Is Slut Shaming Making a Comeback?

Katie Roiphe has published an article at Slate: It’s Not Just Rush: Liberals slut-shame just as much, in which she decries the pervasive slut shaming in our society:

These judgments, about women who sleep around or sleep with the wrong people or fail to settle down, these vicious or catty bursts of rage, or calm-holier-than-thou reflections on other people’s sluttiness or condescending screeds about how pathetic or sad or distasteful or lonely or sleazy it is to live so outside of conventional life, persist through all age groups and social strata, in big cities and small towns, on television news programs watched by millions, and on liberal blogs. 

What can I say? I find this development encouraging. I’m never quite sure what to make of Katie Roiphe. She’s the daughter of an ardent and famous feminist, but in 1994 she burst on the scene with The Morning After: Fear, Sex and Feminism, a book that held women accountable for choices that served to put them in danger of sexual assault. From an article at the New York Times:

One of the questions used to define rape was: ‘Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn’t want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?’ The phrasing raises the issue of agency. Why aren’t college women responsible for their own intake of alcohol or drugs? A man may give her drugs, but she herself decides to take them. If we assume that women are not all helpless and naive, then they should be responsible for their choice to drink or take drugs. “If a woman’s ‘judgment is impaired’ and she has sex, it isn’t always the man’s fault; it isn’t necessarily always rape.

Obviously, this view put her squarely at odds with sex-positive feminists, infuriating Katha Pollitt and other prominent feminists of the time. One imagines she wouldn’t be welcome, or interested in attending a local Slut Walk.

In a 1997 book review a writer for the LA Times criticized Roiphe for not embracing the Sex as Empowerment Scam:

For Roiphe, who is 28, the sexual revolution of the ’60s had nothing to do with a desire to create a more erotic and more egalitarian society. Instead, Roiphe focuses on “bikinis from France, and the Pill, and nudity in movies, and honest and open marriages, and no-fault divorces” and then notes that “paradise” mysteriously failed to materialize. She is like the theatergoer who takes her seat during the second act and then loudly whispers to everyone around her that the plot makes no sense.

Mistakenly, Roiphe believes that the sexual revolution consisted simply of “having sex with as many people as you could.” She is oblivious to the fact that the sexual revolution–at least for many women–was less about mindless promiscuity than about finding newer, truer, less sexist and more ecstatic ways of being sexual. It was about the experience, not just the numbers; about creating something, not just getting lucky.

Fifteen years later, we all know that few found “newer, truer, less sexist and more ecstatic ways of being sexual.” They found ways of being sexual that were risky, superficial, awkward and unsatisfying. The sexual double standard is as prominent as ever, being biologically determined and therefore immutable. If anything, men have become hypersensitive to female promiscuity, warily inquiring about a woman’s number before investing one ounce of emotional energy.

So why is Katie Roiphe suddenly writing in defense of sluts?

In fact the trope of “sluts” is perpetuated in liberal circles as well as conservative ones, and there is a much more widespread tendency to judge women for their sex lives than we like to admit. There is a great deal of unacknowledged, uninterrogated contempt for women who are perceived as promiscuous, floating around even in right-thinking, fashionable, urban, blue-state pockets of the world.

…The slut is not a mythical creature on college campuses, a unicorn or dodo bird, vanished from the vernacular, in other words. The girls talk about being sluts or feeling like sluts or other girls being sluts, and if this seems exotic or surprising to us, we can think back to our own college lives, or to yesterday, when we heard someone expressing something very much like that over coffee about someone else for a sexual encounter, or sexual style or sexual existence they don’t approve of for one reason or another.

I can’t explain Roiphe’s mysterious mid-life conversion to sympathy for sluthood at the age of 44, but I can note that female promiscuity is not a problem “for one reason or another.” It is directly responsible for the near disappearance of fulfilling and intimate cross-sex relationships among young people in college, the mistaken and tragic sense that most college students have of themselves as sexual “losers,” the rapid rise of sexually transmitted diseases in the U.S., and the creation of a “spinster class” of women now in their 30s and 40s. 

If liberals are willing to shame promiscuity, that’s a good thing, a rare example of people working effectively across the aisle. Let’s not forget the manwhores while we’re at it, OK? The sooner the casual sex culture gasps its last breath, the sooner we can begin to repair the harm to our young women and men, as well as the most important societal institutions of marriage and family.

One Pingback/Trackback

  • Senior Beta

    “The sexual double standard…. is immutable.” Truer words were never spoken. Should be the logo for this blog.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Would be interesting to know if the women Roiphe says are talking disparagingly or in some other way negatively about sluttishness were themselves part of the high-count scene. Or, presumably some of them were, so it would be nice to know the proportion.
    IOW, how many people are learning from others’ mistakes? College is an age and setting where your lying eyes are always at fault, and what the Kewl Kids say is always right, notwithstanding its appearance in the real world. For that matter, at that age it’s not solely about doing whatever, but about admitting your view of whatever even if you’re not doing it, should that view conflict with the CW. If Roiphe is correct in saying she’s seeing more of this, enough to generate a book or article, that’s a Big Deal.

  • Days of Broken Arrows

    1). She’s not so much seeing a problem with slut shaming per se as she is with the left’s hypocrisy regarding the Rush Limbaugh flap.

    2). She’s a single mother by choice twice over. From her articles in Slate, she’s pretty defensive about this. Could be her views on slut shaming changed as her own number count rose.

  • Herb

    @Susan

    Slut shaming is good but one minor quibble:

    the creation of a “spinster class” of women now in their 30s and 40s.

    There are now more and more men falling into that class.

    It’s pedantic but last thread there was a bit of a kerfuffle about men’s feelings not being real/mattering. That is the kind of thing more and more men are reading in that way.

    @Day of Broken Arrows

    She’s not so much seeing a problem with slut shaming per se as she is with the left’s hypocrisy regarding the Rush Limbaugh flap.

    I’m still trying to figure out why we can have slut walks and encourage women to sexual explore and then calling a woman a slut is a bad thing.

    Either it’s an insult or it’s not…

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

      @Herb

      the creation of a “spinster class” of women now in their 30s and 40s.

      There are now more and more men falling into that class.

      It’s pedantic but last thread there was a bit of a kerfuffle about men’s feelings not being real/mattering. That is the kind of thing more and more men are reading in that way.

      I was specifically referring there to women who spent their 20s riding the carousel or making otherwise bad choices. And it’s my understanding that the decline in the marriage rate is being driven largely by men, so I didn’t perceive them as victims on this particular issue.

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    I’m under the impression that Ms. Roiphe’s feeling now like her particular ox has been gore. Before this, not so much. It sounds like, at age 44, it’s become very personal to her.

    It’s easy to point to some “intrasexual competition” as the reason she’s taken her stance, but the truth is that guys do this too. That sullen, moping teenage boy is the archtype. He’s projecting the same sort of shaming that Roiphe is, except that it’s turned more inward.

  • Days of Broken Arrows

    @Herb: Because “slut” is the n-word for women. They can call each other it, but no one else can. Same goes for bitch.

  • Escoffier

    “I can’t explain Roiphe’s mysterious mid-life conversion to sympathy for sluthood at the age of 44″

    I can.

    She initiated a frivilous divorce and is now raising her kid alone while she sleeps around Manhattan like an alley cat. All of which she’s written about enthusiastically. She’s also written about how much she admires, envies and wishes to emulate her mother’s promiscuous 20s, which Katie missed out on during her own 20s when she was writing that sexually “neo-conservative” book.

  • Underdog

    “She’s a single mother by choice twice over. From her articles in Slate, she’s pretty defensive about this. Could be her views on slut shaming changed as her own number count rose.”

    I did a quick search on her to satiate my curiosity and came to the same conclusion.

  • Mike M.

    Shaming is a good start…but only a start.

    And it applies to both sides of the sexual divide.

  • Richard Aubrey

    So she’s made this up and is putting the words and sentiments in other women’s mouths?
    Not implausible.

  • Fingenieur

    No.

    Calling people sluts is still mean and though it might be accurate, it’s still not something I’d like to infuse society with. The problem ain’t with female promiscuity itself. The problem is with the culture of promiscuity combined with unrealistic view of relationships and human interaction. There’s without a doubt a huge number of people for whom the lifestyle suits well and who can be comfortable with the consequences it creates to your odds of finding lifelong partners. I don’t think it would do any good to make them feel bad for expressing their sexuality in a way they feel comfortable with.

    Other group would be the 30-40′s who’ve fallen for the illusion of enduring choice and low-costs of strategy change (“I’ll settle when _I_ choose…” -myth) The reality hits them hard enough as it is. More constructive approach would be to provide sympathy and support for these people, who are increasingly coming to terms with the consequences of their choices. I don’t see what good the slut-shaming would do here. Sluts are people too.

    The only group who would somewhat benefit from mild “slut-scaring”, would be the younger people playing and entering the SMP. But still, it’d be more constructive and morally tolerable to educate objectively, not condemningly of the choices and consequences they might face. How everything they do might not be “empowering” and how Karma can kick back at the most unexpected places. Just burst the poisonous soap-bubble we are wrapping our kids in and let them face the ugly truth as soon as possible. No need to make it any harder for them (by bullying) than it already is…

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

      @Fingenieur

      First, will all due respect, I’d like to point out that as a Scandinavian, your outlook and experience on the question of promiscuity in the U.S. is bound to be somewhat less relevant. While we might agree wholeheartedly on matters of biological realities, evolution, etc., the post is really about the effect of promiscuity on American society, which has been disastrous.

      There’s without a doubt a huge number of people for whom the lifestyle suits well and who can be comfortable with the consequences it creates to your odds of finding lifelong partners. I don’t think it would do any good to make them feel bad for expressing their sexuality in a way they feel comfortable with.

      After three years of research, I can only find a minority of people whom the lifestyle suits well. One group is made up of extreme outliers, like poly folk and women who embrace the identity of sluthood – which I would place below 5% of women. The other, much larger group of beneficiaries are the dominant males who rack up sexual partners like billiard balls on a pool table. This group represents roughly 20% (or less) of young American males. Their partners in casual sex are often abjectly miserable, seeking love in the soiled sheets.

      Also, a quibble. Slut shaming is not the same as slut scaring. While slutty women do potentially serve as cautionary tales for young women, there is no real way to expose these truths to young people, as the media romanticizes promiscuity and the education system is heavily influenced by sex-positive feminism.

      Shame is a valuable tool for maintaining civilization. It always has been. Without shame we’d still be rutting on the savannah, as we would have had no motivation or time to ask questions or study the world around us.

  • purplesneakers

    Fingenieur +1

    I’ve been thinking about this. “Slut” is such a loaded term. I think talking to women instead about being honest about whether they really want to have NSA sex for the sake of the sex itself, or whether they are doing it with the hope of landing a relationship, is a place to start. Also about how, even though it doesn’t seem fair, men will judge women who have a lot of partners and not see her as relationship material. Framing it more as a strategy rather than just shaming them morally.

    Then again, it seems most women act on feelings rather than logic? I can’t relate to that since even though I can get very emotional, I’m extremely risk-averse.

  • Richard Aubrey

    fingenieur
    I was pretty much on your side until “bullying”. That’s the Swiss Army Knife of arguments with the added benefit that it doesn’t have to be relevant.
    Explaining that something is shameful to somebody who hasn’t started it, or who is doing it, is not bullying.
    Bullying is taking advantage of a position of power to humiliate somebody who is not in a position to defend.
    Fact is, the idea of shame, guilt, manners, duties are what keep society as copacetic as it is. One old SCOTUS justice remarked that, as manners go out, law must come in and…others have noted that law, compared to manners and a shared social code, is hamfisted and clumsy.
    Of course, the question might be whether the results of sluttish behavior on the slut are anything society has to worry about except for concern for the slut, which is probably more charity than most of us can find. Is there a larger social issue?
    Years back, somebody wrote, about illegitimate births, a book entitled, “This Is Going To Hurt”, explaining that only shame would cut down on the epidemic. Laws won’t, and paying for it, oddly, has not, either. Might be true. Legitimizing it hasn’t slowed it down, either. Funny, that. And society has an interest in this issue, as opposed, probably, to the slut issue.

  • Underdog

    Speaking of sluts, does anyone know what happened to Karen Owen? Is she still in hiding or what?

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

      Speaking of sluts, does anyone know what happened to Karen Owen? Is she still in hiding or what?

      I heard that she got a job as a management consultant with a prestigious firm. I cannot imagine how. Maybe her Power Point skills?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Okay, so the liberal/conservative confusion boils down to this: there are multiple dimensions of liberalism/conservatism.

    - Religious social conservative (abstinence, no sex before marriage, no evolution in schools, no birth control or abortion)

    - Secular social conservative (prudish, old-fashioned sexual morality, pro traditional marriage; think most of Asia)

    - Secular social liberal/libertarian (feminist, sexual revolution, pro birth control and abortion)

    - Fiscal conservative (large corporations in conjunction with government sponsorship, trickle-down Reaganomics, military intervention to control key resources such as oil)

    - Fiscal libertarian (small government, local, small, competitive, free market, non-military intervention)

    - Fiscal liberal (government controlling corporations, regulated markets, anti-trust laws, military for defense)

    These are simplified definitions and perhpas a bit off, but it’s about the gist of it. You can also throw in moderate in there. These can all be separated out by each category, so a person can be a fiscal conservative and a social liberal, or a fiscal liberal and a social moderate, etc.

    So there is really no inherent reason why someone who is considered “liberal” in economics cannot be on the same side as “conservatives” when it comes to the social issues.

  • GudEnuf

    Can we start shaming people who have unsafe sex?

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

      @GudEnuf

      Can we start shaming people who have unsafe sex?

      Sure, but how would you identify them?

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

    - Religious social conservative (abstinence, no sex before marriage, no evolution in schools, no birth control or abortion)

    Funny comment about that, in my very catholic country evolution is taught since fifth grade, FYI.

  • Fingenieur

    @Richard:
    “Explaining that something is shameful to somebody who hasn’t started it, or who is doing it, is not bullying.”

    That’s why I tried to separate it with the term “slut scaring”. And I see benefits in it. But what this thread is doing for Ms. Roiphe and “the spinsters”… I don’t see it as most constructive behaviour.

    “Of course, the question might be whether the results of sluttish behavior on the slut are anything society has to worry about except for concern for the slut, which is probably more charity than most of us can find. Is there a larger social issue?”

    And if there is, would the end result be beneficial or destructive? For example, I could see much benefit in more tolerable attitudes towards prostitution where I live. I can see there’s a place in society for promiscuity and fighting that kind of sexual expression instead of tolerating and seeking deeper understanding might end up hurting more than it would help. Status quo of conscious and unconscious double standards and fear of evaluating consequences clearly ain’t the way to go, but it was not that good in the 50′s either… We need more evolution instead of revolution…

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

      Status quo of conscious and unconscious double standards and fear of evaluating consequences clearly ain’t the way to go, but it was not that good in the 50′s either

      Why do feminists always jump to assuming that rejecting promiscuity in society entails a trip back in time to the 1950s? It’s the go-to tactic for trying to shut down debate. Implying the other person wants to see society devolve and regress.

      I believe in the ideal of a society where people are free to make their own choices, prepared with a realistic understanding of the likely consequences of those choices, and an awareness that other members of society will have opinions about those choices if they are affected by them.

  • GudEnuf

    Hope: Even more confusing is that the lables are switched in different countries. In Australia, the Liberal Party is known for being anti-gay.

  • GudEnuf

    Anacaona: Funny comment about that, in my very catholic country evolution is taught since fifth grade, FYI.

    Whereas in America, Catholic schools teach evolution and liberal arts colleges teach evolution denialism.

  • Emily

    >> “Funny comment about that, in my very catholic country evolution is taught since fifth grade, FYI.”

    Yeah, it makes me mad when people assume that Catholics don’t believe in evolution. :(

  • Cooper

    @#11
    “Sluts are people too.”
    So are douchebags, assholes, and murderers. (the list could go on)
    What’s your point?

    “The only group who would somewhat benefit from mild “slut-scaring”, would be the younger people playing and entering the SMP.”
    Well, I guess that’s me then. ;)

    @purpplesneakers
    “Framing it more as a strategy rather than just shaming them morally.”
    +1

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

      “Framing it more as a strategy rather than just shaming them morally.”

      For the record, and the benefit of new readers, let me state that my objection to female promiscuity has nothing to do with morality. I am entirely preoccupied with strategy, individual success in finding relationships, and what I believe to be helpful to society (like fewer single mothers with children by numerous men and an increasing marriage rate). Though I have some religious readers here, I do not come at this topic from a religious orientation.

  • purplesneakers

    Oh and to add to my previous comment- for the ‘strategy change’ to work, young men also have to play a certain role. They have to stop rewarding the girls who dress and comport themselves only as ‘hot’ and sexually available–no matter what character flaws they might have–with their attention and gushing (even if they don’t get laid with these girls) over the simply ‘pretty’ and easy-going girls who may not show as much skin/make out with other girls for attention/get on top of the bar and dance. The whole culture is immature. If young men are truly disgusted with girls who sleep around (especially with cads), then show that disgust. Don’t try to get into those girls’ pants (or microminis).

  • Fingenieur

    @Cooper:
    “So are douchebags, assholes, and murderers. ”

    Maybe I shouldn’t take the bait to parallel murderers to people with bad judgement of their sexual choice, but I’ll go anyway.

    Here in Scandinavia, we have this idea of treating even our scumbags with dignity and respect. (e.g. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01mTKDaKa6Q) It works out pretty well.

    Yeah, promiscuity is a darned addiction if it hits the wrong person. But kicking the victims very rarely work. Whether it has been drug addicts, murderers or rapists… unemployed and the outcasts. I’ve _always_ witnessed much better results with approaches aiming to help the victims instead of punishing them.

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

      @Fingenieur

      First, I can’t believe you lured me to a video by Michael Moore. Ugh! Any chance you’d take him? We hate him here.

      Second, I can’t believe you’d try to sell prison as a place where a chain-saw murderer gets to play volleyball and go to summer camp. I can just imagine how the neighbors feel about that prison. In any case, that will never happen in the U.S. Treating a perpetrator of a chain saw massacre as a man worthy of respect is just wrong, IMO. Maybe it works for Norway, I dunno.

  • Cooper

    “In Australia, the Liberal Party is known for being anti-gay.”

    And where I’m from the Liberal Party is technically the Conversative party. (as in it’s more aligned with the federal Conservatives)

  • someINTP

    I consider myself quite liberal and I am against “slut shaming”. Tolerance and fairness is an important aspect of liberalism. I believe that promiscuous women are as necessary (or inescapable) as prostitution. To the Babylonians, they fulfilled the role of “public wife”, offering companionship to men who could not afford families or were in a profession that did not accommodate families (soldier of arms). These women should be open and proud about their lifestyle as they are in other cultures. They deserve tolerance and respect.

    That said, promiscuous women should not expect to be treated like maidens or conventional wives. This would be unrealistic on their part. Their role is different, as are their goals, which reveal themselves through behavior. People should be respected equally, but they should not be treated as if they are all the same. This is a frequent contention in modern liberalism: How do we treat people equally while respecting their individuality? This is the same calculation for race, religion, and ethnicity.

    Respect versus acceptance can be a difficult distinction to make for a society with few formal boundaries. The best way to explain would be to think of a person’s lifestyle as if it were a career. It is great that they fulfilling that role in society (someone has to do that job), but everyone has different idea on what they want to do.

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

      @someINTP

      Respect versus acceptance can be a difficult distinction to make for a society with few formal boundaries. The best way to explain would be to think of a person’s lifestyle as if it were a career. It is great that they fulfilling that role in society (someone has to do that job), but everyone has different idea on what they want to do.

      One problem with the view that sluts can do their own thing like it’s their job is that there’s a strong missionary element to sluthood. Sex-positive feminism is proselytizing in nature. Women’s Studies programs on college campuses participate in Freshmen Orientation with “You go girl” presentations and sponsor Sex Week, where things like live BDSM demonstrations are provided, complete with nipple clamps and whipping, e.g. Yale Sex Week.

      Another problem is that promiscuous women often learn in time that men will still apply the sexual double standard. They feel duped and resentful about this. Their only solution is to get more women to rack up high numbers, and eliminate any chaste competition. Here’s an example, left by a woman named Joy Brondite at feministing after she found HUS:

      “There is this notion of slut shaming in the media and it happens on a more personal level among people who shame one another. There is also something that is discussed on other websites but never in the wider media – something called slut rejection. The latter is what heterosexual men who seek a life partner supposedly engage in. I have personal experience with this. My ex did not try to shame me but upon knowing more about me, he just sort of faded away. Its so wrong that women may have to lie or not say anything and either strategy is prone to backfire. I believe that if men had less [sic] alternatives, that is if most or many women had a fruitful sexual history, then that would become the norm and therefore acceptable.”

  • Cooper

    @Fingenieur
    Ok. It was a very poor parallel, I’ll admit that.

    The point I was trying to make was, everyone of varying degrees of bad judgement “are people too.”
    Where would we draw the line to be judgemental?

  • M3

    “Let’s not forget the manwhores while we’re at it, OK?”

    I agree, tho am reticent to reiterate that one can only be a manwhore if gates continue open for him.

  • Frank

    I have to disagree a bit with you. The problem is feminism – not sluts. Feminism has stacked the economic deck in favor of women, so that upper and middle class women are increasingly fighting over the relatively few men in their economic classes. Because women are almost incapable of marrying down financially – and men are – these upper and middle class women are trying to prevent or inhibit (by ‘slut shaming’) relations between ‘their’ men and lower class women (i.e. ‘sluts’).

    Your point about a ‘spinster class’ is spot on!

