human nature that people will put a good spin on their own marriages, kids, etc.”

    Which is much better nature than to bitch about it and air their dirty laundry. The things some people have told Athol about, and depended on him for, are unbelievable.

    Jesus, just awesomness :) Though I actually disagree about there being no natural alphas; as far as leadership goes, many have natural inclinations and others don’t.

    Esc, AMEN!! Onenitis is in fact love, only to be given up if a relationship’s over.

    Luksy, thanks for the info!

  • Escoffier

    No, the will to power is not a natural order. it is a necessary (in his view) effort by man to impose an artificial order once rationalism has ripped off the hood and revealed the nothingness underneath, once all formerly accepted truths are exposed as myths.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jennifer,

    How do you know what’s “natural” and what’s “learned” in a 25 yr old man, or a 12 yr old girl for that matter?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    No, wrong. Once rationalism has lifted off the hood, we’re left with the will to power.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Hey Doug, this left-leaning independent supports gun rights and is not in a race denial. :P

    I think Asians may be a lot less politically correct about race and genetics. I recognize traits, looks, height, IQ, competence, and genetic quality. I’m also very harsh and judgemental on myself about these things (like my mongoloid features; I’m half Han and half Manchurian). I used to frequent the blog gnxp (gene expression) and read up on the statistics. I’m not one to bury my head in the sand and plug my ears against unpleasant truths. I want to know the score.

    There is a bit of Asian race worship with respect to whites, and I can’t say that I’m totally proud of that. At the same time, I wouldn’t want to be with a dumb white person and would prefer to be with a very smart person of any race. Most positive traits cluster together, so a person of “quality” is generally above average along multiple dimensions. Think Natalie Portman who is attractive, classy, capable, and has a very high IQ. This also ties back to what I consider “alpha.” I don’t find stupid men “alpha,” no matter what. Whenever I hear a guy loudly proclaim he doesn’t care about the woman’s IQ, I know he’s a fool. My husband would not have married me if I was dumb and “declasse.” That’s rather elitist of him, but that’s also the biological imperative.

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

      @Hope

      I don’t find stupid men “alpha,” no matter what.

      This reminds me of a discussion Obsidian had a while back, where various famous men were discussed, Michael Vick being one. I actually do think that betas have higher IQs in general – high testosterone is associated with lower IQ I believe. And the prisons are full of dumb alpha thugs.

      However, I totally appreciate your focusing on intelligence as a desirable trait. That has always been my #1 non-negotiable.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    JM,

    I’ve read everything that Nietzsche’s written.

    Well that’s impressive. I wanted to punch myself in the face when I was reading the Genealogy of Morality.

    Doug,
    Cool your jets about the leftist feminist garbage. I never tried to argue that race was purely a social construct, and I’m not going to try to argue it now.

  • Escoffier

    You are “left with” the will to power because everything else has been shown to be false. So new values have to be created. There is nothing natural about them. Their un-naturalness is not even to be covered up with myths and noble lies. They are, for the first time in history, to be explicitly understood to be generated solely by man, created as it were out of thin air.

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

      Jesus and Escoffier are talking waaaaayyyy over my head. Damn, this is an intellectual crowd.

  • lurksy

    Adding – I am first generation American, educated abroad. Most of my studies are abroad as well.

    Also, very little can be trusted of most American scientists. I’m not intimidated nor phased by their findings, as for the most part are funded by the powers that be.

  • Doug1

    Hope—

    I’m half Han and half Manchurian

    That sounds delich to me.

    I don’t find stupid men “alpha,” no matter what. Whenever I hear a guy loudly proclaim he doesn’t care about the woman’s IQ, I know he’s a fool. My husband would not have married me if I was dumb and “declasse.” That’s rather elitist of him, but that’s also the biological imperative.

    Completely agree. I’m far more attracted to smart girls. I’d never get into anything serious with any girl who wasn’t smart, and also at least naturally classy.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    The will to power can be seen in the very fact that universe manifested itself. It can be seen in the evolution of species. It’s not some “made-up” band-aid to cure the ills of nihilism.

    Nietzsche’s revaluation of values was an attempt to construct a moral code based on the fundamental natural of man and the universe: the will to power. What he proposed was very much like a meritocracy. The Christian conception of “good” was the opposite of “evil”: kind, passive, compassionate. Nietzsche saw “good” as the opposite of “bad”: able, active, and passionate.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Olive,

    Well that’s impressive. I wanted to punch myself in the face when I was reading the Genealogy of Morality.

    lol. Much of what Nietzsche writes about is relevant to all of our discussions of alpha and beta.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Lurksy, I work with genetic counselors and MDs on the Web side of things, and to say they’re mostly funded by the powerful is a bit silly. Various gene-related disorders are not sensationalized in the media quite like IQ is, but the research is useful medically. There are lots of average people who donate to cancer research for instance, and there is a hereditary component to certain cancer risks. Gene therapy and maternal serum screening are also medically interesting, and should not be overly affected by politics, although they sometimes can be.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    JM,
    Yeah it’s true. I’ve been following your discussion with Escoffier (but not jumping it because I understood very little of what Nietzsche wrote… not meant to be a philosopher lol).

    FTR I think you’re on the mark. It’s not that our natural instincts lead us into nihilism, it’s that our current moral code leads us there. At least that’s what I think I took from the book. Not claiming to be the authority on Nietzsche.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Olive,

    Yea, that’s pretty much it.

    To go back to Escoffier’s metaphor, rationalists pulled the hood off the vehicle and said, “look, nothingness.”

    Nietzsche would’ve asked, “what made you pull the hood off to begin with? THAT is the will to power.” And that’s what the whole vast stretch of nothingness is brimming with. That’s how the Universe manifested itself.

