Kicking the Hookup Habit

Timothy Wilson’s review of  THE POWER OF HABIT: Why We Do What We Do in Life and Business by Charles Duhigg, begins with this quote:

Human consciousness, that wonderful ability to reflect, ponder and choose, is our greatest evolutionary achievement.

It’s something we tend to forget when we talk about sexual imperatives and the competing mating strategies of the sexes. Regardless of your genetic predispositions, your life experiences, or even the culture you live in, you have the freedom to consider your options in nearly every aspect of behavior.

Recently, I was talking with Emileigh, a female college student who’s gotten into the habit of hooking up at school. Freshman year she had a regular hookup that eventually turned into an official relationship, though it was fraught with drama and suspicion of his cheating. Looking back on it, she said, “I know he didn’t love me.”  

When that relationship burned and crashed over the summer, she returned to school figuring she’d follow the same path. This wasn’t entirely insensible – hooking up is the pathway to relationships in college, though it happens only 12% of the time. (Hayes, Allison, McManus, Brian and Paul, 2000). Two and a half years later, she’s had many hookups, none of which made it to the relationship stage this time around. She’s a senior now and feels miserable about it. I asked her why she kept doing it. Her answer had several elements. 

  • Guys give her attention knowing she hooks up on the reg.
  • The girls who don’t hook up get zero attention from guys, which she fears would be even worse.
  • Her number has gotten so high she doesn’t see why it matters anymore. :(
  • It’s awkward to say no.
Regarding that last point, 12% of women say that it is sometimes easier to have sex with a guy they don’t know than to make conversation (Glenn, Norval and Marquardt, Elizabeth, 2001).
 
Emileigh was clearly wrestling with the fact that she’d become one of the most promiscuous girls on campus. Hooking up was a habit, and she no longer gave any thought to the decision before making it. She had forfeited her power to reflect, ponder and choose. She feels terrible about her choices – she was very upset while telling me this – and she wants to stop. She’s not sure how. It was clear to me that just telling her to get a grip was not going to help. I asked her to think about a hiatus, starting now. No sex. I asked her to say no this weekend to hooking up. If she could make it one weekend, she could try again next week. I realized I was basically advising Jerry Seinfeld’s “don’t break the chain” method of forming a new habit. I sensed that Emileigh would find it challenging to stop doing this thing that makes her feel so badly, and that it might help to break it down into small steps.

 

Back to Duhigg’s book, Wilson continues:

This is not a self-help book conveying one author’s homespun remedies, but a serious look at the science of habit formation and change.

One way behavior can become habitual is through repetition. If we acquire a bad habit this way it is very hard to change, because its grooves are so well worn in our minds. We have to painstakingly practice a better response that wears a new groove.

Duhigg is optimistic about how we can put the science to use. “Once you understand that habits can change,” he concludes, “you have the freedom — and the responsibility — to remake them. Once you understand that habits can be rebuilt, the power becomes easier to grasp, and the only option left is to get to work.” He also suggests that by understanding the nature of habits we can influence group behavior, turning companies into profit makers and ensuring the success of social movements.

As you can imagine, that last sentence really caught my eye – if we think about hooking up as a habit, and we understand how that habit gets formed and how it can be broken, then perhaps we really can influence the culture for young people.

Social psychologists have shown that an effective way of changing many habitual behaviors is to change people’s perceptions of the norms that govern them, resulting in reduced drinking on college campuses, for instance.

…Other behaviors are habitual because they obey social norms — norms that we rarely question or think about. We shake hands when we greet people, wear socks of the same color and eat with a fork because these are the customs we have learned. Such behaviors are not well-worn grooves in our minds, but actions we could easily alter if the laws or customs that governed them should change.

Wilson refers here to the success colleges have had in curbing binge drinking by exposing pluralistic ignorance: not nearly as many kids are getting wasted as you think, and not nearly as many kids want to get wasted as you think. We know that pluralistic ignorance plays a role in hookup culture as well, so it stands to reason that exposing it might prove beneficial to the majority of students.

Finally, Wilson addresses what I believe is going on with Emileigh, and certainly with many more young women like her:

There is another type of habitual behavior that involves more cognitive activity, namely people’s interpretation of a situation according to what it means for them and how it fits into the narratives they tell themselves. These behaviors are habitual in the sense that people have chronic ways of interpreting the world.

We need to decouple self-esteem and validation from casual sex. Emileigh has a narrative that she replays in her head whenever she goes out. Because her experience rarely departs from the narrative, it’s worn a very deep groove in her mind. She is stuck in a rut, literally. Perhaps if we can decipher what stories people tell themselves, and explore where the narrative reinforces behavior, we can interrupt the chronic cycle of choosing without reflecting or pondering.

One Pingback/Trackback

  • Charm

    It’s awkward to say no.

    I thought awkward was burping in someones face while making out, or brushing someones genitals while trying to get passed them in a crowded space, or even making eye contact with a stranger that won’t stop looking at you.

    But now denying someone access to the most intimate part of your body is awkward?

    I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.

  • Ted D

    Wow. It’s easier to have sex with a stranger than talk to him.

    I fear for our future.

  • Cooper

    “hooking up is the pathway to relationships in college”

    Was Emileigh seeking a relationship?

    “Emileigh was clearly wrestling with the fact that she’d become one of the most promiscuous girls on campus.”

    How come none of the hook-ups were relationship worthy, then?

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

      @Cooper

      How come none of the hook-ups were relationship worthy, then?

      None of them wanted to commit to her. It was all pump and dump.

  • Lokland

    Sucks to be her, good luck.

  • Charm

    Sucks to be her, good luck.

    +1

    I was thinking the same thing. I didn’t wanna be the first to say it. I wonder how many random cocks she had to sit on before she realized it was a bad idea.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Charm

    Haha. Where would you like to live instead?

  • Charm

    @Sassy

    The goddamn moon. At least there you wouldnt have young women putting out to avoid a damn awkward situation of saying the word “No”.

    This post really pisses me off. This shit is getting out of hand. She slept with all those people. And for what? Attention?

  • Lokland

    @ Charm

    I think she is now a bad bet for a relationship for the guy.
    I still feel for her shes in a tough situation even if she put herself there.

    As for habitualness being trained, I agree 100% with Susan on this point.

  • Charm

    I think she is now a bad bet for a relationship for the guy.

    I agree. I hope she doesn’t end up with some clueless beta. But we all know that odds are she will. Unless shes upfront about her past. I ain’t puttin’ my money on that happenin’.

    No wait, she’ll just adopt the slogan “If I hadn’t got pumped and dumped by all those guys in college, I wouldn’t be the person I am today.” Thus softening the blow.

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

      No wait, she’ll just adopt the slogan “If I hadn’t got pumped and dumped by all those guys in college, I wouldn’t be the person I am today.” Thus softening the blow.

      Actually, I was struck by the absence of a rodent on a fly wheel. She took full responsibility for her own actions, to the point where I felt compelled to reassure her that she’s hardly alone. She’s not Hester Prynne. She is, like it or not, a product of her culture.

  • ExNewYorker

    “As for habitualness being trained, I agree 100% with Susan on this point.”

    Just one more reason why guys prefer low count women. A lot of us didn’t particularly want to sign up to become some type of “habit breaker” therapist or trainer.

    I feel bad for her, but really, she’s an adult. I got to see plenty of these well-educated, intelligent habit followers flock to some of my favorite cads. The best defense against cads sometimes is not having engaged them in the first place…

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

      @ExNewYorker

      Just one more reason why guys prefer low count women. A lot of us didn’t particularly want to sign up to become some type of “habit breaker” therapist or trainer…The best defense against cads sometimes is not having engaged them in the first place…

      Absolutely. It’s actually a little scary how quickly someone can fall into a pattern of behavior. Obviously, this will vary enormously by individual – that person’s propensity to ponder and reflect. It’s really no surprise that the literature describes promiscuous people as being very impulsive, risk-seeking and novelty-seeking. Precisely the behaviors that circumvent introspection.

  • Cooper

    “None of them wanted to commit to her. It was all pump and dump.”

    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
    Albert Einstein

    I don’t know what else to say.

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

      @Cooper

      I think of that Einstein quote often when I hear stories like Emileigh’s. The thing is, she did get the desired result her first time out. (Even though it sounds like the guy was kind of a “fake boyfriend.”) And she looked around on campus and saw that most of the couples were hookup buddies for a while first. That’s what is so insidious about hookup culture. People think it’s the only way to get a boyfriend – and it is.

  • Cooper

    I went through college seeking a relationship, as I always have.

    And the part about girls who don’t hook up, don’t get attention. Is pretty true.
    I initially thought the girls hooking up were the ones not looking for anything serious. But I quickly found out that the one’s not hooking up, in fact, actually didn’t want the attention.
    Thus I would have to compete with every sort of guy out there for the girls who were hooking up. So I find it hard to beleive that none of the guys pursuing Emileigh were looking for LTR.

    Perhaps she was only choosing the ones’ not LTR interested?

  • LunarEclipse

    Additionally the marital acts flood the brain with dopamine and oxytocin.

    Dopamine is the hormone produced naturally that cocaine stimulates. It is the “reward” hormone in your brain.

    Oxytocin has its own important functions.

    Importantly people overcoming a ‘habit’ of casual sex may face more than just a conscious choice of behavior change, like choosing a different color socks. In overcoming a sexual addiction people need to “rewire” their brain and take time to adjust to these lower levels of certain hormones.

    There is a reason pharmacologists advice patients going on and off drugs that affect the brain recommend stepping up and down the dosage rather than cold turkey.

    You can’t do that with the rush of hormones that accompanies love making.

    You will need to realize the pattern of behavior that can trigger the chain of events that leads up to the sin, so you can cut it off at the impasse.

    It is a whole lot more difficult to say no when you two are in bed at 2am than saying no to your friends who are making plans at 9pm.

    Then you need to find another action to take the place of that trigger action. Make plans days in advance for a dinner party for your house with your closest girlfriends rather than inevitably falling back into the same cheap nightclub so many encounters started at.

    For example if you have a habit of drinking a coke at a certain time of the day you may want to switch to water. You are identifying the need. (Socialization, hydration, etc.) and modifying the behavior to fulfill that need in a non-destructive way.

    Most importantly when excising this behavior from your life you need to find something to replace it. You need to find a reason to live.

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

      @Lunar Eclipse

      Good comment, thanks. I thought about the question of sexual addiction, but I thought that might be too much. I think it’s a controversial diagnosis, because it absolves the person of responsibility by saying “she just couldn’t help herself.” In college hookups, I don’t think that oxytocin is as much of an issue because women have orgasms only 19% of the time. I do think the attention and validation can become addictive though, Emileigh admitted as much.

      I agree that kicking the habit does mean controlling for the outcome well in advance. If Emileigh’s friends are sympathetic and supportive, that could help. But it they’re a bunch of loose goose types it’s going to be very difficult for her to stand out in the crowd and take a cab home alone.

  • Charm

    @LunarEclipse

    She could take up knitting. Ive heard its a useful skill.

  • Jacko

    Poor Emileigh. She’s made a horrible mess of things. Women with a number as high and a rep as bad as hers are not likely going to find any happiness in life through sex or relationships. It will be difficult enough for her to have any meaningful long-term relationship with a man, but that’s assuming she can find some guy who would be willing to have a long-term relationship with her in the first place. Most sane men would not want to take the risk.

    Her best life course at this point would be to find religion, repent and “go all-in” [i.e. ignore the things of this world [including sex and relationships] and concentrate on the things of heaven]. Eat [simply], pray [much], love [God].

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

      @Jacko

      I agree that Emileigh’s risk for future dissatisfaction in relationships is high. Vox Day’s Fidelity Survey backs that up. I don’t know her number, but I think it’s fair to say she’s in the top (bottom?) 10% of women in terms of promiscuity. However, I think entering a convent might be too drastic a solution. The fact that she’s identified the desire and need to change is an important step. I told her that I will support her and talk her off the ledge if she finds it trying. It’s clear that promiscuity is a hard habit to break.

  • ksn

    My guess is that is excatly what she did. She went after the gusts who were ‘fun’ and ‘interesting’, meaning they new how to tease, meg, and display high market value. It is extremely doubtful that anyone of those hooks UPS were with anything less than what roissy would call a greater beta. In fact someone should ask her how many guys she did turn down? I am willing to wager, through my experience, that even as easy as she was she turned probably turned down alot of guys. Sad thing being she probably would have gotten what she wanted from them. It’s sad but I can’t say I feel sorry for her, she made her bed.

  • LunarEclipse
  • Charm

    @Jacko

    No, she can still find a relationship and love technically. She will have to lower her standards though. Sane betas dont want her, but more than a few omegas would fight to the death for her.

  • Chris_in_CA

    “Regarding that last point, 12% of women say that it is sometimes easier to have sex with a guy they don’t know than to make conversation (Glenn, Norval and Marquardt, Elizabeth, 2001).”

    Personally, I’m surprised this percentage isn’t higher. Having a conversation anywhere past the superficial is analogous to pulling someone else’s teeth with your toes. Unwillingly.

    To say nothing of the utter havoc this percentage wreaks on the guys who are left in the cold.

    @Lokland

    “I think she is now a bad bet for a relationship for the guy.
    I still feel for her she’s in a tough situation even if she put herself there.”

    It is a tough situation, and I can sympathize to some extent. That being said, she IS a bad bet for a relationship, and she DID put herself there.

    My point, as it is so often, is not that women can’t change this habit. If they honestly regret treating themselves and others so poorly, then of course they should be encouraged toward a better choice!

    The only problem is, there is no real consequence if she backslides. She could go find a desperate beta who’s willing to overlook her past (becoming rarer, and rightly so). Marry him. Maybe even have kids, if it’s not too late.

    But what if one day she wakes up and feel the urge to hook up again? What’s stopping her? Barely any social pressure. Certainly not legal pressure. She can shatter every semblance of that life in a snap, if she wants.

    What guy with any spine would want to deal with that?

    This is why we have MGTOWs. This is why “breaking the hookup habit” is indeed commendable, and a worthwhile goal in school years. But it’s only half a solution.

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

      @Chris in CA

      Personally, I’m surprised this percentage isn’t higher.

      That data is more than 10 years old. My guess is that it is higher at this point. It makes sense, though. If you go home with someone, you have already signaled consent to at least some sexual activity. Small talk would be a form of courtship or politeness, prior to getting naked with a stranger. I can see why it would feel artificial. If getting to know someone was the goal, they could meet for coffee.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Cooper, did you meet many girls who were in relationships in college? I was with the same boyfriend all 4 years of college, and for several years after college. I didn’t really know a lot of other girls who were in stable relationships around that time.

    I’m curious why you competed with other guys for the hook up girls though? Were they hotter or just seemed more receptive to male attention?

  • Emily

    She might also have more luck finding an LTR if she moved somewhere new. (Although she might have to wait to finish college for this.)

    A lot of guys will probably still be turned off by her high number, but I imagine that it’d be less worse to be somewhere where she doesn’t have a “reputation” and that isn’t crawling with guys that she previously hooked up with.

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

      @Emily

      A lot of guys will probably still be turned off by her high number, but I imagine that it’d be less worse to be somewhere where she doesn’t have a “reputation” and that isn’t crawling with guys that she previously hooked up with.

      Yes, we talked about this. Even though her number and experience go with her, I think it will be easier for her to stop the behavior once she gets out of that environment. For one thing, she won’t be a sitting target the way she is now. And the sooner she stops, the more emotionally healthy she can become, potentially. I have to say I was really struck by her emotional turmoil. It makes me furious that there are people, i.e. feminists, who are purposely promoting this behavior.

  • M3

    @ Charm

    But now denying someone access to the most intimate part of your body is awkward?

    I don’t want to live on this planet anymore.

    +1 billion.

    I had the same reaction when i read that.

    Sorry to say, this girl for me would be a lost cause, even after therapy. I learned my lesson to stay away from being a rescuer of wayward women.

    Perhaps she should be on the frontlines with a bullhorn telling feminists to go dig holes to die in for making her think hooking up like a guy was empowering. If she did that, I’d at least have some respect for her and maybe after enough time and therapy, might consider her ‘reformed’.

  • Cooper

    @Hope

    I had to compete with non-LTR interest men for the ones receptive to male attention.

    I tried, quite chivalrously, to display my intension for a non-hook up girl, only to find out, after a while, that she actually had no interest in finding relationship.

    And since the one not seeking attention didn’t want any relationship, I switch to presuming the girls that were habitually hooking up must be the ones looking to LTR-qaulities.

    I later found this to also not be true.

  • M3

    kns 17

    Sad thing being she probably would have gotten what she wanted from them. It’s sad but I can’t say I feel sorry for her, she made her bed.

    Over and over again apparently.

    You know.. i REALLY am struggling to find the sympathy here.

    Just thinking back to all the sympathy i got for being a hapless incel beta shmuck… OH WAIT.. .yeah, exactly.

    But you know what… i won’t blame her.

    Her parents are FAIL. Does she have a father in her life? I’m curious to know.

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

      @M3

      You know.. i REALLY am struggling to find the sympathy here.

      Just to be clear, I don’t expect anyone to sympathize with Emileigh, particularly. I think her story is interesting as an example of habitual behavior, and how difficult it can be to kick it. It was very clear to me that saying “Just stop” was not going to be effective. Emileigh is really struggling to figure out just where she went off track, and how to get back to a place that feels right. And of course she’s worried that she’ll never find someone to love. Sadly, it’s that desire to find love that drives most females to hook up.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Well, I can understand everyone’s cynicism here, but I hope this girl finds what she wants. I hope she’s honest about her past with whoever she does find, but I hope she ends up happy.

  • Tom.s

    @ Chris

    “But what if one day she wakes up and feel the urge to hook up again? What’s stopping her? Barely any social pressure. Certainly not legal pressure. She can shatter every semblance of that life in a snap, if she wants.”

    I think women often wonder why men stereotypically won’t ‘commit’. For me, I am more scared of DIVORCE than marriage. I feel bad for her if she does want to ‘reform’ because yes, I would not want to take the risk of marriage with her. The risk/reward is not there for me.

    I wish her all the best though.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I would not want to take the risk of marriage with her. The risk/reward is not there for me.

    I wish her all the best though.

    Exactly.

  • Maggie

    “The girls who don’t hook up get zero attention from guys, which she fears would be even worse.”

    I do feel sorry for this girl and at 18 she was a girl, not an adult, when she made these bad choices. It’s obvious she has low self-esteeem and is most likely depressed. Susan, I hope you will continue to help her.

    At 21 or 22 she is not a lost cause and can turn her life around. A lot of people here are very harsh.

  • Charm

    @maggie

    How are we harsh? How is she not considered an adult? She definitely knew that if she didn’t put out she would get no attention, so in order to get short term validation from men she gave her body away. It was a transaction. A cheap one at that. You can continue to try and absolve her of responsibility but the fact is she was aware of how promiscuous behavior would make her look. She did it anyway. Over and over and over again.

    Who knows if she’ll end up a spinster. But if shes straight forward and honest about her past her odds of staying single increase dramatically compared to a girl thats slept with 2 guys. Fact is that she isn’t so special that a guy can’t choose another girl. If she’s drop dead gorgeous, I doubt she’ll have a problem, but if she’s average at best, well those come a dime a dozen anyway.

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

      If she’s drop dead gorgeous, I doubt she’ll have a problem, but if she’s average at best, well those come a dime a dozen anyway.

      She’s quite attractive. I know she will have suitors, and some of them would probably put her in the girlfriend box if she didn’t put out right away. She knows this on one level, but on the other hand she has seen some of her girlfriends get what they wanted by slutting it up. Personally, I think those “relationships” are often just glorified booty calls with little emotional intimacy.

  • Rum

    Her best move would be to move after graduation to a deeply red state, preferably to a rural-ish part, where there is so much less awareness of the true condition of the modern SMP. In such an environment, her basic acting skills might be all that would be necessary to convince some well meaning schlub that she is merely a “nice girl” who “made a mistake or two” before she found religion and moved away from the City. She should not dwaldle, however. The sphere keeps expanding its dark dominion.
    Beyond all that, I suspect something deeper is going on; one that her hamster wants to keep covered over & out of sight (mind) with wood-chips and newspaper bits – and that is that she really gets a serious dopamine rush from the supposed power and attention and affirmation of being able to snag alpha play even for one night. Five minutes of alpha is indeed more valuable than five years of faithful beta to her hind brain – and it is the hind brain that rations out the dopamine.
    In other words, she really likes the hooking up. The day after is what feels bad.
    If they are to be believed, and I do, high end escorts often describe how hard it is to give up a day to day routine that involves being given serious money to sex up high status rich guys who usually end up trying to impress and please her. And I bet they have an easier route to self justification than our college girl hero.

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

      @Rum

      I suspect something deeper is going on; one that her hamster wants to keep covered over & out of sight (mind) with wood-chips and newspaper bits

      LOL! I didn’t know there were any hamster jokes left – that’s hilarious.

      it is the hind brain that rations out the dopamine.
      In other words, she really likes the hooking up. The day after is what feels bad.

      Yes, I asked her this point blank and she confirmed it.

  • Dinkney Pawson

    17 ksn had a good point.

    She had to have said no, perhaps non-verbally, to somebody.

    Perhaps that could be her stopping place.

    Avoiding the places she finds hookup partners might work better.

  • Lokland

    To get us officially off-topic

    “I think women often wonder why men stereotypically won’t ‘commit’. For me, I am more scared of DIVORCE than marriage.”

    I wonder how many women are single because they give off a cheater/cuckolder/EPL/ruin your life some day vibe.

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

      @Lokland

      I wonder how many women are single because they give off a cheater/cuckolder/EPL/ruin your life some day vibe.

      Not as many as should be, sad to say.

  • Maggie

    @Charm

    How many 18 year-old college freshman are adults? Very few. I live in a college town and have a lot of interaction with the students. They are delightful but as freshmen they are still children. The next few years are a time of dramatic growth for them.

    How do you know that at 18 when she started hooking up she was aware of how her promiscuous behavior would maker her look? My daughter in high school tells me that the girls who hook up are the most popular in the school — for now. It might be too early for them to have faced the consequences yet.

    I think she has a bigger problem then a bad rep and that is her low self-esteem that most likely led to this behavior in the first place. Really, unless she gave someone guy an STD, who beside herself has she hurt?

    I don’t think she is a lost cause, not at all. Alcholics give up drinking, drug addicts go straight, there is no reason why she can’t change.

    None of us is perfect. I believe in redemption and I’ve seen a lot of it. She’s not even through 1/4 of her life, it’s ridiculous to write her off.

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

      @Maggie

      I don’t think she is a lost cause, not at all. Alcholics give up drinking, drug addicts go straight, there is no reason why she can’t change.

      None of us is perfect. I believe in redemption and I’ve seen a lot of it. She’s not even through 1/4 of her life, it’s ridiculous to write her off.

      I agree! I wouldn’t presume to tell any guy to wife her up, that’s not my call. But I applaud her efforts to change her behavior. Many women have bounced back from far worse. Heck, my husband’s grandmother got knocked up on a haystack by the boy from the farm next door and got married fast. She became a pillar of the Congregational Church and beyond reproach – and that was in the 40s!

  • WarmWoman

    I can understand why she has a hard time saying no. I don’t know this girl’s background, but child sexual abuse and rape victims often are programmed to not know how to assert themselves during unwanted sex. Some people freeze in situations that require confrontation. She needs to learn that she doesn’t owe anybody anything. Just because she had a hook-up in the past with a man doesn’t mean she has to keep doing it.

    Going on a no sex strategy sounds good, but it’s like going on a diet. It will take a lot of self-control. Over time, it gets easier.

    “I hope this girl finds what she wants. I hope she’s honest about her past with whoever she does find, but I hope she ends up happy.”

    +1.

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

      @WW

      . I don’t know this girl’s background, but child sexual abuse and rape victims often are programmed to not know how to assert themselves during unwanted sex.

      No, nothing like that. She’s simply a college girl who got caught up in the hookup scene. She’s hardly a rarity.

  • Dinkney Pawson

    I think Rum has a point. She likes getting buzzed every weekend. She doesn’t like the morning after.

    After the flight comes the fixing.

  • WarmWoman

    “I don’t think she is a lost cause, not at all. Alcholics give up drinking, drug addicts go straight, there is no reason why she can’t change.

    None of us is perfect. I believe in redemption and I’ve seen a lot of it. She’s not even through 1/4 of her life, it’s ridiculous to write her off.

    I agree, Maggie. But, only this young woman can prove the skeptics wrong.

    I sometimes think that discouraging people and naysayers are a blessing in disguise. They propel us to prove them wrong. ;)

  • Charm

    @Maggie

    So at what age do you think a person should be considered an adult? 20, 21, 22, 23?

  • WarmWoman

    @Charm

    The brain isn’t technically developed until 25, or so they say……

  • Rum

    WW
    Why does it not cross your mind that the reason she repeatedly engages in hooking up is because it gives her a lot of pleasure to do so? Why invoke the specters of child sex abuse and low self estemme, etc. to explain behavior that is easily explained by “I feel really good when I do it”
    Also, embedded in your ideas is the notion that women do not enjoy sex and only do it to get something else they want or as an expression of some psychic damage.
    See, even, or especially, healthy women like to fuck. They get really angry if they are turned down when they want it. Women have this weird ability to compartmentalize this. They act like wild she-wolves in heat when they feel like it and later say shit like, “I like sex a little bit; but it needs to be gentle and caring.” As if the guy cannot possibly remember what she did the night before.

  • SweetSue

    Charm @ #10
    No wait, she’ll just adopt the slogan “If I hadn’t got pumped and dumped by all those guys in college, I wouldn’t be the person I am today.” Thus softening the blow.

    Chances are unless she gets some self esteem -she will play the victim with some poor beta, resent him and screw up his head a.k.a re-arranging her mind was disarranging mine a la the Rolling Stone.

    How is it easier to engage in intimacy than it is to say no – the rationalization hamster just fell off the wheel and died laughing.

    @Cooper

    “The one’s not hooking up, in fact, actually didn’t want the attention.” Correction they wanted the correct kind of attention that matched what they wanted. Rather than accept attention that would not lead where they wanted they preferred to opt out; rather than endure being drowned out by the over eager to please who cannot say no!

    @Maggie

    Harsh – no. Realistic yes! Hard cold facts of the way the world works. Telling her otherwise would only be enabling and encourage her to follow the same ill advised path. Better to tell the straight up truth and give her a chance to maybe get some self esteem and make better choices in the future.

    Giving her the straight up scoop maybe the kindest thing – because with that knowledge she has the power to change if she wants to chart another path. When one knows better one has the power to do better. It won’t be easy – but it can get better.Maybe not an ideal path; but hopefully a less painful path. Telling her the truth says whether she knows it or not she has value and worth and it matters; but she has to see it herself before things will change – but they can change.

    She may not have been an adult when all this happened, though 18 is considered legal in most states. One does not have to be “an adult” to know that after a point doing the same thing the same way will provide the same results. She can’t learn any sooner and to sugarcoat it denies her the knowledge.

  • WarmWoman

    @SweetSue

    “How is it easier to engage in intimacy than it is to say no – the rationalization hamster just fell off the wheel and died laughing. ”

    Ask your dad to rape you and then see how you turn out.

    Screw you. I’m out of here.

  • WarmWoman

    Susan can delete my comment, but I don’t care if I sound like some borderline b*tch.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Sorry if this conversation is triggering for you WarmWoman. *hugs*

    My bad past was mostly trauma from my mother, but I also had an absent father and was in a bad relationship for many years. I would not be “on the surface” considered a good bet for marriage, but I think I’m better than who I was when I was 18. So yeah, I think people can change.

  • Dinkney Pawson

    I don’t want for her to have ruined her life. I see a number of potential problems:

    1) One or more pelvic infections may have scarred her Fallopian tubes. It doesn’t have to be one of the big name diseases. It’s a major cause of infertility. The probability goes up with partner count.
    2) Her behavior may have become off putting to men looking to commit.
    3) She has probably damaged her ability to bond.

    If she does find a man, bears his children, and does stay faithful to him then he won’t be a chump. They’ll both have lucked out. Kind of like winning at Russian Roulette.

  • SweetSue

    @maggie #34
    Even children can understand cause and effect , and that choices have consequences, and behaving responsibly if they are taught. The longer that lesson is delayed the more the “child” is damaged and deprived of a survival skill. Children can also be taught that if they make a mistake they can recover.

    Her best bet is to own her “stuff” and be brutally honest with herself. Given the prevalence of social media her past is unlikely to remain hidden. Own it, forgive herself – heal. Harvest the lessons learned from it and move forward. Make a decision to accept her past is what it is but it is past and move forward. When she meets someone at a later point in life, don’t hide or deny her past but don’t play dig up old bones that have nothing to do with the person she will be at that point in time.

    Assuming she successfully makes the necessary changes and puts it behind her – her past and how she moved forward shaped the person she became. Your past may shape the future but it only seals your future if you fail to learn from it or continue to re-live it.

  • Maggie

    So at what age do you think a person should be considered an adult? 20, 21, 22, 23?

    It depends on the person. Extenuating cicumstances such as war forces people to grow up very quickly. Most people today are probably adults by 20 but I know some guys are are still children in their late 20′s

  • Charm

    Had some sexual trauma happened to this girl and she never sought help then I could understand her behavior. But since Susan never put her family background in the post I think most of the people here are operating under the assumption that she had a very normal upbringing. If that is that case, then Im with Rum, maybe she just likes to have sex, and chooses to do it with many different people. If that is the case no one is really going to sympathize with her.

    Im not saying people can’t change. Were all always changing but the fact is that most men and most women are not sleeping around. Period. So sure, maybe our brains don’t fully develop until 25 but there are a whole hell of a lot of people who do just fine and make very good decisions with those underdeveloped brains. Just because a handful of people fuck up and make bad choices doesn’t absolve them.

  • SweetSue

    Warm Woman@ #42+43

    Clearly a nerve has been touched – not intended. That being said the comment was made in the context of not knowing her background and therefore taking it at face value and not presuming – rape, incest or abuse. No other information was provided and in the absence of this stated as being a factor one can only take what is said at face value. Based on the information on its face there appears to be a disconnect – hence the comment.

  • Charm

    @Maggie

    How do we determine who is a child or who qualifies as an adult then?

    If those guys still act like children then please revoke their drivers licenses, and ban them from being able to buy alcohol and force them to move back in with Mom and Dad. You don’t get to do all those fun adult things while still claiming to be “child-like”. Sounds like a cop out.

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

      I think what’s missing from this discussion is the fact that Emileigh is not some hussy who’s the town slut. She is behaving in a way that is reinforced by the culture. She’s considered highly desirable by men and is high status at her college. She grew up in an era that told her that the sexual double standard is invalid. She may well have taken a sex ed class in high school that encouraged her to explore her sexuality. Like everyone else at college, she probably believes that a large percentage of women are hooking up, and she was no doubt comforted by that fact.

      Emileigh is a product of the last 50 years of feminist programming post-Sexual Revolution. It’s surprising more women don’t participate. I imagine that some of it was bad luck, some was naivete, some was weakness. She’s miserable, but she’s not blaming anyone but herself. Which is more than I can say for some unhappy campers in this SMP.

      She’s still quite young. What she does now will be very important, I think.

  • Charm

    @Susan

    Well at least she’s owning it. Thats respectable. I might even like her more if she acknowledged that it might make a future mate uncomfortable when it comes to long-term commitment. Like I said before, Im all for hearing people out as long as the are fully aware of their past actions and why they won’t be repeating it in the future.

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

      @Charm

      I might even like her more if she acknowledged that it might make a future mate uncomfortable when it comes to long-term commitment.

      I told her that, and she said, she knows, she’s in the slut box. To give credit where it’s due, she did not ever say she would lie about her number. She said that she knows her pool of potential mates is small. I felt badly in a way – she knew this from reading here. OTOH, I think it was a factor in her deciding to make a change.

  • Maggie

    “If those guys still act like children then please revoke their drivers licenses, and ban them from being able to buy alcohol and force them to move back in with Mom and Dad. You don’t get to do all those fun adult things while still claiming to be “child-like”.

    It is not so cut and dry. Actually in most states in the US driving privileges are phased in over several years, one cannot buy alcohol until one is 21, and college students in dorms usually have some restrictions enforced on them.

  • drg

    I’m curious about what things she would have to do for the other guys on here to accept her as a potential LTR. Thoughts?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    drg,

    That would depend on the length of time she spent being promiscuous, the types of behavior she engaged in, the number of guys she’d fucked, etc…

  • Charm

    That’s what is so insidious about hookup culture. People think it’s the only way to get a boyfriend – and it is.

    Correction: Thats the only way to attempt to get an attractive (thus highly desirable) guy to commit to you exclusively. Most college campus are crawling with Betas willing to treat you right and wait in order to have sex with you. The types of guys she was after weren’t willing to wait, so she gave it up early.

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

      @Charm

      Most college campus are crawling with Betas willing to treat you right and wait in order to have sex with you. The types of guys she was after weren’t willing to wait, so she gave it up early.

      You are right, but it’s a bit more complicated. College isn’t a big dance hall with the alphas lined up against one wall and the betas against the other. Mostly there are parties, heavily populated by alphas. A few betas slip in here and there, and they do OK if they’re cute. This is why pluralistic ignorance takes hold – people extrapolate from a small minority of students.

  • Tom.s

    @ Maggie

    Unfortunately the story does not end with Emileigh cleaning up her act, like alcoholics stop drinking. The relationship aspect means some man has to trust Emileigh. In short, it’s not really up to Emileigh.

    It’s not that it can’t be done, it’s that a precedent has been set, and some man has to trust her despite that.

    I would argue that there is more risk for the same reward. But every man will analyze his situation differently, so of course, there is still a chance.

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

      @Tom.s

      I would argue that there is more risk for the same reward. But every man will analyze his situation differently, so of course, there is still a chance.

      One of Vox Day’s conclusions in the last post was that cads marry sluts. My guess is that Emileigh will wind up with a high count guy.

  • Lokland

    @ drg

    She couldn’t.

    Lets say shes 22, 4 years non-promiscuous.
    2 years LTR.
    Then mearriage for 1 year then children.

    Thats 7 years = 29. Say I was one year older. By that point I want to be watching my kids learn to play soccer. Not starting out.

    So its impossible. At least for me.

  • lalady

    To those of you saying she should have known better… perhaps, but how? Unless someone grows up in a very SERIOUS religion, who is telling these girls that it’s NOT ok to hook up? I already posted a little of my story in another comment thread if you want to look it up, but until I found out about game and the “manosphere” I really had NO IDEA that there was anything wrong with hooking up. I saw it on TV, in movies; even the sex ed classes in my liberal school (and from what I know about Susan, Emileigh probably grew up in a similar environment) seemed predicated on the fact that we were all eventually going to start going at it like rabbits and the best anyone could do was to encourage us to use condoms. I did attend church occasionally, and although my pastor once mumbled a few words to us about saving sex until marriage, he never discussed the WHY of it, which might have stuck with me even though I was never really enamored of all the God-stuff. And I don’t think my parents had any idea that they were supposed to tell me not to have sex with random guys immediately after meeting them if I was horny… I think they assumed that part was a given, as it had been in their day- when the sexual revolution had only just begun and all traces of sexual restraint had not yet been extinguished.

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

      @lalady

      Thanks for sharing that. I think your experience with the culture (Sex and the City, ugh) and sex ed definitely reflects how women were encouraged to have no-strings sex. And you’re right – most parents are clueless – I don’t think my generation understands just how we got here. There’s been very little connecting of the dots until now.

  • Rico

    “I’m curious about what things she would have to do for the other guys on here to accept her as a potential LTR. Thoughts?”

    Based on what Susan has shared, nothing. Even if she had completely repented, been celibate from this moment forward, etc., she would be completely off my radar as a potential GF/wife. There’s plenty other women out there who could bring just as much to the table, but without the carousel baggage.

  • Lokland

    @lalady

    “To those of you saying she should have known better… perhaps, but how?”

    Not anyones problem but hers. We aren’t all walking penance machines, if you fuck up its on you. Regardless of whether or not you knew it was wrong. (Its called negligence in legal speak or so I’m told.)

  • Jesus Mahoney

    lalady,

    Thing is, this has little to do with “blame.” She’s done what she’s done (and if Sue’s breaking things down into individual w/e’s, then she’s probably done a lot) and while she maybe a product of the culture, she’s also a product of all those hook up experiences. And, as Sue says, she did get that pay off, that high at the moments the hook ups were taking place. So you have to look at all that when considering whether or not this girl can be fit for a LTR in the future.

    I hope she works her issues out, but I don’t blame guys who are wary of women like that.

  • Lokland

    @ Susan

    “No, nothing like that. She’s simply a college girl who got caught up in the hookup scene. She’s hardly a rarity.”

    Not to be picky but according to the states she is. (Assuming shes in the high number category as we don’t have the actual.)

  • Lokland

    states = stats

  • Charm

    @Lalady

    I agree with Lokland. You know how many men were lied to by feminist? Tons. They walked the line, got married, did everything a good little boy was supposed to do and in many cases got screwed over trying to treat women as equals while ignoring female behavior. You know what women said to that? “Tough shit”.

    Look, this girl obviously felt bad for what she was doing, and yet she kept doing it. Thats the part I dont get. If I regretted something the day after I’d stop doing it. Put you hand in the fire once, and I’ll excuse it. But to do it over and over again like the shit isn’t going to burn you is inexcusable.

    So now one told her. Well it sucks to be her. Everyone knows that movies and TV are bullshit and if she hadn’t figured that out a while ago then we’ve got another problem on our hands. She even points out all the girls who weren’t hooking up. I think she had some idea that not everyone else was doing it. Come on now.

  • lalady

    @Charm – Yet this corner of the internet seems to have plenty of sympathy for those men, as do I. I never said she wouldn’t have to deal with the consequences of her actions, just that I’d hope ya’ll would have a little sympathy for the poor girl.

  • lalady

    Everyone here that is saying “tough shit” to her is like feminists saying “tough shit” to a man who just got screwed in divorce court despite doing everything he thought he was supposed to do. And I know how well THAT goes over in the manosphere.

  • Charm

    @Susan

    Well then good for her. At least shes fully aware of it all. I think that staying in the dark would hurt her more since she’d conduct her dating behavior over the next few years under the assumption that men didn’t care. Knowing is gonna save her a lot of time and heart break. I was reading an article and a woman in her 30s had finally met a man she wanted to marry and was dating him for nearly a year and when he jokingly asked her number and she answered honestly, that was the last time she saw him. I think she was like 35 or something, so that was probably her last shot.

    I could only imagine how shocked she was when she read HUS and some of the opinions of the regulars here. The red pill for women is a bitch to swallow. If she really didn’t have any idea then I can sympathize with that. While she was naive in believe that everyone else was doing it, and thinking it would pay then becoming an “accidental slut” must suck.<—no pun intended I promise.

  • Charm

    @Lalady

    I still think all those guys hold a bit of responsibility as well. Im sure alot of those women were absolute harpies when they married them so they shouldn’t have been surprised when it when badly. But I will also say that in the sphere women are judged more harshly for their behavior and given less sympathy. Its not fair, but it is what it is. I think about things very objectively. From an objective standpoint she fucked up. You’re asking me to think subjectively and thats not really my thing. Hope and Jesus and a few others threw her some sympathy.

    Susan said shes good looking so she’ll be fine. She’ll get a guy. My sympathy isn’t going to undo what shes done.

  • Charm

    @Susan

    Yes you’re right. Betas certainly aren’t the center of a attention at the biggest parties. But women certainly don’t go to those parties looking for good beta guys. They go looking for the Alpha commanding the room. So in that case, I guess they get what they deserve.

  • Lokland

    @ lalady

    The beta guy who got raped in court.

    He fucked up and its his fault.
    EVERYTHING that happens to you after you become concious (when is debatable) is your fault.

    Getting married and having sex are DEFINETELY conscious decisions (or drinking to lose your inhibitions).

    The only difference between the beta who fucked up and the slut is that the guy is able to fix his problem. Tough shit and it sucks for women but it is what it is.

    What your asking is for some random guy to take a hit, aka hurt himself, to help her.

    I’ll take a hit for my fiance, hell I’ll take ten or twelve probably some more but I wouldn’t do it for some random.

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

    “Easier to have sex than to engage in s conversation”

    But if the sex leads to a relationship, which is clearly what these girls are often hoping, the relationship will involve a LOT of conversations…..

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

      @david foster

      But if the sex leads to a relationship, which is clearly what these girls are often hoping, the relationship will involve a LOT of conversations…..

      I got the sense Emileigh’s relationship freshman year was not very committed. More a convenient arrangement for both parties. I wouldn’t be surprised if they had few conversations. They probably partied together a lot and had a lot of sex. I doubt they studied together, or did any of the intimate things that real couples do. That was my sense, anyway. As she said, he didn’t love her.

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

    @SW
    “My guess is that Emileigh will wind up with a high count guy.”

    This might be true. Reading her story, I felt sorry for her because she felt “compelled” to make those kinds of choices, and at the same time she’s extremely limited the % of men who will ever want to commit knowing all the facts. Kind of like a statistical point of no return. Indulging in one’s mating opportunities being analagous to going over the side of a cliff. Obviously, it’s easier for single women to do this than it is for single men. The gatekeeper principle would definitely benefit women individually AND collectively…

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

      Indulging in one’s mating opportunities being analagous to going over the side of a cliff.

      That’s a brilliant metaphor.

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

    But if the sex leads to a relationship, which is clearly what these girls are often hoping, the relationship will involve a LOT of conversations…..

    One has to wonder if they even know what a relationship is “having sex with one person in a regular basis?” or something along those lines.

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    Emileigh has a narrative that she replays in her head whenever she goes out. Because her experience rarely departs from the narrative, it’s worn a very deep groove in her mind.

    @Charm

    I hope she doesn’t end up with some clueless beta. But we all know that odds are she will.

    My experience was so completely the opposite of Emileigh’s that I understand it completely.

    Hear me out on this. Charm, as great as your comments have been, you do not understand. Emileigh’s not in danger of ending up with a beta. She’s living in fear of ending up alone.

    I can tell you exactly the mental dialog I would have had if I had known of an “Emileigh” back then. I would be absolutely 100% convinced that I would be the only guy on campus with whom she would never hook up (betaboy that I was). The realization would be devastating.

    It was a different mental narrative from which I would rarely, if ever, depart, a self-fulfilling prophecy that was every bit as wrong then as Emileigh’s is now and it leads to exactly the same mind-set. Both narratives are full of self-loathing and both get you no closer to either a relationship or love.

    There is an answer (thank God) that a very few lucky ones stumble into. It goes like this: laugh at yourself a little, be patient, stop with that internal dialog and grow up just a little. Friends and family will be there to help you if you let them.

    You just knew it was going to be something kitchy like that, right? I know. It’s still true, though.

    Doesn’t work for everyone, but the success rate is surprisingly good.

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

      @Joe

      Great perspective and wisdom, thanks! It is very good to see you, I hope all is well with you!

  • Mike C

    She’s quite attractive. I know she will have suitors, and some of them would probably put her in the girlfriend box if she didn’t put out right away.

    The fact that she is attractive is a huge plus for her in terms of attracting a serious boyfriend. Now we don’t know how promiscuous she has been. I’ll say there is a big difference in perception (at least for me) between say 15-20 and 50-100. Some things you can get beyond,..some you can’t.

    Going forward, she has to try to be discerning between the guys who just see her as a hot pump and dump versus the guys who might realistically consider her as a serious girlfriend. IMO, she’ll be asking for more trouble if she shoots for guys with high to very high SMV. If she stays attractive, cultivates good girlfriend qualities, and shoots for realistic guys she shouldn’t have a problem, but it sounds like she has issues to work through.

    It was alluded to earlier somewhere, but I grow increasingly convinced that the main “addiction” young women who hookup have is the validation from high status males basically being willing to dump a load in them. You see that running through every story like this from the Duke girl to this one.

    ““You cannot change your destination overnight, but you can change your direction overnight”

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

      @Mike C

      ““You cannot change your destination overnight, but you can change your direction overnight”

      I like that. She definitely has some issues to work through, but I think just getting out of college should help. Re the number, she said she wished it was 7 – I don’t know why that particular number. My guess is she’s at 2-3x’s that. Honestly, she’d have to have done this like it was her job for three years to get over 20. As it is, 5 sex partners per year would put her in the top 3% of female college students.

  • Charm

    I would be absolutely 100% convinced that I would be the only guy on campus with whom she would never hook up (betaboy that I was).

    This is something I don’t really get. Why? Maybe its because Im neutral with people off the bat and generally expect the worse, but it seems ridiculous to believe this. Beta or not. I wouldn’t assume the person slept around but Id at least expect them to have had sex at least once or twice. If this is a beta thing to do then I guess I see how they get screwed over.

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

    @SW
    “The girls who don’t hook up get zero attention from guys, which she fears would be even worse.”

    Sexual interaction vs. no interaction. Sounds like a false dilemma. Unfortunately, many women do subscribe to this belief, thus writing off guys who aren’t nearly as sexually aggressive. Perhaps I’m self-projecting a bit from my single days, but if college women were more inclined to accept simple dates when asked out, they could avoid having sex with strangers and get to know guys first? Maybe it makes too much sense to work these days : |

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

      Perhaps I’m self-projecting a bit from my single days, but if college women were more inclined to accept simple dates when asked out, they could avoid having sex with strangers and get to know guys first? Maybe it makes too much sense to work these days : |

      Unfortunately, I think that less sexually aggressive guys are unlikely to ask a girl out on a real date instead. And I’ll be the first to admit that it’s so unusual that many women would look askance at the gesture as a DLV. That’s how screwed up things are right now.

  • GudEnuf

    However, I think entering a convent might be too drastic a solution.

    Half of nuns admit to having sex since vowed celibacy. 60% of priests do.

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

      @GudEnuf

      Half of nuns admit to having sex since vowed celibacy. 60% of priests do.

      Really? For the nuns, I’m only surprised because I don’t see where they’d have the opportunity. I guess there must be player priests, or they’re getting busy with one another.

  • Charm

    @Joe

    Lol, my bad. I just re-read that comment. Disregard. I misread it the first time. I thought you said you would have thought she’d never hooked up with anyone. Oops. I need to get offline.

  • Rum

    I know that this young woman has been misled by the culture. A lot of men have fallen for complete BS they got from their culture as well. So, it is not her gullibility that inspires mens lack of sympathy. The lack of sympathy arises from a toxic mix of two ingredients found in abundance in this tale. First, she has for years indulged her favorite habit of having sex with desire-able partners more or less as often as she feels an itch and then presumes to tell men (who for the most part can only dream of having that option) that she is feeling less happy do it than she used to. \. It would be like telling a poor person that your Rolls Royce is starting to bore you and you are looking for something better. And act really sad and depressed about it, like you should get some sympathy.
    Second, she does not seem to have any concern (in measurable amounts) about the effects all her hooking around will likely have on any realistically obtainable future husbands well being. If asked about this her hamster will grab the microphone and actually speak directly to this. It will squeak, “She could only love a man who is confident enough within himself that he can accept her for who she is). Only a fully trained hamster could say something that twisted and evil without giving away at least a few facial tic tells. The kind of tic, btw, that alerts the hearer to the large possibility that the speaker is neither lie-ing or telling the truth – she has just no idea what it really means, because she just rote memorrized it off an Advise Column she found in Cosmo.
    These issues might be allowed to fit inside the borders of the word”naive” if the guys are in a good mood but if they are not its “She is an attention- whore who has become so spoiled by it – well beyond the point of putrifaction – and is already showing signs she has lost all ability to perceive or care what men need a lot of – which is respect.
    Stir that recipe for awhile and then call it “Micro Short Term Relation ship Material.”

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

      @Rum

      First, she has for years indulged her favorite habit of having sex with desire-able partners more or less as often as she feels an itch and then presumes to tell men (who for the most part can only dream of having that option) that she is feeling less happy do it than she used to

      She didn’t tell men, she told me. And she didn’t ask for sympathy once.

      Second, she does not seem to have any concern (in measurable amounts) about the effects all her hooking around will likely have on any realistically obtainable future husbands well being.

      I would say that she’s 100% ignorant of her past’s putting her at higher probability of cheating. So while she accepts that she’s perhaps disqualified herself as LTR material for a lot of guys, she believes that when she does find someone to love she will be as devoted as anyone. And perhaps that is true. In any case, I think you’d find that most women who’ve done some hooking up in college would be shocked to hear they’re more likely to cheat on a future husband. Again, they perceive that their behavior is the norm.

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    Good evening, Susan, and thank you!

    I try not to comment when I don’t feel like I have anything to add. Your group of commenters seem to be a pretty sharp bunch (and people like Stuart Schneiderman are world-class! How can I add to that?!). But I read your posts faithfully and read many of the comments.

    As it is, I sometimes feel like screaming to your intended audience that, as important as it seems, there’s other things thing besides hooking up to concern themselves with. Even with relationships, there’s so much more to it than any 20-something (or 30-something, 40-something… sigh) can know. And I’m learning about some of that now. I feel young (and I can still do five mile runs), but now I’m caring for an ailing wife nearly full time. That’s not going to change, and it’s given me a whole new perspective on what having a relationship really means.

    But that’s not what being 20-something is about, and it’s not what you want to focus on. I only want to put it surreptitiously in the back of your reader’s minds. ;)

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

      @Joe

      I feel young (and I can still do five mile runs), but now I’m caring for an ailing wife nearly full time. That’s not going to change, and it’s given me a whole new perspective on what having a relationship really means.

      I am so sorry to hear that, I didn’t know. Thank you for reminding us what is truly important. It is something we should focus on here when we talk about LTRs and marriage. I’m working on a post about regrets, and one article I found talks about what people regret as they near the end of life. There’s a lot of wisdom there.

  • purplesneakers

    Wow. This was a really interesting post. I feel bad for Emileigh. I hope she can “kick the habit” and find actual love.

    At the same time… it helps me feel better about my own situation. Often I feel like a total freak, a virgin female in my early 20s, but seeing what the other extreme can be, yeah I totally prefer this. Now I don’t feel so bad about not having gone to most parties in college, if they all really just ended with situations like this.

    I think the saddest part is how she points out that her freshman year “boyfriend” didn’t love her. No guy has ever loved me either… but she’s slept with all those guys. And she doesn’t have even a little love to show for it. So sad!

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    @Charm ‘s’ok. What I was trying to write came out awkwardly. Apparently, I need to get off-line as badly as you! ;)

  • ksn

    Hear me out on this. Charm, as great as your comments have been, you do not understand. Emileigh’s not in danger of ending up with a beta. She’s living in fear of ending up alone.

    I agree with you on this. While I do not have much sympathy, I do have some and the fact is the fear of bearing alone is terrifying. More so for women than men, I think biological evolution, and the reality that men live in, has left men somewhat more inundated; though it doesn’t make men impermeable to those fears. But I do have fears for the ‘beta’ boy she will end up with. While the fact she recognizes her problems are a positive sign, I still wouldn’t be on any of her future relationships working out.

  • anonymous

    Here are some suggestions

    1- Send her to Roissy and Roosh’s sites (well, this would’ve been ideal before she started hookingup)
    2- Find a sex addiction program/sex therapist/counselor
    3- Take a self-defense class so that she can learn to be assertive (in case she was raised to be a “nice” girl who can’t “NO!”)
    4- Find/form a support group
    5- No more; drinking, hanging out alone with guys, cut ties with her “friends” if they’re living the hookup lifestyle- until she gets things sorted out.
    6- Learn what makes a woman a good catch, so that she can learn how to keep a man interested that doesn’t involve hookingup .
    7- Join a gym, volunteer- to build up some self-esteem

    Does she have caring family/friends? Is she depressed? Is she lonely?

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

      @anonymous

      Those are all great suggestions. I don’t think she is depressed or lonely, based on what I saw, but I don’t know her well. She does have friends, but they are surely fixtures in the same social scene at school. She’s lucky that college is about to end – that will remove a lot of the day to day temptation. Hopefully, she will have or find a different crowd wherever she ends up after she graduates.

  • Charm

    @ksn

    I think both men and women are afraid of ending up alone. Its human nature to want to be bond with another human being. Human beings want to reproduce and care for their offspring which is ideally done in a committed and loving relationship.

    I hope shes a least honest with the guy she ends up with. That way he knows his odds.

  • anonymous

    @ Rum:
    “Second, she does not seem to have any concern (in measurable amounts) about the effects all her hooking around will likely have on any realistically obtainable future husbands well being. ”
    ——–
    Understand that I’m not trying to undermine your concern as a man, I get it.
    However, getting back to her, she hadn’t even considered what it was doing to her own well-being, how could she have thought about what it would do to a future husband?
    She was probably thinking that her future husband would have a similar sexual history that she does, so he wouldn’t care.
    “Everyone’s doing it and the only consequences are STDs and pregnancy, right?”

    Not that this absolves her in any way from the mess she’s gotten herself into.

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

    I hope shes a least honest with the guy she ends up with. That way he knows his odds.

    My hope is different. I hope she understand in the deepness of her heart that a guy giving her a chance is very valuable I think a lot of the stories of the “reformed slut” later cheating and divorcing comes from the fact that deep down she feels the man is a chump the whole “I wouldn’t want to be part of a club that has me as a member” syndrome. So once she stumbles upon that guy she needs to be 100% at peace with what she did and the consequences and appreciate his gesture, YMMV.

  • Mike C

    My hope is different. I hope she understand in the deepness of her heart that a guy giving her a chance is very valuable

    Thumbs Up and High Five!

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

      @Anacaona

      I hope she understand in the deepness of her heart that a guy giving her a chance is very valuable

      I told her this straight out, and explained why, so if she didn’t understand before she does now. She definitely gets it.

  • Jones

    The conversation here is so narrow-minded. Susan tried to raise a point about the broader culture, and all you’ve discussed so far is how much of a slut this girl is and how no man should get with her. Great, whatever, but the post was not about one girl and how much of a slut she is.

    I think this site has potential, but it is often squandered on small-minded conversation. On this thread there’s a very silly “human interest” angle. Why not take a breather from the “slut-shaming” for a second and look at the bigger questions?

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

      @Jones

      Welcome, and thank you for your comment.

      Susan tried to raise a point about the broader culture, and all you’ve discussed so far is how much of a slut this girl is and how no man should get with her. Great, whatever, but the post was not about one girl and how much of a slut she is.

      No it’s not. Reading the comment thread it’s as if Emileigh wrote and asked for advice, and now we’re all weighing in. But that is indeed not what the post was meant to be about. I’m interested in the idea of how understanding habitual behavior, especially under social pressure, might enable us to short-circuit it. As Wilson pointed out in his article, colleges have had great success in altering student behavior by blowing holes in the perceptions about binge drinking. Pluralistic ignorance is a powerful motivator and we know it’s a huge factor in hookup culture.

      Duke did a study of its own students and claims that only 10% actively hook up. Based on all the stories about Duke in the press, I would have thought that number was more like 90%. We’re allowing the behavior of a small minority to essentially mess up the heads of everyone else, and it has the effect of preventing healthy relationships at a time when young people want and need them.

  • Emily

    >> “Betas certainly aren’t the center of a attention at the biggest parties. But women certainly don’t go to those parties looking for good beta guys. They go looking for the Alpha commanding the room. So in that case, I guess they get what they deserve.”