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

      @Frank

      Because women are almost incapable of marrying down financially – and men are – these upper and middle class women are trying to prevent or inhibit (by ‘slut shaming’) relations between ‘their’ men and lower class women (i.e. ‘sluts’).

      The spinsters are sluts, or were, for the most part. That will change as the number of college educated men continues to shrink, and many women who were not promiscuous will be unable to marry.

      Slut shaming happens between women. It is ineffective for women to attempt to shame men, since the men have strong incentives to continue to spend time with sluts. It is politically incorrect (and also contrary to those incentives) for men to shame sluts.

  • Rum

    Remember the old joke about being already 50% in agreement just by wanting what another can offer you? Slut affirming women are in 50% agreement with the men they would have commit to them.

  • Extragiraffe

    I think your addition of “let’s not forget the manwhores” at the end of your post is disingenuous. I’ve noticed for a while now a disturbing current of anti-feminist woman-blaming in your writing and it’s pretty gross. And this post takes the cake:

    “FEMALE PROMISCUITY…is directly responsible for the near disappearance of fulfilling and intimate cross-sex relationships among young people in college, the mistaken and tragic sense that most college students have of themselves as sexual ‘losers,’ the rapid rise of sexually transmitted diseases in the U.S., and the creation of a “spinster class” of women now in their 30s and 40s.” [emphasis mine]

    Nice one, Susan. As if young women aren’t still forced to shoulder a disproportionate share of society’s neuroses. Let’s take shit back a few decades! Oh and let’s give men, especially the MRAs and the player assholes like Vox/Roissy/etc. , a pass (well, except for maybe a little offhanded slap on the wrist)!

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

      @Extragiraffe

      I must confess, your picture offers an interesting insight into your comment. With your backwards baseball cap, Ray Bans and arm extended while you snap your own photo, you look like some frat star douchebag who’s got a personal stake in the argument. Just saying.

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

      @Extragiraffe

      I must say, your picture provides an interesting insight into your argument. With your backwards baseball cap, your fakey Ray Bans and your arm extended while you snap your own photo, you look like a frat star douchebag who has a personal stake in the debate. Just saying.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @ Senior Beta
    Good point.

    @ Everyone

    I think much of this discussion is premised upon an intuitive, and probably accurate, perception that women can obtain sex easily. Consider the following statement: “I met someone last night and we had sex and then I had sex with all of the roommates.” You must admit (most of you; I’ve learned there are people on blogs who DISPUTE EVERYTHING; tell them shit stinks and they’ll swear they had one in 2011 that did’nt) that your perception is quite different depending on whether the speaker is male or female. If the speaker is male telling it to his cohorts he’s a stud. If it’s a female telling it to her girlfriends, well-I daresay all of them will think it, and a few might even say it to her face-”You slut?!!?” Ok now you one or 2 disputants tell me “Oh no, it’s her right to dispose of her body as she chooses blah blah blah” fucking bullshit don’t try selling those shit stamps to Uncle Tom he ain’t buyin’ ‘em.

    But it’s tedious and endless to go on about one half of the equation. I’d rather go on to the larger issue. Which is thus. There is a prominent place within our spirit that contains our sexuality. It goes so far beyond need, ego satisfaction, craving-the sex itself is only a pebble tossed into an immense lake; the ripples extend from here to eternity. Deny it and ultimately you will feel bereft. Deny it long enough and you will lose forever the capacity to know it. It’s called consequences. Every moment of your life and every act you do or forbear carries them.

    I will be dead in a year and I would not trade places with any one of you. I would not bet that I could find again the love I found, lived, have and will have to my last dying breath. My regimen has nearly destroyed my body; I look like ET or the first pregnant man you ever saw. I am swollen, distended, irritable-yeah, pregnant except women don’t lose their hair. And when my Susan looks at me I KNOW she sees none of that, she sees the man she loves and wants to keep, as long as she can, and I her, whatever the cost , however the losses mount up.

    And I will tell you this. You will never find that, or even come remotely close to it, none of you, in gratuitous anonymous hookups, narcissistic meaningless seminal discharges, or whatever the hell else you want to call these vulgar bestial couplings that are even worse than the meanderings of barnyard animals. It doesn’t even rise to the level of disgusting.

    So keep at it. Keep at this long enough and you will leave this world never knowing what I’ve known. Forget what I’ve written here; it will be a blessing that you do not know what you’ve missed.

    But I can’t resist. Look on the end of that hook you’re using to “hook up” with; what’s on it?

    If you cannot answer that, even Uncle tom cannot help you.

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

      @Munson

      Your brilliance lights up the sky and the conversation. Keep that in the back of your mind if you can as you struggle through the weekend. xoxo

  • M3

    i see a white knight has arrived.

    atop a giraffe.

  • M3

    Munchy

    I have immense respect for you and what you’re going through. I lived it first hand with my brother.

    But the sad reality is even tho everyone wants to experience what it is you have, attaining it is not as easy because too many variables have changed.

    You can’t expect a better future without correcting the conditions that conspire today. No matter how acidic and toxic these debates (or yelling matches) become, they are necessary.

    Everything has to be put out on the table to be scrutinized under the light.

    (i hope i read your comment correctly and that you weren’t inferring that anyone here was engaging in bestiality? lol )

  • Jim

    Sexual liberation created the spinsters and nothing else. You have one hell of a vapid and shallow population of women. Period. Too bad a lot of them are employed in jobs with government subsidies yet no one ask this simple question. If you got a government check for a million dollars, would you be a millionaire?

    http://www.usdebtclock.org/

    Once that goes and the long process of cuts before which includes many jobs filled by women, spinsterhood is going to turn into chaos. Nor will many women survive it. You folks better start thinking in terms that go outside of the BS because women have simply dug themselves into their own graves. And merely because of how they used not only their sexuality, but abused their gains in the job market coupled with insane laws that still looks at women as some kind of moral super being to burn men left and right. MRA’s and PUA’s didn’t cause women to end up that way. Women did because they took their gains and just like little tyrants and sociopaths, destroyed whatever their enablers allowed them to.

  • Anonymous

    I do not like the idea of enforcing the term slut, rather I do not like the idea of using a term to make others feel bad about themselves. Like others have states, this has always turned sour for society in the past. From this, I am taking that you think that women are to blame for the commotion that the hook up scene has caused, oh, and manwhores. Being a woman I am offended because I know women on both sides of this spectrum who would disagree. Now that we have someone to blame, and we have a finger to point at for the reason why dating is uncommon on college campuses and marriage is so unstable, we have fixed the problem! The meaning of the word slut is hard to define, and it is thrown around like nothing. But doing so will help the problems girls who are considered sluts and others considered good girls find boyfriends…

    Not.
    Ridiculous.
    I disagree.

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

      Now that we have someone to blame, and we have a finger to point at for the reason why dating is uncommon on college campuses and marriage is so unstable, we have fixed the problem!

      Promiscuity is the problem, sluts are the product. Women must reject the former en masse to greatly decrease the number of the latter. It is in women’s best interest to stamp out sluttiness. (Not a realistic goal, but something to aim for nonetheless.) Without sluts in every campus quad, relationships would once again become the norm. The highest ranking men don’t commit because they enjoy every advantage in this SMP. The other 80% of men are left with nothing. Promiscuity benefits no one but the top men.

  • Jhane Sez

    I’m always amazed by the willingness to “slut” shame in an environment where the men expect sex by the 3rd date and freely express a distrust or an uncertainty when it comes to committing.

    This isn’t about alpha carousel riding either because this type of thinking is setting up a dynamic that just makes a bad situation worse, by trying to influence behavior through negative as opposed to positive behavior.

    If a young woman enters into a relationship with a guy and starts giving him sex before commitment how long does she continue to sleep with him sans commitment before she is justified in moving on because he is uncertain about what being committed means beyond not sleeping with anyone else… today.

    I think this sets girls up for the nice guy better deal… he sleeps with her exclusively until he can do better or the relationship just follows the short term mating strategies most young people employ, where they sleep together, then get to know each other well enough to decide to commit… only to agree that there is no long term potential there.

    This seems azz backwards at best.

    I’ve always wondered how the number thing works in the real world without commitment… if we are encouraging boys not to get too serious too fast because she maybe a slut… but go after early sex with non “slutty” women because she has to prove interest… I wonder how long is it before a young woman looking for a “real” boyfriend who is committed becomes a “slut” via kissing frogs, even if that is sleeping with betas, until one commits.

    Is the real end game to shame women into continuing to provide sex without commitment out of fear of being labeled a slut… because she really has no other options if she is concerned about adding to her number using such a poor selection criteria.

    Remember just because a guy is good, doesn’t make him good for you ~JS

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

      @Jhane Sez

      I’ve always wondered how the number thing works in the real world without commitment… if we are encouraging boys not to get too serious too fast because she maybe a slut… but go after early sex with non “slutty” women because she has to prove interest… I wonder how long is it before a young woman looking for a “real” boyfriend who is committed becomes a “slut” via kissing frogs, even if that is sleeping with betas, until one commits.

      This is why I said that I urge women to reject both Assholes and Impostor Assholes. Women must take men at face value. Hoping you’ve snagged a nice guy pretending to be a jerk to keep you interested….it makes my head hurt just thinking about it. I understand why nice guys might want to employ these tactics, but it’s just more mind games, akin to dread. I’ve concluded that it is in women’s best interests to provide negative reinforcement for such behavior. Otherwise she’s risking her health (both emotional and physical) and her reputation with every roll of the dice. It’s not surprising that some male Game bloggers would try to shift the risk to women, but women should refuse to play.

  • M3

    Hehehe. You know, i’m a couple beers into a relaxing friday and i see the comment above and the only thing that jumped into my head was…

    How do you a stop a manwhore in his tracks?

    Keep yer legs shut.

    Wow.. epic.

    fuck the rulebook.

    - wait 3 dates minimum. guy loses interest, he’s a manwhore. your rep intact. personally, i say claw it back to 5. any manwhore worth his salt wont last that long.
    - escalate slowly, a la Lockland method.
    - if on campus, talk to other girls who know him, if he’s dogged them all, steer clear
    - meet other people in his life (and not just his guy buddies) to confirm he’s a decent fucking human being and not a pumpndump scam. you research you employment opportunities dontcha?

    Carry on.

    ps-just caught Jane’s comment in my guhmail. no, feel free to encourage any woman to retain the right to slut around. just dont feed her bullshit into thinking all men will just accept it when the time comes to ‘settle’ down.

  • Charm

    promiscuous women should not expect to be treated like maidens or conventional wives.

    This. This is the only problem I have with the whole thing. If we can clear this up then I’d be good. Its the fact that a lot of them want to be promiscuous and THEN enjoy their cake (higher marriage value) too. I’ve never had a problem with people liking casual sex per se. I don’t agree with it, wont pat you on the for it, but I think that if it genuinely makes a person happy they should do it…..but I don’t want to date you. Its a values thing.

    @TVM

    I know we’ve never exchanged words, but that comment really warmed my heart. Thank you so much for saying that.

  • Jhane Sez

    “ps-just caught Jane’s comment in my guhmail. no, feel free to encourage any woman to retain the right to slut around. just dont feed her bullshit into thinking all men will just accept it when the time comes to ‘settle’ down.”

    Wrong… I am not pro-slut… I am saying that if you sleep with guys on the 3rd date without a commitment, regardless of how good the guy was eventually you will end up in the slut pile being judged by guys who demanded sex early and now deem you unfit to settle down with ~JS

  • Dogsquat

    *I wrote this before I finished reading all the comments. You’ll see someone has already done what I predicted.

    Susan said in the post:

    “I can’t explain Roiphe’s mysterious mid-life conversion to sympathy for sluthood at the age of 44, but I can note that female promiscuity is not a problem “for one reason or another.”

    _____________________________

    Susan, this sentence and where it is placed in your article may be a tactical error.

    I know you’re fair and egalitarian. Your regular readers know that, as well. Anything more than a casual glance through HUS will show the same thing.

    However, he said, furrowing his low, sloping brow…

    That quoted sentence is going to be a cognitive killswitch for many. Saying anything negative about female promiscuity will be perceived as wishing for Sharia-like control of all bajingos in the Western world.

    You do make your (evenhanded, equal WRT gender) view known, but it’s two or three sentences down.

    It is my opinion that this space between ideas makes it extremely easy to take your statements out of context. Someone with an opposing view could take control of an argument this way. They’d be all

    “She is sexist because she harps on female promiscuity!”

    and you’d be all

    “Well, if you look at the rest of the article, and at many other pieces I’ve written, you’ll find that I have a balanced and nuanced view of the current situation yadda yadda…”

    If you rearranged that paragraph a bit you could just drop

    “Read the next sentence, asshole.”

    Rounds complete, target destroyed, continuing mission.

    Nitpicky, to be sure – but it did stick out at me.

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

      @Dogsquat

      Thanks, that’s good advice, I’ll edit the post today. As someone who does all my own editing and proofreading, it’s helpful to have a critical eye.

  • Charm

    If a young woman enters into a relationship with a guy and starts giving him sex before commitment how long does she continue to sleep with him sans commitment before she is justified in moving on because he is uncertain about what being committed means beyond not sleeping with anyone else… today.

    This is simple. Since the woman holds the key to her gate (read: vagina) she simply does not sleep with a guy who doesn’t know what commitment is, who doesn’t know how he feels about her, who doesn’t know if she will be the only woman he is sleeping with….today.

    Why the hell is this confusing for people?

    Its not that hard. If women looked for men that had character instead of guys that “just seem fun”, they would have an easier go at it. Guess what?Learning who someone really is takes time, which is why its best to take your time courting and not rush the damn process. As I’ve said before, I take my goddamn time. If someone is courting me, then they are courting me and Im allowing only them to do so. So no one is getting screwed over here.

    I don’t believe in striking up relationships just to have them and would only get exclusive with someone I like a lot and what compatible with in the long term. So yes, if a girl wants a quick and easy relationship build out of paper plates and elmers glue, then she should throw caution to the wind and put out early. But when that “relationship” (which has no strong foundation) falls apart, Im going to have to ask her not to be surprised.

    Lets stop playing the “how are women supposed to know” game. Use your damn head, that how.

  • Charm

    was compatible with*

  • Jhane Sez

    “Why the hell is this confusing for people?

    Its not that hard. If women looked for men that had character instead of guys that “just seem fun”, they would have an easier go at it. ”

    Because we won’t tell the truth…

    A man with character doesn’t expect sex on the 3rd date. ~JS

  • Charm

    @Jhane

    Im confused? Who wont tell the truth? Women, men? People?

    But yes, a man of character would hope the woman sitting across from him would respect herself and be selective enough to not put out early.

  • Dogsquat

    @Mr. Munson:

    “You must admit (most of you; I’ve learned there are people on blogs who DISPUTE EVERYTHING”
    _______________________

    I totally disagree with you.

    I read a blog in 2009 where nobody disputed anything. I walked outside to reflect, to Bask in The Moment, to mark that Magic Moment in Time.

    I faced the gentle breeze, and gazed into the crisp azure sky. A vee formation of pigs flew over and blotted out the sun.

    But seriously:

    I just want to let you know that you are sharp as a fucking tack, and you haven’t lost a cognitive step. Strong work, that.

    Stay up, friend.

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

      I just want to let you know that you are sharp as a fucking tack, and you haven’t lost a cognitive step. Strong work, that.

      Isn’t he though? Munson is like our own personal John the Baptist. I’ve got a Munson notebook, and every comment goes in there. When I’ve amassed enough, I’m going to offer Munson’s wisdom as a free download. Or maybe charge with proceeds going to the cause of Munson’s choice.

  • Dogsquat

    Footwear of An Amaranthine Hue wisely stated:

    “young men also have to play a certain role. They have to stop rewarding the girls who dress and comport themselves only as ‘hot’ and sexually available–no matter what character flaws they might have–with their attention and gushing (even if they don’t get laid with these girls) over the simply ‘pretty’ and easy-going girls who may not show as much skin/make out with other girls for attention/get on top of the bar and dance.”
    _______________________

    If you change the “young men have to” to “young men should”, then I am with you 100%. This issue is not a one-way street.

    You and I being correct and in agreement on this doesn’t. matter. a. bit.

    We might as well demand that all hills transform into valleys.

    Ain’t gonna happen.

    Part of the reason is this:

    “If young men are truly disgusted with girls who sleep around (especially with cads), then show that disgust. Don’t try to get into those girls’ pants (or microminis).”
    ___________________

    It’s not as black and white as this.

    Plenty (most, maybe?) of guys will date/screw/go after promiscuous women. The aversion to those gals only arises when an intimate relationship is considered.

    There is a place for promiscuous gals in most guys’ lives. That place ain’t called marriage.

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

      Re the responsibility of men on the issue of promiscuity:

      I agree with Munson’s view of sex, and I respect any individual who lives that credo, male or female. This is why I have no use for manwhores – I understand the market forces at work, but I don’t respect their view of sex.

      However, make no mistake. Women are the gatekeepers. Most guys, especially while young, are not going to turn away hot girls climbing onto their laps in bars. It’s just not realistic to expect men to police promiscuity in any way when it’s offered without strings. (As we know, men are less likely to commit to promiscuous women.)

      Women need to learn that casual sex usually causes regret, as Emileigh did. They also need to learn that men will enforce a standard of chastity on them to some degree for commitment.

  • deti

    In the name of all that is good and holy:

    Everyone: read Munson 32 above.

    Please, someone, collect and preserve Munson’s writings for posterity before this shining beacon of light is snuffed out and we are forever deprived of its illumination.

    I want a SW post: “The Wisdom of Munson.” Please, SW, get on it posthaste.

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

      @deti

      Ah, I see you already anticipated me! (I’m catching up on the thread this morning, one by one.)

      I’ve asked Private Man to also collect Munson’s wisdom there. I have a record of everything Munson has said here. A post would be good, but an ebook would be better. I want to get this out there, far and wide.

  • Underdog

    Susan:

    “I heard that she got a job as a management consultant with a prestigious firm. I cannot imagine how. Maybe her Power Point skills?”

    LOL. If only I could be a fly on the wall during that job interview.

  • Jhane Sez

    “Im confused? Who wont tell the truth? Women, men? People?”

    Anyone who would advise or encourage you that its okay to put out by the 3rd date… or any other strategy that is the slippery slope of upping your body because you hope the guy is sincere… but you can’t know because you don’t know him

    I find it interesting that very little of the advice being put out there for today’s SMP involves getting to know the person first.

    A simple vetting process would put an end to a lot of the problems in the SMP ~JS

  • Charm

    There is a place for promiscuous gals in most guys’ lives. That place ain’t called marriage.

    Lol.

  • Charm

    @Jhane

    Well, yes I agree. I think the problem is that people want a prescription that fits everyone. Thats not going to happen. If you have 4 girls, 3 of which are comfortable with the person sitting across from them to put out after say 4 dates, I don’t think the 4th girl should feel that she has to do the same. I think people need to learn to do what works for them and stop comparing their comfort levels with others. There is a social pressure/expectation surrounding the issue. I think we should being saying:

    “Put out when you are ready, and not a second before. BUT don’t waste the guys time by leading him on. If you’re not into him, end it early. AND I don’t put out for other guys in the mean time while making this one wait.”

    If we all subscribed to this, I think the SMP would improve immensely.

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

      @Charm

      “Put out when you are ready, and not a second before. BUT don’t waste the guys time by leading him on. If you’re not into him, end it early. AND I don’t put out for other guys in the mean time while making this one wait.”

      If we all subscribed to this, I think the SMP would improve immensely.

      Well said, I endorse that. The woman who follows that advice is a woman of good character. Unfortunately, there are so many women of poor character, they’ve kind of effed it up for the rest of you.

  • Tony Stark

    @ Jhane Sez

    “A man with character doesn’t expect sex on the 3rd date.”

    Wrong. Men, of good and bad character alike, expect sex as quickly as they can get it. How quickly that will be is determined by the suppliers (read: women), who in turn base their timetables on prevailing social customs. Hence the utility of slut-shaming.

    If you want a culture in which men don’t expect sex by the third date, women need to stop providing sex by the third date. The best way to get them to do so in numbers large enough to affect the broader culture is by exerting external pressure (i.e. slut-shaming).

  • purplesneakers

    Dogsquat,

    Yeah I figured that kind of change would be unlikely (or impossible). It’s one of the most depressing parts of the “female red pill”- that most men, especially young guys, would sleep with a woman even if they thought very little of her as a person. “Hate fucking” and all that.

    But the corollary is- then why bother advising young women to select relationship-quality men and not just the ones more suitable to short-term mating that give them more ‘tingles’, if even the “men of good character” would rather try to have easy sex with a ‘hot’ girl instead of a relationship with a not-”hot”*-but-still-attractive girl who doesn’t sleep around (and yes, they actually exist).

    This could go in circles forever. Principl e of Least Interest, indeed.

    *I read this article recently about how “pretty” is no longer in anymore. Now it’s all about being a ‘hot’ girl, meaning more overtly sexual, more aggressive, less innocent. Physically this translates into tighter and more revealing clothing, heavier make-up, etc. Whereas ‘pretty’ is feminine in a more flowing way, and more natural-looking.

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

      @purplesneakers

      *I read this article recently about how “pretty” is no longer in anymore. Now it’s all about being a ‘hot’ girl, meaning more overtly sexual, more aggressive, less innocent. Physically this translates into tighter and more revealing clothing, heavier make-up, etc. Whereas ‘pretty’ is feminine in a more flowing way, and more natural-looking.

      I heard a convo among some guys in their 20s. They were talking about various attractive women, and opining on who was “hot but not pretty” and who was “pretty but not hot.” Guess which women the guys were trying to text for plans :(

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

    @T. Stark
    “Men, of good and bad character alike, expect sex as quickly as they can get it.”