    Which relates to a conversation I had with Sue about Eckhart Tolle and Jesus and all that good stuff.

  • Lokland

    @JM

    Allels are variations of genes. Think about it like this. Gene for eye colour
    allele A is blue, B is brown etc.
    If this was already answered at least now you really, really know.

    @ Jennifer

    Go with Olives idea behind Ethnic group and race. TBH in a biological sense the word race is not really real. We are all one species, so are dogs.
    Consider it like that different races are like different breeds of dogs. All are one species but different forms of that species.

    Therefore to say a chiwawa and a great dane are both dogs is correct. To say they are of the same breed (race) is incorrect. Human races work in the same way except they are way more similar than dog breeds.
    That doesn’t change the fact that they are not the same though.

    Like Lurker said a race is a grouping of alleles (variations of different genes) that produce a certain type of person. The people are all still human we have the same genes just different variations of those genes tend to cluster together to produce a trait.

    I just thought of a horrible analogy. We have a set of coloured legos.
    You can build a erson using a specific set up of legos but the colours can be different in each one. Races tend to use the same colour legos in the same spots but we all use the same sized pieces to build a person.

    This also goes deeper into traits that are polygenic (controlled by multiple genes). Say eye colour is controlled by A B and C genes. I can have one set and someone else can have another set that produce the same or different colour eyes depending on a million or so other factors. Races will tend to have the same setups to produce similar-identical traits.
    (I have no clue how eye colour works this is just a hypothetical example.)

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Lokland,

    That’s what I figured. Thanks for confirming.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    BTW, that wasn’t a horrible analogy. That was a terrific way to explain it.

  • Doug1

    Olive—

    I was mostly pointing out to Jennifer that, even if race and ethnic groups are purely social constructs, which many academics argue, they are not synonyms.

    You’re right about that. Ethnic groups always have a shared culture, as well as usually being somewhat different on a sub sub racial genetic basis. See Askkenazi Jews.

    A good quite stark illustration of the non equivalence or racial sub groups and ethnic groups is to compare the Protestant northern Irish to the Catholic Irish Republicans, or the Catholic northern Irish. All three groups are just about identical racially, but the Catholic and Protestant Irish are different ethnic groups, starting with religious differences but then upon the separation some other things grew different too.

  • Escoffier

    This is way OT, but Nietzsche was not trying to create a moral code based on the fundamental nature of man. He did not believe that man has a fundamental nature.

    All prior moral codes, he says, were invented. Moses went up Sinai with a hammer and chisel, came down with the tablets, lied and said he got them from God, and people believed him (in part because he had the force to make them believe; “Whoever reads the Bible judiciously
    will see that since he wished his laws and his orders to go forward, Moses
    was forced to kill infinite men who, moved by nothing other than envy,
    were opposed to his plans.” Machiavelli, Discourses III 30).

    The philosophers subject religiosity to a pitiless analysis which demonstrates to all but blinded fools that it is not merely false but preposterously so. In its place they attempt to construct an edifice of “natural right,” a non-religious account of a natural order that explains the world and that answers the question of how men should live.

    But their own methods are turned against them. Subsequent generations of philosophers subject this earlier philosophic edifice to withering analysis which also proves that it is no less false or man-made than religion.

    This exposure was not good for man; it was a disaster. But it can’t be undone. “Man unlike a crab cannot crawl backward” (TotI, Skirmishes, 43). The only way is forward.

    The way forward must be taken in full cognizance of the bereftness of nature, of the reality of nihilism. The recreation of the tragic sense, of the heroic, is the goal but it can never again be accomplished on the old terms. It must be accomplished on wholly new terms, of the new man, the superman, willing the new morality into being. It will be buttressed by no noble lie or divine myth. It will be known to be myth from the beginning. There is nothing natural about it except, perhaps, the necessity which requires it.

    But that leads to a deeper problem in that how can something be necessary if nothing is true?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    All moral codes are invented. That doesn’t mean that they can’t have a basis in nature.

    Idk, bro. Like I said, I think you’ve just seriously misread Nietzsche. If you believe him to be a nihilist, then you’ve definitely misread him.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jesus Mahoney and Escoffier

    For the record, I find the discourse you two are having very sexy. Nothing gets be hotter than intellectual conversation. Carry on.

    (Mentally records discussion for her spank-bank)

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sassy,

    (Mentally records discussion for her spank-bank)

    lmao. You’re welcome.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Thanks, Sue.

  • Doug1

    Jennifer—

    I don’t respect Keoni’s methods at all, Sting; you may as well know that now. His tone is very selfish. Yes, he’s done all the game moves here and then some, and tells everyone of his severe rules. Once again, I’ve heard of many unhealthy living situations, and everyone saying they were happy. I don’t take domineering strangers seriously. And for pete’s sake, standing up for yourself is being honest, not playing a game; this is part of the term-blurring I hate.

    This like much from you on this thread is complete yuuccck. Far too American feminist. Dave from Hawaii/Keoni Gault’s advice on how to game your wife is great for men. Just about all guys who’ve read him think so.

    Stingray for the win! Certainly not you. I think men should avoid you, personally. Though alas most haven’t taken the red pill.

  • Escoffier

    He calls himself a nihilist! And he says over and over that there is no objectively true order to anything. “Every belief, every considering something-true is necessarily false because there is simply no true world.”

    Etc.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    Jesus and Escoffier are talking waaaaayyyy over my head. Damn, this is an intellectual crowd.

    I’m loving it right now. Whenever I have discussions with men like that in real life, the gina tingles flow freely.

  • Doug1

    Escoffier–

    Ugh, some of you need to read more Nicholas Wade (science writer, NYT). He is the #1 genetics/dna reporter in the country. It’s amazing that the times actually publishes him.

