140»

Tidbits: Cherry Tree Edition

Here’s a mix of interesting links, tidbits, and a bit of blog business.

1. Modern Day Matchmaker Paul Carrick Brunson, aka “the real life Hitch,” has named Hooking Up Smart one of his favorite relationship blogs in a piece for Essence magazine. (Brunson has created a new dating show, Lovetown, USA,  in collaboration with Oprah. He’ll be hosting it on OWN later this year.)  I was surprised and delighted to be included. I’m in some rather daunting company, but PCB had this to say:

So I try to read every blog on this list, weekly. However, if time is tight for me and I only have a few minutes and I’m forced to pick one, this is it. Susan Walsh, the founder, approaches relationships in a very deliberate and strategic way. Her posts are always insightful and applicable to both women and men.

By the way, his slideshow was also a wake up call. I can’t believe how janky my photo looks compared to the others. Mr. HUS commissioned a blog portrait for me for Valentine’s Day, so I’ll be replacing it soon.

Congrats to fellow blogger Obisidian, whose Obsidian Files was also on the list. 

2. Today Vox Day introduces Hypergamouse, a new weekly comic at Alpha Game Plan.  It already looks like a hit over there, I’m hoping it will become the next xkcd. In any case, I’m sure VD will never run out of source material. :P

3. Fellow blogger Danny From 504 has developed a bit of a cult following, thanks to his inimitable streams of humorous, positive and perceptive thoughts on “horse shit, women and food.” My favorite posts are the ones that feature his cooking, which leans heavily towards his New Orleans roots. He’s started posting on  The Chef In Jeans ~ A Culinary Website for Men.  The Chef introduces Danny in a post called Hide Yer Daughters, which is fitting, saying:

He’s the CIJ Cajun connection hailing from New Orleans and he’s here to school my Yankee ass on how to make proper Cajun food.

Danny’s culinary lessons begin with, what else? A lesson on how to make a proper roux. Read and learn.

 4. Thanks to reader Desiderius for sharing this poignant story of a Yale male fail. Be sure to read the comments and watch the young feminists rail. Freshman David Lilienfeld is clearly not schooled in the ways of female sexual psychology, but he hits the head of the nail. 

5. Ian Ironwood has a very interesting post on Alpha and Beta traits at The Red Pill Room. I especially love this graphic, which encapsulates the constant debate we have here at HUS:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 6. A couple of readers in the Boston area have asked if I’m interested in forming any more focus groups, and whether they might participate. I’m game. I’d do it with women, men or even coed. If you’re in my area and interested, shoot me an email via the Contact page. 

  • Wudang

    The way things are going you`l be on Oprah soon.

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

      The way things are going you`l be on Oprah soon.

      Oh boy, I’d better go to Spinning tomorrow. Much work to do.

  • Julie

    At first, congrats to the mention as the favorite relationship blog! And to the comic: Hypergamouse will be my new fav, I’m already addicted although I’ve never seen any episodes:)

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

      @Julie

      Welcome, and thank you!

  • Ramble

    Brunson has created a new dating show, Lovetown, USA, in collaboration with Oprah. He’ll be hosting it on OWN later this year.

    I am sure that the show will offer wonderful insight into the male perspective.

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

      @Ramble

      You were quick, I wondered how long it would take for the anti-Oprah sentiment to surface. For the record, I agree that she is shameless biased in favor of women. I featured a couple of bad EPL stories from her blog in another post. Still, it’s a nice opportunity for PCB.

  • Stingray

    Janky?

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

      @Stingray

      From Urban Dictionary:

      Janky
      April 26, 2006 Urban Word of the Day
      (adjective) inferior quality; held in low social regard; old and delapidated; refers almost exclusively to inanimate material objects, not to people

      This word is a favorite among my daughter and her friends.

  • Wudang

    If its possible for outsiders to comment on the Yale article someone should head over there and explain things to them.

    If you know anyone at Yale or a similar school that understands what is going on maybe you could encourage that person to write an article about hwo things actually work. With a bit of luck it could explode into the debate of the decade in such a university newspaper. Because of the status of the school MSM and other colleges would pick up on it. Or you could contact the Yale paper and try to make them interview you about this since this article has made the topic hot and you have a very interesting perspective.

  • http://www.chefinjeans.com Chef In Jeans

    Thanks for the linkage Susan. I’m looking forward to seeing what Danny has to teach me and what we together can teach others.

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

      @Chef in Jeans

      Thanks for the linkage Susan. I’m looking forward to seeing what Danny has to teach me and what we together can teach others.

      I know it’s a blog for men, but I plan to do some lurking there. One can never have too many good food blogs in one’s Google Reader :)

  • http://dannyfrom504.wordpress.com dannyfrom504

    Gracias Tia. i appreciate the link love.

    how old’s your daughter again? lol.

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

      @Danny

      how old’s your daughter again? lol.

      Ha, she’s 22, but she sounds about 12 in that comment, I know. The whole time she was growing up I wanted to teach her to sew and cook. NO interest. Now she’s obsessed with DIY crafts and cooking. I like it – it’s a good way to get her to stop by on Sundays.

  • Ramble

    Danny’s culinary lessons begin with, what else? A lesson on how to make a proper roux. Read and learn.

    He gives a treatise on how to make a proper Roux without any reference to lard, clarified butter or duck fat. Yet, he does reference Vegetable Oil and Olive Oil.

    I always find things like that fascinating. For most of the Roux-making history in Louisiana, Veg Oil did not exist and lie Oil would have been difficult to get and very expensive.

  • Ramble

    BTW, ignore my comment at #10…I came off like a complete dick.

    6. A couple of readers in the Boston area have asked if I’m interested in forming any more focus groups, and whether they might participate. I’m game. I’d do it with women, men or even coed.

    Susan, if you could have had a coed group for the night you met with Kate Bolick, would you have done it? (Say, the guys would have been Badger, Mike C, Escoffier and a few others.)

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

      @Ramble

      Susan, if you could have had a coed group for the night you met with Kate Bolick, would you have done it? (Say, the guys would have been Badger, Mike C, Escoffier and a few others.)

      Definitely! My primary goal was to get the apex fallacy into the article, and the guys would have helped a lot with that. At the dinner, it didn’t even come up, but I hammered at it hard during our phone conversations. She was very responsive to the idea – it made intuitive sense to her, though she had never thought of it. Kind of like me a couple of years ago.

  • J

    YAAYYYYY, SW!!

  • J

    I read the first Hypergamouse comic strip. Funny, but the elephant in the room is that not just that Hypergamouse gives her gamma orbiter friend bad advice, but that he is punching above his weight class. The nerd girl is still better than he could hope for given assortive mating and his appearance. Can a comic book nerd find love? Sure, I’ve attended my share of SF cons; DH had quite a collection of Mad Magazines and war games when we met. But we are about equal in looks. Hypergamouse should have told Gammamouse to drop a few pounds or lower his expectations. I suspect though that in the next installment, MysteryMouse will give him a fuzzy hat. We will not see Gammamouse ask ChubbyMousette for a date.

  • J

    Re Oprah–

    There was a special on Mail Order Brides and Relationship Tourism on OWN that was far more favorable than the one Nat Geo did. The Nat Geo special gave the impression that people who do the mail order bride thing are losers and users. The OWN special emphasized love across cultures.

  • Sassy6519

    Congrats Susan on the accolades. You definitely deserve them.

    With that, I am off to read the Hypergamouse comics. :)

  • Rum

    Arty
    Please don’t call me rude names and make me go back into my cave. The pain might be more than I can bear.
    FWIW, I doubt if you really would disagree with what I actually wrote if you read it more than once.
    I mean, are you really going to take the counter-position? That when a woman is strongly turned on SEXUALLY by a new man that she does not lose a LOT of the turned-oned-ness she can feel for the old guy? That is what you would have to argue for if you are going to get to call me a “misogynist.”
    Guy can definitely want to bang a new chick without losing much if any desire to bang relation-ship girl. If he can control it, it is a case of no-harm-no-fowl. Most women have trouble with that notion precisely because they know how their own instincts work – that is, if she is aware that she wants to sex another guy it is very bad news for her existing relationship.
    Feel free to disagree. Until then , I will only do caves when I feel the need to.

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

      @Rum

      Guy can definitely want to bang a new chick without losing much if any desire to bang relation-ship girl. If he can control it, it is a case of no-harm-no-fowl. Most women have trouble with that notion precisely because they know how their own instincts work – that is, if she is aware that she wants to sex another guy it is very bad news for her existing relationship.