    Generalization, much?

    Something I’ve quoted a couple of times in other discussions, from a 2002 Gallup survey: “74% of single men agreed that if you meet someone with whom you think you could have a long-term relationship, you will try to postpone sex until you know each other.”

    Whether this is displaying good character or just being smart, it is what it is.

  • M

    Lurked for awhile, first post…

    Women are the stoplights, pure and simple. If the light is out and the police officer is waving them on thru, 99% of men are going to drive thru the intersection.

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

      @M

      Welcome to HUS, thanks for de-lurking. Agree with you.

  • Charm

    @purpleSneaks

    I’d call them a hypocrite and refuse to date them. thats another thing Ive never liked about the whole issue. You’ll sleep with a whole slew of them, but the aren’t marriage worthy because you think they are low, loose, whores, slut etc? Yea I’ve got a fucking problem with that. I judge men the same. Though, a fair portion of women do not. Thats why they get away with the shit.

  • Jhane Sez

    “Wrong. Men, of good and bad character alike, expect sex as quickly as they can get it. How quickly that will be is determined by the suppliers (read: women), who in turn base their timetables on prevailing social customs. Hence the utility of slut-shaming.”

    See the glory of the royal scam.

    What’s next… it’s okay baby I love you and everyone is doing it and if it doesn’t work out what we had was special.

    And then she washes, rinses and repeats the above scenario until she is a defacto slut.

    Real talk… I can’t knock the hustle but the truth in your statement is that this only serves the male best interest… there is nothing in it that will actually help women secure LTR and/or marriage.

    Because the male can normalize early sex and eschew commitment via slut shaming that they contributed to… saying that they can and will take the sex but shames a body count he considers high…

    And the gotcha gotcha is that he doesn’t actually have to offer commitment he just has to allude to the possibility.

    It’s a scam ~JS

  • Dogsquat

    Susan pursed her lips and pondered sexually transmitted infections, and the identification of their hosts:

    “Sure, but how would you identify them?”
    ____________________

    I have found not answers, but some small solace in an ancient Book.

    Ahem.

    I will now read a passage from First Gonorrheites, starting at Chapter 24:

    1 This is the book of the Gonorrheites. In that day, the Trichomonites and the Pustulicians lived in far Crotcholia. In the likeness of a jestful punishment did GOD create them. Male and Female did He create them, and bless them, and call them by their confusing slang Names.

    2 And The Clap was known by Man, begat in drunkeness. Unto Man was bequeathed a Painful urinary Discharge, and it did burn. Unto Woman was put a Scarring of Tubes, and a distinct unpleasant Odor.

    3 And GOD looked upon The Clap. HE declared,”Sometimes you will be asymptomatic in Woman.”

    4 GOD is a Merciful GOD. Unto Man and Woman alike He bequeathed a bounty of Prescribing Physicians, ELISA Tests, Aptima Gen-Probes, and Third Generation Cephalosporins. In His Infinite Wisdom, He granted also unto Them Legions of Lesions, Ulcers both Painful and Painless, and Smears of Limburger Cheese Scented Sludge that oozeth from The Foreskin of Man.

    5 And in this Time was Labratorus Technicianus born as King of Crotcholia.

    6 Labratorus Technicianus looked upon the Work of GOD and Men, and Despaired. He smeared his face with ash and donned a garment of coarse burlap-cloth.

    7 With much gnashing of teeth and smiting of his brow, Labratorus Technicianus climbed unto the highest Mountain in the Land. “Why, GOD of my People, don’t you make these idiots wear Con-Doms and read their Fucking test Results? Don’t they know you can’t tell just by looking?”

    Page after page like this. It weighs heavy on my heart it does. There’s just no way to tell. When I was dating, I sort of looked forward to national computerized healthcare records. Bet your ass I’d look up a girl I was considering sleeping with.

    Who wouldn’t?

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

      Page after page like this. It weighs heavy on my heart it does. There’s just no way to tell. When I was dating, I sort of looked forward to national computerized healthcare records. Bet your ass I’d look up a girl I was considering sleeping with.

      Heh, you could sell your services on the down low if you had a way to get past HIPA.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Megaman “Generalization, much?”

    Pretty sure Tony Stark is in NYC or some other big city. It’s probably a true generalization for those guys. SayWhaat had a really hard time with dating in NYC.

    I would advise women to avoid those places like the plague. Go go small towns and non-famous cities!

    Oh and here in Utah… check out the dress code at BYU (this is for Continuing Education not just for undergrad):

    http://ce.byu.edu/yp/efy/dressAppear.cfm

  • M

    @Jhane

    As the first comment succinctly states, there is a sexual double standard. It’s tough, but it exists.

    On the flip side to women being the sexual gatekeepers, men are the commitment gatekeepers. Most women have a natural endgame to their search (relationship/marriage), while a fair share of men don’t have anything specific in mind to dating, and most likely wouldn’t even call it a search.

    While there are men out there who naturally want to be married and be a father, there is no true ‘biological clock’ ticking in the back of their heads, so even then, even their ‘search’ probably resembles a leisurely stroll more than anything else.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    According to the BYU dress code, this (the dress on the left with black leggings) was too risque:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2105657/Brittany-Molina-BYU-student-chastised-dressing-provocatively-lands-modelling-gig.html

    This story was quite the scandal here in Utah. :P

  • purplesneakers

    Charm,

    I dunno. I don’t think it’s that simple for most of the guys I know. I have male friends who are attractive, funny, and likeable. They’re not assholes, and they don’t hate women. But they want to sex up a lot of women they see on a daily basis. The male sex drive is something I don’t understand. But when I’m with them, I notice girls giving them looks, even coming up to them and starting conversation, and well, I don’t exactly begrudge them for not turning away these obvious signs of interest, even if they know it probably won’t lead to anything serious. The girls, also, just want to “have some fun.” So much of the time I feel like the way the SMP is described in the red pill sphere isn’t actually how it’s played out in reality. A lot of the times the girls stop calling these guys back because they’re “not looking for anything serious.” These are not cads or players I’m talking about. They’re just young guys exploring their options.

    I don’t know where I’m going with this. Basically just saying, I don’t think it’s that simple.

  • Charm

    Jhane,

    I think you’re projecting a bit. You’re projecting how women see the issue of “first sex” onto how men see it. We’ve determined that women hold the keys to the gate, but with that being said, men don’t just sit idly by twiddling their thumbs waiting for her to feel up to opening. Hell no. They are going to try to get it open. They are both testing you and hoping like hell that you open it. Sure, some guys will tell a woman what she wants to hear (and if shes dumb enough) and she will open the gate early just to get screwed over in the end. Thing is, women want men to escalate (I do), but only when the go ahead has be given to do so. Surely no one wants their boundaries crossed.

    The situation is ambiguous (to some) but you just have to feel it out. Hopefully, if a woman gets screwed over once, she’ll take it as a learning experience and won’t repeat it over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again.

    You know, “fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice…and well, its my own damn fault.”

  • purplesneakers

    Pretty sure Tony Stark is in NYC or some other big city. It’s probably a true generalization for those guys. SayWhaat had a really hard time with dating in NYC.

    Yeah but otoh I think the sex ratio and general liberal, cavalier attitude that a lot of the women have makes it such that there is not such a great alpha/beta divide as there might be in other places. It’s not 80/20… maybe 20/80.

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

    @Ms. Hope

    That dress code could apply at my place of work : )

    I believe SayWhaat admitted that NYC wasn’t conducive to finding a decent guy, but she beat the odds. The stats on Big Cities speak for themselves: higher rates of crime, infidelity, STDs, etc. It’s no wonder quality relationships are scarce in that environment. I know for a fact that this same thing goes on in SF and LA.

    Guys who expect sex quickly, without commitment or anything else, I guess they have different priorities. They’re not in the majority, though. And if they don’t get the sex they want up front, what does that say about their expectations?

  • purplesneakers

    So basically meant to agree and say… yup, that’s exactly why it’s harder for both men and women who want serious relationships in a big city. But not because the alphas are hogging the sex, but because everyone is just sleeping around so much.

    OTOH I actually prefer big city dating to small town dating, having done both in the past few years, because there are more young people (who are not college students) and more options.

  • Charm

    @Purplesneaks

    Yes, I admit I looked at it in very simplistic terms. It really is not that simple. Its quite hazy. I think a lot of young guys simply don’t put too much thought in to it. They just want to get laid. Im not trying to absolve them of responsibility or anything, but I think thats what it is. I still don’t agree with it, but I also wouldn’t ride someone off for having had casual sex a few times and then determining it was empty and not for them. The men that are very pro-casual sex and slutty women and scream it from the rooftops, only to judge them for it later, are the ones Im wary of. The men who go out of their way to hook up with slutty women and bang as many as possible “for fun” are the ones Im wary of. I’d be wary of say, a PUA, but a 22 year old thats only had the opportunity to have casual sex like once or twice aren’t that bad. But I’d still let them know I did not approve of it. I think its a case by case thing. JM did it for a while and decided against it. I respected that and could accept it.

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

    @purplesneakers
    I think looking at dating as Amsterdam vs. Mayberry is kind of a false dilemma. Most of the U.S. population by far lives in small(er) cities and suburbs that are outside the large metropolitan areas. One need not move to a tiny rural community to get married and raise a family.

    There’s a measurable pattern WRT young people in the Big Cities. If and when they do meet, date, and get married, they usually move out of the city to raise kids somewhere else…

  • Charm

    Re BYU dress scandal

    STONE HER!

    I kid, I kid.

  • purplesneakers

    The men who go out of their way to hook up with slutty women and bang as many as possible “for fun” are the ones Im wary of.

    Yeah, definitely. My nightmare is running into the type of guy that would post on the roosh forum on topics like “how to bang 16 yr olds” and reducing women to their rating on a 1-10 scale. Spending too much time in the “manosphere” is seriously depressing.

  • Charm

    @Purplesneaks

    Hell yea. I can’t read the RooshV forum. Its too disgusting. I think those guys have went over to the dark side. There is one blog (the university of man) where he asks that guys leave the “good girls” alone when they are looking to bang a bunch of broads using online dating services. Lol, we need the Gamer/PUA with a heart of gold meme to leave girls like me and you the hell alone.

  • http://aplace-formythoughts.blogspot.com/ Renee

    Mike M.,
    Shaming is a good start…but only a start. And it applies to both sides of the sexual divide.

    If you mean both men and women I agree. I myself can’t really get behind outright slut-shaming (I’m not the shaming type of person), though I’ve been known to give the “side-eye” to a person I’m with when we both see an extremely slutty outfit or article of clothing, once the girl/woman walks past.

  • purplesneakers

    I think looking at dating as Amsterdam vs. Mayberry is kind of a false dilemma. Most of the U.S. population by far lives in small(er) cities and suburbs that are outside the large metropolitan areas. One need not move to a tiny rural community to get married and raise a family.

    There’s a measurable pattern WRT young people in the Big Cities. If and when they do meet, date, and get married, they usually move out of the city to raise kids somewhere else…

    You’re right, that is a false dilemma. But there are also personal reasons keeping me here, and I guess I also feel like moving to find a relationship more easily would be….. desperate of me? Especially when I couldn’t do it anyway in a small town (not quite rural).

    Also… and this is just totally personal experience, but I’ve noticed that in other places, the tall bleached blonde look is most popular. Being a short dark girl, there’s no way I could ever be that. There are simply more people here who like my look.

  • purplesneakers

    Hell yea. I can’t read the RooshV forum. Its too disgusting. I think those guys have went over to the dark side. There is one blog (the university of man) where he asks that guys leave the “good girls” alone when they are looking to bang a bunch of broads using online dating services. Lol, we need the Gamer/PUA with a heart of gold meme to leave girls like me and you the hell alone.

    The other thing is, after knowing that this is how the PUA types think, they become less attractive anyway (if I were to ever find them attractive in the first place). I’m not saying that game (in the sense of being dominant) doesn’t work. It does. But guys whose sole purpose in life is to fuck as many girls as possible are seriously gross.

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

    @Charm
    “But I’d still let them know I did not approve of it. I think its a case by case thing. JM did it for a while and decided against it. I respected that and could accept it.”

    Yeah, sorry to see him go. I don’t recall the exact details of his metamorphosis, but I believe he hooked up with something like 8 women in the span of 2 months. Would that fit in your comfort zone?

    IMO whether you approve of someone’s past behavior or not, once you choose to commit to him or her, you’re basically validating all that stuff. So I guess the lesson is, choose very carefully who you fall in love with.

  • Charm

    @Purplesneaks

    I couldn’t agree more. If its being used for good, I’m all for it.

    @Megaman

    I definitely am absolute opposed to it. In a perfect world, it would be something I’d never have to even come up against, but the world aint perfect. Im not saying I approve of what JM did. I don’t. I wasn’t here for the whole transformation, so I don’t know the full story, but I spent a lot of time reading what he wrote, so I began to respect who he was as a person. He didn’t beat his chest over it like he was a “man” for pulling those women. He did the opposite. He tried it, didn’t like it, so he stopped. Maybe through that experience he learned something. Maybe he grew from it.

    Im the kind of person where I don’t need to do something in order to learn a lesson. I can run the scenarios through my head and come to the conclusion that its a very bad idea. As much as I wish other people to be like that, they simply aren’t. Some people need to put their hand on the stove. I stand pretty firmly against casual sex and I wont be swayed easily, but Im still a very practical and I realize that attitude matters. It was his attitude that I respected. It wasn’t like he banged 50 women and then flipped the script (if he had, Id be wary). It was only 8 (i believe). 8 really ain’t that bad.

    I think his attitude about it outweighed those 8 women. Like you guys keep saying “You can’t get everything you want in a man”. You have to compromise somewhere. Previous sex history/behavior is only 1 of the things considered when choosing a long term mate.

    So I guess the lesson is, choose very carefully who you fall in love with.

    This is very true. With all things being equal, if I had to choose between a guy who was always against casual sex and never cared to do it, and a guy like JM who had done it and opted out of it, I’d choose the former every time.

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

    @Charm
    Interesting perspective. FWIW, you probably won’t have to make a choice between hookup guy vs. no-hookup guy. Median for guys is only 5 partners (most of which aren’t NSA). Guys looking for LTRs that could lead to marriage tend of keep their numbers down, too. Funny, that’s what women are told the should do : )

    I’m just kind of chuckling at the SDS in action. I doubt very much a woman who went through 8 guys in 60 days would get much respect or admiration, even if she did have an ephipany afterwards.

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

      . I doubt very much a woman who went through 8 guys in 60 days would get much respect or admiration, even if she did have an ephipany afterwards.

      I thought Munson’s example was brilliant – the story of a person who had sex with a student, and then all their roommates. How differently that comes across depending on the sex of the storyteller!

  • Dogsquat

    Plum Colored Kicks said:

    “why bother advising young women to select relationship-quality men and not just the ones more suitable to short-term mating that give them more ‘tingles’, if even the “men of good character” would rather try to have easy sex with a ‘hot’ girl instead of a relationship with a not-”hot”*-but-still-attractive girl who doesn’t sleep around (and yes, they actually exist).”
    __________________

    Why bother?

    That’s a complicated question.

    I understand that personal anecdotes are sometimes frowned upon, but they are the filter through which we process the world. It’s impossible to answer such a subjective question objectively anyway, so I’m not even going to pretend.

    I’m a sort-of desirable guy. I’m tall, in good shape, and kind to children and animals. I have a decent gig. I’ve been a few places, and achieved some stuff. I’m on track to do more of the same. Susan and some regular readers have even seen a picture of me, and I doubt many would say I got beat with the ugly stick. Since I choked down a fat Red Pill, I haven’t had many problems with women.

    I’m in a relationship now. I love my girlfriend, and she loves me. We are great together. I’d rather eat my fucking large intestine than cause her a moment’s doubt or pain. I would never, ever knowingly do something she considers “a dealbreaker”.

    I’ve dated/had relationships with several woman – almost got married once , even. This girl is the first woman I’ve been with that I have no reservations or doubt about since I Red-Pilled myself.

    With every one of those other girls, there was something that stuck in my craw. Several times (granted – not always!), it was related to past promiscuity. One woman had kids from a “cad” type. One tearfully disclosed an STD I wasn’t interested in contracting. One had a jilted ex that tried to stab me in a parking lot after work. With one girl I dated, I had several guys tap me on the shoulder at different times and say stuff like,”Uhh…dude, you know your girl used to hook up with Tom/Dick/Harry, right? He still likes her, so be careful ’cause he’s really sitting over there really drunk right now.” See what I mean?

    These were all attractive, interesting, smart women. They had enough going for them to overcome my natural distaste for promiscuity in a partner. I gave them a shot, but ultimately chose not to stay around. Some of them probably didn’t care much, but for others getting dumped by my goofy ass was painful.

    I don’t have those issues in my relationship now. My girl is smart, attractive, fun, and easy to be around. She also has very little baggage from her past. I don’t worry about some video of her blowing an ex popping up on the internet. She doesn’t get drunken texts/phone calls at 0200. There aren’t 15 former fuckbuddies on her Facebook. I am confident she values me a lot, in part because I’m one of the few guys she’s chosen to have sex with.

    It feels pretty goddamn good when she puts her arm in mine and calls me her man. It’s a big deal to her, and that makes it mean a lot to me.

    To summarize/attempt a generalization:

    Most guys are not going to rule out a serious relationship/dump a woman because she’s choosy about who she sleeps with. Matter of fact, a choosy woman choosing a particular guy is a very positive thing from the guy’s point of view.

    On the other hand, many guys will not start/stay in a relationship with someone they deem too promiscuous. Most dudes have a limit for that. When their girl is close to that limit, it causes a lot of soul-searching, doubt, pain, and anguish in the guy. The girl who’s up against that “limit” has to compensate for it in other ways, or she’ll get dumped. Her guy will go find someone else equally as cool/attractive, but with a past that’s easier to tolerate.

    Perhaps, Mauve Nike Person, the better question to ask is – Is It Worth It?

    Girls do give up something by not being promiscuous. Sex is fun. Hanging around naked with attractive people is a pretty goddamned good way to pass the day. Instant gratification is easy, while keeping your eye on a prize that may never come is difficult.

    So:

    Q. Why Bother?

    A. It might matter someday.

    _________________________________

    Just a note to the younger gents reading:

    If you want a girl who is fucking awesome in every way, you’re gonna have to work for it. They aren’t all that common – but they’re out there. Their standards are just as high as yours.

    Showing up to the dance stupid, fat, and boring isn’t going to net very good results. It is unproductive, unfair, and flat-out wrong to bitch about the girls you can pull when you haven’t given maximum effort to improve yourself, to become a respectable and desirable man.

    You don’t rate an awesome woman any more than Miss Frat Fellatio deserves to be swept off to Happilyeverafterland by Prince Charming.

    Do the fucking work. It is hard. You will sacrifice some things for other, more valuable things. It can take a long time. There is an element of luck involved.

    I think it’s worth it. Your mileage, as always, will vary.

  • Charm

    @Megaman

    1. Thats good. But I also don’t want to end up with someone that felt like they “missed out” on the hook up/casual scene. We all know that a count of 5 isn’t always by choice.

    2. Well it depends on why the woman slept with 8 men. I don’t know that back story for Jesus. Maybe he said “Fuck it, Im banging mass bitches” and then flipped the script afterward. If so, my opinion would obviously change, but then again maybe something bad happened to him and it drove him to learn game and use it to get casual sex, initially. I don’t know. I’d need to know why a woman slept with that many men in 60 days. She could have went through some sort of trauma and/or loss and used sex as a way to deal (WarmWoman brought this up before she left last thread). Again, I don’t know. If that was the case, then I could understand.

    Still, at the end of the day, I’d prefer not to deal with the situation at all. A person who turns to sex to deal with their problems seems reckless to me. Risking an STI ain’t worth it.

    In cases like Emileigh, she tried to use her body as a bargaining chip and I thought that was rather cheap. To me it was almost as if saying: “I banged all those guys, and all Im left with is a lack of commitment.” She seemed more upset at her lack of a BF then she did at her behavior. Thats what I couldn’t get behind.To her “slut box”= smaller dating pool.

    So I think the motivations behind the behavior need to be taken into account as well. Lol, I know Im quick to judge people, but it does sink in after a while and only then will I be able to sympathize with the situation.

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

      @Charm

      In cases like Emileigh, she tried to use her body as a bargaining chip and I thought that was rather cheap. To me it was almost as if saying: “I banged all those guys, and all Im left with is a lack of commitment.” She seemed more upset at her lack of a BF then she did at her behavior. Thats what I couldn’t get behind.To her “slut box”= smaller dating pool.

      That’s not true – at least not in the cynical way I think you mean it. The fact is, most couples in college (not BYU) experienced physical intimacy before emotional intimacy. Most of the time, people have been having sex for a while before they even have “the talk.” I was discussing this with a young woman yesterday. She described the normal college process of becoming a couple like this:

      1. Girl and guy hook up, probably just making out the first time.
      2. Over the next couple of weekends, Rounds 2 and 3, with sex usually happening at Round 3. Note – this is all going home together at the end of the night. No dates, meeting for coffee, or anything like that.
      3. Day texting may start. How was your day? That kind of thing.
      4. Prior to the weekend, some attempt to meet up may occur. Hey, you going to the Kappa Sig party tonight? Cool, see ya then.
      5. More sex.
      6. Hand holding while out at night may begin. People now notice this may have gone beyond the purely physical, and that these two make actually like each other.
      7. More sex.
      8. After a month or so, guy says to girl, “Are you hooking up with anyone else right now?” Girl says no. Guy says, “Good, me neither.” Exclusivity is established.
      9. More sex.
      10. Peers begin referring to the pair as “together” or “sort of together.”
      11. More sex.
      12. After 2-4 months, guy says “So do you want to be my girlfriend?” Girl says “Yes.”
      13. Couple is now dating.