    Yeah, Nicholas Wade is great. And it IS rather amazing that the NY Times publishes him.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Jesus Mahoney, have you had any exposure to the Law of One material? I’m reading through it now, and it’s quite interesting, if not a bit difficult to read, esoteric and strange. But if you’ve slogged through Nietzsche, this should be fine.

    The philosophy contained in the Law of One is related to “how the universe manifested,” and the idea of “God” or “Creator” as being “everything.” This is analogous to the way that all the cells in a human body constitute the human, but those cells are also comprised of atoms and particles, which make up “everything else.”

    I once asked my husband a rhetorical question, “Where do atoms come from? Like carbon, oxygen, hydrogen… they are abundant on Earth, but where did they come from?” He said, “Well, there is real no answer. They know what atoms are, what the models are, but there are only theories. Scientists have said they could be space dust, shed from stars, formed from the big bang, or whatever. It’s like math, you have basic principles upon which everything else is built, but you don’t question the basics.” My own response was that this was not enough. I want to know deeper than that, but everything past a certain point is beyond my comprehension.

    Anyway, on your discussion with Escoffier. I liked Nietzsche, but he just isn’t as interesting to me these days. I would agree with Escoffier’s analysis of Nietzsche insofar as that is how the majority of Nietzsche’s thought has been interpreted later. The man himself may have had nobler ideals, but those who followed him took the nihilism and other parts, and twisted them into a very dark philosophy — infamously, Hitler’s distortion of the term Ubermensche, devolving into Nazism.

    Then later Nietzsche’s philosophy became a rallying call for atheists, the famous God is dead phrase, and from here Nietzsche’s own writing became less important than the *interpretations* of his works, with some viewing it as fundamentally life-affirming, valuing the good, the noble, the genetically competent and superior (to borrow something from the other discussion at hand), while others viewing it as dire, gloomy, death to traditional values and morality, and creating new, nihilistic values that are detrimental to the social good.

    If I am not mistaken, Escoffier probably falls into the second camp. Regardless of what Nietzsche himself intended, once a philosopher has “gone big” so to speak, the adherents often set the tone. Tying this to pick-up artists and use of the dark game, the tone is certainly darker than the writing itself.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    “Objectively” is the key word. Without someone there to judge it, the Universe has no value. Value is necessarily subjective, because… it requires a “subject” to make the evaluation.

    Nietzsche used the term nihilism in multiple ways. Every time the world proves to be different from the way in which we conceived it, we experience a moment of nihilism: suddenly, the old meaning is irrelevant. But in the sense that it’s most commonly used today–i.e. existential nihilism–Nietzsche wasn’t at all a nihilist. We create value, sure. Value is a matter of perspective. That doesn’t make it any less real though.

    Nietzsche calls nihilism a sickness. He definitely went through periods of nihilism himself. And he overcame them. This is why the figure of the “overman” was so integral to Nietzsche’s philosophy. Mankind continually overcomes obstacles and becomes stronger for it. Existential nihilism is the ultimate obstacle, and requires a lot of strength to overcome.

    But, in Nietzsche’s view, it isn’t overcome by creating an artifice that has no relation to reality. Nietzsche was essentially an historical philosopher and one thing that he is incessantly pointing out throughout his writings is the fact that man overcomes. And in the process becomes stronger. That is the essential nature of man. And it’s the crux of his entire philosophy.
    And his call for the revaluation of values rests on this. We need to create a moral code that takes into consideration man’s essential nature: the will to power.

  • tom

    Doug the only guys who need to game their wife are the guys who lack communication or interpersonal skills. Your push pull theory is crap. Most women need a feeling of security in a relatioship. Create dought in an intellligent womans mind and see how fast hypergamy happens. Once again a clueless Roissy deceiple gives bad advice….Gualts gaming advice is also crap. All you are doing is the male version of shit testing. Might work on insecure low IQ women.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    BTW, that “nihilistic moment” when the old meaning suddenly becomes irrelevant is very much what men experience upon swallowing the red pill.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Hope,

    It’s like math, you have basic principles upon which everything else is built, but you don’t question the basics.” My own response was that this was not enough. I want to know deeper than that

    That is the will to power.

    Anyway, no, I’ve never read the Power of One, but it sounds interesting. I’ll have to check it out. Thanks.

    And you’re right about Nietzsche. Usually I don’t even bother defending him because he has been so misappropriated and misunderstood that it’s almost pointless.

  • Escoffier

    True, Nietzsche’s nihilism is not the nihilism of despair. It is, or attempts to be, a nihilism of strength. Or rather he urges strength as a response to the truth of nihilism. When I say he is “nihilist” I don’t mean “fatalist.” I mean nihilism in the strict sense, denial of the existence of God (or gods) and/or natural right.

    All previous epochs of men thought they understood the truth and their true place within it. In his epoch the full truth finally becomes evident, which is that it was all false. It always will be false. We create meaning for ourselves as an act of will. In prior epochs that was done subconciously or delusionally but going forward it will have to be done conciously, knowingly, in full awareness of the underlying truth of nothingness.

    Hope, I love Nietzsche, very fun to read, very insightful on the crisis of rationalism in late modernity. But he made a fundamental mistake. He draws a straight line from Socrates down to himself and blames rationalism simply for the crisis of his time. He does not see the radical break that created that crisis.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    If by “in full awareness of the underlying truth of nothingness,” you mean in full awareness of the truth that there is no God at the helm, then yes, I agree.

    But that’s far different from saying there’s no natural order.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    I don’t think Nietzsche “blamed” anyone. I think he just understood the fact that while rationalism began as an attempt to discover and understand God’s world, it ended with “the death of God.”