      I don’t agree with this, it was Doug1′s primary argument. I believe women are programmed for serial monogamy – maybe we cycle through males every 4-7 years if left to our own devices, but we don’t double up. It’s essential to the raising of young that our men follow the same path, and pair-bonding/monogamy did evolve as the preferred method for raising children. It’s extremely threatening to a woman to share her man, whose love, fidelity and resources are compromised by non-monogamy.

      Any woman willing to share her man is an extreme outlier, or is not emotionally invested in her relationship. I do not believe that her vulnerability to emotional investment during cheating is the reason for her unwillingness to allow her partner to have sex with other women.

  • J

    If he can control it, it is a case of no-harm-no-fowl.

    No poultry were harmed during the typing of Rum’s post.

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

      @J

      No poultry were harmed during the typing of Rum’s post.

      Thanks for the belly laugh.

  • http://revoltagainst.wordpress.com/ Flavia

    Congrats seriously……White Oprah FTW

  • http://dannyfrom504.wordpress.com dannyfrom504

    Ramble-
    who uses lard anymore? i certainly don’t. so let me clarify.

    roux- a thickening agent comprised of equal parts oil and flour. pick your poison for the oil part.

  • WarmWoman

    “Ha, she’s 22, but she sounds about 12 in that comment, I know. The whole time she was growing up I wanted to teach her to sew and cook. NO interest. Now she’s obsessed with DIY crafts and cooking. I like it – it’s a good way to get her to stop by on Sundays.”

    Now, my situation was the opposite where I wanted to learn cooking…but my mom refused.

    I turned to youtube videos, cooking classes, books and trial/error.

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

      @Warm Woman

      Now, my situation was the opposite where I wanted to learn cooking…but my mom refused.

      I turned to youtube videos, cooking classes, books and trial/error.

      Same here! I taught myself. When I was a senior in college, my parents moved to Brussels for five years. That first Thanksgiving, my two younger brothers came to spend the holiday with me. I roasted my first turkey ever, and used sewing machine needles to truss the bird, not having the proper supplies. When I pulled the turkey out, the needles were gone, which meant we had to eat the meal looking out for them in every bite. Also, I made twice baked potatoes, using blue cheese to mix with the potato flesh. My brothers thought they were gross. They stood up, and hurled the potatoes across the apartment into the kitchen sink. Two points! I do not have a sister, but my brothers are awesome :)

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Congrats Susan! Will be cool to see the new photo, too. :)

    This is my favorite spot, too, for the civil conversations and interesting topics.

    And yeah,crafts/DIY/homemade is huge right now. I have a friend who handmakes quilts as a baby shower gift for everybody she knows.

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

      @Hope

      I have a friend who handmakes quilts as a baby shower gift for everybody she knows.

      Sounds like you’re going to get a lovely gift…

  • J

    I believe women are programmed for serial monogamy – maybe we cycle through males every 4-7 years if left to our own devices, but we don’t double up.

    Probably half of us are programmed for serial monogamy, and there’s probably just some luck involved as well. In more natural circumstances, about 50% of first marriages work out. Of the women whose relationships break up, there is a cycle of 4-7 years with one guy till the next break-up cycle of about 50%. Rinse and repeat. There are a few die-hard sluts though. It seems that there are some women who are just hardwired to double-up on men in order to have access to multiple pools of resources. (See the work of Sarah Hrdy–yes, that’s correct, no vowels in the last name.)

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

    @SW
    Monogamy being a prerequisite (and ongoing requirement) for a relationship used to go without saying. I’ve noticed a constant drumbeat against it, though, ever since I started lurking last year. Perhaps that’s what you get with heavy (self-selected) male participation? Doug1 was certainly the most notorious…

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

      @Megaman

      Monogamy being a prerequisite (and ongoing requirement) for a relationship used to go without saying. I’ve noticed a constant drumbeat against it, though, ever since I started lurking last year.

      Yeah, well, I’m not buying it. My advice to women is to get the real deal by selecting a man of that mindset. I think that there are many men who seek a monogamous life partner – enough so that women who want the same should have no difficulty finding that if they choose wisely.

  • Michael of Charlotte

    Congrats on your success Susan. Here’s hoping you can positively influence the Oprah crowd, should they follow Brunson over here.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Cosign Susan at 27. I really think this is one instance in which the guys do not understand the female drive. Get this: over the weekend, my boyfriend was telling me about a girl he used to like, and I still got all suspicious and jealous for a moment (for absolutely no reason, that was nearly three years ago). It’s not that I was projecting, I just can’t handle the thought of my partner being with another woman. I have a gut reaction. I literally cannot understand how a woman could forgive a man for cheating. I’d be outta there in two seconds.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @Susan, we got our gift at the baby shower for Liam. It was a really great quilt, and as we deliberately asked for gender-neutral we will be keeping it for the new little one.

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

      @Hope

      When is your next ultrasound? I am on tenterhooks! Are you feeling well?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @Susan, it won’t be for another month. I’m starving and nervous all the time. My husband makes fun of me for eating so much. :P

  • Rum

    Susan
    The chicken did not survive. The thing that happened was not planned; nor was it pretty . The problem was provided by a horrible pervert who showed up at the scene and demanded to be allowed to enact his answer to the essential question —-Why did The Chicken Cross the Road?
    Because to cross the road the chicken needed a ride on the perverts dick.
    My parents raised me better than to fall for that. But none of gods children want to cross that road alone.

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

      @Rum

      Dude, what are you smoking?

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

    @SW
    “I think that there are many men who seek a monogamous life partner…”

    Well, at least a long-term monogamous partner. I’ve noticed that young people (men and women) tend to have very short-term goals. Perhaps that’s just living in CA too long. The idea of a life partner is probably a big sell to those who have a hard time staying a relationship for more than a year.

    Obviously, lifelong marriage works for most couples over a certain age. However, with formal dating considered an antiquated notion these days, I don’t see how Gen Y, particularly the male portion of it, can go from short-term thrills to lifelong commitment without some major change in priorities.

  • WarmWoman

    What a funny and cute story, SW! I bet you’re a great cook by now. ;)

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @Olive, I have a similar reaction to my husband talking about an old crush or girl he used to like, but I’m also super curious so I want to know more. Maybe it’s so I can figure out if she was better than me in some way?

    I think men are silly for trying to get women to be more “understanding” about this. A woman who is in love with her man would not want to share him. Incidentally, my husband does know how women feel because he has very high empathy, which is not typical of most men.

    Which reminds me of this radio story I heard the other day about a woman discovering her husband has Asperger’s. Tons of other women upon hearing about it also wondered if their men have it, too. Being low on empathy, insensitive, not reading social cues, etc. are typical of a masculine brain. My husband and I were both listening to the story, and I told him that I had absolutely zero suspicion of him having it.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “I don’t agree with this, it was Doug1′s primary argument.”

    I think you are misreading Rum’s quote. He said its no harm if a man desires to bang other women, not if he *acts* on it and actually does it. Having that desire won’t reduce desire for your woman, but many women seem to think so. Controlling it means not acting on it.

    And the reason he brought this up, I think, was to show that women think this desire is more dangerous than it really is due to projection. If a woman has the generalized desire to bang other men (again, not acting on it, just the presence of it) then bodes poorly for relationship, far more than if the man does. I’m pretty sure Mike C has made this same point earlier.

    Doug’s point was that if you want a high alpha, expect to share. That may be somewhat true, but its a totally different thing, and I’m not gonna get into that…

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

      @OfftheCuff

      OK, thanks for clarifying. I think I did read that wrong. I thought he was saying that women don’t want men to have variety because they themselves couldn’t handle it. It’s true that we can’t, but it’s not the reason we don’t want our men to have it. Or maybe it is. I’m confused now.

  • http://4stargazer.wordpress.com/ Anacaona

    I have a friend who handmakes quilts as a baby shower gift for everybody she knows.

    I have friend envy now. :)

    Perhaps that’s what you get with heavy (self-selected) male participation? Doug1 was certainly the most notorious…

    There is been a war against monogamy and people acting like polyamory is the next step on human evolution for a while, spare me please.