      YMMV.

      Emileigh, like other women in college who hook up to get a boyfriend, was acknowledging the reality of this script. The alternative is to sit out the hookup scene altogether, and acknowledge that you will graduate from college at 21 without having had a boyfriend.

      I remain surprised that more women don’t follow the script.

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

    @Charm
    “Thats good. But I also don’t want to end up with someone that felt like they ‘missed out’ on the hook up/casual scene. We all know that a count of 5 isn’t always by choice.”

    Well, a guy can always choose to up his number by paying for company : |

    To some guys, sleeping with X number of women is important enough, that if they don’t achieve it they feel inferior in some way. I can’t relate to that at all. To other guys, their number (and by extension their options) don’t matter because they’re only looking for one particular girl to be with. I can definitely relate to that feeling.

  • Charm

    @Megaman

    Im big on quality over quantity and I appreciate other people who feel the same way. I don’t get that “must bang X number of women” either. Seems like people who pursue that strategy are already lacking in something anyway. I feel like this also applies to women as well though. It seems a lot of women are concerned with getting the attention and/or validation from certain types of men (men that don’t treat them that well) while ignoring the attention/commitment/affection of men who would give their arm to be with them. Its a crappy situation.

  • Dogsquat

    Susan, if you want to make your forum pop a little bit, please consider the following:

    Create a thread in the forum for each of your posts, and have the comment/read comments button link there instead of here.

    Pow. Buncha readers there, and a buncha people poking around the forum who never have before.

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

      @Dogsquat

      Susan, if you want to make your forum pop a little bit, please consider the following:

      Create a thread in the forum for each of your posts, and have the comment/read comments button link there instead of here.

      I’ve considered it, but here are two things I’m worried about:

      1. The format/software for the forum is less user friendly. (Don’t know if this is true or not from a reader’s perspective.)
      2. I’m afraid of losing the promotional value of having a high comment count visible on the post.

      I’ll have to investigate whether these could be addressed. Do you think it would grow the forum without harming the home page?

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

    @Charm
    Quality is definitely important in a mate. When I was single and admittedly lonely at times, I used to think “anything” was better than nothing. I came to realize that wasn’t true. I suppose if you polled women about which kind of guy they’d prefer: one who’s had one or two serious girlfriends vs. one who’s slept with several ditzy barflies, I’m pretty sure which guy they’d pick.

    Even though virgins aren’t that common anymore after college, I don’t think many people looking for a serious relationship would turn one down (up to a certain age). Though my SO didn’t have her V card when we met (it’s the 21st century after all), I was glad she’d only had a couple of BFs. One of whom was an idiot. That made me look good right off the bat : )

  • Charm

    @Megaman

    Oh yea. The last relationship I had (my second one) it was a bit of a comfort relationship. He was a good person, but I miscalculated our compatibility and it burned out pretty quickly. I knew him for over a year before we dated, and on the surface, he seemed one way, but after getting to know him intimately I realized how insecure and self-deprecating he was (turn-off). Now that I think back about it, the signs were there. So, I too agree that a couple of relationships are good for a person. It definitely helped me to realize what I needed in a relationship. I absolutely am not compatible with someone I don’t have an intellectual connection with. Sure, I can shoot shit with the best of ‘em, but if I can’t talk to someone about more complex topics, its not gonna work out for me, Lol. He was also irresponsible with money, smoked, and wasn’t very future oriented. Yea, a lot from that relationship got added to the deal-breakers list when I decide to look for another mate.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @ M3 #34

    My philippic was directed at those to whom it applies. But I would not trade places with any of you. I know full well I pulled the stuff animal out of the 50 cent arcade “crane” game, and luck played a factor. I used this analogy before; you are hustling to see if you can make the last sitting in the greatest Italian restaurant in the world, whilst I emerge, full and satisfied, with my lovely wife at my side.

    @ Charm #42
    Hugs through the ether.

    @ Dogsquat #49

    I’ve been waiting to see you post so I could thank you for offering to dedicate a statue to me. But I’d prefer a drinking fountain, with my name in the bowl. That way I’d live with the city. When the parched denizens refreshed themselves, they’d ask “Who the fuck was that guy?” And they may never know, but they’d sure appreciate it. Statues just collect pidgeon shit.

    @ Deti #51

    And don’t forget OBNUG.com, where I wrote around 250 articles about the Boise State Broncos with my own inimitable metaphysical bent. And theblueturf.com-these have embedded videos.And theprivateman.com; he DOES have an old article called “The Wisdom of Munson” where he pasted a long comment I made. ‘Tis all there for you my beloved readers that I cherish because you give me the only thing that matters against this annihilating universe-your attention.

    MMWHHAAAH! (hugs and kisses through the ether (latter only for the ladies))

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    BTW if I can write that many articles about Boise State football (and I’m still adding) think how many I can do about sex, love , relationships and existence.

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

      BTW if I can write that many articles about Boise State football (and I’m still adding) think how many I can do about sex, love , relationships and existence.

      Well get cracking then! Just kidding. But do write as much as you feel up to. You have a ready and waiting audience.

  • http://stagedreality.wordpress.com Leap of a Beta

    “They are both testing you and hoping like hell that you open it. Sure, some guys will tell a woman what she wants to hear (and if shes dumb enough) and she will open the gate early just to get screwed over in the end. Thing is, women want men to escalate (I do), but only when the go ahead has be given to do so. Surely no one wants their boundaries crossed.”

    So you want him to be assertive, masculine, push for sex, yet not cross/should respect boundaries until you’ve approved his crossing them? That’s contradictory and won’t happen.

    Also, JM’s story was that he broke up with his fiance when he found out she was a slut and had lied to him about it. He spent the summer learning game, sleeping around, and beginning to digest the red pill.

  • http://stagedreality.wordpress.com Leap of a Beta

    @ Munson
    Thanks for the wisdom man. Hopefully we can all find ways to use it and fix the problems we face in this cluster fuck in our own ways to find happiness.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @ Leap
    You will; with or without my “wisdom”. You are all braver and better than you realize. You are the next in line in a steady process on improvement in the human race and while not always consistent, 2 steps forward , one back, it is ALWAYS forward. We would never have descended from the tree were it not thus.

    HEY EVERYONE!
    Those of you interested in seeing how I write in the narrative style should skip over to theprivateman.com and look at the top of the link for “Living Like Tom”. Scroll down a ways and you’ll see the beginning of my serialization “THE SUMMER I WAS JESUS CHRIST”. It is an account of my battle with bipolar illness, my institutionalizations for same, illicit drug use, paranormal activity with a certain 1970′s bent including some Carlos Castaneda and of course sociological observations from moi. I’d be interested in your critiques. Susan, forgive me for the plug!

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

      Susan, forgive me for the plug!

      Munson, you can pimp your writing any time you like. I’m almost caught up over there. Will probably finish reading with a glass of white wine this evening. :)

  • SayWhaat

    @ Dogsquat:

    Most guys are not going to rule out a serious relationship/dump a woman because she’s choosy about who she sleeps with.

    But you would have when you were younger.

  • SayWhaat

    The meaning of the word slut is hard to define, and it is thrown around like nothing.

    I actually agree with this. I think when a lot of women protest against “slut-shaming”, they are in fact protesting against the idea that women can’t be sexual. A woman being sexual and a woman being promiscuous are two very distinct issues that have somehow become conflated.

    On top of that you have men who are angry at women who won’t have sex with them, and call them “sluts”. Then the women who don’t have sex with any of them are denigrated as “prudes” or “friend-zoning bitches”. There’s no room for middle ground, and as such women have a knee-jerk reaction to both terms. Which is why so many are reluctant to slut-shame.

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

      On top of that you have men who are angry at women who won’t have sex with them, and call them “sluts”. Then the women who don’t have sex with any of them are denigrated as “prudes” or “friend-zoning bitches”. There’s no room for middle ground, and as such women have a knee-jerk reaction to both terms. Which is why so many are reluctant to slut-shame.

      Further confusing the issue is the enthusiastic effort of sex-positive feminists to reclaim and proudly wear the slut label.

  • SayWhaat

    Pretty sure Tony Stark is in NYC or some other big city. It’s probably a true generalization for those guys. SayWhaat had a really hard time with dating in NYC.

    Yeah but otoh I think the sex ratio and general liberal, cavalier attitude that a lot of the women have makes it such that there is not such a great alpha/beta divide as there might be in other places. It’s not 80/20… maybe 20/80.

    +1. Even omegas get laid like tile in big cities.

  • SayWhaat

    EDIT:

    A woman being sexual and a woman being promiscuous are two very distinct THINGS that have somehow become conflated.

    Not trying to imply that a woman being sexual is an issue. :)

  • VD

    As if young women aren’t still forced to shoulder a disproportionate share of society’s neuroses. Let’s take shit back a few decades! Oh and let’s give men, especially the MRAs and the player assholes like Vox/Roissy/etc. , a pass (well, except for maybe a little offhanded slap on the wrist)!

    They have to shoulder the blame for a disproportionate share because they contribute a disproportionate share, just as men rightly shoulder the blame for a disproportionate share of society’s pychoses. The shit, it will be taken back more than a few decades, in fact, we will be fortunate indeed if we only lose a few societies and not all of Western civilization thanks to our collective decision to unchain the demon of female sexuality. I’m reading Boorstin’s The Discoverers right now, and while it is a biased and occasionally outdated work, it does nicely underline the incredible fragility and improbability of the civilization we presently possess. A few wrong turns and we’re back to what he calls The Again and Again.

    The other thing is, after knowing that this is how the PUA types think, they become less attractive anyway (if I were to ever find them attractive in the first place). I’m not saying that game (in the sense of being dominant) doesn’t work. It does. But guys whose sole purpose in life is to fuck as many girls as possible are seriously gross.

    They may sound seriously gross to you in theory. In practice, you are almost guaranteed to find them charming and highly attractive. Women tend to highly overrate their defenses, and remember, the darker the player, the more skilled he is at presenting himself as whatever you want him to be. They not only improvise and adapt much better than you can probably imagine, they very much enjoy the process. Sometimes, they’ll even put on an act simply for its own sake. My friends once challenged me to pick up a woman with a fake Japanese accent, so the next thing I know I’m explaining to a group of fascinated women that the reason for my unusual accent is that I was a Vietnam War orphan raised by missionaries in Sagamihara. The level of bullshit that men can sell, especially smart and well-traveled men, tends to significantly exceed female imaginations, mostly because we find great amusement in the selling and throw ourselves into it with enthusiasm. You might think “I would never buy that”, but I would estimate that less than 5 percent of women ever saw through even the most ludicrously absurd BS.

    Anyhow, I suggest that the “I wouldn’t be attracted to pick-up artists” attitude is foolish because it puts women at risk in the following manner: if she is attracted to a man, he cannot be a pick-up artist because you know you are not attracted to pick-up artists. Of course, it’s entirely possible you ignore your own professed logic and are merely posturing here, in which case, do carry on.

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

      @VD

      They may sound seriously gross to you in theory. In practice, you are almost guaranteed to find them charming and highly attractive.

      This is why, when Little Miss HUS went to DC for a summer internship, I sat her down and showed her pics of Roissy and Roosh, along with examples of some of their writings. I warned her to avoid conversing with them even for a moment if she should be approached in a bar, and to treat them as if they were radioactive waste. Why? Because there’s no doubt in my mind that despite having me for a mother, and having basically read every word I’ve ever written, she’d be tingling for either one in no time.

      Such is the power of Game in the hands of a master.

      And by the way, I feel fortunate that she never met either one. I have no confidence whatsoever that she would have heeded my advice in the heat of the moment.

  • VJ

    No, it’s not. And it’s now a ‘cute’ sci-chic movie, soon to be playing Boston! http://www.losingcontrolmovie.com/

    Still with the ‘newer, truer, less sexist and more [Experimentally!] ecstatic ways of being sexual’ this time from an actual Harvard PhD. gal writer. Take that you ‘retrograde’ slut shammers! They’ve got More movies about this exciting journey of self discovery. Award winning and even NPR interviewed & all!

    http://www.losingcontrolmovie.com/www.losingcontrolmovie.com/Press.html

    So no, it’s just a blip. Sort of like the Pre-Raphaelite w/o the great production of good & useful art & all that. Cheers, ‘VJ’

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

      @VJ

      OMG, if that guy marries her after her series of ONSs I’ll shoot myself.

      P.S. Good to see you!

  • Emily

    >> “I was specifically referring there to women who spent their 20s riding the carousel or making otherwise bad choices”

    I’m curious. The assumption that the more promiscuous women won’t get married often gets repeated here. But are there any stats that actually back it up? I know they’re more likely to get divorced, but are they actually less likely to get married in the first place? Or is this just how we all wish that the world worked?

    Maybe the tables will turn as more of my peers start to get married, but so far I’ve known a lot of “sluts” who don’t seem to have any problem getting boyfriends who, as far as I can tell, are completely devoted to them.

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

      @Emily

      I know they’re more likely to get divorced, but are they actually less likely to get married in the first place? Or is this just how we all wish that the world worked?

      Maybe the tables will turn as more of my peers start to get married, but so far I’ve known a lot of “sluts” who don’t seem to have any problem getting boyfriends who, as far as I can tell, are completely devoted to them.

      Excellent question – hell if I know. I’m going by what guys say. I do think there’s a big difference between dating and getting married. I also have always maintained that the promiscuous generally pair up with one another, and I suspect that will hold true for marriage as well.

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

    To some guys, sleeping with X number of women is important enough, that if they don’t achieve it they feel inferior in some way. I can’t relate to that at all. To other guys, their number (and by extension their options) don’t matter because they’re only looking for one particular girl to be with. I can definitely relate to that feeling.

    I think this is an important distinction many men do have certain sexual goals but I don’t think all men do and there are many that upon reaching that goal decide to challenge themselves and up it more. Of course men are more practical if after certain age their goal is not met and not even close some of them will recalibrate and adapt to just finding a couple of decent gals of course some of them will resent having to recalibrate if there are men that they can see can pull the numbers easier and they have no idea why, because objectively speaking he doesn’t seem that different to him. There is another aspect of rampant sluthood that is often missed in this discussion having the sluts rubbing in men’s faces that they can sleep around all they want and they just had to suck it up. Is like a rich person prancing their riches in a poor neighborhood all the time, that got to hurt…a lot.

    I’m reading Boorstin’s The Discoverers right now, and while it is a biased and occasionally outdated work, it does nicely underline the incredible fragility and improbability of the civilization we presently possess. A few wrong turns and we’re back to what he calls The Again and Again.

    Oh I freaking love that book. Totally worth read for anyone paying attention, very good easy read about history I haven’t read the whole series but this one was reaaaally good.

  • Dogsquat

    @SayWhaat:
    “But you would have when you were younger.”
    ___________

    I used to think drinking bourbon and fighting people in bars was the most fun it was possible to have, too.

    To clarify:
    When I was younger, I would have been less likely to try a relationship with a woman who was pining over a lost love.

    Pining is unattractive.

    Only I am allowed to do that.

    My suffering is unique and special.

    I…..

    am……..

    A SNOWFLAKE

  • Dogsquat

    Emily said:
    “Maybe the tables will turn as more of my peers start to get married, but so far I’ve known a lot of “sluts” who don’t seem to have any problem getting boyfriends who, as far as I can tell, are completely devoted to them.”
    __________________________

    Some guys genuinely don’t care.

    Some guys go through recurring periods of grotesque and hellish introspection, whereupon they stuff their feelings of revulsion down into the pit of their stomach. Episodic brutal repression of deep-seated feelings is habitual for them. These guys are either afraid of appearing judgmental, or are convinced there’s no one out there for them who’s “better”/different.

    Some guys leave the relationship long before they could be considered “devoted”.

    Some guys are ignorant, possibly willfully.

    People are funny creatures.

  • VD

    I know they’re more likely to get divorced, but are they actually less likely to get married in the first place? Or is this just how we all wish that the world worked?

    According to my recent survey on female fidelity and ignoring divorces, the female results were as followed.

    Virgin = 0% ever-married
    1-3 partners = 79% ever-married
    4-9 partners = 83% ever-married
    10-19 partners = 67% ever-married
    20+ partners = 43% ever-married

    The sample set was small, with 59 female respondents. But they are largely in line with what Game predicts. The main point isn’t that sluts can’t ever get married, only that they’ll tend to have to marry down from what the status otherwise would tend to indicate. Their lower rates of marriage is therefore likely indicative of a) a lesser interest in marriage and b) a disinclination to accept the reality of the need to settle for a lower-rank male.

  • Lokland

    @VD

    Do you have an age breakdown for the virgin category?
    I suspect that its more an age thing then virgins not getting married.

  • Jhane Sez

    “I think you’re projecting a bit. You’re projecting how women see the issue of “first sex” onto how men see it. We’ve determined that women hold the keys to the gate, but with that being said, men don’t just sit idly by twiddling their thumbs waiting for her to feel up to opening. Hell no. They are going to try to get it open. They are both testing you and hoping like hell that you open it. Sure, some guys will tell a woman what she wants to hear (and if shes dumb enough) and she will open the gate early just to get screwed over in the end. Thing is, women want men to escalate (I do), but only when the go ahead has be given to do so. Surely no one wants their boundaries crossed.”

    Nope not projecting… I’m advising.

    You are a classic example of wanting to tread on the slippery slope of getting it in because you are feeling a guy and still wanting to believe that the slut shaming is only going to apply to the dumb chicks got gamed, pumped and then dumped.

    I’m not saying that your instincts are wrong but even under your smart girl scenario you too could end up… after a couple of relationships that didn’t work out, being considered a slut, and unsuitable for relationships…

    Because the slut standard is arbitrary and the best most women can do in a slut shaming culture is to try to draw the circle past their own behavior and hope that they meet the standard of still being viable for LTR and marriage.

    Honestly there are guys that would consider it slutty to want to have or act on the desire to escalate sexually even if there isn’t intercourse and once you have escalated enough times you might be considered a slut as well

    And this is how most chicks get swindled because they are encouraged to behave in ways that aren’t conducive to securing a relationship

    Because its never about your current behavior, but only your past… as most guys here will tell you that ideally they would like their ideal woman to be hot for them and only them and are distrustful if she has been with another guy in similar circumstances

    And most girls engage in this way of thinking and behaving with men who don’t even have any skin in the game… i.e. commitment

    My point is when you put the focus on slut shaming, you actually take the focus off commitment and that is detrimental to most women’s end game ~JS

  • this is Jen

    Tony Stark March 23, 2012 at 11:14 pm

    @ Jhane Sez

    “A man with character doesn’t expect sex on the 3rd date.”

    Wrong. Men, of good and bad character alike, expect sex as quickly as they can get it. How quickly that will be is determined by the suppliers (read: women), who in turn base their timetables on prevailing social customs. Hence the utility of slut-shaming.

    ———————————————————

    I dont know about that, Tony. I was reminscing with anold college friend, and it occured to me that he slept with 3 of my closest friends. So I asked him ” why did you never pull that crap with me?” He said “I respected you too much”

    Guys can differentiate between the sluts and the respectable women, but women are the ones that need to decide which one they are going to be!

  • Charm

    @Leap

    Oh no. Maybe I worded it weird. What I meant was that I don’t expect a man to not want to have sex with me (if were dating). I don’t expect him to apologize for wanting to have sex with me. Its normal. It seems like Jhane wanted him to “take the high road” and act like he was above wanting sex or something. Even if a woman isn’t ready to sleep with someone, I don’t think a guy expressing his desire to sleep with her when she is ready is bad at all.

  • Gorbachev

    The problem is, a lot of men love this situation.

    Frankly, feminism delivered men unlimited amounts of free sex without the slightest need to invest energy, emotion or resources in a woman, and allowed us to discard them more or less freely whenever we want under the rubrik of resisting patriarchy.

    What man who’s getting laid is *ever* going to give up feminism?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    “Some guys go through recurring periods of grotesque and hellish introspection, whereupon they stuff their feelings of revulsion down into the pit of their stomach. Episodic brutal repression of deep-seated feelings is habitual for them. These guys are either afraid of appearing judgmental, or are convinced there’s no one out there for them who’s “better”/different.”

    Yep. Just because they aren’t openly expressing a feeling, doesn’t mean it isn’t there.

    What’s really annoying is feeling like second best. Current GF…thinking about dumping her. She thought it was about the number. Told her I honestly didn’t care if it was 6 or 6,000. She smiled at that. And it’s true, for me anyways.

    She didn’t like when I started questioning her about why she felt the need to “almost have a threesome” with a random fling and one of his other harem whores and then a few months later decide I had to wait months on end to have sex with her.

    She also didn’t like that I hated her explanation of “I have two personalities, a wild side and a mature side and you get the mature side.”

    By hated, I mean I turned away from her because I almost vomited. And I’ll admit that I wanted to cry, but after years of untreated clinical depression I just don’t see the point in crying anymore. Who the fuck wants to make a lifelong commitment to that kind of situation? How can you NOT feel used after that a statement like that?

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

      @A Definite Beta Guy

      She also didn’t like that I hated her explanation of “I have two personalities, a wild side and a mature side and you get the mature side.”

      By hated, I mean I turned away from her because I almost vomited. And I’ll admit that I wanted to cry, but after years of untreated clinical depression I just don’t see the point in crying anymore. Who the fuck wants to make a lifelong commitment to that kind of situation? How can you NOT feel used after that a statement like that?

      OMG, I almost vomited at that. Dump that bitch!

      And get that depression treated! You don’t have to feel like crying all the time.