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Anyway,

    Enough about Nietzsche, I’m too interested in my earlier post about alphas, betas, and sigmas. I feel like I’m on the verge of something like Game 2.0.

  • tom

    Jesus food for thought…if the universe is expanding..what is it expanding into? Nothingness?…..if there was a big bang, who made the huge mass and what caused it to explode?… no one has any correct answers. The origin of the universe is so advanced our human brain can not even begin to comprehend. All these blow hards jjust spew hot air just to hear themselves sound important… in reality they may as well say space is made of jello. They would be just as correct as their guess/ theories. One thing that might be true and is hard to concieve is..space goes on forever, infinity. Because if it ends, what is on the other side…;)

  • Escoffier

    No, for him there is no natural order. Socrates believed in a natural order and it was proved false just like Socrates proved the gods of Mount Olympus were false.

    FWIW, I don’t believe that myself, I’m just saying that’s what N believed.

    As for blame, maybe that’s the wrong word, but N looks at pre-Socratic man and finds much to admire even though all the things that man accepted as “true” were in fact false. Socrates is, in effect, the malicious older child who tells his six year old brother there is no Santa Claus. It’s true of course but the little kid was happier believing the opposite.

  • Jennifer

    “How do you know what’s “natural” and what’s “learned” in a 25 yr old man, or a 12 yr old girl for that matter?”

    Come on Jesus, you’ve never noticed people who have natural leadership abilities? They just stand out; they can be leaders without being raised to be such. Yet others are pushed to be such and just have more passive personalities; I knew one such girl for years.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    One thing that might be true and is hard to concieve is..space goes on forever, infinity. Because if it ends, what is on the other side…;)

    I remember when I was like 5 or 6, I had the same thought. Some nights I would scare the shit out of myself with the thought and have to invite the dog into bed. Other nights, I’d feel like my mind was expanding with the universe and I was a part of the everything/nothing. But it gave me insomnia for quite a while and I remember seeing the sun come up through my window every morning. And then falling asleep when I got to school.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    Again, the order is the will to power. But you’re entitled to be wrong once in a while. :P

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Jennifer,

    I know that a lot of people I’ve only known recently think that I have those “natural” leadership qualities, but if you knew me a couple of years ago, you’d never think it. In fact, I watched a home video of myself at 20 a couple of nights ago, and I was stunned at how awkward and self-conscious and meek I was back then.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Jesus Mahoney, Law, not Power. I would not have recommended it if you hadn’t mentioned Eckhart Tolle. I have not read any of his works, but I recognize the name.
    http://www.lawofone.info

    Escoffier, I see Nietzsche as an extremely intelligent but emotionally adolescent writer who was stuck in a pattern of rejecting and rebelling against previous philosophies. I do not particularly like him because his writing does not strongly resonate with me. Socrates is more to my taste, because his approach was one of going into the Light, and that famous allegory undoubtedly had layers of meaning toward positivity, light and love. On the other hand, Nietzsche’s insights also helped lead to a negative spiral of the same type of attitude which we now call nihilism.

    I don’t want to argue semantics, so I will take your strict definition that nihilism is simply denial of God. Denying God as a philosophy does not help most of the world, on a spiritual or practical level, and I say this as a quite non-religious person. Jesus Mahoney insists that there is a human will to power, which I won’t disagree with, and that is in itself value-neutral. But there are other human impulses, those toward spirituality, compassion, understanding, unity and love. Denying these (God is Love, Love is God, to borrow a theological expression) is quite dark. It has negative value.

    According to Nietzsche, I am merely placing this value judgement because it is a value passed down to me. But I feel strongly that there is a soul-level knowledge that we simply know a thing to be true because it is eternal, unchanging and true. This does not stand up to rigorous debate, of course, because it has to do with “feelings.” So again I point back to our current, limited scientific understanding of “emotion” and “thought.” We do not know where consciousness comes from, and we know neurochemicals affect our emotions, but beyond that is up for speculation. I am a fan of rationalism and logic, but Nietzsche took it to its logical extreme to declare God is dead, without taking into account the rest.

  • Escoffier

    The order is not the will to power. The will to power is the necessary response to the LACK of an order.

    Anyway, yeah, back to betas et all. What the hell were we talking about?

    My point was, as low as the PUAs seem sometimes, reading Roissy talk about love makes me think he might have a soul.

  • Jennifer

    Thank you Tom, perfectly put.

    “Dave from Hawaii/Keoni Gault’s advice on how to game your wife is great for men.”

    Sure Doug, from assertive to ridiculously domineering. You’ve proven to be in the dark about many ways to treat women.

  • Escoffier

    Hope:

    First of all, Socrates didn’t write anything. Second, Nietzsche was not juvenile at all. He was in the upper, upper rank of greatest thinkers who ever lived. His writing style is, IMO, spectacular and intoxicating. He has way more in common with Socrates than you would expect.

    And nihilism is not merely the denial of God (gods), it is the denial of the divine AND natural right. Socrates did not belive in Zeus but he did believe in the eidos (form) of the Good. Nietzsche believed in neither.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I haven’t read any Eckhart Tolle either, but Sue recommended him to me recently. I’ll definitely check out the Law of One.

    FWIW, I don’t deny those other impulses, nor am I sure that there are separate from the will to power. I’m completely irreligious, but I’d say I’m a tad bit spiritual. And I think there’s nothing better than love.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    The order is not the will to power. The will to power is the necessary response to the LACK of an order.

    Nope.

    But yeah, I think Roissy’s got a soul. Just a very tortured one.

  • Ted D

    I can’t remember who I heard it from, but I always remember this: “those that aspire to be the leaders of the world are probably the ones that least deserve it.”