    To be fair, it’s not like guys wear badges that identify them as either Alpha or Beta. In some cases, it’s extremely obvious. In other cases, not so much. And it’s probably a lot less obvious to girls who doesn’t read these blogs. I think people tend to oversimplify with the Alpha/Beta thing. In reality, it’s not quite that black and white.

    That being said, she should figure out a guy’s character BEFORE she sleeps with him. But it sounds like she’s starting to realize this. Although she’s created a huge mess for herself, this is a huge step towards improvement.

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

      @Emily

      I think people tend to oversimplify with the Alpha/Beta thing. In reality, it’s not quite that black and white.

      Agreed. I think college males are evaluated strictly on a doucheiness scale. While that is often a good proxy for alpha, it’s not entirely indicative.

      Also, I personally know a bunch of young guys that are beta, who have all had 10+ sexual partners. Vox Day says 15 is alpha, so 14 is greater beta? At age 22? (I say they are beta because they are all about the comfort traits, and not in the least bit dominant. They’re cute, and they get lucky sometimes.)

  • M3

    I hope she understand in the deepness of her heart that a guy giving her a chance is very valuable

    I told her this straight out, and explained why, so if she didn’t understand before she does now. She definitely gets it.

    While i will try to afford sympathy where i can, i have to wonder if she’s not now at GREATER risk of ending up pulling the EPL unhaaaappy on a beta.

    A beta, especially one on a ‘fix’ approach, much like my former self, might take it upon himself to try and show her ‘the love she never experienced’. She’ll be trying so hard to make it work that 10 years later she’ll wake up and realize ‘wtf have i done’.

    PS-Susan, no one answered my previous query. Does this girl have a stable father figure in her life?

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

      -Susan, no one answered my previous query. Does this girl have a stable father figure in her life?

      Yes, but her parents had a terrible marriage and a very acrimonious divorce when she was in high school. She feels closer to him now than she ever did before.

  • http://my-s-word.blogspot.com/ Singlicious

    For what it’s worth, I think I understand both the incentives for hook-up behavior, the regret, and the difficulty in changing a habit. I sympathize, and I certainly hope the past doesn’t have to have limited her pool substantially for the future, assuming she changes her behavior to what she feels comfortable with and is honest with future partners.

    I realize this is a story about one particular person, but it sounds like her story is intended to illustrate something about hook-up culture. Where are the guys in this? Why, in the 21st century, are we still hearing concerns that this woman is a huge risk for a relationship but not hearing anything remotely similar about the guys who are out at the college parties hooking up every weekend?

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

      @Singlicious

      Why, in the 21st century, are we still hearing concerns that this woman is a huge risk for a relationship but not hearing anything remotely similar about the guys who are out at the college parties hooking up every weekend?

      Welcome, I assume you’re new to HUS. If so, it’s understandable that you’re unaware that I rail against manwhores on a regular basis. I’m an equal opportunity shamer.

      What the data indicates – and there’s little of it, so this is rather premature – is that a high number of previous sex partners is a predictor of cheating and divorce. For both men and women. Personally, I would be wary of a guy with a high number because he’s had so much sexual variety I would deem it unlikely that monogamy would suit him over the long term.

  • Jason

    Singlicious,

    There is plenty of backlash against guys in society (and this site) who have ‘too high’ of a number, whatever that may be in an individual female’s eyes, especially when looking for a low count girl. In general society it is less pronounced and a lot more forgiveable, but it’s still there.

  • http://my-s-word.blogspot.com/ Singlicious

    Having thought about this a bit more, I have some advice for Emileigh, if she’s open to it:

    1) Try not to beat yourself up about the past. You can’t change it, and you had reasons for your choices, even if you regret them now. We’re all human and a product of our time and culture.

    2) Life is long. It’s not over at 22. One of the great blessings about being young is behavior then is easily written off by people in their 30s and beyond. Very few people at 30 or 35 are going to blame you for something you did in your early to mid-20s if you no longer act that way–I can’t think of anyone, male or female, who escaped the 20s unscathed. And even the relationships you had or didn’t have in your 20s will seem much less important when you’re in your 30s or 40s.

    3) With respect to your “number,” if asked later in life (which might not happen–I’ve never been asked that), I think it’s fine to say, “I hooked up a lot in college, but I didn’t like it, so since I graduated, I’ve had x partners” or something like that. I don’t think the actual number is critical to tell people as long as you’re not lying about it. It seems to me the actual adult conversation should involve an STD talk, and perhaps, if a relationship is on the table, a conversation about commitment and views on cheating.

    4) Please take care of yourself in terms of using condoms, preferably with another form of birth control (my neighbor, who’s a gynecology nurse, likes condoms + the sponge), and get checked for STDs. Hook-ups themselves are one thing, but you don’t want colleateral consequences if you can avoid them.

    5) With any change in behavior, I think it’s helpful to have support. If you have girlfriends you trust to help you change patterns, that would be ideal. I agree with those who’ve said it’s harder to make the decision not to hook up once you’re in the circumstance that usually gets you there. Better not to go to the party, if possible, or to go with friends who will leave with you if you get tempted, etc.

    6) Since you’re a senior, pretty soon you’ll be graduating and will most likely be in a new environment. It’s much easier to change a habit when all the familiar associations with it are gone. This would be a prime opportunity not to develop a new set of party friends but rather to meet people through a gym, sports, a hobby, work, etc.

    7) Therapy is hugely helpful both in accepting oneself and in changing behavior. It’s important to find a good therapist, though, who listens and doesn’t judge. I once had one tell me, when I was 28 and wanted to talk about my past relationships with guys, “don’t worry, I won’t think you’re a slut.” I should have stopped seeing him after that session.

    8) Try to be alert to when you feel you are being treated badly by anyone, in any context, and set boundaries, whether that means walking away, saying no, or developing new friendships. That includes a therapist; that is a critical trust relationship. A good therapist should be helpful with boundary-setting.

    I hope this helps.

  • http://deleted Jason

    Singlicious,

    After reading a couple of your blog entries it’s hard to even take your posts seriously now. Hell, in one of your entries you even admitted to contradicting what you say about the men you want with what your actions portray.

    As far as your points…

    1) That’s fine, but she has to recognize her choices and not be ignorant of the consequences. This quote by an earlier poster “I hope she understand in the deepness of her heart that a guy giving her a chance is very valuable” sums it up well.

    2&3) These pretty much miss the entire point of this site. You’re just kicking aside the legitimate fear that ‘nice guys’ have. The girl, who in her teens and 20s (best attractiveness years), would never have given a second look to nice guys is now hoping to snag one of these guys because she is older and ‘more mature’. Yeah, that’s what nice guys want, a girl who has run out of options because of her age and has been pumped and dumped by a bunch of alphas who would never committ.

    4) Sound advice

    5) Good in theory, difficult in practice. Female friendships are quote sneaky and often duplicitous, especially in the 20s age range. I’ve seen this too many times to count, even among ‘best friends’.

    6) Ok, this is fine.

    7) I’m not a big proponent of therapy, but whatever.

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

    Susan…”pluralistic ignorance”…what a great phrase!

  • purplesneakers

    The conversation here is so narrow-minded. Susan tried to raise a point about the broader culture, and all you’ve discussed so far is how much of a slut this girl is and how no man should get with her. Great, whatever, but the post was not about one girl and how much of a slut she is.

    I think this site has potential, but it is often squandered on small-minded conversation. On this thread there’s a very silly “human interest” angle. Why not take a breather from the “slut-shaming” for a second and look at the bigger questions?

    +1 Susan mentioned that colleges have blown away the ‘everyone is binge drinking’ perception. Somehow, I feel like it’s more politically fraught to even try to blow away the ‘everyone is hooking up (and having a great time!)’ perception. It would seem like it’s condemning hook-up culture, and therefore the people who hook up, to feminist/”sex positive” groups or overly PC university staff.

  • OffTheCuff

    Charm: “She will have to lower her standards though. Sane betas dont want her, but more than a few omegas would fight to the death for her.”

    Charm is on fire today. A lower-beta (doormat type) will certainly bite. A greater-beta with an ounce of self-respect would stay far away from a rep like that.

    WW: “The brain isn’t technically developed until 25, or so they say……”

    Excuses. That doesn’t mean you can’t be a functional adult, which to me is 1) self-sufficiency and 2) accepting the consequences of your own actions. I’ve been out on my own long before 25, heck, I was married and had my own house by then. People who aren’t “adults” at 20 are only that way because they’ve chosen to do so, and someone has enabled them to do so.

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

    @SW
    “And I’ll be the first to admit that it’s so unusual that many women would look askance at the gesture as a DLV. That’s how screwed up things are right now.”

    Sorry, kind of OT. What’s so strange is that neither my friends nor I back in college were expecting sex when asking girls out on dates. We just expected… going on a date! Physical attraction was there, but it was usually someone we noticed in class (sounds so high school). I’d assume guys who actually made the effort to ask girls out weren’t the sexually aggressive types. A DLV would be asking the same girl out again who previously shot you down, not going out on a limb the first time.

    Let’s see if these scenarios make sense: 1) Guy asks girl out, sober during the day. Her reaction, this guy’s showing weakness. “A real guy would hit on me while drinking at a party.” 2) Girl shows interest in guy, sober during the day. His reaction, wow she must be desperate for a boyfriend (or something). “I might as well get in her pants, if she’ll let me.” Seems like an inability to communicate romantic intentions?

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

      @Megaman

      Let’s see if these scenarios make sense: 1) Guy asks girl out, sober during the day. Her reaction, this guy’s showing weakness. “A real guy would hit on me while drinking at a party.” 2) Girl shows interest in guy, sober during the day. His reaction, wow she must be desperate for a boyfriend (or something). “I might as well get in her pants, if she’ll let me.”

      That’s as good a summation of hookup culture as I’ve ever seen.

  • M3

    Charm: “She will have to lower her standards though. Sane betas dont want her, but more than a few omegas would fight to the death for her.”

    Charm is on fire today. A lower-beta (doormat type) will certainly bite. A greater-beta with an ounce of self-respect would stay far away from a rep like that.

    Yep, that was me once upon a midnight dreary..

    but i got much better.

    Now i don’t rescue strays. I go to the breeder and get the full lineage history and proof of medical.

    The last time i took in a stray… it bit me,

    and took half my stuff.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “She’s simply a college girl who got caught up in the hookup scene. She’s hardly a rarity.”

    The CDC paper puts 15+ at 7.2% in her age group. Sure, there are others like her, but they are an outliers. I would bet hitting 30 gets you down to 1% to less.

    Sue: “Mostly there are parties, heavily populated by alphas. A few betas slip in here and there”

    Maybe there are some exclusive parties, but that’s not the whole scene – do you really think the betas just sat home studying every night? I went to hundreds of parties, even ran my own. Hookups were not the focus, but a happy by-product of fun, as it should be.

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

      Maybe there are some exclusive parties, but that’s not the whole scene – do you really think the betas just sat home studying every night? I went to hundreds of parties, even ran my own. Hookups were not the focus, but a happy by-product of fun, as it should be.

      Yeah, I was thinking of how the Greek and athletic scenes dominate campus life. I hope there are good alternatives, but IDK. I know at my son’s school the guys not in frats try to get into frat parties whenever they can. One night there was a long line around the block for entrance into a frat party – clearly the event of the weekend. Suddenly the frat guy guarding the door starting yelling, “No more dicks!” The guy at the front of the line, a freshman, demanded to be let in, saying, “I’m not a dick, I’m a really good guy!” This story got around because that kid wound up writing an editorial for the student paper, bemoaning the control frats have over the social scene.

  • http://my-s-word.blogspot.com/ Singlicious

    Jason, thank you for the feedback on the substantive content of my posts. I can certainly see the concern a “nice guy” would have about a woman who’d slept around a lot. I was of course *not* advising anyone to sleep around in the future and then whitewash that in some way. Rather, in Emileigh’s case, we’re talking about an existing person with a past. Since no one can change the past, the trick is to deal with it going forward. One’s “number” is a signal, but, like many signals, is imperfect. It’s getting at things like STD risk, fidelity propensity, taste for variety, perhaps self-esteem issues, etc. Those can be addressed directly. I can tell you from experience that when I tell people (honestly) that I’ve had sex with one guy since my divorce 2.5 years ago, after seeing him for 5 months (and declined many others), no one asks what I did in my 20s. It’s just not very relevant (at age 40+) to anything a current prospective partner cares about.

    Beyond that, Jason, I’m not sure what on my blog caused the ad hominem attack (“After reading a couple of your blog entries it’s hard to even take your posts seriously now. Hell, in one of your entries you even admitted to contradicting what you say about the men you want with what your actions portray.”). In my blog, I’m trying to examine my own feelings and behavior in the course of looking for a post-divorce relationship. My basic philosophy is to follow the Golden Rule, which has a lot of corrolaries, including honesty. If you’ve followed my blog, you’ve seen that I don’t reflexly blame or praise either sex (or myself or the other person), rather I try to dig beneath the surface to understand behavior. I’m not sure which particular post you’re referring to, but knowing myself and the fact that I try very hard not to play games, I suspect that the context was one in which I felt my behavior could be misinterpreted–sometimes I criticize myself for not saying precisely and completely what I mean, which is hard to do even though I’m a pretty direct person–or I thought my actions could give me some insight into my true desires. Happy to discuss further if you want to point out which post you meant, and we can do so by email or on my blog if you think this thread is off-topic here. Your call.

  • Wudang

    “I think what’s missing from this discussion is the fact that Emileigh is not some hussy who’s the town slut. She is behaving in a way that is reinforced by the culture. She’s considered highly desirable by men and is high status at her college. She grew up in an era that told her that the sexual double standard is invalid. She may well have taken a sex ed class in high school that encouraged her to explore her sexuality. Like everyone else at college, she probably believes that a large percentage of women are hooking up, and she was no doubt comforted by that fact.

    Emileigh is a product of the last 50 years of feminist programming post-Sexual Revolution. It’s surprising more women don’t participate. I imagine that some of it was bad luck, some was naivete, some was weakness. She’s miserable, but she’s not blaming anyone but herself. Which is more than I can say for some unhappy campers in this SMP.”

    This is why I have a very hard time slut shaming. I find her choices perfectly reasonable under the circumstances.

    A large part of the difficulty of breaking this habit is to leave without the dopamine rush of new thrilling sex partners, the oxytocin boost of affectionate physical contact and the good feelings of validation from the attention of men she gets through hooking up and through being perceived as a potential hookup. So what can be done about that?

    One way to make it easier to deal with the lack of oxytocin is to become a bit more physically affectionate with friends and people you interact with in daily life. That boosts oxytocin. One can also go get a massage every now and then and attend dance classes to get such effects.

    Dealing with the validation habit can be helped by realizing it is empty. If they are only willing to hook up that is all they are validating in her but she likely feels on some level they are validating her LTR value as well which is false. If she really takes that in she will feel less inclined to seek that attention.

    I don´t think there is one very good surrogate for the dopamine rush of new exciting partners. It does however help the more the rest of your life is nourishing for you. IMO it especially helps if your life has meaning and purpose. When meaning is lacking people always become more hedonistic. I notice this in myself.

    A great way to deal with feeling the hole left by not hooking up anymore is to workout, to do qigong or yoga and to meditate. All those feel you up with all sorts of happy hormones and makes you the opposite of needy. There are studies showing the effect of all four having large beneficial effects on breaking addictions, on mental health, on future time orientation on hormone levels etc. They will all also make you look more physically attractive.

    She could change the way she dresses from trying to look hot to trying to look beautyfull and feminine in a girlfriend material type way. The style women are encouraged to go for today is largely the hot style. Aim for another style. You should still look sexy but in a different way.

    Also spend time on the manosphere blogs written by women trying to cultivate and explore femininity such as BloggingBelita, Spacetraveller etc. Becoming more feminine will probably make you more content in yourself and make you more LTR worthy. Also look to cultivating all sorts of other LTR relationship skills such as cooking to enhance your LTR value to compensate for the loss through promiscuity. Reducing all sorts of impulsivity and becoming as balanced and future time oriented and serious as possible in all other areas of life will make men feel like you are safer than your number implies. If you make life changes in several areas you can also more plausibly spin your promiscuity as an irresponsible faze that is no over just as other bad habits are now over.

    Spend time in the manosphere to learn about behaviors that actually impress men in terms of making you LTR worthy. Just by not at all being flaky and keeping drama tendencies to a minimum during the dating period you will become a much better prospect.

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

      @Wudang

      Epic comment there and great advice for Emileigh, thanks.

  • M3

    …a single woman’s real-time story of her search for love (with a few detours along the way)….

    looks like you’ve already set yourself up with a few mulligans on your quest. convenient ;)

    …a driving man’s real-time story of his quest to attain a drivers license (with a few maimed pedestrians along the way)….

    what will you find? as yoda said “only what you take with you.”

  • http://my-s-word.blogspot.com/ Singlicious

    Thanks, Susan. I’ve been lurking here for a little while and read some of your older posts, too. I also linked to one of your recent posts on Saturday.

    The comment of mine that you quoted was not directed at you, but at the comment thread here, which I read about 90% of. Whenever I read or hear about sexual behavior, it always strikes me that it takes two. I do understand that the illustrative example here focused on one person, who’s female. I wonder, though, if there are guys who struggle with similar post-hook-up feelings. My read of society is that the incidence of that is much less, and it would be unusual for a male senior in college to fear that only a small group of women would be interested in him because of his past promiscuity. But maybe I am wrong. It would be interesting to see data on the perceptions of both men and women on how promiscuity affects their prospects and another’s promiscuity affects their interest in that person.

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

      @Singlicious

      My read of society is that the incidence of that is much less, and it would be unusual for a male senior in college to fear that only a small group of women would be interested in him because of his past promiscuity.

      I think you’re right about that. And the reason is that men prefer women with fewer sexual partners, while women seek some amount of validation from other women when they select men. While some women will be turned off by a slutty guy, the truth is that guy is obviously feeling no shortage of female attention. His problem is more likely to be that the women he would consider for marriage will be the ones who were turned off by him in his youth.

  • M3

    Susan

    Yes, but her parents had a terrible marriage and a very acrimonious divorce when she was in high school. She feels closer to him now than she ever did before.

    I can appreciate that she ‘feels’ closer to him… but i have to question how he raised her to have such a low opinion of herself and her sexuality to get to the point where having sex was easier than having conversation.

    Does the father know about her issues? Did they even have a birds & bees convo? Was he out of her life during her formative years? Was he being her ‘friend’ more than her ‘father’ as is typical nowadays?

    So many questions…

    Feminism gave her the rope to hang herself with. Fortunately the rope snapped. Now we’re all gathering around hoping there’s still a pulse.

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

      @M3

      Does the father know about her issues? Did they even have a birds & bees convo? Was he out of her life during her formative years? Was he being her ‘friend’ more than her ‘father’ as is typical nowadays?

      I don’t know the specific answers to your questions, but I think your point is very valid. Parents have a very important role to play in the lives of their daughters, and research shows that girls want advice from their dads re boys. My daughter usually came to me first, but if she really wanted to know something about how men think, she asked her dad. He offered very strong advice re male nature and the behavior she should adopt.

  • Jonny

    A person has his reputation at college. It cannot be ignored. You know people from college. Your reputation follows you. Thus, I think this woman is sadly not suited for a LTR regardless whether she changes her tune, which I doubt could be possible.

    She needs to immediately stop dating for a year or two. A self-imposed celebacy will work. Then, she needs to actually learn how to talk to a man. It is sad that she doesn’t give herself a chance to know who she is sleeping with.

    Her answers need a response.

    “Guys give her attention knowing she hooks up on the reg.”

    How is this conducive to a LTR. She gives attention to every guy indiscriminately.

    “The girls who don’t hook up get zero attention from guys, which she fears would be even worse. ”

    She needs to improve perception of other girls. Girls get attention regardless of whether the guys sleep with them.

    “Her number has gotten so high she doesn’t see why it matters anymore.”

    It matters to the guy that she wants to have a commitment. Thus, she is inhibiting what she wants.

    “It’s awkward to say no.”

    This makes her a risk to a relationship. She cannot be trusted. Marriaged minded guys must avoid her.

  • http://my-s-word.blogspot.com/ Singlicious

    @M3: By “detours,” I meant topics outside the romantic relationship sphere. I sometimes talk about my friends and even a little about work, so I didn’t want new readers to feel mislead. But language is ambiguous and always open to misinterpretation, no matter how precise I try to be! :-/

  • M3

    By “detours,” I meant topics outside the romantic relationship sphere. I sometimes talk about my friends and even a little about work, so I didn’t want new readers to feel mislead. But language is ambiguous and always open to misinterpretation, no matter how precise I try to be! :-/

    Fair enough, i withdraw my smartass remark ;)

    let comment 137 be stricken from the record.

  • http://my-s-word.blogspot.com/ Singlicious

    Well said, Wudang. Great point about finding substitute ways to boost oxytocin. I think the endorphin rush of exercise helps tremendously. You also don’t need a partner to have an orgasm. :-)

  • Odds

    I’d like to wish her the best of luck, but it would feel kind of empty. Like wishing a starving person good luck finding food, but being unwilling to give them half of my sandwich – I’m not willing to take that step for a girl like her, and would advise any of my friends not to do so, either.

    Wudang is right that she is a product of her circumstances, but I disagree that she made reasonable choices in those circumstances. Doesn’t matter how many people tell me that touching the stove is awesome – I’ve done it before, it sucks, and I don’t care how many cool people are doing it. Reasonable people realize that. If she doesn’t have the willpower to resist social pressure in order to avoid pain, she doesn’t have the willpower to resist her harpy friends telling her to dump/divorce the nice beta. If she develops that willpower, she could be a worthwhile girlfriend even with her current number, but I don’t think that’s likely to happen. Besides, I (and I suspect other guys) care less about the number, and more about how many alpha-player-cads she’s been with (in my mind, one Tucker Max is more damaging to her long-term SMV than ten regular guys).

    @ Singlicious

    Some guys aren’t big on hookups. I don’t much like them (haven’t had all that many, though). At this point it’s more about proving to myself that I could go out and get a random if I needed to. Still would rather just have a girlfriend, but I’m cynical enough about the SMP that I feel like I need to not need her.

  • deti

    I have to take issue with the entire approach of viewing hooking up as a habit. With all due respect to everyone here, and especially to Emileigh, no one gains any insight or valuable information from viewing hook up sex or choices that lead to hookup sex as a habit.

    A habit is something akin to fastening one’s seat belt upon entering a car, or sniffing one’s food before taking a bite, or even smoking cigarettes. These things become repetitive behavior in which the actor is on autopilot. She does them automatically, without even thinking about them.

    It seems fanciful to view engaging in sex as a habit like brushing one’s teeth after every meal or sleeping on one’s left side every night. Sex always involves conscious choices. And sex involves a set of conscious choices that culminate in sex. And the actors engaging in those choices are (or at least should be) able to select their choices from a set of alternatives. They are responsible for them and the consequences that flow from them. She has the choice whether to go to the bar, whether to get blackout drunk, whether to go on the date with the nice guy, whether to go home with the frat boy.

    Are we really saying that some women who hook up and have casual sex are just on autopilot and allow men to have their way with them and they put no thought or decisionmaking or executive function into it whatsoever? I don’t buy it.

    Emileigh’s story is not indicative of habituation or dysfunction. It is a series of poor choices — nothing more, nothing less. The fact that her behavior might follow a common pattern does not mean it’s a habit and occurs with no thought or decisionmaking. It means that she selects the same choices from the same alternatives leading to the same predictable outcomes.

    My greatest objection to the suggestion that hookup sex might be habit is that it relieves the actor of responsibility for her choices. “Oh well, it’s a habit for you, you just can’t help it!” She is robbed of her ability to make rational, informed choices. “She just can’t help sleeping with alphas! It’s a habit!” This post implies that a woman might be in the clutches of a bad habit, that’s why she hooks up, and therefore she’s not responsible.

    No sale.

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

      @deti

      I have to take issue with the entire approach of viewing hooking up as a habit. With all due respect to everyone here, and especially to Emileigh, no one gains any insight or valuable information from viewing hook up sex or choices that lead to hookup sex as a habit.

      Habit, at least as defined by Duhigg, includes the full range of repetitive behaviors, including addiction. For the purposes of this discussion, I concur. Emileigh would rightly say that she is in the habit of going home with guys when the bar closes, for example. Or someone might say, “She makes a habit of hooking up with athletes.”

      Sex always involves conscious choices. And sex involves a set of conscious choices that culminate in sex. And the actors engaging in those choices are (or at least should be) able to select their choices from a set of alternatives.

      Hmmm, now I’m wondering if you read what I wrote. The gist of the post is that human beings are conscious, which is defined as the ability to reflect, ponder and then choose. Habits are behaviors that have been repeated often enough to wear a groove of sorts in the psyche – they occur without reflection and conscious awareness much of the time. Any behavior can become a habit. We might even define a habit as something that one does without giving it much, or any, thought. Because we’ve done it before, we go through the motions – I think Duhigg describes this as like being on autopilot.

      My greatest objection to the suggestion that hookup sex might be habit is that it relieves the actor of responsibility for her choices. “Oh well, it’s a habit for you, you just can’t help it!” She is robbed of her ability to make rational, informed choices. “She just can’t help sleeping with alphas! It’s a habit!” This post implies that a woman might be in the clutches of a bad habit, that’s why she hooks up, and therefore she’s not responsible.

      I’m not sure why you’re making that claim when Emileigh’s own penitence and regret is on full display in the post. She did take full responsibility for her choices, and when I asked her why she kept hooking up with guys she cited the reasons I gave. Mostly, she was looking for a relationship, and she accurately sensed that hooking up was the pathway to that. That may be dysfunctional, but that’s a reality of the SMP. The women I hear from who have truly taken my advice to heart are on the sidelines in college. They hang with their gf’s, avoid the party scene, and don’t have too many social interactions with guys.

      People are generally held responsible for the natural consequences of their bad habits, in my experience. No one really pities the smoker with lung cancer, or the binge drinker who gets her stomach pumped, or the junk food eating, sedentary guy who can’t get a gf.

  • Cooper

    @Odds, and Jason (#127, responding to Singlicious’ 2&3 points)

    It seems some people with hign numbers justify their past with the fact that somewhere there is someone, whom they formerly would’ve not given the time of day, that will still treat them like a prince/princess.

    When confronted with this scenario, I will choose to cut off my nose to spite my face.
    I will not enter a relationship, or hookup, with the admission cost of me forteiting my dignity. Cause that’s what that is; omit their promiscuious past by accepting the rise of ones’ own relationship-risk.

  • Charm

    I will not enter a relationship, or hookup, with the admission cost of me forteiting my dignity. Cause that’s what that is; omit their promiscuious past by accepting the rise of ones’ own relationship-risk.

    +1

    Co-signed. I’d feel like a goddamn fool too. This is Im glad sluts and cads end up together a fair portion of the time. They deserve each other.

  • Just1X

    @Wudang

    “This is why I have a very hard time slut shaming. I find her choices perfectly reasonable under the circumstances.”

    I admire your humanity, slut shaming Emileigh does seem harsh on the personal level (even when it’s been earned), but for the purposes of societal in general perhaps it’s useful; “pour encourager les autres”?

    I know society doesn’t encourage introspection (do whatever feels right, right now, fork the consequences), but would she really have had to think very deeply to know that what she was doing was pretty poor, even if superficially, society gave her behaviour the thumbs up?

    As an atheist I find it depressing to recognise that victorian values (as in old school religion based) did improve society. I used to be against censorship because everyone should be able to judge for themselves, but it seems that a lot of people need to be guided…god (little ‘g’) that’s depressing.

  • Odds

    @ Deti

    I don’t think anyone is denying Emileigh’s moral agency here. Totally with you about women being fully functional, responsible moral agents, and that they mustn’t be allowed to claim agency or lack thereof according to convenience. But habit doesn’t imply absolution from the moral consequences of choices – people with a habit of not using their turn signals are still assholes, for example, and we don’t let them off the hook for it. I think most folks here are using “habit” in the colloquial sense of making the same stupid decisions over and over, not in the more literal sense of abdicating responsibility for the consequences of her actions.

    Again, you’re right that no pussy pass should be granted (though it likely will be if she’s hot enough), so some of the remedies offered here for her situation irk me a bit – speaking as a decent guy who is trying to avoid the situation where I end up being lonely all through my twenties before settling with some woman who wouldn’t have given me the time of day before her egg timer went off. But there’s a difference between a get-out-of-jail free card (telling her to move away and hide her past, thus defrauding some poor beta) and a solution for what is in all likelihood a well-intentioned girl who’s just slow on the uptake (telling her to abstain from sex for a while, learn to be feminine, and especially telling her to learn to resist social pressure and exercise her power of self-determination, thus giving her at least a small chance to shape herself into a decent girlfriend).

    Best thing Emiliegh could do is pass her knowledge on to other girls so they don’t have to learn the hard way. I’d be curious if that has even occurred to her, though. If it has, it’s a good sign she’s learning to influence the world around herself rather than just giving in to everything.

  • deti

    The other important thing and caveat about this post is that Emileigh racked up a high partner count in two and a half years. And it had happened before she knew it.

    This is what can happen when women hook up in place of traditional dating. Now, many men will consider her unsuitable for dating or marriage. It’s sad, really.

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

      @deti

      The other important thing and caveat about this post is that Emileigh racked up a high partner count in two and a half years. And it had happened before she knew it.

      This is what can happen when women hook up in place of traditional dating. Now, many men will consider her unsuitable for dating or marriage. It’s sad, really.

      That’s not a caveat, it’s an important part of the message I was trying to convey.

  • deti

    Odds:

    I can see what you’re saying. But what I’m saying is, the same voluntary choice to the same alternatives is not in my view a habit.

    here’s what I focused on:

    “Hooking up was a habit, and she no longer gave any thought to the decision before making it. She had forfeited her power to reflect, ponder and choose. She feels terrible about her choices – she was very upset while telling me this – and she wants to stop. She’s not sure how.”

    This makes it sound like Emileigh is Pavlov’s dog: when the bell rings, she salivates. When the alpha booty calls, she answers and goes home with him, first time every time. This suggests to me she has no say in the matter.

    The way to stop having indiscriminate sex is not only to stop the sex, but to stop the behaviors and the choices that lead to indiscriminate sex. Someone upthread suggested she voluntarily go celibate for a year. I concur. She needs to get herself completely out of the scene.

  • Odds

    @ Deti

    I read that same passage, and I can see how you got that interpretation. It’s just different from mine – I saw forfeiting choice as the moral decision itself (she is morally responsible for voluntarily refusing to make any choices). Saying she’s not sure how is further evidence that she has chosen to be acted upon, rather than to act, but she’s still responsible for that choice, and offering any solutions is implicitly telling her that she has the choice to be an actor (and is, in fact, responsible for what she’s done until now).

    But yeah, yours is definitely a valid interpretation, now that you put it that way. If nothing else, it’s something that ought to be pointed out and clarified from the start.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “I know at my son’s school the guys not in frats try to get into frat parties whenever they can.”

    Huh, I guess some elite schools have more stratified social scenes like that, and ours was clearly Greek-ruled. I’ve never been turned down to a frat party – they were either open or closed, not operated like an exclusive club. Even the best Greek bar in town didn’t discriminate when full… one in, one out. IMO, if a venue isn’t doing that and you’re waiting on line, then you’re doing a huge DLV. I’d rather go somewhere else or host my own party.

  • Escoffier

    The once sentence of Susan’s that I find objectionable was this: “she wants to stop. She’s not sure how.”

    Of course she knows how. Everyone knows how. You stop by stopping, by not doing it. That doens’t mean it’s easy. Smokers know how to stop smoking but many of them don’t manage to do it because it’s difficult, not because it’s complicated.

    Stopping any bad habit is acutally quite simple, which is different than easy.

    E knows how. Maybe she lacks the will but not the knowledge.

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

      E knows how. Maybe she lacks the will but not the knowledge.

      I guess I should have been more specific. She can immediately stop hanging out with her current group of friends, which includes girls and guys. She can skip Senior Week, stop drinking, and settle in with War and Peace on Saturday night. She can opt out completely. People do it. She knows that. What she said was, “I don’t know how I’m going to manage that.”

      So it’s all about parsing the word “know.”

      Again, attempts to discredit Emileigh’s acceptance of personal responsibility are off base here. She’s worried about being able to pull it off without support. Which is why I told her I’m here to talk anytime.

  • Malia

    “Hooking up was a habit, and she no longer gave any thought to the decision before making it. She had forfeited her power to reflect, ponder and choose. She feels terrible about her choices – she was very upset while telling me this – and she wants to stop. She’s not sure how.”

    All I’m saying is that I could write this:

    “Cheating was a habit, and she no longer gave any thought to the decision before making it. She had forfeited her power to reflect, ponder and choose. She feels terrible about her choices – she was very upset while telling me this – and she wants to stop. She’s not sure how.”

    And hardly anyone would agree that it was a habit.

    I’m with Deti on this, not a habit, but a series of poor choices.

  • Cooper

    @OffTheCuff
    The University I went to wasn’t very Greek dominated; in fact you were considered a little off if you had sincere interest in them.
    Most freshmen were advised to act interested for the sake of the participating in the start of the year pledge-parties.

    I remember being in a line, exactly as Sue mentioned. All, or most, of the girls were imediately admitted. And a long line of guys were outside hoping to be let in when the frat guys didn’t think the ratio of dick-to-chicks wasn’t too much.
    I ended up at the front of line being told their cutting off all the guys for the night, just as Sue mentioned. Although my friends and I stayed in line anyways pleading for entrance. We did actually get in after long being told, no more guys will be allowed.
    When we became an exception, of course, all the guys behind us pleaded for equal treatment. Whether any more made it in behind us, I’ll never know.

    lol

  • Malia

    The once sentence of Susan’s that I find objectionable was this: “she wants to stop. She’s not sure how.”

    Agree with this also. She knows how to stop, what she DOESN’T know how to do is to stop the behavior but continue receiving the benefits she is accustomed to.

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

    As an atheist I find it depressing to recognise that victorian values (as in old school religion based) did improve society. I used to be against censorship because everyone should be able to judge for themselves, but it seems that a lot of people need to be guided…god (little ‘g’) that’s depressing.

    When you don’t believe in God you believe in EVERYTHING else…

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

    Just1x – “As an atheist I find it depressing to recognise that victorian values (as in old school religion based) did improve society. I used to be against censorship because everyone should be able to judge for themselves, but it seems that a lot of people need to be guided…god (little ‘g’) that’s depressing”

    See now, I’ve always known most people need guidance. It shocked the hell out of me that anyone thought removing the “fear of God” from people was a good idea. Let’s face it, there are thousands of people out there that only behave because they fear jail. And, obviously even the fear of prison isn’t enough for some. I imagine eternal damnation went a long way toward forcing people to behave in the civilized manner we’d all like to think is human nature. It isn’t. Human nature is selfish, destructive, and violent. Look at any large society left to their own vices, and you’ll see the same pattern. After all, Rome wasn’t built in a day, but it certainly didn’t take too long to fall.

  • M3

    @ Ted D

    I’ve always known most people need guidance. It shocked the hell out of me that anyone thought removing the “fear of God” from people was a good idea.

    Ted.

    There is no god.

    There is however a teacup orbiting the sun at a distance of 2,754 kilometers… give or take a few.

    I fear that teacup.

  • Rhen

    Jason…why assume that she “wouldn’t have given a second look to nice guys”? It does seem to be a common assumption that if a girl has a lot of sex she’s having it with jerks, but is it really true? Nice guys often do get laid in college–maybe some of them got laid with Emileigh.

  • Escoffier

    Susan, she can stop hooking up well short of cutting herself off from all society.

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

      Susan, she can stop hooking up well short of cutting herself off from all society.

      Maybe that’s like saying an alcoholic can stop after two glasses of wine. It’s a slippery slope.

  • OffTheCuff

    Rhen: “It does seem to be a common assumption that if a girl has a lot of sex she’s having it with jerks, but is it really true? Nice guys often do get laid in college–maybe some of them got laid with Emileigh.”

    First, let’s use objective terms:

    “Jerk” = seeking only casual sex.
    “Nice” = seeking a relationship.

    If none of those men ever offer or accept to be exclusive, then yes – she’s only seeking out with “jerks”.

    Perhaps your definition is different, where “nice” is a friendly guy who honestly seeks casual sex (Susan’s “player”), and a “jerk” is a guy who uses deception or dark game to seek casual sex (Susan’s “cad”).

  • Jonny

    “People are generally held responsible for the natural consequences of their bad habits, in my experience.”

    But we are talking about slutty behavior, which there are no consequences. Or at least we are not looking as the consequences as penalties that should be paid via societal disapproval.

    The natural consequences of slutty behavior is damage to marriages, lack of marriage, long term relationships, diseases, abortions, bastards/babies, and personal dignity. There is a cost that is largely bore to women, but men are affected as well. To be actually hold women responsible is to make them pay the costs (no welfare and no child support payments from fathers, removal of custody rights).

    The way to mitigate is to prevent casual sex. Calling women sluts via slut shaming is one technique, but NOT used. This is left on the table.

  • Jason

    Jason…why assume that she “wouldn’t have given a second look to nice guys”? It does seem to be a common assumption that if a girl has a lot of sex she’s having it with jerks, but is it really true? Nice guys often do get laid in college–maybe some of them got laid with Emileigh.

    Yea, some nice guys do get laid in college based on ‘getting lucky’ and being in the right circumstance, but they aren’t the ones running through women like a truck through the holland tunnel. Nice guys are usually much more likely to be looking for a LTR as well, which Emileigh said she wanted. There is already some disconnect there.

    Emileigh’s number wasn’t stated, but if it’s as bad as some of the college super sluts that I’ve seen then there is no way she was going through nice guy after nice guy and somehow being denied a LTR although she has been deemed as attractive. That just doesn’t happen. In this situation it’s almost always the case where she was going after frat stars, athletes and other very high SMV guys, i.e. the alphas and getting P&D.

  • http://deleted Jason

    Susan,

    I guess I should have been more specific. She can immediately stop hanging out with her current group of friends, which includes girls and guys. She can skip Senior Week, stop drinking, and settle in with War and Peace on Saturday night. She can opt out completely. People do it. She knows that. What she said was, “I don’t know how I’m going to manage that.”

    This seems a bit extreme, especially for a 21/22yo, but it’s true that peer pressure and a lack of self control makes moderation difficult for many. There are girls out there who still participate in things like Senior Week, bar nights, parties etc. that don’t get shit faced at every opportunity and never go home with a guy. That should be the end goal for Emileigh, to live life, but on her own terms, not terms dictated by the actions of those around her.

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

      @Jason

      There are girls out there who still participate in things like Senior Week, bar nights, parties etc. that don’t get shit faced at every opportunity and never go home with a guy.

      Yeah, I know, I birthed one :) I think it’s hard to turn over a new leaf, though. Her behavior will be unexpected, by both guys and girls. Her gf’s will probably feel judged or defensive as well. She’ll probably need new friends. That’s not to say she can’t do it, but it’s a challenge. We all know how hard it is to change one’s life – she’s going up against the deep grooves. She views the world through a lens, and she will need to change that lens.

      That should be the end goal for Emileigh, to live life, but on her own terms, not terms dictated by the actions of those around her.

      Agreed.

  • Escoffier

    “Maybe that’s like saying an alcoholic can stop after two glasses of wine. It’s a slippery slope.”

    No, it’s more like saying, An alcoholic can go out to dinner with people who order wine while he himself sticks to club soda. I get that for some people that’s impossible. They need to protect themselves even from exposure. But others can handle it.

    I don’t know what category E falls in. If she thinks that simply being around guys will cause her to give in, then yeah she should stay home. But if she can muster the will power to go out, have some fun and still say “NO!” to a hook up, then by all means, go out.

  • Tom

    “We need to decouple self-esteem and validation from casual sex.”
    _____________
    Oh boy……. That is a toughy. Many women want the attention of males and are willing to go to different lengths to get it. Obviously with these young ladies, casual sex is but a means to an end. Once the guilt or shame wears off that activity, it is like, “opening the flood gets” with some of them. They no longer see anythnig wrong with their ample promiscuity, until that day down the road when they do finally “get it.” I think some of them get tired of being used by men for sex only, they have had their hearts broken a number of times, it is not working as a means to a relationship, they understand sex isnt the only thing a man wants from a prospective mate.
    Using sex as their only bait to catch a man, is, when you really think about it, pretty shallow.

  • Herb

    @Susan

    We know that pluralistic ignorance plays a role in hookup culture as well, so it stands to reason that exposing it might prove beneficial to the majority of students.

    I know it’s beyond your core mission here at HUS, but shouldn’t the same logic apply to cracking the divorce culture (admittedly with more external inputs to fight).

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

      @Herb

      I know it’s beyond your core mission here at HUS, but shouldn’t the same logic apply to cracking the divorce culture (admittedly with more external inputs to fight).

      Can you explain what you mean here? The difference between perception and reality re divorce?

  • Herb

    @Maggie:

    How many 18 year-old college freshman are adults? Very few. I live in a college town and have a lot of interaction with the students. They are delightful but as freshmen they are still children. The next few years are a time of dramatic growth for them.

    I served with many an 18 and 19 year old with responsibilities that, if done incorrectly, could lead to the death of 120+ people and the loss of a multi-billion dollar submarine. Now, admittedly, 99.999% of things that important were verified after being done, but often both the doer and the verifier were 20 or younger.

    I bet my life on those men (and they bet their life on me).

    If an 18 year old can do life or death valve line-ups how hard is learning to say ‘no’ to cheap sex.

    The best you could use along those lines is: the military taught us to be that responsible and washed out those who couldn’t. Parents and universities feel no need to demand squat from women like her. Now it’s biting her in the ass.

  • Herb

    @WarmWoman:

    The brain isn’t technically developed until 25, or so they say……

    Yet somehow we crew nuclear submarines in a way that a majority of the crew isn’t 25 yet.

    For most of human history one was an adult filling an adult role a decade earlier than 25.

    What has happened since WW2 to change that? Did the brain start developing slower or did we just start using that as an excuse (one among many).

    I feel for the young lady and how her choices have had long term harm to her in multiple dimensions. I think she was poorly served by the adults in her life. This is not new. The best episode of My So Called Life had Angela being pressured to sex by her BF. We got to watch an hour of a high school freshman who desperately wanted to say to the school’s bad boy about sex turning to adult after adult who told her “only you can make that choice” and “if you do, protect yourself”. Not one said “Are you fucking kidding me? Tell him ‘no’”.

    I’ll bet you paychecks that Emileigh got the same socialization in high school. But at 18 she can vote, enter contracts, enlist in the service, and be tried as an adult.

    She is an adult and misnaming the fact that older adults didn’t prepare her for adulthood as “she’s not an adult” does not help her or Emileigh 2 who is 15 now and in three years will make the same bad choices.

  • Wudang

    “I admire your humanity, slut shaming Emileigh does seem harsh on the personal level (even when it’s been earned), but for the purposes of societal in general perhaps it’s useful; “pour encourager les autres”?

    I know society doesn’t encourage introspection (do whatever feels right, right now, fork the consequences), but would she really have had to think very deeply to know that what she was doing was pretty poor, even if superficially, society gave her behaviour the thumbs up?”

    Yes, I agree it is good for society. But the women my generation have been repeatedly told there is nothing wrong with hooking up and to the extent many feel shame only having had LTR sex and they have been under the illusion the double standard does not exist any more or at least has been diminished so much she can safely have a rather high number. I find it hard to shame those women considering that that is the circumstances. I have myself seen nothing wrong with promiscuity for either women nor men untill coming to this blog and getting the rational perspective on it. I have a bunch of female friends that have hooked up quite a lot and I am convinced that they would not have or have done it very little had they been told the real story. So I don`t shame, I just tell people the consequences.

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

    Tom – “Using sex as their only bait to catch a man, is, when you really think about it, pretty shallow.”

    What do you know! I found something you said that I completely agree with. ;)

  • Tom

    What do you know! I found something you said that I completely agree with.
    _____________
    LOL I didnt say anything about a woman who hooks up because she really likes sex on occation….Thats not shallow, but Im sure there is a word from the guys here to describe it…lol

  • Herb

    @Susan

    Emileigh is a product of the last 50 years of feminist programming post-Sexual Revolution. It’s surprising more women don’t participate. I imagine that some of it was bad luck, some was naivete, some was weakness. She’s miserable, but she’s not blaming anyone but herself. Which is more than I can say for some unhappy campers in this SMP.

    I don’t disagree with that but the problem with respect to men is having been beat up by the same feminist culture and having had the response Charm mentioned, “tough shit” she’s not going to get a lot of sympathy.

    In an earlier thread I said the first generation to not have the weaponizing of the SMP won’t be born until 2020 at least. The reaction here from men is exactly what I’m talking about. As unfair as it is, this woman was lead into a minefield with sniper fire coming down.

    The best I think we can hope for is a critical mass of her and her male counterparts will be so revolted the children they start having at 2020 are given the education and guidance she wasn’t.

    Perhaps that revulsion you’re hearing from her is a sign we might get that.

  • Tom

    deti
    She just can’t help sleeping with alphas! It’s a habit!” This post implies that a woman might be in the clutches of a bad habit, that’s why she hooks up, and therefore she’s not responsible.

    No sale.
    ______________
    Women have told me their self esteem was pretty low and a hookup, even though temporary, made them feel good about themselves… A while longer that “fix” wore off so they had another esteem booster in the form of another hookup. They then feel good again..rinse and repeat. VERY understandable how the weak fall for the pattern. I guess it could be hard for some people to empathize if they never suffered from esteem problems. Some people just do not have that capability.

  • Ceer

    In our society, women show a particular inability to connect emotionally with the opposite sex, carry on conversations, and socialize with the vast majority of men. Such women need social lessons. That’s one reason why I think every child deserves 2 parents, a mother and a father…so they can learn by seeing the connection between the two and be able to bond with both.

  • Cooper

    @Tom
    “I guess it could be hard for some people to empathize if they never suffered from esteem problems. ”

    Or some people have had that option to ‘refill’ their esteem with a hookup.

  • Herb

    @MikeC

    Going forward, she has to try to be discerning between the guys who just see her as a hot pump and dump versus the guys who might realistically consider her as a serious girlfriend. IMO, she’ll be asking for more trouble if she shoots for guys with high to very high SMV. If she stays attractive, cultivates good girlfriend qualities, and shoots for realistic guys she shouldn’t have a problem, but it sounds like she has issues to work through.

    Great point…on the SMV I think the key is to be realistic about hers. To just a rather gross metaphor her attractiveness wrapped around her count is like packing fresh ground beef around day old. Both are edible but you do it so people will look at the former to give the latter a chance.

    With a guy of equivalent SMV when all factors (including her number) are put into play she has a huge advantage because she’s probably more attractive than other women with similar SMV. If she’s a 7 in appearance and 6 because of number, a lot of 6 guys will think they hit the jackpot when they first meet and she’s got a lot of time to build a good bond before the number comes out.

  • Tom

    Cooper
    Or some people have had that option to ‘refill’ their esteem with a hookup.
    _________
    Unless they are a troll, most people do have that option, whether they exercise it is another option.

  • Cooper

    Tom

    If you say so. I mustn’t be trying. (and I’m far from a troll)

  • Escoffier

    “Unless they are a troll, most women do have that option, whether they exercise it is another option.”

    FTFY

  • Tom

    Men too have the option, but most guys try to do women out of their league

  • Escoffier

    Uh huh …

  • Charm

    Emileigh is a product of the last 50 years of feminist programming post-Sexual Revolution.

    So was I, Hope, Sassy, Saywhat, Purplesneakers and the other girls here, but we weren’t riding the alpha carousel. Now I know were outliers and all that, but we’ve already established that most women aren’t riding the carousel. No one told me that hooking up was bad. No one. I still didn’t do it. Why? Because I realized that wasn’t who I was. From what I observed at my college, a lot of girls went out and partied, but most of them only did that and most weren’t sleeping around.

    Millions of women are “products of the sexual revolution”. Millions. And they aren’t out there sleeping around and racking up very high numbers. So this is another reason why I feel like she doesn’t deserve that much sympathy. Most girls (from what I observe) are willing to do other stuff to get male attention. Like wearing sexy or more revealing clothing, flirting and teasing guys, dancing provocatively and the like.

    So I think that by Emileigh taking it a step further and sleeping with the men it was an attempt to raise the bar and separate herself from the other girls. “He’ll flirt with all those girls, and find them sexually attractive, but I was the one that went home with him and had his undivided attention for all of 13 mins before he squeezed one out and rolled over.”

    For most girls to get attention from men, especially college aged men all she has to do is be at a healthy weight, dress nicely, smile, smell good and have a pleasant personality. Most guys will find that attractive and she’ll get a lot of attention. So I don’t think this has anything to do with attention from men or the sexual revolution.

    So when Emileigh says “you wont get attention from guys”, I think she meant “you wont get attention from alphas and you wont be popular”. So I agree with the above posters, this shit doesn’t have anything to do with habit. I think that Emileigh was probably very popular with that guys in the party scene. An attractive girl that is DTF would have been on everyones radar and Im sure those guys had no problem validating her mere existence because she was eager to put out. She probably got treated like royalty. She probably got invited to every party and every guy and girl there knew her name. We all know that men love slutty women, they just don’t want to marry them.

    So if anything was a habit, I think that it was the mass amounts of attention and popularity she had with the “in crowd” at her college. So if I was some young alpha at a party damn straight I would have kept Emileigh around. She gave them access to girls just like her. Im sure her friends were all down to put out as well. Female competition and all that.

    So what I think really happened is that college is winding down, and Emileigh is about to graduate and the party will just be over. Im sure she didn’t mind that reputation when it got her a ton of positive reinforcement, but now that everyone has dipped their toe in that pond, shes probably old news, and there are newer girls moving in the replace her. So when she wasn’t that popular anymore, and that void in her self esteem could no longer be filled, she had this “epiphany” that she should probably stop.

    Im just thinking out loud here guys.

  • Herb

    @Susan:

    Can you explain what you mean here? The difference between perception and reality re divorce?

    Yes, sorry I wasn’t clear.

    But if you read the data the manosphere has dug up about the reality of post divorce relationships for women (odds of remarriage, danger to children of bf vs. their father, etc) and then see popular culture views from ELP and such are women (who divorce much more than men) suffering from pluralistic ignorance just as much as Emileigh did with hooking up.

    If the answer there is yes do we have the same opportunity in helping people to choose sticking things out (knowing that those who do tend to report things getting better).

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

      @Herb

      Thanks for clarifying – I agree, that would make an interesting post. Someone said here recently that he came near to divorce, and while news of his separation spread, the women started hitting on him. His wife was taken aback and admitted she was the one getting no offers. They averted divorce. Part of me feels like those EPL women get what they deserve, but I agree it’s best if the divorce can be avoided altogether.

  • Herb

    @Charm:

    “He’ll flirt with all those girls, and find them sexually attractive, but I was the one that went home with him and had his undivided attention for all of 13 mins before he squeezed one out and rolled over.”

    ROFLMPO…

    or I was until I considered that guys that age have 13 minutes of stamina and then I was depressed :)

  • Charm

    or I was until I considered that guys that age have 13 minutes of stamina and then I was depressed

    I was factoring in being intoxicated and being all around selfish since most young cads generally only care about getting off. They dont typically care if the girl does or not. 13 mins of pounding it should be enough time to get er done.

  • Tom

    Not sure women understand it is a competition with the alpha men. They are like little kids, proving who has the most toys or the best bike. (or bragging rights on a particular woman.) why women want these guys attention is beyond me. As an Athlete, I was constantly approached, but to listen to the stories in the locker rooms and dorms was just plain childish. If those women only knew what was being said about them……

  • Charm

    @Tom

    I believe susan has a post that illustrates exactly what is being said about them. You should look it up.

  • Just1X

    @Anacaona

    “When you don’t believe in God you believe in EVERYTHING else…”

    Here we go again, what is it about credulous people?

    No, I just don’t believe in sky-pixies. That’s all that atheism entails. Look it up, it’s very simple.

    You’d be amazed how many (tedious) people have views on ‘what I MUST believe in’ just because I have no desire, or need, for a deity. A lot of people seem very unhappy when they can’t pigeon hole you into a religion, many such people become desperate to assign ‘evil’ (small ‘e’, I’m an atheist remember?) beliefs to you; abortion, communism, amorality, nihilism. Just so they can pigeon hole you as a BAD person.

    My point was that religion could be seen as being socially useful even without believing in any god. The down side is some people assign themselves the god given right to tell everybody else what to do (god told them)…kind of like feminism, come to think of it (just add/remove a god). Then I kind of go cold on the idea of religion.

  • Lokland

    @ Just1X

    Don’t bother.
    The number of times I got myself to explain the difference between atheism and evolution when younger was ridculous, I probably should have charged.
    And by explain I mean screamed at.

  • Just1X

    @Charm

    “For most girls to get attention from men, especially college aged men all she has to do is be at a healthy weight, dress nicely, smile, smell good and have a pleasant personality. Most guys will find that attractive and she’ll get a lot of attention.”

    Sounds good, I hope that that remains the case. I’m not that old, and that sounds familiar. The previous post on numbers was a pleasant surprise, I hope that the numbers were accurate (I have no particular reason to believe, or not).

  • Just1X

    @Lokland,

    yeah, I kind of forgot…my bad.

    I just get peeved when people start assigning beliefs to me.

    Basically, ‘you’ believe what you want as long as you leave me out of it (don’t knock on my door, I will be brusque), just allow me to not-believe what I want. I sure as ‘hell’ am not going to bother to convert ‘you’.

    Have a nice evening

  • Passer_by

    Were I a younger man, assuming I knew all of the facts of her past, she’d have to be celibate for at least a couple years (maybe more) for me to want to start a relationship with her, especially if I was at her college and knew her then. Even then, it would probably bother me. It’s not the fear of cuckolding or unfaithfulness (though perhaps it should be). It’s the idea of giving someone commitment when just up until last week she was lavishing the best of her sexuality on every tom, dick and harry for a song. Her sexual value will never be as high as it was when she was having her fun. It just wouldn’t sit right with me. Not interested in being chumpy chumpasaurus. I imagine some really high count guy might not care much, especially if he was one of the guys whose rotation she was in. So, Tom can feel free to chime in predictably here about my obvious insecurity and lack of “manliness” as he has chosen to define it (which coincidently matches his own behavior).

    @lalady

    “Everyone here that is saying “tough shit” to her is like feminists saying “tough shit” to a man who just got screwed in divorce court despite doing everything he thought he was supposed to do.”

    First of all, this is not the power of the state apparatus doing this to her. It people making personal choices about who they want to be with. Secondly, who told her she was “supposed” to do this? Some feminists? Media culture? Surely not her parents or her teachers growing up. Up until now, the messages to women on this have been far more contradictory and competing than the messages to young men to beta-up and be the dutiful nice guy provider.

    That said, I’m not saying “tough shit”. I hope she finds somebody. I’m saying there are two people in a relationship, and the other person’s feelings and desires count too. Women have always been free to reject men for whatever reason, and they don’t shy away from doing so.

    Besides, Susan is being a bit contradictory here. She has other posts insisting that not many college women are acting this way despite the perception, but this post wants to suggest that this girl’s behavior was a totally predictable and normal reaction to the environment.