  • Gorbachev

    “A Definite Beta Guy”

    Exactly: What man wouldn’t hate that? My reaction to a woman who is interested in me long-term and therefore withholds sex:

    Sure, and you were getting drunk last week with guys whose name you barely remember.

    So you’re giving *me* the raw deal, right?

    Not a chance. With sluts, you need to be in the “I’ll fuck you” zone. Being in the “I’ll be the guy who picks up the pieces later” zone is utter bullshit.

    Happily, sluts are in no short supply.

    I actually have huge respect for sluts. They are decent, completely licentious people. With no sense of shame and a usual tendency to seek out the baddest asses in a group, or vocally profess their indiscriminate choice preferences.

    And if other women don’t want to play:

    Too bad. Your sisters ruined it for you. NO reason to stay with a slut who isn’t banging you or a woman who won’t sleep with you because she wants something serious.

    Wait until she’s 29 or 30 and then see if she’s managed to keep the count to less than, say, 10.

    Until then, the optimal strategy for you is:

    Learn Game and fuck the way you like. As man, as few as you want. On your terms.

    Consider a woman’s terms more or less irrelevant to your own motivations.

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

      Until then, the optimal strategy for you is:

      Learn Game and fuck the way you like. As man, as few as you want. On your terms.

      Consider a woman’s terms more or less irrelevant to your own motivations.

      Slut shaming is the answer to this.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @Gorbachev

    “Until then, the optimal strategy for you is:

    Learn Game and fuck the way you like. As man, as few as you want. On your terms.”

    The way I would like to fuck, is with my current girlfriend, as my wife. That may be impossible, but meh. I can overlook the number. Hell, I can even overlook the waiting to some extent, because we were still rounding 3rd Base regularly, and the option was open even on the first date. Which is unusual, even for her.

    The question is whether she is fully sexually invested in me now, and more than any other guy. The answer to that may be a Yes. If it is, I would never forgive myself for letting go of a girl who other-than-a-number is near-perfect.

  • M

    @purple/Susan

    My personal standard for attractiveness among the women I encounter has always been ‘will they look good even without makeup?’ Not that I endorse a woman to go new-age and reject it (I don’t), but if you realistically pursue anything beyond a few dates with her, you’re going to start seeing a much less composed side of her. Maybe it’s just I’m at more of a LT stage in life (27, in school for a grad degree), but I can even appreciate a woman’s tasteful modesty in dress.

    I think that should be the overall goal of women; make it to the 25-27 age range having self-preservation on their minds. Very few (one) of my friends got married before that, but it seems like all of a sudden I’m getting invites left and right. Have fun, enjoy life, discover yourself in the midst of a relationship, but be jealously mindful of some of those aspects of yourself that only degrade with exposure/use.

  • http://Dannyfrom504.wordpress.com Dannyfrom504

    But Tia….I love sluts. Guess what I did last night? Lol. Never mind I’ll just send you the pics.

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

      @Danny

      Haha, I know you do. No worries, I don’t think my strategy is going to cut into your supply any time soon.

  • SayWhaat

    I heard a convo among some guys in their 20s. They were talking about various attractive women, and opining on who was “hot but not pretty” and who was “pretty but not hot.” Guess which women the guys were trying to text for plans

    I think that there has been a small resurgence against this by women, though. Stars like Zooey Deschanel, Christina Hendricks…they specialize in the power of their femininity. They aren’t “slutty hot sex-bombs” like Megan Fox, but they are celebrated in their own way, and they are especially admired by women. I wonder if this will start to become a trend…

  • Gorbachev

    Definitely a beta guy,

    It sucks being the guy who doesn’t get any from the slut or the girl who gives it out to some guys and yet she still wants to drain your time.

    This is exactly what it is: A drain on your time.

    Susan’s advice is good for women. Her perspective is transparently about giving women both more power (sexually and in the SMV) and more satisfaction in romance.

    She states repeatedly that there’s no way to corral men: that men are more or less just responding opportunistically to the signals that women give out. She points out how feminism has created this situation largely on its own, with the addition of technology.

    She tells women how unfortunately bad this is, because men react as they do based on male interests and are not just ciphers on which feminists can paint whatever picture they want. Men are actors, too, and how men respond may not be as feminists assumed they would.

    So the slutty girl who won’t go to bed with you but will with lots of other guys: I know this will sound unlike her advice, but it’s unlike hers because it comes from a man.

    Ditch the woman. Seriously. Don’t stop to consider her feelings for one bald second.

    1) You’re her beta orbiter and nice guy to help ring in her new-found chastity and seriousness. In all seriousness, great for her. Absolute dog shit for you. Vote in your own interests.

    2) There are, literally, an unlimited supply (at least in relative terms) of other women. There is a) nothing particularly special about this one, b) other women are just as unique in different ways, and c) you are more valuable to you than any non-related woman should be, unless she’s already mothered your own children, in which case she has some value, though less than your actual children.

    These are cold calculations, but they’re calculations in *your* interest. *Your* interest, not the general social good you do by being The Man Who Sacrifices His Interests or The Interest Of Women or A Woman or anything else, is the most important thing for *you*.

    Let Susan educate other women. That’s hers and their business. Her advice is almost always good and at least relevant.

    You don’t have to give a rat’s ass about any of it. It’s merely interesting to you. I cannot tell you this enough.

    *DO NOT* seek advice from women who are counseling other women. When you step back and thoroughly examine Susan’s positions, they make for superb advice for dating for *women*. She has a solid understanding of male psychology and needs, but she self-avowedly advocates for maximizing female interests in the dating game.

    Her objection is to the more or less pack of misapprehensions and lies feminism as it is has sold women. She’s just straightening them out by giving them a dose of reality, not reeking idealism. She reminds women that men don’t just do whatever women want, that if you do X, men will respond with Y, and you can’t shame them into being X.
    Most feminists who give such bad advice are not even particularly straight, or are the 5-8% that are “poly”, bisexual, asexual or otherwise non-standard. Their advice for “standard-issue” human females is disastrous, something they find almost impossible to admit.

    All of this is great.

    I cannot stress this enough, sir.

    *None of this applies to you.*

    You should seek out your own interests and answers. I repeat these things, which some women will object to but which are hard-core male facts and interests. You might resist them. But you need to absorb this early.

    1) Roissy principle: Pussy is fungible. Less directly, you can change a GF and have an equally good experience. No woman is so valuable to a man that he can’t get better or at least different.
    1a) Don’t get one-itis until a woman has devoted herself to you and will make and help raise your offspring. This is the bulk of a value of a woman to you.
    You can go traveling, hang out with and do most non-sexual things with any male or female buddy. You can see sex from female fuck buddies and those sluts that are so derided. Some of those sluts are awesome, and so long as you’re not stupid enough to expect them to be consistently with you, on a long-term basis, and actually treat you well long-term, then they’re fantastic. Enjoy it.
    When some girl comes along who ACTIVELY PROVES HER EXCEPTIONAL VALUE TO YOU, on your terms, then bag and pay for it. And make no mistake: You will pay. One way or another. If she’s not a slut, you will have to pony up something, so you also need to be worthy of her.

    Which brings me to
    2) Be the man who can get the kind of woman you want. You can be other men, too. You don’t need to tell her you went through the entire sorority. You’ll be fighting off one-itis your whole life; you’re a man. Women are usually functionally loyal. Men have this retarded tendency to be loyal to individuals, for obviously good reasons, even when pushed. Some women are, but this is often a function of his perceived value. It’s a tendency, not a rule. Some women follow losers to the bottom: Welcome to the human race.

    But you need to pony up to get the woman you want. In the meantime, there are the sluts and the other women and the women who are biding their own time. You can have actual relationships with them, too. Just don’t expect too much. The relationships may actually be better for expecting nothing.

    3) Never take advice from women. I cannot stress this enough. Listen to it. Filter it. Consider it. But their advice will always and ever be poisoned with their own interests, which, while similar to, are not the same as yours.

    Most men can give you more even-handed advice, so long as they haven’t bought into mindless chivalry or feminist guilt.

    4) Women don’t like to fuck feminist men.

    5) Women say they like lots of stuff, and the women are almost always wrong. Watch behavior, and ignore words.

    Hence: GF who won’t bed you but will talk about threesomes with bad boy exes? In all seriousness, screw her. Walk away or make it clear you’re done. When she calls you a cad, call her this:

    Amoral emotional manipulator.

    You will be correct.

    Susan will back up some women playing these games, because men are difficult and we play games with women to get sex. Sure. But this doesn’t make women more moral or give them moral high ground.

    Both sexes play games. Don’t hate women for it. This is the nature of the species. There’s much to have contempt for in men, too.

    But you DO need to calculate your own interest and act accordingly. Use this calculation with monogamy, who to date, when to do it, when to marry (never out of any obligation: It’s YOUR decision, on your side, and you owe a woman who hasn’t spawned kids for you NOTHING).

    Two things you need to watch out for in this jungle:

    1) White-knight chivalry types. With all due respect, tell them where to stuff it. The religious are exceptionally blind to this. Danger #1 for nice guys.

    2) Feminists who say one thing and then fuck all kinds of bad boys. They’re the easiest to get into bed, and the first to abuse you. They will do whatever is in their power to deny you the same power of choice they assume.

    and for additional consideration,

    3) Equality.

    Ram this baby down the throats of every woman you ever date. This is the color of the sky now. Do what women do, and keep a mental tally of the amount of time, energy and resources you invest in a woman, and how she treats you. Many women will take you for everything you’re worth, and leave your husk by the side of the road. They’re mercenary and merciless this way. You will get no sympathy from other women or men. Women may decry this statement, but virtually every man alive will echo it.

    You make sure women don’t walk all over you. Never let them claim special status because they’re female. Make them work for it. You don’t need to be a beast of burden.

    Hold doors open for men and women. Carry bags for people, not for women. Let her chase the spiders out 50% of the time.

    You calculate it in your terms, not hers. You can negotiate in the middle.

    Make no mistake: This *is* a negotiation. It goes on forever.

    When it comes to advice, Susan is almost always on point.

    For women.

    Please take this advice. Don’t fear being a cad. Don’t worry about becoming a “bad boy” or being a “god boy”.

    You think *only* about getting the results *you* want. Society can burn to the ground for all it matters: the birth rate can drop to 0%: every woman you date can love you and be baffled as to why you won’t marry her and give her the huge house and three cars and a new handbag every week.

    It matters none at all.

    If you want the family, with the picket fence, you have one thing to consider.

    Add up what you offer. Be generous, but not unrealistic. Value yourself.

    Find an appropriate mate you can 1) trust, 2) sleep with, 3) have conversations with, because this is vital, and 4) be friends with, because you’ll spend more time as friends than fuck buddies, no matter what players may tell you.

    Additionally, make sure she’s 5) An excellent choice for mother for your children, 6) Loyal and 7) useful in other ways. Can she fix a car? Do accounts? Balance her budgets? Is she fun to travel with? Reliable?

    Bring what you have to the table, but you make absolutely sure a woman brings what you want to the table. if she doesn’t–

    Ditch her.

    Other women are good for sex. Movies. Travel. Whatever.

    Dude, value yourself.

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

      @Gorbachev

      How amusing to see you warning Beta Guy to ignore my advice which was:

      OMG, I almost vomited at that. Dump that bitch!

      I don’t really have any problem with your own advice to him, here at my blog, except this:

      Hence: GF who won’t bed you but will talk about threesomes with bad boy exes? In all seriousness, screw her. Walk away or make it clear you’re done. When she calls you a cad, call her this:

      Amoral emotional manipulator.

      You will be correct.

      Susan will back up some women playing these games, because men are difficult and we play games with women to get sex.

      I have never backed up any woman playing those games. I’ve been as critical of women like that as I am of cads.

      When we approach other human beings as immoral or amoral emotional manipulators, we debase them and ourselves too. (Cads are immoral because they actively engage in dishonesty.) I would advise any person, regardless of sex, to run away from such a person as fast as their legs can carry them and never look back. That way lies heartache and degradation, for both men and women.

  • Gorbachev

    PS,

    I think slut shaming is awesome.

    For other women.

    Me, I think sluts are eminently useful.

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

      I think slut shaming is awesome.

      For other women.

      Me, I think sluts are eminently useful.

      Of course you do. I think I’ve made it pretty clear throughout this thread that it’s a woman’s job to shame another woman for promiscuous behavior.

  • Tony Stark

    @ this is Jen

    “Guys can differentiate between the sluts and the respectable women, but women are the ones that need to decide which one they are going to be!”

    True. Guys can and do differentiate. Guys looking for easy sex will purposefully target sluts, while guys looking for relationships will do the opposite. My point was not about individuals, but about the broader culture. Jhane Sez complained that guys expect sex after three dates. My response was that if guys expect sex after three dates, it’s because they look around and see plenty of women putting out after three dates. If guys go out to the bar expecting to find a woman for same night sex, it’s because they look around and see plenty of women putting out the first night.

    If you want to change the culture (and as a non-slutty woman you probably should because the culture works directly against your interests) the only way to do it is to change the behavior of other women. Women, not men, are the drivers of sexual mores.

    @ SayWhaat

    “Even omegas get laid like tile in big cities.”

    Wrong. Omegas never get laid. That’s what makes them omegas. But there definitely is easier sex in the big blue cities. The combination of a permissive, liberal culture, highly competitive atmosphere, and relative anonymity due to numbers = a player’s dream. But this brings us back to my original point. In this environment, it’s not just the players expecting quick sex. When quick sex is the norm, even nice, relationship oriented guys will expect it. Hence the utility of slut-shaming (if the easy sex culture is something that bothers you).

  • Gorbachev

    PS,

    Have sex with her if you can. Then slow fade out.

    This will manage it all on your terms and you can walk away. It does wonders for your damaged ego.

    Trust me on that.

  • purplesneakers

    For the record, and the benefit of new readers, let me state that my objection to female promiscuity has nothing to do with morality. I am entirely preoccupied with strategy, individual success in finding relationships, and what I believe to be helpful to society (like fewer single mothers with children by numerous men and an increasing marriage rate). Though I have some religious readers here, I do not come at this topic from a religious orientation.

    Oops, didn’t mean to imply that your blog is coming at it from the ‘moral shaming’ aspect. I meant something more along the lines of what SayWhaat said above- a lot of young women will take any encouragement to introspect about their sexual activity as an attack on being sexual itself, rather than a strategic way of getting what they actually want. As far as I’m concerned this blog is the rulebook for getting in line with that ‘strategy.’

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Susan, wow the sex by date 3 dating script that Emileigh described is awful. Please, any girl reading this, DO NOT follow it!

    A woman can have sex hundreds of times without falling in love. But a woman can only fall in love a few times in her lifetime. Don’t have sex without love. It’s not worth it!

    By the way, Bb reposted this on her blog:

    https://mashable.com/2012/03/22/world-of-warcraft-dating-infographic/

  • purplesneakers

    VD @ 98

    No, I’m aware that–sadly enough–I probably would find some of the guys that post online on threads like “how to bang 16 yr olds” attractive and charming if I were to meet them. I didn’t say that I would never find them attractive, just “if I were to find them attractive to begin with.” (Not all PUAs are attractive just because they are PUAs). If I did, and I then found out that their mission in life was to fuck as many girls as possible, I would find it gross and run far away. Hopefully avoiding one-night stands and fucking on the first date will help keep away the men who see women as playthings to sell their bullshit acts to.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Tony Stark

    If you want to change the culture (and as a non-slutty woman you probably should because the culture works directly against your interests) the only way to do it is to change the behavior of other women. Women, not men, are the drivers of sexual mores.

    You know, as much as we’d all love to be influential culturally, a lot of us here are outliers to begin with, don’t have a big social group, and don’t have much influence among acquaintances. If we started “slut shaming” on social media under our own names, it would go over like a lead brick balloon.

    So, what I would advise women who are “against the grain” is to change her own behavior. Like attracts like, and she won’t attract the men who are chasing after easy and casual sex, but she will attract the men who want a real connection, genuine emotions from a woman and an actually loving relationship that will lead to a good marriage and family.

    No offense to you or the other men who consider yourselves “good,” but I don’t consider you marriage material either. If a woman is going to get choosy and close her legs, she’s going to be an outlier already, and she’s not going to choose one of you mainstream men demanding sex after 3 dates. She just isn’t. Like attracts like.

  • Lokland

    @ Susan

    “Such is the power of Game in the hands of a master.

    And by the way, I feel fortunate that she never met either one. I have no confidence whatsoever that she would have heeded my advice in the heat of the moment.”

    I know this wasn’t your intention but this confirms(suggests?) two things that come out of the manosphere,

    i) theres no such thing as a bar slut
    ii) a women will cheat given the right circumstances (I’ll admit this one is far weaker)

    Thats not what you said but it was where my thought process first went.

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

      @Lokland

      I know this wasn’t your intention but this confirms(suggests?) two things that come out of the manosphere,

      i) theres no such thing as a bar slut
      ii) a women will cheat given the right circumstances (I’ll admit this one is far weaker)

      I’ll ignore the second, as I believe cheating involves a very different set of impulses, thoughts and actions.

      I’ll disagree on the first. First, I think there are probably a handful of men in any city who have game that tight. Roissy and Roosh and the masters of the universe in this regard, and they happen to live in the same city. It’s like the movie Les Liasons Dangereuses – John Malcovich seduces and destroys the Michelle Pfeiffer character, a woman of the highest innocence and moral standing. She’s quite different than all the women he’s had before her (bar sluts) – she’s the ultimate challenge – and she takes a lot more work.

      I’ve often said that all women are susceptible to Game. But some go down fast, and some take work.

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

    @Hope
    Mainstream guys aren’t demanding sex by date 3. Mainstream guys have a partner count of ~5 and are married by age 28. No sense feeling like you’re in a minority when you’re not.

    The whole “shaming” discussion seems a little problematic. Particularly when people, could be guys or girls, are capable of lying to get what they want, even if that’s commitment. Chameleon effect so to speak. What used to work in the old days, before birth control and safe sex, was ostracization. That tended to keep people in line because there were real consequences to “wild” behavior.

    But you’re right on choosing a partner. For the most part, men and women who have some standard they expect in a partner also apply that same standard to themselves. I guess that’s how you can protect yourself from the chameleons out there. Live the way you’d like your future parter to live, and hope you meet them eventually.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Lokland “Thats not what you said but it was where my thought process first went.”

    I think a parent’s thought process is usually “think of the worst, plan for the worst, and pray you’re pleasantly surprised.”

    Megaman “Mainstream guys aren’t demanding sex by date 3.”

    I hadn’t done a lot of “dating” to know what most guys are up to, really. He did say that when enough number of women do put out quickly, that will dictate how quickly most men expect women to put out as a collective. It sounds plausible, but it doesn’t mean all women should or would follow those same expectations.

    And it doesn’t mean I find men with those expectations to be… good for me and other women who want different expectations.

  • Tony Stark

    @ Hope

    “If we started ‘slut shaming’ on social media under our own names, it would go over like a lead brick balloon.”

    I’m not saying every time you encounter a slut to make a capital case out of it. What I am saying is that the culture will only change when a critical mass of women adopts an intolerant attitude towards slutty behavior. As far as I can tell, you individually have already done your part.

    “So, what I would advise women who are ‘against the grain’ is to change her own behavior.”

    Agreed. And this is in no way mutually exclusive with the above.

    “No offense to you or the other men who consider yourselves ‘good,’ but I don’t consider you marriage material either.”

    Please don’t personalize this. NOTHING I’ve said here or in any other thread is based on my own personal life or behavior. Everything I’ve said is based on my observations of the social milieu in which I reside.

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

    @Hope
    This is what happens when guys generalize from the worst examples of female behavior onto the whole female population. They’ll be disappointed often, because most relationship-type women aren’t going to put out on the 3rd date. They’re going to wait for exclusivity, however long that takes.

    FWIW, I’ve never believed a guy who A) wanted sex with a girl as quickly as possible, and B) also said he wanted a serious relationship with said girl. Guys intereste in relationships tend to act very differently from guys who looking to use you and lose you.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Tony Stark, I really didn’t mean any offense by the statement. I simply think if you sanction the attitude of other men having expectation of sex by 3rd date, that reflects your own attitudes, which are not compatible with a woman who is seeking true love and marriage.

    Megaman, I don’t believe that either, which is why I said they wouldn’t be good marriage material. It doesn’t mean they aren’t good men in other regards, just that in all likelihood, they don’t even have marriage in mind.

  • SayWhaat

    Gorbachev # 150: pretty sure that’s Dark Game being advised here at HUS.

  • Lokland

    @ Hope

    “I think a parent’s thought process is usually “think of the worst, plan for the worst, and pray you’re pleasantly surprised.”

    I think an INTELLIGENT INDIVIDUALS thought process is usually “think of the worst, plan for the worst, and pray you’re pleasantly surprised.”

    @ MM

    “No sense feeling like you’re in a minority when you’re not.”

    And therein lies the problem.

    “Guys intereste in relationships tend to act very differently from guys who looking to use you and lose you.”

    I cosign this.

    Fixed it for you. I was just pointing out conclusions that could be drawn from her statement that are counter to her typical opinions.
    I don’t believe them myself.

    @ Saywhaat

    “Gorbachev # 150: pretty sure that’s Dark Game being advised here at HUS.”

    You actually read that whole thing? :P

  • SayWhaat

    You actually read that whole thing?

    I did. I didn’t have a problem with most of it. But it was comment #150 particularly that struck me as Dark Game.

  • Cooper

    @Susan #134
    Exclusivity after a month?
    There would be numerous parties and hookup opporunites in that time.