    I don’t want leaders that enjoy leading, at all. I want leaders that lead because they know they are the ones for the job, or perhaps that they are the only ones that can DO the job. People that want/like to lead are generally people that simply strive for power or control. I want someone that leads because they feel the moral obligation to fill that role.

    Of course I fall into that category. I only accepted positions in management that required me to manage people because my family needed the increase in income. I very much dislike being responsible for others, but under the right conditions I do a great job of getting things done. But it also means I have a very “hands off” management style and need people under me that are self motivated and self managed, for the most part. I basically like to know that things are going well, and want to know what the roadblocks are quickly to get them resolved. Other than that, if the work gets done, I’m happy.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Escoffier,

    The philosophers subject religiosity to a pitiless analysis which demonstrates to all but blinded fools that it is not merely false but preposterously so. In its place they attempt to construct an edifice of “natural right,” a non-religious account of a natural order that explains the world and that answers the question of how men should live.

    He calls himself a nihilist! And he says over and over that there is no objectively true order to anything. “Every belief, every considering something-true is necessarily false because there is simply no true world.”

    Etc.

    FWIW, I read Nietzsche exactly the same way you did, the first time. Was in a class at NYU. We had to write the paper, then hear the lecture (bad idea, I had never read anything like Nietzsche in high school). Got a D on the paper… apparently I completely misinterpreted the entire thing lol (also I don’t get Ds on papers… imagine the shock! :-P)

    It’s not that Nietzsche is a nihilist. It’s that he believes nihilism is inevitable, that we’re headed there whether we plan to or not. Only when we reach rock bottom can we consider a new moral code, “invent” it if you will.

    JM,
    Really interesting analogy about the rock bottom nihilism being the first swallowing of the red pill. I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I might have to pull the ol’ book off my bookshelf, dust it off, and reread it. I’d like to hope I’m at least slightly smarter now than I was at 18…

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Olive,

    The Gay Science and Beyond Good and Evil are more interesting reads. The Genealogy of Morals is good, but it definitely reads more like straight-forward philosophy, whereas the two I mentioned are composed of aphorisms.

    BTW, I went to NYU too.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Escoffier, alright, semantics again. I carefully and specifically did not say that Socrates had written anything. I referred to Plato’s retelling of the philosophy of Socrates, which could well be a distorted account.

    Perhaps something was lost in translation from German, but I didn’t find Nietzsche intoxicating. Or it could be that I feel a strong identification with the ideas of divinity, natural law and order, while Nietzsche was a fan of Dionysus, famous for chaos, disorder, etc.

    Anyway, getting away from that, the idea of “one-itis,” “love as a weakness,” etc., is not very different from the way some ancients saw love, that it is a madness which takes over and causes people to behave like fools. I personally believe that when both people are mature, balanced and self-aware, they are able to love in a healthy manner, which does not weaken or cause suffering, but strengthens and brings joy. Teaching men and women to be capable of loving in this manner is the difficult part.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    JM,
    Did you? I dropped out in the middle of the first semester and went somewhere closer to home the next year. Let’s just say my hometown is nowhere near as big as NYC. Funny though, I kinda considered it for grad school. They have an interesting food studies program I looked into.

    BTW, you had quite the favorable male-female ratio at NYU, unless it was totally different when you went. Don’t think I met very many straight guys in my short time there.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Love is a weakness only insofar as the ego is concerned. The ego says “I,” but love says, “We.” You have to let down your guard in order to open up and connect to another person. Love leaves you vulnerable, that’s why egoists think it makes you weak. You can get hurt. But when it works, it makes you stronger. Also, it’s beautiful.

  • Doug1

    Tom–

    Doug the only guys who need to game their wife are the guys who lack communication or interpersonal skills. Your push pull theory is crap. Most women need a feeling of security in a relatioship. Create dought in an intellligent womans mind and see how fast hypergamy happens. Once again a clueless Roissy deceiple gives bad advice….

    You simply don’t know what you’re talking about. I’m probably about 2/3 natural (I was a natural leader and always wanted to be and was playfully dominant with girls once in a relationship, but I also had lots of bad good guy and semi pedestalizing messages in my head), the rest was game (I thought of it as the art of seduction) I taught myself by observing what I did that worked best with girls and what less well, and observing other guys who were really good at attracting pretty girls. long before I ever read Roissy or any other game blogs or book.

    Push pull, attraction and comfort works with women. It simply does. Even Susan counsels betas to learn this sort of game, in a light way. The two leading game in marriages guys, Dave from Hawaii and Athol Kay definitely do.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Doug,

    I’m probably about 2/3 natural (I was a natural leader

    *coughbullshitcoughsmile* That’s very interesting. You should consider a blog on leadership.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Olive,

    I have a favorable ratio, but an unhealthy frame.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    *had

  • Stingray

    Doug the only guys who need to game their wife are the guys who lack communication or interpersonal skills. Your push pull theory is crap. Most women need a feeling of security in a relatioship. Create dought in an intellligent womans mind and see how fast hypergamy happens. Once again a clueless Roissy deceiple gives bad advice….Gualts gaming advice is also crap. All you are doing is the male version of shit testing. Might work on insecure low IQ women.

    A couple of things about this. One is that Keoni, I believe, was on the verge of a divorce and is very happily married now that he has started using game. I have known guys who have spent hours communicating with their wives doing the whole long talk thing and it was so beta that the wives lost respect for them. All that was necessary was to walk away and give her time to calm down and think. I don’t know what Doug said about push/pull but is it fair to assume to give her some of your self and then pull back?