  • Wudang

    “Any woman willing to share her man is an extreme outlier”

    I don`t encourage women to acept such a deal or men to try to get a woman to agree to it but I strongly belive what yu say is factually inacurate. Take a trip over to fasterseduction.com and ask them how difficult they find it to get women to accept the deal of her being monogamous and him having something on the side without emotions. They don`t find that very difficult at all. A LOT of women will accept that deal with the right man playing his cards right. I have been surprised myself that three women I met were quickly willing to accept the deal in theory and I am certainly no mpua or apex alpha. Historically it has ALWAYS been the case that the top men either had several wives or had mistresses/the ability. I have a lot of french friends and they tell me the aceptance for this has historically been large although of course reluctant. Take a trip to Hon Kong and on fridays you will find an unusual amount o men traveling to mainland china. That is because it is so much cheaper to keep one or more mistresses in their own houses in china rather than be a suggar daddy for a woman from hong kong. I read an article in the economist on how masses of mistresses live in the area arround Hong Kong to supply the wealthy men there. Their wives know and are not divorcing them. Now, I belive that once women are more economically independent the number who is willing to acept this will decline a lot but that it will still be the case as long as the man is alpha enough. That is why it is not difficult for good PUAs to find women who will go for this even today. As I said I don`t encourage anyone to set this up and would rather discourage it but I don`t think it is a good idea to do it by denying the truth. Women who will acept this are not extreme outliers by far. Thats just fact.

  • lovelost

    @Susan
    Congrats!!! on the accolades. You’re the new relationship coach. :)

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

    @Wudang

    Let me clarify. Sharing a male sexually is never the preferred arrangement. It is something that women negotiate and navigate as a tradeoff for other benefits. Polygamy exists where women are powerless, and as you say, many American women today do not need the financial resources or protection of a man. A woman who is willing to accept being part of a harem in the U.S. today may be seeking any number of things, but marriage and children are not in her mindset, obviously.

  • http://areallthegoodnamesgone.blogspot.com Ted D

    Olive – “It’s not that I was projecting, I just can’t handle the thought of my partner being with another woman. I have a gut reaction. I literally cannot understand how a woman could forgive a man for cheating. I’d be outta there in two seconds.”

    I am exactly like this as well. It is literally a physical reaction in my stomach, similar to getting horrible news, or that feeling you get about 2 seconds before the car behind you hits you at the light and you see it coming.

    And as far as cheating goes, I have a zero tolerance policy. And, I’m not just talking about sex. I told my ex when she wanted to separate and stay with her dad for a month or so, that if she so much as went out on a date i was done. I figure once she decided to even go out with another man, she was over us. I won’t say I wouldn’t ever forgive cheating, but I would never stay WITH a cheater. I would forgive her eventually, but it wouldn’t change the outcome in the least.

  • Ramble

    Ramble-
    who uses lard anymore?

    Danny, I do. But that is not the point, I was too aggressive in my response.

    However, the point I was attempting to make is that so often we get lessons on the “authentic” way of making something (and, I understand that you did not use that word) and that recipe will invariably involve a cooking fat that did not exist before the late 19th century.

    Yet, people in the Gulf Coast have been making roux based dishes going back to at least the 1700′s. The cooking fats that they most likely used wsa lard.
    ==========================

    BTW, Vitamin D deficiency is a big problem in the West. Anywhere between 50-80 percent of people in North America and Europe are deficient. I bring this up because (with the exception of Cod Liver Oil) Lard and, by extension, (Fatty) Bacon are the best sources of Vitamin D in our diet. Except, well, “who uses lard anymore?”.

  • WarmWoman

    @Hope “Being low on empathy, insensitive, not reading social cues, etc. are typical of a masculine brain”

    Really?

    When I think of a man that’s being insensitive and not being empathic, I think of that as signs of an unhealthy relationship. I would like to think that there are more males out there that know how to behave in healthy relationships, such as being able to empathize and be respectful to your partner.

  • Wudang

    “Let me clarify. Sharing a male sexually is never the preferred arrangement. It is something that women negotiate and navigate as a tradeoff for other benefits. Polygamy exists where women are powerless, and as you say, many American women today do not need the financial resources or protection of a man. A woman who is willing to accept being part of a harem in the U.S. today may be seeking any number of things, but marriage and children are not in her mindset, obviously.”

    I agree it is never the prefered arrangement and it is always negotiated for in some way. A woman in the US today that would voluntary become one of more wives would definitively be a real outlier. However, a woman who has a shot of being with a VERY alpha and all round attractive man only if she acepts that sometimes he will have other women on the side will often acept taht even today no matter how much money and freedom she has. Thats just an observable fact by looking at how many of the women PUAs who try to get such a deal with go for it. Most don`t but a fairly high percentage do. They are not extreme outliers. The majority no and I couldn`t say what proportion but it is much higher than you or most believe. The thing is almost none of the women who acept the arrangement never thought they would do such a thing but once they are in the situation of having fallen for such a man they still often do. So it is difficult to asses the amount of women who given the right man would go for it because almost no one can imagine being willing untill they are actually with the right man. I have seen this in my own life as well amongst people my parents know, amongst some people I know and I have met three women who would have acepted such an arrangement with me if we had gotten together. These women are not super sluts or mentally damaged, they just calculate that the man will stay with her as long as he gets to have sex on the side with women he don`t find LTR worthy. As long as he can make her belive she will be his only madonna she`ll let him keep his whores. It is a gamble but often the only way to keep certain men and because of the high value he brings they take the gamble. I`ll leave this topic after this topic as I am not interested in debate about this I just wanted to state my opinion that such women are NOT extreme outliers. As I said I DON`T encourage people to have that kind of relationship I just don`t think there is value in misrepresenting the facts about it.

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

      @Wudang

      Thats just an observable fact by looking at how many of the women PUAs who try to get such a deal with go for it. Most don`t but a fairly high percentage do. They are not extreme outliers. The majority no and I couldn`t say what proportion but it is much higher than you or most believe. The thing is almost none of the women who acept the arrangement never thought they would do such a thing but once they are in the situation of having fallen for such a man they still often do.

      I do not doubt that PUAs boast more of these arrangements than the average man, or even most natural alphas. I would suggest there is enormous selection bias in looking at that group. In fact, I consider them extreme outliers. In any case, they are not cutting such deals with women searching for a life partner and family, as they advertise quite openly they have no intention of being monogamous from the start.

      I have seen this in my own life as well amongst people my parents know, amongst some people I know and I have met three women who would have acepted such an arrangement with me if we had gotten together. I just don`t think there is value in misrepresenting the facts about it.

      I think this is my first test since the weekend. Let me phrase this as carefully as I can.

      The only couples I have ever heard of having this arrangement have been revealed here – I know of two, and I believe there is a third, though it was not explicitly stated. I have no way of testing the veracity of those claims.

      I have known quite a few men who cheated, including friends of my own parents. It was a serial cheating, with promises to be faithful in between lapses. There was never an agreement permitting sexual variety. I believe all of those marriages ended in divorce. I have seen a few horrendous divorces at the schools my kids attended, all of which were initiated by women married to cheating alphas.

      I have never heard a single young woman consider such an arrangement, much less enter into one. The lax players at Duke that Karen Owens banged were all in serious relationships, and I assume there must have been a certain amount of looking the other way that went on in exchange for “dating” a high status varsity athlete. As I said, people cut their deals.

      I also believe that there are a minority of women who can have sex without becoming emotionally invested, and there are women who benefit from relationships with men whom they are not attracted to. They are likely to behave differently, perhaps. Again, I consider them outliers.

      IOW, my experience does not align with yours. You have represented the facts as you perceive them, and I represent the facts as I perceive them. I am no more guilty of misrepresentation than you are.

      I agree that this would not be a fruitful debate, so I’ll leave it here.

  • Sasha

    Sharing a male sexually is never the preferred arrangement.

    The never part is simply not true – I have known women who explicitly expressed their desire for their b/f (or husbands) to pursue other women.

    Having followed you for a while, I came to a conclusion that you live in a cognitive, emotional and experiential monogamy bubble. It’s a form of blindness.

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

      @Sasha

      The never part is simply not true – I have known women who explicitly expressed their desire for their b/f (or husbands) to pursue other women.

      Yes, there is a female version of the cuckold fetish. What percent of the adult female population would you say that describes? .005%?

      Having followed you for a while, I came to a conclusion that you live in a cognitive, emotional and experiential monogamy bubble. It’s a form of blindness.

      You are correct that I am a firm believer in monogamy, and write for a female audience that shares that view. The sex poz crowd feels very differently. Your diagnosis of blindness is obviously an editorial opinion. I believe that you equated monogamy with stagnation in a previous comment. I also believe that your posts here have sought validation for your own preferences, which you will not receive here, at least from me.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Oh for heaven’s sake, here we go. Susan, you can probably just unban Doug now. :-P

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

      Oh for heaven’s sake, here we go. Susan, you can probably just unban Doug now.

      No, that’s not going to happen. I’ll strangle that debate.