    If I find out a girls hook up with someone else, since me, I’m over it. I’ll purged all feeling, and be done.
    To me, her hooking up with someone else speaks a thousand words.
    I’ve always been told women know what they want, and so I’ve always let their actions speak for them.
    If she’s hooked up me, once to three time in that first month, and also gone to another guy, I’d take it as a sign of comtempt.

    Most importantly, that I wasn’t enough to conjure any desire for a relationship.
    Am I not entitled to feel so strongly this early?

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

      @Cooper

      Am I not entitled to feel so strongly this early?

      You are entitled to feel any way you want to. It just means filtering out women who would do this. Not all would – I’m talking about people active in the hookup scene here.

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

    @SW
    “She described the normal college process of becoming a couple like this…”

    And you say this convulted process only leads to a relationship 12% of the time? Not surprising. The guy and girl in that generic example seemed genuinely afraid of displaying actual emotion. People have to be getting together in other ways, even in college. A relationship is only successful if it lasts, after all.

  • purplesneakers

    Definitely A Beta Guy, if the gf who almost had a threesome with her ex-hookup buddy is your current gf, you need to dump her now. You don’t deserve that bullshit.

    Dogsquat,

    To summarize/attempt a generalization:

    Most guys are not going to rule out a serious relationship/dump a woman because she’s choosy about who she sleeps with. Matter of fact, a choosy woman choosing a particular guy is a very positive thing from the guy’s point of view.

    On the other hand, many guys will not start/stay in a relationship with someone they deem too promiscuous. Most dudes have a limit for that. When their girl is close to that limit, it causes a lot of soul-searching, doubt, pain, and anguish in the guy. The girl who’s up against that “limit” has to compensate for it in other ways, or she’ll get dumped. Her guy will go find someone else equally as cool/attractive, but with a past that’s easier to tolerate.

    Perhaps, Mauve Nike Person, the better question to ask is – Is It Worth It?

    Girls do give up something by not being promiscuous. Sex is fun. Hanging around naked with attractive people is a pretty goddamned good way to pass the day. Instant gratification is easy, while keeping your eye on a prize that may never come is difficult.

    So:

    Q. Why Bother?

    A. It might matter someday.

    I don’t feel like I’m giving up anything by not having casual sex. Ok, sure, maybe some great sex (assuming it’s not a typical situation where we’re both drunk and he doesn’t care about my pleasure at all)… but only to be followed by an empty, hollow feeling that too many “sex-positive feminists” describe in their stories about “reclaiming sluthood.” I have hooked up in the sense of making out, etc. before, and only felt gross and devalued when the guy literally up and left because he realized he wasn’t going to be getting any, and I realized he didn’t care about me beyond wanting sex.

    Also, my own personal situation (to put it simply, what I was like during the formative years vs. what I’m like now) is such that I will admit that I have some sexual hang-ups, mostly where it comes to body image. I could try to ‘exorcise these demons’ by sleeping around for male validation like so many girls seem to do, but I’m also extremely risk-averse. It takes a lot of trust for me to take my clothes off in front of someone. (No wonder I just got dumped for not feeling comfortable having sex in less than three weeks of knowing someone. And this person knew I have never done the whole ‘sleep with some guys immediately while LJBF’ing other guys and using them’ thing before).

    But at the same time, especially after taking the ‘female red pill,’ I’m perfectly aware that I’m not getting any more attractive to men as I get older. Ugh.. forgot where I was trying to go with this train of thought.

    Just out of curiosity Dogsquat- how old are you, and how old is your gf?

  • Cooper

    @megaman
    I’d say that, what Susan described, was a normal college process.

    Usually the first hookup with at the end of a particular night. And each of them would probably not initiate daily contact until maybe a second hookup. (with the exception of coordinating plans) And they probably would continue aloof to avoid seeming over eager.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    purplesneakers, I think you have to adopt a more hardened attitude toward men who want to use you solely for sex. Basically, screen them as much as you can before doing anything physical.

    Kissing frogs is kind of gross if you think about it… :P

    I think you should try to befriend guys, get to know them and have them get to know you. If they don’t respect your boundaries, forget about them and move on. There are plenty more men to get to know.

    Also, you’re still young. I thought I was getting “old” at 23. It was totally dumb. You don’t have to worry, take your time, and don’t rush. Guys can smell desperation and use it, too.

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

    @Cooper
    If by normal you mean it happens to the average college student at least once during 4+ years, then I can see that. But I wouldn’t call the process normal in any real sense of the word. The whole 13 steps read as pretty dysfunctional. Assuming they actually stay together long-term, wouldn’t they be somewhat embarrassed to admit that’s how they got together? Sleeping with a stranger, rolling the dice, etc.

    12% is a pretty low chance of a relationship. And what’s the failure rate of those relationships? I get the feeling there’s a large chunk of young college students who are smarter than this and find ways to start relationships in healthier ways.

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

      @Megaman

      12% is a pretty low chance of a relationship. And what’s the failure rate of those relationships? I get the feeling there’s a large chunk of young college students who are smarter than this and find ways to start relationships in healthier ways.

      First, I think the quality of many, if not most, of these relationships is pretty poor. In a lot of them the emotional intimacy never grows. The woman who shared this with me (it wasn’t Emileigh, by the way – new weekend, new stories!) also said that she has never known a couple where cheating did not become an issue. She said she doesn’t know a single person of either sex who hasn’t either cheated or been cheated on.

      This whole process is highly dysfunctional as you say, and the relationships are bound to be low quality and short-lived.

      There are undoubtedly some students who get together in other ways – there’s the group that researchers call “college marrieds” who typically are in the same year and get together within weeks of arriving at school, staying together for four years. These relationships are characterized by intense symbiosis. Never a meal eaten apart or a night not spent in one twin bed together.

      I do not believe there is a large chunk of college students successfully navigating an alternative approach, though I do think many would welcome the opportunity to be in relationships.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Nothing wrong with Dark Game when a guy, especially a good guy, is getting screwed over. I don’t disagree with anything Gorbachev says, I just don’t want to follow through on losing a girl that might be valuable.

    No need to make a decision right now. I can sit on it for a few weeks and think this through.

    For the record, Susan: thank you for your concern. I am not depressed anymore. I have also lost 25 pounds in the last few months, should be starting a decent paying job soon, etc. Things have been good.

    But for 2 of those years…and I don’t know why I said 7, it was more like 12…I commuted by train to college, alone. And almost every day, I cried on that train. Alone. Because no one, not once, not in a city of millions of people, offered to help me.

    After forgiving humanity for that, forgiving my parents for making it worse, forgiving certain friends for not trying harder, forgiving culture for creating a society where I pretty much had to exist online because no where else would have me, forgiving myself for not getting help and pushing people away and aiding the process along instead of fixing myself….

    Well, a number just doesn’t mean anything. I’ve slayed dragons and I did it by myself: girls are just trivial by comparison. That’s why I said I wanted to cry but really couldn’t. What’s the big deal about some girl that’s not fully invested in me? I can always dump her and get another. Dealing with depression, though, that’s some serious shit.

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

      @Beta Guy

      I truly wish you all the best. I’m glad you’re feeling better. No one should suffer tears every day.

  • Mike C

    This will be interesting to watch in the coming years as to what the dominant social trend is amongst women. In terms of “slut shaming”, you’ve got two diametrically opposed forces.

    Force 1 is intrasexual competition amongst women and either women who really intellectually understand “sluts” cheapen the value of sexual access or at least intuitively “get it”. Force 2 is female “empowerment” and everything that goes along with that such as the perceived injustice of the double standard.

    I really have no idea where most women will eventually land in terms of balancing those two forces in their own views and actions. To some extent, where you stand depends on where you sit so I think many women will have views aligned with their own self-interest.

    From a guy’s perspective, anyone with even an iota of brain cells knows to keep any “slut shaming” to online blogosphere discussions. Never, ever slut shame in real life. Appearing non-judgemental is just one more aspect of good Game.

  • Mike C

    Cooper,

    I had been meaning to make this comment for you, and don’t take it as patronizing. In another comment somewhere, you had indicated you had been doing a lot of “thinking”. That is good. Keep that up. Think and reflect and don’t take anyone’s word on anything as gospel, and don’t put boxes around yourself on what thinking is allowed. Allow your thinking to take you wherever it goes.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Cooper, that’s what ignorant college students think is “normal.” Like college students thinking a diet consisting solely of fast food is “normal.”

    Here’s what’s actually healthy. Guy and girl meet, get to know each other over a period of time, become closer emotionally without getting physical, form a friendship bond tinged with attraction, then one or both escalate verbally and mutually confess their feelings. They talk a lot, fall in love, and then finally have sex, their feelings get even stronger, and they continue to have lots of hot sex.

    Of course, it’s going to take longer and be more complicated. It’s like going to the grocery store, picking out fresh meat and vegetables, getting good nutritious ingredients, going home, cutting up the food, firing up the stove, cooking the food, serving the food in a real plate with metal utensils, and eating it. Then washing the pans and dishes, and cleaning up the area when you’re done.

    Does it sound like a hassle? It’s better, healthier, and lots of “normal” people do it all the time.

    College is not forever. It’s a blip in the scheme of your adult life. Get real life skills, romantic and practical, to prepare for the real world.

  • Mike C

    On the other hand, many guys will not start/stay in a relationship with someone they deem too promiscuous. Most dudes have a limit for that. When their girl is close to that limit, it causes a lot of soul-searching, doubt, pain, and anguish in the guy. The girl who’s up against that “limit” has to compensate for it in other ways, or she’ll get dumped. Her guy will go find someone else equally as cool/attractive, but with a past that’s easier to tolerate.

    Perfect description of what takes place in most male psyches when confronted with this issue.

  • Just1X

    @Mike C

    “the perceived injustice of the double standard”

    Depends on how people respond to “It’s not faaaaiiiir”

    To me this is the argument of a five year old throwing a tantrum and stamping their feet. When I tried it at that age, I was told that life isn’t fair, deal with it.

    Is it even legal to say that now, especially to feminists? :0

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Then again, plenty of young people in their 20s who graduated from college still eat fast food all the time and don’t take the time to cook. I guess it’s no surprise that the hook up thing is happening more and more even after people graduate.

  • SayWhaat

    Force 1 is intrasexual competition amongst women and either women who really intellectually understand “sluts” cheapen the value of sexual access or at least intuitively “get it”.

    One of my girlfriends is a virgin. One day when we were talking about boyfriends and sex, she suddenly said, “you know, we wouldn’t have such a hard time of it if only other girls would stop putting out so much!” This was something she arrived at completely independently. I hadn’t even mentioned HUS to her at that point.

    She’s a smart cookie. I bet other girls like her are completely aware of how the market is acting against their best interests and are figuring it out earlier. The only problem is that women en masse don’t know what to do about it.

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

      @SayWhaat

      She’s a smart cookie. I bet other girls like her are completely aware of how the market is acting against their best interests and are figuring it out earlier. The only problem is that women en masse don’t know what to do about it.

      We’ve made shame a dirty word, a way of suppressing human freedom, and the refuge of the illiberal and small minded. You can see some of that in this thread. I’ve always maintained that shame is not only valuable but invaluable to civilization.

      I would also point out that slut shaming may be as simple as selecting friends differently, or withholding approval rather than granting it. It doesn’t mean putting women in the stocks in front of the library.

  • SayWhaat

    Then again, plenty of young people in their 20s who graduated from college still eat fast food all the time and don’t take the time to cook. I guess it’s no surprise that the hook up thing is happening more and more even after people graduate

    I made this same observation to Ozy over at the forum. :)

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

    @Hope
    The hookup scene actually happens more outside of the college environment, adding more fuel to the fire of pluralistic ignorance. People who only have a high school education report more partners (?). You may interpret that any way you like : )

  • purplesneakers

    purplesneakers, I think you have to adopt a more hardened attitude toward men who want to use you solely for sex. Basically, screen them as much as you can before doing anything physical.

    Kissing frogs is kind of gross if you think about it… :P

    The thing is, I am actually attracted, and I want to show that attraction. I don’t want them to think I would be frigid when the time comes, or that I am just using them for an ego boost or to buy me stuff. I remember reading a comment from a guy here about going on a date with a Spaniard and how free she was with touching him (like hand on the shoulder, hugs, etc.) and how that made him like her more, and more willing to wait. I dunno, maybe I’m trying to be something I’m not here though. But non-verbal contact has actually (magically) become easier for me (the most introverted girl in the whole freaking world, it seems sometimes) than saying ‘I think you’re really hot and really want to have sex with you’ (which I’ve forced myself to say–in less dorky terms–but it felt so unnatural).

    The story about guys getting up and leaving once they realized they weren’t getting any was more from college. It’s hard to recreate that in the real world because of the lack of dorm rooms, haha.

  • Mike C

    Depends on how people respond to “It’s not faaaaiiiir”

    To me this is the argument of a five year old throwing a tantrum and stamping their feet. When I tried it at that age, I was told that life isn’t fair, deal with it.

    Ha….yeah…whenever I hear someone proclaim “That’s not fair” on anything, I know I am dealing with someone with a child-like mentality and view of the world. The world is literally riddled with “unfairness” from SMP stuff to economic stuff like wealth and income to stuff about navigating the corporate environment and career. At some point, someone with sense stops whining about unfairness and gets on to business of playing by the rules of the game.

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

      @Mike C, @Just1X

      When my daughter was young, she had a hard time accepting disappointment. Ultimately I would say, “I’m sorry, but that’s just the way it is. Life is not fair sometimes.” She would inevitably respond, “But I don’t want that. I want it to be different.” We could go around and around like this for hours. And of course, she remained very agitated. Acceptance is the key to emotional stability and sanity. Change what you can and let the rest go. (I learned this from reading Zen stuff, and have not yet learned to put it into practice. But at least I understand the concept.)

  • deti

    Gorb 147:

    Tour. de. Force. Absolutely superb.

    This is some of the best advice I have ever seen written anywhere.

    I am going to print this for my son.

  • Just1X

    @purplesneakers

    non-verbal contact ? yeah, I think that as long as you have some feelings, that this will be taken as an acceptable sign of interest, short of sex.

    if he’s young and inexperienced please give him something waist height to stand behind when you do this for the first few times, hormones aren’t just for women, you know. Show some mercy

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @ Cheerful

    Your words have buoyed me it’s a little difficult this meaning. Been meaning to tell you how touched my wife and I were when you said you were worried about me driving home to Boston one Sunday a while ago. Putting such a reference to it made it so real to us. I am reminded of a verse from “Sweet Baby James” (from the same titled album):”Now the first of December was covered with snow/ and so was the turnpike from Stockbridge to Boston.” When I hear or think of that verse from now on I’ll picture you, driving, wondering how I’m doing-like James says, “sweet”.

    My example is sort of a take on an old joke that starts the movie “The Verdict”. Stop me if you’ve heard it. Guy’a talking to his pals and says “Hey, there’s this great new place where for $50 you can get a meal, all the beer you want, and then they’ll take you in the back and get you laid.”

    Pal: “You’re telling me there’s a place where for $50 you can get a meal, all the beer you want, and then they’ll take you in the back and get you laid?”

    “Yeah.”
    “When did you go there?”
    “Haven’t, but my sister went there last night.”

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

      @Munson

      How funny. My drive that day was from Stockbridge to Boston. Sweet Baby James is the album I came of age with. That and Carole King’s Tapestry.

      Anyway, you’re on my mind, and on lots of other folks’ minds too.

  • purplesneakers

    Just1x-

    non-verbal contact ? yeah, I think that as long as you have some feelings, that this will be taken as an acceptable sign of interest, short of sex.

    if he’s young and inexperienced please give him something waist height to stand behind when you do this for the first few times, hormones aren’t just for women, you know. Show some mercy

    hahaha. (oops, the word I meant non-verbal *communication). I’m not saying I’m being a tease… I’m not sticking my chest in their faces or grabbing their junk. Just light touches, meaningfully long hugs and kisses. I also don’t dress ‘hot’ so that already turns away a large % of guys already only interested in casual sex.

  • deti

    Cooper:

    Hope’s viewpoint at her comment 173 is “healthy” and advantageous from a female standpoint.

    My wrinkle on it is this: There has to be some attraction there. She has to be physically and sexually attracted to you from the get go. She has to tingle for you from the get go.

    If the tingle’s not there, you’re a beta orbiter and you’re wasting your time and money.

  • Just1X

    Thanks for the laugh Mr Munson, hope your come down wasn’t too bad

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

    “This is some of the best advice I have ever seen written anywhere.”

    Why did I have the opposite reaction? It just seemed like cliched training for wannabe players…

    Discouraging women from sleeping around is a worthwhile goal. Encouraging men to sleep around at the same time seems schizophrenic. If I had a son and daughter, the thought of giving them contradictory advice like this… blech. I wouldn’t be able to look at myself in the mirror.

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

      If I had a son and daughter, the thought of giving them contradictory advice like this… blech. I wouldn’t be able to look at myself in the mirror.

      I’ve often wondered about this. Dads encouraging their sons to be cads, while warning their daughters about the dangers of cads. I don’t think it’s possible. You’re a liar in one case or the other.

  • deti

    Actually, the more I consider Hope’s advice — that’s great advice for a young woman.

    It’s poor advice for a young man.

  • Mike C

    3) Never take advice from women. I cannot stress this enough. Listen to it. Filter it. Consider it. But their advice will always and ever be poisoned with their own interests, which, while similar to, are not the same as yours.

    Most men can give you more even-handed advice, so long as they haven’t bought into mindless chivalry or feminist guilt.

    I cannot emphasize this point more strongly for any guy. No matter how logical and rational any woman or her advice seems, or how “fair and balanced” she seems, any advice she gives to a man is being filtered through the prism of eollective female interest and her own persona interest as a woman. There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT AT ALL. But less perceptive guys might mistake the advice for being analytically sound and in their interest as a guy.

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

      No matter how logical and rational any woman or her advice seems, or how “fair and balanced” she seems, any advice she gives to a man is being filtered through the prism of eollective female interest and her own persona interest as a woman.

      No matter how logical and rational any player or his advice seems, or how “fair and balanced” he seems, any advice he gives to a man is being filtered through the prism of collective male interest and his own personal interest as a player.

      I would argue the second does far more damage, as morality is rarely a concern, and emotional manipulation is his most used tool. The player always seeks to steal something via deception and illusion.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    As an aside, there is no one promiscuous among the female friends I have. They’re all married or in LTRs. They talk about calligraphy, crafts, book clubs, dinner clubs and school for their kids. They go to parks, skiing, hiking and plan girls’ camping trips. The kind of woman who are going to be in this social circle has never gone out and slept with a ton of random guys. Like is attracted to like, so how would slut shaming really happen among these kinds of groups?

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

      @Hope

      Like is attracted to like, so how would slut shaming really happen among these kinds of groups?

      It wouldn’t need to. But it’s clear that in college there is some mixing of promiscuous and non-promiscuous women in friend groups. I’ve seen it in my focus groups, and in my observations of various college social scenes. And of course, randomly assigned roommates are often different. Even the non-promiscuous girls wind up lending a supportive ear to the disappointed dumpee after a “one and done” hookup.

  • purplesneakers

    One of my girlfriends is a virgin. One day when we were talking about boyfriends and sex, she suddenly said, “you know, we wouldn’t have such a hard time of it if only other girls would stop putting out so much!” This was something she arrived at completely independently. I hadn’t even mentioned HUS to her at that point.

    She’s a smart cookie. I bet other girls like her are completely aware of how the market is acting against their best interests and are figuring it out earlier. The only problem is that women en masse don’t know what to do about it.

    Funny story… after relaying to my friend–who was moderately promiscuous in college and is now in a LTR–the story of how I got dumped by the most recent guy I dated basically because his former hookup buddy from college came to town and made herself very sexually available, she said, ‘Man, what a slut.’ And this coming from someone who even had a little bit of a reputation in college. Of course part of it is trying to make her friend feel better, but yeah, intrasexual competition is alive and thriving.

  • Gorbachev

    Look, I’m not saying be a dick.

    I’m just saying:

    Get what you want. If what you want is a wife and a normal life, know how to get that and to maintain it.

    Or sleep with every woman you meet.

    Ironically, the skills and knowledge are actually much the same.

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

      @Gorbachev

      Look, I’m not saying be a dick.

      I’m just saying:

      Get what you want. If what you want is a wife and a normal life, know how to get that and to maintain it.

      I didn’t think you were. Your advice to Beta Guy passed my test, I had no problem with it. I’m sure you won’t be surprised to hear that I won’t allow HUS to be used as a platform for Dark Game in any way.

      And I’m probably not inclined to tolerate much more of this “Don’t listen to Susan” stuff. I get more requests for advice from men than I do from women at this point, and that’s been true for a while. At this point, I refer everyone to the forum, and if I do put up a post here, I give men every opportunity to disagree in the comment section.

      For the last two guy letters I put up, both guys left the comment thread because of the things the men were saying. Including advice like “get her drunk at the bar and bang her” and “be banging another chick at the same time so she hears about it and wants you more.” The fact is, many men don’t want to hear it because they don’t want to be that kind of man. They’re unwilling to compromise their own moral standards for “fungible pussy.”

  • deti

    Megaman:

    Maybe it’s the pendulum swinging, IDK. Maybe it’s pushback.

    All I know is that men need something better than the toxic and false BS “just be nice and be yourself, and the girls will flock to you and want to be your GFs.” Men have been colossally lied to and defrauded. Many women — not all, but many women — are playing men for losers and chumps and fools.

    Men need to know about the real rules of the real game they’re in. They don’t need to be given rules that applied to the game which existed circa 1955.

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

      @deti

      Many women — not all, but many women — are playing men for losers and chumps and fools.

      Can you put a percentage on that and explain how? It’s long been my contention that about three quarters of women aren’t even in the game. We might call them beta females.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    “It’s poor advice for a young man.”