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

      @Passer By

      Besides, Susan is being a bit contradictory here. She has other posts insisting that not many college women are acting this way despite the perception, but this post wants to suggest that this girl’s behavior was a totally predictable and normal reaction to the environment.

      I’ve said she’s probably in the top (bottom?) 3% of women re promiscuity. Her behavior isn’t really predictable or normal, in the strict sense of the word. However, her story is typical of other women who just want a boyfriend and wind up being slutty in the pursuit of that. And I do think the culture is complicit. Fortunately, most women are just made to feel like losers by the culture, rather than sluts. FWIW, the culture affects guys too – perfectly healthy, attractive guys feel like losers if they’re not scoring hookups regularly. So….who’s happy? Only the players.

  • Charm

    sky-pixies

    Im stealing that word. Its hilarious.

    Im an atheist too.

    I hope we don’t get into a flame war over religion now.

  • Just1X

    @Charm

    flame war? naaaah.

    Been there, seen it and done it, but it’s kind of pointless, isn’t it?

    There’s no argument that would cause me to believe, and I’m not bothered about de-converting any believers.

    (I thought sky-pixie was pretty old school, but then religion is dead in the UK. Even Gandalf is retiring; http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17399403 )

  • Cooper

    @Passer_by

    Which ‘lack of “manliness”’ do you speaking of?
    The fact that you won’t put up with being a chump?

    I’d like to comment on the “sports locker” talk Tom (#200) was mentioning. I was on the Rugby team throughout High School, the A-team actually. And the team was, of course, stacked with the biggest cads of the school. The ‘locker-room’ chat was a constant competition, of whom has objectified the hottest chick lately.

    I’m with Tom in saying, “why women want these [alphas] attention is beyond me.”
    Anyone is going to be hard-pressed to convince me that beta means a lack of manliness, and that Alpha is epitome of masculinity.

    To me, Alpha means asshole. As Tom said, “They are like little kids, proving who has the most toys or the best bike. (or bragging rights on a particular woman.)”

    I astonishes me to know woman are inherently attracted to such behavoir.
    And ‘betas’ are treated as if defective, as though they lack the essence of masculinity.
    This is simply not the case. We know Alpha, first hand. And it isn’t how I was taught, or wish, to treat women.

  • Charm

    @Cooper

    I think a fair portion of the female population would be very attracted to the alpha-est of alphas, but there are a lot of women who wouldnt. I personally really dislike anyone who would call themselves “alpha” anyway. There is nothing wrong with betas in general. What women dislike is the supplicating beta behavior. Which is why Susan advocates the Greater Beta who is a good mix of beta and alpha qualities. Ill take a greater beta over an alpha anyday.

    @Just1X

    Religion seems dead from my perspective. All of the religious people I know only claim the title and don’t bother practicing or upholding their faith. I dont get it.

  • Passer_By

    @cooper
    “Which ‘lack of “manliness”’ do you speaking of?
    The fact that you won’t put up with being a chump?”

    Was a facetious comment. Tom has been quick to condemn any man who purports to care at all (or, more accurately, to care more than he does) about his partner’s sexual history as being losers who are insecure in their manhood and would not feel that way if they were high value men as he purports to be. Essentially, the typical feminist shaming effort. It’s basically a transparent exercise in bragging.

  • Herb

    @Charm

    I was factoring in being intoxicated and being all around selfish since most young cads generally only care about getting off. They dont typically care if the girl does or not. 13 mins of pounding it should be enough time to get er done.

    You’re only making it worse :) At 21 I would have been happy to hit the big 13.

  • Cooper

    @Charm
    Yeah, I’m aware of the amount of women who don’t necessarily seek anyone who call themselves ‘alpha;’ there are a few here on HUS.
    I was speak about the college scene, and the hookup mentality that Emileigh has experienced.

    @Passer_by
    I guess I didn’t catch that it was facetious.

  • Passer_By

    lol@herb

  • Just1X

    @Charm

    I believe the accepted term is “Churchian”. The belief that you exist on a higher plain of morality because you go to church, no set of beliefs in deity or morals are to be implied, or indeed required; just go to church. (However, we are wandering onto matters Dalrockian, who is currently closed for business.)

    I guess that the spectrum now goes something like:
    Christian – churchian – agnostic – atheist.

  • Jones

    Thanks for the welcome, Susan. I’ve been lurking for a while, and I really like the general message of your articles. I’ve also learned from the conversations in the comments.

    This thread is absurd. It has me very confused. I think it displays some interesting characteristics of group behavior, as well as some of the strange consequences of the culture of the “manosphere.”

    A participant in the hook-up culture wants out, is very upset, and seeks out advice (from Susan, not from you) on how to change her ways. Awesome!…you’d think. But this thread is a very bizarre response.

    My first observation is the narcissism of the comments – most commenters have adopted a “me first” approach here. Any sort of analysis, advice, or broader commentary is subordinated to the primary task, which is shaming the slut, making sure everyone knows you wouldn’t date the slut (who cares?). I get the idea behind that, but – you shame the shameless, not the repentant. So to me that seems like a complete waste of time and energy. It’s also weirdly instinctive and unthinking, like a reflex – in fact, it illustrates the habits of the people commenting on the website.

    Personally, I think attacking individual behavior is pointless – to say nothing of attacking the behavior of individuals who are already on your side. What you need to do is create an alternative culture for people to defect to. And you have to make defection attractive.

    The underlying truth is that much of the “manosphere” consists of damaged men seeking solace in company. Therefore it seems they can ill-afford the enlarged thinking required to create or maintain a genuine alternative culture. I genuinely sympathize with these people. Sadly, these problems will persist unless more capable others take over the task. Susan, I think you’re doing well but you risk ending up with a diminished and isolated audience.

    Let me add some things more generally about this whole “game” approach:

    Every society has its myths, with stock characters whose behavior people discuss, admire, and emulate. In your culture, these myths have baboons and chimpanzees as their central characters. You study the behavior of these animals, treat it as exemplary, and emulate it.

    You forget that you have choices other than to take monkeys as role models. It’s called civilization. There’s not much of it left, but therein lies your only hope. This alpha/beta stuff is ultimately ridiculous. I grant that it is helpful to a lot of people, and has even been helpful to me. But let’s move on to something serious.

    This all goes hand in hand with another thing that has always bothered me, which is that there is very little evidence of any cross-cultural or cross-temporal awareness in any of these discussions. The situation in mainstream 21st-century advanced capitalist white America is taken to somehow speak to the fundamentals of human nature in general. Your culture isn’t a direct product of some underlying human nature. It’s a creature of your own making. You can remake it. Let me point out that this whole conception of the “alpha” has emerged at the same time as America becomes a winner-take-all society, in which a tiny number of people amass great wealth, and with a general breakdown of morals in major sectors of society (in economic as well as social life). It hasn’t always been this way in this country, and it isn’t this way for everyone in the world.

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

      @Jones

      The situation in mainstream 21st-century advanced capitalist white America is taken to somehow speak to the fundamentals of human nature in general. Your culture isn’t a direct product of some underlying human nature. It’s a creature of your own making. You can remake it.

      Bravo, I love this sentiment. That’s really what I’m aiming for, in my own clumsy way. Pluralistic ignorance? Let’s end it by shining the light of truth on all that misconception!

      Let me point out that this whole conception of the “alpha” has emerged at the same time as America becomes a winner-take-all society, in which a tiny number of people amass great wealth, and with a general breakdown of morals in major sectors of society (in economic as well as social life

      Interesting food for thought here, I think you might be onto something. It’s the 1%. We talk about the apex fallacy – 20% of guys getting all the action – but the truth is that there’s a “high alpha” crowd that exceeds that minimal alpha partner count of 15. We keep creating higher and higher levels of….what? Status? Social dominance? Douchebaggery?

  • Charm

    @Just1x

    But they don’t go to church. If you ask if they believe in God, they’ll say yes and thats where their belief begins and ends.

  • Tom

    Cooper
    I think the reason women are attracted to the athletes is the fame, body, other women want them, ect. The women are not privey to the locker room conversations. If they knew what was being said one would think they would pass. As for passerby, I dont think all guys who worry about a womans number are insecure, but if the shoe fits my friend.
    Ive said many times here I get it if a woman doesnt match his moral fiber or his value system. I get that. But for a guy who also has been promiscuous to require that from any prospct is hypocritical, at least

  • Charm

    @Jones

    So you’re saying that because she stopped hooking up she shouldn’t be judged for it?

  • M3

    Welcome to the fray Jones.

    I assume i will see you lining up to take this young lady by the arm and date her and court her in the hopes of marrying her as soon as she figures out how to say no to having sex with random hookups.

    I find your entire comment absurd.

    Most everyone here has done one simple thing. Point out reality. If pointing out personal responsibility for ones actions is shaming, then count me guilty. Most everyone here has mentioned that while they ‘hope’ she can go on to find happiness, none of us men here knowing what we know would roll the bones on this one.

    So the conundrum is, what of the men who don’t know, walking around out there in the matrix, still plugged into the system. Do you suggest that maybe it’s ok for her to go to one of them and fudge the numbers or omit all together to make life easier for her?

    Many people are repentant for many things they wish they could take back. Their repentance does not grant them the right to tell other people what they should think about what she’s done and if they can accept it.

    You speak of Game as myth, the alpha/beta paradigm is if it’s illusion. You whitewash all the reasons why men are turning to these systems, emulating who they emulate. Feminism and women’s choices drove them there. It’s accepted on this forum that game is a good thing when used for personal development and attraction triggers.

    You’re a man in feminist clothing, a white knight, and perhaps a mangina.

  • Just1X

    @Jones

    that’s all lovely stuff about the manosphere, but this isn’t the manosphere. But don’t feel bad the SPLC balls’d it up as well.

    I believe HUS overlaps the manosphere somewhat, but can you see much talk about men’s rights here?

    Why are you tradcons / socons / whatever-you-call-yourself always so keen to tell everyone else what they should be doing / where they’re going wrong? It’s Susan’s blog, you’re a guest and you’re being rude.

    exhibit ‘A’
    “In your culture, these myths have baboons and chimpanzees as their central characters. You study the behavior of these animals, treat it as exemplary, and emulate it.”

    Real manosphere?
    http://www.avoiceformen.com/
    http://www.manwomanmyth.com/
    http://www.angryharry.com/
    You’ll get your arse handed to you

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

    Here we go again, what is it about credulous people?

    I didn’t meant you. I mean people in general terms what is about atheists that always think they are getting attacked by the credulous? ;)

  • Just1X

    @Charm

    Christian – practising churchian – lapsed churchian – agnostic – atheist ??

    late here – I’m off Cheers

  • Lokland

    “I didn’t meant you. I mean people in general terms what is about atheists that always think they are getting attacked by the credulous? ”

    For merely answering the question “Which fait are you?”

    I have been told to burn in hell/convert or die/the devil wants to eat me exactly 14 times.

    Not all religous ppl are bad but the ones who are kinda outshine the memories of those who are not.

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

    For merely answering the question “Which fait are you?”

    First the word is faith. Second I was raised catholic. Third if you are rubbing in their faces how better than they you are because you are not religious and they are just ignorant opium smokers like many atheists I know do, sometimes with harsh words sometimes condescending, they might respond with similar thoughts. As you can see atheists can be as fanatics as religious people. Not all of them Hubby is Agnostic but there is a branch of Atheists that hate the living crap out of anything religious and spent insane amounts of time trying to proof how evil and ignorant all of us are like JustXI said, you don’t need God to monopolize a hateful ideology (feminism) but in the other way around believing in God doesn’t make you a hater.
    I also got my fare share you are going to hell and you are ignorant believer from both sides I try to judge the person and not the ideology unless there is undeniable proof that the ideology itself cause more harm than good, YMMV.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    Wilson refers here to the success colleges have had in curbing binge drinking by exposing pluralistic ignorance: not nearly as many kids are getting wasted as you think, and not nearly as many kids want to get wasted as you think.

    Success? Could’ve fooled me. My experience at every college I’ve either attended or visited is that at least 80% of the student population goes out and gets drunk on a regular basis. Maybe they just mean that people aren’t passing out, blacking out, and puking everywhere as much as they used to?

    My experience has closely matched OTC’s:

    Maybe there are some exclusive parties, but that’s not the whole scene – do you really think the betas just sat home studying every night? I went to hundreds of parties, even ran my own. Hookups were not the focus, but a happy by-product of fun, as it should be.

    Most schools I’ve been to, everybody parties everywhere. I’ve never really noticed any kind of exclusivity, but I guess I haven’t been to many of the elite schools either.

    In the height of my partying days, I was going out partying it up 3-5 days a week. I didn’t do it to fit in. I didn’t do it for validation. I did it because it was fun. And the people I did it with thought it was fun. And plenty of us were smart enough to do it in enough moderation that it didn’t lead to bad consequences or decisions.

    Susan, I know one of the main principles you’ve always preached is that the biggest reason college students drink is so they can have the courage to hook up. But I have to respectfully say that couldn’t be farther from the truth in my experience. For most college students partying is a goal and an end in and of itself.

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

      @Jimmy Hendricks

      Susan, I know one of the main principles you’ve always preached is that the biggest reason college students drink is so they can have the courage to hook up.

      No, that’s not quite right. It’s not the biggest reason students drink. But drinking is often necessary to facilitate hooking up. Students who have a reasonable expectation of hooking up, like Emileigh I imagine, make a point of getting very lubricated as the evening progresses to make use of liquid courage.

      There’s plenty of drinking that goes on at college even in single sex activities.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    There are girls out there who still participate in things like Senior Week, bar nights, parties etc. that don’t get shit faced at every opportunity and never go home with a guy. That should be the end goal for Emileigh, to live life, but on her own terms, not terms dictated by the actions of those around her.

    Absolutely. I’ve known plenty through the years.

    For most girls to get attention from men, especially college aged men all she has to do is be at a healthy weight, dress nicely, smile, smell good and have a pleasant personality. Most guys will find that attractive and she’ll get a lot of attention. So I don’t think this has anything to do with attention from men or the sexual revolution.

    Absolutely. I’d venture to say 75% of girls at both schools I went to were 6s or above.

  • Passer_By

    @tom
    “But for a guy who also has been promiscuous to require that from any prospct is hypocritical, at least”

    No argument there. It just seems that your past comments went a lot further than that. Maybe you’ve mellowed.

  • Lokland

    @ Ana

    “First the word is faith. Second I was raised catholic. Third if you are rubbing in their faces how better than they you are because you are not religious and they are just ignorant opium smokers like many atheists I know do, sometimes with harsh words sometimes condescending, they might respond with similar thoughts. ”

    I’ll get my spell check running.
    Congrats so was I.

    Last, thx for all the wonderful assumptions.

    Atheists are drug addicts , atheists are rubbing other peoples faces in their non-religous life (not me).

    Someone asked me when I was at work if I believed in Jesus and I said no and was told to go to hell. 14 times over 3 years. I was a kid mopping floors for 8 bucks an hour.

    Again, most people who believe in God are very good and normal ppl. I never said otherwise. As are most atheists.

    Your own bias might say otherwise but don’t take it out on me I meant you no offense.

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

    Your own bias might say otherwise but don’t take it out on me

    I was answering to JustiX and YOU took it on you to answer. And I also said many.

  • Lokland

    @ Ana

    I don’t know what I said to offend you.
    I actualy added in extra neutral statements to avoid this conundrum.

    Anyways, I’m sorry.

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

    I don’t know what I said to offend you.
    I actualy added in extra neutral statements to avoid this conundrum.

    Anyways, I’m sorry.

    I’m not offended. You saw a comment about atheists not directed at you and decided to chime in, later adding that you don’t believe all religious people are the same but then adding your “sad encounter” with one. I added my personal experience as a counter example. I’m calling you out in the idea that you are no biased. You so are.

  • Just1X

    Hi Ana,

    I am not trying to start an argument with this comment.

    But I believe that English isn’t your first language (I speak about 1.5 languages, so you are doing better than me). I used a wordplay earlier that a lot of native English speakers might have missed. I don’t think that you detected it (I could be wrong), but I do NOT want to cause you problems in real life.

    “Credulous” was the (naughty – mea culpa, mea maxima culpa) word I played with. I don’t want you using that in real life and causing yourself problems – credulous doesn’t mean what it looks like it means; it doesn’t just mean ‘believer’:

    credulous [ˈkrɛdjʊləs]
    adj
    1. tending to believe something on little evidence
    2. arising from or characterized by credulity credulous beliefs
    [from Latin crēdulus, from crēdere to believe]
    credulously adv
    credulousness n

    So:
    a) please don’t take offense, it was a little joke not an argument starter.
    b) be careful how you use it
    c) have a nice evening
    d) if you already knew – don’t bother reading this comment.

    e) back off to bed – good night

  • Lokland

    @ Ana

    My example was in direct answer to your question.

    “what is about atheists that always think they are getting attacked by the credulous? ”

    Well 14 times…..

    Now see my point for bringing it up.

    As I said, I think 99.9% of people are good people regardless of their belief system.
    Its the actions of that .1% that make “atheists think they are getting attacked by the credulous?”

    I felt real reasoning from example was better than a general b/c statement. As for your statement on atheists, it seemed purely spiteful and totally out of context. Considering you thought I was throwing a dig your way it seems more reasonable.

    Last, you can ask this question of multiple people and you will get much the same reasoning for why we feel we are under attack.

  • Lokland

    I think to put it to another example.

    Its much the same as the SMP. It appears everyone is hooking up therefore everyone is.

    It appears I’m getting …. therefore they all are.

    Its not true but the reasoning and logical flow of that argument can seem very strong if you don’t see the fallacy in it.

  • Mike M.

    Partying depends on the major. It’s rare among STEM majors, especially engineering students. The workload is too heavy.

  • http://my-s-word.blogspot.com/ Singlicious

    @ Jones (comment #217): Amen.

    I’m confused about the “slut-shaming” concept. I think I’m out of the loop on this. Admittedly, I’m over 40, so maybe that explains it. But to me, “slut” is an inherently negative term. It’s a term that doesn’t have an obvious male counterpart, viz. man-whore (since an unspecified whore would of course be female). I generally don’t believe in shaming, but if hooking up is objectionable, it should be objectionable for both sexes. Here’s an example of a comment I don’t get (from #173):

    “The natural consequences of slutty behavior is damage to marriages, lack of marriage, long term relationships, diseases, abortions, bastards/babies, and personal dignity. There is a cost that is largely bore to women, but men are affected as well. To be actually hold women responsible is to make them pay the costs (no welfare and no child support payments from fathers, removal of custody rights).

    The way to mitigate is to prevent casual sex. Calling women sluts via slut shaming is one technique, but NOT used. This is left on the table.”

    It seems to me women are shamed for sleeping around. But that won’t reduce casual sex much as long as men are not only not shamed but lauded for doing the same thing. It takes two to make a baby, after all.

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

    @JustXI
    Is all good credulo and creyente are usually interchangeable in Spanish for people of faith but also means credulous on the sense you mention, depends on the context, since you used it for my own statement so I though the terms were interchangeable too in English. My bad totally, thanks for the correction I rarely mention religion in English but just in case I will remember this is not the same word.

    My example was in direct answer to your question.

    Which was the same question JustIX did and I turned around. Why me and not him if you are not biased either way?

    Well 14 times…..

    Now see my point for bringing it up.

    So far I haven’t been part of anyone mentioning religion here in the circle of people that are atheists or agnostics were “ignorant believers/kool aid drinkers” had not been used in a despective way….see my point for answering?

    I felt real reasoning from example was better than a general b/c statement.

    Same here.

    Last, you can ask this question of multiple people and you will get much the same reasoning for why we feel we are under attack.

    Now you know the other side of the argument for us believers.

  • Lokland

    @ Ana

    “Which was the same question JustIX did and I turned around. Why me and not him if you are not biased either way?”

    I didn’t claim not to be biased. (And if I did it was a lie!!!!!! Also if you could point it out so I can take note of my own idiocy it would be appreciated.) Of course I’m biased, I have a team and I answer questions asked of my team. Biased, yes. Bad, no.

    As for the rest of your argument, cool beans.

    “Now you know the other side of the argument for us believers.”

    Curious, how did I imply that I did not know?

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

    (And if I did it was a lie!!!!!! Also if you could point it out so I can take note of my own idiocy it would be appreciated.)

    Your own bias might say otherwise but don’t take it out on me I meant you no offense.

    It seems that you assumed that my answer came from bias, which it does, but that yours came from….I have no idea actually, this pseudo-argument started with JustIX and he and I pretty much closed it. No idea why you felt the need to comment. Charm also talked to him without paying attention to my statement so again I have no idea what was the point of you focusing on my answer to JustXI.

    Curious, how did I imply that I did not know?

    You only mentioned atheists attacks, why not “All ideologies are under attack from each other” if you think believers are also under attack from atheists?

  • Charm

    It seems to me women are shamed for sleeping around. But that won’t reduce casual sex much as long as men are not only not shamed but lauded for doing the same thing. It takes two to make a baby, after all.

    First off, women hold the keys to the gate. They determine whether or not someone gets access to their body. Their body is the most valuable thing that they possess. Period. If a woman discounts her sexuality and body by giving it away freely then she is lowering her value. Just like women value men for their status and even their stature. If a man doesn’t have a job, cant make money, cant provide and isn’t desirable to other women then he too is low value.

    We can keep playing the “its not fair game” but thats the way it is. When it comes to promiscuity women get the sharp end of the sword. They always have and always will. Thing is, women of the past knew that, so they kept their legs closed. For a woman to sleep with 20 men all she has to do is have a vagina, be decently attractive, and be willing to put out. For a man to sleep with 20 women he has to be in good shape, be able to dominate a room, have the interest of other women, respect of other men, have some sort of status and social proof and be able to turn the key to that womans lock in order to have sex with her. Thats a lot of work, no?

    Its seems that sluts want the same pat of the back as cads, yet they don’t even do a quarter of the work. Its not impressive for a girl to sleep around. It shows she used her vagina as a bargaining chip. She gave the milk away for free to 20 guys and now she wants some guy to come along and buy the whole cow for $500. Aint gonna happen. If she gave it away free to everyone else, then he wants it for free too.

    I think that people don’t slut shame openly anymore. Its gone underground with everything else. Sure, there are men who say they wouldnt care, but watch their behavior and see how many of them are shacking up with higher count girls. Its like all the men who think women should be able to be as fat as they want and yet they aren’t jumping in line to date any of these fat princesses.

    So the whole “the double standard no longer exists” meme is a fake lure. If you’re stupid enough to latch on to it, you’re going to get a hell of a surprise.

  • Lokland

    @ Ana

    I had the same question, in regards to your original staement, as Just1X but he beat me to it.

    “You only mentioned atheists attacks, why not “All ideologies are under attack from each other” if you think believers are also under attack from atheists?”

    For the same reason I don’t mention that the sun rises in the morning every time I wake up.

    As for talking to Charm/Just1X, the convo would have been, I agree. Me too, ohh really me too. It doesn’t make for interesting conversation.

    As for this convo, pardon me for interrupting your day by speaking to you.

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

    As for this convo, pardon me for interrupting your day by speaking to you.

    You are forgiven :p
    Seriously, it just seemed so random and unnecessary that I had to ask.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Singlicious,

    Charm is right about women being the gatekeepers of sex. I don’t think we should applaud men for scoring with a ton of women (I’m all for shaming man-whores if you want), but I also think we need to look more toward women to curb the easy access.

    A lot of the criticisms here, though harsh, are meant to illustrate the first part of what Mike C said beautifully somewhere up above: you can’t change your destination overnight, but you can change your direction.

    I think letting Emileigh know that she can’t just erase the past is valid. That said, I think it’s more beneficial to focus on the second part of what Mike said, to support her in her attempt to change her direction–and in that regard, I think you, Sue, and Wudang provided some great advice.

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

    @Charm
    “For a man to sleep with 20 women he has to be in good shape, be able to dominate a room, have the interest of other women, respect of other men, have some sort of status and social proof and be able to turn the key to that womans lock in order to have sex with her.”

    Or just have a lot of money? : )

    I understand your points and recognize that the SDS concept does exist. It’s also used to rhetorically justify male promiscuity, even though most guys aren’t promiscuous. I’m certainly not someone who’d pat a guy on the back because he scored with X number of women. I mean, if you knew exactly how some guys go about sleeping around, and the STD rates they tend to have, that alone takes a lot of luster off the “stud” crown.

  • Lokland

    @ Ana

    I’m a scientist. I really only have two default functions when I see something interesting.
    1. Investigate
    2. Run and get my lab coat and then investigate.

    Option 2 usually involves acid.

  • Lokland

    @ MegaMan

    How to justify male promiscutiy as wrong/bad?

    We can’t do it the same way we do women. Men don’t like it therefore its bad for relationships sums up the enitre argument.

    We can’t do the same thing for men (to a degree) because women don’t find it a turn-off (to a degree).

    The best option is to do it in other ways:
    - bad satisfaction in relationships
    - higher chance of infidelity from both partners etc.

    Simply saying its bad for men won’t appear logical the same way it does for women. Fair, no but it is the nature of the beast.

  • Charm

    @Megaman

    Oh I agree. You know I don’t like the cads. But I said that exact thing to a cad once on why men got away with it and he thought about it for a second and agreed. He recalled having to cultivate his skills with women over the years to get good at getting laid. It didn’t happen over night. Though, he was blessed with natural game and figured most of it out on his own.

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

    @Lokland
    “Simply saying its bad for men won’t appear logical the same way it does for women. Fair, no but it is the nature of the beast.”

    Well, given the innate differences between men and women, we’ll never get to a single standard. But I’ve always liked the idea of a “minimum” standard of behavior, for both sexes.

    I’m just thinking off the top of my head, but… if you reduce another human being to his or her sexual utility, and that’s all he or she is worth to you for a brief period of time, then at best you’re being selfish? As opposed to having a conscience and considering the other person’s feelings before doing the deed.

  • Malia

    It seems to me women are shamed for sleeping around. But that won’t reduce casual sex much as long as men are not only not shamed but lauded for doing the same thing. It takes two to make a baby, after all.

    That’s because for most of the commenters it’s not about positive change, it’s about vengeance and punishment. There’s also some attempt to thin the herd, so to speak.

    I think the real culture shock will be when the younger girls get older and ready to marry and they find out that their suitable mates are not interested in marrying AT ALL. Sluts or low partner count, they just aren’t going to marry, commit and put resources at risk, period. It will put this whole slut vs good girl under a different context when both end up in the same place (unmarried when they want to be married), but one party believes they did “everything right”.

    That’s just where it’s headed, and they’re helping it get there.

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

      @Malia

      Sluts or low partner count, they just aren’t going to marry, commit and put resources at risk, period. It will put this whole slut vs good girl under a different context when both end up in the same place (unmarried when they want to be married), but one party believes they did “everything right”.

      That’s just where it’s headed, and they’re helping it get there.

      Interesting and depressing. Why do you think so?

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

    @SW
    “We keep creating higher and higher levels of….what? Status? Social dominance? Douchebaggery?”

    Ego-driven sociopathy?

    I say that as a proud supporter of the capitalist mode of production. I don’t think it’s the 1% that’s caused these vast social changes since the 1960s. But greed is certainly not always good.

  • Lokland

    @ MM

    I would say its good but to “fluffy” for my tastes.
    I’d word it in a more straightforward manner but I tend to write/read literally.

    So;

    Don’t fuck someone if your only using them for sex. (My interpretation of your idea.)

    Makes way more sense to me. However that still puts the emphasis of blame on men because women don’t tend to do this. Sex for them is a tool to attempt relationships.

    Something along the lines of;

    Don’t fuck someone if your only using them to try and get what you want and disregarding their motives.

    covers the selfish bit but is not entirely selfless either. AKA both parties get one operating criterion that allows them both to pursue their goals while not preventing others from achieving theirs.
    (Totally unnatural btw but humans are greater than their hind brains.)

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

    @Lokland

    Yeah, sex has a selfish aspect to it, but that’s a far cry from viewing other people as disposable. As someone with a degree in economics, I don’t think you can apply utilitarian principles like that to human emotions. Love and sex aren’t “free markets” IMO. I recall Marx writing about commodity fetishism (no pun intended) in regards to commerce. I think the hookup scene has kind of pushed people in that direction. Think about it this way: sex has been reduced to a drunken handshake with some stranger you may not even like. If that’s not cheapening a very intimate part of human behavior, I don’t know what is.

  • SayWhaat

    I think that people don’t slut shame openly anymore. Its gone underground with everything else. Sure, there are men who say they wouldnt care, but watch their behavior and see how many of them are shacking up with higher count girls.

    I think it’s too early to say this. Plenty of guys fall in love with a girl, find out about her high-count past, and force themselves to get over it. One of my best friends has a count of 20+ and she has no shortage of beta guys who want to be her boyfriend. I’m friends with one of her exes, too; he’s a really cute greater beta. (His brother is a Ford model, if that gives you any indication as to the family’s looks.) So I don’t know if we can say that these guys aren’t willing to wife up the sluts. Certainly the manosphere won’t, but as another commenter correctly noted, the majority of the manosphere is comprised of damaged men, and how good of a relationship bet are those men anyway?

  • SayWhaat

    I think that people should also back off on the judgment of Emileigh. She has recognized the problem and wants to change, and we should be supportive of that.

    I have a lot of sympathy for girls with majorly troubled pasts. My best friend with the 20+ count has a similar story. That can really cause a number on one’s psyche, and would be a huge impetus behind not wanting to be alone, and wanting a loving relationship. I don’t consider these girls to be “true sluts”, to borrow Anacaona’s terminology. I think they can change. My best friend is a model example of that, and I think Emileigh should do what my friend did, which was:

    - a period of celibacy; no dating during this time
    - when dating, abstaining from sex unless and until exclusivity
    - if/when asked about the number, acknowledge the mistakes made as well as the role a troubled background would have played into those choices

    I think Emileigh can still find a guy to her liking. I wish her the best.

  • SayWhaat

    WarmWoman, I hope you’re still reading and I hope you return. If not, I’d like to stay in touch with you. I think you’ve added a lot to the conversations we’ve been having here.

  • Charm

    @Saywhaat

    I waiting for that to be true for a very average looking girl. We all know the same will not apply. If a girl is hot then she can do whatever the hell she wants. She can sleep with 50 people in a row and someone will want to date her. But I did notice how you said “forced himself to get over it”. This implies that there is an automatic negative reaction to it. That negative reaction exists for a reason. Also once feelings are established most people aren’t willing to walk away which is why the sex talk should happen relatively early. Sure, a person can get over something now, but when it resurfaces later on during times of stress, I wonder how they deal with it. I think Jason comment about meeting his gfs ex is a good illustration about what happens when the shit resurfaces. Its easy to deal with a partner count of 20 as long as you dont run into them. But Im sure if you’re faced with shit eating grins of guys who “got their first” you’re going to be rethinking your acceptance of it.

    I don’t think the men in the manosphere are “damaged”. Some surly are but a lot of them just simply got screwed over. Im sure there are a lot of guys out there just like them feeling the exact same way but not realizing the truth of it all. I cant tell you how many guys I know that absolute hate being in a relationship with the girls they are dating but think that the behavior is “normal” because all their friends are putting up with the same shitty treatment.

  • SayWhaat

    Charm,

    But I did notice how you said “forced himself to get over it”. This implies that there is an automatic negative reaction to it. That negative reaction exists for a reason.

    Of course. And as with slut-shaming, that reason has been forced underground. Which is why the guy will “get over it”.

    Also once feelings are established most people aren’t willing to walk away which is why the sex talk should happen relatively early.

    But in the case of these girls, it’s likely that the sex happened before feelings were even established, no? So the guys know that the girls they’re dating aren’t angels…but they date them anyway. The shit can resurface later on, but they’ll still get over it.

    But Im sure if you’re faced with shit eating grins of guys who “got their first” you’re going to be rethinking your acceptance of it.

    This made me lol. There was only one guy who even cared to “get there first” with me. Haha.

    I don’t think the men in the manosphere are “damaged”. Some surly are but a lot of them just simply got screwed over.

    And after getting screwed over…they became damaged. And embarked on a vicious cycle of damaging.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    WarmWoman, I hope you’re still reading and I hope you return. If not, I’d like to stay in touch with you. I think you’ve added a lot to the conversations we’ve been having here.

    +1. I like WarmWoman a lot.

    On another note, has anyone else noticed how sweet Saywhaat has become since she started getting some?

  • SayWhaat

    On another note, has anyone else noticed how sweet Saywhaat has become since she started getting some?

    You’re speaking too soon. I gave Ken Gailbraith a real verbal thrashing over at the forum.

  • SayWhaat

    (Not that I’m proud of it… : /)

  • Jesus Mahoney

    So I don’t know if we can say that these guys aren’t willing to wife up the sluts. Certainly the manosphere won’t, but as another commenter correctly noted, the majority of the manosphere is comprised of damaged men, and how good of a relationship bet are those men anyway?

    Damaged sounds harsh–how about hurt? Also, while I agree that some guys will overlook a slutty past, I don’t think it’s fair to suggest that only “damaged” guys would have an issue with it.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    You’re speaking too soon. I gave Ken Gailbraith a real verbal thrashing over at the forum.

    lol, I saw. I out-thrashed you though, I think.

  • Charm

    @Saywhaat

    Well if the relationship started with a hookup and the guy has the nerve to be shocked that shes done it before then he’s a certified fool. Absolutely. Thats just stupid. Sure, it happens sometimes, but most of the time they person has done it before.

    I also wasn’t taking all the gamers in the manosphere into account. Lol, I think its because Im getting so used to HUS and all the committed guys here that came back from the dark side or who never went there in the first place.

    As for the gamers, yea I think a lot of them are very damaged. I sort of feel bad for them. They’ve seemed to have given up (at such young ages too). Thankfully a lot of those guys don’t frequent this site and none of them have given Emileigh advice because they are the last ones that should be talking.

    There was only one guy who even cared to “get there first” with me. Haha.

    And so I’ve heard. Good for you.

  • SayWhaat

    Also, while I agree that some guys will overlook a slutty past, I don’t think it’s fair to suggest that only “damaged” guys would have an issue with it.

    Sorry, that’s not what I meant to imply. What I was trying to say was that there are more guys than you would think who would be willing to overlook that kind of indiscriminate behavior — especially if pluralistic ignorance has everyone convinced that kind of behavior is the norm.

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

      @SayWhaat

      . What I was trying to say was that there are more guys than you would think who would be willing to overlook that kind of indiscriminate behavior — especially if pluralistic ignorance has everyone convinced that kind of behavior is the norm.

      Great point about PI – I didn’t think of that, but you’re right, people are likely to judge less if they perceive the behavior as common. They might even judge themselves as losers, and the promiscuous girl as successful – kind of upside down social proof. I know one young man who was so happy to become the latest crush of the school’s most promiscuous girl – he said, “She’s so hot, she’s the one that everyone wants to get with!” She took his V card and it only lasted a summer, but he was seriously into it.

  • Charm

    (Not that I’m proud of it… : /)

    I was. He deserved it.

  • Chris_in_CA

    @SayWhaat

    “So I don’t know if we can say that these guys aren’t willing to wife up the sluts. Certainly the manosphere won’t, but as another commenter correctly noted, the majority of the manosphere is comprised of damaged men, and how good of a relationship bet are those men anyway?”

    Laughably wrongheaded (seriously, I laughed aloud).

    @Charm

    “I don’t think the men in the manosphere are “damaged”. Some surly are but a lot of them just simply got screwed over. I’m sure there are a lot of guys out there just like them feeling the exact same way but not realizing the truth of it all. I cant tell you how many guys I know that absolute hate being in a relationship with the girls they are dating but think that the behavior is “normal” because all their friends are putting up with the same shitty treatment.”

    Wiser.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Chris_in_CA

    Good thing you aren’t looking for a relationship, then.

  • Lokland

    @MM

    “Economics =/= sex and love”

    Sex is a selfish act. Relationships require mutal selflessness.
    Approaching sex from a selfish POV predisposes a selfish relationship.

    Therefore in that regard. Both parties have to give-take to create a relationship. Women give sex, men give REAL commitment. However that requires being somewhat economical in making sure the exchange is even.

    The problem with the SMP is that everyone thinks their investor extrodinaire and can invest $0 and get 10000% return. Men don’t give commitment but want sex. Women don’t give sex (to

  • Chris_in_CA

    Immediate ad hominem attack. This day just gets better and better!

  • Lokland

    Women don’t give sex (the good/normal girls here, not the sluts) but expect 100% commitment.

    I feel like most succesful relationships that I see have started off somewhere in the middle.

    The scarcity mentality on both sides of the field is disturibing.

    Note: I’m really tired so everything I jsut typed might make absolutely no sense and I’ll adjust tommorow if need be.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    You’ve convinced me there is no real problem witht he SMP just the perception of it.
    Expose the pluralistic ignorance of it and I think everyones lives (except female sluts) improve drastically.

    That guy who thinks he’s a loser for not getting laid by some rando every weekend doesn’t have to feel like shit.

    The very concept is foreign to the mindset I was force-fed.

    If its fixed a few young guys won’t be as bitter as I am.
    That sounds really good.

    @ Malia, Susan

    Vengeance feels good. The very idea of that makes my evil-bitter half happy. That doesn’t make it right.

    Anyway I am also very curious on Malia’s proposed trajectory for society as well.

  • Charm

    You’ve convinced me there is no real problem witht he SMP just the perception of it.
    Expose the pluralistic ignorance of it and I think everyones lives (except female sluts) improve drastically.

    Thats probably the answer to all of it. Seriously.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Chris,

    Immediate ad hominem attack. This day just gets better and better!

    You’re annoying.

    That makes 2 ad hominem attacks.

  • Damaged_Manosphere_Guy

    “Immediate ad hominem attack. This day just gets better and better!”

    Yeah, typical female emotional stupid answer.

  • SayWhaat

    ^

    hahaha

  • Chris_in_CA

    Oh! Oh, my poor damaged heart!

    Heh. So, anyway.

    It appears there’s been a lot of good advice and a lot of farce thrown around in this discussion. I do hope Emileigh shows up to read it. If nothing else, she learns a sobering lesson about what feminism has wrought in her life and the lives of many others.

    And maybe, juuust maybe, she’ll learn a bit about the reasons men are leaving the SMP. Understanding is always a good thing.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Chris,

    I don’t dislike you. I don’t think I dislike anyone here with the exception of Rollo. I don’t even dislike Escoffier and he basically called me an egomaniac.

    But your attitude is so repellent it drives me nuts. I would be very wary of a relationship with a woman who had a promiscuous past, but god, give the girl a bit of compassion. Here’s what you wrote:

    If nothing else, she learns a sobering lesson about what feminism has wrought in her life and the lives of many others.

    And maybe, juuust maybe, she’ll learn a bit about the reasons men are leaving the SMP. Understanding is always a good thing.

    All you hope for this girl is that she understands why she fucked up so badly… That, and you hope she understands your reasons for leaving the SMP. You don’t give a shit if she learns to make better, healthier choices; you don’t give a shit if she learns to find a way to be happy in her life; and you don’t even give a shit if she learns how to be in a happy, mutually beneficial relationship with a decent man. All you care about is you.

    You are such a toxic person. You are the only reason you’ve failed in the SMP. It’s all on you. It has nothing to do with sluts. Women don’t like you because you hate them.

    I have nothing against MRAs or even MGTOW. Actually, I happen to like and respect Just1X quite a bit. But you… you’re like a nuclear meltdown, spewing radioactive waste in every direction.

  • http://my-s-word.blogspot.com/ Singlicious

    @Malia (comment #253):

    “That’s because for most of the commenters it’s not about positive change, it’s about vengeance and punishment. There’s also some attempt to thin the herd, so to speak.”

    Why? I feel naive asking, but I don’t get it. What’s the stake in punishing? And what herd are we talking about?

    “I think the real culture shock will be when the younger girls get older and ready to marry and they find out that their suitable mates are not interested in marrying AT ALL. Sluts or low partner count, they just aren’t going to marry, commit and put resources at risk, period.”

    Very interesting. Why do you think that? And do you think women will still want to get married? There’s currently the programming to want that (in the U.S., much less so in France, for example). I suspect most women will continue to want commitment, but I wonder if marriage will become less important. My mother’s view, FWIW, is that women have a lot to lose in marriage, sometimes more than men.

  • purplesneakers

    I agree with SayWhaat. It’s surprising how accepting my peers are of slutty and whorish behavior, at least publicly. Including guys. I actually got into a debate with a guy (early 20′s) recently about the Duke ‘fuck list’–guess which one of us was arguing that it was ‘empowering’? Hint: it wasn’t me. And this is an attractive, professional guy.

  • Passer_By

    @Mahoney
    “You don’t give a shit if she learns to make better, healthier choices; you don’t give a shit if she learns to find a way to be happy in her life; and you don’t even give a shit if she learns how to be in a happy, mutually beneficial relationship with a decent man. All you care about is you.”

    Well, to be fair, I see nothing to indicate that she would genuinely give a shit whether he finds happiness either.

  • Charm

    @Passer_by

    Lol.

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

      @Passer_by

      Lol.

      I think we all take Passer By for granted. He shares more genuinely funny remarks than anyone else, and he often successfully diffuses tension with his wit.

      So thanks to Passer By for all the LOLs.

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

    My mother’s view, FWIW, is that women have a lot to lose in marriage, sometimes more than men.

    Ohh boy. This is the most ignorant statement ever. Legally speaking a woman can cheat on her husband and walk away with half the assets, move him her new boyfriend in the house her husband paid for, get alimony and still cut the kids from the husband life, no consequences whatsoever. What can be worse than that?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Passer by,

    lol. We need to get Emileigh here so we can ask her advice to help Chris.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I’m with Ana. Seems to me that the man risks losing more in a marriage. There’s also the fact that the man’s probably going to hit his peak SMV during the marriage, while, let’s face it, the woman’s is going to start dropping after her mid-twenties.

    Still plan on getting married, but from an objective POV, it seems the man antes up as much or more in a marriage.

  • Cooper

    “My mother’s view, FWIW, is that women have a lot to lose in marriage, sometimes more than men.”

    smh

  • Charm

    “My mother’s view, FWIW, is that women have a lot to lose in marriage, sometimes more than men.”

    I was gonna make a sexist comment about this, but decided to hold my tongue. But I agree with Cooper, Lol. It is funny though.

  • Charm

    @Jesus

    It depends on the race of the woman. I know Asians age like every 20 years (or so it seems), but white women hit their late 20s and plunge. Thats what I think about when Im walking through campus and I see all these cute little white girls in the sun trying to get their tan on. Little do they know that its gonna catch up with them in the worse way.

  • Cooper

    @charm

    hahah, ditto.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Charm,

    Yea, I’ve heard girls speak enviously about the seeming agelessness of Asian women. I’ve also heard people say that black women age better. Idk. I never noticed a real difference. Girls who go tanning a lot are definitely screwing themselves in the long term though. Definitely.

  • Charm

    @Jesus

    Yes, women of color definitely age better. Asians do because they make a conscious effort to stay the hell out of the sun. I cant tell you how many of them I see running around with umbrellas and hiding under trees to avoid the sun. White women don’t seems to be that conscious of their aging it seems. They don’t get with the program until its too late. I think its because most races of men will continue to prefer white women regardless of how they age.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    @Susan
    In that case I stand corrected. Thanks for clearing that up.

  • purplesneakers

    re: aging of different races. Asians also tend to have more fat on their faces, and wider faces with more prominent cheekbones (and, ridiculously, in plastic surgery for asians, this is one of the things they try to get rid of!), which lend to a more youthful appearance. But more importantly, traditional Asian women don’t smoke or drink, and definitely not binge drink, ever.

    My mom (indian, not east asian) has incredible cheekbones and even now, in her 50′s, her co-workers try to set her up with guys, forgetting that she’s married. She gets asked “how old were you when you had kids, 13?!?” when people find out she has two kids in their twenties. I can only hope I age so well!

    As for most races of men preferring white women, that hasn’t been my experience.

  • VD

    My point was that religion could be seen as being socially useful even without believing in any god. The down side is some people assign themselves the god given right to tell everybody else what to do (god told them)…kind of like feminism, come to think of it (just add/remove a god). Then I kind of go cold on the idea of religion.

    That thought was old when Seneca the Younger was expressing it in the early days of Augustan rule. And Voltaire. And Marx. Only the New Atheists are historically stupid enough to believe that Shiny Sexy Sciency Seculatopia is a genuine possibility. The reality is that it is necessary even if you don’t believe in it.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Only the New Atheists are historically stupid enough to believe that Shiny Sexy Sciency Seculatopia is a genuine possibility. The reality is that it is necessary even if you don’t believe in it.

    If by “it” you mean religion, and if by “religion” you mean a shared set of values, beliefs, and customs, then I agree.

  • Herb

    @Susan

    Great point about PI – I didn’t think of that, but you’re right, people are likely to judge less if they perceive the behavior as common. They might even judge themselves as losers, and the promiscuous girl as successful – kind of upside down social proof.

    While I agree PI is the weak point of hookup culture attacking it at college is too late. As early as the early 80s the first signs of hookup culture as an idea were being marketing to HS students. I remember seeing Risky Business as a high school sophomore when it came out and noticing one of the lines Tom Cruise used to sell prostitution to HS boys was “college girls can smell inexperience”. Coming just before AIDS blew out it was taking a riff on the, very common in popular culture, ethos of the one night stand (last example I can think of in pop culture where the post-college ONS was assumed was “About Last Night” in 1987).

    I know I had absorbed enough “family friendly” pop culture about ONS in the 70s and early 80s to think I was a loser for being a virgin when I hit college and fixed that during orientation.

    The fact is, popular culture depictions about college that include binge drinking and hookups and those depictions aren’t marketed to college students but HS and JHS students. Combine that with the adult surrender of “they’re going to have sex so we have to make sure they’re safe” and by the time people go to college a large percentage anticipate, not just expect but actually anticipate, the hookup. Without even thinking hard I can think of multiple pop culture “college is where your supposed to have sex” scenes (High Fidelity and South Park immediately spring to mind).

    A key point of changing habits is making sure your environment doesn’t aid and abet the bad ones but supports the good ones. In the specific example people have suggested social isolation. Given the current PI culture on campuses, which itself is arguably a habit of thinking built from pop culture expectations that the college environment aids and abets, they are probably right. Alcoholics might be okay going to a restaurant and watching someone else serve wine, but if the only restaurants in town put pitchers and glasses on the table as a matter of course they need to avoid all of them.

    So, I’m thinking the habit we need to attack isn’t hooking up to change the culture. The habits we need to attack are the lazy thinking of PI absorbed from 13-19 in pop culture before people hit college.

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

      @Herb

      So, I’m thinking the habit we need to attack isn’t hooking up to change the culture. The habits we need to attack are the lazy thinking of PI absorbed from 13-19 in pop culture before people hit college.

      I agree that it all flows from the culture, and things won’t change much if the culture keeps pumping out movies like Friends With Benefits and No Strings Attached, where it’s the woman who doesn’t want commitment, and the gorgeous guy eventually wins her over.

      Pluralistic Ignorance is important though, just because there’s strength in numbers. Any relaxation of pressure, whether induced by peers or oneself, would be a good thing. And it really has apparently reduced binge drinking on college campuses. I’ll see if I can dig up some specifics on that.

  • Escoffier

    What is PI?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    PI=Penile Implant.

    or Pluralistic Ignorance.

  • OffTheCuff

    SayWhaat, promiscuous women will typically have no problem finding a beta orbiter to happily be her boyfriend, should she deign to let one in. That’s the orbiter definition, after all – nobody’s disputing that. After all, there are lots of men without any self-respect, so finding a similar woman is a perfect natural match in dysfunction.

    Whether it last and turns into a functional relationship, or durable marriage, is a different thing entirely. A long string of 6-month boyfriends is not really indicative of quality relationships.

    I’m not sure why you think only “getting” a boyfriend is the definition of success here. Perhaps, you’re at the beginning of a relationship, and I know this seems like the end of a long journey for you — but it’s the beginning. The beginning is always easy when you’re under the hormonal crush of lust. It’s keeping him around that’s the real deal.

  • Escoffier

    Ok, does anyone have the correct answer?

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

      @Escoffier

      PI is pluralistic ignorance. I was just too lazy to keep typing it out.

  • Lokland

    @ Esc

    Pluralistic ignorance

  • deti

    Malia 253: Sluts or low partner count, they just aren’t going to marry, commit and put resources at risk, period. It will put this whole slut vs good girl under a different context when both end up in the same place (unmarried when they want to be married), but one party believes they did “everything right”.

    That’s just where it’s headed, and they’re helping it get there.

    Susan 257: Interesting and depressing. Why do you think so?

    I can think of a few reasons:

    1. Refusal to shame sluts. I’ve seen this. Even a lot of low count women won’t shame sluts. Here’s what I usually hear:
    –”It’s a free country.”
    –”She’s just living her life, just like any man would.”
    –”if it’s OK for a man to sleep around if he wants; then it’s OK for a woman to sleep around if she wants. ”
    –”who are YOU to judge, anyway?”

    2. Careerism. Many very competent, low count women are in high stress, high paying and demanding jobs that leave little time for anything else in their lives. And so she makes it to age 30 and finds out her clock is winding down; and now it’s too late. Many times she is highly competitive and that’s a turn off for men.

    (And as we all know, it’s not that hard charging career women “intimidate” men who “can’t handle” a strong woman. It’s not that men can’t handle such a woman; it’s that they don’t want to. She’s frankly not worth the hassle. Men don’t want to compete with their dates; and they don’t want to date women who act and talk like men.)

    3. Women holding out for The One, refusing to pare down their 463 bullet point checklists. Young single Christian women are particularly guilty of this; being raised as “Daughters of the King” and “God’s special princesses”. They are ridiculously hypergamous. Every man is rejected because he’s not as good as Christ. (In doing so, she seals her own fate for obvious reasons.) But the hotter young single Christian women will give it up for the bad boy at church camp or on a weekend field trip. He just has to be outside the church social circle so as to preserve her virginal reputation.)

  • OffTheCuff

    Singl: “Very interesting. Why do you think that? And do you think women will still want to get married?”

    Of course women will still want to get married. Legally locking down a man’s resources for a few decades is a great deal. The danger is, as Malia points out, that men are going to eventually realize the lopsided risks of marriage and opt out entirely. The social costs of that are huge: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/03/roissy-tells-murray-to-man-up.html

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

      @OffTheCuff

      Thanks for the link, I agree with Roissy 100%. (I never thought I’d say that.) A couple of things that interest me from the post:

      And make no mistake, the jerks are exactly to whom women, particularly lower class women, are dispensing their favors.

      Last week I mentioned that socioeconomic status is the elephant in the room when discussing female sexuality in practice. It’s an important distinction because I’m speaking to a specific target market. They might all be outliers in the general population, or when you compare them to single moms, but they’re not outliers in the women who are dealing specifically with hookup culture.

      In fact, as I have argued, if a prosperous, civilized, self-reliant society is your goal it actually makes sense to shame women MORE than men, because women are the gatekeepers of sex, and as such their combined sexual marketplace decisions carry more import in the direction the culture takes.

      This is what I just got done saying to Deti. Women are in the driver’s seat of the SMP. But men won’t get away with shaming women – the feminists will go bananas and will silence it. Even I can’t stand it and I’m more open minded that most women. The slut shaming has to occur as an aspect of female intrasexual competition. It would really amount to a counter revolution.

  • deti

    Malia 253: “That’s because for most of the commenters it’s not about positive change, it’s about vengeance and punishment. There’s also some attempt to thin the herd, so to speak.”

    This is a small part of it. For some men it’s about punishing women who done them wrong. It’s not that MRAs or MGTOWs are very large in number; it’s that they’re among the loudest voices. Those who are really aggrieved and have a lot to shout about are usually doing the majority of the shouting.

    But most of it is men simply taking stock of the situation around them and making a rational decision that marriage isn’t a good deal for them. They are weighing risks and benefits, and deciding marriage isn’t worth the risks relative to the potential benefits they derive (or could derive) from it.

    There are a lot of factors: men going through the divorce meat grinder or watching a man close to them go through it; men coming from broken homes at early ages and never knowing a father; men enduring one too many nuclear rejections and simply giving up; the economy in the toilet with no end in sight; many women earning more than men yet still demanding supplication and tribute; wildly unrealistic expectations women have from men, marriage and longtime companionship with a man; entitlement princessing; attention whoring; and the list goes on.

    I contend that all this is a result of completely unrestrained hypergamy; which is itself a result of liberalized divorce laws, which were a result of economic and technological changes over the last 100 to 150 years.

    And so the male response has been:

    1. Game
    2. Dark triad/hardcore asshole game
    3. Refusal to spend time or money on dates as a method of limiting investment
    4. Pushing hard for early sex to measure her attraction
    5. “hanging out” instead of taking a woman on, and paying for, dates involving expensive drinks, meals, or entertainment as a method of limiting time and money investment
    6. limitation on self-improvement and development (the idea being that there is simply no reason to do it if it will not aid in attracting a high quality woman and/or assets accumulated over years are simply confiscated or wasted in divorce)

    None of this is to fix blame. It is simply what it is. And really, no one should be too surprised that this has been the result.

    Whatever the cause, I can’t blame many men for looking at the current landscape and simply concluding “I can’t win the game. If I can’t win, why should I even try to play?”

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

      @deti

      I contend that all this is a result of completely unrestrained hypergamy; which is itself a result of liberalized divorce laws, which were a result of economic and technological changes over the last 100 to 150 years.

      The Women’s Movement is the root cause, the divorce laws are a byproduct of the Sexual Revolution, which did indeed unleash hypergamy and caused divorce to skyrocket.

      However, both sexes played their part. Men welcomed the sexual revolution with open arms, threw their keys in the bowl at neighborhood parties, and participated in their marriages falling apart. Feminists won the battle on what the disintegration of marriage would look like.

      Today, women are fully complicit in hookup culture – in fact, they’re the ones that perpetrate it. The most hypergamous women have driven the price of sex to near zero. It won’t happen, but if women were to begin policing themselves and shaming the promiscuous among them, men would start asking women on dates again. They’d have no choice. No matter how unattractive marriage becomes to males, they will marry if it’s the only way they can get sex. Women pull all the strings on this issue, and have forfeited their leverage in the last 50 years.

  • Escoffier

    The problem I see is that no one with any authority or influence is telling these girls “NO! Don’t do this!” Maybe in truly, deeply religious households but in the UMC the parents’ attitude seems to be “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” Don’t flaunt what you’re doing and I won’t ask. It’s not that they want their daughters engaged in this but they feel completely intellectually disarmed about how to talk to them about it. They have no intellectual confidence in any sort of abstinence argument. So they just say nothing and surrender their daughters to the mercy of the hook-up culture, which college administrations–far from opposing in any way–actively support. It’s actually a miracle that more girls don’t succumb, when you think about it.

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

      @Escoffier

      It’s not that they want their daughters engaged in this but they feel completely intellectually disarmed about how to talk to them about it. They have no intellectual confidence in any sort of abstinence argument. So they just say nothing and surrender their daughters to the mercy of the hook-up culture, which college administrations–far from opposing in any way–actively support.

      This was one of the reasons I started blogging. The only reason I became a confidante to young women is that they couldn’t talk to their own mothers. Then I’d find myself in the position of hearing their moms talk about how chaste and innocent they were – some of them were but feeling like losers, and some of them were not at all chaste.