    Yes, women absolutely need a feeling of security in a relationship. That does not mean that you fawn all over her and give her everything she wants all the time (I’m going to the extreme here to make my point). A wife can feel very secure in a marriage while the husband is still pulling back at times. He goes out and does his own thing from time to time and makes sure it is known that this simply is something he is going to do. It doesn’t have to be rude. A simple “Hey, I’m going to play pool tonight” is pulling back into himself and in itself is reassuring. It’s reassuring because no woman wants a man to lose himself into her so much that he loses himself.

    I am beginning to wonder if some of the hate towards this stuff has to do with some of the strong language being used. “Dread” for example. Obviously, some men are using this and it works for them. However, one does not need to establish dread at all. Only a woman is intrigued by a man that is liked by other woman as well. This isn’t dread, but a knowledge that he is desired. The manoshpere bloggers who use these terms are talking mostly to other men and are being blunt and straightforward. I wouldn’t argue that it only works on low IQ and insecure women. Only that these insecure betas took the strong language that is being tossed about and in their anger over their past relationships took it literally (yes, I do think that often it is used literally. It brings in readers and keeps them there) with the women they are seeing now. Here’s the thing. It is working for them for what they want. This is typically STR.

    But just because these concepts have been perverted a bit, please don’t mistake there place in a loving and healthy marriage. Only it is toned back drastically.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    JM,
    I’m guessing you mean you had an unhealthy frame. Your frame seems pretty ok nowadays.

    *coughbullshitcoughsmile* That’s very interesting. You should consider a blog on leadership.

    LMAO

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Olive, that is still a valid interpretation. Too bad that didn’t fit with what your professor wanted. D is pretty ridiculous for a paper if it’s well-written and well-argued.

    Then again, I learned that you have to know what the professors want you to say and think, and regurgitate that back at them. I had written down, word for word, what professors said and peppered those phrases into my papers. They always ate that up, and sometimes even circled those phrases and wrote that they were good. To them it probably looked like I was reading their brilliant minds. :P

    In high school I did have teachers who encouraged divergent thoughts, and we could write all kinds of theories and interpretations as long as it could be supported with the original text. I had some truly amazing and passionate teachers who allowed us to discuss things and go off-topic into economics, politics, current events, etc. then tied them back to the old philosophers and writers. Loved them. Too bad college did not turn out that way, and I lost all interest in academia.

  • Jennifer

    Well, it can develop over time, Jesus. I was very passive in MS, but in college, to my surprise, I found myself appointed and then willing to be leader in a few different discussion groups. I’d say I can be in-between, but I’m no blind follower. As far as the push-pull thing in relations, it’s one of the things that usually occurs at some point, but shouldn’t be manufactured. You’d think these people tried ordering every aspect of their relationships into being instead of letting them happen naturally. Susan’s advocated fun and light game, but never deliberately causing conflict the way Roissy has.

    “I think Roissy’s got a soul. Just a very tortured one”

    I was going to say that myself, but had to run after my last post. If ONLY he’d use his powers for good..

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Yes, women absolutely need a feeling of security in a relationship. That does not mean that you fawn all over her and give her everything she wants all the time

    Yeah this totally makes sense. Was going through my old line of bullshit with my BF last night (sometimes I revert back to old nagging high school student, trying to work on that) and he totally called me on it, said I was being unreasonable. Immediately apologized and got all snuggly, without even thinking. So, I guess it does work lol.

    BTW impressive reaction from my BF. Guess he’s got a little game in him, eh? ;-) Would’ve been worse if he said “oh yes my dear, anything you ask.”

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Jesus Mahoney, that reminds me of a conversation I had with my husband early on, about a week after we first started really talking. We were chatting on Yahoo messenger, and a simple survey popped up that had these choices:

    A) Me
    B) You
    C) Them

    The results overall: Me got 40%, Them got 37%, and You got 23%.

    He and I both chose “You” on first instinct.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Hope,
    Yeah it’s like the “red pill” of academia. Plenty of professors don’t really want to encourage free thought, they want you to stroke their egos. After that episode I became pretty good at just regurgitating information. Got me quite far in an environmental policy class, for example.

    However, not sure my paper was very well-written. My writing is 10x better now than it ever was when I was 18. Interestingly I had another professor at NYU, a writing professor, who really helped me learn to write more clearly. So they aren’t all bad eggs, thankfully.

  • Jennifer

    “Really interesting analogy about the rock bottom nihilism being the first swallowing of the red pill”

    I would have thought rock bottom was the 10th swallowing. Tom, thanks for the excellent words about Galt as well.

    Sting, guys who take the dread stuff literally are guys who took it JUST as it was presented. Inducing dread is not the same as a man being, and spending time by, himself. If a man’s desirable, his wife will know he could be with others period, so there’s no point or justification for his demonstrating such arrogance to keep her hungering for him. I used to like Galt ok, but I’ve seen way too much arrogant crap now; he went from one extreme to another, and I have little patience for people with such little balance; any guy who thinks it’s a choice between pandering to her and bossing her is worthy of a joke. You were correct when you said that all that’s necessary is walking away and not fawning.

    “That does not mean that you fawn all over her and give her everything she wants all the time (I’m going to the extreme here to make my point). A wife can feel very secure in a marriage while the husband is still pulling back at times. He goes out and does his own thing from time to time and makes sure it is known that this simply is something he is going to do. It doesn’t have to be rude. A simple “Hey, I’m going to play pool tonight” is pulling back into himself and in itself is reassuring. It’s reassuring because no woman wants a man to lose himself into her so much that he loses himself.”

    Exactly.

  • Jennifer

    Exactly, Olive; I respect direct men so much more than sidelining ones. My father is a great guy and dad, and his voice carries so much authority (and is louder than he realizes) that it can make me jump out of fairly deep sleep just hearing it. Obviously I don’t want a hierarchical relationship with my husband, and my dad and I have butted heads big time, but my point is that my dad is not a game player; he is direct, commands attention, and gives credit where it’s due. You cannot ignore him in the room if he doesn’t want you to, and he has this attitude naturally, without having read any guides about how to get it (no doubt it had something to do with his upbringing, but his dad was a major natural at authority too; also a great father).