  • http://areallthegoodnamesgone.blogspot.com Ted D

    Well to be totally fair, you have to admit Susan that there IS indeed a small minority of women that are not only OK with their man having some “on the side”, but look for and/or promote such situations. Talking in absolutes is just about always a mistake when dealing with people. Somewhere, someone doesn’t fit the mold.

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

      @Ted D

      Well to be totally fair, you have to admit Susan that there IS indeed a small minority of women that are not only OK with their man having some “on the side”, but look for and/or promote such situations.

      I did admit that from the start. They are called outliers, which means they’re in the long tail of the bell curve. I stand by that assessment.

  • J

    Thanks for the belly laugh

    Any time, SW.

    On jealousy: I pride myself on not being jealous or paranoid about my DH and other women, but early in our marriage I woke up one morning and began to harangue him for not telling me about his previous marriage. He sat up and patiently explained to me that he had never been married before. As he spoke, I noticed that he was looking at me as though I’d lost my mind. I gazed around the room and noticed that we were still in bed. I had literally dreamed up the other marriage and woke up screaming because I thought it was real.

  • http://revoltagainst.wordpress.com/ Flavia

    I can see both @Olive’s and @Hope’s points of view. My husband is very warm, empathetic, loving and sensitive. To me. That’s pretty much where it ends. He is very logic minded and straightforward with other people. I would think that a man who was cold and unsympathetic to their spouse might not be so much “logic minded” …just a bit of a detached a-hole or maybe aspie.

    @Sasha- those women are expressing a evolutionary strategy to secure a high status male- one they would not be able to keep in a standard relationship. It is a fine strategy, if you want to have hoardes of violent men left wifeless and a societal breakdown. There is a very distinct correlation between a civilized society and monogamous pairings (which result in high investment parenting). I am fine with outliers doing whatever they want, but I would not want to live in a society where this was the norm.

    As far as cheating, I agree with the commenters above- I’d be out in a second. I do not condone it, and I could never do it. Actually, I just had a dream yesterday that (in his prime) George Clooney wanted to sleep with me, and had a hotel all set up- but I denied him because I was married. I have to tell my husband about this….not even in my dreams..Not even a kiss!!!…..lol. (Yes, i woke up annoyed, lol)

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

      It’s interesting that two people have reported their dreams. I have some extremely unusual dreams as a result of blogging here. I had a dream recently that a man came to me worried about the size of his penis. I assured him it was probably just fine, and he dropped his pants. What he had was one single, red ice cream sprinkle. I woke up in a state of extreme agitation, and prayed as I went back to sleep that the dream would not resume. Thank you HUS.

  • J

    @OTC

    He said its no harm if a man desires to bang other women, not if he *acts* on it and actually does it.

    Oddly enough, as much as I have zero tolerance for cheating, I have no problem at all with fantasizing. “Lust in the heart,” go for it! Who cares?
    Lust in somen other woman’s bedroom? That’s a dealbreaker!

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Ted,

    Well to be totally fair, you have to admit Susan that there IS indeed a small minority of women that are not only OK with their man having some “on the side”, but look for and/or promote such situations. Talking in absolutes is just about always a mistake when dealing with people. Somewhere, someone doesn’t fit the mold.

    I’m pretty sure you just NAWALTed. Good job. :-P

    Wudang,

    These women are not super sluts or mentally damaged, they just calculate that the man will stay with her as long as he gets to have sex on the side with women he don`t find LTR worthy. As long as he can make her belive she will be his only madonna she`ll let him keep his whores.

    It’s worth it to note that these women aren’t seeking out men who cheat simply because they cheat. They’re seeking out high value men, letting them cheat so they’ll stay. The desire is for a high value man, not for a man who cheats.

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

      They’re seeking out high value men, letting them cheat so they’ll stay. The desire is for a high value man, not for a man who cheats.

      Value is in the eye of the beholder. Tastes vary. I consider a cheating man extremely low value, for obvious reasons. They siphon off critical emotional, psychological, time and financial resources from the family. Again, if a woman is looking for a casual arrangement, this will not matter.

  • http://areallthegoodnamesgone.blogspot.com Ted D

    Olive – “I’m pretty sure you just NAWALTed. Good job. ”

    DOH! I hate it when that happens…

  • Wudang

    “@Sasha- those women are expressing a evolutionary strategy to secure a high status male- one they would not be able to keep in a standard relationship. It is a fine strategy, if you want to have hoardes of violent men left wifeless and a societal breakdown. There is a very distinct correlation between a civilized society and monogamous pairings (which result in high investment parenting). I am fine with outliers doing whatever they want, but I would not want to live in a society where this was the norm.”

    I highly agree and I am very pro monogamy anti poly because of this. In part also because I don`t think it works out very well for the people involved most of the time. I just don`t belive it is a good strategy to deny the facts.

  • Sasha

    @J,

    So you would encourage (“go for it!”) cultivation of lust for other women in his heart/mind but not in his body? That’s not what I’d call monogamy.

  • http://areallthegoodnamesgone.blogspot.com Ted D

    “I highly agree and I am very pro monogamy anti poly because of this.”

    I suspect that poly lifestyle could work very well for smaller tribal groups. But, any Western country would be far too large for that setup. I believe we would see much more domestic violence (as jealousy began causing fights), worse parenting than we already see, and a faster downward spiral than we are current in. (Not saying poly people are bad parents. But I believe the majority of the non-poly folks trying to BE poly would make horrible parents.)

    I can see that the lifestyle can and does work for a small minority of people, but I imagine those groups tend to form into something similar to an extended family, which actually lends some legitimacy to my claim that it works great in a tribal group.

    Ozy – Please feel free to tell me I’m full of shit. I will be the first to acknowledge that I know very little about the poly lifestyle.

  • Wudang

    “It’s worth it to note that these women aren’t seeking out men who cheat simply because they cheat. They’re seeking out high value men, letting them cheat so they’ll stay. The desire is for a high value man, not for a man who cheats.”

    Exactly! So I think in the west today that means they are very high on the hypergamy index. In less wealthy countries it might very well be the most security seeking women who opt for this because there it is more about financial security. It might also be women with social climbing instincts more than hypergamy as they could get elevated to a different class. THis can be different from hypergamy because it is about HER becoming high status through access to wealth rather than the hypergamous impulse to feel great desire for a man of high status.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    I just don`t belive it is a good strategy to deny the facts.

    Right, but in this particular case, I don’t think Susan is denying the facts.

    Here’s what she said:

    Sharing a male sexually is never the preferred arrangement. It is something that women negotiate and navigate as a tradeoff for other benefits.

    You didn’t contradict this statement, what you did say was that sometimes women seek out high value males and let them sleep with other women so they’ll stay. That doesn’t mean they prefer the guys sleep with other women, it’s that they prefer the men don’t leave or cheat dishonestly.

    Also, I want to say something about NAWALT. Susan has taken a lot of heat as of late for claiming NAWALT, even from me. I’d suggest people don’t go after her for her use of the word “never” in this case, as we often talk in broad generalizations at HUS. Let’s not get into a situation of “NAWALT for me, but not for thee” (that sounds really goofy lol).

    Sasha,

    So you would encourage (“go for it!”) cultivation of lust for other women in his heart/mind but not in his body? That’s not what I’d call monogamy.

    I strongly suggest you don’t go down this path. Doug tried to redefine monogamy and polygamy too, and he was banned. We don’t really like to talk about this at HUS, and in all fairness to Susan, it has nothing to do with her mission.

    And besides, I’ve read your commentary elsewhere and I generally like it (I dislike Doug more because of his writing style than anything). I don’t want you to get banned. :-P

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @WarmWoman, I’m talking about men who are actually on the spectrum. I think many men who are like this tend to also be extremely loyal and logical, and not likely to stray or be abusive. They are just somewhat hard to deal with as people, since they don’t quite understand social norms.

    One example given was the wife complaining about traffic, and the husband mapped out an entire series of alternate routes and presented them to her, when she just wanted him to say “that sucks honey.” :P The radio show portrayed the husband in a very loving and good light despite his Asperger’s. He clearly cares about her, and in my book that makes it at least fundamentally a healthy relationship.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Exactly! So I think in the west today that means they are very high on the hypergamy index.

    Hmmm I don’t know about this. It has been suggested that women with high jealousy instincts are also high on the hypergamy spectrum, but I haven’t been able to work out that theory yet.

    It might also be women with social climbing instincts more than hypergamy as they could get elevated to a different class. THis can be different from hypergamy because it is about HER becoming high status through access to wealth rather than the hypergamous impulse to feel great desire for a man of high status.