      If I had the time, I would start a whole new blog on Parenting Smart.

      It’s actually a miracle that more girls don’t succumb, when you think about it.

      Sooo…..maybe some of them aren’t really very hypergamous at all. :P

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    On religion/atheism: I used to be an atheist until I found spirituality. I used to dislike religion until I realized what it is, and I used to worship science until I realized that was silly. I try to get along with everybody, since I can find common ground all around. I’m still a skeptic, but as in the X-Files, “I want to believe.” :P

    On pluralistic ignorance: I don’t think people are actually ignorant. They’re just feigning ignorance. Most people have heard the terms slut, promiscuous, loose woman, etc. When women dress and act a certain way and get a certain kind of attention, they know what they’re doing. Yes even 14 year olds know what they’re doing. But they keep doing it because for the moment, the damage and long-term consequences are not apparent.

    On parenting: parents do exert some influence, but peers have a lot more influence starting in teenage years. The reality of it was that my mother broke me so badly that I had no trust of female friends, so I avoided the female herd and therefore the hook-up culture. I got into the male nerdy subculture of early Internet days, and they became my best friends. Nerdy guys, thanks for keeping me out of trouble for the most part, even though some of you put hacks and trojans on my computer.

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

      @Hope

      On pluralistic ignorance: I don’t think people are actually ignorant. They’re just feigning ignorance. Most people have heard the terms slut, promiscuous, loose woman, etc. When women dress and act a certain way and get a certain kind of attention, they know what they’re doing. Yes even 14 year olds know what they’re doing. But they keep doing it because for the moment, the damage and long-term consequences are not apparent.

      PI in this context refers to the fact that most college students estimate that 75-85% of the student body had sex the previous weekend, when in reality it’s more like 5-10%. It leads to people feeling marginalized when their behavior is, in fact, the norm. Of course, that makes it more likely they will attempt to engage in the behavior to fit in.

  • Escoffier

    I revert back to what I said about distribution curves. Hypergamy is the female impulse in the same way that polygamey is the males. Everyone has to varying degrees and some (small number) don’t have it at all. Some who do have it manage to control it.

    Susan, you would not assume that every man who remains faithful to his GF or who declines to hook up when he can feels no impulse to screw around. Rather, the more likely explanation is that he is CONTROLLING the impulse. The same is true for the girls. Lots and lots of them who decline the hookup culture are nonetheless attracted to alphas. They just don’t act on it for various reasons.

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

      @Escoffier

      Susan, you would not assume that every man who remains faithful to his GF or who declines to hook up when he can feels no impulse to screw around. Rather, the more likely explanation is that he is CONTROLLING the impulse. The same is true for the girls. Lots and lots of them who decline the hookup culture are nonetheless attracted to alphas. They just don’t act on it for various reasons.

      I do think that many are controlling the impulse, yes. But I also believe that most women do not want a relationship with a guy who is all alpha. It is probably accurate to say that while most women would like 5 minutes with alpha, they don’t want to stretch it to 10 (figuratively speaking).

      Selecting for partnering traits is an important component of long-term mating – as important, or perhaps moreso – than selecting for physical strength, prowess, dominance, etc. The manosphere keeps trying to sell the idea that the woman desires alpha traits but knows she needs to settle for some beta – that it’s a compromise. That is not true. In truth, a woman can be sexually turned on by beta traits. I ran a graphic recently depicting the way this works. It’s not alpha on, beta off. It’s two dials being mixed.

      Anyway, here’s a legit link to Ogi Ogas’ work. He’s an evo psychologist and researcher, and author of A Billion Wicked Thoughts, a bestseller. He builds on the work of Roy Baumeister, also very prominent in the field. The quote is from his book, so I can’t link directly. (You’ll see my hypergamy chart there too, btw.)

      http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/09/30/hookinguprealities/marcottes-boxers-are-in-a-twist-over-nice-guys

      Dominance is very important to women, but it’s not the whole story:

      Women are more focused on emotional and psychological cues, which generate erotic stories suited for satisfying female appetites. Women respond to a truly astonishing range of cues across many domains. The physical appearance of a man, his social status, personality, commitment, the authenticity of his emotions, his confidence, family, attitude toward children, kindness, height and smell are all important to women.

      Unlike men, who become aroused after being exposed to a single cue, women need to experience enough simultaneous cues to cross an ever-varying threshold. Sometimes, just a few overwhelming cues can take a woman there. Other times, it takes a very large number of moderate cutes. For a man, a single cue is often sufficient, and sometimes necessary. For women, no single cue is either necessary or sufficient.

      So, yes, of course all human beings are distributed along a spectrum for a whole host of traits, including hypergamy. Where I differ with the manosphere is in considering female hypergamy some kind of looming, malignant force that threatens to send women into the arms of apes when they ovulate. That is hardly an exaggeration, according to some male bloggers and their disciples.

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

    “Sooo…..maybe some of them aren’t really very hypergamous at all. ”

    The trick is finding them. ;-)

  • M3

    They’d have no choice. No matter how unattractive marriage becomes to males, they will marry if it’s the only way they can get sex.

    Genie’s out of the bottle.

    Can’t speak for anyone else, but being involuntary incel as long as i was did teach me one thing. I can live without pussy. It’s not desirable outcome, but i’ve transcended my biological imperative.

    And no. As long as the manosphere continues to grow and educate, as marriage remains unattractive due to the current system, men will chose GTOW vs. marriage, just for the ‘privilege’ of getting sex.

    Especially for a guy like me who wants sex to be a loving-bonding-emotional experience, not something to be bartered for.

  • Lokland

    @ Susan, M3

    “They’d have no choice. No matter how unattractive marriage becomes to males, they will marry if it’s the only way they can get sex.”

    “not something to be bartered for.”

    This is probably the most offensive part of this entire site. The wonderful under the sufrace message that: men are play things to be used and disposed of at will. Though if your a good wife you will choose not to dispose of him.

    I don’t think this is actually the case but its repeated here fairly regularly.

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

      @Lokland

      This is probably the most offensive part of this entire site. The wonderful under the sufrace message that: men are play things to be used and disposed of at will. Though if your a good wife you will choose not to dispose of him.

      I don’t believe men are play things. I simply acknowledge that women and men exchange sex and commitment. That’s really what separates us from dogs rutting on the prairie. It doesn’t mean there’s no respect. But as Roissy points out – women are the gatekeepers of sex. That is immutable. Today women squander this role and the power that comes with it. Males have the edge there, though of course that same female hypergamy penalizes most of them as well. I’ve said it many times – the only winners in this SMP are alpha males.

  • Sassy6519

    Susan, you would not assume that every man who remains faithful to his GF or who declines to hook up when he can feels no impulse to screw around. Rather, the more likely explanation is that he is CONTROLLING the impulse. The same is true for the girls. Lots and lots of them who decline the hookup culture are nonetheless attracted to alphas. They just don’t act on it for various reasons.

    Bingo. I’m attracted to alphas, and I definitely have a hypergamous streak, but I control it. I don’t think that makes me a bad person. It just makes me female.

  • Underdog

    @OffTheCuff

    “promiscuous women will typically have no problem finding a beta orbiter to happily be her boyfriend, should she deign to let one in. That’s the orbiter definition, after all – nobody’s disputing that. After all, there are lots of men without any self-respect, so finding a similar woman is a perfect natural match in dysfunction.

    Whether it last and turns into a functional relationship, or durable marriage, is a different thing entirely. A long string of 6-month boyfriends is not really indicative of quality relationships.”

    I agree with this. One of my close friends in college was an absolute beta who fell head-over-heels in love with a girl with a promiscuous past. Like a true beta, he acted like a sappy romantic puppy and never stopped wining-and-dining this girl, whom he publicly called his “queen”. They moved in together after 2 years or so. She was always open about her past and saw it as a learning experience; and since I was so close with them, there would be times when she confided in me about how unhappy she was that he was a beta (she even used the terms beta and alpha) and how the guys she used to hook up with were aggressive alphas who made her feel more fun/secure. I didn’t know a thing about game at the time and I was a beta myself so I didn’t give those conversations a second thought and believed those two to be a good couple.

    One night, we went to a club with her girlfriends and she hung out with the girls all night and ignored him. They tried dancing together but for some reason they stopped and she came back to our table pissed off at him. I was getting hammered with another buddy of mine so I didn’t remember much, but I vividly remember seeing him grabbing her and man-handling her as we left. He (or she I forgot) later disclosed to me that they got into a fight when they got back home and he snapped and raped her.

    Fast forward 3 years later and they’re still (seemingly) a happy couple when we go out. But over the years, I’ve learned about social dynamics/game/took the red pill whatever you call it, so I can now see through the bullshits and smell their subconscious resentments toward each other. He still acts like a fawning beta, opening doors, pulling out chairs, kissing her hands and she still acts like a princess happy to be on her pedestal. They fight all the time over the dumbest shit (she starts, he mostly just takes) and their relationship is a mess. But they swear they’re in love. I would never want anything like that for myself, but I’m close friends with both of them so it’s hard to tell one of them to leave the other. God, I fear for their future children. I’d hate to be raised by such mother and father.

    So yeah, moral of the story: beta guys (most men) may fall in love with ex-promiscious girls and convince themselves to “get over it”, but there are subconscious resentments that those betas feel which make for extremely dysfunctional fucked up relationships.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    It just makes me female.

    That’s not what makes you female. I’d venture to say that most women are attracted to someone with a healthy balance of alpha and beta traits. Someone who is attracted to “alphas” seems… a little imbalanced to me.

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

    m# – “Can’t speak for anyone else, but being involuntary incel as long as i was did teach me one thing. I can live without pussy. It’s not desirable outcome, but i’ve transcended my biological imperative.”

    Simple truth right there. I spent years in a sexless marriage, so I know I can go without sex. It sucks, but if I managed to find a way to not get all depressed, frustrated, and angry about it I would manage just fine. And, if nothing else, I want my boys to know and understand this too. NO amount of sex is worth sacrificing your integrity and dignity. I’m not saying that relationships should be all about what the man wants, but by damn he should get at least as much as he wants from it as she does. I will never form a relationship again without clear guidelines of what I expect, and what she can expect from me. I used to leave that up to fate, or the “magic” of romantic love. That is a sure recipe for a man to find himself divorced and robbed of half his shit.

    If my boys marry (and I hope they do!), I want them to do it on their terms, by their rules, and for themselves. To hell with “man up”, “settling down and starting a family”, and any other number of ideas intended to guilt men into slavery. If they take that risk, I want it to be because they decided it was a good bet, not because they are supposed to. If that means they never see marriage as a good deal, so be it. I would rather have no grandchildren than have to fight with an ex-daughter-in-law to see them twice a year.

  • Lokland

    @ Ted D

    “If my boys marry (and I hope they do!), I want them to do it on their terms, by their rules, and for themselves. To hell with “man up”, “settling down and starting a family”, and any other number of ideas intended to guilt men into slavery. ”

    Don’t be ridculous.
    Men have no personal choice or power in their relationships. Women decide who gets married, they decide who gets to have what and whether or not the divorce occurs.
    If they don’t end up divorced and live a happy life its not any of their own doing its because their wives let it happen.

  • deti

    It will put this whole slut vs good girl under a different context when both end up in the same place (unmarried when they want to be married), but one party believes they did “everything right”.

    Malia at 253 is onto something here.

    Once more into the breach. I go where others now refuse to tread.

    I can see (and am already seeing) a lot of young women surveying the landscape and saying “I just don’t understand it. I have a master’s degree. I have a job, a car, furniture, and my own place. I’ve kept my weight down, my hair long and my makeup on. I’m not crazy, I don’t waste my money on silly shit, or waste my time on stupid magazines or TV shows. And I don’t sleep around, either. I’ve had sex with two men in my entire life, and both of those were college boyfriends. WTF!?” Hence the “where are all the good men?” articles.

    There are several things going on here. First, I think a lot of women have little empathy for men, their struggles, and the way their lives have turned out. I don’t think many women truly understand what men have to do to prove themselves in a world, economy, society, culture, and legal environment increasingly hostile to them, especially in relationships and marriage.

    Second, I suspect a lot of women truly don’t understand how attraction works, for men and for women. They don’t even understand how their own attraction triggers work. Or they understand it but won’t own up to it because the truth is too ugly or socially unacceptable to speak. And many women don’t want to compromise anything or give men a chance they otherwise wouldn’t give the time of day.

    Many women think their careers or their degrees increase their attractiveness or marriage market value when the exact opposite is the case. Many women think they will get men to commit with early sex; when men are learning that commitment is their trump card and they will not — WILL NOT– give up that card for any woman. Many women won’t approach — will not even consider approaching — any man.

    Many women are not willing to admit their own darker natures. They don’t want to admit their hypergamous tendencies to “trade up” or be dissatisfied with a less-than-attractive man — or that hypergamy operates at all levels at all times, everywhere, in a woman’s life. They don’t want to admit that sometimes they, not their BFs or husbands, are the problem in their relationships or marriages. They don’t want to admit that sometimes they like, ahem, vigorous sex with a dominant man and are willing to risk ONSs. They won’t admit that female cheating is usually a result of her loss of attraction and subsequent checking out of the marriage. They won’t admit the douchebag tingles them but is bad for them. They don’t want to admit that sometimes they, not the man, are just in it for the sex. And they don’t want to admit the double standard:

    A man who sexes lots of women: social proof, preselection, attractive.
    A woman who sexes lots of men: slut.

    Both men AND women see and enforce this double standard, whether they believe they are or not and whether they want to or not. This double standard is not going away.

    Perhaps most importantly, they don’t want to admit their marriage market values are considerably lower than their sexual market values. IOW, they refuse to see that what they can pull for a night of hot monkey sex is not at all what they can get to walk them down the aisle. And further IOW, many women will not come to terms with the fact that the douchebags who they find so attractive will never marry them.

    Why won’t those douchebags marry them? (1) Douchebags will never marry anyone because they don’t want to marry or are not suitable for marriage; or (2) The women are attractive enough for sex with a douchebag, but not attractive enough for marriage.

    Finally, I’ve seen Obsidian riff on this, and Malia too in some other threads. The dynamic she’s talking about with sluts and “good girls” both ending up as spinsters has already played out en masse in the African American community at large.

    –Economic opportunity drying up
    –men’s inability or unwillingness to DHV
    – men’s inability to attract any woman of any kind of quality
    – the complete removal of any and all incentives for men to work, try to find work or remain with a family
    – men giving up on marriage altogether
    –men being dragged through the divorce meat grinder and being separated from their money and their children
    – men simply walking out when they can read the writing on the wall
    –extreme hypergamy
    –women acting more and more like men in demeanor, mannerism and way of life
    –women picking up the slack where men cannot or will not do it
    –women rejecting men wholesale and then lamenting the lack of quality men
    –skyrocketing illegitimacy
    –plummeting marriage rates
    –skyrocketing divorce rates

    I know some African American men who will remain with a longtime paramour. He lives with her, has a couple of kids with her. He has a child or two by prior relationships; as she does. They both work. House, cars, money in the bank. But– he won’t marry her. He’ll do anything for her but walk her down the aisle. Why? I posit he’s seen his dad or other men chewed up in the divorce meat grinder. He’s seen his and other men’s fortunes rise and fall. He views life as wildly unpredictable. If it all comes crashing down one day, he needs to be able to pick up and move on quickly, no muss no fuss. One acquaintance even told me after a few beers: “well, look. I’ve been in this situation before. If I need a way out, I need a quick and easy way out. My car is mine, some furniture is mine, I have some bank accounts, she has her bank accounts, the house is hers. If I need out, I throw my stuff in the car and I’m gone.”

    I’m convinced this might very well be our near term future: men who want kids will cohabit if they want, and will keep their lives separate so they can get out quickly if they have to.

  • purplesneakers

    This is what I just got done saying to Deti. Women are in the driver’s seat of the SMP. But men won’t get away with shaming women – the feminists will go bananas and will silence it. Even I can’t stand it and I’m more open minded that most women. The slut shaming has to occur as an aspect of female intrasexual competition. It would really amount to a counter revolution.

    So… how do girls go about ‘shaming’ sluts–even ones who are their friends–and without reverting to middle school antics? Any stories from the front lines/your focus groups?

    I think the closest I have come is when I told a friend in college who was being strung around by some player that I saw him all over another girl at a party and she should probably just cut her losses and stay away from him. This made her cry, but the irony is that it’s not like she wasn’t hooking up with other guys in the meantime too.

  • deti

    “Men welcomed the sexual revolution with open arms, threw their keys in the bowl at neighborhood parties, and participated in their marriages falling apart. ”

    I agree only in part. This is apex fallacy. Susan, you know that only a small number of men benefitted from the SR. Only the top men, the natural alphas, the top 10% or 15%, were really doing things like pulling women left and right, and throwing keys in bowls at parties. We all know that the real beneficiaries of the SR were alphas and women.

    As for men participating in their marriages falling apart, maybe SOME men did. Sure, we can all point to some men sleeping around in the nascent days of the SR. And there will always be some men who cheat on their wives. But you know the stats that it’s mostly women who instigate divorces.

    “No matter how unattractive marriage becomes to males, they will marry if it’s the only way they can get sex.”

    That’s the assortative mating and restrained hypergamy system we used to have and it worked pretty well. Pretty much everyone who wanted a spouse could get one. Might not be the best or richest or hottest or slimmest or bestest, but you got one.

  • Herb

    @Escoffier

    The problem I see is that no one with any authority or influence is telling these girls “NO! Don’t do this!” Maybe in truly, deeply religious households but in the UMC the parents’ attitude seems to be “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” Don’t flaunt what you’re doing and I won’t ask.

    A very interesting version of this you see is in the S&M world, where a large number of people are promiscuous. People in a serious D/s relationship generally have a dynamic where the Dominant partner approves the sexual partners of the submissive one other than the Dominant partner. Around such people you’ll hear people pursue S&M play and/or sex and get the response, “I’d love to but you’ll have to ask Master/Mistress/Grand-pubah/etc.”

    Sometimes I wonder if some of these people have promiscuous histories and their willingness to allow this level of control in their relationship is to regain a needed external control they lacked previously in life.

  • Escoffier

    Susan, I would interpret the above a bit differently. Women are attracted to stereotypical “alpha” traits they way men are attracted to pretty faces, big boob and pert asses. However, what a woman REALLY wants is an alpha “who will treat her right,” i.e., the right mix of alpha and beta.

    The problem is, these don’t often go together. Most alphas have pretty low beta characteristics and most betas are not long on alpha. But for most women, the alpha traits are more viserally attractive. So, if she has weak character, is drunk, not that intelligent, really horny or needy, etc. the pull of alpha will be very strong whereas the pull of beta will be quite weak. Even if she KNOWS that beta is best for her, the pull of alpha will still be stronger.

    The overriding preference may always be for the perfect “mix” but for quite a lot of women, especially when they are young, if they can’t have both and they have to choose, then they will choose alpha more often than beta and even when they do choose beta the pull of alpha does not go away. The Good Girls learn to control it. The lucky ones get their perfect mix man. The weak ones try to stay with their beta but end up cheating and dumping in favor of alphas. The bad ones just ride the carousel and ignore betas altogether.

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

      @Escoffier

      But for most women, the alpha traits are more viserally attractive. So, if she has weak character, is drunk, not that intelligent, really horny or needy, etc. the pull of alpha will be very strong whereas the pull of beta will be quite weak.

      This is a contradiciton, unless you think most women are weak and stupid alcoholics with poor mental health. I agree that those are the women strongly drawn to pure alpha. And I think they represent about 10% of women, if that.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    It is probably accurate to say that while most women would like 5 minutes with alpha, they don’t want to stretch it to 10 (figuratively speaking).

    How would you define “alpha” when you say that most women would like 5 minutes with “alpha”?

  • deti

    “Where I differ with the manosphere is in considering female hypergamy some kind of looming, malignant force that threatens to send women into the arms of apes when they ovulate. ”

    Hypergamy is not all powerful. It does not show up like a boogeyman and all women are completely powerless in its clutches. But a lot of women just don’t understand what it really is or that it’s always there.

    I’m with Esco and Sassy on this one. I, like most men, tend toward polygamy. I estimate that probably 60% to 70% of the women I see on any given day are f**kable. If I could, I’d sex them all. Would I marry them? Hell no. But I’d sex them. Are some more attractive than others? Yes. But regardless of where they are on the spectrum, I’d sex them.

    I’m not powerless against it. I resist it. I control it. I understand it. I know there are powerful moral, social and economic forces arrayed against me if I do anything to indulge it. I engage in risk benefit analysis: “OK. Now. She’s hot. I’d sex her. But I’d have to approach her, ask her, proposition her, expend resources, and in doing so cheat on my wife (in the unlikely event I actually succeed). I will have to cover my tracks, lie like a rug, and suffer eternal damnation in the fires of Hell. I will lose wife, kids, life, money, and lifestyle. Risks outweigh benefits.” Impulse controlled.

    Hypergamy is the same thing. It is an impulse than can be resisted. But there are very few controls on it anymore. The only real restraint on hypergamy is the woman’s internal controls, whatever they may be. There are no societal controls. If anything, hypergamy is indulged, not restrained.

    The second thing is that polygamy and hypergamy operate all the time, everywhere, at all levels. It’s not a “looming force”. It’s a quiet background hum. It’s surface noise. I’m always aware of how sexually attractive many other women are to me. I’ve been aware of it since I was about 9 years old and it’s never gone away. There are moral, social and economic forces which tightly restrain that polygamy.

    I suspect it’s the same with women. They are always aware of how their man measures up to other men. Hypergamy is always in operation, always present. The big difference is: there are no external restraints on it. She is free to indulge it any time she wants. She has to learn about it, understand it, and control it. She has to do it herself. Society does not do it. Her friends do not do it. On the contrary, her friends are cheering her on with shouts of “You go, grrl!” Her parents do not because they don’t even understand it themselves.

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

      @Deti

      That’s a great comment about polygamy and hypergamy. I think I can work with this to explain my view.

      The second thing is that polygamy and hypergamy operate all the time, everywhere, at all levels. It’s not a “looming force”. It’s a quiet background hum. It’s surface noise. I’m always aware of how sexually attractive many other women are to me. I’ve been aware of it since I was about 9 years old and it’s never gone away. There are moral, social and economic forces which tightly restrain that polygamy…I suspect it’s the same with women. They are always aware of how their man measures up to other men. Hypergamy is always in operation, always present.

      OK, right there. I don’t feel that way. You talk about the desire to sex other women as something that happens on a daily basis. Other guys here have shared that they think about fucking other women repeatedly throughout the day. Maybe that’s normal, average, whatever, I dunno.

      As a woman, I think of my husband’s status, even in a background humming kind of way, hmmm, maybe several times a week. By that I mean I may notice another woman engage him in an interaction, I feel pleased when he has a triumph at work (not just because he’s happy, but because his status is confirmed), he’s dominant in an interaction in a way that catches my attention, I see him doing something he’s extremely good at, or we have sex. None of this is unusual, I’d say there’s at least one of these things happening every day.

      Now, of all these incidents that satisfy my own hypergamous impulses, none puts me in the position of comparing him to other men. Because hypergamy is not about him relative to other men, it’s about him relative to me. The concept relates to women selecting men of higher status than themselves. This is why Roissy’s current post is so good – he correctly speaks about the shrinking pool of men who have higher status than the higher earning more educated women of Generation Y.

      If polygamy is the natural default for men, then serial monogamy is the natural default for women. I believe Helen Fisher has said that left to their own devices, women prefer monogamous relationships of a duration of 4-7 years. I haven’t researched that fully – I should do so asap. So I’m not sure what she says about the factors that inspire women to move on. Move on, not trade up. That’s where the disagreement is.

      It makes sense to me that if a relationship dynamic shifts in such a way that the woman gains status while the man maintains or loses it, she may desire once again to get with a male who has higher status than herself. However, if her hypergamous impulses are satisfied at the start of the relationship and the man’s status is maintained, there is no ostensible reason related to status for her to attempt to change partners. Of course, she may wish to do so for other reasons.

  • Herb

    @Hope

    On pluralistic ignorance: I don’t think people are actually ignorant. They’re just feigning ignorance. Most people have heard the terms slut, promiscuous, loose woman, etc. When women dress and act a certain way and get a certain kind of attention, they know what they’re doing. Yes even 14 year olds know what they’re doing. But they keep doing it because for the moment, the damage and long-term consequences are not apparent.

    I’m going to mildly disagree with you here.

    Yes, 14 year olds know dressing slutty gets male attention. Hell, our culture is working hard to push the age we teach that down further and further.

    What that 14 year old doesn’t know is the damage and long-term consequences. They have not lived long enough and experienced enough to learn it on their own. The people who have learned it won’t tell them for a variety of reasons although I boil them down to three: to do so forces them to examine their choices, they don’t want to be judgemental (big fraction of this: they don’t want to be parents), or they’ve been cowed into being quiet by groups one and two.

    So I do have sympathy for women like and do think in a sense they can be held somewhat blameless, because no one has adult-upped and explained life to them and they’re too young to know. In fact, most adults in our culture seem to child-down and yell “go girl” or think being an adult is handing them a condom.

  • Escoffier

    BTW, Susan, this: “It is probably accurate to say that while most women would like 5 minutes with alpha, they don’t want to stretch it to 10 (figuratively speaking).”

    strikes me as a major torpedo to your other claims. If it’s really true that “most women would like 5 minutes with alpha,” then that’s the whole point, right? That’s hypergamy in action. Who cares if it’s five or ten minutes or even a night or a weekend? If you’re the beta she’s stepping out on, do you care about the duration? It’s second-order at best. If you’re the prospective husband concerned about her high count, do you care whether all those encounters lasted five minutes or ten? Of course not.

    The DESIRE for alpha is itself the problem. Indulging it leads to other problems. If you’re right that that’s what most women want, then we all have a big problem.

  • Herb

    @deti

    Hypergamy is not all powerful. It does not show up like a boogeyman and all women are completely powerless in its clutches. But a lot of women just don’t understand what it really is or that it’s always there.

    This, a thousand times this.

    Men are to varying degrees polygamy oriented, but even today we’re taught that part of being a man instead of a boy is restraining that and picking one woman. Hell, that’s a huge part of every “man-up” article that comes along.

    Women’s tendency to hypergamy to various degrees isn’t even discussed. If we don’t discuss how it how the hell do we expect women to conceive that a hallmark of being a woman, instead of a girl, is to control it and pick one man.

    Now, men might not have the concepts to discuss it but they are observing what’s going on and rejecting that “being a man includes picking one women and remaining true” if the world says “being a woman still allows choosing a new man if you want.”

    Until women are taught what drives some of their impulses and then are encouraged to use very conscious thought processes which the book quotes you used to kick off this post highlight there is no way women can over come them.

    Hell, I’ll say it here: feminism, at least in encouraging “if it feels right do it” hypergamy, has encouraged women to be more ape like and less human. Who that helps women or increases their dignity or makes them more equal to men escapes me but there it is.

  • Passer_By

    “So thanks to Passer By for all the LOLs.”

    Man! I’m feeling the love!

    Anyway, as reward, I would like a “Name Passer_By Contest”. I picked it when I first posted a comment (maybe as far back as late 2009), assuming it would be a one time thing. But, at this point, I think it’s safe to say that that assumption didn’t hold. I’ve always really sucked at picking internet handles. Now that I’ve learned about Meyers Briggs (thanks to this site), I’ll blame it on my INTP personality.

    Anyway, HELP ME! I need a name!

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

      @Passer By

      No way! I love it that you pass by frequently. Your handle makes me feel good that I got you hooked in.

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

    Lokland – “Don’t be ridculous.”

    It wasn’t so long ago I believed all that crap. I’d say a major contributing factor to my getting married in the first place was at 25, I felt like I was expected by my family to settled down and start a family. As a person with a strong sense of duty to family, part of me felt that if I didn’t “grow up”, (old school version of “man up”) they would be disappointed in me.

    I will make sure my boys never feel this. I very much want them to marry, have kids, and live happily ever after. But, I will never tell them that, and I certainly wont tell them it is their “duty” to do so. I won’t be one of those parents that starts asking “when I’ll have grandchildren” and stupid crap like that either.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Herb, I kind of said the same thing in shortened form in the last sentence of my paragraph.

    But I don’t believe adults are all letting the kids down. There’s plenty of information out there, even when I was 14. Back then I knew about teen pregnancy, STDs, and various methods of birth control. The adults also told kids not to be slutty and not to have casual sex. I’m not talking about my parents because they sure didn’t tell me anything, but other adults.

    That was the 90s though, when the big campaigns were “just say no” — mostly to drugs, but some of that message overlapped with sex. It was basically “say no” to everything that could be considered dangerous or bad for kids, sex, smoking, alcohol, drugs, etc. Sure kids rebelled and still did those things, but they knew it was not encouraged by adults. At least, I knew…

  • Malia

    Deti @ 238

    Well I think you see exactly where I’m coming from. I’ve refrained from elaborating because Susan has made blatantly racially biased observations instead of realizing that many of the same dynamics she promotes here have already played out in the black community decades ago.

    But yes, essentially you see my perspective and you see how interesting it is to watch people naively play out the same dynamic but with much more awareness of what they are doing.

    Susan, you all will win the battle against sluts, but you all will lose the war to sustain marriage.

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

      Susan has made blatantly racially biased observations instead of realizing that many of the same dynamics she promotes here have already played out in the black community decades ago.

      WHAT?! Please explain?

      And if you don’t intend to explain your ideas, why comment in the first place?

  • Underdog

    This is off-topic but the movie Bridesmaids had hypergamy as the main character’s flaw and a lot of females seemed to identify with that movie.

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

      @Underdog

      This is off-topic but the movie Bridesmaids had hypergamy as the main character’s flaw and a lot of females seemed to identify with that movie.

      They sided with the cop, not the douchebag, and they rooted for her to come to her senses, which, thankfully, she did. I don’t think women identified with the movie, particularly – they just found it funny. If there was any part that really hit home, it was the friendship dynamic among the three women.

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

    Escoffier – “BTW, Susan, this: “It is probably accurate to say that while most women would like 5 minutes with alpha, they don’t want to stretch it to 10 (figuratively speaking).”

    strikes me as a major torpedo to your other claims.”

    I’m SO glad I’m not the only one that almost literally jumped out of my seat at that comment.

    Susan – For real, if that is really true, then perhaps we are truly just screwed. Every woman wants her 5 minutes of alpha, but logically she knows she will have to settle for less someday if she wants security and a LTR.

    Count me out please. I have no desire to be women’s second choice.

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

      Whoops, looks like I stepped on a land mine myself, or at least into a cow pie.

      No, I did not mean that literally (I guess my “speaking figuratively” wasn’t clear enough). I certainly did not mean I want to run off to the arms of some meathead during ovulation. Nor that I needed to get a dose of alpha, making him my “A man” and then move on to some preditable provider, my “B man.”

      I meant it like this. Imagine a clock face, and your man is one hour. 5 minutes of it goes to alpha traits. Maybe 10. It’s what I was saying about mixing the dials.

      I consider my marriage egalitarian. My husband is not a very dominant kind of guy, but he has enough to suit me. A summation of my advice to women might be: “Find a good man with the least amount of dominance you can still find attractive.”

      I realize I mixed metaphors, cribbed Roissy language and turned it upside down, and then went offline. Sorry about the confusion, I hope this clears it up.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Ted,

    Of course I’ll let Sue speak for herself, but my guess would be that she meant something other than what it sounded like. Honestly, I don’t think there’s any such thing as an “alpha.” You and I and the rest of the men here all have alpha qualities. That’s what makes our respective SO’s “tingle” for us.

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

    JM – I get that it was an expression Susan used, but the underlying point is valid. If women really do what that quick hit of excitement, but know that it cannot be sustained and they must at some point “settle”, then there is very little chance of anyone but the rarest unicorn of a man that could completely satisfy a woman on all counts.

    I mean, I surely want an attractive GF/wife, but I have never “longed” or “dreamed” or even desired 5 minutes with the hottest woman on earth. In fact, there’s a pretty damn good chance that I’d find her unappealing after listening to her talk for 15 minutes.

    On the flip side, we can easily find tons of women complaining about how horrible cads are, yet there seems to be no shortage of sex for them.

    I wasn’t trying to bust the actual comment, but the message it delivers is pretty much exactly what I see from the ‘sphere: all woman want alpha, some just manage to talk themselves out of it before its too late…

  • deti

    Esco:

    The DESIRE for alpha is itself the problem. Indulging it leads to other problems. If you’re right that that’s what most women want, then we all have a big problem.”

    Splendid, Esco. And — hypergamy does not go away just because she is dating, or in a serious LTR, or even married. It is always there, in operation all the time, at all levels, everywhere.

    Here’s my quibble: Women WANT their 5 minutes of alpha. And most of them can get it in today’s day and age. Even a 20 year married woman can get an alpha douchebag to sex her for a ONS if that’s what she really wants. As I’ve said, any woman of even average attractiveness can get sex any time she wants.

    The rub is that many women do not learn to master it, to control it, to bring it to heel. How can they, when their own mothers submitted to their own hypergamous impulses by divorcing their fathers? How can they, when their own parents don’t understand it? Why should they, when they have an entire phalanx of societal and legal forces not only refusing to constrain it, but in fact encouraging them to indulge it?

    Most men today MUST learn to master their polygamous impulses. If the average man does not master them, he will likely end up on the business end of another man’s fist, in jail, in the hospital, broke, divorced, a defendant in a sexual harassment lawsuit, isolated, alienated from family and children, impoverished, jobless, homeless, or even in a morgue.

    It is only the apex man, the top alphas, who can do whatever they want.

  • OffTheCuff

    Underdog 324: Exactly, I couldn’t have picked a better example.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    deti,

    It is only the apex man, the top alphas, who can do whatever they want.

    Idk, bro. Some men don’t want to fuck all the attractive women in the world. It’s not that they fear the repercussions, it’s that they want something else even more.

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

    deti – exactly.

    Just because a man gets married, doesn’t mean he doesn’t still have the urge to sex up other women. However, that is highly discouraged by society. However, if a woman decides after years of marriage she wants to act on HER natural tendencies, she is cheered on and supported by society as she steals half of her ex-husbands accumulated wealth and most likely his children with it.

    No worries. Hypergamy isn’t some evil sexual drive, like for example, the desire for variety. *rolls eyes*

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

    Susan – OK that makes more sense. So what you are suggesting is every woman wants both traits from the same man, but the mix may vary.

    I can buy that, but I don’t know how any man can be expected to know this on their own. If all they see are asshats getting sexed up, I would hardly blame them for assuming being an asshole gets you laid. It doesn’t help that women perpetuate that by complaining loudly about the bad treatment, and then jumping on alpha laps.

    Hell, before I found MMSL, I had absolutely no clue of just how many variables there are to a good marriage. I mean, I always knew it was work, but I imagined the “work” to be paying bills, raising kids, etc. In actuality, that seems to be the easy part! All of this “stuff” (alpha/beta traits, hypergamy, principle of least interest, etc…) is a LOT of work for someone that isn’t naturally “alpha-like”, and I can honestly say that trying to get a handle on it has been one of the largest mental exercises I’ve undertaken since college.

    It seems absurd to me on some level that it takes THIS MUCH EFFORT to get and maintain a relationship. I guess it only takes effort from people that just aren’t naturally inclined to be attractive. And I guess that means guys like me. :P

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

      I can buy that, but I don’t know how any man can be expected to know this on their own.

      Honestly, you’d be amazed by some of the convos I have at dinner parties. I sometimes feel like a circus performer. Everyone in their 40s and 50s wants to talk about hooking up, sex and relationships. On my recent yoga retreat, the other seven women couldn’t get enough of this stuff. I finally had to just refuse to talk about it – I need a break from HUS sometimes!

      In three years of blogging, and shmoozing about this stuff in my real life, I think I’ve only met two or three people who had already “gotten it” when we spoke. Middle aged beta guys are astounded to hear about the 80/20 rule. Women can’t believe it either – they’re bewildered by talk of alpha and beta traits. They look at me and tell me Norm is just fine the way he is. As I’ve said, the divorce rate in my crowd is exceedingly low, and 90% of the men (and women) are betas.

      They don’t know it because they didn’t live it. That’s how much the SMP has changed. Those living it now are figuring it out as they go. It’s a jungle out there, and we’re hacking our way through it one step at a time.

  • Cooper

    “BTW, Susan, this: “It is probably accurate to say that while most women would like 5 minutes with alpha, they don’t want to stretch it to 10 (figuratively speaking).”

    I still think this metaphor speaks truth, as it reads.

  • Escoffier

    Not a contradiction.

    Women are drawn to alpha the way men are drawn to beauty and variety. Each sex has to learn to overcome that impulse to the extent that it causes them to cheat or ride the carousel. I guess men don’t ride, they ARE the carousel, but anyway …

    Girls with good character control their hypergamy and avoid hooking up with alphas. It doesn’t mean the attraction goes away, it just means they get it under control. There are a variety of reasons why some girls don’t get it under control, of which booze and self-deception are prominent.

    As deti noted, the male polygamous impulse never goes away. Unlike him I am not physically attracted to 60% of the women I see every day. I don’t know what the % is but it’s well under 50%. However, that still can easily add up to more than a dozen women every day that I find physically attractive. This is a biological impulse that just can’t be turned off. It can be controlled however.

    Since the male impulse is well understood and acknowledged, society broadly speaking has an expectation that you better control it, buster, if you are married or in a LTR. To the contrary, the corresponding female impulse is neither well understood nor acknowledged. So there is no cultural expectation that she control it. Exactly the reverse is true, there is a whole sisterhood excuse factory that kicks into gear when she steps out on him because “it was a loveless marriage” … “there was emotional abuse” … “it wasn’t meant to be” … “he looked at porn” … “you just wanted different things” … “you deserve to be happy” … and on and on.

  • Passer_By

    @ted
    “It seems absurd to me on some level that it takes THIS MUCH EFFORT to get and maintain a relationship. ”

    It doesn’t, because perfection doesn’t exist and is typically not required. It just means keep these things in mind from time to time to push the right buttons.Your habits will adjust a little bit accordingly, more for some people than others, but any adjustment helps. I mean, the time you’ve spent posting on this (and presumably other) sites dwarfs the time and effort that it would take most guys to keep these things in mind once they grasp them. That doesn’t mean they will instantly become George Clooney – it just means they’ll be sufficiently improved not to keep failing.

    Just my 2 cents.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    As deti noted, the male polygamous impulse never goes away. Unlike him I am not physically attracted to 60% of the women I see every day. I don’t know what the % is but it’s well under 50%. However, that still can easily add up to more than a dozen women every day that I find physically attractive. This is a biological impulse that just can’t be turned off. It can be controlled however.

    I don’t get it. Can’t you see an attractive women without requiring “outside” forces to control your impulses? I mean if I see a pretty woman, I don’t think, “gotta fuck that. Oops, can’t. If I got caught, my gf would break up with me.” At most, I’d think, “there’s a hot girl,” and then move on with my day.

    I can’t imagine how someone could have a healthy productive relationship a. feeling like the only thing keeping them faithful were external constraints, and b. imagining that the only things keeping their mate from going off and fucking some supposedly alpha ape were external constraints.

    Sounds so bizarre to me.

  • Cooper

    @Escoffier #357

    This is what I’ve been thinking the entire time I’ve been on HUS.

  • Escoffier

    That’s exactly what I do, I think “She’s pretty” and keep going. A whole host of restraints prevent anything else, some of them external some internal.

    Susan, I think it is a mistake to limit hypergamy simply to his status relative to the womans. Certainly that is a big part and maybe the most important part. But it also applies to his status versus that of other males.

    Athol had a good post a while back about the “value differential” it would take to get a woman to cheat or bolt. That’s actually my term, not his, I am re-stating this from memory. His point was, if a woman has snagged a 7 earning $100K, then an 8 earning a $100K isn’t going to be all that tempting nor would a 7 earning $125K. But a 9 earning $200K or a 10 earning $150K … well, suddenly the picture is different. Ditto if her 7 gets laid off and goes 12 months without working. Then suddenly a 6 earning $75K might be tempting …

    A woman of character would merely feel the tingle, recognize it and get over it. A woman of weak or bad character, the story changes. That’s hypergamy too, even if BOTH men are higher in status/SMV than she is.

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

      @Escoffier

      Susan, I think it is a mistake to limit hypergamy simply to his status relative to the womans. Certainly that is a big part and maybe the most important part. But it also applies to his status versus that of other males.

      Who says so? Gaaahhhh, it’s taking all my willpower not to type this in caps. Hypergamy is about the status differential between a man and a woman. In this SMP, a less attractive woman can go higher on the ladder if she puts out. The ranking of the male is material because it determines his status relative to other males (which is also conferred by other males, btw). She will go as high as she can with what she’s got to work with. If a female 5 wants a ONS she will get a higher status guy than if she’s looking to get married. This does not mean that if she married a fellow 5 she will be dreaming of a ONS with an 8. That is not the way it works.

      His point was, if a woman has snagged a 7 earning $100K, then an 8 earning a $100K isn’t going to be all that tempting nor would a 7 earning $125K. But a 9 earning $200K or a 10 earning $150K … well, suddenly the picture is different. Ditto if her 7 gets laid off and goes 12 months without working. Then suddenly a 6 earning $75K might be tempting …

      But that isn’t going to happen, it’s theoretical. The woman who snagged the 7 earning 100K had precisely enough appeal to achieve that. No 9 or 10 is going to look twice at her, much less ones earning twice what her husband earns. She’ll never get the opportunity to make that jump, and she knows it. The only way it could happen is if she undergoes a significant improvement in the qualities men seek. So if she lost a bunch of weight, got a makeover, and went from a 7 to a 9, she may well find that now her status is higher than her husband’s. And therein lies the problem. The status differential must be maintained one way or the other.

  • Sassy6519

    Girls with good character control their hypergamy and avoid hooking up with alphas. It doesn’t mean the attraction goes away, it just means they get it under control. There are a variety of reasons why some girls don’t get it under control, of which booze and self-deception are prominent.

    I’ll use myself as an example with this. Do I find alpha traits attractive? Definitely. Do I like all of the alpha traits? No.

    The perfect mix for me would be 75% Alpha and 25% Beta. I like the caring/thoughtful/sincere beta traits, but I also want the looks, personality, ambition, and status of the alpha traits. To sum it up, as someone else mentioned, I’d like an alpha male that treats me well.

    The problem is, finding an alpha male that uses his powers for good is fairly rare, but understandable. They have the world at their feet. Women throw themselves at them, and they have their pick of the litter. There is no pressure nor motivation to control their instincts because women have afforded them the opportunity to run amok. What guy with all the options in the world would settle down?

    I’ve seen plenty of women continually running into brick walls, trying to make an alpha male commit. I’ve had a few dating stints with alpha males, and they were nerve wracking at best.

    Women do want a mix of alpha and beta traits, but the desired mix varies from woman to woman. I like my men with a bit more alpha than other women might like. I think it’s important to find a woman that likes what you can offer.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    That’s exactly what I do, I think “She’s pretty” and keep going. A whole host of restraints prevent anything else, some of them external some internal.

    For me, it’s usually that I went to the store to get coffee and not stare at a woman’s ass. And the fact that I’m most attracted to my gf so, you know, I’d rather use all my sexual energy on her. But of course, you don’t get that.

  • Escoffier

    Yeah OK bro.

  • Herb

    @Ted D
    Count me out please. I have no desire to be women’s second choice.

    Actually, it’s more consolation prize than second place.

    I’ve been both and the former is much more soul killing…people observing from the outside I wasn’t myself for nearly 5 years even though I thought I was okay after 2.

  • deti

    SW: “Now, of all these incidents that satisfy my own hypergamous impulses, none puts me in the position of comparing him to other men. Because hypergamy is not about him relative to other men, it’s about him relative to me. The concept relates to women selecting men of higher status than themselves.”

    OK. I can modify my prior comment. I don’t agree with you that hypergamy isn’t always there in the background. I don’t have any evidence for it. It’s just a hunch, a hypothesis based on my observations. I submit that hypergamy is, like polygamy, a quietly operating subroutine, always there, always running, all the time, everywhere, in every woman.

    Hypergamy is not a looming force. It’s a quiet background hum, surface noise. A woman is always aware of her man’s status relative to her.

    I would disagree with Susan in this: Her view is a woman is only sometimes, occasionally aware of his status relative to her. I submit a woman is CONSTANTLY aware of this, even subconsciously. I submit a woman is CONTINUOUSLY evaluating, assessing and reassessing him, his status and his ability to maintain his higher status.

    Is that always conscious? No. Is it taking place subconsciously? I believe that it is, consistently and continuously.

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

      @deti

      Her view is a woman is only sometimes, occasionally aware of his status relative to her. I submit a woman is CONSTANTLY aware of this, even subconsciously. I submit a woman is CONTINUOUSLY evaluating, assessing and reassessing him, his status and his ability to maintain his higher status.

      Is that always conscious? No. Is it taking place subconsciously? I believe that it is, consistently and continuously.

      I’ll concede this point. It’s certainly plausible. Even if she were not conscious of it, any warning that his status was slipping relative to hers would set off alarm bells. So I think you’re right about this.

  • Cooper

    @Herb
    Exaclty. When there’s only two choice, the second isn’t second. It’s last.

    It may as well be a participation ribbon.

  • Malia

    And if you don’t intend to explain your ideas, why comment in the first place?

    Because I want to.

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

      @Malia

      And if you don’t intend to explain your ideas, why comment in the first place?

      Because I want to.

      You’ve accused me of racism and declined to elaborate. I consider that unacceptable. Either explain yourself or go.

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

    PB – “I mean, the time you’ve spent posting on this (and presumably other) sites dwarfs the time and effort that it would take most guys to keep these things in mind once they grasp them”

    In truth, part of the reason I post so much here and at other sites is because I’m still working on the grasping part. I am not the type of person to simply read an instruction and do it, without thinking about it a great deal. Sure, if I blindly accepted “game” as gospel, it would be a simple matter of just acting the way I’m told to get the result I want. But, I’m not interested in simply following directions. I am interested in figuring out how to solve these riddles on my own terms, so that I don’t need to “act” like anyone but myself.

    For instance, if my SO required some form of social proof, I might purposely engage with a woman in public somewhere. I naturally wouldn’t do so, but if it is something required for my relationship, I may do it. Doing so wouldn’t change the fact that *I* don’t want to, and even if it becomes a habit, I can’t imagine I would like it any better. Many of the things suggested by Athol and the ‘sphere work just fine, but that doesn’t mean I want to do them, or even like the prospect of doing them.

    What you suggest in the statement above is that I should give up wondering why I have to do these things, and simply do them. That simply isn’t in my nature. I’m trying to work out which “game” techniques I don’t find too distasteful so I have some tools in my bag of tricks. It’s kinda like looking for diamonds in a pile of crap. I feel like I’m digging a lot, and getting really dirty, but not hitting it rich.

  • deti

    Sassy: “The perfect mix for me would be 75% Alpha and 25% Beta. I like the caring/thoughtful/sincere beta traits, but I also want the looks, personality, ambition, and status of the alpha traits. To sum it up, as someone else mentioned, I’d like an alpha male that treats me well.”

    From the horse’s mouth. Proof positive that:

    1. Better to err on the side of too much alpha. Better to start out with alpha and then gradually mix in a little beta.
    2. Women want more alpha than beta.
    3. When women say they want a “nice guy who will treat them right”, what they really mean is “I want an alpha male who is nice to me, treats everyone else like shit, will commit to me and have sex only with me”.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    From the horse’s mouth. Proof positive that:

    1. Better to err on the side of too much alpha. Better to start out with alpha and then gradually mix in a little beta.
    2. Women want more alpha than beta.
    3. When women say they want a “nice guy who will treat them right”, what they really mean is “I want an alpha male who is nice to me, treats everyone else like shit, will commit to me and have sex only with me”.

    I like Sassy, but with all due respect to her, I wouldn’t take her as “proof positive” of what women in general want.

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

      I like Sassy, but with all due respect to her, I wouldn’t take her as “proof positive” of what women in general want.

      After Sassy admitted to basically locking herself in and chewing on the bedsheets to prevent herself from finding an alpha to fuck during ovulation, I knew she was a rare creature. I asked her if she believes she is very high in testosterone, and she admitted that she probably is. Dad was a super alpha, apparently.

      From my perspective, the miracle is that Sassy has the self-control she does. I think biology dealt her a very high-risk set of genes, and she’s got it totally under control.

      But, no, she is not representative. I’d put her in the 1%.

  • Malia

    @ Sing #284
    Why? I feel naive asking, but I don’t get it. What’s the stake in punishing? And what herd are we talking about?

    I think there is a good number of men and women who don’t like the fact that they weren’t able to participate in the dynamics (able as in weren’t asked) and have resentment against those who were able (asked) to participate in a certain element of dating/relationships and/or hookups.

    Very interesting. Why do you think that?

    Because there’s already a trend away from marriage, marriage rates are declining across the board and at rapid rates when compared to the past (i.e. it’s not drifting down, it’s PLUNGING down). There are women who think that they are fighting a battle of worthiness with respect to other women, so they are encouraging a way of dividing the worthy from the unworthy. While, in reality, the entire shift is away from marriage altogether regardless of “worthiness”.

    I do think women will want to get married. And even though there’s a group of women who go the “sperm donor” route they are getting older (from when they started) and the younger women are realizing that “single mother by choice” isn’t so great either, so they will still want to get married.

    Off topic: your mother said women had more to lose by getting married. I’ve heard that more from women who are in their 60s and older because they were socially and financially pigeonholed into staying in abusive and miserable marriages (rampant cheating, etc) because there was divorce shaming and no financial/support support system in place. So I don’t think people are taking that into context when poo-poohing your statement. These aren’t the women of the EPL and the “I love you but I’m not in love with you” generation.

  • Malia

    I like Sassy, but with all due respect to her, I wouldn’t take her as “proof positive” of what women in general want.

    Yeah I was just going to write that. Let Sassy speak for Sassy, don’t paint the rest of us with that brush.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Remember Escoffier, Sassy has said she doesn’t ever want kids. I want at least 50% beta in the mix because I don’t want to risk the father of our children leaving. I want him to play with our babies and nuzzle them and teach them stuff and it makes me feel so giddy to think about that. I love the way my husband babytalks to animals, for example, and I just know he’ll be a loving daddy. He already talks daddy talk to my belly.

    Girls that want a ton of alpha usually aren’t thinking about children.

  • Cooper

    It seems men and women of all ages are still working on grasping game, and condition of the current SMP.

    I feel at a loss, how am I going to figure it out? When people with 10-15 years on my, some who’ve figuratively gone laps around me, are still trying to ‘get it’.

  • Passer_By

    @ted
    “What you suggest in the statement above is that I should give up wondering why I have to do these things, and simply do them. That simply isn’t in my nature. ”

    But I think you know why. You’re either trying to know “why” to an even finer degree, or trying to find a reason it’s not true. I guess more likely the former. But knowledge can never be perfect – you could still be perfecting your knowledge in ten years at this point.

    “I’m trying to work out which “game” techniques I don’t find too distasteful so I have some tools in my bag of tricks”

    That’s fine. Personally, I don’t find those small changes I’ve made distasteful. Just adopt a mindset of benign dominance – in other words, someone who is dominant toward, yet very caring and protective of, her while fully expecting her return love and slight submission, rather than someone who is seeking her approval or trying to please her all the time (which is not to say you shouldn’t do things that you think she will appreciate). Flirting in front of her to make her uncomfortable is not consistent with that mindset. You can help with that mindset by trying to put yourself in the position of someone who will feel better submitting to and pleasing you, and then helping facilititate that in a BENIGN way.

    You must calibrate the degree of this attitude to the personality of your SO. I was surprised by the degree to which my wife seems to desire to submit in many areas. YMMV

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

      Just adopt a mindset of benign dominance – in other words, someone who is dominant toward, yet very caring and protective of, her while fully expecting her return love and slight submission, rather than someone who is seeking her approval or trying to please her all the time

      This is how I would describe my husband’s behavior toward me. Very demonstrative but also strong. And never manipulative. If my husband tried to instill dread in me, I’d probably think I’d been beamed back to middle school.

  • Escoffier

    Hope, I’m not saying that all or most women want a ton of alpha. I’m saying that alpha traits are more VISCERALLY, gut-level, sub-conciously attractive to women than beta traits. In the same way that beauty, boobs and butts are more viscerally, gut- (and lower, ahem) level attractive to men.

    Both sexes need to use their brains to see beyond this animalistic response. Most sensible men, if they could choose between the bitchy or totally superficial 10 and the sweet, stable, competent 7 will choose to marry the 7. Some won’t and maybe they’ll be happy because they like bitches or they’re just as superficial as she is, but men of some substance who choose the personality-challenged 10 will end up unhappy. It will have been a bad desicion, made more with the little head than the big one.

    Women face the same challenge though to a lesser degree. By and large alphas aren’t offering marriage so the women never have to face that dilema. What they do have to do, however, is overcome their visceral attraction to alpha traits to enough of an extent that they can be happy with some beta or alpha/beta mix.

    I have little doubt that most sensible women know it is a bad idea to try to build a LTR with an incorrigible alpha. Yet many of them keep chasing alphas anyway. One difference between the sexes is that far more women chase alphas with the delusion that she can make him commit (this time it will work!) than men chase pretty girls intending to marry them. For the male bio impulse, just banging the pretty girl is generally good enough. For the female bio impulse, just banging the alpha is not good enough. There is another psychological layer than wants him to stay even though her left brain knows he won’t.

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

      One difference between the sexes is that far more women chase alphas with the delusion that she can make him commit (this time it will work!) than men chase pretty girls intending to marry them. For the male bio impulse, just banging the pretty girl is generally good enough. For the female bio impulse, just banging the alpha is not good enough. There is another psychological layer than wants him to stay even though her left brain knows he won’t.

      This is true, but only for the minority of women who choose to compete in that ring. We already know that alpha chasing yields plenty of ST sex, and only 9% of college women have more than 5 sex partners in college. So again – we’re talking a small minority.

  • Charm

    It seems men and women of all ages are still working on grasping game, and condition of the current SMP.

    I feel at a loss, how am I going to figure it out? When people with 10-15 years on my, some who’ve figuratively gone laps around me, are still trying to ‘get it’.

    Me too. reading the last 90 comments or so makes the future look oh so grim. I wouldnt be surprise if, at the end of the day, I opted out all together. My desire for a relationship already isn’t as strong as others, and surveying the landscape makes me not even want to bother with it.

    Excuse me while I go choose my ideal cat breed. Lol.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    In the same way that beauty, boobs and butts are more viscerally, gut- (and lower, ahem) level attractive to men.

    What you seem to be missing is the fact that breasts and hips correspond, at a primitive level, to good “mother” traits. In the same way, many women are viscerally attracted to good “father” traits, aka “beta” traits.

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

      What you seem to be missing is the fact that breasts and hips correspond, at a primitive level, to good “mother” traits. In the same way, many women are viscerally attracted to good “father” traits, aka “beta” traits.

      Exactly! Viscerally attracted. As in tingling over them. As Ogas says, the perfect “cocktail” (no pun) will vary for each woman. Some women will get aroused by one strong cue, e.g. violence vs. holding a baby. Other women may experience attraction as the cumulative effect of many small cues being triggered, e.g. nice smile, wit vs. brooding face or smirk. Still others have moderate attraction to a moderate number of cues. And this can vary for each women as well, depending on the mix.