  • Anacaona

    I always considered that Nietzsche’s works had been more interpreted than read, like The Bible. Is like reading a literary Analysis of Romeo and Juliet per decade. Before sexual revolution it was the story of two tragic lovers doomed by fate after sexual revolution is a cautionary tale from the dangers of two stupid teenagers in love and I’m sure in 2050 there would be a new theory of what the hell Shakespeare message was. The truth is that the truth is only present in the hard science and match 1+1 = 2, no matter language of philosophy and that is why the origin the universe has been the field of scientist for a while, the soft science are, like my husband told me, stamp collecting. So my personal definition is that Nietzsche (or any philosopher) interpretation are pretty much living in a Schrödinger’s cat kind of state. He is both a nihilist and he is not. The intellectual majority at the top, decides which state is the most likely at any given time, YMMV as usual.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    I would have thought rock bottom was the 10th swallowing.

    Nah, in Nietzsche, hitting rock bottom is good, because it’s the point at which you can finally consider a new moral code. Before that you’re stuck on the old one.

    As I understand it, it’s kind of the same for men who swallow the red pill. Once they swallow it, they can work to acquire new traits, to become more attractive or whatever.

    JM,
    You should really consider that blog. You seem to have changed your frame while still managing to retain the romantic/idealist part that girls actually love. Rivelino would benefit from reading stuff you wrote, he seems to think he needs to create some sort of secret 80% alpha bad boy/20% romantic idealist formula, and guys (some of the more bitter ones, perhaps) are telling him to stop it with the romantic shite. He also seems to think marriage is bad, that marriage is inherently “beta” and “weak.” You have good thoughts on that stuff, and I don’t see you as a particularly “weak” person.

  • Stingray

    I used to like Galt ok, but I’ve seen way too much arrogant crap now; he went from one extreme to another, and I have little patience for people with such little balance; any guy who thinks it’s a choice between pandering to her and bossing her is worthy of a joke.

    I never take what these manosphere men at their word as how they treat their wives. I have been around people enough to know that what they present and what they practice at home are usually two very different things.

    The other things I have come to learn is that 1.) these guys are not typically interesting in finding a good woman to settle down with. The extreme works for them and that is what they are looking for. So, as in any business the writers are often giving them what they want (Chateau). 2) Many of the women out there that these guys are meeting really are shallow, entitled brats. If the extreme works on them, I don’t have much problem with it. It may sound cruel, but if they feel they can treat others that way they cannot be pissed off when someone else does it to them. 3) I have met wives who behave the exact same way and they sicken me. If this is what it takes to bring some respect back into the relationship I also have no problem with that. In no way do I think the dread stuff or the extreme push/push is in anyway appropriate for women or men who are reasonable and the relationship may have lost it’s way a little bit.

  • Jennifer

    Olive, I find philosophy so fascinating. Nihilism was interesting to read about in college, but I’ve found it depressing on the Internet.

  • Jennifer

    Heh, that’s true Sting; as one of my friends and my dad said, this ain’t real life. But I still wish Galt wouldn’t promote some of the trash, like Roissy, that he does; you should never advocate disrespecting a spouse, esp. for influential young men. As for shallow women, yes, I realized this when pondering how these men spoke of women like they were heartless. But honesty is still best; snubb her if she’s being nasty or tell her off, but I don’t like games. As for Heartise, I agree totally; you have a lot of discernment when it comes to these places.

  • Escoffier

    Olive, nihilism in itself can’t be “inevitable.” It either is or is not. The realization by the mass of men that nihilism is true may be/have been inevitable. But the underlying truth of nihilism was true all along. We just didn’t realize it until late in the game.

    I am guessing that Benardete was dead by the time you two got to NYU but if he wasn’t and you didn’t take his courses, you missed big.

  • Escoffier

    Hope, I’m with you, I believe in natural right. I disagree with N. I still can recognize his greatness, though.

  • Escoffier

    Well, not to defend Roissy but … his posts on what constitutes a “quality woman” are quite accurate. He often writes about marriage in a way that suggests he is not inalterably opposed and may in fact be wistful for it. True, he is unambiguously against marriage as currently constituted. But the whole logical train of his love posts leads in the direction of marriage.

  • Jennifer

    I’m dubious, Escoff.

  • Stingray

    he is direct, commands attention, and gives credit where it’s due.

    This is game. At least a big part of it. Just because a guy is a natural doesn’t mean he doesn’t use game, he just didn’t have to learn it like the people who frequent the blogs.

  • Escoffier

    Jennifer, I’m not saying he would admit that his logic leads him to be covertly pro-marriage. I’m only saying that, in fact, it does.

  • Stingray

    Escoffier,

    I have very little problem with Heartiste (I have no idea if he is Roissy or not. Since I have really only known Heartiste I will go with that name). I don’t necessarily have a problem with the men there who are just out to get women. I can understand why they have reached that place. One of the things I do have a problem with are these men who go there and are so exacting that they can’t tell the difference in the nuances. These are the ones who can’t tell when a little back bone is needed vs. a full out bitch slap. They are there and I am always completed amazed by these guys. I have seen Heartiste try to explain the nuances but I think he gets tired of it after a while.

  • Jennifer

    Sting, this is where we differ. In fact, many believe that having game is different from PLAYING games. But even so, I don’t like calling natural authority and directness “game”. That’s simply a nebulous label that’s been over-applied to WAY too many things, and is very modern. I don’t agree with the usage of it at all, just like I don’t use the terms alpha and beta to describe actual people.