    I’ve always understood that the idea behind hypergamy is the selfish desire for a higher position in the social and economic pecking order. Girls often get high status boyfriends to show them off to friends, so they themselves will be seen as high status. Under this argument, the women who agree to polygamous arrangements would be very high on the hypergamy spectrum, because they desire high value men.

  • Wudang

    Right, but in this particular case, I don’t think Susan is denying the facts.

    Here’s what she said:

    Sharing a male sexually is never the preferred arrangement. It is something that women negotiate and navigate as a tradeoff for other benefits.

    You didn’t contradict this statement, what you did say was that sometimes women seek out high value males and let them sleep with other women so they’ll stay. That doesn’t mean they prefer the guys sleep with other women, it’s that they prefer the men don’t leave or cheat dishonestly.

    Here is what she said that I was responding to:

    “Any woman willing to share her man is an extreme outlier, or is not emotionally invested in her relationship”

    I interperated that statement as being about the amount of women that would be willing to acept the agreement of the man having something on the side not about the amount of women that would prefer he had some on the side.

    I belive it is wrong that women who will go for the agreement under the right circumstances are not extreme outliers and said it was my observation that a much larger percentage of women, though far from the majority, would go for such an agreement with exactly the right guy playing his cards right. If we are talking about women who prefer a man who sleeps with other women I agree that such women are very rare altough they do exist as I see them in sexuality forums on the net.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @Sasha, I didn’t grow up in a monogamy bubble. My grandfather had children with a mistress, and my father cheated on my mother. It is actually because of seeing and knowing this from a young age that I never dated an Asian man. I’ve dated black and white and mixed, but no Asian in the mix.

    The choice was laid out before me: choose a “high status, rich and powerful” man who would cheat, or one of the “invisibles” who would remain loyal and faithful to me for life. I chose the second, over and over again. I went for men who did not want to have a “side dish” but wanted me for life.

    Now I acknowledge that I am also an outlier, but I think if women knew the reality of cheating, they would not sign up for it. In a f-buddy or casual arrangement, sure whatever. PUAs have that market cornered. But a real commitment with children?

    The terrible reality involves: feeling worthless, pain, pain to children, shame, loss of intimacy and trust, loss of the pair bond, and feeling like you’re living a lie. You’re just roommates pretending to have a relationship, while one or both go outside to get real needs met. They can’t wait to escape back into the arms of the lover because life at “home” is so suffocating.

    If you want kids, if you even so much as possess the ability to have kids, then do your kids a favor and don’t go swinging, cheating and lying into multiple partners’ pants. I grew up under a dark cloud of terror because of what my father did, and I never ever want my children to experience the same.

  • Wudang

    “I’ve always understood that the idea behind hypergamy is the selfish desire for a higher position in the social and economic pecking order. Girls often get high status boyfriends to show them off to friends, so they themselves will be seen as high status. Under this argument, the women who agree to polygamous arrangements would be very high on the hypergamy spectrum, because they desire high value men.”

    I think you can make a distinction dedending on how coldly calculated such a match is from the womans side. If she marries a rich guy in order to get the benefits of his money but is not really that into him it is not really the hypergamous sexual instinct. The hypergamous sexual instinct achieves higher status and benefits for the woman by the woman following her tingling. If she tingles for others but marries rich I don`t really see that so much as hypergamy as practicality.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Wudang,
    To be honest, I don’t know that her statement about emotional investment is off the mark. I would argue that a woman who is highly hypergamous is in a relationship for the status, not for the “lovey feelings.” And if you think about the history of marriage, it makes sense. Before, marriage was an economic arrangement and the “falling in love” process before marriage was largely avoided (check out societies in which arranged marriage is the norm). Now, “lovey feelings” are commonly recognized as the driving force that keeps marriage together.

    On the other hand, it’s possible that the embrace of “lovey feelings” encourages women to be hypergamous. Now THAT’S an interesting topic. Need to think on it though.

  • J

    Doug2 #63

    Sorry, just ran out of troll chow. Will get back to you after a quick run to the store.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Wudang,

    I think you can make a distinction dedending on how coldly calculated such a match is from the womans side. If she marries a rich guy in order to get the benefits of his money but is not really that into him it is not really the hypergamous sexual instinct. The hypergamous sexual instinct achieves higher status and benefits for the woman by the woman following her tingling. If she tingles for others but marries rich I don`t really see that so much as hypergamy as practicality.

    There’s something very Western about this perspective, no? “Following the tingle” isn’t really an issue for societies that require women to “get married off.” Also, couldn’t we argue that it’s the richest men who are also the most desired/”tingle-inducing” in these societies? I think the West is really different in that we’ve evolved to a point where those men don’t necessarily hold the most political and economic power anymore (though Bill Clinton certainly did…).

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @Olive, I think it’s an interactive feedback loop. Women who are after high-status rich men due to hypergamy also tend to tingle for high-status rich men. I don’t think there is too much of a distinction there.

    As for “hypergamy” vs. “practicality,” that’s just a semantics debate. You could say it’d be quite “practical” for girls to want to be the mistress or second wife to a multi-gazillionaire, but really, it’s still the hypergamous instinct driving the action. He’ll give her huge diamonds, tons of jewelry, lots of designer labels and fancy vacations. And all she has to do is give her pussy. Good deal!

    The “emotional investment” can be of a selfish nature — “what can he do for me?” As opposed to the selfless nature — “what can I do for him?” I would argue that the first one drives hypergamy/polygamy, while the second one drives monogamy/seeking of his monogamous investment, because the emotional investment in the second case is on a deep level.

    There are women who feel so much of the selfless love that they are willing to sacrifice their own happiness for the man’s happiness, but the problem with this is that she’s then like a candle and burns out too quickly. The man gives nothing back to her if he goes and has all kinds of side dish girls and doesn’t care about her feelings. That’s the classic setup of foolish lack of self-love on her part, and loving an unworthy cad. And no, sorry, that’s not enviable.

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

      @Hope

      The “emotional investment” can be of a selfish nature — “what can he do for me?” As opposed to the selfless nature — “what can I do for him?” I would argue that the first one drives hypergamy/polygamy, while the second one drives monogamy/seeking of his monogamous investment, because the emotional investment in the second case is on a deep level.

      That’s a great insight, as it distinguishes between the different natures and traits of the two women.

  • http://areallthegoodnamesgone.blogspot.com Ted D

    “On the other hand, it’s possible that the embrace of “lovey feelings” encourages women to be hypergamous. Now THAT’S an interesting topic. Need to think on it though.”

    I’m chewing on hypergamy as well, as most of you are painfully aware of. :P I’m trying to work this exact same thing out. Is Hypergamy driven by social status, “the tingle”, or some mix? Is it likely that a highly promiscuous woman is more hypergamous, or is it simply a correlation between promiscuity and hypergamy, and in fact the two are not directly linked?

    Logically I can see that a woman most concerned with social status would indeed be very hypergamous, as the desire to “trade up” seems to be linked to social status a lot. And, it stands to reason that such a woman may very well indeed be more promiscuous, as she would see sex as a way to snag that high status man. But, that certainly doesn’t mean that every women who was/is promiscuous has a high hypergamous drive.

  • Wudang

    Doug2 #63

    Sorry, just ran out of troll chow. Will get back to you after a quick run to the store.

    Haha. THe difference is that I don`t encourage the arangement and would not take advantage of the possibility even if I can get it. I think it is bad for society and bad for the people involved.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    The “emotional investment” can be of a selfish nature — “what can he do for me?” As opposed to the selfless nature — “what can I do for him?” I would argue that the first one drives hypergamy/polygamy, while the second one drives monogamy/seeking of his monogamous investment, because the emotional investment in the second case is on a deep level.

    There are women who feel so much of the selfless love that they are willing to sacrifice their own happiness for the man’s happiness, but the problem with this is that she’s then like a candle and burns out too quickly. The man gives nothing back to her if he goes and has all kinds of side dish girls and doesn’t care about her feelings. That’s the classic setup of foolish lack of self-love on her part, and loving an unworthy cad. And no, sorry, that’s not enviable.

    Good stuff, Hope. We missed you in the Great Doug Debate.

  • Wudang

    “I do not doubt that PUAs boast more of these arrangements than the average man, or even most natural alphas. I would suggest there is enormous selection bias in looking at that group. In fact, I consider them extreme outliers. In any case, they are not cutting such deals with women searching for a life partner and family, as they advertise quite openly they have no intention of being monogamous from the start.”