      Women think they have a type, but they really don’t. Most women wind up with someone nothing like their professed type. The attraction was sparked in a complicated series and combination of synapses firing. We don’t even know why some guy does it for us and another doesn’t half the time. His smell, for example – that operates at the subconscious level for most women.

  • deti

    “What you seem to be missing is the fact that breasts and hips correspond, at a primitive level, to good “mother” traits. In the same way, many women DESIRE good “father” traits, aka “beta” traits.”

    Fixed it for you.

    All due respect, women are not attracted to good father traits or beta traits. Women desire them and want them for the purpose of providing for offspring, for conscripting the man into service to that purpose; but they are not “attractive” in the sense of sexual, physical attraction that produces the visceral “tingle” response.

    It’s incorrect to say women are attracted to those traits or want to have sex with a man who exhibits those traits over and above others.

    Women want some of those traits. But they are not sexually attractive traits, IMO.

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

      @deti

      But they are not sexually attractive traits, IMO.

      Then how do you explain all the ladyboners for Little League coaches and camp counselors? A lifeguard giving a swimming lesson is 100 times more attractive than a lifeguard sitting in a chair. Watching single guys with kids soaks panties all the time.

  • Escoffier

    Susan, it probably doesn’t happen a lot but it DOES happen. And in any case, the point is not how many times women actually follow through (the high divorce rate suggests that the number is non-trivial, but that aside), the point is, Does she still feel the impulse?

    You seem to be saying that once a woman gets a man who is a click or two above her in SMV (mesured more by status than looks, because women care about the former more than the latter), then her hypergamous impulse is forever satisfied. She never ever again in her life feels the slightest tingle or attraction for another man. She can’t possibly even be tempted by a man 3 or 4 or more clicks above her SMV.

    Once again, you are willing to admit that the base male impulse is real and lives on after marriage but you want to wave away the base female impulse and insist that the right marriage fixes all.

    Well, I would agree to this extent. Pre-SR, it was easier for women to “marry up” and thus satisfy their hypergamy. That, among other factors, contributed to a far lower divorce rate. But the impulse to trade up was not gone, it was just properly channelled, controlled and tamped down. Women still left their husbands pre-1960 and left them for hypergamous reasons. They just did so far, far less often. The impulse was and is always there.

    Returning to my example, you seem to be saying the following. The 7 married to the 7, if she gets seriously propositioned by a 9 or 10, she won’t feel even a little tempted? Really? Not a single female would? The majority would not? Maybe some number would actually feel nothing at all. That’s great. Maybe lots of others would feel it but have the character not to do anything about. This is what I think we should be aiming for, since I don’t think any of us knows how to control other people’s feelings. But history has shown that when as a society we set our will to it, we CAN influnce for the better people’s BEHAVIOR.

    We can’t do that, though, as long as we keep denying the nature of those feelings that influence that behavior.

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

      @Escoffier

      You seem to be saying that once a woman gets a man who is a click or two above her in SMV (mesured more by status than looks, because women care about the former more than the latter), then her hypergamous impulse is forever satisfied. She never ever again in her life feels the slightest tingle or attraction for another man. She can’t possibly even be tempted by a man 3 or 4 or more clicks above her SMV.

      I don’t know about forever – as I said, it depends on their relative status to one another over time. Of course a woman could be tempted by another man, but it may or may not be hypergamy. As I said yesterday, I think many women wind up having affairs with men of much lower status – their tennis instructor, personal trainer, etc. That is hypogamy.

      Once again, you are willing to admit that the base male impulse is real and lives on after marriage but you want to wave away the base female impulse and insist that the right marriage fixes all.

      I also said yesterday that I believe the claims about base male impulses are also exaggerated. Or at least the kind of mindfucking you describe applies to some percentage of men, not all.

      Basically, I think both men and women are far less base than you do, and neither is worse than the other. In any case, value judgments are silly. We evolved, and that has nothing to do with virtue.

      In practical terms, men’s visual orientation means that impulses may be frequently triggered, while women’s attraction cues, so numerous in number, will be triggered less frequently. Perhaps when it does happen, it’s more damaging – as some have said, by the time women cheat, they’ve already got one foot out the door.

      The 7 married to the 7, if she gets seriously propositioned by a 9 or 10, she won’t feel even a little tempted? Really?

      It would depend on whether she found him attractive (it’s not just about looks, by a long shot) and how attracted she feels to her husband. At 53 I was propositioned by my handsome personal trainer, and I was not even a little tempted. I was totally skeezed out and now I feel awkward going to the club. I’m sure he’s had success with some women there, but surely no happily married ones.

  • Cooper

    @Charm
    I’m thinking of going the Calico route, as well. haha

    @Escoffier
    I’m still in complete agreement.

  • anonymous

    deti: “2. Careerism. Many very competent, low count women are in high stress, high paying and demanding jobs that leave little time for anything else in their lives. And so she makes it to age 30 and finds out her clock is winding down; and now it’s too late. Many times she is highly competitive and that’s a turn off for men.

    (And as we all know, it’s not that hard charging career women “intimidate” men who “can’t handle” a strong woman. It’s not that men can’t handle such a woman; it’s that they don’t want to. She’s frankly not worth the hassle. Men don’t want to compete with their dates; and they don’t want to date women who act and talk like men.) ”
    ————–
    Have you seen this?
    *The Marriage Gap: The Impact of Economic and Technological Change on Marriage Rates*
    http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2012/0203_jobs_greenstone_looney.aspx

    “The growing economic opportunities for women have been accompanied by changes in marriage rates. Figure 2 underscores that, just as with men, the decline in marriage rates is not spread evenly across income levels.
    Marriage rates either held constant or increased for the top 10 percent of female earners over the last four decades.
    In contrast, the bottom 70 percent of female earners saw their marriage rates decline by more than 15 percentage points.”

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

      Ohh, anonymous, thanks for that link on marriage rates!

  • Passer_By

    @susan
    “After Sassy admitted to basically locking herself in and chewing on the bedsheets to prevent herself from finding an alpha to fuck during ovulation, I knew she was a rare creature. ”

    I’m picturing Sassy on the prowl at ovulation as being a black version of Natashia Henstridge in the movie Species when it became time for her to seek a mate.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Escoffier, I would not say that “alpha” traits are more viscerally, gut-level attractive to me, but I may be an exception because I don’t like celebrities, and I am more into intelligence, empathy, honor and other supposedly “beta” traits than I am into money, fame, status and other supposedly “alpha” traits.

    This may be partially because of my background/upbringing. What I find gut-level attractive is, well, good breeding. Healthy, symmetrical, smart, able to provide for offspring, and basically won’t be inbreeding with me to amplify deleterious recessive genes. A person is the result of both genetic and environmental influences. I’d like to have good conditions for both.

    I find it hot when a man is instinctively protective of me and other small animals, because he will protect our children when we mate. I also find it hot when a man is truly kind-hearted and compassionate. There’s a saying, “Don’t marry a man if you would not be proud to have a son just like him.” I would be thrilled if we had a son who is just like my husband.

    As for tingles, believe it or not, I always tingle really hard for my husband when we’ve had a deep, heartfelt, honest and long conversation laying in bed together, finding out more about him and his past, and reaffirming our love for each other. I love that he can go so deep and be so spiritual, and that love just overflows and makes me want to bond with him more and more, in every way, including physically.

    Tingles for random alpha #37291? It’s never happened.

  • purplesneakers

    Susan- any thoughts on how young women would go about ‘shaming’ their slutty peers?

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

      @Purple

      Susan- any thoughts on how young women would go about ‘shaming’ their slutty peers?

      That’s a very touchy subject. I’ve written on it in the past and gotten women really upset. Very few women have the appetite for it, and I concluded it was not a realistic strategy. It would take the form of witholding approval (which is not the same as voicing disapproval), not being a listener re sex-related drama, choosing friends who are not promiscuous, etc.

  • Sassy6519

    After Sassy admitted to basically locking herself in and chewing on the bedsheets to prevent herself from finding an alpha to fuck during ovulation, I knew she was a rare creature. I asked her if she believes she is very high in testosterone, and she admitted that she probably is. Dad was a super alpha, apparently.

    I’ve been putting a lot more thought into this recently. I honestly do think I have a higher level of testosterone than most women. It explains a lot of the things I do or think about. It might also explain why I’m such a sucker for pretty boys (sorry JM). Perhaps men with beautiful faces and slender bodies have a lower amount of testosterone/higher estrogen than most men. It also explains why the men I like the most have longer/shaggy hair. Perhaps my higher testosterone prompts me to find feminine men the most attractive. Maybe, to a larger extent, my higher testosterone has even shaped my brain and created my ENTP personality profile.

    I have every intention of exploring this rabbit hole even further.

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

      Sassy, I have to hand it to you. You are so objective about your behavior, and so disciplined it really is remarkable. That strength is your saving grace.

  • Escoffier

    Hope, fine, so you are over on the left tail. But that tail is narrower than the bulge in the middle.

    I am on the left tail in a lot ways too, for instance I find a lot of Maxim model types only generically attractive and I can’t muster any interest in them at all. OTOH a lot of the girls I find really beautiful, I’m sure if you posted them at Roissy’s, the comments would be very harsh, “Get a paper bag, 5 at best!!!” and so on. I also think their insistence that 30 = the wall is preposterous. I get that fertility declines but women do not suddenly get ugly at that age and many are still extremely pretty.

  • Charm

    @cooper

    I was thinking more along the exotic route. I’d become a world renowned breeder that was featured on the covers of dozens of international pet magazines. I’m sure that would fill the void in my empty love life.

    @Susan

    I’d imagine if I wasn’t demisexual, I’d be like Sassy. I have a surprisingly high and aggressive sex drive, but it lies dormant most of the time.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Escoffier, I think in the “normal distribution” there is a lot of local variation. You mentioned that you’re in NYC. That’s the capital of excess status and crazy stuff run amok. In much of the rest of the world, especially outside of the cities, women are not all lusting after “alphas.” Mainstream American culture has been infecting more suburban areas, but in most places girls still get tingles just fine for that cute boy who’s not the captain of the football team and might be a little awkward.

  • Charm

    @Purplesneakers

    Point them to HUS and tell them to start from the beginning and read every post ever written and to skim the comment sections.

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    @Susan

    Watching single guys with kids soaks panties all the time.
    And puppies. ;-)

  • Jason

    They sided with the cop, not the douchebag, and they rooted for her to come to her senses, which, thankfully, she did.

    After she gave the dbag just about every opportunity imaginable to change. Just saying…

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

      @Jason

      My quibble was not that Kristen Wiig’s character wasn’t hypergamous, it was that women identified with her hypergamy. The opposite is true. She was obviously written as a character to be ridiculed, a head case with low self-esteem.

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

    Escoffier at 390 – That is exactly how I view hypergamy, and can’t for the life of me figure out why any woman would assume that desire goes away.

    “Just adopt a mindset of benign dominance – in other words, someone who is dominant toward, yet very caring and protective of, her while fully expecting her return love and slight submission, rather than someone who is seeking her approval or trying to please her all the time (which is not to say you shouldn’t do things that you think she will appreciate).”

    And this is still my biggest hangup. I don’t think I know how to be “benign dominant”. I mean, you’ve all seen my idea of managing people: my way or the highway, do your work and I’ll leave you alone. If I’m the leader, I want it done my way. If I can’t have it done my way, then I’m not the leader.

    I really can’t comprehend what you mean by benign dominance. For all the talk of captain and first office, the only reason that works is because the first office knows his place in the pecking order, and voluntarily falls in line. So, if my SO believes she wants an equal relationship, how would I go about being dominant without her “knowing her place” and falling in line? I suppose I could just BE dominant and see if she submits, but that really feels SO manipulative to me that I find it distasteful. I have tried some simple game concepts, and found that I got positive reactions. But I can’t mentally bring myself to essentially “forcing my will” on her without at least hearing from her that she is OK with it. Of course, if she tells me its OK, then the purpose is lost. If she tells me to be dominant, it doesn’t work.

    This is the kind of mental gymnastics I’ve been doing for months now. It’s really getting me worn down, and I’m getting frustrated as hell.

  • Escoffier

    Sure men are attracted to PHYSICAL fertility cues but that is still a physical attraction. It has nothing to do with the intellectual realization that “she will make a good mother.” A plump, frumpy 5 with sterling character and the greatest maternal instincts in the world will make a better mother, in the sense of doing the job for 18 years, than the gorgeous C-cup 0.7 W-H hip babe who would prefer to pawn the kid off on a nanny. The boobs and butt are just biological proxies for fertility.

    There is no physical beta trait that sexually attracts women because she thinks “good father.” Rather, the visceral attraction is to “strong genes” which correllate with alpha. At the intellectual level, she can surmise that cad = bad father whereas beta = good father. The more women who act on that the better but their vaginas are, by and large, working against that outcome not for it.

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

      At the intellectual level, she can surmise that cad = bad father whereas beta = good father. The more women who act on that the better but their vaginas are, by and large, working against that outcome not for it.

      No. Did you read the Ogas quote? Beta traits inspire sexual attraction. We’re talking tingling when we see a man comfort a child or assist an elderly woman. We’re talking mad crush when we observe the loyalty of one guy to his lifelong friend.

      Escoffier, you are just flat out wrong. You appear to be invested in this worldview, so I won’t argue it any further, I have other stuff I need to do.

      This is not pie in the sky stuff. There has been a great deal of study and research on this. Devlin doesn’t count. You and I don’t get to make shit up. I’m tired of quoting facts at you that you could easily find by googling this topic yourself. You won’t take the blinders off. I think you took two red pills instead of one. If that’s working for you, it’s no skin off my nose, but I don’t want to spend any more time on it.

  • anonymous

    purplesneakers:
    “”Susan- any thoughts on how young women would go about ‘shaming’ their slutty peers?

    This is directed at Susan but I hope it’s OK for me to weigh in.
    I’ve mentioned this before, but just in case you’ve missed it..
    Slut shaming among women was effective in the past because the genders didn’t mix as they do today. So if a woman was shunned by other women, she would be lonely and isolated.
    Today, those women will just go and hang out with their male friends and with other promiscuous girls.
    The media glorifies that behavior.
    PC culture prohibits criticism of that behavior.
    Alternatives to marriage, acceptance of OOW children
    If she’s hot, some schmuck will still marry her or cohabitate, procreate with her
    Same as with cads, as long as they have admirers and no consequences, they’ll continue to grow in numbers.

  • Passer_By

    @susan
    “Then how do you explain all the ladyboners for Little League coaches and camp counselors? ”

    They aren’t exhibiting beta traits – they are in a leadership position and demanding compliance from several people – albeit children. In the case of coaches, they are also alpha in the sense that they seem to show outsized confidence in their abilities and knowledge and enjoy being the focus of attention. A natural beta would not feel entirely comfortable standing on the sideline and constantly barking instructions at a bunch of kids that aren’t even his while their parents looked on.

  • deti

    Esco 390:

    this is spot on, I think.

    I think many women understand hypergamy. And I think this is very important because it’s sort of Game 101. Any man who gets into a relationship with a woman needs to grok this. And we as a society aren’t talking about these things in part because these are ugly truths about women that most men AND women aren’t willing to face. It’s that unwillingness that has got us to this point and this messed up sexual marketplace. Too many women do not understand these things. They need to if they are to have any chance at lasting relationships.

    Hypergamy is always there, all the time. Marriage does not satisfy it. An alpha does not satisfy it, at least not all the time. Women still feel that urge, that impulse, to trade up, to get a better man. And I submit that they feel it all the time.

    I disagree with SW that it’s an impulse only to “move on”. (Why “move on” if you’re not “trading up”?) It’s not about getting A man, or THE ONE man, or MANY men. We all agree that hypergamy is about getting a man of higher status than she is. Really, that means she wants the best man she can get. If her husband is not the best man she can get, she will experience twinges of hypergamous discomfort at higher status men. Those twinges are tingles, and cognitive dissonance at feeling hard sexual attraction for a man who she KNOWS is more attractive than her husband. “But this can’t be,” she thinks. “I’m married. I can’t feel sexually attracted to another man!” Yes you can, and it would appear that you are.

    Your example of a married 7 woman being seriously propositioned by a 9 or 10 man — would she be tempted? Well, right time, right circumstances, right man — I submit that you better believe she’d be tempted. MOST will be tempted, and MOST will reject it due to her marriage. But it’s simply 100% wrong and a complete denial of human nature to say our intrepid married 7 isn’t attracted. OF COURSE SHE IS. It’s wrong to say she doesn’t find him more attractive than her 7 husband. OF COURSE SHE DOES.

    The problem is society’s unwillingness to accept these truths, to acknowledge they exist, and to teach girls and women ways to address, control and master them. Because too many women are mastered by them.

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

      @deti

      If her husband is not the best man she can get, she will experience twinges of hypergamous discomfort at higher status men. Those twinges are tingles, and cognitive dissonance at feeling hard sexual attraction for a man who she KNOWS is more attractive than her husband.

      No argument there. Which is why women should never “settle.” It’s not fair to the man, and it won’t lead to a lasting, fulfilling marriage.

      But it’s simply 100% wrong and a complete denial of human nature to say our intrepid married 7 isn’t attracted. OF COURSE SHE IS. It’s wrong to say she doesn’t find him more attractive than her 7 husband. OF COURSE SHE DOES.

      How do you know this? I’m asking a serious question. Where do you derive your knowledge of female temptation and sexuality? Because it seems to me like you’re just echoing Escoffier, who is echoing Dalrock, who is echoing Roissy, etc. – it’s just one big manosphere circle jerk.

      The truth is rough enough. If you want to opine on female sexuality, back up your claims with credible sources. I can cite a source for every claim I make. You should do the same. And as Escoffier can tell you, by credible I don’t mean misogynist sociopath.

  • Charm

    @Sassy

    Maybe, to a larger extent, my higher testosterone has even shaped my brain and created my ENTP personality profile.

    I wonder if there is any studies done on this. On a site that a frequent one of the posters asked NT women to look at their ring and index fingers to see which was longer. Most of the womens fingers were equal length or had a ring finger that was just a bit longer. Most of the women here are NF and NT, and so are alot of the other female bloggers that I read. Hmmm….I wonder. My ring fingers a a pinch longer than my index fingers and I too swear I have a masculine brain.Im also tall which extra T generally contributes to. A lot things that appeal to men also appeal to me. Though, you might register as more feminine than I do. NTPs are usually more personable than NTJs.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Sassy, that makes some sense, but I think it may also be a function of age. In my teens, I also liked feminine-looking men, longer hair, and generally prettier boys. Now I can’t stand them. The boy bands of the 90s and 2000′s all featured those pretty boys, and it’s usually younger girls who are into them.

    I think it may be a relic of age-related assortative mating. Nature didn’t want 15-year-old girls to find 40-year-old men super hot for optimal mating purposes, so the 17-year-old boy look (which tends to be a bit feminine) is what young girls lust after, and then when that girl grows to be 30, the 40-year-old man is way hotter than the 17-year-old boy.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    It might also explain why I’m such a sucker for pretty boys (sorry JM).

    lol. I don’t mind people finding others’ physically attractive. I just don’t think I could melt or swoon or lose my head over a person just based on how she looks. Who a person is in an important factor for me. Hard on over a pretty girl? Sure. But I can get a hard on from a bumpy ride on the bus, so that’s no big feat.

  • deti

    Then how do you explain all the ladyboners for Little League coaches and camp counselors? A lifeguard giving a swimming lesson is 100 times more attractive than a lifeguard sitting in a chair. Watching single guys with kids soaks panties all the time.

    Come on Susan. You know better than this.

    LIttle league coaches, camp counselors, lifeguards: positions of authority, leadership and dominance. They have shown competence and authority to get to those positions. They lead others. They wield a certain amout of power.

    Lifeguard giving a swimming lesson: display of power and authority. Requires confidence and dominance.

    Single guys with kids, soaking panties: Not in my experience. And even if it does moisten some ladies, it’s because he’s in authority over the kids.

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

      Single guys with kids, soaking panties: Not in my experience.

      We need GudEnuf. He says that having his little brother around gets women crushing on him all the time.

  • Cooper
  • Sassy6519

    I’m picturing Sassy on the prowl at ovulation as being a black version of Natashia Henstridge in the movie Species when it became time for her to seek a mate.

    That’s what it feels like most of the time.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Hypergamy is always there, all the time. Marriage does not satisfy it. An alpha does not satisfy it, at least not all the time. Women still feel that urge, that impulse, to trade up, to get a better man. And I submit that they feel it all the time.

    Wow. Is this based on your personal experience of… you know, people close to you?

    Just seems like such a base, cynical, and mercenary view of women. I’d hate to land the woman who fits that description.

  • Charm

    @Ted

    Its okay, I don’t get it either. You seem pretty dominant to me. Though, I don’t identify very heavily with the “dominance” that is talked about in the ‘sphere. Everything that you’ve written registers as my ideal style of dominance. So I’ve come to the conclusion that they are definitely different styles. The way that the ‘sphere talks about dominance reminds me of ESTPs or ESTJs or ESFPs and I don’t too much like those kind of men which is why it turns me off. You’re level-headed, hard-working, rational, you enjoy intellectual discussions, you don’t care to befriend or be liked by the masses, you prefer a small group of people who like you and all your glory, you know where you stand and won’t easily be moved. Shit, what more could a girl ask for? Call me crazy, but you get an A+ in my book.

  • deti

    I think many women wind up having affairs with men of much lower status – their tennis instructor, personal trainer, etc. That is hypogamy.

    You’re not makin’ sense, sis.

    Tennis instructor and personal trainers are high status — high level of competence in or mastery of a particular field. He’s the instructor (dominant), she the student (submissive).

    Sorry, Susan. You’re all wet on this one. Esco has the better argument, I think.

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

      @deti

      Tennis instructor and personal trainers are high status — high level of competence in or mastery of a particular field. He’s the instructor (dominant), she the student (submissive).

      Sorry, Susan. You’re all wet on this one. Esco has the better argument, I think.

      No. They’re low status. A woman of education and means getting caught having an affair with either one is a laughing stock. She’s risked all the things she enjoys – the trappings of status of her current marriage – for a guy who’s probably a manwhore who has sex with older women. He’s unlikely to possess much in the way of resources.

      Of course, this would not be the case if the woman herself was of lower status. But most women who hire tennis instructors at their country clubs and personal trainers at their gyms are high socioeconomic status. Having an affair with a “hired hand” is slumming it.

      You are correct that he does have a sort of situational dominance, which is how these women fall into the trap in the first place. It’s a very high risk, low reward move. And I don’t think women leave their husbands for these men, who probably wouldn’t want them anyway.

  • Passer_By

    @sassy
    “That’s what it feels like most of the time.”

    Hopefully, if you ever act on it and have your way with them, you won’t leave them in a pool of blood.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    LIttle league coaches, camp counselors, lifeguards: positions of authority, leadership and dominance. They have shown competence and authority to get to those positions. They lead others. They wield a certain amout of power.

    They lead KIDS. And this is an important point. I remember Yohami saying that I was being “alpha” when I went to a bon fire with my gf because I was playing with the kids, “leading” them in their play, etc… But it does not require a whole hell of a lot of dominance to lead a kid in a sport or a game. What it does require is a lot of patience, care, support, encouragement, etc… Most of all, it requires a love of kids. You don’t lead little league by being dominant, you lead it by having good healthy relationships with children. You become in many ways a “father” figure to them. All that stuff requires bringing on a lot of beta. Some alpha, sure, but far more beta.

  • Charm

    @Cooper

    That woman is just sad. Just sad. Those cats were damn near feral. I couldnt imagine taking them on a vet trip.

    No, my cats will be well behaved, the are award winners after all. I’d breed 2 litters a year to maintain exclusivity. I’d sell they for top dollar to the highest bidder.

  • Herb

    @Cooper

    @Herb
    Exaclty. When there’s only two choice, the second isn’t second. It’s last.

    It may as well be a participation ribbon.

    Actually, I consider them different:

    2nd is being in a poly situation where you’re not her primary partner. It’s an open situation and while there is a relationship you know your not her primary interest.

    A consolation prize is when you’ve both agree that you were each others forever and she, for whatever reason, decides “now I can do better so that statement is in operative.” That’s being told, to your face, that she settled and you’re a loser she doesn’t have to settle for anymore…oh, and btw, here’s the bill for being a loser.

    I’m in the first right now and while I wish it wasn’t that way I’m under no illusions about my place in her world.

    I had the latter done to me. It still hurts even to write about.

  • deti

    JM 422:

    As you can see from the discussion thread, and despite the personal nature of your post, I’m not the only person who believes this. So it isn’t just me, or my life, or my personal experiences.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Well, fathering requires a mix of alpha and beta, probably 25% alpha and 75% beta. I would guess that mix is a turn-off to women who don’t want dad types, but would look quite attractive to women who do want a family.

  • deti

    JM 427:

    they might be leading kids, but they’re still leading and in authority.

    Desirable? You bet.

    Attractive? That’s a stretch.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Hope

    I find both older and younger men attractive. The men I tend to find the most attractive are the men with beautiful faces, longer hair, and little muscle, regardless of their age.

    @ Charm

    My index fingers are longer than my ring fingers. Perhaps that is the one area that my testosterone didn’t affect.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “I also said yesterday that I believe the claims about base male impulses are also exaggerated.”

    They are absolutely not, they exist on a continuum of how they are suppressed. Consider a bunch of married men:

    Guy A might mindfuck other women in public all day, but stay faithful.
    Guy B might admire women’s bodies in public, but stay faithful.
    Guy C might not intentionally look at live women, but use porn at home, and stay faithful.
    Guy D might never look at women intentionally, but still go to the beach, and feel sheepish if a girl in a bikini walks by and has a stray thought.
    Guy E might just never go to the beach or bar.
    Guy F might become a celibate monk.

    All of them have been faithful. But all of them have the same underlying instinct. They all have different levels of control, even to the point of it being subconscious and them being unaware of it.

    My experience? Nearly all guys are A-C. One of my best married friends never ever talks about women or sex, yet when we went to a strip club for a bachelor party, he admitted he liked it.

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

      @OTC

      There’s a HUGE gap between A and B, IMO! Lots of the men here have bundled all men into Guy A. I’d guess my husband is either B (though he would never do so in my presence) or D. Probably B. I have no problem with it.

      All of them have been faithful. But all of them have the same underlying instinct. They all have different levels of control, even to the point of it being subconscious and them being unaware of it.

      Surely sex drive is a factor? We know that high T predicts both cheating and divorce, and also influences sex drive. So base male impulses are probably hormonally determined, at least in part.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Desirable? You bet.

    Attractive? That’s a stretch.

    So they’re getting lady boners over guys they don’t find attractive? I don’t get it.

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

    Charm – LOL. If that’s the case, then I’m just never going to appear properly dominant to most of the human race.

    I’m honestly trying to think of an example of a man I consider dominant that isn’t an asshole. I know a few that aren’t an asshole to me, but to most people they are total jerks. I don’t get that treatment because I won’t tolerate it, but the line of people wanting to do their will always amazes me.

    I think my real issue is: I don’t WANT anyone to submit to me. I don’t want followers, admirers, and people desiring my validation. In fact, for the most part, I just prefer people don’t even know I exist. Problem is, if most of attraction is built on “social proof”, you can’t get it without being social. I really don’t like the idea that my mate must be submissive to me. It puts at least some of the responsibility for HER actions in my hands. I certainly don’t want to treat her like one of the people I manage. My professional relationships are just about completely devoid of emotion. I may be friendly with the people I work with, but it is ONLY because it is expected to have a minimum level of social interaction with the people around you. Its “fake” friendly, although I’ve found that I am very convincing from the reactions I’ve received from the few people I met at work that became personal friends. One even told me that I was almost a totally different person outside of the office. I told him that was not correct, I am a totally different person to the few people I love and respect.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Sassy, that look tends to be more common on younger guys. So your preference for it is semi-subconscious probably.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    Sassy, I have to hand it to you. You are so objective about your behavior, and so disciplined it really is remarkable. That strength is your saving grace.

    Thanks! I try to live/view my life through a lens of objectivity. I don’t mind calling myself out on behaviors. I don’t mind speaking of what I think, incriminating or not.

    On a completely different side note, I’m going to the midnight showing of The Hunger Games. I’m so stoked. I’m totally team Peeta, for the record.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    deti,

    Tennis instructor and personal trainers are high status — high level of competence in or mastery of a particular field. He’s the instructor (dominant), she the student (submissive).

    True, but if the discussion is about hypergamy and you’re defining hypergamy as a constant desire to trade up, then the salient point isn’t whether or not the tennis instructor is in a dominant position in relation to the woman, but whether or not his dominant status is higher than the husband’s.

    I think we can safely assume that in most cases, tennis coaches have less social status than millionaire husbands.

  • Escoffier

    Susan, the danger from (say) a trainer is related but different. It’s a cliche, and therefore somewhat true, that women often have affairs with tennis pros and the like. One the one hand, for someone of your socio-economic status (SES), this seems like hypogamy, trading down, since the trainer is way lower on the status ladder than your husband.

    However, what is typically going on when a woman actually succumbs is that hubby has become very beta and boring and the trainer brings some serious alpha to the table. If game theory (no John Nash) has taught us anything, it’s that alpha transcends SES and can exist without it. Women don’t have affairs with men they perceive to be more beta than their husbands.

    Take a look at the Bill Lockyer case out in California. Here’s a guy who’s near the top of the political pyramid in the largest state, could be Governor some day, and his wife steps out on him … for her meth dealer. Yeah, she’s a druggie, which doesn’t help but obviously the dealer had something that Lockyer didn’t. This is the same relationship dynamic portrayed in the movie Casino (based on a true story). DeNiro has all the money and status and power but Sharon Stone can’t help running to the skeevy James Woods, who is way more alpha than her conventionally status-laden husband.

    You were skeeved by your trainer presumably for two reasons: 1) You are happy at home; 2) you have good character. Maybe also a third reason, 3) you genuinely didn’t find him attractive. Well, what if you did and he caught you during a spell when you were unhappy at home? We all have those, right? Then you could fall back on 2. Take away 2, and what do we get? A woman who has to be happy at home ALL THE TIME (which is impossible) or else she strays and it’s hubby’s fault. She has no character to fall back on. We have basically raised a couple of generations like that.

    The greater (and also rarer) danger for someone like you is, you go back into consulting, land a big client who turns out to be a hunky multi-millionaire who does economy-altering deals during week, plays a bad-ass game of tennis, scales rocky peaks for fun and founded his own children’s charity. And he’s way into you.

    You’re still happy at home but man this is way more tempting than the damned trainer. You really need character to fall back on. Which I don’t doubt you have. But the idea that you wouldn’t feel the danger just a little bit strikes me as unlikely …

    There seems to be a meme here, from JM and others, that to have to fall back on character is itself a sign of failure of character, since a truly “good” or at least “in love” person would never feel the slightest temptation in the first place. That strikes me as a pretty lie, to coin a phrase.

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

      There seems to be a meme here, from JM and others, that to have to fall back on character is itself a sign of failure of character, since a truly “good” or at least “in love” person would never feel the slightest temptation in the first place. That strikes me as a pretty lie, to coin a phrase.

      I don’t feel that way. I think character is critical. I also suspect that it becomes linked with one’s impulses over time. Maybe it’s a form of cognitive dissonance, I don’t know. The personal trainer is very good looking, don’t ask me why he came sniffing at my door. I suspect it was his way of “trading up” – not re looks, obvs, but in SES terms. He has something the successful husbands don’t have, that sort of thing. Who knows.

      Anyway, I didn’t feel attracted. I confess I felt a little flattered, and quite embarrassed. And I knew it would make a good story for my gf’s. Now I’m pissed because I have to skulk around the gym. I think that in all my years of marriage, feeling fully committed, I’ve probably reached a point where I’m just not vulnerable to intruders. I think it’s possible. There are men here who wouldn’t choose to practice polygamy even if given the option. JM is one, Ted too, Joe, and Megaman for starters. And they’re all in committed relationships.

      Different strokes for different folks I guess. That’s why it’s really very difficult to generalize.

  • anonymous

    deti:
    “Really, that means she wants the best man she can get. If her husband is not the best man she can get, she will experience twinges of hypergamous discomfort at higher status men. Those twinges are tingles, and cognitive dissonance at feeling hard sexual attraction for a man who she KNOWS is more attractive than her husband.”
    ——
    This may be true in cases where a woman is leaving the guy for another one she has lined up.

    At other times, a woman may leave a man who doesn’t “measure up” just because he doesn’t measure up to her standards, not because she’s looking to have his spot filled in immediately (usually not wanting to jump back into any relationship).

    In my observation, sometimes what these women define as “not measuring up” is when inevitably their partners stop showing interest in them in the way they did in the beginning of their relationship when there were fireworks and hot sex, which explains

    deti:
    “Tennis instructor and personal trainers are high status — high level of competence in or mastery of a particular field.”

    and not necessarily the status of the guy she cheats with, but the interest the new man gives her.

    Back to the other women who don’t end a relationship for another man but for other reasons….
    This is caused by unrealistic expectations, lack of tools to reignite the relationship, a cultural push to prematurely end relationships when they hit rough spots, entitlement, etc., etc. which hypergamy alone doesn’t explain. Just my 2 cents.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    OffTheCuff, cool list. How about one for girls:

    Girl A might think about constantly trading up to a hotter guy and is never really satisfied with what she has.
    Girl B might think about celebrities and other hot guys when it comes up sometimes.
    Girl C might think about hot guys every now and then, but only when she’s unhappy.
    Girl D might try to never think about other guys, and feels bad if she starts thinking about another guy.
    Girl E might be asexual most of the time and doesn’t care, really.
    Girl F might not have a pulse.

  • purplesneakers

    Sassy – me too! I can’t believe the kid who plays him is 18/19. I’m getting too old for this shit…

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier

    There seems to be a meme here, from JM and others, that to have to fall back on character is itself a sign of failure of character, since a truly “good” or at least “in love” person would never feel the slightest temptation in the first place. That strikes me as a pretty lie, to coin a phrase.

    You didn’t coin the phrase “pretty lie.” Not that you need to coin new phrases to make a point here. Just saying…

    I never said that the need to fall back on character is a sign of character deficiency. You make it out that every man would be ramming his cock into a different woman on an hourly basis if it weren’t for character and that every woman would be spreading for bad boy alphas if they didn’t have a fully functional frontal lobe. It’s just so ridiculous and stupid that I don’t know why intelligent people are evening taking shit like that seriously.

  • Escoffier

    Susan, I’ve seen a lot of women go “Awwww, isn’t that cute!” when they see a guy taking care of a child. There does not strike me as anything sexual about it at all. Thinking back to my own childhood and remembering friends who had younger siblings, I certainly often saw girls fawn over the little tykes and give the “Awwww” to the big brother who was taking care of them but not once did that “Awwww” translate into anything beyond. Not that I saw. They always seemed 10x more interested in the kid than the dude. The same way that dogs are supposed to be useful for pickup. Certainly women like to stop and pet dogs but they are way more interested in the dog than the dude.

    The flipside does seem to happen though. That is, if a girl is wary of a guy because he seems to be a player and therefore a bad bet, him showing some beta can help get those defenses down. This is a trope of pop culture, skeevy guys scheming to entrap girls by pretending to be more sensitive. A great example is the movie An Affair to Remember. Cary Grant is a world famous cad who comes on to Deborah Kerr. She is completely wary of him until he takes her to meet his grandmother, and then she sees his softer side and she totally melts. Leaving aside the fact that it’s just movie, this is not an example of beta traits SPARKING the attraction. Rather, the display of beta traits sweep away her prudential reservations against an attraction that already existed.

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

    Esc – “There seems to be a meme here, from JM and others, that to have to fall back on character is itself a sign of failure of character, since a truly “good” or at least “in love” person would never feel the slightest temptation in the first place. That strikes me as a pretty lie, to coin a phrase.”

    Ouch. Yep that about sums it up. It seems like a desire for the Madonna type of woman. Which is fine, except every Madonna has a little bit of whore in her somewhere. The amount and mix varies, and I’m sure there are a few women out there WAY on the Madonna side. I imagine it is a very small group though.

    I think the “newly in love” have this immunity for sure. When all that newness is still causing hearts to flutter and chemicals to flow through the blood. During that time, she is probably only barely aware that other guys exist, sexually speaking. But, after the rush is gone, whats left? Hopefully a solid emotional bond, and a woman of good character. Because at the end of the day, it may be only her character that keeps her faithful when temptation strikes.

    Of course, the exact same thing can be said for men.

  • Passer_By

    People are confusing socio-economic status with mate status. Mr. Burns on the Simpsons has high socio-economic status, but no woman wants to fuck him – especially if she ever saw the episode that showed him naked for a brief instant.

    Status here is the perceived quality of his sperm by her hindbrain. This will be affected by social status and socio-economic status, but will not be determined by it. Good lucks and sufficiently alpha behavior can trump it, especially for sex. In most cases, it’s not like she wants to marry the instructor. She gets hot from his physical attributes and his alpha position over her.

    Hypergamy in the classic sense of “marrying up in social status” is only a subset of hypergamy for game purposes.

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

      Hypergamy in the classic sense of “marrying up in social status” is only a subset of hypergamy for game purposes.

      And the only part of hypergamy that has been rigorously studied and reported. Game purposes tend in another direction.

  • Escoffier

    You didn’t coin the phrase ‘pretty lie.’ ”

    No, really? :rolleyes:

  • Jesus Mahoney

    OTC,

    I would say that most guys are B. And I would add that most guys probably don’t go out looking for women to ogle. If I see a pretty woman, I look. I admire. I move on. If I’m out with my gf, pretty women barely register. Mostly because my attention is focused on us.

    I’m sure I’d get an erection at a strip club despite myself, but I also think I’d leave depressed. A bunch of naked unaroused women dancing for men they don’t like or respect in hopes of monetary reward… sounds sad and pathetic to me.

  • deti

    Susan:

    Tennis instructor/personal trainer: Low social status but high sexual status. She already has social status. Why is she in an affair with him, then? The instructor/trainer obviously had something she wanted but her high status husband could not give her.

    Maybe she won’t leave her husband for the flavor of the month. And do all women do this? Of course not. If they do it is because they experience nothing constraining them, which is the entire problem.

    Hypergamy is never going away. It can only be contained and restrained, not eliminated or even reduced.

    Again, you’re applying hypergamy simply to LTRs and marriage, when I think it also applies to pure sexual response and behavior.

    Do I have a study to back this up? No. Just anecdote…after anecdote….after anecdote… ad nauseam.

    And I don’t understand why Devlin “doesn’t count.” So much of what we talk about here has to do with personal experience and what we see,d what we hear others talk about, and facts on the ground as reported by those in the trenches living them. Are we to conclude that has no validity at all? I can’t agree that the mountains of anecdotal evidence discussed here and over at AlphaGame are to be so easily dismissed.

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

      @deti

      Do I have a study to back this up? No. Just anecdote…after anecdote….after anecdote… ad nauseam.

      Vox himself would say that is massive confirmation bias. Who are you hanging out with and swapping stories with? How many of them come from real life? I know exactly one woman who had an affair with her tennis instructor. She came home and tearfully told her husband. Who confessed, truthfully, that he was also having sex with the same tennis instructor.

      Big scandal! And this is a family whose name adorns wings of hospitals in Boston.

      But then, I’m not gathering these tales of woe in forums for cuckolded men.

      And I don’t understand why Devlin “doesn’t count.” So much of what we talk about here has to do with personal experience and what we see,d what we hear others talk about, and facts on the ground as reported by those in the trenches living them. Are we to conclude that has no validity at all? I can’t agree that the mountains of anecdotal evidence discussed here and over at AlphaGame are to be so easily dismissed.

      I don’t dismiss anecdotal evidence, but it is never sufficient to make broad claims about any aspect of human behavior. Can you imagine the state of science if it were? No doubt there was a great deal of anecdotal evidence that sailing ships reached the edge of the sea and fell off.

      We discussed Devlin yesterday. He has zero credentials in this area, other than as a writer of editorials. That’s fine, as far as it goes, but that’s not very far.

      I’m as subject to bias as anyone else, no doubt I cherry pick the studies I wish to write about. But I won’t let myself read some piece and exclaim it to be Truth because it confirms my world view and makes me feel better in some way. I think there’s a lot of that going on in the manosphere.

      Honestly, I feel like the Game bloggers and their readers are getting more and more strident, more and more negative about women. The animus has skyrocketed in the last year or so. I am not sure why. Roissy used to be the most cynical, and he’s a pussycat compared to Rollo or Dalrock. I’m trying not to let HUS get caught up in all that hate. It bums me out.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Surely sex drive is a factor? We know that high T predicts both cheating and divorce, and also influences sex drive. So base male impulses are probably hormonally determined, at least in part.”

    There is an video from NPR about a trans woman who took T therapy, (linked from Roissy comment) who described being an “A”, involuntarily due to the T. Towards women! She described it as someone playing projecting X-rated movies inside her mind, starring her and the woman she was looking at, beyond her control.

    She tasted a bit of what it’s like to be a teenage boy.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Escoffier,

    No, really?

    Really, I swear.

  • Escoffier

    Ah, but Smithers wants to fuck Mr. Burns!

  • Charm

    @Sassy

    Im in agreement with Susan. You’re a rare breed indeed.

    @Ted

    Everything you said translates as someone who knows who he is. I too agree with not wanting other people to submit to you. I don’t get that. I dont like to be dominated nor do I aim to dominate. Im a very autonomous person and I only desire control over myself. Social proofs is very real, but I don’t much agree with it, nor do I identify with it. Seems silly from my POV, but apparently works wonders with other women. I too compartmentalize very well with other people. I hate hate hate the social game. I hate it (this is why I think I might be introverted), but its not socializing that drains me, its having to play nice that gets to me. I can’t stand it, but I feign it very well too. I don’t like having to bullshit people, but if people knew who I really was (mask removed) they’d be a little surprised.

    Its a very frustrating way to live. Either you get with the program, and follow behind everyone else and play the game (no matter how fake you feel doing so) or you get left behind. Though, I don’t exactly expect any sympathy because whenever I find myself in a situation that caters heavily to me I abuse the hell out of it. I’d rather go without then get with any program, but that’s how I’ve always been.

  • Sassy6519

    I never said that the need to fall back on character is a sign of character deficiency. You make it out that every man would be ramming his cock into a different woman on an hourly basis if it weren’t for character and that every woman would be spreading for bad boy alphas if they didn’t have a fully functional frontal lobe. It’s just so ridiculous and stupid that I don’t know why intelligent people are evening taking shit like that seriously.

    I think the reason why most people control their base instincts is because of religion, the concept of morality, and the socially sanctioned control of human behavior.

    I’m almost 100% positive that the behavior you described above happened amongst our primitive ancestors. Sex wasn’t moral or immoral. Having sex with the alpha males wasn’t moral or immoral. Men chasing after women with the most fertility cues wasn’t moral or immoral. It just was.

    I’ll be honest in saying that if there were no social ramifications, no chance of pregnancy, and no chance of catching a STD, I would be out banging a slew of men. Why? Sex feels good. Without the social dams in place, there really wouldn’t be an incentive to not sleep around.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    She tasted a bit of what it’s like to be a teenage boy.

    Oh, teenage boy? Yes. Mindfucked at least 1/3 of every girl I went to school with. And all the pretty teachers. I think the majority of teenage boys are in Group A.

  • Escoffier

    JM, yes, when you stuff a strawman full of shit, the shit does tend to fall out, I agree.

  • deti

    “I’ll be honest in saying that if there were no social ramifications, no chance of pregnancy, and no chance of catching a STD, I would be out banging a slew of men. Why? Sex feels good. Without the social dams in place, there really wouldn’t be an incentive to not sleep around.”

    Hypergamy at work. Witness what would occur without restraints. The difference between Sassy and a sizable contingent of women in today’s society is that they have no restraints.

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

      @deti

      Hypergamy at work. Witness what would occur without restraints. The difference between Sassy and a sizable contingent of women in today’s society is that they have no restraints.

      Why did you ignore my claim and Sassy’s admission that she is a highly sexed and unusual woman? We’ve already established she’s not representative. The different between Sassy and a sizable contingent of women is that her testosterone is very high.

  • anonymous

    SayWhaat:
    ” What I was trying to say was that there are more guys than you would think who would be willing to overlook that kind of indiscriminate behavior — especially if pluralistic ignorance has everyone convinced that kind of behavior is the norm.”
    —————
    Susan Walsh:
    “Great point about PI – I didn’t think of that, but you’re right, people are likely to judge less if they perceive the behavior as common. They might even judge themselves as losers, and the promiscuous girl as successful – kind of upside down social proof. ”
    ————–
    > I believe that PI is the reason many women don’t ask men about their number of sex partners.
    After hearing that “all men are pigs” “boys will be boys” “men only want one thing”, most women think that most men will have high numbers and so they don’t bother asking, especially if they feel it’s better to remain in the dark.
    You see this same attitude being adopted by men, as Saywhat points out, now who assume that most women will have had several sex partners, so they even advise each other not to ask women about their sexual history.

  • Passer_By

    @ted
    “I’m honestly trying to think of an example of a man I consider dominant that isn’t an asshole. I know a few that aren’t an asshole to me, but to most people they are total jerks. ”

    That’s because you have to be an Ahole to dominate people who don’t want or need to be dominated. You can be benignly dominant with someone who takes great comfort in it. Think of it as being paternal, only not that extreme. When you’re around your kids, you’re in charge, and you’re not doing things obsequiously to please them. Doesn’t mean you have to mean or an asshole about it – in fact you shouldn’t be, and you would carefully take into account what they say much of the time. But, ultimately, they understand that you are in charge and presumably have their best interests at heart, and they take comfort in that. I don’t mean to offend any women by suggesting they are children or that this is exactly like a parent child relationship, because it’s obviously not nearly that extreme. I’m just trying to help Ted understand the concept of benign dominance vs assaholic dominance.

    “I think my real issue is: I don’t WANT anyone to submit to me.”

    Get over it. We’re not talking about submission on some grand or degrading scale. It’s mostly just attitudinal.

  • deti

    And there really are no restraints on any woman except the ones she imposes upon herself, and those she allows others (a husband, e.g.) to impose upon her.

    There really are no customs or traditions which restrain hypergamy.

    There are no laws which restrain it.

    STDs can be guarded against cheaply, safely and effectively, and if contracted, can be cured outright or medically managed.

    Pregnancy can be avoided with cheap, safe and effective contraceptives; or aborted in the case of unplanned pregnancy.

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

      @deti

      STDs can be guarded against cheaply, safely and effectively, and if contracted, can be cured outright or medically managed.

      False. Incurable STDs like genital herpes and HPV compromise women’s fertility. Genital herpes dramatically reduces SMV. Condoms don’t prevent all STDs. Women get more than men, but throat cancer from HPV is on the rise in young men. If by medically manage, you mean take a pill to heal sores faster, or have one’s cervix scraped of cancer cells after each abnormal pap smear, then I guess you’re right as long as the woman doesn’t want children.

      I will agree that many people are not properly alarmed by this. Only a third of college hookups include the use of a condom.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I think the reason why most people control their base instincts is because of religion, the concept of morality, and the socially sanctioned control of human behavior.

    Sure, to an extent. Certainly that’s how we learn some of our values. Some people internalize those values, though. They’ve integrated those values into their psyches, they’ve become a part of who they are.

    I’m almost 100% positive that the behavior you described above happened amongst our primitive ancestors.

    But you also realize they probably took shits out in the open as well. I don’t imagine a lot of people walk around with the desire to poop on sidewalks like dogs. I don’t, but I may just be an outlier.

    I’ll be honest in saying that if there were no social ramifications, no chance of pregnancy, and no chance of catching a STD, I would be out banging a slew of men. Why? Sex feels good. Without the social dams in place, there really wouldn’t be an incentive to not sleep around.

    Pregnancy and disease aren’t social ramifications–they’re biological ramifications. Also, most people have a biological desire to bond with someone else. Fucking around sort of precludes that. So I think there are things other than social dams that keep people from slutting about town. But whatever,that’s fine that you’re like that (and tbh, though I’d never thought I’d say this to a woman, I actually think you should just go and sleep around), but you’re definitely not representative of most women, Sassy. Which is neither bad or good, of course. It just is.

  • Escoffier

    I would not practice polygamy, even if given the option. I don’t doubt that some huge % of men feel the same way. Though I have no idea what that % is.

    But I do know this. The % of men who nonetheless feel viscerally attracted to women they have no intention of hitting on overlaps substantially with the % of men who would not practice polygamy even if given the option.

  • Passer_By

    @deti
    “I’ll be honest in saying that if there were no social ramifications, no chance of pregnancy, and no chance of catching a STD, I would be out banging a slew of men. Why? Sex feels good. Without the social dams in place, there really wouldn’t be an incentive to not sleep around.”

    Hypergamy at work. Witness what would occur without restraints. ”

    How is that hypergamy? It just says she would like to fuck a lot – doesn’t say anything about her mate choices – and, more specifically, it doesn’t in and of itself a desire to ONLY do that with men of relatively higher mate status than herself. In fact, I’m not convinced that Sassy is particularly hypergamous – just that she has strong sex drive and, MAYBE, more urge for variety than the average woman. Both of these are more male qualities that could be a result of higher T.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Ah, but Smithers wants to fuck Mr. Burns!

    JM, yes, when you stuff a strawman full of shit, the shit does tend to fall out, I agree.

    Is this witty repartee that’s going over my head or are you losing your marbles?

  • Escoffier

    JM, you’re taking this all far too personally, it’s just an honest disagreement.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    But I do know this. The % of men who nonetheless feel viscerally attracted to women they have no intention of hitting on overlaps substantially with the % of men who would not practice polygamy even if given the option.

    So you’re saying that monogamous people see other attractive human beings throughout the course of a day? Shocking.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jesus Mahoney

    I know that the risk of pregnancy and STDs are biological ramifications. That’s why I wrote them out separately from social ramifications. Thanks for your input though.

    Anyway, why do you think I should just sleep around? What would that get me? The risks obviously outweigh the pros, in that situation. Why do you feel that I should engage in the risks anyway?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    JM, you’re taking this all far too personally, it’s just an honest disagreement.

    Huh? What have I taken personally? I’m genuinely confused.

  • Passer_By

    @susan
    “And the only part of hypergamy that has been rigorously studied and reported. ”

    Maybe, but i’m not sure how one would really study it because first you would have to be able to quantify relative mate value. But, I think the OK cupid study that showed that women rate a subtantial majority of men as “less than average in attractiveness” is a pretty good start.

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

      But, I think the OK cupid study that showed that women rate a subtantial majority of men as “less than average in attractiveness” is a pretty good start.

      I don’t dispute that women seek to land the highest value mate they can, and that value is determined largely by dominance rather than looks. Though looks obviously play a role as well. I suspect that some men with very tight Game and bragging rights would rank well below average in attractiveness. Actually, I know they would. That’s why online dating doesn’t serve men as well as women. They can’t strut their best stuff with that format.

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

    Kinda O/T, but I thought the crew at HUS really needed to see this bizarre story.

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

      @david Foster

      Interesting video there! I read that a young college student, tired of picking up her roommate at various boys’ apartments in the morning, has started a Shuttle of Shame service. She charges $5 to pick girls up in the morning and take them home. No word on how many takers she’s had.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Anyway, why do you think I should just sleep around?

    Because what the rational part of you says it wants is not what the subrational part of you desires. The guys you want are unlikely to want a relationship with you. You don’t seem to value a strong bond with someone. You once described your perfect relationship and you do your thing and he does his and you come together now and then. Also, you don’t want children.

    What would that get me?

    Laid.

    The risks obviously outweigh the pros, in that situation. Why do you feel that I should engage in the risks anyway?

    Practice safe sex. Find a regular partner. Use condoms. Get on the pill. Have him get tested. There are ways to be safe.

  • deti

    Passer By:

    “How is that hypergamy? It just says she would like to fuck a lot – doesn’t say anything about her mate choices – and, more specifically, it doesn’t in and of itself a desire to ONLY do that with men of relatively higher mate status than herself.”

    There is no way in hell a self-described 8 (as Sassy has described herself) is going to bang fuglies because she needs to have sex. I don’t believe that for one single solitary second. She’d be banging men she finds attractive and therefore above her in some way. Women don’t go out seeking fuglies just to scratch an itch. Women have sex with men they find attractive, who tingle them, who are above them in status. She’s not talking about pity sex. She’s talking about going out and rutting just to rut.

    I just don’t believe that women will do this with average joe men. They do it with cads, players, douchebags and athletes. They do it with men who display and peacock. They do it with alphas. THey don’t seek out betas and omegas just for servicing. The reason they do it with alphas is because there is a cadre of top 20% men who stand (heh) ready, willing and able to service Sassy any time, anywhere, any day she needs that void filled. She has a choice, and given a choice, I venture to say she’ll select the hot alpha with even more T than she has, every time.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jesus Mahoney

    You may think that I’m not representative of women, but I think I’m not representative of the women on this site on this topic. Most other women aren’t as introspective as we are here. Most are also the products of broken homes and weakened social ramifications. What makes you think that other women are so much different than me?

    I have a feeling that the current problems in today’s SMP are only going to get worse, exactly for the reasons I have mentioned above. Without restraint, without ramifications, without religion, without morality, what stops humans from acting on their base instincts?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Without restraint, without ramifications, without religion, without morality, what stops humans from acting on their base instincts?

    Their higher instincts.

  • Sassy6519

    Practice safe sex. Find a regular partner. Use condoms. Get on the pill. Have him get tested. There are ways to be safe.

    So now you are advocating that I get a FWB, despite the fact that it would hurt my value socially in the eyes of men?

    That’s just hilarious.

  • Passer_By

    @deti

    Ok, now you’ve gone off the deep end

    “There is no way in hell a self-described 8 (as Sassy has described herself) is going to bang fuglies because she needs to have sex. ”

    That may very well be true, but all her statement above said is that she would fuck a lot. Find another statement to prove your point.

    Here is a summary of your argument

    “All women are hypergamous all the time
    Proof: Sassy says that without social restraints and consequences, she would fuck a lot more guys”
    “PB: How is that proof? It just says she wants to fuck”
    “Yes, but because she is by definition hypergamous, she would only do so hypergamously, and therefore she is obviously proof of hypergamy”

    Also, not banging fuglies is not the same the same as being hypergamous. From what I’ve gathered, her recent boyfriends have not been of high mate value (by other womens’ standards), and that caused instability in their relationship due to guys’ insecurities. I’ll allow for the possibility that she’s full of shit, but I’ll allow for the possibility that she is telling the truth.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jesus Mahoney

    This begs the question of whether or not our higher instincts are a product of restraint, social ramifications, religion, and morality or vice versa.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    So now you are advocating that I get a FWB, despite the fact that it would hurt my value socially in the eyes of men?

    That’s just hilarious.

    Not like you want that strong bond and a family and all that…. So who cares?

    You might. And that’s fine. I’m not actually advocating for you to do anything. Do whatever makes you happy.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    This begs the question of whether or not our higher instincts are a product of restraint, social ramifications, religion, and morality or vice versa.