    Well, maybe. My husband has the same attitude on love/relationships as me, and he remained single for long periods of time because he couldn’t find a girl with the same attitude who was also single — most of the girls whom he would be compatible with were in long-term relationships already.

    It actually gave him an attitude of choosiness that was quite attractive. There were other girls who tried to audition for the role of girlfriend and failed. He was maybe a tad bit too choosy. I was very happy that I passed his extensive filtering.

  • Passer_By

    @susan

    In answer to your original question, no I don’t think slut shaming is making a comeback. I think this is just feminism doubling down on efforts to stamp it down further. I realize this particular woman used to be on the outs with feminists, but she is clearly with them on this one. Also, sometimes people just have to think up something to write about in order to get published and paid.

    @all women

    Read Definite Beta Guy’s story and never again question why a man instinctively bristles at the concept of a woman making him wait while knowing she got her freak on with other guys from the get go. Nobody wants her responsible side. They want both sides.

    Also, let this be a lesson to you. There are, IMO, a lot of guys like Beta Guy here. They aren’t THAT concerned about the number. All other things being equal, they’d rather it be lower, but they grasp that you can only address the here and now. However, don’t do anything that makes them feel like second place sexually, EVER, IN ANY RESPECT. Don’t make them wait longer, don’t be less wild. If he already knows you were a slut, you’d better now be HIS slut. If that bothers you, then don’t expect to date him for long and still respect him.

    @Beta Guy

    Do what Gorby said. First, immediately disinvest yourself emotionally in the outcome of this relationship. This may take a week, but make it so that you have moved on your mind. Then, start amping up the Ahole dominance with her – and quit crying. Use that emotion to be a dominant A hole. Fuck her hard in every position. If she gets into you, suggest a 3 way, and, if she declines, start flirting with other women a little – she might come around. Anyway, once you’ve used her sexually, dump her.

    Cruel, you say? What she has done to you is far more cruel. This will help you more than all the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors you can take.

    In terms of a long term relationship or marriage, I think you are deluding yourself as to how that would go. I get that we’re only getting a snippet of your relationship here, but it’s what we have to go on. By permitting this, you have caused her attraction centers to downgrade you. Over time, she will become less and less attracted until sex crawls to a halt. She might cheat (given her past) or she might look for reasons to resent you so she can divorce you. Either way, the outcome looks bleak.

    Please pay the receptionist on the way out.

    @gorby

    How is Susan’s advice to him (“Dump that bitch”) materially different than yours? She just didn’t include the part about extracting more sex first.

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

      @Passer By

      Great advice for beta guy. I endorse this:

      Use that emotion to be a dominant A hole. Fuck her hard in every position. If she gets into you, suggest a 3 way, and, if she declines, start flirting with other women a little – she might come around. Anyway, once you’ve used her sexually, dump her.

      Cruel, you say? What she has done to you is far more cruel.

      I want to point that out because in this case, having been treated with outrageous disrespect by this woman, full on dread followed by a dump is entirely fair and appropriate. Where I reject the use of dread is as preventative maintenance for a healthy relationship.

  • Just1X

    @Gorbachev

    the guy needs a desperate transfusion of Heartiste / Roissy STAT

    and then go and find someone who treats him decently because she is giving him an almighty shit-test, and he’s already failed. Sorry man, but it’s true & too late; Save your self respect, she is showing you none whatsoever.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    There’s nothing really wrong with dumping a girl for any personal reason the guy has.

    There is something kind of sketchy about dumping her after extracting more sex from her. It involves a level of double-faced deception, because she assumes you still like her and want to be her boyfriend, so you’re having sex with her, but you actually don’t like her, don’t want to be with her, and just using her for her body.

    As an analogy, I don’t think a guy would want to be strung along as a pretend boyfriend so the girl can extract more money/resources out of him. He’d rather be dumped.

  • Cooper

    @Mike C, Hope, and Deti
    Thanks for the input.
    @Mike C #174
    +1

    I have a tendency to agree with deti though. Hope’s advice is ideal, and the most healthy. It’s the process I’d most like to follow. That’s how I feel, not by and large how everyone my ages feels.

    There girls I know who will sleep with someone specifically due to their non-commitment attitude. (they aren’t horrible people) I feel that many girls my age would be reserving part, if not a lot, of their decision on commitment based on the physical hookup.
    And I’m down right certain they’d think a guy is crazy if he fell in love before having sex with them.

  • Mike C

    Well, maybe. My husband has the same attitude on love/relationships as me, ****and he remained single for long periods of time because he couldn’t find a girl with the same attitude who was also single**** — most of the girls whom he would be compatible with were in long-term relationships already.

    Well…that’s really the point right there, right? Maybe MGTOW was A-OK all right with him until he got lucky enough to stumble across you, and I believe you are a rarity (and I mean that in a very positive way). If 99% of women were like you, then guys could take what Gorbachev said in his comment and flush it down the toilet. But most men are not going to be willing or happy living the lifestyle your husband led prior to meeting you.

  • Gorbachev

    @passer_by,

    How is Susan’s advice to him (“Dump that bitch”) materially different than yours? She just didn’t include the part about extracting more sex first.

    Exactly.

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

    @Gorby
    “Get what you want. If what you want is a wife and a normal life, know how to get that and to maintain it.”

    I would only say that finding a wife for a lifelong commitment vs. sleeping with X number of women just for the sake of it don’t involve the same skills and knowledge at all. IMO they don’t even involve the same kind of personality. Most guys are monogamous, but some will never be.

    Your screen name and advice remind me of the Berlin wall before it came down : ) On either side, two polar opposite views of the world.

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

      @Megaman

      Your screen name and advice remind me of the Berlin wall before it came down : ) On either side, two polar opposite views of the world.

      You’re another one who provides a lot of great chuckles here. With all the agita in some of these comment threads, you witty guys are the saving grace. Thank you.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Just speaking personally (not speaking for other people), even if someone else had stooped to a low level in treating me, stooping to that same level wouldn’t make me feel vindicated or happy. It would just make me feel… low.

    But different people are different. Some people love that whole revenge sex thing. /shudder

  • Passer_By

    @giraffe

    “and the player assholes like Vox/Roissy/etc.”

    I won’t address the rest of your pablum, but just wanted to point out that Vox is married and claims (I think) to have never cheated on his wife. Not sure how that qualifies him as a “player” (and, no disrespect to Vox, I doubt he was ALL that much of a player before marriage). Now, he certainly is an asshole, but I don’t think he would dispute that.

  • deti

    Mike C 190:

    Absolutely right. All due respect to the women here having been given: men should not heed advice from women on dating, sex and relationships. They should hear it, filter it, and consider it with all the other advice they receive from knowledgeable men. But men should not heed it as being in his interests or as neutral.

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

      They should hear it, filter it, and consider it with all the other advice they receive from knowledgeable men

      Some of the “knowledgeable men” doling out relationship advice online are not what they seem. If a blogger is anonymous, anyone, woman or man, would be wise to take their writing with a healthy and necessary dose of skepticism. Just saying.

  • Cooper

    @passer_by #196
    I’ll have to go back, I missed Beta Guys’ story.

    But from what you said. I completely agree.

    Some girls feel fine being very sexual with someone casual, then attempt to be reserved with someone they truly like. If the latter guy knows about the former, then he’s certainly going to think she either doesn’t really like him at much or thinks of him as inadequate.

  • Gorbachev

    because she assumes you still like her and want to be her boyfriend, so you’re having sex with her, but you actually don’t like her, don’t want to be with her, and just using her for her body.
    As an analogy, I don’t think a guy would want to be strung along as a pretend boyfriend so the girl can extract more money/resources out of him. He’d rather be dumped.

    Um. Exactly.

    This guy’s ego is now shredded. He’s her tampon. He’s utterly emasculated.

    Step one: Turn the tables.
    Step two: Walk away.

    Do to her what she does to you.

    Women will say this is bad, it’s revenge, it’s evil. Because they don’t care about the guy’s ego or state of mind.

    I care only about the guy’s ego and state of mind when giving HIM advice.

    When giving women advice, women, including Susan most of the time, consider the woman first and the man only in terms of how he fits in.

    I’m just doing precisely, exactly the same thing – from a male perspective.

    Interesting. When the shoe’s on the other foot, people automatically react this way: Not right. Dark game. Etc.

    When giving him advice, all that matters is him. I couldn’t care less about some random girl tooling the guy.

    This is why men should go to men for advice.

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

      @Gorbachev

      Women will say this is bad, it’s revenge, it’s evil. Because they don’t care about the guy’s ego or state of mind.

      OK, now I’m calling bullshit. First, I didn’t say that. Second, you are not qualified to interpret my POV or feelings about men. Third, start your own blog dude! You’ve commented here, what – twice? And now you’re all about steering guys away? I’m not holding anyone hostage here. If guys read here and comment, or write to me, it’s because they believe I have something to say they can relate to. And they often disagree, which is fine. But at least I’m not instructing men to make a pact with the devil. There are some people who want to be able to look at themselves in the mirror each morning, knowing that they didn’t deliberately inflict harm on someone the night before.

  • Mike C

    Your screen name and advice remind me of the Berlin wall before it came down : )On either side, two polar opposite views of the world.

    “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.

    F Scott Fitzgerald

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

    @Hope
    The more guys discount your personal experiences and advice, the more your reputation goes up IMO : )

    Neither you nor your husband are extreme outliers. Confirmation bias is a religion for some many people, though.

  • Cooper

    @Hope

    What Mike C said #200 is absolutely true. You’ve got to realize your the exception to most of this.

    If only 99% of women were like Hope…

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Mike C, well, I was also very lucky to have met him. I consider how my husband and I met to be something of a really spectacular event, on the level of “something moved us around so that we were destined to meet at that particular time.” I wouldn’t suggest it as a practical strategy for anyone, that’s for sure. :P

    I don’t advise men to wait for the Perfect One. My husband wasn’t a virgin when we met either. He’s an outlier among outliers, and what “worked” for him won’t work for most men. However, I do think that it would be prudent for men to screen their sex partners, instead of just randomly sticking their penises in all kinds of women who are willing to put out… if for no other reason than safety and sanitary reasons.

  • Just1X

    @Purplesneakers

    “I’m not saying I’m being a tease…”

    I absolutely get that, it never crossed my mind that you meant anything evil. I think that your approach is a good way to address the issue of showing interest without feeling pressured about sex right here and now. I actually said it better in the Kicking thread @936 (even Susan gave me a thumbs up for part of it)

    I’m just saying that for young men, there can be ‘side effects’…them there damned hormones! And don’t take it seriously if it happens, we don’t have control at that age (any age?), it should not be seen as anything involving the ‘higher brain’ or intent.

    Best of luck

  • SayWhaat

    All I know is that men need something better than the toxic and false BS “just be nice and be yourself, and the girls will flock to you and want to be your GFs.” Men have been colossally lied to and defrauded.

    I really wish MRAs would stop harping about this. BOTH men AND women were lied to. BOTH SEXES. No one has a monopoly on pain here.

    The advice to “just be yourself” is not toxic, nor false. It’s basically Inner Game. The only issue is that the proper advice should have been “just be your *attractive* self”. There’s nothing toxic or false or malevolent about that; it’s simply the other half of a larger picture.

    And beating the “MEN WERE LIED TO BY WOMEN RAWR” does no good around here. We need to build a bridge between the sexes, not burn the other to the ground.

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

      And beating the “MEN WERE LIED TO BY WOMEN RAWR” does no good around here. We need to build a bridge between the sexes, not burn the other to the ground.

      Women and men were lied to by women and men. I was lied to. I was told that femininity is proof of stupidity and weakness. I was also told that with my Wharton MBA I would “set the world on its ear” and be the desired object of men everywhere. By my father.

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

        Oh, for crying out loud. I’ve banned Sleuth, but I don’t know why Poly Desi wants to be here when she knows it’s not going to last. Undoubtedly, she’ll get another IP address and try again. Sorry folks.

  • Mike C

    Mike C, well, I was also very lucky to have met him.

    And that is what makes you special. We need to arrive at a point where most women do in fact feel LUCKY to have a good man willing to commit to them, instead of starting with the presumption they are entitled to one. In many of your comments, it comes across to me how grateful you are to have your husband. There are many other comments where there is always this subtextual backdrop that as an attractive, smart woman “I am entitled to a man to commit to me”. To me, this is one of those gamechanging attitudes that must take place, and won’t until marriage rates really decline and disappointed spinsters really increase.

    I consider how my husband and I met to be something of a really spectacular event, on the level of “something moved us around so that we were destined to meet at that particular time.” I wouldn’t suggest it as a practical strategy for anyone, that’s for sure. :P

    It’s funny…I consider how I met my GF with a similar perspective. There truly were some very unusual factors regarding us every crossing paths.

    However, I do think that it would be prudent for men to screen their sex partners, instead of just randomly sticking their penises in all kinds of women who are willing to put out… if for no other reason than safety and sanitary reasons.

    I agree with that…heck, if I were single again, I’d be terrified when you think about the percentage of people with something like herpes.

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

    @Mike C

    FSF is one of my all-time favorite writers… of fiction.

    But I wouldn’t take life lessons from a womanizer (according to Zelda) who died at 44 from alcoholism.

    I don’t buy the argument that every many is both capable of both sleeping around and making a lifelong commitment to one woman. Some guys are far more suited to monogamy than others. I don’t view my wife as disposable or interchangeable with some other woman I haven’t met.

  • SayWhaat

    And with that, I’m off to improv. BBL folks.

  • deti

    Cooper 199

    Let me say this again:

    No relationship with any woman is ever going to work UNLESS SHE TINGLES FOR YOU FROM DAY ONE.

    The tingle has to be there FROM THE FIRST TIME SHE SEES YOU.

    She either is sexually attracted to you, or she is not sexually attracted to you. There is no in between. You cannot negotiate with her for her sexual or physical attraction. You cannot talk her into being attracted. You cannot reason or cajole her into being attracted. You cannot purchase her attraction with money or time or status. She cannot even talk herself into being attracted.

    It is either there, or it is not there.

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

      No relationship with any woman is ever going to work UNLESS SHE TINGLES FOR YOU FROM DAY ONE.

      The tingle has to be there FROM THE FIRST TIME SHE SEES YOU.

      Hmmm, I disagree with this. I hesitate to say so, because I tingled for my husband from day one. But I also had other guys grow on me over time. In fact, a few alpha asshats became much more attractive once they showed some beta traits. I can actually think of several very solid marriages where the tingle came later. I attended a wedding this summer between two graduate students. They were platonic friends for three years – no tingle – advising one another on other relationships and eventually sharing an apartment. Living together, they fell deeply in love. Three years later they married – both near 30. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind of their sexual attraction for one another or the depth of their commitment.

  • Passer_By

    @cooper

    “Some girls feel fine being very sexual with someone casual, then attempt to be reserved with someone they truly like. If the latter guy knows about the former, then he’s certainly going to think she either doesn’t really like him at much or thinks of him as inadequate.”

    Sorry, no offense, but, even though you were sort of agreeing with me, I think you’ve been talking to too many women about this (which might only be one), and you are buying the hamster fueled frame they are selling. She’s more reserved with the guy who she thinks is more stable and a logical relationship prospect in the long run. Don’t confuse that with “really like” in the romantic or sexual sense, even if women attempt to frame it that way to justify it. “Really like” because he’s a nice decent guy is not the same as “really like” in a way that that he gets her hot. If her loins “really liked” him, she wouldn’t feel the need to be reserved (or she wouldn’t be able to remain reserved even if she did).

    And it’s not that the guy is going to “think” those things, he’s going to know it with near certainty in his gut, EVEN IF SHE DENIES IT AND TRULY BELIEVES WHAT SHE IS TELLING HIM.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Gorbachev “When giving him advice, all that matters is him. I couldn’t care less about some random girl tooling the guy.”

    Which is fine, and that is entirely within your right, but I don’t personally agree.

    And that’s all I said.

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

    @deti
    “Men need to know about the real rules of the real game they’re in. They don’t need to be given rules that applied to the game which existed circa 1955.”

    I don’t know why advice to men has to be so monolithic. Guys are all over the spectrum, involved in different “games” (i.e. paths to relationships). And there are players cheating in these games, too. It sounds like you’re suggesting guys trade in their consciences for sexual expediency. I doubt very much that will lead to marital happiness.

    I sometimes feel like I’m on another planet when I stop in here : |

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

      I sometimes feel like I’m on another planet when I stop in here : |

      If the aliens ever leave, HUS will fall into a black hole…

  • Just1X

    @SayWhaat

    “MEN WERE LIED TO BY WOMEN RAWR”

    it’s worth saying because it’s what a lot of nice-guys need to hear first; you are not alone, you’re not mad, it’s happened to lots of guys. It’s a major part of the first red-pill, and the red-pill is healthy; stress drops, feelings of betrayal drop, bewilderment drops – all good stuff…

    It doesn’t say women weren’t lied to too…why such a strong reaction?

    (BTW I replied to you on the Kicking thread @936)

  • Cooper

    @deti and passer_by

    Oh, I’m in agreement. Maybe I didn’t elaborate on my example enough.

    I’ve been that “more stable and a logical relationship prospect,” thats been told “I’m just not that attracted to you.” Then seen the same girl hook up with a alpha with no commitment intension. I know.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    deti, “No relationship with any woman is ever going to work UNLESS SHE TINGLES FOR YOU FROM DAY ONE. The tingle has to be there FROM THE FIRST TIME SHE SEES YOU. ”

    That’s a tall order. And I don’t think it’s true.

    I believe Susan has posted on this in the past. Men are more like burning stoves and heat up quickly. Women are more like ovens and heat up slowly.

    “You cannot talk her into being attracted.”

    This part also seems wrong to me. A lot of women can be talked into being attracted, because many female attraction triggers are psychological.

    I got more and more attracted to my husband as he talked to me more and more. I don’t think I’m that much of an outlier in this regard. My husband has talked some LJBF girls in his past into tingling for him, too. Yeah… don’t ask. :P

  • Mike C

    I’ve been that “more stable and a logical relationship prospect,” thats been told “I’m just not that attracted to you.” Then seen the same girl hook up with a alpha with no commitment intension. I know.

    Cooper, you must have imagined the entire thing. I’ve been told repeatedly this type of behavior is more myth than reality.

  • Herb

    As if young women aren’t still forced to shoulder a disproportionate share of society’s neuroses.

    Really, then it’s perfectly well adjusted men who are committing suicide at a rate of more than three male suicides per female suicide (17.7 versus 4.5 per 100,000)?

    Really, the it’s perfectly well adjusted men whose median life span is 10% lower than their female counterparts (72 vs. 79 years)?

    If either of those stats reversed we’d have “pink ribbon” campaigns faster than you can say “double standard”.

    Try again.

  • Passer_By

    @hope
    As others have said, if the majority of women were like you, we wouldn’t be having these discussions.

    “But different people are different. Some people love that whole revenge sex thing. /shudder”

    I’m not sure if you really meant “people” here, but if there are women who think they can get revenge on a guy by having wild ruthless sex before they break up, then the joke’s on them. As the Br’er Rabbit might say “Please don’t throw me in that Briar Patch of Sex”.

    @deti #217

    You have a tendency to overstate things sometimes in absolutes, and your comment at 217 is no exception. There are women who just take a while to warm up. But, if she’s warming up to others quickly, and warming up to you slowly, I’d strongly suggest FIDO.

  • deti

    Say Whaat:

    “I really wish MRAs would stop harping about this. BOTH men AND women were lied to. BOTH SEXES. No one has a monopoly on pain here.”

    True, but totally irrelevant to this discussion. The fact that both sexes were lied to is beside the point we’re discussing and which was started with Gorb’s excellent essay.

    “The advice to “just be yourself” is not toxic, nor false. It’s basically Inner Game. The only issue is that the proper advice should have been “just be your *attractive* self”. There’s nothing toxic or false or malevolent about that; it’s simply the other half of a larger picture.”

    Not true. You don’t understand the advice, its intent, and the way it’s given and received. Lots of young men, including myself, are and were told not just “be yourself” but also “be nice”. This is the absolute worst advice anyone can give any young man on dating. Here’s the way it’s given: “Be nice, and be yourself, and the girls will absolutely LOVE you.”

    here’s the way it’s received: “You don’t have to do anything, change anything, or be anything except your pimply, chubby, dorky, uninteresting self. The right girl will come along and love you anyway. And when she does, give her everything she wants. Don’t try to sex her because that’s not nice. Don’t push for sex because that’s not nice. Pay for everything for her, buy her gifts, buy her flowers, buy her meals. Because if you don’t, you’re not being nice.”

    “And beating the “MEN WERE LIED TO BY WOMEN RAWR” does no good around here. We need to build a bridge between the sexes, not burn the other to the ground.”

    Any bridge between the sexes was burned to the ground around 1977. Men (and sites like this one) are doing their level best to construct the bridge from the smoldering remnants left by feminism, no-fault divorce, and the carousel. Besides, building bridges can only be done when you have the right tools, the right measurements, and the right plans. You can’t do it with blueprints from 1955 when the entire game has changed.

  • Mike C

    That’s a tall order. And I don’t think it’s true.

    I believe Susan has posted on this in the past. Men are more like burning stoves and heat up quickly. Women are more like ovens and heat up slowly.

    “You cannot talk her into being attracted.”

    This part also seems wrong to me. A lot of women can be talked into being attracted, because many female attraction triggers are psychological.

    I think the truth is different from both what you and Deti are saying.

    There is that old expression “I know within 5 minutes if I am going to sleep with a guy”. That expression/meme didn’t just conjure out of nothing.