    There is some selection bias sure but the women that go into it are of all kinds, even virgins, so I don`t think it can be discredited. It is not true that the women who go for this are not looking for life partners and families. Some do some don`t.

    As you say yourself many of the Duke athletes were in relationships but probably had girlfriends looking the other way. If they are willing to do that implicitly why not explicitly.

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

      @Wudang

      As you say yourself many of the Duke athletes were in relationships but probably had girlfriends looking the other way. If they are willing to do that implicitly why not explicitly.

      Because it’s a major FAIL in terms of female intrasexual competition. “She can’t keep her man happy.” “Look at him pressing up against Daphne on the dance floor. I feel so sorry for his wife.” “All that botox and her husbands still cats around.”

      Women feel deeply shamed when they are “not enough.” It’s the reason why we get crazy jealous, and it explains women’s repulsion to the male desire for sexual variety.

  • Wudang

    “To be honest, I don’t know that her statement about emotional investment is off the mark. I would argue that a woman who is highly hypergamous is in a relationship for the status, not for the “lovey feelings.” And if you think about the history of marriage, it makes sense. Before, marriage was an economic arrangement and the “falling in love” process before marriage was largely avoided (check out societies in which arranged marriage is the norm). Now, “lovey feelings” are commonly recognized as the driving force that keeps marriage together.”

    I think of them as following their sexual desire and the romantic feelings that tends to die of after a few years or weaken strongly for everyone. Certainly not pairbonding feelings. So in that sense you could argue they are less emotionally invested. But compare that to a woman who is only moderately attracted to her midling beta husband but has developed fairly strong pairbonding feelings. I think easily the hypergamous one would be more crushed by loosing the man she felt was the love of her life. So I guess it is a matter how you see it.

  • Wudang

    Oh, and a key part of setting up such an explicit arangement is to give her the illuision/feeling of monogamy and so not talking about the other women and him being allowed to cover it up and to never let anyone else know so that she won`t be humiliated by it publicly. That makes a lot of the couples who have this arrangement unobservable to most people.

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

      Oh, and a key part of setting up such an explicit arangement is to give her the illuision/feeling of monogamy and so not talking about the other women and him being allowed to cover it up and to never let anyone else know so that she won`t be humiliated by it publicly. That makes a lot of the couples who have this arrangement unobservable to most people.

      I saw that coming. If it’s so secret, how did you acquire your sample?

  • Wudang

    “There’s something very Western about this perspective, no? “Following the tingle” isn’t really an issue for societies that require women to “get married off.” Also, couldn’t we argue that it’s the richest men who are also the most desired/”tingle-inducing” in these societies? I think the West is really different in that we’ve evolved to a point where those men don’t necessarily hold the most political and economic power anymore (though Bill Clinton certainly did…).”

    Agree, but so many of the rich men there still wouldn`t produce much tingles if they did not have looks or game or could relate very well to the woman which of course would often be the case.

  • Wudang

    “As for “hypergamy” vs. “practicality,” that’s just a semantics debate. You could say it’d be quite “practical” for girls to want to be the mistress or second wife to a multi-gazillionaire, but really, it’s still the hypergamous instinct driving the action. He’ll give her huge diamonds, tons of jewelry, lots of designer labels and fancy vacations. And all she has to do is give her pussy. Good deal!”

    I don`t really think it is semantics. Is the gold digger who has no desire, rather contempt, for her husband while banging the alpha private trainer following her hypergamy with her husband? She is using the gender dynamic were deep down there is an exchange of sex for resources but if she is not tingling for it but someone else I would say her hypergamy is pulling her away from her husband towards the personal trainer. Her hypergamous instinct is just in savanah mode and not so adapted to modern life.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    @Wudang, I absolutely agree. Bad for society and bad for people involved.

    I think it can be a very potent lesson to learn though. My husband and I have both been in “love triangles” in the past, which is why we have zero desire to explore that dynamic any further. It brings so much pain and distress that it can be like a huge spiritual exam, one you have to pass before you experience a sort of enlightenment.

    Just as I don’t tell druggies and addicts that they’re horrible human beings, I don’t tell people involved in such situations that they’re bad people. I simply recognize it as something I do not want for myself. Partially because I already know what it’s like, and it’s really not great.

  • J

    What he had was one single, red ice cream sprinkle. I woke up in a state of extreme agitation, and prayed as I went back to sleep that the dream would not resume.

    LOL. Be thankful that’s something impossible IRL. Even microphalluses are bigger than that.

  • http://4stargazer.wordpress.com/ Anacaona

    Women who will acept this are not extreme outliers by far. Thats just fact.

    I think the distinction is not if women will accept it but if a woman that is burning in desire with love is happy and enjoying their partner’s cheating as she will enjoy seeing him engaging in a favored hobbie or fulfilling that dream. As explained before many women can accept this not out of love but convenience, economic or social. Some others have deep issues and they accept because they think they deserve it or because they have no choice or because they are not woman enough to keep a man happy on their own, some others accept it for the chance of winning the Alpha for themselves over the other girls so the man is just a prize and object of validation. The % of women that are really, happy, nonjealous and fulfilled in a healthy way with this arrangements most be as low as real asexuals. Don’t confused putting on with desiring.

    I have to tell my husband about this….not even in my dreams..Not even a kiss!!!…..lol. (Yes, i woke up annoyed, lol)

    Welcome to my monogamous hell! :)

    Hmmm I don’t know about this. It has been suggested that women with high jealousy instincts are also high on the hypergamy spectrum, but I haven’t been able to work out that theory yet.

    I’m very jealous so I don’t think is correlated, personally.

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

      @Anacaona

      It’s in discussions like these when your knowledge of the DR SMP is very illuminating.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Value is in the eye of the beholder. Tastes vary. I consider a cheating man extremely low value, for obvious reasons.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m totally on board with you, and I would stay the hell away from a cheating man. But I was referring more to what society sees as valuable. I think we have to recognize that a high value man today is not the same as a high value man of the 1950s. I’ve said this before, that my grandfather (who was apparently a complete alpha asshat, also very old-world Arab) had a mistress. Apparently there was a long line of people out the door at his funeral… everybody loved him, and he was quite wealthy (his son, my father, still hates him, and he died some 20 years ago).

    Even though society is changing, I think a lot of women are still looking for that alpha guy who everyone loves. And if he’s high status enough, Wudang makes a point: they will look the other way. I’m not saying it’s good or preferable, or that those girls even know what’s good for them. I’m just saying that’s how society worked for a long time.

  • http://4stargazer.wordpress.com/ Anacaona

    Relevant to the discussion Athol’s article about women that accept to be with cheating men, with my own guest post!
    http://www.marriedmansexlife.com/2012/01/male-rationalization-hamster.html

  • Wudang

    The % of women that are really, happy, nonjealous and fulfilled in a healthy way with this arrangements most be as low as real asexuals. Don’t confused putting on with desiring.

    THAT I agree with. I think it means suffering a lot for the positive of having very strong tingling for her man.

  • Wudang

    “Relevant to the discussion Athol’s article about women that accept to be with cheating men, with my own guest post!
    http://www.marriedmansexlife.com/2012/01/male-rationalization-hamster.html

    I thought about mentioning that post. I think Hope described well how i think it often plays out in poorer cuntries and I think Athol describes how it would eventually play out today in a situation were divorce is a greater possibility.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Wudang,

    Agree, but so many of the rich men there still wouldn`t produce much tingles if they did not have looks or game or could relate very well to the woman which of course would often be the case.

    Two things about this:

    1) In many situations, the high status man has money and looks and game. That’s sort of the ultimate image of an alpha man: he has it all. Only in the West, where men have started to lose power, has this really changed. But check politicians, it hasn’t changed with them. Bill Clinton, FDR, George H. W. Bush… they all had affairs, and wives who stayed with them (whether or not it was for political reasons that they stayed is beyond the scope of this conversation).

    2) This whole “following the tingle” thing is also very Western. In the past women couldn’t follow the tingle, because it wasn’t socially or legally acceptable. Several men have actually come to HUS saying women should be shamed for following the tingle (Doug comes to mind). I would disagree (and I think Jesus Mahoney and Ted would back me up here): no man wants to be with a woman who doesn’t tingle for him. The ideal is for a woman to know her attraction triggers, and pick a mate accordingly.

  • Tony Stark

    Any of you guys who actually think women are fine with their men cheating don’t know women very well. Just sayin’…

    For the record, I’ve heard there are men with cuckold fetishes. That must mean men in general enjoy being cuckolded.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Susan,

    Because it’s a major FAIL in terms of female intrasexual competition. “She can’t keep her man happy.” “Look at him pressing up against Daphne on the dance floor. I feel so sorry for his wife.” “All that botox and her husbands still cats around.”