  • Jennifer

    So no, my father sure as hell does not use “game” on me. Ugh.

  • Stingray

    Ok. But let me ask you this? Who do you think the men who first began the concept of game observed to come up with the practice of it?

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Olive, nihilism in itself can’t be “inevitable.” It either is or is not. The realization by the mass of men that nihilism is true may be/have been inevitable. But the underlying truth of nihilism was true all along. We just didn’t realize it until late in the game.

    I don’t disagree, I think we’re saying the same thing. At the point at which we realize that nihilism is the underlying truth, it’s too late to go back; i.e. it’s inevitable.

  • Jennifer

    Sorry if that seemed aggressive, Sting, I’m just so brain-weary of the different uses, labels and definitions of and inside game, that I’ve become impatient and wary of them. But I hope my meanings are clearer; I understand yours too.

  • Jennifer

    I can imagine who they observed, Sting, the kind of men they used to distort and muddy several renamed old concepts. I wish they could teach young men confidence without all this ridiculous murkiness.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    I am guessing that Benardete was dead by the time you two got to NYU but if he wasn’t and you didn’t take his courses, you missed big.

    Bleh wasn’t around long enough to figure out who most professors were. I read Nietzsche for an elementary western civ. class, which was taught by some guy named Renzi.

  • Stingray

    I didn’t perceive anything aggressive at all. It’s all good. ;)

    I wish they could teach young men confidence without all this ridiculous murkiness.

    We are in complete agreement here. I only think that, used wisely, game could be a useful tool to do this. That is one of the reasons I frequent these blogs.

  • Jennifer

    @Stingray Cool :)

  • ozymandias

    Sorry for bringing up the race issue, Susan; I didn’t realize it’d cause such a shitstorm. And thanks for correcting me, Doug.

  • Jennifer

    It’s not a shitstorm, and it was great to hear from two real experts.

  • Emily

    I am also a member of the Jesus Mahoney Fan Club.

    Plz plz plz start a blog!!!! I’d read it. *puppy dog eyes*

  • OffTheCuff

    Your father doesn’t use game? Here’s a story.

    When I would come home from work, I’d try go to hug my daughter, who would give a petulant “No!” and run away. This was never a problem with the boys, who despite being rambunctious chatterboxes, are always happy to see me.

    I used to wondered if she liked me at all, until a certain corner of the internet schooled me in female psychology.

    What do I do? I call her “silly little girl”, and chase her around the house. She begins cracking and a little giggle escapes here and there. Eventually I catch her, pick her up, all while she is struggling against me and saying “NO!!!”, but the giggles are cracking the exterior. Eventually giggles turn into outright laughter. When I’ve finally picked her up, against her will… she laughs, smiles, and hugs me.

    It didn’t take long after that. Now, when I come home, she runs up to me, says “Daddy!!!” jumps into my arms, kisses me, and hugs me tight. This makes Dad happy.

    The four-year old shit test: passed.

    So, here I am, an abusive, gas-lighting, emotionally manipulating, game-player father who is destroying my daughter, by not respecting her verbal boundaries. Send in the cops.

  • Emily

    >> The four-year old shit test: passed.

    That’s adorable! IMO the importance of healthy daddy/daughter relationships cannot be over-emphasized, which is another reason why the current divorce rate is such a tragedy.

  • Jennifer

    No OTC, I don’t call that “gaming”; there are plenty of natural actions I don’t call or superimpose the term gaming on. And things like gaslighting and manipulating are also clearly defined and not humorous.

  • Jennifer

    And by the way, there are real verbal boundaries and times when teasing shouldn’t be pressed; I’m not talking about even necessarily the obvious ones, but the personal ones. I never felt nice, or warm and fuzzy, when these were crossed, and guys need to learn not everything’s a tease or a game.

  • Jennifer

    Sometimes kids do love to be chased; my niece will often giggle if she sees me get ready to chase her, or cheer her up with goofy looks and actions. Other times, though, she wants to be left alone, and I know not to push it.

  • Mac

    @OffTheCuff may I generalize your story?

    Children test boundaries, such as being nice to their parents. Frequently humor is a positive way to break through children who test said boundaries.

    I, a Mom, have been through the exact same thing with my daughter. Same solution, amusingly enough. I bet it would work with boys.

    Game. Rationally understanding and using people’s irrationality, specifically in relationships.

    I consider it respectful to point out the irrationality at some point. With little kids that’s harder but I consider it a parental responsibility to call it out as kids get older and you can expect more logical thinking. I DON’T want my daughter to make shit tests like that to boyfriends. I want her to understand why she might feel like doing so and why it would be better not to.

    Mac

  • Jennifer

    Using people’s irrationality? That’s just one of the many, and less commonly used, definitions of game. I think pointing it out is better, as you expressed.

  • OffTheCuff

    Game. Rationally understanding and using people’s irrationality, specifically in relationships.

    BINGO!!!

  • http://www.postmasculine.com Zac

    This was a really interesting article. When it comes to happy relationships I do think generosity is very important. I had never really thought of how important of a roll it played in my past relationships as well as my current one. My and my girlfriend are always doing little things for each other and it definitely helps solidify our bond. I had truly never thought much about how important respect was to me until I had read this. Me and my lady talk often about how much we appreciate and respect each other.

    I think in a way this partly boils down to vulnerability. When you are in a relationship you are vulnerable. When you don’t feel respected you feel as though your vulnerability is being exploited. When you receive respect and appreciation from your partner it allows you to open up and be who you are in a more substantial way. I really enjoyed this article and I’m glad I came across this site because it has some really wonderful things to say. I have only read a few articles so far but they have been great. I look forward to reading more =)