    Well, if you have a pessimistic view of humankind, then you’d believe the former.

  • deti

    Susan:

    “Honestly, I feel like the Game bloggers and their readers are getting more and more strident, more and more negative about women. The animus has skyrocketed in the last year or so. I am not sure why. Roissy used to be the most cynical, and he’s a pussycat compared to Rollo or Dalrock. I’m trying not to let HUS get caught up in all that hate. It bums me out.”

    Who’s hating on anyone? We’ve been in here talking about hypergamy and whether it has broader applications beyond marriage. I have my views, you have yours. All well and good.

    Strong disagreement, even vehement disagreement, isn’t hate. I’ve had JM throw my personal relationship in my face just a few minutes ago. And I know very well why he did it — to discredit me and my views. That’s more hateful than anything I’ve done or said today.

    You know, I think I’ve made my points. I’d just better bow out. This is just degenerating now.

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

      @deti

      Who’s hating on anyone? We’ve been in here talking about hypergamy and whether it has broader applications beyond marriage. I have my views, you have yours. All well and good.

      I’m sorry, I wasn’t directing that specifically at you. It was more of a big picture comment that I vented at the end of that post to you. Bad placement, I should have made it a separate statement.

      Disagreement and debate is all good. I get really frustrated when the logic is a circle. If you’re honest, I think you’ll agree that there’s a lot of stuff peddled on blogs, probably including this one, that we read, we think that sounds fairly reasonable, we may even think it’s good news because it means someone else is to blame instead of us, and bam, it’s gospel truth.

      It’s all so adversarial. Here’s a post – a young woman acknowledges her poor choices, reflects on her behavior, and seeks my counsel. The same weekend I read a review of a book about the science of habit. The ideas connect in my mind, and I decide to riff on that – approaching hookup culture in a new way – exposing the Pluralistic Ignorance and providing support for people who want to change their behavior.

      And here we are, arguing about what hypergamy means. To what end? How would any reader make sense of this comment thread? This isn’t an accusation against you, it’s just an observation about what’s on people’s minds and what’s bugging them, as evidenced here.

      I find it discouraging, that’s all.

  • Passer_By

    @susan

    Also, I get your desire for studies, and unbiased studies can be helpful. But, keep in mind, I’m sure feminists could come her armed with a gaggle of studies by the properly credentialed that contradict pretty much everything said here. Doesn’t make them right.

  • Charm

    but throat cancer from HPV is on the rise in young men.

    *vomits*

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

      @Charm

      but throat cancer from HPV is on the rise in young men.

      *vomits*

      I kept reading about this, and one day I asked an oncologist from Children’s Hospital in Boston how many cases of this they see in a week. He said a handful. I expected him to say zero. So a dozen a month or so, 20 year old boys with throat cancer. I think it’s a pretty serious situation, too. I think HPV may be a very, very serious health problem moving forward.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I’ve had JM throw my personal relationship in my face just a few minutes ago. And I know very well why he did it — to discredit me and my views. That’s more hateful than anything I’ve done or said today.

    WTF? I just asked if you experienced what you were describing with anyone close to you.

  • anonymous

    deti:
    “Finally, I’ve seen Obsidian riff on this, and Malia too in some other threads. The dynamic she’s talking about with sluts and “good girls” both ending up as spinsters has already played out en masse in the African American community at large”
    ———–
    In the Latin-American community also and not caused by feminism but by other factors that weakened the traditional family structure.

    You forgot to add that more people jumping onto the carousel doesn’t correct it as some people are hoping for.
    When not marrying, cohabitation, children OOW are more commonplace- no one group decides to “straighten themselves out”, quite the contrary, it becomes “just the way things are.”
    Only a small percentage of people find their way out of the cesspool and children end up paying the price (along with society, taxpayers).
    It’s not sustainable en masse.

  • deti

    “Incurable STDs like genital herpes and HPV compromise women’s fertility. Genital herpes dramatically reduces SMV. Condoms don’t prevent all STDs. Women get more than men, but throat cancer from HPV is on the rise in young men. If by medically manage, you mean take a pill to heal sores faster, or have one’s cervix scraped of cancer cells after each abnormal pap smear, then I guess you’re right as long as the woman doesn’t want children.

    I will agree that many people are not properly alarmed by this. Only a third of college hookups include the use of a condom.”

    Everything you say here is true. Herpes and HPV are medically managed through medications and are not curable. Of course that’s true. Never said it wasn’t. The point is that condom use can prevent transmission of STDs. Nothing is perfect.

  • Sassy6519

    Also, not banging fuglies is not the same the same as being hypergamous. From what I’ve gathered, her recent boyfriends have not been of high mate value (by other womens’ standards), and that caused instability in their relationship due to guys’ insecurities. I’ll allow for the possibility that she’s full of shit, but I’ll allow for the possibility that she is telling the truth.

    A few of them have been average, and a few of them have been very high value/alpha. The last ex nearly left me in a crumpled heap of anger and utter devotion.

    Not like you want that strong bond and a family and all that…. So who cares?

    Here’s the thing. I want a strong bond with my man, just not in the way you define it. Your definition of love and my definition of love are about as far apart as Pluto and the sun.

    Also, just because I don’t want kids doesn’t mean that I don’t value monogamy/marriage. It’s one of the reasons why I give a rat’s ass not to hookup with random men in the first place. I know doing so would damage my value. Does the base urge to sleep around go away despite that? No. I restrain myself because I know that it will be better for me in the long run.

    It’s also why I don’t go on a daily food binge, despite the fact that I’d love to eat all the food I want without gaining any weight. I know it’s better for me in the long run.

    False. Incurable STDs like genital herpes and HPV compromise women’s fertility. Genital herpes dramatically reduces SMV. Condoms don’t prevent all STDs. Women get more than men, but throat cancer from HPV is on the rise in young men. If by medically manage, you mean take a pill to heal sores faster, or have one’s cervix scraped of cancer cells after each abnormal pap smear, then I guess you’re right as long as the woman doesn’t want children.

    Exactly. I don’t want to take the risk of catching something, regardless of whether or not I can cure it. I’d rather be safe than sorry.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sassy,

    That’s cool. Wasn’t trying to criticize you. I’d say that a lot of people wouldn’t binge on food all day even if they could get away with it. A lot of people wouldn’t have random sex even if they thought they could get away with it, too. You’re hemmed in purely by social and biological constraints. That must feel terrible.

    I still think that you’re an outlier, though. Not saying that’s bad, but you know, NAWALT.

  • Herb

    @Susan

    Honestly, I feel like the Game bloggers and their readers are getting more and more strident, more and more negative about women. The animus has skyrocketed in the last year or so. I am not sure why.

    1. It used to be “where have all the good men” articles were a Valentines Day think and were more lament. Now they’re “grow the fuck up and serve my needs” and they’re monthly.

    2. The Secretary of State of the US can say “Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat.” and even a decade later I had to explain to a woman why a man might find it offensive.

    3. Mass (your state) tries to reform alimony laws and NOW is on the rampage about how it harms women.

    4. SPLC classifies game bloggers as the equivalent of the Klan.

    5. Slut-walks

    From the male side it looks like women are escalating…are you surprised they are too…remember our conversation about everybody weaponizing back on the dread thread. It’s all of a piece.

  • Sassy6519

    You’re hemmed in purely by social and biological constraints. That must feel terrible.

    Charming.

    Tell me, what other constraints are there besides biological and social constraints?

    Don’t bother saying spiritual, because spiritual constraints are a product of social constraints.

  • Herb

    @Susan

    And here we are, arguing about what hypergamy means. To what end? How would any reader make sense of this comment thread? This isn’t an accusation against you, it’s just an observation about what’s on people’s minds and what’s bugging them, as evidenced here.

    That it’s the Internet…I mean, seriously, this isn’t even bad drift compared to some forums I read.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Tell me, what other constraints are there besides biological and social constraints?

    Psychological, why?

  • anonymous

    “But, I think the OK cupid study that showed that women rate a subtantial majority of men as “less than average in attractiveness” is a pretty good start.”

    Was this study based on photos alone or on videos?
    I think it makes a difference because of the fact that women’s attraction is based on several factors (like behavioral), so a photo alone isn’t going to generate attraction for many women.

  • deti

    Herb:

    “From the male side it looks like women are escalating…are you surprised they are too…remember our conversation about everybody weaponizing back on the dread thread. It’s all of a piece.”

    And it’s been like this ever since I can remember, since I was in high school in the mid-1980s. It’s been escalating for at least 30 years.

    .

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

      @deti, @Herb

      You guys are right, I’m just getting emotional. You know that as a woman I take this stuff to heart. I can stew over these threads for hours, and that’s my fault, not anyone else’s. I need to get better perspective. For an online site with men and women, many of whom have been disappointed in one way or another, we do a decent job of keeping things civil, I think.

      Honestly, I don’t know how anyone runs for public office. It must take an ego of steel.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Don’t bother saying spiritual, because spiritual constraints are a product of social constraints.

    And this I don’t get. How are spiritual constraints necessarily the product of social constraints.

    Seems to me that Jesus, the Buddha, Muhammad, Moses… all those guys had to get away from society in order to awaken their perception of spiritual values. They fled to the desert, the forest, caves, mountaintops…

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jesus Mahoney

    Psychological is a product of biological, not to mention social. Thanks for trying though.

    On another note, why do humans do anything that they do?

    I think humans have the tendency/instinct to seek pleasure and avoid pain. Biological and social constraints afford humans that luxury.

  • Escoffier

    ” I know exactly one woman who had an affair with her tennis instructor. She came home and tearfully told her husband. Who confessed, truthfully, that he was also having sex with the same tennis instructor. ”

    Now, that’s funny. Sad, too, but the element of comedy is inescapable. There’s a movie in that.

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

      Now, that’s funny. Sad, too, but the element of comedy is inescapable. There’s a movie in that.

      I agree. They divorced, he moved to a gay bachelor pad. It’s her family with the money, and her husband worked for her father, so he’s SOL. Haha, he acted like the hypergamous female.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sassy,

    lol, For that matter the social is the product of biological, since there’s no society w/o biological beings to populate it.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jesus Mahoney

    Yes, all of those men did flee society for a time. Eventually, they came back to society in order to spread a message, their message. If they didn’t care to have an effect on society or social morals, they would have stayed isolated forever and not tried to spread a message.

    It’s not a bad thing to want to affect society, but it is a social effect and constraint.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    @ Jesus Mahoney

    Yes, all of those men did flee society for a time. Eventually, they came back to society in order to spread a message, their message. If they didn’t care to have an effect on society or social morals, they would have stayed isolated forever and not tried to spread a message.

    It’s not a bad thing to want to affect society, but it is a social effect and constraint.

    Okay, and in that case, the spiritual affected the social and not the other way around.

  • Passer_By

    “Was this study based on photos alone or on videos?
    I think it makes a difference because of the fact that women’s attraction is based on several factors (like behavioral), so a photo alone isn’t going to generate attraction for many women.”

    Right, I get that. It’s just that they were rating their physical attractiveness, in and of itself, as either above or below average, or perhaps it was more precise and they were supposed to rate it from 1 to 10 or some such thing. They weren’t rating them as to whether they want to date them – just an appraisal of their relative physical appearance. Men, instinctively, produced a set of ratings for women that averaged out to what you would expect – a balanced curve centered at 50%. Women instinctively rated the physical appearance of men in a way that left a substantial majority of them below the 50% line.

    I don’t know if they saw videos. I suspect they saw profiles, but I’m not sure.

  • Herb

    @deti

    And it’s been like this ever since I can remember, since I was in high school in the mid-1980s. It’s been escalating for at least 30 years.

    Oh, I remember…if we’re talking specifically this year the one that has really hit me is the “where are all the good men” articles.

    2011 is the first year I remember a large number not in late January or February. Also, while I first saw “why are all men losers” versions, the man-up aspect seems to have significantly ramped up in the past 18 months or so.

    Why now? Economy, critical mass of Gen X women hitting 40 alone? Who knows, but that does seem to be the biggest change. It was that change (how often they were occurring) that lead me to the manosphere and HUS. I suspect that may be another issue. More and more men aren’t arriving for game to get women but are, as was put above, damaged and out to fight back.

    Perhaps the number of men who would rather shoot back than game sluts has hit critical mass?

    Then again I don’t know why I’ve stuck around the handful of places I have (mostly here and the Captain’s blog with side trips to Dalrock and Grerp)…relationship wise I’m so out of the mainstream most of the rules don’t apply plus the lifestyle I’m in spends so much stuff on relationship talk (six out of seven classes at my last conference to one degree or another) it’s not really necessary.

    Maybe I’m just worried about my nephew and my niecphew.

  • Passer_By

    @sassy

    “Psychological is a product of biological, not to mention social. Thanks for trying though. On another note, why do humans do anything that they do?”

    Man, this thread is getting heavy.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sassy,

    And the biological is the product of the physical and the physical is the product of the spiritual and the knee bone is connected to the thigh bone. Where are we going with all of this?

  • Herb

    @Susan

    You guys are right, I’m just getting emotional. You know that as a woman I take this stuff to heart. I can stew over these threads for hours, and that’s my fault, not anyone else’s. I need to get better perspective. For an online site with men and women, many of whom have been disappointed in one way or another, we do a decent job of keeping things civil, I think.

    If Boston netgoth was still around I’d sign you up. After that, you learn not to get upset at the Internet…that list was so rough I rejoined (and I wasn’t the only one) to flame a newbie who had flamed a long time (and well loved) member.

    Said newbie survived and became quite popular…it was just a rough crowd.

    Which is the long way of saying, if that’s your idea of having a emotional moment about an Internet thread, keep the day job ;)

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sassy,

    I think humans have the tendency/instinct to seek pleasure and avoid pain.

    Let me ask you this: if a man risks his life to save another person or if a parent lays down his or life for the life of a child, is that person seeking pleasure, avoiding pain, or acting on some other impulse entirely?

  • anonymous

    Escoffier:
    “Women are attracted to stereotypical “alpha” traits they way men are attracted to pretty faces, big boob and pert asses. However, what a woman REALLY wants is an alpha “who will treat her right,” i.e., the right mix of alpha and beta.

    The problem is, these don’t often go together. ”

    To me, it’s no different than men wanting a hot looking slut for short-term and then a feminine nice looking chaste woman for a wife.

    For women- the hot looking dominant alpha for short-term.
    Good looking mixed alpha/beta as a husband.

    Individual people fall on different sections of the spectrum regarding how much they get involved in the short-term strategy (if at all) and the degrees of what they’re satisfied with for LTRs.

    A cad being satisfied with that sweet chaste girl nextdoor is just as weird as a woman marrying the nice guy and wanting him to act like a cad.

  • Sassy6519

    Okay, and in that case, the spiritual affected the social and not the other way around.

    Not necessarily. A person can believe anything that they want. I could believe that my lava lamp is a deity. That’s spiritual. It is a purely individual desire to connect with something else. The desire to connect with something, deity or not, is social in nature.

    And the biological is the product of the physical and the physical is the product of the spiritual and the knee bone is connected to the thigh bone. Where are we going with all of this?

    Enjoy the ride JM. This is where we are going.

    You seem to believe that there are more constraints than biological and social constraints, as expressed in this comment:

    You’re hemmed in purely by social and biological constraints. That must feel terrible.

    It’s the smug, patronizing attitude you have about the idea of people limiting their own behavior due to risks or constraints that bothers me. You seem to think that people act the way they do for other reasons besides that, which is fine in and of itself. The judgement and the holier than thou attitude is what is off putting. You seem to think that you are above your base instincts for nobler reasons, but you are not. That fact does not make you a damaged person. It makes you human.

    Unless you fancy yourself a deity. By all means, do so. Just don’t be surprised when other people find it hard to worship your line of thinking.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jesus Mahoney

    It is in my opinion that altruism is a product of both seeking pleasure and avoiding pain.

    If I saved a person from a burning building, I would feel pleasure from feeling like a hero. I would be avoiding pain by doing the socially accepted thing, which is to help others.

    If I didn’t attempt to save a person that I was capable of saving, people would think poorly of me. Think of how the men were scorned for pushing women out of the way and jumping on the life boats themselves. They went against the socially sanctioned/accepted behavior, and they caught flack for it.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sassy,

    I don’t feel hemmed in by many constraints. I act out of my volition. I fancy us all deities (Namaste).

    Calling the desire to connect with your conception of the divine “social” is a major stretch. It’s absurd, actually.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    If I saved a person from a burning building, I would feel pleasure from feeling like a hero. I would be avoiding pain by doing the socially accepted thing, which is to help others.

    That’s nice. But I would be acting on a different impulse entirely.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Passer By, that article did say women rated most men below average, but they also messaged those men:

    http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dating/

    “the average-looking woman has convinced herself that the vast majority of males aren’t good enough for her, but she then goes right out and messages them anyway.”

    It supports the idea that female mechanisms of attraction are not purely visual. Most men aren’t attractive to most women by sole virtue of their looks.

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

      @Hope

      When my husband got home from work tonight, I noticed he had gotten a haircut. I took a play from your book and said, “You are the handsomest man in the whole world.” He chuckled, shook his head and said, “I’m so glad you’re delusional.”

  • Sassy6519

    Calling the desire to connect with your conception of the divine “social” is a major stretch. It’s absurd, actually.

    How so? Think about it.

    Why does the concept of a deity or higher being exist anyway? People want to have something to believe in to explain why we exist in the first place. Our desire to find answers to questions is biological, created by mutations in our brains over thousands of years.

    Next, people simply don’t designate a deity for themselves and call it a day. They interact with it. They talk with it. They socialize with it. It’s all social.

    That’s nice. But I would be acting on a different impulse entirely.

    What impulse is that?

  • purplesneakers

    Calling the desire to connect with your conception of the divine “social” is a major stretch. It’s absurd, actually.

    Um, no it’s not. Ever heard of Durkheim?

  • deti

    Herb 517:

    I’m not in the manosphere to fight. I’m here to gain understanding and insight. I’m here to help my son avoid the mistakes I made. I’m here to find out the truth.

    I’m here because I stumbled onto Roissy in March 2011 and found out that what I’d been told and taught, had drilled into my head about women and intergender relationships was out and out fraudulent.

    I’m here because my readings in the manosphere make more sense than the bill of goods I’d been handed by my parents, pastors, teachers, Scout leaders, and even other girls. I realized they had no f*cking idea what they were talking about. I realized just about everything I had been doing wrong in my marriage and my previous relationships.

    As for “man up”, I think that meme is ramping up and you’ll see it ramped up even more. And I don’t think the male response is going to be “fighting back”. The male response will be “meh”. They’re becoming increasingly impervious to the shaming. Men who can’t win at the game (omegas and gammas) will simply refuse to play. The men who can win will take what they can and give as little as possible. The superalphas will make a killing with soft harems and ONSs. The divides will probably become even starker. But this will all happen slowly as the marriage rate continues creeping downward and average ages of first marriages continues to inch upwards.

    Mind you, I’m not advocating this necessarily. I think this is the most likely scenario.

  • purplesneakers

    What impulse is that?

    I’m sure it’s just the impulse to save other human beings, completely of his own volition, of course.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Calling the desire to connect with your conception of the divine “social” is a major stretch. It’s absurd, actually.

    How so? Think about it.

    Why does the concept of a deity or higher being exist anyway? People want to have something to believe in to explain why we exist in the first place. Our desire to find answers to questions is biological, created by mutations in our brains over thousands of years.

    Next, people simply don’t designate a deity for themselves and call it a day. They interact with it. They talk with it. They socialize with it. It’s all social.

    You’re coming at it with a Western bias. In many non-Western cultures, the concept of a deity is impersonal. And in Buddhism, of course, there is no deity, only the experience of divinity, which it is quite possible to experience in solitude.

    What impulse is that?

    It would have nothing to do with wanting to play hero. And it would have nothing to do with the pain I would feel for having done the cowardly thing. It would be a response to the pain of another. If I see a child in a busy road about to be hit, I’m only thinking of the survival and/or pain of that child. If I run into the street to help it, it’s because the child’s pain/pleasure has suddenly become more important than my own. It’s a selfless act. You could call it empathy, but I think it’s more than that. I believe it’s rooted in a realization of interconnectedness.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Um, no it’s not. Ever heard of Durkheim?

    Yea, ever heard of someone calling Durkheim absurd?

  • Sassy6519

    @ purplesneakers

    I agree with you. I have the impulse to save other human beings of my own volition, but it’s based on social ideas and constraints, not to mention my desire to avoid the feeling of guilt (which is a manifestation of pain avoidance).

    You would be surprised what people are capable of doing due to social conditioning and ideas. I have my bachelor’s degree in psychology, and I’m pursuing my master’s in psychology.

    There are too many tests, too many examples of bad behavior, and too many examples throughout history of bad behavior that are the direct result of social ideas and conditioning.

    Slavery, the Holocaust, hazing, warfare, you name it.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I’m sure it’s just the impulse to save other human beings, completely of his own volition, of course.

    That’s not passive-aggressive at all.

  • Cooper

    @deti

    “I’m here because I stumbled onto Roissy in March 2011 and found out that what I’d been told and taught, had drilled into my head about women and intergender relationships was out and out fraudulent. ”

    Can you provide a link, so I can understand what you’ve learned since then?

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jesus Mahoney

    You are correct in thinking that I would consider what you described empathy. As a result, your behavior would be a form of pain avoidance because you would be trying to limit or stop the pain you feel on their behalf.

    One of the worst things I have ever experienced is feeling humiliated and embarrassed for another person. It’s a feeling that I don’t tolerate very well, and I typically walk away from the situation when it arises. I had a love hate relationship with American Idol auditions for the longest time. I liked watching the show, but I felt physical pain watching some people sing poorly. I felt embarrassed for them, and it was overpowering.

  • http://thesanctuary-spacetraveller.blogspot.com JT

    @ Escoffier @ 450,

    Great comment.
    All VERY true.
    :-)

  • deti

    Cooper:

    Can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic or not. If you are, heh. You’re a funny guy.

    If you’re not, there aren’t enough links to give you and SW would never let me post them all.

  • Charm

    Lol. This thread is getting out of hand.

  • Passer_By

    @hope
    Yes, I realize that the messaging of the women was also skewed such that it was only a little to the right of that curve, but it was to the right.

    My theory as to why they didn’t message the most attractive guys largely to the exclusion of the others is a a desire not to get used for sex through an online dating service.

    “It supports the idea that female mechanisms of attraction are not purely visual. ”

    Again, they were simply asked to rate them on a scale of below average, average, above average, etc. They were asked if they were willing to date them. They just seem to instinctively rate 80% them as below average looking.

    Also, looking back at the article, I think it’s implicit that, for purposes of the ratings, they were only shown the pictures – because they wanted to see to what extent the rating level of the picture in and of itself influenced the numbers of messages received.

    Conversely, in the messaging, the men shoot for the moon alot, since there is no real harm or cost to them in trying, but they ultimately message the others too.

  • Cooper

    @deti
    I knew my sincerity would be in question. I was being serious. I’m not familar with the likes of Roissy, Rollo or Dalrock. (those are the ones you mentioned)

    I googled what I could about Roissy’s post. Honestly, what I’ve read so far has made be kinda sick. This shit actually works?

    I’m not better off without it, so I’m all ears.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Susan, don’t take it to heart. People are always ruder/more honest/speak their minds more online than in real life.

    If you can imagine someone speaking 1/1000th of what I usually say online, with more polite language and a meek little smile, that’s me. :P

  • Charm

    One of the worst things I have ever experienced is feeling humiliated and embarrassed for another person. It’s a feeling that I don’t tolerate very well, and I typically walk away from the situation when it arises. I had a love hate relationship with American Idol auditions for the longest time. I liked watching the show, but I felt physical pain watching some people sing poorly. I felt embarrassed for them, and it was overpowering.

    +1

    I generally don’t mind laughing at people and often times its probably not nice, but when someone is embarrassing themselves I can’t stand to watch it. I don’t find it funny at all. My ex used to get off on watching someone humiliate themselves but I hate it. It evokes a very powerful response in me as well. Watching people find amusement in others humiliation infuriates me. Sometimes, when a poster makes a stupid claim on this site, I don’t even want to refresh the browser to see the responses. I feel so embarrassed for them and often times just want them to go away. In real life however, I’ll try to either take the attention off them, stop them from doing it in the first place, or just walk away.

  • Charm

    @Cooper

    yea, Roissy will do that to you. He has a few posts that aren’t so bad, but getting through the bad ones is the tough part. He represents the very things I don’t want to believe exist within the human mind.

  • Cooper

    “Watching people find amusement in others humiliation infuriates me.”

    *raises hand* Guilty.

    My best friend begged, and begged for me to drive him 5 blocks. I finally gave in, and when he was getting out of the car, his phone (which was on his lap) fell into a puddle.
    I laughed, and said “that probably wouldn’t of happened had you chosen to walk” lol
    Am I bad person?

  • Passer_By

    @cooper

    “I googled what I could about Roissy’s post.”

    Which post? You mean his blog? Or a particular post?

    I would recommend taking a week or so and, in your spare time, reading his blog from beginning to end chronologically (i.e. start with the oldest posts). It will be an interesting read, and the more you look at stuff like that the more you get. But, also understand, a lot of writes is a bit hyperbolic, for lack of a better word, to drive home a point to guys to snap out of it. And, well, sometimes he just seems flat ass wrong. Other times, he seems to draw conclusions that are too absolutist from data that suggest only statistical tendencies (which is true of much of the manosphere). But it’s still valuable, and, when he’s on, he’s a hell of a writer.

  • Cooper

    @Charm

    If Roissy (and ect) is what everyone refers to as the “red pill,” I think I’m going to slide that pill back to the other side of the table.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Passer By, I think most women’s reactions to most men’s appearance is “meh.”

    I met my husband in an online video game, and we saw each other’s pictures before we started really talking. My thoughts on his picture: “whatever.” His reaction to my picture: “hot/cute.”

    I think my husband is super handsome now, but that only happened after I fell in love. I think feelings dictate how many women judge male appearances. In a totally neutral scenario, probably the vast majority of men would not be on a woman’s radar.

    Sometimes I say to my husband, “You’re so handsome and sexy. I don’t know why tons of girls aren’t throwing themselves at you.” And he will roll his eyes and chuckle.

  • Passer_By

    @charm

    “I generally don’t mind laughing at people and often times its probably not nice, but when someone is embarrassing themselves I can’t stand to watch it. I don’t find it funny at all. My ex used to get off on watching someone humiliate themselves but I hate it. It evokes a very powerful response in me as well. ”

    Count me in for that too. I just get physically uncomfortable. If the person is A-hole, that helps a little, but most of the time I just want it to stop.

    @Cooper
    Your friend just experienced minor inconvenience or loss. It’s not the same as extreme humiliation.

  • Cooper

    @passer_by
    I don’t think I found his actual blog, just another re-posting his posts.

    It was something like The 16 Commandments of Poon.

    Like I said, it made me sick – to even consider adopting such mentality.

  • Charm

    @Cooper

    No, not that. I would have laughed and said I told you so too.

    Im talking more along the lines of dealing with people who have no idea they are embarassing/humiliating themselves. Like on American Idol when they actually believe that can truly sing….and they can’t. I don’t find it funny at all. The few times when this has played out is dealing with people with higher functioning autism. One of the guys I worked with was a high functioning but it was obvious that something was a bit off. Anyway, he didn’t up cues and behavior from his surrounding so if you didn’t point it out, he’d continue doing whatever awkward or inappropriate thing he was doing. One day he was mopping the floor is this god awful manner and everyone stood around whispering and laughing at him and no one would correct him. I got pissed off and walked over him and showed him how to mop the floor. Once I did he got it and did it correctly. The fact that no one saw that he was a bit autistic and stood there and laughed at it infuriated me. I’d correct him all the time and people thought I was being rude, but he appreciated it because he said other people would just sit by and watch. Thats how we became friends.

  • Charm

    *didn’t pick up one cues

  • Passer_By

    @hope
    “Passer By, I think most women’s reactions to most men’s appearance is “meh.””

    I know, but you would think they could at least rate their degrees of “meh”, such that they perceived some as more “meh” than others in a way that balanced out around the middle. That’s my only point. The fact that they didn’t supports the notion that, as they go through regular life, most men are invisible to them such that they don’t have an intrinsic sense of how many men they find unnattractive. Then, when presented with pictures of actual men, they all look less than average to a degree they never realized.

  • OffTheCuff

    Hope: “Passer By, that article did say women rated most men below average, but they also messaged those men”

    That’s about as comforting as a man saying “you’re kind of ugly, but hey, I’d bang you anyway”.

  • Charm

    @passer_by

    If the persons an asshole and they deserve it, its always funny. But I find that when it comes to people who have a mental disability, or low IQ or grew up in a impoverished environment and don’t know any better I simply can’t find the humor in it. Its cruel. I hate it.

  • deti

    Cooper:

    “This shit actually works?”

    Short answer: Yes.

    Long answer:

    I don’t remember mentioning Rollo or Dalrock although I respect their work. I do remember mentioning Roissy. It shouldn’t make you sick, necessarily; but remember that Roissy’s early writings describe the DC hookup club scene, which to my understanding is one of the most brutal dating scenes in the entire country.

    For married game, no one beats MarriedManSexLife and the Dave from Hawaii posts at Roissy (now Heartiste). I’m 43 years old, married nearly 16 years.

    I’m not going to post any links here. Suffice it to say I’ve learned the following:

    1. Be your own man. Develop your own interests, hobbies and activities.
    2. Work on “inner game”: Improve your physical fitness. Approach women.
    3. For young single men, approaching is a numbers game. Your sexual market value tends to go up as you get older, peaks in your mid 30s or so, and then starts a slow decline.
    4. The best mix for long relationships is a mix of alpha and beta traits, with more alpha than beta.
    5. Stand up for yourself and what you want. If you’re not getting what you want from your relationship, End. It. Now.
    6. As a general rule, women with high partner counts present a host of issues in relationships, some of which can be surmounted if you — and she — are willing to be honest about them and are willing to do the work.
    7. Men and women are very different in their attraction triggers, methods of processing information, and ways of seeing and reacting to the world.
    8. These are the things women find attractive in men: Confidence. Dominance. Displays of power and authority. These are the things women find desirable: Honor. Fidelity. Loyalty. Dignity. Industriousness. Stoicism.
    9. Your maleness is a good thing. It should not be suppressed, hidden or apologized for.
    10. Lead her. Show dominance. Insist on her respect for you, publicly and privately.

  • Cooper

    @deti
    You’re 43, and only started reading Roissy since March 2011?

    FYI, CNTR+F and you can find any word on the page (ie. Dalrock)

    and btw, I’m only 23.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sassy,

    You are correct in thinking that I would consider what you described empathy. As a result, your behavior would be a form of pain avoidance because you would be trying to limit or stop the pain you feel on their behalf.

    I don’t think this does my example justice, but I’ll wait to comment until the end.

    One of the worst things I have ever experienced is feeling humiliated and embarrassed for another person. It’s a feeling that I don’t tolerate very well, and I typically walk away from the situation when it arises. I had a love hate relationship with American Idol auditions for the longest time. I liked watching the show, but I felt physical pain watching some people sing poorly. I felt embarrassed for them, and it was overpowering.

    I feel the same way (not about American Idol necessarily, but in general). Yet, empathy like that doesn’t fit neatly into the standard pain avoidance/pleasure indulgence schema. Presumably, according to that theory, we would make connections with others because it’s a pleasurable. And yet, empathy arises in the face of another’s pain, not pleasure. If everything boiled down to the pain and pleasure of the individual, then empathy would be a very rare experience indeed.

    Further, the example of the person running into the street to save the child goes beyond mere empathy. Empathy might describe (though not necessarily explain) the sense of pain we feel on behalf of another, but it doesn’t describe the willingness to sacrifice oneself for the sake of another. Sacrifice, the willingness to allow yourself get run over by a car in order to save the life of a child, is not pain avoidant behavior. It looks more like pain indulgence, though I don’t know for sure that that explains the phenomenon.

    With empathy, we experience another’s pain along with them. With sacrifice, we shoulder the pain for another.

  • Passer_By

    @Cooper

    “It was something like The 16 Commandments of Poon.”

    Well, looking back at it, I would prefer to ignore some of the more manipulative aspects (Items II (as it pertains to openly flirting), V, and VII) and I think he takes some of them too far (Items VI, VIII and X). But there are also useful thoughts there. But, again, you have to read it as something designed to provoke a reaction, and intentionally over the top a bit, to drive home a point.

    I still would advise reading it all. Ignore those points that don’t suit you.

    Ignorance is not bliss.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Passer By, yes, a lot of the guys considered “below average” on OKCupid are just “invisible.” I have gotten attracted to guys who were like that, after getting to know them.

    OffTheCuff, women are less superficial than men about looks. It’s not supposed to be insulting. I mean really it’s like saying to a guy, “you’re not girly looking.” Not an insult. Then again, I personally think most of the so-called “good looking” men look a bit girly.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    purple

    I’m sure it’s just the impulse to save other human beings, completely of his own volition, of course.

    Anyway, this isn’t what I’m getting at. What I’m really getting at is that individual volition can’t explain all phenomena. I said I act of my own volition, but I can’t say for certain that “my” volition is my own or a part of a “volition” greater than me of which I merely play a part.

  • Passer_By

    @charm

    When I was in my first year of high school, there were a few mentally retarded kids who had their own class, but they would use the same lunch area. One of them really liked Elvis, apparently, and he could be egged on to do his Elvis impersonation. For amusement, a lot of jerks would start chanting “Elvis, Elvis, Elvis”, until he got up and starting doing it – at he wasn’t trying to be funy. This would result in a free for all in the lunch area, whereby the mentally retarded kid would ultimately get scolded and taken away.

    I guess, in retrospect, I only saw it a couple times in my first year, and I think he moved on after that, but my understanding was that it had been going on for a few years.

    I found it appalling and incredibly uncomfortable, but was simply powerless to do anything.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jesus Mahoney

    I never said that the two desires (pleasure seeking and pain avoidance) didn’t coexist at times. That’s life. Typically, one effect outweighs the other in those instances.

    In regards to your idea of “sacrifice”, refer to my post about altruism.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Sassy,

    You misunderstand. I’m not saying that they coexist at times. I’m sure they do, but that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying that they’re inadequate to describe all phenomena.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Also,

    I don’t agree with your views on altruism.

  • Herb

    That’s about as comforting as a man saying “you’re kind of ugly, but hey, I’d bang you anyway”.

    You mean that doesn’t work?

    Now someone tells me.

    On a more serious note, yes that isn’t very helpful. I think it’s a mild example of the “men don’t have feelings anyway” which is funny given how often women advise us to get in touch with them then act like they aren’t there.

    *shrugs*

    The more I learn the more I conclude peoples is just whacked.

  • Sassy6519

    You misunderstand. I’m not saying that they coexist at times. I’m sure they do, but that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying that they’re inadequate to describe all phenomena.

    No worries man. Think what you want to think. I don’t have a problem with it.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    No worries man. Think what you want to think.

    I always do.

  • Herb

    @Cooper

    @deti
    You’re 43, and only started reading Roissy since March 2011?

    FYI, CNTR+F and you can find any word on the page (ie. Dalrock)

    and btw, I’m only 23.

    I’m 45, divorced a decade last July 31, and married a shade over 11 years when it happened and only started reading out this way since about the same time (that WSJ man-up article triggered it). I had heard of Roissy from the cover story on dating in the Weekly Standard from a while back.

    My take-away has been a bit different from deti’s take, but yeah…lots of men hit middle age before getting to it.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Susan, that’s really awesome. See, men secretly love it!

    My husband says, “Everybody else tries to deflate my ego. I’m glad you pump mine up.”

  • Jesus Mahoney

    See, men secretly love it!

    See, I’m not such an outlier. I just don’t make a secret of it.

  • Passer_By

    @cooper
    “@deti
    You’re 43, and only started reading Roissy since March 2011?”

    I don’t understand the comment. People find a blog when they find it. That has nothing to do with their age. I found it in mid 2009. I think it started in 2007, but only had slight readership for a while.

  • Cooper

    @passer_by
    Yeah, I didn’t mean anything about mentioning his age. I just surprised that he’d started reading that blog so recently. I was under an impression that the blog had been around much longer.
    He said he’d been married for 16years, which means I only started reading it after being married for 15.

  • purplesneakers

    JM, I see your point. I don’t have much invested in this debate, honestly. I come here to read about gender dynamics and dating/relationship advice.

    Like Hope’s “girl game” advice. It is awesome. Hope- did you ever write at the “Girl Game” blog? (with Bhetti et al)

  • OffTheCuff

    Hope: “It’s not supposed to be insulting. I mean really it’s like saying to a guy, “you’re not girly looking.” Not an insult. Then again, I personally think most of the so-called “good looking” men look a bit girly.”

    I think you mean “I didn’t mean it as an insult”… But that’s irrelevant if people take it to be one.

    If there’s one thing I learned, it’s that I could be insulting without intending it, and whether it was, isn’t really up to me, and when i was unintetntionally it was a failure of my social/empathy skills.

    Did you really just tell me I shouldn’t be insulted?

    This is a huge stretch and i dont buy it, not to mention not all women think good-looking is girly.

  • purplesneakers

    The men here are projecting the male way of being onto what Hope is saying. For men, attraction is primarily physical. Attraction for women is different–it is partly visual, but also depends much more on personality and lots of social cues. This is exactly why “game” works–although the better-looking guy is better off at a baseline, an average-looking guy who is socially and sexually dominant will find lots of women attracted to him. It doesn’t work the same way for women- being super nice (and definitely not super bitchy) isn’t going to make men want to have sex with us if we don’t meet their physical standards.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    purple

    JM, I see your point. I don’t have much invested in this debate, honestly. I come here to read about gender dynamics and dating/relationship advice.

    It’s cool. I don’t want to drag everyone into a metaphysical debate. The reason I took the time to explore it is that I think it’s extremely relevant to the issues on this blog.

    For example, if you believe, as Escoffier and Sassy seem to believe, that freed from biological and social constraints, humans would revert to their base instincts, indulging every pleasure and avoiding every pain, then your view of relationships is going to differ from someone with a more optimistic view of human nature. If you believe, as deti and Escoffier believe, that hypergamy is an instinct that makes every woman desire the “most alpha” man, regardless of her current relationship status, it’s going to color all of your other views about relationships.

    And honestly, I think the beliefs that I mentioned in the previous paragraph are anathema to the mission of this blog. It doesn’t seem possible to foster a loving, intimate bond with a person you believe is hard-wired to want to trade up for a more dominant man. And it doesn’t seem possible to foster that type of bond with a person if you believe that the only things keeping them from indulging “base” desires are various “constraints” upon behavior.

    I’m not saying that these beliefs make a person “bad” or even inferior, but I do believe that they’re impossible to reconcile with the stated purpose of Sue’s blog.

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

      And honestly, I think the beliefs that I mentioned in the previous paragraph are anathema to the mission of this blog. It doesn’t seem possible to foster a loving, intimate bond with a person you believe is hard-wired to want to trade up for a more dominant man. And it doesn’t seem possible to foster that type of bond with a person if you believe that the only things keeping them from indulging “base” desires are various “constraints” upon behavior.

      If I believed those things I’d shut down HUS immediately. Honestly, I think there is some truth in everything that’s been said here today. But there is also great sensationalism and exaggeration for dramatic effect. Not by the commenters, necessarily, but by the authors of those concepts, whoever they are. It’s all quite muddled, there’s no science to back it up, not even junk science.

      I reject this “Lord of the Flies” view of human sexuality. We’re not lions on the savannah, we were endowed with the power to reflect and ponder before choosing. To get back to the point of the post.

  • Jon

    @drg

    I’m curious about what things she would have to do for the other guys on here to accept her as a potential LTR. Thoughts?

    She wouldn’t have to do anything. As long as she is intelligent, attractive and has a compatible personality, I’d give her a chance.

    I wouldn’t marry her though, but that’s not her fault; I learned my lesson the first time.

  • deti

    If you believe, as deti and Escoffier believe, that hypergamy is an instinct that makes every woman desire the “most alpha” man, regardless of her current relationship status”

    That’s not entirely accurate.

    I believe that hypergamy operates all the time, in all women, everywhere, regardless of her relationship status. I believe that hypergamy is hardwired and innate, and causes women to want the best man they can get. I believe a woman constantly evaluates, assesses and reassesses her man to determine whether he is higher status than she is and whether he is “the best man she can get”.

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

    JM…spiritual constraints & social constraints. ” Seems to me that Jesus, the Buddha, Muhammad, Moses… all those guys had to get away from society in order to awaken their perception of spiritual values. They fled to the desert, the forest, caves, mountaintops…”

    Indeed. I guess one could say that they set themselves apart from society temporarily in order to develop a new set of archtypal beliefs which later–once they returned and communicated these beliefs–became part of a *new* set of social constraints.

    Arthur Koestler has written of The Night Journey, which involves things like fleeing to the desert, Jonah and the Whale, etc. This is part of his model of the Tragic and the Trivial Planes of life, explained as follows by his friend Richard Hillary, a writer and fighter pilot:

    “K has a theory for this. He believes there are two planes of existence which he calls vie tragique and vie triviale. Usually we move on the trivial plane, but occasionally in moments of elation or danger, we find ourselves transferred to the plane of the vie tragique, with its non-commonsense, cosmic perspective. When we are on the trivial plane, the realities of the other appear as nonsense–as overstrung nerves and so on. When we live on the tragic plane, the realities of the other are shallow, frivolous, frivolous, trifling. But in exceptional circumstances, for instance if someone has to live through a long stretch of time in physical danger, one is placed, as it were, on the intersection line of the two planes; a curious situation which is a kind of tightrope-walking on one’s nerves…I think he is right.”

  • Charm

    @Passer_by

    Yea, stuff like that. Disgusting.

  • OffTheCuff

    Ok, if it’s not insulting, then this should be OK: most women have below average intelligence. Didn’t Larry summers get canned for saying much less than that?

    Ignore me, mixing beer and muscle relaxants is not my usual mode of operation. :)

  • Cooper

    @JM
    I wasn’t exactly following your, and Sassys’, metaphysical debate.

    Which makes me completely qualified to chim in now! /sarcasm

    I, personally, have always believed in love. So I think puts me on Mahoneys’ side of it.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I believe that hypergamy operates all the time, in all women, everywhere, regardless of her relationship status. I believe that hypergamy is hardwired and innate, and causes women to want the best man they can get. I believe a woman constantly evaluates, assesses and reassesses her man to determine whether he is higher status than she is and whether he is “the best man she can get”.

    Right. That’s pretty much what I was getting at, bro.

  • deti

    Jon 581:

    +1.

    The more attractive she is, the better her chances at an LTR or marriage. But she will have to adjust her views. Many men will happily have sex with her. But these men are probably not the same as the pool of men who would be willing to marry her. The pool of men willing to marry her will be very small.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    OffTheCuff, I was speaking generally and hypothetically about other women, not at you specifically.

    Personally, I have the “I only have eyes for one man” syndrome. In my binary system, all other men = 0 and my husband = 1.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    The pool of men willing to marry her will be very small.

    Meh, I think her past is going to be a big stumbling block, but if she changes her ways now, proves through her actions that her views have changed, then the pool of men willing to marry will be bigger than you believe.

    I’d be wary of that past, too. But as I’ve said before, if I can recognize real change in a person, I can overlook past mistakes. I think there are guys like that around.

    Not that I’d criticize the men unwilling to take the chance. I just don’t think the pool is as small as you all hope.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I, personally, have always believed in love. So I think puts me on Mahoneys’ side of it.

    Thanks, Cooper

  • OffTheCuff

    That’s good because I was speaking about men generally, and not me specifically! Or something!

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

      haha, OTC, you do seem kind of loopy tonight. I trust Mrs. Cuff is keeping watch.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Jesus Mahoney, accept that you’re an NF trying to debate with a bunch of NT’s. Especially dangerous territory is talking about spirituality/morality/philosophy with NTs! No fun zone. Stay away! The sooner you realize that it’s futile, the better for your nerves. :P

  • Jesus Mahoney

    More than anything else, my real concern would be who she was hooking up with. That would give a clue as to what she finds attractive. But if she’s ultimately going to be going for a relationship with the same type of guy she’s been sleeping around with, then I don’t think she’ll have much trouble.

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

      More than anything else, my real concern would be who she was hooking up with. That would give a clue as to what she finds attractive. But if she’s ultimately going to be going for a relationship with the same type of guy she’s been sleeping around with, then I don’t think she’ll have much trouble.

      Yeah, I don’t have a good handle on that, or her number. Didn’t seem right to ask. I don’t think she’s into the frat scene though – it sounds like she’s got a more alternative scene. Of course, that doesn’t mean nicer guys necessarily, but it might.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    OffTheCuff, if I wanted to insult you specifically, I wouldn’t have said the words “women” and “men.” I’d say “you.” :P

  • Ted D

    Deti -”I believe that hypergamy operates all the time, in all women, everywhere, regardless of her relationship status. I believe that hypergamy is hardwired and innate, and causes women to want the best man they can get. I believe a woman constantly evaluates, assesses and reassesses her man to determine whether he is higher status than she is and whether he is “the best man she can get”.”

    Yes this. Which means a man must always be the best she can get. Or put another way, he must ensure that his market value declines slower than hers. I hope this isn’t true, but I just can’t shake e feeling that on some level it is.

  • deti

    “I just don’t think the pool is as small as you all hope.”

    Easy on the accusatory finger, JM. Nobody wishes ill on Emileigh. Nobody wishes spinsterhood for her. I certainly don’t. I don’t “hope” the pool of marriageable men for Emileigh is small. I just said I think it will be very small.

    Them’s the facts. A woman drives her partner count up, she drives her MMV down. That shrinks the marriage pool.

    I don’t “hope” these are facts. They just are. My “hoping” or “wishing” that they are or are not facts does not alter what is a fact.

    But who knows. Maybe you’re right. Maybe there will be men beating down her door. It will depend on her physical attractiveness. I do know she’ll have to be honest about that partner count with the right guy.

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

      But who knows. Maybe you’re right. Maybe there will be men beating down her door. It will depend on her physical attractiveness. I do know she’ll have to be honest about that partner count with the right guy.

      I told her point blank that she was looking at a smaller pool of men, and she said she knew that. She has seen the double standard in action, she didn’t need me to tell her that. She said she knows she’s been putting herself in the slut box rather than the girlfriend box. She gets it.

      I also told her she must come clean about her history when she meets someone. If she doesn’t it will eat away at her – I know that for a fact. Lying is no way to make a connection or start a relationship. She agreed. She talked about one guy who likes her and knows of her history. He has directly told her that he is concerned about the way she is behaving. He sounds pretty dominant, so maybe he’s no angel himself, IDK.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    For what it’s worth, I don’t think what Larry Summers said was offensive. He said “whatever the set of attributes… that are precisely defined to correlate with being an aeronautical engineer at MIT or being a chemist at Berkeley… are probably different in their standard deviations as well.” I know that I ain’t far enough into the tail end of the standard deviation curve to make it as an engineer at MIT.

    In fact, I got a big fat rejection letter from MIT.

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

      @Hope

      For what it’s worth, I don’t think what Larry Summers said was offensive.

      I agree completely. That was a total hatchet job. His lack of diplomacy didn’t help him weather the storm, but he spoke the truth.

  • Passer_By

    @deti

    “I believe that hypergamy is hardwired and innate, and causes women to want the best man they can get.”

    Last I check, men want the best woman they can get. So you aren’t really describing hypergamy there.

    “I believe a woman constantly evaluates, assesses and reassesses her man to determine whether he is higher status than she is and whether he is “the best man she can get”.”

    Maybe, more at a subconscious level. But, again, that’s not really hypergamy in and of itself. Men have been known sometimes to trade their older wives in for younger hotter models. I think the frequency of this was widely overblown, but no doubt it happened and still does. But we don’t call this “hypergamy”. It may be exacerbated by hypergamy, but, to me, the desire to improve or the desire for serial monagamy is a separate issue altogether.

    I also think you are taking this too far to suggest that the level of “background” hum is on par with the male urge to spread seed. First of all, even at a most cynical level, it would not be in her reproductive interests to do this – certainly not if she was pregnant or had young children by an attentive husband. In the EEA, this would have put her young at huge disadvantage. Also, even absent that, it would not be in her advantage to risk a committed relationship for the mere possibility of a neww one, unless her relative status to her mate changed significantly. So, this constant battle doesn’t ring true to me.

    What I do agree about is that her attraction switches must at some level periodically assess his status to make sure that she isn’t grossly violating her hypergamic instinct, because it will be harder for a woman to maintain some level of attraction to a man whose perceived relative mate status has fallen than it would be for a man to maintain some level of attraction for a woman whose relative mate status has fallen (whether by his increase in status or her decrease).

    I also think you need to acknowledge that, like most human tendencies, this one probably exists on some sort of bell shaped curve, so ascribing the most extreme examples of this to all women is likely a mistake.

    Long ago, I made a comment here as to what I think is really the essence of hypergamy. At the time, Susan agreed, though now she seems back on the social status aspect. At the risk of further debating the meaning of hypergamy in a thread where Susan thought such a debate silly, I’ll try to dig it up, but that might be hard.

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

      @Passer By

      What I do agree about is that her attraction switches must at some level periodically assess his status to make sure that she isn’t grossly violating her hypergamic instinct, because it will be harder for a woman to maintain some level of attraction to a man whose perceived relative mate status has fallen than it would be for a man to maintain some level of attraction for a woman whose relative mate status has fallen (whether by his increase in status or her decrease).

      This is what I have been trying to get across.

      Long ago, I made a comment here as to what I think is really the essence of hypergamy. At the time, Susan agreed, though now she seems back on the social status aspect. At the risk of further debating the meaning of hypergamy in a thread where Susan thought such a debate silly, I’ll try to dig it up, but that might be hard.

      Not silly, just frustrating. Anyway, I’m not denying female hypergamy. Dominance is a piece of it, certainly. I just don’t think women go through life wanting to trade up, up, up. It’s about relative status.

      I can probably find the comment more easily than you can – I’m happy to investigate if you can recall any details at all.

  • Charm

    esus Mahoney, accept that you’re an NF trying to debate with a bunch of NT’s. Especially dangerous territory is talking about spirituality/morality/philosophy with NTs! No fun zone. Stay away! The sooner you realize that it’s futile, the better for your nerves.

    Lol. Im inclined to agree with Hope. Though as an NT I agreed with Jesus. I too believe in the same type of love, and since thats apparently too idealistic, I’m thinking of opting out.

  • deti

    JM:

    “But if she’s ultimately going to be going for a relationship with the same type of guy she’s been sleeping around with, then I don’t think she’ll have much trouble.”

    I disagree. She’s kidding herself if she thinks the same kinds of guys she hooks up with are going to be the same kinds of men who will wife her up. I don’t see that at all.

    If she’s looking for a husband, she needs to lower her standards and start approaching, asking out and getting with Nice Guys that I am constantly hearing women say they want.

    The men who are willing to sleep with her won’t be willing to invest and commit. If they were, one of her hookups would have offered investment and commitment by now.

  • Passer_By

    Also, one other thing I forgot to mention in this thread. From Susan’s original post here:

    “■Guys give her attention knowing she hooks up on the reg.”

    Did anyone else read that incorrectly the first time? :)

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

      @Passer By

      I’ve been puzzling over your comment. Then I burst out laughing. Did you think I was referring to period sex?

  • OffTheCuff

    I wasn’t insulted by you or thought you were addressing me, and i know you wouldnt be insulted by Summers statement since you’re too rational, I was speaking in generalities and responding to purplesneakers. My point here is totally lost.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    It’s all good OffTheCuff.

    I should also correct myself. Rejection letters are actually really thin.

    Charm, I think the difference with us NFs is that we tend to stubbornly hold onto that idealism even when we get a giant dose of the red pill.

  • deti

    Which means a man must always be the best she can get. Or put another way, he must ensure that his market value declines slower than hers. I hope this isn’t true, but I just can’t shake e feeling that on some level it is.

    My experience tells me this is true, in marriage, in LTRs, in dating. The women I knew were constantly sizing me up, measuring me, assessing me, evaluating me. I know now why — to make sure I was higher status. If I wasn’t — NEXT!

    I can’t even tell you how many times I got this treatment. After one date, I get an LJBF. Why? She didn’t like me, didn’t click, not feeling it, incompatible, we just don’t have anything in common. What’s the common thread in all that? She perceived me as not having higher sociosexual status relative to her. I was perceived as not good enough.

    This is not woman hating or misogyny. It just is.

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

      @deti

      I can’t even tell you how many times I got this treatment. After one date, I get an LJBF. Why? She didn’t like me, didn’t click, not feeling it, incompatible, we just don’t have anything in common. What’s the common thread in all that? She perceived me as not having higher sociosexual status relative to her. I was perceived as not good enough.

      This is not woman hating or misogyny. It just is.

      Agreed. The selection process is brutal. Women are brutal. I think we may disagree on what happens once that selection has been made, but I won’t argue that women are rational or fair in choosing mates. If they were, I really wouldn’t need to be blogging.

  • Jennifer

    Well, the “red pill” isn’t something you can just find online; it’s something you get a bitter dose of just by properly observing the world around you: it sucks. People freaking suck. But marriages still work, families still stay together, because they WORK at it. Thank God this is fact, not idealism.

  • Charm

    @Hope

    Yea, I conflict over that. Im very blunt and rely heavily on logic, but when it comes to people and building bonds with them I hold them to very high idealistic standards and always end up disappointed. Yea, I know true human nature, but apart of me wishes people were better than that. Though, I guess “that” is what makes us human in the first place. Le sigh.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Charm, I don’t know that I hold other people to idealistic standards. I think I do it to myself more than anything else, trying to be a better version of me. Of course a lot of times I disappoint myself. I’m too busy being disappointed in myself most of the time to think about what others have done to me. :P

  • purplesneakers

    OTC – I don’t think there is a parallel between women rating men’s looks below average but still pursuing them, and you saying that most women are of below average intelligence. It’s was the women’s subjective ratings of the men in that study. But they must have still found something they liked about the man, to pursue him.

    Anyway, at least 51% of women below average intelligence? By definition, half of the population is of below average intelligence. This hypothetical hasn’t gotten me riled up at all, haha. But the difference is that this isn’t a subjective measure, whereas the women’s ratings of men’s physical vs. overall attractiveness was.

    Unless the point was to say something I would find insulting? I don’t find it insulting.

  • purplesneakers

    ugh, not below average. below median? I have a feeling Vox Day is going to show up and call me a stupid woman for this last comment. But most women being below average in intelligence would only be true if there was enough of a group of men with high enough IQs to make most women below average.

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

      @purplesneakers

      I have a feeling Vox Day is going to show up and call me a stupid woman for this last comment.

      Haha I know the feeling! Vox is scary. I must admit it was funny to watch him deal with Tom and Jess in a recent thread.

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

    @SW
    “PI… leads to people feeling marginalized when their behavior is, in fact, the norm. Of course, that makes it more likely they will attempt to engage in the behavior to fit in.”

    Sounds like a great silent, miserable majority. I think I was part of that for 4+ years…

    It’s interesting that pluralistic ignorance has been related to the hookup scene as well as alcohol consumption in college. I think the major reason why universities have made some traction in reducing binge drinking is because you literally have students drinking themselves to death. In my the case of my alma mater, I would read about DUI deaths in the student newspaper every 4-6 months or so. There’s no corresponding shocking consequences to sleeping around (or feeling pressured to sleep around) in college.