    Funny, this reminds me of a good story. My friends from college have all crushed on one of our guy friends, who definitely gets around and has not proved to be a very good boyfriend (though he’s quite charismatic, a real gentleman on a superficial basis. Even my parents like him).

    One of my friends just started dating him, much to the chagrin of one of the others, who advised him not to date her (competition much?). Over the weekend, another girl who’s still in college drove three hours to his house to be his date to a work party. The second friend immediately texted the first “just to let her know.”

    Meanwhile, one of my other friends (a third!) told me over Christmas break that this guy has always been in love with her, that he never liked the girl he’s dating now. They’re all crazy IMO lol.

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

      @Olive

      That is a funny story – hamsterwheeling at 60 mph. By the way, I love it that Bella De Paolo took umbrage with the rodent metaphor. That’s a Roissy-ism, and I’d like to think he would find her fury amusing.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    “it means suffering a lot for the positive of having very strong tingling for her man.”

    Meanwhile after some number of years the tingles inevitably go away, and she’s left with no tingles, no love and lots of resentment.

    A lot of it also depends on the culture. My grandparents had an arranged marriage, so presumably my grandmother never “tingled” for him. She probably didn’t care all that much what he did sexually speaking.

    The second set of family seemed almost congenial and on good terms with the first set. I was asked to call the son of the mistress uncle, etc. (I was around 7 or 8.) I don’t really know all the details, but my grandmother seemed fine with it.

    My grandfather never left his wife or kids. He continued to take care of my grandmother when she suffered a stroke in her 60s, and did so until she died in her 80s from cancer.

    The old world model of lifelong commitment sans romance and strict adherence to that set of codes can work, but how many would make that work in today’s environment?

  • Wudang

    Because it’s a major FAIL in terms of female intrasexual competition. “She can’t keep her man happy.” “Look at him pressing up against Daphne on the dance floor. I feel so sorry for his wife.” “All that botox and her husbands still cats around.”

    So, if I am understanding you correctly you are saying that the Duke girlfriends and women like them are willing to live with a man who is extremely likely to cheat or maybe even one they know will cheat as long as he promises not to cheat and gives her the illusion of monogmay so that she hopefully won`t get confronted witht the fact of his cheating unless he gets caught. And that they prefer this type of relationship to one that has the an explicit arrangement to let him have some on the side. So the point is that it hurts too much to really take in that it is that way so they prefer this verison were the reality feels further away/can be denied/can be denied at least most of the time. Am I understanding you correctly?

    This would match what I read some PUAs say. Some said they had explicit agreements but never talked about it and were expected by the girl to lie to cover it up and she would not inquire when suspicious. Some would say they never had made the arrangement but they implictly made it very clear so that the girlfriends always knew but never had to take in that it was in fact happening to the degree if it had ever been discussed. Both types would see it as key that no one else would no so the girlfriend not become socially humiliated. Some said social humiliation was a more critical risk factor than her bein gconfronted with it too strongly.

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

      @Wudang

      So, if I am understanding you correctly you are saying that the Duke girlfriends and women like them are willing to live with a man who is extremely likely to cheat or maybe even one they know will cheat as long as he promises not to cheat and gives her the illusion of monogmay so that she hopefully won`t get confronted witht the fact of his cheating unless he gets caught.

      No, those women openly acknowledge to themselves and one another that they are in a harem. Same with the Duke basketball players. They have willingly made a deal to be Top Girl, and they don’t experience shame in that case because they only hang out with other lax players and their top girls. My guess is that the shit hit the fan when Karen Owen’s powerpoint came out, because they were humiliated in front of the whole school, their families, friends from high school, etc. But yeah, those guys were hooking up with other girls in campus bars – everyone could see.

      My guess is that those “serious relationships” are just glorified fuckbuddy arrangements. Obviously, the arrangement does not permit much in the way of emotional intimacy.

      I don’t believe that it’s possible to keep such an arrangement entirely secret. Women will be judged and shamed for enabling a relationship like that by all but other women who are doing the same thing. This is perhaps why certain cultures, i.e. France, tolerate such things on a wider basis.

  • http://femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Susan,
    Yeah I got that too, it was great. Today I was reading through the old Dalrock thread (I never did get a chance to read it, but damn did they take your responses to Doug out of context). In any case, it was almost refreshing to read Bella’s article. I also loved how she brought up Dominique’s credentials in response to your calling her a cat lady. The article was full of “shame shame shame.”

  • Wudang

    “I saw that coming. If it’s so secret, how did you acquire your sample?”

    Big part of the sample is the internett were the secrecy do not aply. Part of the sample was friends of my parents who had more open agreements. These were more alternative minded intelectuals and radicals. Part of the sample was my mothers upper class environment were it was known that this went on a lot but was kept quiet about but still rumoured. Part of the sample was a book were a woman interviewed men about their sexual and romantic lives and I was shocked by the amount of cheating that ended up becoming acepted cheating and the amount of cases were there was agrements that he could cheat while traveling but not at home etc. Part of the sample are younger people today who are more inclined to say they consider/considered something like this or are doing it or have done it before. Take the observable numbers and then add to that to get an estimate of real numbers because it is downplayed.

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

      @Wudang

      I don’t find your sources credible in some cases, but I have no investment in trying to change your mind. I would still describe such women as outliers. We can disagree on this point, but I will not change my reporting of “the facts.”

  • Tony Stark

    Also, this goes both ways. Plenty of men put up with incredible amounts of shit from their girlfriends for a variety of reasons. I have a buddy whose girlfriend is a huge bitch. Literally none of his friends can stand this girl. But he stays with her and puts up with it because she’s extremely hot. In his mind, he’d rather put up with the bitchiness if he can bat out of his league in terms of her hotness. However, I’m sure that ideally he’d prefer a girl just as hot without the bitchiness. Again…people make tradeoffs.

  • Ramble

    I didn’t know that G. H.W. Bush had had an affair.

  • http://areallthegoodnamesgone.blogspot.com Ted D

    Olive – “The ideal is for a woman to know her attraction triggers, and pick a mate accordingly.”

    I agree with the above statement, but feel the need to add a point. I see a HUGE difference between “following the tingle” and “knowing your attraction triggers”. Yes, I believe NO woman should ever initiate or allow a relationship to occur with a man she does not tingle for to some extent. It doesn’t have to be full on pantie-wet buzzing, but it should be more than enough to get her turned on.

    That is a far cry from “following the tingle”, as to me following implies being led around BY the tingle, and that is a path to a large partner count and a lot of empty sex.

    The truth is, it is a fine line between smart mate selection and promiscuous behavior. They are both driven to an extent by natural attraction, but the difference is in what you DO with that attraction.

  • Ramble

    The second friend immediately texted the first “just to let her know.”

    I am curious, why the quotes?

  • Wudang

    “No, those women openly acknowledge to themselves and one another that they are in a harem. Same with the Duke basketball players. They have willingly made a deal to be Top Girl, and they don’t experience shame in that case because they only hang out with other lax players and their top girls. My guess is that the shit hit the fan when Karen Owen’s powerpoint came out, because they were humiliated in front of the whole school, their families, friends from high school, etc. But yeah, those guys were hooking up with other girls in campus bars – everyone could see.”

    Damn. I`ve never even heard of something like that. They are officially “girlfriends” but the guys hookup and everyone knows? And this works because they are in a group where many others do the same and because the guys are the highest status and the girls are the prettiest no one else dare shame them? But you have ehard taht after the Karen Owen thing the girls gut mad/broke things up because the cheating got official?

    Maybe its because of the US campus culture with all the sports. You get local super alphas because they are sports heros and at the top of the only social ladder that exists in the college years, the people on campus. Add in everyone being so young that they are in full alpha chasing mode/seed spreading mode and maybe that is why.

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

      @Wudang

      But you have ehard taht after the Karen Owen thing the girls gut mad/broke things up because the cheating got official?

      I didn’t hear anything about their girlfriend’s reactions, that is speculation on my part. I do know that those same guys were out the same weekend the powerpoint broke, hitting on new chicks at a frat party. They really had nothing to lose.

  • Wudang

    “I don’t find your sources credible in some cases, but I have no investment in trying to change your mind. I would still describe such women as outliers. We can disagree on this point, but I will not change my reporting of “the facts.”

    We`ll just agree to disagree then.

  • Ben K.

    Hey Susan. Tried to email you on your contact form about focus groups in the Boston area but it keeps returning an error message. Very interested in joining one, as well as in talking with you about how my research and curriculum development for young men may dovetail with what you’re up to on your blog (which, by the way, I’m telling everyone about! It’s truly the best out in the blogosphere on the topic of modern dating and romance. Hats off to you…) Please contact me when you can, or perhaps just inform me when the contact form is fixed. Thanks!

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

      @Ben K

      Sorry about that, I didn’t know there was a problem! I’ve noted your email, and will be in touch. FYI, I have heard from 2 guys and 3 women so far, including you. We’d need about 10 for a really good group – let’s see what else I hear this week.

  • http://areallthegoodnamesgone.blogspot.com Ted D

    Susan – have you considered allowing people to join your sessions by Video chat? If you can’t get enough people in person, technology can lend you a hand.

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

      @Ted

      Susan – have you considered allowing people to join your sessions by Video chat? If you can’t get enough people in person, technology can lend you a hand.

      That’s a great idea. Then I wouldn’t need to limit it to Boston area folks.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    About vox´s cartoon

    See, in Vox´s Hypergamouse comic, where the character is advised to “be himself” and he runs into a random girl stating he´s seen StarWars a hundred times… his fail aint assuming his real self. His fail is talking to THAT girl. Because he should be talking to a girl dressed as Princess Leia in a StarWars convention. His fail is not finding his market.

    The full stuff here http://yohami.com/blog/2012/02/21/be-yourself-doesnt-work-let%C2%B4s-get-deeper/

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    Wudang,

    Damn. I`ve never even heard of something like that. They are officially “girlfriends” but the guys hookup and everyone knows? And this works because they are in a group where many others do the same and because the guys are the highest status and the girls are the prettiest no one else dare shame them?

    It works because none of the girls are a “girlfriend”. One might be the top girl, or girlfriend with quotes, but not the blue pill kind.

    The girls do get shamed. By other girls who want to join. The guys do get shamed, by other guys who want those girls.

  • Wudang

    his fail aint assuming his real self. His fail is talking to THAT girl. Because he should be talking to a girl dressed as Princess Leia in a StarWars convention. His fail is not finding his market.

    There is one exactly like that in this video but as you can see the competition is bigger than anywhere else:

  • VD

    Because he should be talking to a girl dressed as Princess Leia in a StarWars convention.

    I take your point and don’t disagree with it in general, Yohami. But look more closely at her shirt….

  • J

    His fail is talking to THAT girl. Because he should be talking to a girl dressed as Princess Leia in a StarWars convention. His fail is not finding his market.

    Did you notice her shirt? It’s hard to see, but the thing that looks sort of like an A is R2D2.

    Right market, wrong shelf. She has too many HB points on him. Except for her clothes, she is roughly equal to Hypergamouse in looks. In fact, it looks like the artist drew the same girl in different clothes.

  • J

    Whoops, sorry about the crosspost, VD…

    Full disclosure, I once looked a lot like NerdgirlMouse, and I have dressed as Princess Leia at an SF convention or two.

    Fuller disclosure, I once told by Frederick Pohl that I would make a fantastic Deja Thoris.

    It’s not the interest in SF that sent her running. He really could be himself about that. It’s the ponytail and the weight. Even at a con, there’s a pecking order. NerdgirlMouse will hook-up with NASA scientist PR guy at the con. He’ll be beta; this guy is gamma.

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    VD, if the girl was a StarWars fan, then it wasnt the commentary. Probably the beer gut. Or the attitude. Or the opener. Not the StarWars fandom for sure.

  • Passer_By

    @susan

    “I’m game. I’d do it with women, men or even coed. ”

    I always figured you were the adventurous sort.

  • VD

    Except for her clothes, she is roughly equal to Hypergamouse in looks. In fact, it looks like the artist drew the same girl in different clothes.

    She’s cute and out of his league, to be sure, but if you look closely, you’ll see she’s considerably less curvy than his female friend. But like all comics, this one will take a little time for us to sort out what works graphically and what doesn’t.

    Not the StarWars fandom for sure.

    There is a considerable difference between the nerd girl fans and the hard core omega dorks. In fact, the nerd girls probably have the keenest sensitivity to the acceptable limits of fandom, since they’re the ones most likely to be approached in this manner. I suspect J can back me up here….

  • J

    She’s cute and out of his league, to be sure, but if you look closely, you’ll see she’s considerably less curvy than his female friend. But like all comics, this one will take a little time for us to sort out what works graphically and what doesn’t.

    Ah, put fangirl in a pushup bra and dress with a belt to accent her waistline and she’ll clean up just fine. I’m rooting for fangirl, in case you can’t tell. ;-)

    There is a considerable difference between the nerd girl fans and the hard core omega dorks. In fact, the nerd girls probably have the keenest sensitivity to the acceptable limits of fandom, since they’re the ones most likely to be approached in this manner. I suspect J can back me up here….

    Yes, indeed I can. Nerd girl fans not only know the male limits, they know their own. They, at least the upper tier, usually have a life outside of fandom and relatively straight jobs where they assiduously avoid discussions of fandom. They tend not to live in their parents’ basements, and they tend to have an idea of just how weird this interest looks to people on the outside of fandom. They have non-fan friends and interests. They are, as you note, the girls most likely to be approached at cons, not just by fanboys but by SF authors, reporters covering the con, English teachers teaching a SF course, NASA PR guys, publishers, IT managers, etc.

    There is a lower tier of female fandom though that corresponds to your fanboy character, and they are desperate for male attention–chunky girls in Deja Thoris costumes, cute but mildly aspy girls, shy girls, etc. And they go to meet someone, maybe hook-up. That’s your boy’s niche. The question is will he approach one of them?

  • http://www.yohami.com/blog/ YOHAMI

    J,

    May the force be with you.

  • http://4stargazer.wordpress.com/ Anacaona

    It’s in discussions like these when your knowledge of the DR SMP is very illuminating.

    Good to know that years of being witness to so much suffering are useful to a point.

  • J

    LOL. And also with you, Yohami.

  • WarmWoman

    “@WarmWoman, I’m talking about men who are actually on the spectrum. I think many men who are like this tend to also be extremely loyal and logical, and not likely to stray or be abusive. They are just somewhat hard to deal with as people, since they don’t quite understand social norms. ”

    Oops sorry, hope! I misunderstood your comment.

  • Jackie

    @Susan
    @Obsidian

    Congrats, Susan and Obsidian, at being featured in Essence! That is beyond awesome! :-)

    Susan, I wouldn’t be surprised if HUS starts garnering more national attention. I would start watching clips of authors, etc, on the morning shows (GMA, etc) for what to wear, presentation, etc. Because once things start to happen, it will be QUICK. :) And I will be anticipating the new professional pic, too! Any idea what kind of message you want your photo to be sending (i.e. a 21st Century Marmee)? It is worth a thousand words, after all. ;)

  • http://revoltagainst.wordpress.com/ Flavia

    re: polygamous vs monogamous

    I am sure there is something for everyone, however there is a level of intimacy that is had when two people share a relationship that just cannot be reached when it’s a relationship between three or four or ten people. Even platonic friendships are much stronger when there are two people who are best friends, as opposed to a clique of friends who all know each other similarly (actually groups just naturally tend to partner up).

    I like monogamy for civilization, but also I like it for me. I like to feel like it’s me and Husband against the world. I like to be perfectly comfortable in the fact that today, I could come home with a duffel bag and say “Hide the body! Can’t explain now” and the only response I’d get is “I’ll get the shovel.” Ride or die!

    *please do not take the last sentence literally, anyone.

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

      @Flavia

      . I like to be perfectly comfortable in the fact that today, I could come home with a duffel bag and say “Hide the body! Can’t explain now” and the only response I’d get is “I’ll get the shovel.”

      That’s a great metaphor for the kind of trust and intimacy that monogamy bestows on two people. Undivided loyalty.

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

    @Sasha
    “I came to a conclusion that you live in a cognitive, emotional and experiential monogamy bubble.”

    Interesting expession, I actually like the idea of a monogamy bubble. Isn’t this kind of essential for a strong relationship (or marriage)? I’ve always thought that environment is of paramount importance, especially when it comes to perceived social rewards. Even though there are lines I’d never cross, I still don’t put myself in situations where there might be any temptation.

    What would be the opposite of a monogamy bubble? Maybe the anything-goes zone : )

  • J

    Undivided loyalty.

    Yes!

    I also think tht it is hard enough at times to keep one intimate relationship healthy. I don’t understand how throwing some extra people into the mix helps.