    Somehow, normal (not traditional) dating needs to make a comeback. That’s going to take a major change in the female mindset, because guys have pretty much stopped going out on a limb to try to get a date anymore.

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

      @Megaman

      Somehow, normal (not traditional) dating needs to make a comeback. That’s going to take a major change in the female mindset, because guys have pretty much stopped going out on a limb to try to get a date anymore.

      You know what? I bet if you surveyed college kids a very high number would say they’d welcome the return of dating to replace hooking up. It would definitely be better for women, and for most guys.

      While we’re fantasizing, I’d also like colleges to return to in loco parentis.

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

    Somehow, normal (not traditional) dating needs to make a comeback. That’s going to take a major change in the female mindset, because guys have pretty much stopped going out on a limb to try to get a date anymore.

    Maybe college should start dating programs. With guides and counselors the same they have the rape presentations. Change has to start somewhere, YMMV.

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

    Anacaona…”Maybe college should start dating programs”

    A really bad idea, IMO….who wants to listen to a bunch of marginal professors (the kind who would teach such courses) and academic bureaucrats talking about dating? You can bet every word they say would have to be approved by 18 levels of other bureaucrats at the college and 5 more levels in the Federal Government.

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

      You can bet every word they say would have to be approved by 18 levels of other bureaucrats at the college and 5 more levels in the Federal Government.

      And the Women’s Studies professors would run the show. Ugh.

  • Charm

    Maybe college should start dating programs. With guides and counselors the same they have the rape presentations.

    This will get laughed off of campus. I think a lot of people really do want it to come back, but would be weary of participating because they wouldn’t want to look desperate.

    @Hope

    I definitely hold myself to a high standard, but I project….alot. Lol, I need to stop doing that. I need to learn to accept people as they are, but I’ve always been so critical of other people. Why can’t they all just be like me? Ugh, Im such and arrogant bitch.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    I don’t think she’s into the frat scene though – it sounds like she’s got a more alternative scene.

    Yeah, I sort of saw the periphery of the alternative scene. A lot of guys in that scene give attention to the girls who are willing to put out and ignore the prudish girls, and they usually have no plans to get married.

    She needs a new scene, in my opinion.

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

      She needs a new scene, in my opinion.

      Definitely. This is why I’m glad she’s graduating. She’s going to lose that scene in about two months. Next time around she can and should make a better choice.

  • Passer_By

    @susan

    Yes, I had to do a double take. It took me just a second to figure out my mistake, but I was like “Whoa, really?!!”

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

    Susan…status & hypergamy….status, of course, refers to the man’s value as seen by others, NOT just by the woman whose potential attraction we are concerned with. So suppose the man has attributes that are highly valued by his potential hookup/mate/wife but are NOT highly valued by other people in her social circle. Let’s say, for instance, that she is a high school girl who loves classical music but everyone else in the school thinks it’s dorky.

    New student arrives who is reasonably good-looking and is an accomplished classical musician and even a serious amateur composer.

    Is she more likely to be attracted to him, or to a guy who has a rock band which is popular among the kids at the school in general?

    Obviously depends on the individual…but if she goes for the classical guy, would you count that as hypergamy, or not?

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

      @david foster

      Is she more likely to be attracted to him, or to a guy who has a rock band which is popular among the kids at the school in general?

      Obviously depends on the individual…but if she goes for the classical guy, would you count that as hypergamy, or not?

      What a great question! I think you’ve raised something really important. Each of us will have our own ideas about what is valuable, and that will influence our views of what comprises status. For example, earlier I referred to tennis instructors as low status, compared to the women who generally take lessons from them. But it’s very individual. Another woman of the same education and SES might think that’s the ultimate coup, especially if she married a guy who isn’t fit, for example.

      Re the scenario you describe, I would say she was eschewing hypergamy to go for the classical guy, because even though she values him above all others, she chooses him knowing she will lose social standing. I think that happens all the time, by the way. That would be a woman who is very low on the hypergamy scale.

      I’m reading Mindy Kaling’s book right now, and she was one of those independent, go your own way types in high school and college. She never did anything to win social approval. Like so many before her who have marched to the beat of a different drummer, she’s a very creative, interesting and successful TV writer. I bet every single comedian on Saturday Night Live has followed a similar path. I know Tina Fey did.

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

    @Escoffier
    “One difference between the sexes is that far more women chase alphas with the delusion that she can make him commit (this time it will work!) than men chase pretty girls intending to marry them. For the male bio impulse, just banging the pretty girl is generally good enough.”

    You think so? I’m wondering how many guys, given the choice, would turn down a “trophy” GF or wife. Your comment reminded me about this article I came across:

    http://vitals.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/14/9426089-the-hotter-the-woman-the-better-men-think-chances-are

    For all this talk of hypergamy, one could just as easily ask how many guys would like 5 minutes with a Baywatch bimbo? Some male version of this probably explains why some middle-aged men of means trade in their wives of 20 years for something younger and better looking.

    Again, it’s kind of pointless to speculate how many women want to sleep with the hot guys. However, I’m not sure they’re necessarily interested in pinning down said hot guys for relationships either. So much of the hookup scene involves overly egotistical (and good-looking) people seeking some kind of validation IMO. I doubt future marriage is much on their minds, until their options start to run out…

  • Passer_By

    @susan
    “I can probably find the comment more easily than you can – I’m happy to investigate if you can recall any details at all.”

    I looked a little and couldn’t find it. By looking, I discovered that I wrote better comments back then – some were pretty good. lol It also made wonder what happend to some regulars like Aldonza, Veery (sp?), etc.

    It’s probably not worth your time, but it was fairly nerdy description that involved hypothetically plotting the attraction levels to members of the opposite sex of varying degrees of attractiveness (based on ALL relevant criteria, including looks, social status, social dominance, celebrity, money, sweetness, etc., with men and women obviously valuing different criteria), and then observing that the attraction level plot for a man of average attractiveness would start to rise from zero with women who were a few points lower than him, and then steadily increase as it moves up to the 8s, 9s, etc. The point is, the rise would be gradual, By contrast, the attraction level for a woman of average attractiveness would essentially hug zero up until you reached her male equivalent, at which point there would be some tepid attraction, but then the curve would start to rise rapidly (almost parabolically) as you reach the 9s and 10s (especially the apex 10s like Elvis, or whatever), and even surpass the man’s curve as you reach the top of the scale (men don’t pass out or swoon for the hottest women like girls at an Elvis concert). The point is, it’s just wanting the best you can get, men want that too. It’s that her level of desire for men sex is so much more heavily weighted to the top of the scale, and almost non-existent toward men below her relative level. But it’s not just about status, it’s about all the things that factor into sexiness and desire, of which for women social status is one (men, not so much).

    It was a little more detailed than that, but the above description is probably close enough to get the point accross.

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

      @Passer By

      OK, thanks, that gives me something to go on.

      Aldonza left the blog because she felt that the misogyny was increasing and she reached her limit. She is a feminist and just couldn’t take it anymore. That was a loss for me, she and I got drinks together and were friendly. She is super smart and fun.

      Verie44 was outed in a terrible way at Roissy’s. Someone found her pics on Facebook, and sent them to Roissy along with a fake request for advice, using details she had provided here about a previous relationship. Roissy’s response was brutal – he told her that based on her photos, she was a 6 at best, and that she looked like a shrew and a harridan. He pretty much advised her to go drown herself. She was devastated. To his credit, when she contacted him to reveal it was a hoax, he took it down. She and I spoke on the phone about it – she hired a Reputation Defender firm to deal with her info online. She was terrified by the idea that someone despised her enough to perpetrate the hoax, and she was a bit worried about her safety. She relocated from NYC to the Pacific Northwest, and I’ve never heard from her again. Crazy, huh?

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

      @Passer By

      How about a ballpark date? Any idea when you left that comment? I’m intrigued, it does sound interesting.

  • Passer_By

    “desire for men sex” should just read “desire for men”.

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

    Susan…status & hypergamy….status, of course, refers to the man’s value as seen by others, NOT just by the woman whose potential attraction we are concerned with. So suppose the man has attributes that are highly valued by his potential hookup/mate/wife but are NOT highly valued by other people in her social circle. Let’s say, for instance, that she is a high school girl who loves classical music but everyone else in the school thinks it’s dorky.

    I think this is a very interesting distinction guys do want a woman that is hypergamy but only to them “he is the best man in the world” but they do not want one that is hypergamic because of what other people might think “my girlfriends say he is the best man in the world”. So is not that like is always bad but is a bit like the fantasy of the woman that wants the guy that could have any woman and yet chooses only her, hard fantasy to fulfill, YMMV.

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

      @Anacaona

      I think this is a very interesting distinction guys do want a woman that is hypergamy but only to them “he is the best man in the world” but they do not want one that is hypergamic because of what other people might think “my girlfriends say he is the best man in the world”

      Good point. A man who is being selected for the “wrong reasons” usually figures it out soon enough. When he is young he may not care, but as men get more established they should. Obviously, wealthy guys worry about this all the time.

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    @Susan

    While we’re fantasizing, I’d also like colleges to return to in loco parentis.

    Perhaps. But that means the parents would also be the ones receiving their offspring’s grades in the mail, instead of the student. I’m not sure that’s the better thing.

    But more to the point, in loco parentis is definitely more appropriate when the local drinking age is 21. They should probably be linked.

    Of course, I’m from the era when the age at which you could be drafted and the age at which you could drink legally (in most states) was 18, but you couldn’t vote. Somehow, they should all be tied together.

    [voice type="crotchety old man"] And throw in the driver’s licences too, ya young whipper-snappers! [/voice]

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

      @Joe

      Hmmm, perhaps you’ve never been on the receiving end of a letter that read: “Due to your son’s poor academic performance for the past two semesters, we require that he take a semester off to consider his future.” I have. And we had NO idea. I also have a friend who works as a doc at Tufts. They are literally not supposed to tell parents if the kids come in and report being suicidal. WTF. Nor can they call parents if kids are rushed to hospital with alcohol poisoning. All this privacy crap has got to go. At least when I’m paying the bills and my kid is a dependent.

  • Herb

    @Susan

    And the Women’s Studies professors would run the show. Ugh.

    That would be my fear…it would be the worst of the old Antioch College sexual behavior code, “I feel bad I had sex” = rape culture, “man up you losers”, and “you must accept women as your equals in all ways but remember to treat them like princesses” all rolled into one.

    The guys who weren’t hooking up would want to go back to hook up culture within 10 days of a college run dating program.

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

      @Herb

      Every time I think of Antioch I picture a guy saying, “Thank you for letting me touch your right breast. May I touch your left breast now?”

  • Herb

    @Joe

    Of course, I’m from the era when the age at which you could be drafted and the age at which you could drink legally (in most states) was 18, but you couldn’t vote. Somehow, they should all be tied together.

    I’ll stand up for “old enough to serve, old enough to be served” any day.

    I still don’t get that we’ll trust an 18 year old with a rifle or a nuclear sub but not a beer.

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

    @SW
    “I bet if you surveyed college kids a very high number would say they’d welcome the return of dating to replace hooking up. It would definitely be better for women, and for most guys.”

    I would insist that the survey include this caveat: the return of dating must include girls shouldering the burden of date-seeking, and by extension the risk of rejection (before sex). Let’s see how they feel when guys they’re hot for aren’t interested in a 2nd date : )

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

      @Megaman

      I’ll go for sharing the burden of date-seeking and rejection 50/50. But I pretty much advise that now anyway.

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    Hum… I may have misrepresented myself there a bit, Herb. I agree that they should be linked, but honestly, I think there’s plenty of reasons (including biological development reasons) to delay the age of majority (and the rights and responsibilities associated with that) until 21.

    But that’s only one man’s opinion. I object on philosophical grounds to de-linking the responsibilities from the privileges and rights, though, no matter what age is settled upon.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    deti,

    Easy on the accusatory finger, JM. Nobody wishes ill on Emileigh.

    Meh, I’m not sure I believe that.

    I certainly don’t. I don’t “hope” the pool of marriageable men for Emileigh is small. I just said I think it will be very small.

    Okay.

    Them’s the facts. A woman drives her partner count up, she drives her MMV down. That shrinks the marriage pool.

    I don’t “hope” these are facts. They just are. My “hoping” or “wishing” that they are or are not facts does not alter what is a fact.

    Obviously men are (and in my opinion should be) wary of women with a promiscuous past. Yet the way some people on this thread have harped about it, you’d think she has less chance of finding a LTR than a woman who contracted HIV.

    I do know she’ll have to be honest about that partner count with the right guy.

    I hope she is.

    She’s kidding herself if she thinks the same kinds of guys she hooks up with are going to be the same kinds of men who will wife her up. I don’t see that at all.

    We don’t know who she’s hooked up with. Not every guy who can score casual sex is an inveterate cad.

    If she’s looking for a husband, she needs to lower her standards and start approaching, asking out and getting with Nice Guys that I am constantly hearing women say they want.

    Lower her standards? Seems to me she needs to raise them. Interesting that you’d see the “nice guys” as lower.

    The men who are willing to sleep with her won’t be willing to invest and commit. If they were, one of her hookups would have offered investment and commitment by now.

    Obviously she seriously wrecks her chance with a guy she hooks up right away with. But it doesn’t necessarily follow that men who are willing to sleep with her won’t be willing to invest.

  • Herb

    @Joe

    Hum… I may have misrepresented myself there a bit, Herb. I agree that they should be linked, but honestly, I think there’s plenty of reasons (including biological development reasons) to delay the age of majority (and the rights and responsibilities associated with that) until 21.

    I have no problem delaying the age of majority to 21, just don’t demand that people who can’t vote or drink carry a rifle into battle.

    Or, and this was a solution the Navy did when I first enlisted but dropped in the late 90s: regardless of state drinking age, on base a valid military ID indicated you could drink. I think it helped address the driving issue as you walked from the barracks to the enlisted club and back. If you were in bad shape Shore Patrol could assist you (and if they had to assist you too many nights the command found out about it).

    Thinking about it, the military does more in loco parentis for junior enlisted than any university and does it for people already shouldering much more responsibility than the typical college student.

    I know unless the world drastically changes in 17 years I’ll recommend to my nephew a 2-3 year stint in the Navy prior to college. I suspect problems like the hook up culture and binge drinking, as well as many others, will have less appeal after wards.

  • Herb

    @Susan

    Every time I think of Antioch I picture a guy saying, “Thank you for letting me touch your right breast. May I touch your left breast now?”

    Damnit, these are new monitors…old SNL FTW.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I reject this “Lord of the Flies” view of human sexuality. We’re not lions on the savannah, we were endowed with the power to reflect and ponder before choosing. To get back to the point of the post.

    Right, this is my point. And not only are we endowed with the power of reflection, we’re endowed instincts and desires that can’t simply be categorized as “base”.

  • Cooper

    I’m a little late to the discussion.

    What’s NT and NF?

  • Jennifer

    I really was much happier before coming across all this analyzation of hypergamy and other stuff :P Fact is, you never know who men and women will ultimately choose, and whoever pointed out men’s desire to get the best they can get too was right on.

  • Jennifer

    Roissy really is a bastard beyond lowness in so many ways, and “Leap of Beta” seemed to think he was sharing his concern in simply giving men advice so they could “keep around the women they like”. I don’t think so; Roissy will trade one right in for the other.

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

      @Jennifer

      I have been watching you acquit yourself very admirably over at Bb’s! You couldn’t hear me but I was cheering you on. Leap makes me sad, he’s setting himself up as a dupe. But honestly, what baffles me is the women who buy into that crap. The women who fawn over MRAs and try to join Team Man – there’s something off there. And if they’re married, it’s even weirder. Seeking validation from strange, angry men online – very unsettling.

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

    @SW
    It’s easy for us to agree. We’re both married, and no longer on the market. You’ve got to get the SINGLE ladies to agree : )

    I recall observing from my many single years in the trenches, is that people who are at a disadvantage want a level playing field. Trying to get a first date in college was tough enough. Getting a 2nd date was nigh impossible. I knew many guys, myself included, who’d stop trying so hard. Time in between one 1st date to the next was pretty lengthy by senior year. If I thought hooking up at parties actually led to serious relationships, I might have tried it once or twice back then…

  • Passer_By

    @susan

    I think it was somewhere in 2010, but maybe early 2011. But, honestly, I’m sure it said enough beyond what i said above to make it worthwhile to find.

    Too bad about Aldonza. She seemed smart and fun, though i think she took a dislike to me because I joked one too many times about wife spanking. :)

    That’s terrible about Verie44 – I assume (hope) she didn’t move because of that. I remember once a guy came on here and boasted about his attractiveness, and I made a joke to him about having listened to his mother too much (based on his picture). Just guys ribbing each other. Verie took offense and tried to demand that I post a photo, and said I couldn’t joke about such things without a photo to back it up. Of course, my looks were beside the point, since it was just a joke I made. Anyway, she didn’t understand why I would not. I suppose now she gets it, not that I would wish that on anyone. On the whole, though, I didn’t recall her being someone who would cause that sort of anger from someone. Shrug.

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

      @Passer By

      I believe I know who outed her. She was a feisty one, fairly argumentative. She also had an interesting history. Stanford undergrad, a serious relationship with a PUA for more than a year, and still a virgin at 24. Yup, the PUA waited more than a year and never got it in because she broke up with him for his callous ways.

      She worked for The Onion, how cool is that? She moved for a new job, as I recall. I thought it was a good idea for her to leave NYC. Not a big market for virgins there.

      Boy, those were the good old days. 40 comments on a post was a lot. Not that I’m complaining.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    deti,

    I can’t even tell you how many times I got this treatment. After one date, I get an LJBF. Why? She didn’t like me, didn’t click, not feeling it, incompatible, we just don’t have anything in common. What’s the common thread in all that? She perceived me as not having higher sociosexual status relative to her. I was perceived as not good enough.

    The problem with looking for common threads is that you run the risk of oversimplifying things. It could actually be that she thought you were too high in terms of social status to date. It could be that you were too dominant, too pushy, too opinionated, not opinionated enough, not pushy enough, just ugly, just too pretty, just too masculine, just too feminine, etc… You’re choosing to understand it in terms of low social status. That’s not a fact–it’s your interpretation of a fact… of a whole series of facts: separate and distinct incidents that may or may not have anything in common.

  • SayWhaat

    Let’s see how they feel when guys they’re hot for aren’t interested in a 2nd date : )

    FTFY.

    And this is already happening. If it wasn’t, there’d be no reason for HUS in the first place.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @ Cheerful # 643

    Amen sister. I could not access my son’s student account at Oregon State to PUT MONEY IN. I wanted to say his tuition bills ARE COMING TO ME, AND HIS MOTHER AND I ARE PAYING THEM, AND THAT SEEMS PERFECTLY OK TO YOU. But I’d learned that sort of talk got me kicked up to “a higher authority” (I think AA has a very very large Corvallis chapter) which meant more bureaucratic horseshit, so desisted.

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

      Munson Munson Munson

      It is so good to see you, it brings a smile to my face. Making me truly Cheerful.

      I’ve heard horror stories from friends re these privacy laws. Some good friends learned their daughter was expelled from Sarah Lawrence for having skipped classes for two months. It turned out she was faking cheerful phone calls home while holed up thoroughly depressed in her dorm room. Not a single professor or administrator ever checked in to see if she was OK. She was an island at college for the better part of a semester. Then they unceremoniously kicked her out. Terrible.

  • SayWhaat

    Do we have two Coopers here?

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

      Do we have two Coopers here?

      No, just one sneaky Cooper.

  • Jennifer

    You sound nice to me, Passer. That poor lady, I hope she’s ok. She sounds sweet, trying to defend another guy’s feelings, and very cute in her misunderstanding of how guys talk to each other :P As for hypergamy (and was Vox Day the idiot claiming that most women are below average intelligence? LOL), the society can be a biggie. Women don’t take marriage seriously, many of them, because they don’t have to; society gave them the power to dump when they’re not happy. Jewish men dumped THEIR wives easily way back in Biblical times, and why? Because THEY could. Asian women, though, are known for being more devoted to their husbands regardless of age or whatnot. They’re also known for being in many of the same kinds of abstract intelligence-required careers that men are. Surroundings can make a big difference, and even with them, we’re all wonderfully and often unpredictably different. Some things are universal, of course; no woman wants a pushover man, every woman needs security, every man needs appreciation and respect. Just thinking over some things.

  • Charm

    Cooper, Google “MBTI test” and click on the first link and take the test.

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    Susan, you’re right; I’ve received no such letter. and you’ve hit exactly on the point! What I’m saying is that the student in colleges are either adults or not. They should be treated like adults or not. It’s the half-way measures I question.

    I was mugged and stabbed last summer (thankfully, it resulted in nothing more serious than stitches and one night getting anti-biotics and pain killers in a hospital). With all due respect to your anxiousness as a parent for your child, it would have been ridiculous for anyone there to call my (80 year old) parents. In fact, since I was able to, no one even called my wife but me, and that’s the way it should have been. In loco parentis has to come to an end sometime.

    So I ask the question: should we treat 20 year olds any different? If we as a matter of law deem them to be adults, then no, even if we understand that parents will worry tremendously. (And trust me, my mother absolutely DID worry about me, and still worries about me in this neighborhood.) To treat them as children means they will remain children, most certainly.

    Again, my objection is to the half-way measures we seem to have taken. It may be necessary to treat some 20 year olds like 16 year olds, and it may be right to say “no, everyone must wait until they’re 21 (or 23 or 25) to have the full rights and responsibilities of an adult.” I’m just not sure we’re doing them any favors with this mish-mash of a system we have now that says a teenager can get an abortion or be drafted, but can’t get a beer.

    I hope that when the student gets the letter saying “Get your grades up or get out” it has an impact. Clearly, the person paying the bills should get that letter too.

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

      @Joe

      All good points – I feel like we’re up against yet another rather intractable problem…

      I had no idea you were mugged and stabbed. Good Lord, it sounds like you’ve had a rough year. My thoughts are with you and Mrs. Joe.

  • Jennifer

    Thank you Susan! :) *hugs* I feel bad for “Leap” too; he most likely had some bad times, and humans generally have limited tolerance for putting trust into something that seems risky. But we can’t give up morality; too many have already.

    You’re absolutely right, it’s infuriating seeing women appeal to jerky men and behaviors over and over. I’m very anti-feminism now, mainly because they messed up things so terribly; many of their teachings encourage men to become too feminized, and I think the rush to macho men has been in part due to women looking for masculinity in a society that sometimes damns it. But there’s also simply the fact that, without treating sex as sacred and guarded, males and females regress to the “bad” members of the opposite sex that sexually excite them. One woman, in fact, said that she prefers bad boys because they let her be a bitch! Likewise, sluts let men be their biologically polygamous selves without demanding loyalty. So anyways, I’m fine with the anti-feminist movement. But appealing to MRAs who have nothing but nasty words and names for women? Unacceptable, weird, and further enflames the idea that women like jerks!

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

    @SayWhaat
    Kidding, mostly. Dating 101 says that the person requesting the date is at an immediate disadvantage. I usually felt like I was in front of a Roman emperor in the colliseum. Thumbs up or thumbs down. Though I would have been flattered had I been asked out in college. That was less likely than being hit by a bolt of lightning : |

    If women lament not being asked out on dates very often (in college or after), there’s probably a very good reason why it isn’t happening much anymore. People are getting together somehow, but they’ve probably become much more risk averse, or just lazy.

  • Jennifer

    Joe, I’m so sorry you got attacked! Glad to know you’re ok *shudders* Maybe my kids can enroll online..

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Hope,

    Jesus Mahoney, accept that you’re an NF trying to debate with a bunch of NT’s. Especially dangerous territory is talking about spirituality/morality/philosophy with NTs! No fun zone. Stay away! The sooner you realize that it’s futile, the better for your nerves. :P

    Lol. Really, I’m not trying to engage anyone in that debate, I’m just pointing out that the whole metaphysical thing is the subtext for most of these debates. A discussion may ostensibly be about the role of hypergamy in today’s SMP, but that’s just the vehicle through which we’re debating human nature.

    I think what I’m saying is that debating with people who have a pessimistic view of humanity is pointless, because while you think you’re talking about love or sex or relationships, what you’re really arguing about is the deeper question of whether people are naturally good or evil.

    I believe that people with such pessimistic views of humanity are incapable of the level of love to which I aspire. Of course they’ll think I’m being superior or pretentious by saying that, but… it’s true. You can’t love someone in a deep and intimate way if you can’t trust their honesty, their intention, their desire to be with you and only you.. You can’t love someone as freely if you think that person is only faithful because of social and biological “constraints.”

    Those people aren’t going to be swayed by arguments, because their very view of the nature of people doesn’t provide them with the requisite tools to have a healthy, productive, and intimate relationship.

    And with that, I’m going to close this computer and have some more sex with my gf. Goodnight everyone.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Susan, was Verie44 the same one who blogged at Eve’s Library, or was that someone else? I may be getting bloggers mixed up here.

    Sucks what happened to her, though.

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

      @Hope

      I’m not sure if she blogged elsewhere. She became a fixture here for a time, and it was clearly her comments here that fueled the hoax. She was rather controversial, and apparently really pissed off some guy…

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

    Too bad about Aldonza. She seemed smart and fun, though i think she took a dislike to me because I joked one too many times about wife spanking.

    I think Aldonza started to take personally the comments about her divorce being frivolous and her quest for a “man with a though exterior and a mushy inside” specially when we call it the unicorn. I think telling her that she will rarely remarried was really hard on her specially at the time when she said she hoped she will marry again. I hope she is well wherever she is and she is really hot I’m sure she will find many takers in due time.
    I didn’t knew Veery but I feel so sorry for her. I hope that it was a one time thing and that she is happy and safe wherever she is.

  • SayWhaat

    Regarding dating in college…

    I actually did get asked out on a date when in college (this was pre-online dating), and Ex-Fake BF and I went on legitimate dates (though that was after I told him that I wasn’t a hook-up type of girl). But those were the only two guys who asked.

    I just remembered something from my junior year. A guy friend had an idea to host a speed-dating event as a fundraiser. Myself and a few other girl friends went to check it out. I guess the event was poorly marketed, because only about 25 people showed up. However, what I thought was interesting was that of the 25 people, about 22 were girls. The three other guys who were there were pretty close to omegas. But the girls still started talking to them, sitting on speed-dates with the guys 2-on-1. (I think my friends and I bounced and went to a bar, though. We were expecting it to be kind of a fail anyway, lol.)

    Anyways. Just an anecdote I thought I’d share.

  • Jennifer

    “You can’t love someone in a deep and intimate way if you can’t trust their honesty, their intention, their desire to be with you and only you.. You can’t love someone as freely if you think that person is only faithful because of social and biological “constraints.””

    *sighs contentedly* Don’t ever change those views, Jesus.

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

    “But the girls still started talking to them, sitting on speed-dates with the guys 2-on-1.”

    That would have made my semester : )

    It’s too bad, really. More dating experience would probably steer a lot of girls in the right direction WRT finding decent BFs. It would also allow the shy crowd to overcome some of that anxiety that tends to hold them back.

    I think I ultimately came to the conclusion that single girls in college just weren’t interested in dating because they’d be moving on after graduation anyway. That probably only described about 1/3 of single girls, though. I have a couple of single female friends to this day that wonder about roads not taken and opportunities they rejected 10 years ago.

  • Charm

    I think I ultimately came to the conclusion that single girls in college just weren’t interested in dating because they’d be moving on after graduation anyway.

    This. For some reason, the guy I was dating thought it was going to be forever. Im moving to another country in a few months and Ill be gone a few years, I have no idea how he reached that conclusion. Simply saying “Lets end this since were parting way anway” didn’t work as well as I would have liked it to. I imagine a lot of people don’t want to let go of college relationships.

  • SayWhaat

    Megaman, what if they simply didn’t realize that the opportunities they “rejected” were opportunities in the first place?

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

    The “privacy” thing has gotten insane. I understand that in a hospital, a nurse or doctor can’t leave a message about a patient (for another staff member) on the *internal voice mail* system without violating privacy rules.

    Took my mom to a doctor’s office about a month ago, and on the sign-in sheet there was some sort of weird device so that the names of those who had previously signed in were made invisible. This was for an eye, ear, nose, and throat doctor!

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

      @david foster

      Took my mom to a doctor’s office about a month ago, and on the sign-in sheet there was some sort of weird device so that the names of those who had previously signed in were made invisible. This was for an eye, ear, nose, and throat doctor!

      Soon we’ll have doctors averting their eyes entirely. Patients will describe their symptoms and doctors will interrupt saying, “I don’t want to know!”

      Meanwhile my friend who does bone marrow transplants sees DNA reports on families and knows just which men have been cuckolded.

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

    @SayWhaat
    You’re right, it’s one of those life lessons. You don’t appreciate simple things like that until they’re gone, when you realize they were opportunities. I was probably guilty of this, to some extent. Of course, in the case of my friends, present circumstances (i.e. being hopelessly single) seem to cause them to look back with quasi-nostalgia.

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    Jennifer and Susan, thank you for your concern, but really, it wasn’t *that* big a deal (and the pain killers were great – woohoo!) Yeah, it’s been a rough year, but it’s also been one of the best. Life, it seems, is like that sometimes.

    I’m hoping that Emileigh and the regulars here who feel sort of hopeless about the situation they’re in ATM can understand that.

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

    Sorry Aldonza felt she had to depart…I thought she had many insightful comments.

    It’s really pretty low to beat up on someone when they’re at a particularly vulnerable point.

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

    It’s really pretty low to beat up on someone when they’re at a particularly vulnerable point.

    I don’t think many people noticed it. I think there was just one moment when we were talking about women being better off in the past that made her snap and quit HUS for good. But it was slowly building up with all her views being challenged including her guest post. She started posting less and less is a bit of emotional disconnect when a woman starts to think a situation is hopeless abandon soon follows. That is one of the the reasons being a pure asshole only works in the short run no matter how attractive the man is the lack of comfort makes the woman eventually check out emotionally and then physically usually follows, unless there is some other things keeping her in place (too poor to divorce, family pressure and so on) and even so if there is the smallest chance of escape she will. That ties up to the dread thread if all this guys thinking that they are going to keep a woman in love forever by showing that they are in the edge of having an affair they are in for a nasty surprise. Not that I think they will care that much, being left out 7 or 10 years down the line seems like an acceptable and successful run for many of the proposers of dread, YMMV.

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

      @Anacaona

      When I met Aldonza, she was eager to tell me the story of her divorce. It was anything but frivolous, and it was important to her that I know that. I felt really badly that she felt the need to qualify herself to me, and I knew it was because of things people had said to her on my site. Ultimately I think she realized that commenting at HUS made her feel badly about herself, so she stopped.

  • Cooper

    Sneaky, eh?

  • OffTheCuff

    Loopy? We watched Californication, then we played a game of tiddlywinks on the couch, and then, in my weakened mental state, left me to go see Hunger Games. One more pill.

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

    in my weakened mental state, left me to go see Hunger Games.

    Oh boy she is going to come back gushing about Liam Hemsworth and you will have to divorce her.:p

  • Rum

    Roissys signature cruelty might be coming from come a place of honest Sadism. I have read most of what the real life De Sade wrote and there are some echoes.
    But there is a huge difference in their teachings.
    De Sade taught that in an atheistic/nihilistic system torturing young virgins to death was of no more moral significance than turning off a lightbulb. And if that is what gets you off, —- its all good, bro.( Just keep it inside the castle.)
    Roissy just wants guys to own a more serviceable understanding of our real human condition. Which is that the cold reality of unleashed female hypergamy is very dangerous to their well-being unless they are well prepared. And that fact tends to make a person less attached to conventional sexual morality – which gets signified by nihilism.

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

      @Rum

      Roissy just wants guys to own a more serviceable understanding of our real human condition. Which is that the cold reality of unleashed female hypergamy is very dangerous to their well-being unless they are well prepared. And that fact tends to make a person less attached to conventional sexual morality – which gets signified by nihilism.

      Is this your response to the report that Roissy told a woman she was ugly and unworthy of attraction from a male? Because torturing a young virgin to death was exactly what he attempted. To defend that as some generous act on Roissy’s part, looking out for men, is insane.

      The moral equivalency is astounding. What a terrible start to the day.

  • OffTheCuff

    Ana: “Oh boy she is going to come back gushing about Liam Hemsworth and you will have to divorce her.”

    She’s not the celeb gushing type – she likes the stories more than stars.

    Besides, only I can make her gush.

  • Jennifer

    Oh dear. OTC, please tell me Clove died quickly in the movie?? Not too bloody?..

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

    She’s not the celeb gushing type – she likes the stories more than stars.

    Besides, only I can make her gush.

    Good for you!

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    CHEERFUL CHEERFUL CHEERFUL

    I’ve been looking for a way to jump in, but the focus of the topics hasn’t been in my end of the field (did that make sense?). Sometimes the dialogue is like that. 3rd chemo today, actually yesterday (Thursday). This one has ominous feel; once intravenous meds wear off (Friday afternoon) I’m afraid I’m in for it. I was sketching out “Celebrating the Psycopath”, but didn’t want to just buzz bomb it in and was looking for a topic or comment thread to lay in on the gang. But I’m still here and digging the HUS to the most (pre-hippie. Beatnik jazz slang-like WOW man!)

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

      @Munson

      Lay in the Psychopath bit anywhere you like. I know it will be awesome, can’t wait.

      I’ll be thinking of you – it sounds like this could be a rough weekend. Remember that your friends here are sending a lot of good wishes your way.

  • Lokland

    @ Susan

    “I reject this “Lord of the Flies” view of human sexuality. We’re not lions on the savannah, we were endowed with the power to reflect and ponder before choosing.”

    Thats like sticking your fingers in your ears and saying lalalalalalalala. Most people don’t want to ponder or reflect. They want to continue sleeping, eating, shitting and fucking because it feels good.

    As for where your blog stands. IMHO your someone promoting reflection by enabling people the tools to reflect with. However its a personal choice on whether or not they reflect, your an enabler not an enforcer.

    In regards to hypergamy, this has been waaaay over-done.
    However, looking at the big picture the threat of hypergamy (or serial monogamy) for men is now more real and ever-looming that it has been for well over a few centuries.

    Polygamy is socially constrained whereas hypergamy (including serial monogamy) is empowered. This leads to no real problem for men controlling their urges because society regulates them for us. Women must self-regulate. However self-regulation isn’t part of our societies mantra.

    Therefore you want men to trust someone who has every incentive from society to screw them over and not a single reason in the world other than their own character not to. (IMO, if all that held a woman back from serial monogamy was character I would rather she just do it and be done with it.)

    You want to know why its hard to love and trust someone, because every aspect of their existence is designed to either fuck us over or watch it happen. Not saying its impossible to develop trust but its by no means easy.

    As for this hypergamy is the be-all-end-all, women chase alphas. A simple look at the stats points out that it is simply not true. Most women aren’t chasing anything.

    Now, to get back to my post from yesterday morning.

    You and many of the other women here take a cavalier, non-empathetic attitude toward mens emotions/fears. I know you think you don’t but you do. Thats what I was referring to when I mentioned men being play things. (I’m well aware of the possibility that men do the same in return but I am not capable of detecting it.)

    We are informed most men are less than adequate. If we dislike it, too bad.
    We are informed that female dread is acceptable. If we dislike it, too bad.
    We are informed that men have no choice in their personal relationships. If we dislike it, too bad.
    etc.

    I honestly believe this is cultural programming that says male emotions don’t exist. They do and they matter.

    @ JM

    I see you’ve upgraded your horse recently.
    Hows the view below of all us lowly ants?

  • Jennifer

    “Polygamy is socially constrained whereas hypergamy (including serial monogamy) is empowered”

    Actually, no it’s not, men can f*ck around more than ever before.

    We don’t ask that men trust someone unreliable, and there have been good women and men even in times when their selfish actions were enabled by law. But I’d advise everyone to proceed with great caution.

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

      “Polygamy is socially constrained whereas hypergamy (including serial monogamy) is empowered”

      Actually, no it’s not, men can f*ck around more than ever before.

      This is where the sore spot is. Men do have it better than women today from a sociosexual standpoint. There is no restraint whatsoever on soft harems, keeping women in rotation, plates spinning, two in the kitty, etc. But only a minority of men are finding a way to cash in. So who’s to blame? Feminists? Mom? The girls at college who go to frat parties? Someone has to pay for all this pain, it’s only fair.

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

        @Lokland

        We are informed most men are less than adequate. If we dislike it, too bad.
        We are informed that female dread is acceptable. If we dislike it, too bad.
        We are informed that men have no choice in their personal relationships. If we dislike it, too bad.
        etc.

        You know there’s a precise corollary for the women right?

        We are informed by men here that women are entitled, narcissist, masculine flakes who are not worthy of commitment. Therefore, we should expect most men to avoid marriage as our ovaries turn into raisins and we reach our expiration date, at which point we should just head for the glue factory.

        We are informed that it is permissible for men to practice polygamy while we must remain chaste. Female nature, which abhors the sharing of one’s beloved with another, is entirely discounted as immaterial.

        We are informed that women have no choice re the timing of sex. They can either put out pronto or get kicked to the curb. Of course, if they do put out pronto, they go immediately onto Ladder 2, reserved for sluts and hos. There is no option that leads to commitment. We’re told that the best we can hope for is that some asshole is actually just pretending, and once we fall in love with the jerk, he will transform into a loving mix of alpha and beta. If we can convince him that he really is the first man we ever had a one night stand with, because we couldn’t resist worshipping his amazing dick, he may keep us around for a while, while remaining alert to any sign of our hypergamous hindbrains taking over.

        There’s plenty of shit being thrown around here, Lokland. No one escapes it.

  • Jennifer

    Men’s feelings matter greatly, and that’s partly why things are so bad. Female dread is UNACCEPTABLE. Most men are quite “adequate”, and you certainly have choice in your relationships. Don’t let a woman get away with that dread crap for a second.

  • Jennifer

    Divorce can be emotionally hard for women, Lokland, even if it seems like the government can take away their feelings as well as their responsibilities; it can’t. So while the divorce laws are awful and enable many awful women, not every woman is hankering for one.

  • Just1X

    @JM

    hey, you made my day yesterday. Firstly with a compliment, but secondly with you comment about recognising that men pony up more in marriage. That the point has been made and taken up is a big compliment to HUS (I reckon) and the people here.

    The range of people here, with their wildly different up-bringings and experiences but able to discuss tough subjects (usually) calmly. Impressive and interesting.

    Sorry to hear about (some of?) your past tribulations, my best wishes on continuing your processing of them in a positive way. If you choose to get married (insert blah-blah), then I hope that you’re both lucky and happy. Just make your decision with wide open eyes (couldn’t resist, sorry).

  • Just1X

    @Lokland

    nice comment #692

    in particular, but not restricted to;

    “We are informed most men are less than adequate. If we dislike it, too bad.
    We are informed that female dread is acceptable. If we dislike it, too bad.
    We are informed that men have no choice in their personal relationships. If we dislike it, too bad.
    etc.”

    I think that things are changing though, comments on where have all… / poor women-victim articles are becoming amusing to read. And the comments aren’t made by the normal suspects (MRAs), there appears to be a rising wave of men calling feminist on their bullshit. Most encouraging, I look forward to total power failure on the feminist holo-deck (it certainly isn’t reality, is it?).

  • M3

    Jen 693

    “Polygamy is socially constrained whereas hypergamy (including serial monogamy) is empowered”

    Actually, no it’s not, men can f*ck around more than ever before.

    no no no. only those men those women are choosing get to fuck around more than ever.

    get it?

  • M3

    Just1X 697

    I think that things are changing though, comments on where have all… / poor women-victim articles are becoming amusing to read. And the comments aren’t made by the normal suspects (MRAs), there appears to be a rising wave of men calling feminist on their bullshit. Most encouraging, I look forward to total power failure on the feminist holo-deck (it certainly isn’t reality, is it?).

    I won’t be satiated until i see the withering corpse of feminism decaying in the public square for all to see, as a warning to future generations, where little girls can point and say ‘Mommy, what is that hideous thing hanging?’ and mommy can explain why it was a dark moment in human history.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “(I’m well aware of the possibility that men do the same in return but I am not capable of detecting it.)”

  • Lokland

    @ Susan

    Thx for pointing it out. Now I know what to avoid.

    “We are informed by men here that women are entitled, narcissist, masculine flakes who are not worthy of commitment.”

    First two are true of men and women. Societal not gender based.
    Masculine, men are also feminized. You expect us to man-up and bring A-B fine. Bring the femininity.

    “Therefore, we should expect most men to avoid marriage as our ovaries turn into raisins and we reach our expiration date, at which point we should just head for the glue factory.”

    Most women avoid having sex with most guys. We don’t get what we want. You don’t get what you want. Sucks.

    “We are informed that it is permissible for men to practice polygamy while we must remain chaste. Female nature, which abhors the sharing of one’s beloved with another, is entirely discounted as immaterial.”

    No one has ever suggested such. ALL the guys here (excluding myself) are monogamous. Very few have ever practiced any form polygamy. If a woman finds herself in that situation it is not the fault of the men here.

    “We are informed that women have no choice re the timing of sex. They can either put out pronto or get kicked to the curb. Of course, if they do put out pronto, they go immediately onto Ladder 2, reserved for sluts and hos. There is no option that leads to commitment.”

    I remember stating the escaltion my fiance used and you were a big fan. I’m also a fan of a slowed down escaltion that meets in the middle. No guy who comments here regularly has suggested 3-dates and out. I’m willing to bet no one has even put it into practice.

    “while remaining alert to any sign of our hypergamous hindbrains taking over.”

    I’m all about avoiding false-paternity and all that but what happened yesterday was taken over the top. A few individuals don’t speak for the majority.

    On that note,

    “Polygamy is socially constrained whereas hypergamy (including serial monogamy) is empowered.
    Actually, no it’s not, men can f*ck around more than ever before.”

    If I said more black dudes robbed banks now that would not imply all black men robbed banks. Stop being discriminatory against men in this regard because 99% are not doing this.

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

      @Lokland

      My intention was not to have a tit for tat argument, or to say that all men here have said any of these things. It was simply to point out that there’s lots of stuff that gets said here – much of it fraught with emotion. The moment you generalize about women I can do the same about men. The point is, it’s not productive.

      I agree with JM – I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say that we often wind up debating whether people are good or evil.

      In a way, I envy beta males their own category. We hate on alphas, and on women in general. We recognize that beta guys have gotten a raw deal. I think plenty of women are getting a raw deal too. And they’re the natural mates for the beta guys.

  • deti

    Jen: “men can f*ck around more than ever before.”

    SOME men can f*ck around more than ever before. The men who women select can f*ck around more than ever before. The few top men can f*ck around more than ever before.

  • Just1X

    “We are informed by men here that women are entitled, narcissist, masculine flakes who are not worthy of commitment. Therefore, we should expect most men to avoid marriage as our ovaries turn into raisins and we reach our expiration date, at which point we should just head for the glue factory.”

    Yes, I suppose ‘here’ you might hear that (love the way you phrase it – LOL). What Lokland says is what society tells men. That’s the difference I think, but it’s changing.

    The weekend is approaching though, so I’m aiming to remain in a positive frame of mind. Weather’s pretty good here too, which helps.

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

      What Lokland says is what society tells men. That’s the difference I think, but it’s changing.

      Oh – maybe I misunderstood then. I thought Lokland was objecting specifically to what is said at HUS. If I’m wrong, please disregard my comment.

  • Lokland

    “The weekend is approaching though, so I’m aiming to remain in a positive frame of mind. Weather’s pretty good here too, which helps.”

    Weathers great here too. First time all week I don’t have to wear pants and shoes. So grabbin my straw hat and flip-flops.

  • deti

    Lokland:
    “Polygamy is socially constrained whereas hypergamy (including serial monogamy) is empowered. This leads to no real problem for men controlling their urges because society regulates them for us. Women must self-regulate. However self-regulation isn’t part of our societies mantra.”

    Yes. This is one of the things I was trying to say yesterday. It used to be that laws, culture, other women, and fathers regulated female hypergamy. All those things have been removed. And now the only thing that regulates hypergamy is a woman’s own internal controls. An average Jane, a 5, can get sex anytime she wants.

    By stark contrast there is an entire legal, social, political, economic and cultural framework in place to slam men down for even thinking of polygamy or being a “player” — unless he is one of the top men. If he is one of the select few, he can do anything he wants. He is exempt from sexual harassment laws; he can sleep with a series of women; he need not marry or promise commitment in exchange for sex and therefore escapes the divorce meat grinder; he need not jump through hoops.

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

      And now the only thing that regulates hypergamy is a woman’s own internal controls. An average Jane, a 5, can get sex anytime she wants.

      Which is not very valuable if that’s not what she wants. For every Jane that wants a hookup, there are 50 more that want a boyfriend.

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

      By stark contrast there is an entire legal, social, political, economic and cultural framework in place to slam men down for even thinking of polygamy or being a “player”

      Polygamy does not create productive civilizations or economies. Nor is it the best system for raising healthy children. We evolved to pair-bond 1.5 million years ago and monogamy has outperformed every other paradigm since. That is a very real aspect of evolved male nature, which includes the desire to marry, at least according to evolutionary psychologists.

  • Wudang

    Sassy:

    “I’m almost 100% positive that the behavior you described above happened amongst our primitive ancestors. Sex wasn’t moral or immoral. Having sex with the alpha males wasn’t moral or immoral. Men chasing after women with the most fertility cues wasn’t moral or immoral. It just was.”

    I mostly agree:

    http://justbeamanaboutit.wordpress.com/2012/03/05/paleo-origins-of-hookup-culture-the-shocking-revelations-of-nisa/

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

      @Wudang @Sassy

      Here’s an article I’ve been wanting to write about for some time. It’s from the popular blog Evolvify, which also has a paleo orientation:

      The Pickup Artists’ Alpha Male Narrative Myth

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @ Cheerful and all my unmet HUS supporters

    Yeah, this weekend I “pay the rent” (my term for the after effects of chemo; usually first day ok because IV drugs protect you, but like the Allied fighters escorting the bombers over Germany pre-P51 (the redoubtable Mustang), they have to withdraw, leaving you to the merciless Luftwaffe with only your plane mounted .50′s to protect you, your oral meds). If I remain lucid enough and my hands don’t shake too much (I’m a terrible typist; I spell ok but always hit the wronged keys-this sometimes makes my whole post disappear (?) I’ll flesh it out. Don’t get me wrong-I LOVE writing here, not just for the chance to bloviate (where’d I get thart word) but now it is also engaging and calming.

    HUGS THROUGH THE ETHER TO ALL!

    P S Cheerful have you seen my latest “Summer” installments? No one has commented so I don’t know if they’ve been read. T V M

  • Lokland

    @ Susan

    Actually its both.

    My point was that a lot of the bullshit that gets fed to us via media ends up coming out here.

    One of the big ones and my biggest complaint is that men lack emotions. Therefore they can’t feel like shit, which leads to dark female game (dread) being acceptable and men being treated like disposable toys.
    Both here and in wider society.

    I think here is capable of being better than that.
    I was giving you things that are simply not true but are repeated here ad nauseum because as you stated it shifts the burden of blame onto men.

    I’m aware men do the same thing and I think it should be the responsibility of both groups to sort through the bullshit and find the nuggets of truth.

    My tit-for-tat analysis wasn’t to say who has it worse. It was to show you that your worries are not based in reality.

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

      @Lokland

      I’m aware men do the same thing and I think it should be the responsibility of both groups to sort through the bullshit and find the nuggets of truth.

      Agreed. And I think we actually uncover some from time to time.

  • Lokland

    @ Susan

    “Polygamy does not create productive civilizations or economies.”

    You know whats fucked up in this regard. Serial monogamy can.

    So therefore men are being told womens biological impulse > males impulse because its better for society.

    Screw what men want, its all about women and society.

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

      So therefore men are being told womens biological impulse > males impulse because its better for society.

      Screw what men want, its all about women and society.

      But we all know that men formed societies. This is what men chose. Even feminism. Men chose it.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “I reject this “Lord of the Flies” view of human sexuality. We’re not lions on the savannah, we were endowed with the power to reflect and ponder before choosing. To get back to the point of the post.”

    Of course we have the power to reflect and ponder, which is why I’m so upset by hookup culture and the topics here in general.

    Let me ask you something: do you see a lot of people reflecting and pondering anything? For the most part I don’t. I fully believe human beings are capable of magnificent things, in e right environment. That would be an environment that promotes self reflection and awareness. Where ideas are discussed openly and without fear of ridicule. Where society rewards those that behave the best.

    What we have now is far from that. Our society practically shuns self reflection as that leads to “bad feelings” when the hard truh must be faced about bad behavior. People are afraid to speak out because of the social backlash of going against the “herd”. And as far as I can tell by watching TV, our society more often than not rewards the worst ofnhus wih fame and fortune.

    The idealist in me wants to believe that humanity is inherently good, but the truth is we aren’t good or bad, but a reflection of our environment. So, can you honestly tell me that “Lord of the Flies” is that far off?

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

      @Ted D

      The idealist in me wants to believe that humanity is inherently good, but the truth is we aren’t good or bad, but a reflection of our environment. So, can you honestly tell me that “Lord of the Flies” is that far off?

      I agree with you that we’re more self-involved than ever before. That’s a luxury people have rarely been able to afford in history. There’s a thoughtlessness, an entitlement, a selfishness. That is what happens when we stop reflecting and pondering.

      The Lord of the Flies view is much darker than that. It sees malevolence where I see ignorance and indulgence. In that view, female hypergamy, rather than being the product of millions of years of natural selection, is some dark and evil force and civilization will fall apart unless we call in the Hypergamy Ghostbusters. In the female equivalent of that view, mens’ interest in sexual variety is shameful and needs to be bred out of men.

      In my view, both of these are biological realities that have been greatly exaggerated here and elsewhere. Men and women should be able to find the compromise. The current SMP might be dysfunctional, but it’s not enough to undo the evolution of man. There will always be the extreme outliers – sociopaths who are unbridled in their impulses and disregard for the feelings of others. I’m willing to say we have more of those than ever before. A few of them happen to be bloggers. :) But I still think we’re talking 10% of the population.

  • Just1X

    @Lokland

    “So grabbin my straw hat and flip-flops”

    Yeah, well I’m in the UK, I can leave my coat at home…FML

  • Herb

    @Susan

    We are informed that it is permissible for men to practice polygamy while we must remain chaste. Female nature, which abhors the sharing of one’s beloved with another, is entirely discounted as immaterial.

    Really?

    Why is it I have to share the woman in my life with both another man and another woman while myself being monogamous. Why is it that’s been the situation (well, sans other woman) in my three prior relationships.

    In fact, I’ve come to realize that the best option I can get is second place in some woman’s set of toys. While I get my basic needs met it’s far from idea.

    @Jennifer

    “Polygamy is socially constrained whereas hypergamy (including serial monogamy) is empowered”

    Actually, no it’s not, men can f*ck around more than ever before.

    Really, we can? With who? Because I’ve been traded in once. As I said above, anymore I have to share. I regularly go months without sex (and have gone years). Where is all this “men can fuck around” and how do I get in.

    If your answer is learn game, sure I could become a dark triad asshole and get unlimited sex. I’ve thought about it, but the effort/return ratio is so flakey I’d rather invest the time and energy in music and just take the second place stuff. When she finally is ready to move on it’s like she invested in you much anyway.

    @Lokland

    I honestly believe this is cultural programming that says male emotions don’t exist. They do and they matter.

    Nicely summed up in the popular tee shirt: Boys are stupid, throw rocks at them.

    Then girls get mad if boys throw them back.

    You’d think we’d get less “man-up” articles. Men declining to be in rock range are less likely to keep the weaponizing cycle going than men throwing the rocks back. However, it appears the only acceptable response is to stand still and be a better target.

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

      @Herb

      Why is it I have to share the woman in my life with both another man and another woman while myself being monogamous.

      With all due respect, you don’t have to.

  • Just1X

    @All

    I feel a bit abused, Susan uses “Lord of the Flies” to describe the SMP today, just yesterday I talked of Jersey Shore ‘unleashing their inner bonobos’…

    I feel I have been short-changed on the kudos…surely my phrase is funnier (and more accurate)?

    NSFW
    trigger warning; monkey sex; Jersey Shore in monkey suits.
    “It’s humans that have the hang ups. Sex in bonobo society is a mechanism to reduce tension. Sort of like a handshake!”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVJcN81_Abs
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtixIF_jPjk

  • Herb

    @Susan

    Which is not very valuable if that’s not what she wants. For every Jane that wants a hookup, there are 50 more that want a boyfriend.

    I accept this as true despite a variety of personal experience otherwise.

    Here’s the rub, men cannot do anything to change the environment because in society (to make sure we’re not discussing HUS only) men cannot criticize women about their sexual choices. And for the most part it is women’s sexual choices, because they are the gate keepers on sex, that determine the shape of the SMP.

    That’s the biggest reason I’m a fan of HUS because you encourage women to say no to the current rules and want to find a way to reshape the SMP.

    The fact that this far into this problem you’re a voice in the wilderness and the “man up” articles are the more common societal response does speak volumes about the typical American woman.

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

      @Herb

      Here’s the rub, men cannot do anything to change the environment because in society (to make sure we’re not discussing HUS only) men cannot criticize women about their sexual choices.

      You’re right. I’ve said that men could never get away with slut shaming. We women will have to police our own if there is ever going to be a change. That’s a tough sell, because women don’t want the confrontation with one another, but there is no other way. If we don’t do it, only some sort of natural catastrophe could get it done.

  • Escoffier

    “For example, if you believe, as Escoffier and Sassy seem to believe, that freed from biological and social constraints, humans would revert to their base instincts, indulging every pleasure and avoiding every pain”

    No.

    I’ll let Sassy speak for herself but here is what I actually believe.

    You are actually close, all you need to do is add the word “logos” or “nous” or “intelligence” or some equivalent. Thus, to say that “freed from biological, social, and noetic constraints, humans would revert to their base instincts, indulging every pleasure and avoiding every pain” then you would be right. But guess what. We don’t even need to speculate about that. We know what such beings behave like. They are called “animals” and they are all around us. Though even animals can be trained, but leave that aside.

    Even if you freed humans of all SOCIAL and BIOLOGICAL constraints (something one must admit that modern life has been quite successful at doing), logos or nous still remains and many human beings will nonetheless CHOOSE to behave “morally” broadly speaking for any number reasons ranging from genuine conviction at the altruistic end of the spectrum to rational calculation or “enlightened self-interest” at the more cynical end. Plus all kinds of different motivations that vary from person to person. We know this is true because the constraints in question have eroded considerably and yet tons of people still behave themselves.

    One thing is certain, however. The more we bash away at those social (e.g., no more slut shaming) and biological (e.g., the pill) constraints, the the more the RATES of “bad” sexual behavior will rise. This is not binary, contrary to the words you have put into my mouth. Even in the pre-1960 golden age, the rates of cheating, frivolous divorce, carousel riding, etc., were not zero. They were just low, or lower than now. Now they are high, or higher. The brute fact is, the number of people who can be moved by nous alone is, sadly, smaller than the number who are more persuaded by social and biological constraints.

    “If you believe, as deti and Escoffier believe, that hypergamy is an instinct that makes every woman desire the ‘most alpha’ man, regardless of her current relationship status”

    Again, no, and, again I’ll let deti speak for himself.

    Hypergamy is natural instinct or appetite or desire akin to hunger. It is present in varying degrees in all women, and perhaps in a very few it is completely absent. Some women feel hypergamy quite strongly, others very little, and most are somewhere in the middle.

    For all women hypergamy is controllable. Sure, it’s harder for the woman with a highly hypergamous instinct to control it than for a woman who barely feels it. The same way that a person who despises the taste of alcohol is at little risk of becoming a drunk. Nonetheless, it’s possible to control even the most powerful appetite. Athol is a good example. He claims to have a super-charged sex drive and he quite openly confesses to a strong polygamous instinct (he even asked his wife to swing and got shot down). Yet at age 40-whatever, he’s still only been with one woman. Because he has that raging appetite under control.

    Certainly there are some women who are analogous to Athol, they have a strong hypergamous instinct. Some of them can control it. However, the incentive to do so has declined as various “social and biological constraints” have lowered the costs of indulging. So fewer keep it under control today than in the past. Again, it’s no binary.

    Beyond all this, of course, tastes vary in a population as large and varied as modern humanity. People are individuals, etc. Nonetheless, it is possible to indentify broad characteristics of humanity, and of the sexes, that are broadly true if one understands them in the correct light and does not succumb to the temptation to oversimplify and categorize everything too neatly.

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

      @Escoffier

      Yet at age 40-whatever, he’s still only been with one woman. Because he has that raging appetite under control.

      Athol has had two emotional affairs, very intense.

      I find myself agreeing entirely with your post on hypergamy today. Where we differ is in the understanding of what hypergamy feels like to a woman, and you’ll just have to take my word on that. We don’t go through the day “eye trading” strange men. :)

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Lokland,

    I see you’ve upgraded your horse recently.
    Hows the view below of all us lowly ants?

    Don’t go there, bro. I’ve been more than fair to you by not indulging my opinions about your one-way open relationship. And I’m not saying that I’m above you somehow. I’m saying that the ability to form and maintain a deeply intimate, loving bond with another human being (which, it seems to me, is what Sue would like to help people do) is dependent upon one’s view of human nature.

    If you believe that your woman really does fantasize about trading up but just keeps her mouth shut about it out of respect for you, then this is going to serious affect the way you relate to her. You may appreciate the respect you believe she’s showing towards you by keeping quiet about it, but ultimately, you feel that there is a part of her that she’s holding back from you. If she *is* holding back by lying or simply omitting the whole truth, then she’s not being truly intimate with you. If you believe she’s holding back part of who she is, then you’re likely to do the same–which will also inhibit intimacy.

    Of course, from your perspective, that may just be how it has to be. To someone who believes that women are always thinking about trading up, however casual or harmless those thoughts may be, my POV is absurd. And to someone who thinks that people will always be looking to satisfy every fleeting base desire that passes over them if it weren’t for biological and social constraints, my view of love, and my view of what real commitment is, would seem terribly naive. Escoffier says that the best I can hope for is that some woman will lie about her true feelings and desires in order to protect my ego. You seem to think that my desire to be “best” in the eyes of my gf is rooted in a fear of cuckoldry. Neither of you “get” me because you both have very pessimistic views of human nature. It’s analogous to Sassy thinking that someone altruistic or someone willing to make a sacrifice is engaging in self-centered pleasure indulgent/pain avoidant behaviors. The idea of true intimacy, which requires honesty, vulnerability, and trust (and the idea of true selflessness in the case of Sassy) doesn’t compute for you because you have a view of humanity that is fundamentally different from mine.

    If people were as bad as you seem believe, then a lot of what you (and Escoffier, and deti, and, heck, Rollo) say would make sense. But not everyone is willing to believe they’re that bad.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    ref #716

    And like the man said “THE RENT’S TOO DAMN HIGH!”

    Just kidding; I can handle this, no problem. I just had to work that quote in; damn, that dude’s attitude deserves its own latitude.

  • Ted D

    Herb – “Here’s the rub, men cannot do anything to change the environment because in society (to make sure we’re not discussing HUS only) men cannot criticize women about their sexual choices. And for the most part it is women’s sexual choices, because they are the gate keepers on sex, that determine the shape of the SMP.”

    Yes! I’ve tried to make this point elsewhere but failed to nail it the way you did. Men cannot fix this because the tools were taken away from us by Politically Correct nonsense. Here I can discuss bad female behavior because we all accept it as a problem, but no way in hell I even let on how I feel elsewhere. As it is people that know me well and understand my concerns have said my views are far too guilt ridden and uncomfortable to discuss, and these are people I know can actually think and self reflect. How can I have hope when the “smartest” people I know don’t want to face these issues?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    We don’t even need to speculate about that. We know what such beings behave like. They are called “animals” and they are all around us. Though even animals can be trained, but leave that aside.

    And yet, we know of animals that pair-bond for life.

    Even if you freed humans of all SOCIAL and BIOLOGICAL constraints (something one must admit that modern life has been quite successful at doing), logos or nous still remains and many human beings will nonetheless CHOOSE to behave “morally” broadly speaking for any number reasons ranging from genuine conviction at the altruistic end of the spectrum to rational calculation or “enlightened self-interest” at the more cynical end. Plus all kinds of different motivations that vary from person to person. We know this is true because the constraints in question have eroded considerably and yet tons of people still behave themselves.

    You can attribute this to rational calculation or enlightened self-interest if you’d like, but like I said, we know of many forms of life who are incapable of reason who nevertheless behave themselves in monogamous relationships.

    Athol is a good example. He claims to have a super-charged sex drive and he quite openly confesses to a strong polygamous instinct (he even asked his wife to swing and got shot down). Yet at age 40-whatever, he’s still only been with one woman. Because he has that raging appetite under control.

    Good for Athol. Honestly, he strikes me as an odd ball. Most guys I know, even ones who are horny bastards (*raises hand*), don’t desire polyamorous relations.

    Certainly there are some women who are analogous to Athol, they have a strong hypergamous instinct.

    Sure. I’m certain some of them exist as well. I wouldn’t say they’re the norm though.

    Some of them can control it.

    I don’t disagree with this.

    However, the incentive to do so has declined as various “social and biological constraints” have lowered the costs of indulging. So fewer keep it under control today than in the past. Again, it’s no binary.

    Agreed. But again, such people don’t represent the norm.

    Beyond all this, of course, tastes vary in a population as large and varied as modern humanity. People are individuals, etc. Nonetheless, it is possible to indentify broad characteristics of humanity, and of the sexes, that are broadly true if one understands them in the correct light and does not succumb to the temptation to oversimplify and categorize everything too neatly.

    A temptation to which you’ve clearly succumbed.

  • Ted D

    JM – as a person that shares a pessimistic (I choose to call it realistic) view of human nature, I think you are right. We will never see this discussion in the same light, because I don’t have faith in people’s “goodness”. I’m with Escoffier in that I believe people are capable of being “good”, but only a small few truly ARE good. I firmly believe that that number is shrinking as the world’s population increases.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I find myself agreeing entirely with your post on hypergamy today.

    Sure, because he doesn’t actually define what hypergamy is in his post. I suspect that when he compares hypergamy to hunger and says that various women feel it in varying degrees, what he means is that most women eyeing a smorgasbord are going to secretly wish that they could eat every last bit of food on the table. Some women will feel that urge strongly, others more moderately, and a rare few won’t think about it at all. Whereas I think the reality is that most women are *not* thinking about wolfing down the entire spread, not even a little bit. Women will desire a certain helping, of course, but most would not wish they could bolt every dish on display.

    So, women will want varying degrees of status and dominance, but most will not only be content, but happier with what’s on their plate than they would be with the supposed fantasy of having it all.

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

      So, women will want varying degrees of status and dominance, but most will not only be content, but happier with what’s on their plate than they would be with the supposed fantasy of having it all.

      Yes, this matches my own experience and observations.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I’m with Escoffier in that I believe people are capable of being “good”, but only a small few truly ARE good.

    Yea, that’s a major rift then. If you believe that most people aren’t truly good, then relationships are something you need to arm yourself against. I think this is an unhealthy view.

  • Escoffier

    1) The species of animals who pair bond for life is a tiny, tiny % of the overall # of species that don’t. Statistically insignificant. And, of course, if you’re pair-bonding for life simply based on genetic coding, then no moral choice is involved at all, so that applies to the debate of over the goodness or badness of humanity not one whit.

    2) Note the phrase you declined to cite “ranging from genuine conviction at the altruistic end of the spectrum”. People act from a wide range of motivations. Altruism is one of them and it can be very powerful. However, it does not exhaust the alternatives.

    Again, you are being binary. You somehow want human beings to be “good” or “bad” and you are upset that (as you perceive) I am saying that they are “bad.” When all I am doing is pointing out the ways in which they can be bad and the ways in which society used to better control or thwart the impulse to badness. Human nature is a mix of good and bad and human beings respond to incentives. Remove or diminish the incentives to be good, remove or diminish the costs of being bad, and the rates of badness will go up. In the sexual realm, we see this all around us.

    One reason why sexual behavior is better and the divorce rate lower in the UMC is that this classs, by and large, has more innate social and intellectual capital to fall back on as the incentives to be good and the disincentives to be bad are stripped away. Nous or logos works to keep most of the people of this class good even when the other restraints diminish. It does not have the same power over everyone. On this point, I suggest Shakespeare’s Tempest, which is the classic statement.

  • Escoffier

    “We don’t go through the day ‘eye trading’ strange men.”

    I don’t believe you do. And I don’t believe most women do. I do believe that some do, but they are rare.

    Here is what I believe that most women do, however. If a woman is sensible enough to marry a man she boths loves and judges sufficiently “high” in MMV/SES and “psycho-sexual dominance,” then she will likely have a happy marriage and never be tempted to cheat as long as they both maintain their status/value. In the pre-SR days, even if things went south, a variety of constraints would likely keep her faithful. Simply finding options inconceivable actually increases overall happiness. There is a passage in Hume somewhere in which he says , the fact that marriage is understood to be irrevocable beyond all but the most grave reasons acts to keep people happy in marriage. Because they know they can’t get out, they tend to emphasize the positive aspects of what they have rather that fantasize about the possibilities of some imagined “new life.”

    Now, what happens when you remove that irrevocability? All the sudden fantasizing about that “new life” is less of a waste of time because she can actually try it. As long as hubby continues along with more or less the same value he had when she married him, all will likely be well unless her value skyrockets relative to his. But suppose his value drops for one reason or another? Under the “old regime,” chances were much higher that she would stay and even remain happy, if not AS happy. Under the new regime, the latent hypergamous instinct is far more likely to be felt keenly and acted upon. Indeed, the only thing stopping her is her character.

    Ditto with the rarer case of her being solicited by a far higher value man than her husband. Even if hubby’s value has held steady, if a bad-ass suitor comes along, not someone she was looking for, you know, the old excuse, “it just happened” … well, under the new regime, she’s way more liklely to be tempted.

    The point is, the impulse is and was always there. What we’ve done is given it a lot more latitude.

    So, no, most women are not always looking. But a drop in her mate’s status, or a rise in her own, are much more likely to cause her to look today than a few decades back. Similarly, the un-sought approach of a higher value mate is much more likely to be taken seriously today than a few decades back.

    All this applies a fortiori to LTRs than marriages because the former are almost completely unregulated by law or custom.

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

      @Escoffier

      All the sudden fantasizing about that “new life” is less of a waste of time because she can actually try it. As long as hubby continues along with more or less the same value he had when she married him, all will likely be well unless her value skyrockets relative to his. But suppose his value drops for one reason or another? Under the “old regime,” chances were much higher that she would stay and even remain happy, if not AS happy. Under the new regime, the latent hypergamous instinct is far more likely to be felt keenly and acted upon.

      Frivolous divorce (not to be confused with infidelity) is the phenomenon where women leave to have a new life without another man in the picture. They no longer value their husband, and they choose a new life of being single. Most do not remarry. This may reflect hypergamy – the altered relative status they each represent – but has nothing to do with trading up to a new male.

  • Herb

    @Susan

    With all due respect, you don’t have to.

    Point taken but when for a lot of men the options are:

    1. Share
    2. Your hand
    3. Prostitutes

    telling me men can fuck around all they want isn’t going to fly. I’m picking what I’ve concluded is the least bad of the options I have…I know that any kind of real emotional, intimate relationship with a woman is out because I can’t be exciting or fun. Being second is more fun than my hand and cheaper than whores.

    There is no restraint whatsoever on soft harems, keeping women in rotation, plates spinning, two in the kitty, etc. But only a minority of men are finding a way to cash in. So who’s to blame?

    Who is to blame: women. Women choose what men get to have sex and how often they get to have it. They did it by setting the price for a handful to zero and for the overwhelming majority to forget it.

    Now that the market effects are those handful are paying zero and the overwhelming majority is at best deciding to invest elsewhere and at worst getting out and out pissed off they want to blame men for “fucking around whenever they want” and “refusing to grow up”.

    Women built it and only they can change it.

    Which leads us back to:

    We are informed that it is permissible for men to practice polygamy while we must remain chaste. Female nature, which abhors the sharing of one’s beloved with another, is entirely discounted as immaterial.

    Men want they women to share them: men being bad and needing shaming.
    Women wanting their men to share them: men’s fault for putting up with it.

    Hypergamy, wandering, insatiable appetites, call it what you will, it’s real. We indulge it with women to the point of blaming the man she dumps for causing it.

    Meanwhile, we have a double standard within men. The hot men can do what they want and women will flock to them (and if they do it’s the man they’re dumping who is to blame) while the boring guys can just suck it up and pay for all the privileges men have, despite not having access to them.

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

      @Herb

      Meanwhile, we have a double standard within men. The hot men can do what they want and women will flock to them (and if they do it’s the man they’re dumping who is to blame) while the boring guys can just suck it up and pay for all the privileges men have, despite not having access to them.

      Yup. If it makes you feel better to blame women for not being attracted to boring guys, go right ahead. But it’s pissing in the wind.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    1) The species of animals who pair bond for life is a tiny, tiny % of the overall # of species that don’t.
    Statistically insignificant.

    Idk. I agree that the animals that only have one mate for life are statistically insignificant. But there are many other animals that experience pair-bonding to one degree or another, no? And do we know if the animals who are “serial monogamists” are switching as a result of hypergamy? Or do other factors play a role? I don’t know. I’m certainly not an expert zoologist.

    And, of course, if you’re pair-bonding for life simply based on genetic coding, then no moral choice is involved at all, so that applies to the debate of over the goodness or badness of humanity not one whit.

    This is completely false. Moral behaviors are behaviors we assign value to. If pair-bonding occurs on the basis of genetic coding, then it actually shows that some moral behaviors (behaviors we assign value to) are innate.

    2) Note the phrase you declined to cite “ranging from genuine conviction at the altruistic end of the spectrum”. People act from a wide range of motivations. Altruism is one of them and it can be very powerful. However, it does not exhaust the alternatives.

    I never claimed it did. My argument was simply that people are not only motivated by their “base” instincts. I did not say that they weren’t ever motivated by such instincts.

    Again, you are being binary.

    No, I’m not.

    You somehow want human beings to be “good” or “bad”

    Actually, what I want is for human beings to be good. Somehow.

    and you are upset that (as you perceive) I am saying that they are “bad.”

    No, you’re projecting, perhaps? Nothing that you, Escoffier, has ever said on this blog has ever upset me.

    When all I am doing is pointing out the ways in which they can be bad and the ways in which society used to better control or thwart the impulse to badness.

    People can be bad, yes. And society does in fact curb the badness. And has done a better job of it at previous points in history than it is doing today.

    Human nature is a mix of good and bad

    Agreed.

    and human beings respond to incentives.

    Okay, but not only to incentives.

    Remove or diminish the incentives to be good, remove or diminish the costs of being bad, and the rates of badness will go up. In the sexual realm, we see this all around us.

    Okay.

    One reason why sexual behavior is better and the divorce rate lower in the UMC is that this classs, by and large, has more innate social and intellectual capital to fall back on as the incentives to be good and the disincentives to be bad are stripped away. Nous or logos works to keep most of the people of this class good even when the other restraints diminish.

    Could be. I’ve stopped caring enough to consider. Honestly, I agree, actually. Though social and intellectual capital can’t be said to be “innate.” That said, I don’t think that “nous or logos” is the only thing that causes people to behave well.

    Anyway, all this is well-written and reflects some learning and erudition on your part, but it ultimately misses the point. The point is that I don’t believe (and have no good reason *to* believe) that women are constantly looking to trade up. And I don’t believe that all people would behave badly in a relationship if weren’t for social and intellectual “capital.” And, that I think that anybody who *does* own such beliefs lacks the fundamental tools to exist in a healthy, intimate relationship.

  • deti

    I didn’t want to add this because I think the discussion on hypergamy and human nature and goodness/evil has degenerated into a discourse in which no one is ever going to convince one who disagrees; but:

    If human beings were basically good or more good than evil, there would be no need for the vast array of laws, regulations and statutes we have which are designed to :
    1. prevent human beings from acting in evil ways
    2. impose penalties and consequences for evil
    3. address and rectify the consequences of evil

  • Jesus Mahoney

    If human beings were basically good or more good than evil, there would be no need for the vast array of laws, regulations and statutes we have which are designed to :
    1. prevent human beings from acting in evil ways
    2. impose penalties and consequences for evil
    3. address and rectify the consequences of evil

    And therein lies the rift. You believe that humans are more evil than good. And if you believe that–at least if you believe it about the woman you married–than you are incapable of developing a healthy, intimate bond.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    *than=then. Blech.

  • deti

    JM:

    “The problem with looking for common threads is that you run the risk of oversimplifying things.”

    You could be correct. But I think common threads are present more often than we know or like to admit to ourselves. I think generalizations are useful and that valid conclusions can usually be drawn from them. Not always, but usually.

    I tend to think life is much simpler than we make it out to be, and we as humans tend to overthink things. At least I tend to do so. I tend to miss the simple truths staring me in the face. (I don’t intend to make those mistakes again.)

    Hence my argument on hypergamy, FWIW. I think it’s a duck if it walks, looks and quacks like one and if the pattern presents itself repeatedly. This is also why it’s good for men to limit investment and not go all in all at once.

  • Herb

    @deti

    If human beings were basically good or more good than evil, there would be no need for the vast array of laws, regulations and statutes we have which are designed to :

    Mostly agree but I’d change basically good to basically thoughtful.

    Moral behavior, the regulation of instinct, is a product of thought. It’s why you see it in humans instead of animals. Yet more and more we’re happy to embrace “we’re just animals” and surrender our heritage as thinking beings.

    That’s why when JM said and Susan agreed with:

    So, women will want varying degrees of status and dominance, but most will not only be content, but happier with what’s on their plate than they would be with the supposed fantasy of having it all.

    They were on to something. First, that applies to men and their polygamy too (see Tucker Max’s “retirement”).

    But second, that’s an observation that takes thought to have and though (character, moral behavior, ethics, empathy) to act on by delaying instinctual action for the more satisfying ones later.

  • deti

    “Point taken but when for a lot of men the options are:

    1. Share
    2. Your hand
    3. Prostitutes”

    Herb, I think I’m with Susan on this one point. Any woman who tried this shit with me would be kicked to the curb yesterday. I’ll do without the pussy rather than “share”. No way am I sharing a woman with any man (or other woman, for that matter).

  • Herb

    @Susan

    Yup. If it makes you feel better to blame women for not being attracted to boring guys, go right ahead. But it’s pissing in the wind.

    People will want what they want.

    What they can’t have (or shouldn’t be allowed to because in the long run they can’t) is to make people they don’t want pay the price for what they do.

    If you want the bass player don’t make the guy in the audience pay for the kid you had with the bass player after the bass player moves onto the next groupie.

    The more I think about it every manospher complaint: divorce, welfare, LJBF is a variation on this.

    Even the core HUS has an element of this: Women want BFs, not hookups. Yet, in the same environment the only energy women seem to expend is chasing the kind of guys who only provide hookups. Then, it’s the fault of the men they don’t spend energy on (ie, find interesting) that they don’t have BF (oh, the alphas they chase are at fault too, but they’re alphas…we can’t hold them accountable).

    You know what I’d love, at this point, even more than women finding boring traits like commitment, work ethic, and such interesting. Women cutting the alphas off.

    It’s too late for me but I’d like my nephew and my niece/nephew who is coming to have a world where men and women get together and have families because it seems to me that biology has put that in our make-up as much as alpha chasing and harem building.

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

      @Herb

      You know what I’d love, at this point, even more than women finding boring traits like commitment, work ethic, and such interesting. Women cutting the alphas off.

      From your lips to God’s ears, Herb. I’m working it as best I can. Interestingly, some of the strongest pushback I get from guys is when I criticize typical “alpha” behavior, e.g. asshole tactics. I think some beta males are disgusted by alpha males, and some want nothing more than to become just like them. There’s a sort of schizophrenia about that in the manosphere. So when I diss alphas, some of the guys trying to emulate alphas take offense. Which forces me to ultimately advise women to shun both Assholes and Impostor Assholes – behavior should be taken at face value regardless of the intentions we don’t know about. And best of luck to all in getting what they want.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    My view is that people have a choice. A lot of people make choices that are bad/evil/dark/selfish/sinful, but they do not see these choices as necessarily making them all evil. It goes with the whole “everybody makes mistakes” and “God will forgive me” deal.

    I’ve made bad choices, too, and so has everyone. The point of the choice is that we can make good choices or bad choices. Sometimes we don’t really know what is a good or bad choice (ignorance). But if we know what’s good vs. evil, and we still go for the evil choice, consistently, repeatedly, then we’re going down the dark path.

    In the sexual mating context it can be unclear to a young woman that chasing alphas/hooking up with cads/racking up a large count is a bad choice, due to ignorance. The point of HUS is to educate and illuminate, such that young women have the knowledge to make their own choices.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    deti,

    Hence my argument on hypergamy, FWIW. I think it’s a duck if it walks, looks and quacks like one and if the pattern presents itself repeatedly. This is also why it’s good for men to limit investment and not go all in all at once.

    See, in regard to hypergamy, I think the issue is just your understanding of what it is. Sue used the term “hypogamy” yesterday to denote the opposite of hypergamy. I believe that women are hypergamous (looking for greater status/dominance than they possess). And I believe that men are basically hypogamous. I know that I wouldn’t be attracted to a woman who was smarter than me, a woman who was as dominant as me, a woman who was more successful than me. I think most men are like that. That doesn’t mean, however, that my ideal woman would be a helpless welfare recipient who never made it past the 7th grade.

    In the same way, while it’s true that women generally want a man whose more dominant and has more status, they generally don’t want the most dominant and the man with the greatest status. Most women wouldn’t be attracted to a guy who completely out-classed them. Not merely because they couldn’t snag such a guy, but because they’d have nothing in common with him. Most people are attracted to mates who complement them somehow. I suppose some slut who’s hardwired to just find the strongest genes possible would be into that, but the advent of pair-bonding like a million years ago has caused most people to evolve a much different hardwiring.

  • deti

    Herb:

    “I know that any kind of real emotional, intimate relationship with a woman is out because I can’t be exciting or fun.”

    Why can’t you be exciting or fun, or at least dominant? A lot of women can generate mucho respect for a man who projects that he won’t put up with shit; and that he’ll decide the level of investment and commitment appropriate for the woman he’s with.

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

    Human beings–good or evil?

    Leonard Cohen said:

    “When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must,
    I will help you if I can.
    When it all comes down to dust
    I will help you if I must,
    I will kill you if I can”

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

      @david foster

      Leonard Cohen has an awesome understanding of the human experience. I find him hard to listen to, but my husband is a huge fan of his. I like reading his lyrics, though.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Herb

    But second, that’s an observation that takes thought to have and though (character, moral behavior, ethics, empathy) to act on by delaying instinctual action for the more satisfying ones later.

    No, what I’m saying is that most women wouldn’t even have the instinct to scarf down the entire smorgasbord. The instinct to select enough of what seems most appetizing to her is the more common one.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Leonard Cohen is an amazing writer. I started Beautiful Losers yesterday.

  • Lokland

    @ Susan

    “But we all know that men formed societies. This is what men chose. Even feminism. Men chose it.”

    My father wore a white shirt once or so I’m told. I guess he should have worn white shirts for the entirety of his exitence. As should I. Hmmm, my grandfather wore a baclshirt though….. mind fuck.

    This is such a, to put it lightly, FUCKING REATRDED ARGUMENT I actually chuckled to myself. Doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past or those of our fore fathers?

    Men are toys to be used and disposed they have no personal choice.

    If the case is that men created societies. W

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

      @Lokland

      You can chuckle all you like, men have participated with enthusiasm in creating the feminist hordes. They may not have known what they were getting into, but they embraced it wholeheartedly. Most politicians still do. The not-so-pretty truth is that it’s not women who have changed the laws of the land re divorce, it’s men.

      If the case is that men created societies. I guess we can also destroy them.

      Yes you can. There are men trying to destroy American society right now. They had some success on 9/11. You can destroy all the institutions of society, including marriage and family, if you choose.

  • Lokland

    I guess we can also destroy them.

  • deti

    Herb 753:

    “What they can’t have (or shouldn’t be allowed to because in the long run they can’t) is to make people they don’t want pay the price for what they do.

    The more I think about it every manospher complaint: divorce, welfare, LJBF is a variation on this.

    Even the core HUS has an element of this: Women want BFs, not hookups. Yet, in the same environment the only energy women seem to expend is chasing the kind of guys who only provide hookups. Then, it’s the fault of the men they don’t spend energy on (ie, find interesting) that they don’t have BF (oh, the alphas they chase are at fault too, but they’re alphas…we can’t hold them accountable).”

    These are good points. I think what you’re talking about here is a common theme that presents itself every so often. Many women do not understand their own natures including hypergamy (whatever that is), attraction triggers, what they find attractive and desirable and the difference between them, the role of ovulation, attraction/comfort, how men are different, and the rest of all that mess. Frankly I think many of them just don’t know.

    This brings it back around to Emileigh. She might not be in the mess she’s in had someone sat her down and explained all this to her in some kind of cogent way. Men should tell their daughters that they’ll have tendencies to want better men than themselves and that they shouldn’t “date down” or “marry down”. Daughters should hear about things like the tingles and what they mean; how men limit their investment and commitment; how men push for sex; why men do these things; that high partner counts have short term and long term effects and what they are; and that women are responsible moral actors.

    And yes, women should be told that marriage is for life and you better be damn serious about it and you can’t take it back and you don’t get to divorce unless for adultery/abuse/abandonment.

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

      @deti

      Men should tell their daughters that they’ll have tendencies to want better men than themselves and that they shouldn’t “date down” or “marry down”. Daughters should hear about things like the tingles and what they mean; how men limit their investment and commitment; how men push for sex; why men do these things; that high partner counts have short term and long term effects and what they are; and that women are responsible moral actors.

      And yes, women should be told that marriage is for life and you better be damn serious about it and you can’t take it back and you don’t get to divorce unless for adultery/abuse/abandonment.

      +1

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Deti, yep, that’s a good post at 762. Even though I got some of the “talk,” most of that I had to learn on my own, and I didn’t learn enough until my early 20s. I didn’t even start tracking my period/ovulation until then.

    Fortunately I didn’t sleep around or chase alphas, but I didn’t really know why the meek, supplicating behavior from some ex’s was turning me off. I thought I was supposed to like it. This was a wool pulled over my eyes, and once it was gone, I felt… liberated.

    I think Emileigh has a chance to turn things around, if she can realize that truth and knowledge are good even if they sting a bit, and has the self-control and self-awareness to make deep changes within herself. It won’t be easy, and it won’t happen overnight, but acknowledging that something is wrong is a start.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I agree. What deti said in 762 is all quite sound.

  • Cooper

    @ Deti #762

    “Men should tell their daughters that they’ll have tendencies to want better men than themselves and that they shouldn’t “date down” or “marry down”.”

    Wouldn’t that contribute to what Herb #753 was talking about.

    If women have, or told to have, tendencies to want bettter men, and in their eyes only see Alpha to be higher status, then they’ll “[chase] the kind of guys who only provide hookups. Then, it’s the fault of the men they don’t spend energy on.”

    ..vicious cycle?

  • Herb

    @deti

    This brings it back around to Emileigh. She might not be in the mess she’s in had someone sat her down and explained all this to her in some kind of cogent way. Men should tell their daughters that they’ll have tendencies to want better men than themselves and that they shouldn’t “date down” or “marry down”. Daughters should hear about things like the tingles and what they mean; how men limit their investment and commitment; how men push for sex; why men do these things; that high partner counts have short term and long term effects and what they are; and that women are responsible moral actors.

    Walking to work I was thinking about Emileigh in the context of my rant and then the idea of the number in general.

    The common expression is, “men want a woman who is a slut but only for them.” I think a lot of male anger at Emileigh and her sisters isn’t that she slutted it up, but that they know in the slutting it up days they weren’t on the radar.

    So now she is realizing that the men she put energy into aren’t going to be what she wants other men come on her radar. Unfortunately, they know that they’re only on her radar because of disappointment in the men she was interested in. Result is they are going to be less interested in her than they might have been.

    I know we have all these stats about numbers to cheating and all that. I think we’re over thinking it. People want to be someone’s choice. Not their safety, not their second, not their on the side, not their for now but their choice.

    Hooking up is bad for you because you’re being someone’s for now (or maybe their safety).

    Slutting it up, soft hareming, and all that in the end aren’t being someone’s choice (if you’re maintaining a harem, you’re maintaining a group for whom you’re a safety or a for now, don’t fool yourself).

    That the SMP has devolved to the point that a lot of us have concluded all we can be is one of the above is soul killing and unhealthy. Screw stats about cheating or divorce or all that. It robs you of a part of your soul.

  • Escoffier

    “Frivolous divorce (not to be confused with infidelity) is the phenomenon where women leave to have a new life without another man in the picture. They no longer value their husband, and they choose a new life of being single. Most do not remarry. This may reflect hypergamy – the altered relative status they each represent – but has nothing to do with trading up to a new male.”

    I don’t know about this. A divorce can be frivilous even if she leaves hubby for a new man, if hubby was a good man upholding his end of the bargain. I agree there are women who leave their husbands “on spec” not knowing what will come next and probably most assume that their lives will be “better” then find it not to be. There is still an element of “trading up” in that I really doubt a whole of women divorce thinking “I want to be on my own–forever!” Most of them think “I need to get out of this unfullfilling relationship so that I can (eventually) find a man who really meets my needs.” Call that speculative trading up. It rarely works out but that’s what’s on their minds.

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

      A divorce can be frivilous even if she leaves hubby for a new man, if hubby was a good man upholding his end of the bargain.

      You’re right. I’d say leaving a man who you’re already being unfaithful to is worse than frivolous.

  • deti

    Hope, JM:

    The talk about the “birds and the bees” needs to include more than “insert tab A into slot B and that’s how Mr. Sperm gets introduced to Miss Egg and the stork arrives with a blue or pink package nine months later”.

    And boys get the “Keep it in your pants” speech while the girls in 5th grade learn about menstruation.

    I suspect it used to be that grandmothers and mothers gave girls these long instructions about why they should “save it for marriage”.

    I suspect it used to be that grandfathers and fathers gave their sons long instruction, spoken and unspoken, about how much to put up with, what not to tolerate, and being the leader of his family. Course, that’s pretty difficult when the father doesn’t even live with his son.

  • Herb

    @JM

    No, what I’m saying is that most women wouldn’t even have the instinct to scarf down the entire smorgasbord. The instinct to select enough of what seems most appetizing to her is the more common one.

    First, I was speaking more than hypergamy.

    Second, I don’t see what is incompatible between the two. Selecting enough of what seems most appetizing is not the same as selecting enough of what is satisfying. Differentiating between the two is a process that requires thought although it is also a need created by thought. When you operate only on instinct that is both satisfying and appetizing. It’s only when you think, especially in the temporal realm, that the two diverge. However, once they have you need to apply though to join them.

  • Cooper

    @Herb
    “People want to be someone’s choice. Not their safety”

    +1

  • Jennifer

    Susan, brilliant first response to Lokland. I could tell he was describing society, but your response was apt. Lok, you’re really having an open relationship? I’m wondering if that due to trust issues, or polygamous nature.

    Yes guys, men can screw around, and far more than a small number do. So maybe I could get a one-night stand, but if I don’t want one? He drops me as soon as he finds a “higher” number? Plus there’s still the sexual double-standard.

    “So, women will want varying degrees of status and dominance, but most will not only be content, but happier with what’s on their plate than they would be with the supposed fantasy of having it all”

    Yes, and the female fools obsessed with such flimsy stuff should sure as heck wake up and be glad they don’t have a REAL dominant man to put up with.

  • Herb

    @Cooper 765

    @ Deti #762

    “Men should tell their daughters that they’ll have tendencies to want better men than themselves and that they shouldn’t “date down” or “marry down”.”

    Wouldn’t that contribute to what Herb #753 was talking about.

    If women have, or told to have, tendencies to want bettter men, and in their eyes only see Alpha to be higher status, then they’ll “[chase] the kind of guys who only provide hookups. Then, it’s the fault of the men they don’t spend energy on.”

    ..vicious cycle?

    Depends…

    First, a lot of what passes for alpha (“the bass player”) is going to be written off in parental instruction.

    Second, “don’t marry down” and “don’t marry your equals” are different things. The problem isn’t 6s chasing 6s but 6s chasing 9s and slutting it up with them not realizing the 9s aren’t going to bite.

  • Escoffier

    “Nothing that you, Escoffier, has ever said on this blog has ever upset me. ”

    Right, that’s why all the name-calling and petty insults over the last few days, lol.

    On the animals, there can be no morality without free will.

    I’ve addressed at length the straw man that “all women are always looking to trade up.” If you don’t understand why that’s not what I believe, at this point, I doubt you ever will.

    Ditto on the straw man regarding my views of human goodness. There are all kinds of reasons why people behave well or ill, nous is one, constraints are another, sentiment is another, and on and on. It is a fallacy to assume that because something is not mentioned in a particular blog comment, then the author of that comment must be in denial or unaware of its existence.

    Beyond this, you seem to assume that nous/logos is a low motive for behaving well when in fact it is the highest (as in noblest) basis for good conduct.

    My views on human nature, as I have stated before, are basically Aristotelian. Aristotle has plenty to say on human goodness that is not cynical. I agree with all of it, or at least all of it that I understand.

  • deti

    Herb:

    “So now she is realizing that the men she put energy into aren’t going to be what she wants other men come on her radar. Unfortunately, they know that they’re only on her radar because of disappointment in the men she was interested in. Result is they are going to be less interested in her than they might have been.”

    That’s pretty close. Speaking generally (not about Emileigh or anyone in particular), the garden variety female hookupper still wants the alpha men who just want the hookup. But see, she wants those alphas to invest in her and commit to her, with the ultimate prize being marriage. She’s now reluctantly figured out they won’t get serious or wife her up so she widens her horizons. She never really accepts or comes to terms with the fact that the alphas will hook up but won’t wife up. She still pines away for them.

    She isn’t really attracted to the men she turned up her nose at before but she gives it a go because this is the only way she’s going to get a BF or a husband after stepping off the carousel. So what about the men she is now paying attention to? Some will be flabbergasted and happy as clams to get with the ex carouseler, depending on how hot she is. Others will say forget it. But if she is hot enough, she’ll find a man willing to wife her up.

    But the problem is that many times, she isn’t really attracted to him. She is still pining for the alphas she really wants but who won’t wife her up. That’s why we have things like EPL divorce, frivolous divorce, the wife declaring she’s not happy and wants a divorce or stays in the marriage making herself and everyone around her miserable, etc.

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

      @deti

      Speaking generally (not about Emileigh or anyone in particular), the garden variety female hookupper still wants the alpha men who just want the hookup. But see, she wants those alphas to invest in her and commit to her, with the ultimate prize being marriage. She’s now reluctantly figured out they won’t get serious or wife her up so she widens her horizons. She never really accepts or comes to terms with the fact that the alphas will hook up but won’t wife up. She still pines away for them.

      True, but again – we’re talking about 10% of the female population. Feel free to generalize to that segment, but not to all women.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Second, I don’t see what is incompatible between the two. Selecting enough of what seems most appetizing is not the same as selecting enough of what is satisfying. Differentiating between the two is a process that requires thought although it is also a need created by thought.

    I agree with this. People need to choose what’s both appetizing and healthy. The original statement of mine that you cited was about hypergamy, that’s why I focused on that. There seems to be this notion among some gamers that if women weren’t hemmed in by various constraints, they’d opt to eat everything at the dominance table. They may believe that some women feel that compulsion more strongly than others, but most women feel it to some extent. What I’m saying is that this is based on a misunderstanding of how hypergamy works. Most women will pick a few choice bits from the “alpha” table, select some appetizing “beta” dishes, and then sit down to eat without ever having the compulsion to stuff their gullets full of all the alpha treats available.

    But you’re right, women (and people in general) need to learn how to make the healthiest choices from the all the appetizing things on display.

  • Jennifer

    Herb, Deti’s right, the impression that you won’t put up with crap is a powerful one, and superior in all ways to many of the junk practices some people advise guys to have. I’m so sorry you’ve gone through such pain.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    “Nothing that you, Escoffier, has ever said on this blog has ever upset me. ”

    Right, that’s why all the name-calling and petty insults over the last few days, lol.

    Oh, don’t get me wrong, I find you thoroughly annoying. And I also believe that you find some sort of odd satisfaction in being mediocre (which isn’t to say that I think you’re only capable of mediocrity, only that it’s what you choose because you clearly like it).

    Calling you a dipshit may have been petty. I’ll own that. What I really mean is that while you’re clearly bright in some regards, you tend to use that intelligence to explain and protect your view of yourself as “average.”

    And that irks me. Because I find it pathetic.

    But again, you’ve never said anything to upset me.

  • Passer_By

    Man, this is frustrating – we need an edit function. There is nothing more exasperating than reading over a comment I made to see that I left out the word “not” in a key spot, which completely reverses the meaning of the sentence. ARRRRGGGHHH! :)

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Beyond this, you seem to assume that nous/logos is a low motive for behaving well when in fact it is the highest (as in noblest) basis for good conduct.

    I’m not saying it’s a low motive. Though your assertion that it’s the noblest basis for good conduct is an opinion that I don’t share. I believe that love is the noblest motive for good conduct.

    Escoffier, if all women do not have a desire or impulse to trade up (whether or not they engage their logos in the spinning out or dwelling of such impulses), then how is it narcissistic for a man to hold out for a woman who is most attracted to him? If a woman is more attracted to a different man, doesn’t this constistute the desire or impulse to “trade up”?

    And trust me, the last thing I’m doing is trying to put up straw man arguments. If for no other reason than I can’t *stand* the number of times that that accusation has been leveled at people here.

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

      If for no other reason than I can’t *stand* the number of times that that accusation has been leveled at people here.

      LOL, Yohami used to claim strawman and ad hominem to anyone who disagreed with him. The content was irrelevant. If asked to be specific, he complained about reframing. These accusations really are the lazy debater’s go-to strategies.

  • deti

    JM 777:

    Chill out with the chest beating, JM. Everybody knows you’re the AMOG around here.

  • FeralEmployee

    @SS
    Yup. If it makes you feel better to blame women for not being attracted to boring guys, go right ahead. But it’s pissing in the wind.

    If it makes you feel better to detox the mindset of just a handful of men and women, while the bigger problem of divorce risks and gender bias persists in Western society, go right ahead. It’s pissing in the wind too.

    Won’t bother some young fella knowing you’re around, preaching your relationship advice, while he sees his elder brethren going down in court. He’ll be more inclined to join up with the MRA’s, or take up the passive task of MGTOW, perhaps even hope to see an egalitarian marriage contract.

    I’ve noticed that MRA’s, if expressing anger, direct it mainly towards those abusing their privileges. For the most part, they have a fairly neutral bias, give or take the occasional oddball (and The Spearhead).

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

      @Feral Employee

      If it makes you feel better to detox the mindset of just a handful of men and women, while the bigger problem of divorce risks and gender bias persists in Western society, go right ahead. It’s pissing in the wind too.

      You may be right, but at least I’m trying to offer a constructive approach. If I did nothing but complain failure would be guaranteed.

      I’m not saying Herb doesn’t have valid points, I’m just saying that there’s nothing to be gained by arguing about female nature. No one alive today had a hand in designing it. It would be like me saying that I absolutely will not accept that men don’t find my MBA sexy.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    deti

    lol. That wasn’t chest-beating–that was me being blunt. I was trying to deflect his accusations of me being upset nicely, but he pushed it. So I was just honest with him.

    And do you think I’m the AMOG? I didn’t think we had one of those around here.

  • Charm

    She isn’t really attracted to the men she turned up her nose at before but she gives it a go because this is the only way she’s going to get a BF or a husband after stepping off the carousel. So what about the men she is now paying attention to? Some will be flabbergasted and happy as clams to get with the ex carouseler, depending on how hot she is. Others will say forget it. But if she is hot enough, she’ll find a man willing to wife her up.

    But the problem is that many times, she isn’t really attracted to him. She is still pining for the alphas she really wants but who won’t wife her up. That’s why we have things like EPL divorce, frivolous divorce, the wife declaring she’s not happy and wants a divorce or stays in the marriage making herself and everyone around her miserable, etc.

    I agree that this is very true, but what would you propose women like Emileigh do about it? She could probably snag a higher count alpha thats had more than his fair share of fun (under the assumptions shes very attractive), but odds are he wont stay faithful (based on the data provided). I agree that the reason girls chase alphas is because they are very attracted to the traits they possess, which most betas do not, though a beta would be glad to get her and yet she probably wont be attracted to him. This is a shitty situation altogether. She has to:

    1. Find a desireable alpha that makes her tingle…and share him
    2. Find a beta that will accept her past and be her one and only but not be that attracted to him
    3. End up a total spinster and forever alone

    Now I dont want to say that people can’t change what they are attracted to, so lets say Emileigh does give a beta an honest shot. There is nothing there to curb her attraction to alphas. She’ll be married to a beta while she watches all the girls having their fun with the alphas. I dont doubt she’ll still be pining for those alphas.

    From my perspective her very best bet would be to find a guy who has swallowed the red pill and is willing to give her a shot, but as illustrated here, that pools is probably very very small.

  • Charm

    I’d also imagine that girls like Emileigh will be conflicted as they watch women with similar SMP values land better mates simply because they chose to be more chaste sexually and thus are more desirable.

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

    When I met Aldonza, she was eager to tell me the story of her divorce. It was anything but frivolous, and it was important to her that I know that. I felt really badly that she felt the need to qualify herself to me, and I knew it was because of things people had said to her on my site. Ultimately I think she realized that commenting at HUS made her feel badly about herself, so she stopped.

    Yes that is what I got. Hopefully she is in a better place now.

    “It’s humans that have the hang ups. Sex in bonobo society is a mechanism to reduce tension. Sort of like a handshake!”
    And bonobos live in worst stage than the stone age…what is the argument there again? Our big brains created the hang ups for a reason why they don’t acknowledge that part is belong me.

    Yet at age 40-whatever, he’s still only been with one woman. Because he has that raging appetite under control.

    Yes I agree with all you say but I want to point out that there seems to be a prejudice against mastering once weaknesses because is “not natural”. Are we back to the new age crap that “nature is better than civilization?”
    If that were the case there is no merit on anything. I feel very proud of cutting up sugar because I seriously crave for it more than quitting smoking because I really never actually got addicted to it, but it seems that is meaningless because I still crave sugar. That concept only means that people with impulses should go for it, society be damned no one should be recognized for being in control of their emotions, desires and want so eat/fuck/drink yourself to death.
    I don’t think that argument should be widespread I again come from a place were being in control is not valued and we are going to pass to the next millennium being underdeveloped, violent and corrupt all the same. Society needs to have incentives for people that struggle with destructive impulses and win, not telling them that they really are not doing anything but lying to themselves the whole “be truth to yourself” is pretty much the origin of the EPL trend and other modern issues, be “true to the best part of yourself and smash the worsts part to tiny pieces” is my motto, YMMV.

  • Passer_By

    If I kick the crap out mahoney out back, do I get to ascend to AMOG?

    Your days are numbered, Mahoney!

  • SayWhaat

    Drive-by comment: I don’t believe Emileigh has only hooked up with “alphas”, particularly if she’s in an “alternative scene”. I’m willing to bet a few of them were greater betas.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    lol. King of the Hill.

    It’s ironic that a guy who doesn’t even believe in alphas would be tagged as the alpha male of a group. Anyway, I would’ve thought that Yohami earned that title until he abdicated. Mike C would probably be his natural replacement. I see myself as more of an outsider than anything.

    So Passer-By, you can have a go at Mike C out back. But the dude lifts weights, so most likely, you’d get your ass kicked. :P

  • Passer_By

    @charm

    “I’d also imagine that girls like Emileigh will be conflicted as they watch women with similar SMP values land better mates simply because they chose to be more chaste sexually and thus are more desirable.”

    This is true only to a limited extent. If she’s hot, moves someplace else, changes her ways, she stands a good chance of finding some guy who feels it’s inappropriate to ask and/or doesn’t want to know (and he might have a count as well, though not likely to come close to hers). A lot of guys have been socialized to avoid that topic, especially if they have any sort of count of their own, because they don’t really think about how much faster some women can rack up a count, so they think it would hypocritical. But, like I said elsewhere, she should move somewhere else and remain celibate for a while just to reset her default habits, assuming she doesn’t suddenly meet the man of her dreams.

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

      @Passer By

      But, like I said elsewhere, she should move somewhere else and remain celibate for a while just to reset her default habits, assuming she doesn’t suddenly meet the man of her dreams.

      I feel strongly that a period of celibacy is crucial at this point. I hope she goes cold turkey.

  • deti

    JM:

    Come on. Your takedown of Escoffier was in my opinion unnecessary and uncalled for. You did call him names and you did hurl petty insults at him. Esco’s been in here in the trenches making his case and acquitting himself pretty well.

    We can have strong disagreements without getting personal. Or maybe we can’t. If we can’t, and it’s all personal, and we can’t detach ourselves, then all of this is pointless.

  • Passer_By

    @JM

    “So Passer-By, you can have a go at Mike C out back. But the dude lifts weights, so most likely, you’d get your ass kicked.”

    Dude, there’s a reason I targeted you instead of Mike. No offense. :)

  • Charm

    @Saywhaat

    But what if even a lot of greater betas believe they can do better than a high count girl? Men want to get the best out of the SMP as well. We don’t know Emileighs number. The difference between 10 partners and 20 is pretty big. Maybe a GB would be willing to put up with 10 but 20 would seem to much. I feel like Emileigh is gonna end up with someone who has a high partner count himself or is willing to “put up” with hers. I don’t think I find the idea of being “put up” with very appealing in the long term. I think girls like E want guys to not see it as that big of a deal not be bothered by it, but thats not the case. Its seems that even higher count Alphas get bothered by the number after a certain point.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    deti,

    Yea, I get personal at times. Idk, Hope can perhaps enlighten us about whether that’s a characteristic of feeling types or not. Also, be aware that Escoffier started in with the name-calling. I was narcissistic, unrealistic, and sensitive. I said he was a dipshit, which may have been more crass, but was no more personal than what he said.

    Whatever the case, I separate my feelings from the arguments. I don’t disagree with Escoffier b/c I have a low opinion of him as a person. When he makes a point I agree with, I have no problem agreeing with it.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Dude, there’s a reason I targeted you instead of Mike. No offense. :)

    lol. Smart man.

  • SayWhaat

    Like I said before, there are a lot more guys who would “put up” with it than you think.

  • deti

    Charm 783:

    “what would you propose women like Emileigh do about it?”

    Well, that’s just it. You’ve laid out her options:
    1. share an alpha
    2. settle for a plan B beta she doesn’t really love and isn’t attracted to
    3. get cats.

    And I’m going to leave aside the fact that ultimately it’s a problem of her own making, the whole “inability to pair bond”, etc.

    You’ve put your finger exactly on the problem. SW and manosphere sites have been pointing this out for years.

    But it’s not as stark and simple as the 3 options above. She can massage those options a bit, I think.

    If she really wants marriage and kids, she can compromise (NOT settling, but COMPROMISING) for a (Vox scale) BETA or DELTA. She needs to whittle down that checklist. She needs to get real about what she wants vis a vis what she can realistically have. She needs to grok that her sexual market value is not the same as her marriage market value.

    And she needs to accept once and for all that the bad boy ALPHAsare never going to wife her up; and if she does marry one of those ALPHAs, expect to be cheated on.

    She also needs to accept that her pair bonding ability has probably been damaged and it needs to be fixed.

  • Sassy6519

    I believe that people with such pessimistic views of humanity are incapable of the level of love to which I aspire. Of course they’ll think I’m being superior or pretentious by saying that, but… it’s true. You can’t love someone in a deep and intimate way if you can’t trust their honesty, their intention, their desire to be with you and only you.. You can’t love someone as freely if you think that person is only faithful because of social and biological “constraints.”

    Those people aren’t going to be swayed by arguments, because their very view of the nature of people doesn’t provide them with the requisite tools to have a healthy, productive, and intimate relationship.

    And with that, I’m going to close this computer and have some more sex with my gf. Goodnight everyone.

    God, get over yourself, please.

    I have said it more than once, and I will say it again. I have been in love before. I can experience love just like any other person. What I don’t do is experience love the way you think everyone should experience it. If that bothers you, or you can’t wrap your head around it, that’s not my problem.

    I think you are a cool dude and everything, but your pretentiousness on the topic of love is nauseating.

    I prefer to see people as they are instead of how I wish they were. You can call it pessimistic. I call it realistic.

    I hate the fact that you claim people who think the way I do don’t have the “requisite tools” to have healthy intimate relationships. Who gave you the authority on love? Seriously, who gave you that accreditation?

    This type of internet spittle makes me want to bang my head against a wall.

    Admitting that most of human behavior is governed by less than noble impulses/instincts makes me less capable of having a healthy relationship?

    That’s priceless.

  • OffTheCuff

    SW: “Like I said before, there are a lot more guys who would “put up” with it than you think.”

    And like I said before, the duration and quality of that relationship is a lot less than you think.

  • this is Jen

    2012 at 9:43 am

    @Herb

    Here’s the rub, men cannot do anything to change the environment because in society (to make sure we’re not discussing HUS only) men cannot criticize women about their sexual choices.

    You’re right. I’ve said that men could never get away with slut shaming. We women will have to police our own if there is ever going to be a change. That’s a tough sell, because women don’t want the confrontation with one another, but there is no other way. If we don’t do it, only some sort of natural catastrophe could get it done.

    ————————————————————————–
    Why aren’t mothers teaching their daughters to keep their damn legs shut anymore? Its like a whole generation stopped caring about “reputation”, or worse, is pushing their daughter to be the loosest one. Like that is now some kind of accomplishment. Teens getting boob jobs ( which have to be okayed by parents)-crazy stuff!.

  • Charm

    @Passer_by

    Lol. I know a guy that can issue new identities if E needs one and I know a hair dresser that specializes in altering appearances if she needs the hookup.

    I guess I can’t imagine wanting to maintain that level of ambiguity. I guess a lot of people can live their lives never knowing something like that. It seems to me that it would loom under the surface for the remainder of the relationship or maybe people let it go after a while. I personally couldnt do it and no matter how ugly the truth is the need to know it is much stronger than they need not to.

  • Passer_By

    This thread is reminding me of an oldie but a goodie.

    http://xkcd.com/386/

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Jesus Mahoney, I used to be more hotheaded in “debates” as well, letting my emotions get the better of my arguments. But since I don’t have the extra impetus of testosterone, it is not the same for me, especially after I realized it’s better to just walk away and cool off.

    I will say even though my husband is also INFJ, he got a lot lower on the agreeableness score than me on the Big-Five test. He will hurl sarcasm and insults, too, mostly jokingly, but still with an element of seriousness behind it. He doesn’t really want to hurt people’s feelings though… he just wants them to do better.

  • Jason

    The resentment from Herb is hitting an all time high from someone as long as I’ve been on this site.

    Herb, the current situation might suck, but hell, you at least have knowledge of the situation, which puts you a couple steps ahead of the competition. There is no rule against actively playing in the game while trying to change it.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Ana,

    I feel very proud of cutting up sugar because I seriously crave for it more than quitting smoking because I really never actually got addicted to it, but it seems that is meaningless because I still crave sugar. That concept only means that people with impulses should go for it, society be damned no one should be recognized for being in control of their emotions, desires and want so eat/fuck/drink yourself to death.
    I don’t think that argument should be widespread

    I agree. And FWIW, I think it’s great that you cut out both sugar and tobacco.

    Of course, I’m not an arugula salad. It could be that the arugula salad feels a bit used knowing that you crave sugar more than him. Idk.

    What I do know is that it’s reasonable for a man to expect that the woman he is with craves “him” more than some sugary dude that she thinks would be more pleasing to the taste buds.

    Great for women if they’d like to make healthier, more civilized choices about mates. But don’t expect men to feel flattered or sufficiently appreciated if you’re choosing to be with them rather than indulging in the 7 layer cake you really want.

    Of course, I’m sure you’re not like that. I’m sure you don’t crave other men more than your husband.

  • Charm

    @Saywhaat

    Oh I dont deny there are quite a lot. I dont relate to heavily with that sentiment simply because I stand pretty firmly on certain issues and I wont be swayed and have never been one to “put up” with something I was passionately against. Though they guys willing to put up with it probably weren’t passionately against it in the first place. In that case, I don’t too much respect people like that. I’ve known people to “adamantly” be against something one minute and then they next they are stumbling over themselves to make excuses on why they are “putting up” with it the next. Shows weak character to me.

  • http://deleted Jason

    This is Jen,

    Why aren’t mothers teaching their daughters to keep their damn legs shut anymore? Its like a whole generation stopped caring about “reputation”, or worse, is pushing their daughter to be the loosest one. Like that is now some kind of accomplishment. Teens getting boob jobs ( which have to be okayed by parents)-crazy stuff!.

    I honestly don’t think this is the problem. I’m sure plenty of mothers still advocate that their daughters should shut their legs, but the problem lies in it being a mandate without a reasoning behind it. If mothers (or fathers) could sit down and articulate WHY this would be beneficial to their daughters, I think it would make much greater impact.

    IME, most of the sluttiest girls I’ve known have come from strict religious households (mostly christian, but not solely), where the teaching is authoritarian without appealing to a logical reasoning behind it. This just leads to a pushback from the young women, and thus the spreading of the legs.

  • deti

    Charm:

    “1. Find a desireable alpha that makes her tingle…and share him
    2. Find a beta that will accept her past and be her one and only but not be that attracted to him
    3. End up a total spinster and forever alone”

    You might not know my story. Mrs. deti was something like Emileigh, a fact I didn’t know until quite recently. Well, she went through this analysis and settled on a slight variation of option 2, which I also discovered quite accidentally. It was just that Mrs. d. shaded the truth a bit on her partner count.

    How was this problem solved?

    I confronted her on it with, long story short, laying out choices. I wasn’t going to stay in a marriage with her if she was going to continue not appreciating me. She could accept me as is. Or her second choice was that we can end things, in which case she would likely be relegated to option 1 (unlikely unle