    So I think there are men that a woman can find instinctively attractive right off the bat. Rollo has posted on “Looks Matter” as much of the Game community trys to downplay physical appearance, and the evidence suggests looks are a strong component for women albeit nowhere near as strong for men. So there are men women tingle for at first glance, and then the game is his to lose based on interaction.

    I think there is a second category of men where the attraction isn’t immediate but can be developed quickly based on interaction, but it shouldn’t take that long. If it takes too long, it isn’t going to happen at all.

    And the last category are men who just aren’t going to be attractive based on physical appearance or interaction.

    Anyways, after a couple of get togethers/dates the attraction should be there otherwise it is probably being forced after that or the woman is trying to convince herself what a good guy he is.

  • Cooper

    @Mike C

    I wish it has my imagination, for I might have a easier time forgetting.

  • Extragiraffe

    @Susan: When did ad hominem become a substitute for argument? Or do you just not disagree with the anti-feminism charge?

    Also, it’s not a backwards baseball cap, it’s a forwards cyclist cap. Just sayin’.

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

      @Extragiraffe

      @Susan: When did ad hominem become a substitute for argument? Or do you just not disagree with the anti-feminism charge?

      I have no argument with you. And I always find a great deal of useful information in the way people choose to present themselves.

      I am anti-feminism.

      I am on record as saying I support gender equity, which was achieved long ago. Today what is called feminism is really a female supremacy movement. It’s actually a bunch of factions, the most objectionable of which (to me) is sex-positive feminism. Though I’m not crazy about any of those folks. I believe they are deeply misandrist and willfully ignorant about things like biological gender differences.

      I think any man who calls himself a feminist is a weak link, reproductively speaking. Ladies, don’t reproduce with that gene pool.

  • deti

    Hope:

    “You cannot talk her into being attracted.”

    This part also seems wrong to me. A lot of women can be talked into being attracted, because many female attraction triggers are psychological.

    I got more and more attracted to my husband as he talked to me more and more.”

    Hope, this is another example of how men and women see the same thing differently.

    By “talk her into being attracted” I mean a man hanging around trying to display and peacock and prove his worth to her. When a man does this, he is trying to show the woman how “good” and “worthy” he is, and why she should like him instead of the men who really tingle her. He’s trying to cajole, coax, persuade, argue his case. Many women actually tell men that they should do this with women — he must do, work, give, demonstrate, in order to “win her heart”.

    That’s what I mean by “talk her into being attracted”.

    What you’re describing is he hangs around her, talks with and to her, and this budding tingle she has for him germinates, grows and blossoms.

    But if the tingle’s not there in the first place, then he’s wasting his time and money. That is why the tingle has to be there.

    That’s all I ‘m saying.

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

      @deti

      But if the tingle’s not there in the first place, then he’s wasting his time and money. That is why the tingle has to be there.

      That’s all I ‘m saying.

      That completely negates Game. Game is for guys who don’t get the tingle going on first sight (or they wouldn’t need it).

  • Herb

    @Susan

    I was specifically referring there to women who spent their 20s riding the carousel or making otherwise bad choices. And it’s my understanding that the decline in the marriage rate is being driven largely by men, so I didn’t perceive them as victims on this particular issue.

    It may be men who are driving it, especially in the 30s, but a big part of why they are comes back to carousel riding. Many marriageable men have concluded (in a manner both fair and unfair) that carousel riders are unmarriable, especially in the current legal risk environment and the fact that high partner counts make divorce more likely.

    People think that risk is just the odds of X happening. It’s not. It’s the odds of X happening times Y, which is the cost of Y happening. So it is X*Y.

    Y has gone up over time and carousal riding drives up X. I was thinking about your goals in this blog last night and I’m starting to think that if women haven’t gotten in a relationship with the man they want to marry by 28 and married by 30 they are SOL. By their 30s men have witnessed enough Y and been dumped enough to think women are all high X. I suspect 30+ never married men conclude X*Y is over 4 times what they did under 30.

    Thus, these men are not marrying out of lack of desire but out of lack of marriageable women. Women can’t easily change Y but their behavior strongly indicates X. Men have a hard time controlling either (and currently as a group men’s X increasing behavior is both less common and depending on X increasing behavior by women).

    What’s funny is if we look at hookup culture that women are victims of they also have much more power to change as men’s continued participation in it is highly dependent on women’s participation.

    As for 40+ single men not marrying I think that’s an equal mix of the bitterness 30+ single men have squared and the fact that most of the women single at 40+ are 1024 item list women that men at their prime couldn’t match.

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

      @Herb

      I was thinking about your goals in this blog last night and I’m starting to think that if women haven’t gotten in a relationship with the man they want to marry by 28 and married by 30 they are SOL.

      I’m inclined to agree with this. Of course there are exceptions, but this is the reason I advise women to be on the lookout for their future husband the minute they graduate from college. And if they find a good man in their early 20s, don’t throw it away! This is becoming a bigger problem because most women are graduating from college not having had a boyfriend. They meet someone and have a relationship, then wonder if it’s not unwise to settle down with their first real love. No it’s not unwise! You may never get another chance. For women at least, I think there’s very little reason to sample a variety of men.

  • Tony Stark

    @ Hope

    I’m not sanctioning anything. What I’m trying to do is offer a broader perspective. For illustrative purposes, let’s divide the last 45 years into phases:

    Phase I, pre-1968: Nearly everyone got married and stayed married. Extra-marital sex was rare.

    Phase II, early 1970s – mid 1990s: Women are free to express their sexuality. They respond by actively pursuing their natural prerogative: sex with alpha males and eventual commitment from the most attractive male willing to provide it. Most men still play by the old rules, so relationship oriented women have no trouble finding relationships. Life is good for women.

    Phase III, mid 1990s – present: Men begin catching on to the new game. They respond by pursuing their own natural prerogative: commitment only if the ideal wife-worthy woman comes along, sex with as many women as possible in the meantime.

    Phase IV, present – ??: Economic and social changes mean working class men have little ability to support families. They stop trying. The changes also mean that educated, successful UMC men are exceeded in numbers by their female counterparts. These men have their pick of the litter and thus little incentive to settle down quickly. Women intuitively understand this and compete even more aggressively for attention from worthy males. This further exacerbates the sexual arms race, pressuring more women to be more sexual more quickly than they’d like.

    So here’s my problem: when you (and other women on these threads) tell men to take things slowly and play by the old rules, you’re effectively advocating for a return to Phase II. That’s just never going to happen, nor should it. (This may not be your intent, but it’s what will happen if men “disarm” without women doing the same.) The best we can hope for is a return to Phase I (a system in which both sides foresook their natural prerogatives for the benefit of the whole). And the only way to get there is two-fold: society needs to (i) focus on improving the economic success of men, particularly working class men, and (ii) reinstitute a social code which dissuades women from engaging in slutty behavior and exacerbating the sexual arms race (i.e., slut-shaming).

    Note, this says nothing about what you or any other individual should do in your private lives. These are broader observations. As for my personal views, I also seek a return to Phase I, not because it would benefit me personally (I’m an attractive, successful UMC male), but because Phase IV is a recipe for civilizational decline.

    I hope this clears things up.

  • Mike C

    By “talk her into being attracted” I mean a man hanging around trying to display and peacock and prove his worth to her. When a man does this, he is trying to show the woman how “good” and “worthy” he is, and why she should like him instead of the men who really tingle her. He’s trying to cajole, coax, persuade, argue his case. Many women actually tell men that they should do this with women — he must do, work, give, demonstrate, in order to “win her heart”.

    That’s what I mean by “talk her into being attracted”.

    Yes, you are right…I think I misunderstood your previous comment. The point is a guy isn’t going to rationally or logically persuade a woman why he would be “good” for her. The verbal stuff…the interaction it has to be operating on the attraction switches/emotions not the rational mind. But you are right that many guys were sold on the idea of “winning” the girl over through persistence and repeated demonstrations about what a good guy he is. Seriously though, guys shouldn’t be operating under those delusions anymore unless they’ve had their head up their ass the last 5 years or so.

  • Wudang

    “Most of the time, people have been having sex for a while before they even have “the talk.”

    Your list of the progression towards relationship loks very accurate imo Susan. Accurate and awkward. I find it interesting that I keep hearing players and PUAs who have women in rotation say that if you play the part of an alpha that makes her have to chase and don`t volunteer strong relationship signals early on it is almost a natural law that women at more or less exactly the three month mark will ask if this is or is becoming a real relationship. At that point they can`t take it anymore and just have to ask. That makes me ting there is some sort of chemical cycle to romance that goes through a shift at the three month mark. Not sure what that shift would be about chemicaly speaking though.

    “Most feminists who give such bad advice are not even particularly straight, or are the 5-8% that are “poly”, bisexual, asexual or otherwise non-standard. Their advice for “standard-issue” human females is disastrous, something they find almost impossible to admit.”

    I guess this should have been self evident all along but I just realized that feminism has offered a possibility to all sorts of non standard people such as poly inclined, bisexual, asexual etc. so they are all flocking to feminism and radical gender and sex theories in order to change norms to suit their interests. Of course the new norms and the new advice based on that will be less than ideal for the conventional majority. We can see swedish television in Norway and some of the debates I have seen there are great examples of how the views of the minorities can be used to mess things up for the majoriy. Numerous times I have sen debates where feminists attcack the nuclear family as if it were some sort of evil that needs to be destroyed so everyone can live out their individual needs and find their own arangements and no one needs to feel different. Those are explicit claims from some of the queer people and feminists not my theory about their underlying agenda.

    Hope:

    “You know, as much as we’d all love to be influential culturally, a lot of us here are outliers to begin with, don’t have a big social group, and don’t have much influence among acquaintances. If we started “slut shaming” on social media under our own names, it would go over like a lead brick balloon.

    So, what I would advise women who are “against the grain” is to change her own behavio”

    I think the simple solutation is just to make women you know more aware of the fact that guys do in fact stil care about the number and make them more aware of the problematic aspects of the hookup culture for women. Don`t make any kind of judgement just put all the “blame” on men being hardwired for it or just at least still focused on it.

  • Mike C

    Tony Stark,

    Excellent analysis of the phases.

  • Herb

    @Charm

    If women looked for men that had character instead of guys that “just seem fun”, they would have an easier go at it. Guess what?Learning who someone really is takes time, which is why its best to take your time courting and not rush the damn process. As I’ve said before, I take my goddamn time. If someone is courting me, then they are courting me and Im allowing only them to do so. So no one is getting screwed over here.

    Thank you.

  • Charm

    @Susan 134

    yea, I understand that and all. She did get the guy the first year (though it didn’t sound like she was happy), but to use that strategy over and over and over again without it paying off seemed a bit ridiculous. It wasn’t working for a reason, so I think she could have saved her self and tried something different. Though, I guess this is the point where it became a habit. I don’t knock people who got a relationship out of a hook-up (and it worked out well), but if you hook-up a dozen times and get no relationships…stop hooking up.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Tony Stark, I see your point now.

    I’ll try to clarify my position. I’m not trying to tell guys to take things slowly. I don’t WANT to give advice to men. What I want to do is tell girls to not give it up quickly. If the guy truly likes the girl, he will stick around. If he doesn’t, he will leave, and I’m telling girls that is totally fine. Let him go. In moving on, the guy is sending a message about his own suitability for a long-term relationship — that is what I was saying.

    I’m not telling guys not to push for more or to escalate sexually. In fact that is to be expected. Guys don’t want a sexless relationship with a girl who will be frigid. This is not news. However, I’m telling girls to not sexually escalate without love. If it so happens that the guy and the girl fall in love within 3 dates (within the span of a month, let’s say), that’s fine. If there is no mutual love, it’s a bad idea.

    For background, I didn’t grow up in the same phases as the average American. I grew up in a much more sexually conservative culture, where even kissing in public was and still is scandalous. So I don’t operate on the same phase that you operate on. Plus, where I am in Utah 2012, most people are still operating as if it’s phase 1 or 1.5. Where you are in Big City 2012, most people might be in phase 4 or 5 or beyond.

    Maybe there’s a cultural disconnect here, even though we’re all in America.

  • Herb

    @Charm

    We’ve determined that women hold the keys to the gate, but with that being said, men don’t just sit idly by twiddling their thumbs waiting for her to feel up to opening. Hell no. They are going to try to get it open. They are both testing you and hoping like hell that you open it.

    You bring to mind one of my favorite passages by the Bard:

    PAROLLES
    Are you meditating on virginity?
    HELENA
    Ay. You have some stain of soldier in you: let me
    ask you a question. Man is enemy to virginity; how
    may we barricado it against him?
    PAROLLES
    Keep him out.
    HELENA
    But he assails; and our virginity, though valiant,
    in the defence yet is weak: unfold to us some
    warlike resistance.
    PAROLLES
    There is none: man, sitting down before you, will
    undermine you and blow you up.
    HELENA
    Bless our poor virginity from underminers and
    blowers up! Is there no military policy, how
    virgins might blow up men?

    Might I suggest that this tug of war isn’t a new invention and, in a good conservative sense, suggest that the lessons our ancestors spent centuries creating might have something to teach.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Er, that is, even though most of us here on HUS are in America. Don’t want to ignore the Canucks, Aussies, Kiwis, Europeans and other people outside of America. :P

  • purplesneakers

    I’ll try to clarify my position. I’m not trying to tell guys to take things slowly. I don’t WANT to give advice to men. What I want to do is tell girls to not give it up quickly. If the guy truly likes the girl, he will stick around. If he doesn’t, he will leave, and I’m telling girls that is totally fine. Let him go. In moving on, the guy is sending a message about his own suitability for a long-term relationship — that is what I was saying.

    Is it really that simple? What if he likes the girl but there are other girls who are more sexually available and, well, he’s young?

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

    “Maybe there’s a cultural disconnect here, even though we’re all in America.”

    No, there’s a disconnect within America, too. This thread is proof of that.

  • Mike C

    Is it really that simple? What if he likes the girl but there are other girls who are more sexually available and, well, he’s young?

    As I”ve said a great number of times, a lot depends on a guy’s age. A 32-year old man has a different life perspective than a 22-year old boy. Now there might be some 22-year olds living life with a high degree of future time orientation and ALL THAT implies, but most are living for here and now pleasure gratification. That said, there are 30+ year olds with a early 20s mentality as well. Like I’ve said before, I think women fishing for commitment and true emotional intimacy in the 20-25 year old lake are fishing in a pretty shitty lake.

    Hope, how old were you and your husband when you met and married?

  • Tony Stark

    @ Hope, 239

    Agreed. For the record, your advice is the sort of thing I plan on telling my future daughters (but not my future sons).

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

    “Like I’ve said before, I think women fishing for commitment and true emotional intimacy in the 20-25 year old lake are fishing in a pretty shitty lake.”

    Even though about 1/3 of guys in that age bracket are either married or cohabitating? And some % more that are in relationships?

    I think you’re selling a lot of young guys short, not to mention girls the same age (or a little younger) who they’ll be dating.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Mike C, my husband and I were 25 when we first met, and 26 when we got married.

    He does have a high future-time orientation, but he also was born and raised in Utah. A lot of guys get married in their early-to-mid 20s here. Again I think it’s just a different culture. It’s slowly changing, too, but the Mormon influence keeps it more traditional, even for non-Mormons (my husband’s family is not religious, and neither is he).

  • Herb

    @A Definite Beta Guy

    She didn’t like when I started questioning her about why she felt the need to “almost have a threesome” with a random fling and one of his other harem whores and then a few months later decide I had to wait months on end to have sex with her.

    She also didn’t like that I hated her explanation of “I have two personalities, a wild side and a mature side and you get the mature side.”

    My response would be, “My ex-wife got my mature side. Only my wild side is still available”.

  • VD

    What’s the big deal about some girl that’s not fully invested in me? I can always dump her and get another. Dealing with depression, though, that’s some serious shit.

    She’s not going to help your depression one little bit. Move on. There are plenty of girls on the girl tree, many of whom will treat you more respectfully and lovingly than she will. I don’t recommend Gorby’s extract-more-sex solution, as you need to cut ties with her, not create more bonds.

    I won’t address the rest of your pablum, but just wanted to point out that Vox is married and claims (I think) to have never cheated on his wife. Not sure how that qualifies him as a “player” (and, no disrespect to Vox, I doubt he was ALL that much of a player before marriage). Now, he certainly is an asshole, but I don’t think he would dispute that.

    I am indeed married and I will readily assert with complete confidence that I have never cheated. Prior to meeting and marrying Spacebunny, I would say I was probably somewhere between Roissy and Roosh as far as Dark Game goes. Roissy and I are both merely Dark Biad whereas Roosh may actually qualify on all three accounts. I may still be an asshole, but by all accounts I am much less of one than I was prior to the civilizing effects of marriage and Christianity.

    I warned her to avoid conversing with them even for a moment if she should be approached in a bar, and to treat them as if they were radioactive waste. Why? Because there’s no doubt in my mind that despite having me for a mother, and having basically read every word I’ve ever written, she’d be tingling for either one in no time. Such is the power of Game in the hands of a master.

    That’s some good mothering right there. Many people express doubts that Game can do what its advocates claim of it. The truth is that it can actually do more, it’s just that no one except those who have mastered at least part of it and seen the results for themselves tend to fully believe it. All are fallen, which means that all men are susceptible to the call of the wild and all women are susceptible to the call of the slut. The evil side of Game concerns making effective use of the latter. It’s very destructive.

    One of my more amoral and Game-adept friends once said, after convincing a married woman in another country to masturbate to orgasm during an random chat session that turned into phone sex, that the experience made him feel like a demonic tempter. He rather liked it, although he didn’t like it so much after I pointed out that was precisely the soul-destroying role that he was playing.

  • Passer_By

    “I would only say that finding a wife for a lifelong commitment vs. sleeping with X number of women just for the sake of it don’t involve the same skills and knowledge at all.”

    They are not the same skill set, but in most case there is clearly a partial overlap of skill sets in this day and age.

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

    “They are not the same skill set, but in most case there is clearly a partial overlap of skill sets in this day and age.”

    Therefore, what?

  • Mike C

    Mike C, my husband and I were 25 when we first met, and 26 when we got married.

    He does have a high future-time orientation, but he also was born and raised in Utah. A lot of guys get married in their early-to-mid 20s here. Again I think it’s just a different culture. It’s slowly changing, too, but the Mormon influence keeps it more traditional, even for non-Mormons (my husband’s family is not religious, and neither is he).

    Interesting…so just outside the 20-25 range I listed. Speaking from personal experience…both myself and observation guys I’ve known, I think 25 and 30 are sort of markers for reassessing life and what you want.

    I suspect you are correct that culture plains a role, and that for example Utah is radically different from NYC in terms of what the average 23-year old guy is wanting and expecting. The 23-year old guy in NYC fresh out of school with his finance degree isn’t looking for a life partner at that point.

    Anyways, I am ASBOLUTELY CONVINCED that future time orientation and proclivity to commit are highly correlated, and the future time orientation is at least loosely correlated to age.

  • Emily

    >> “. Guy and girl meet, get to know each other over a period of time, become closer emotionally without getting physical, form a friendship bond tinged with attraction, then one or both escalate verbally and mutually confess their feelings. They talk a lot, fall in love, and then finally have sex, their feelings get even stronger, and they continue to have lots of hot sex.”

    I definitely agree with this strategy for girls. A lot of the issues of “combat dating” are diffused when you’re dealing with two people who already know and like each other. Also, IME people tend to have friends who are similar in SMV (ie. frat/sorority types tend to stick together, nerds with nerds etc.)

    This approach is probably a lot more complicated for guys though, since it would be so easy to fall into the “beta orbiter” trap.

  • Herb

    @Grobachev

    She tells women how unfortunately bad this is, because men react as they do based on male interests and are not just ciphers on which feminists can paint whatever picture they want. Men are actors, too, and how men respond may not be as feminists assumed they would.

    +1000

    This is a common problem even beyond the SMP but it appears to be a huge one in the SMP. PUA types don’t care if women are actors because they can get what they want regardless. Women who complain about no BF/husband, however, need to learn that.

    So do beta guys. They think they know that but then use “nice guy” methods to bond to women not realizing many (most?) women have their own agenda that doesn’t reward being nice more than necessary to get the servant they want while still holding out for the fun ride.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Emily, well for guys I would say, if at the crucial point of “feeling confession” she doesn’t feel the same, eject and don’t stick around. Likewise for girls if she is the one to confess first.

    People have to take emotional risks. It’s in fact far less risky than having sex with a random stranger who might or might not have a horrible STD. Just saying. :P

    Lest you end up like this guy:

    http://i.imgur.com/KnrmY.jpg

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Mike C, I have would have to say that Utah does a really good job of providing young men with good economic opportunities. Lots of women here are stay-at-home mothers, and many marry very young. The culture is anti-alcohol, anti-smoking, anti-promiscuity, pro-marriage, pro-kids and pro-family.

    In NYC, you basically can’t afford to start a family until you’re really super established. In Utah, the whole system is set up so that people can start popping out babies early, and lots of them. I attended my husband’s master’s / PhD graduation ceremony. Tons of married people, and lots of little babies in the auditorium. It was a bit depressing because that was a few months after we lost our firstborn, but the point is, you wouldn’t see that at most other graduations.

  • Passer_By

    @VD
    “Roissy and I are both merely Dark Biad whereas Roosh may actually qualify on all three accounts.”

    And which of the triad do you believe you and roissy are missing?

    @herb
    “My response would be, “My ex-wife got my mature side. Only my wild side is still available””

    LOL. Good one.

  • Herb

    @Gorbachev (and Susan since you cited the percentage)

    Most feminists who give such bad advice are not even particularly straight, or are the 5-8% that are “poly”, bisexual, asexual or otherwise non-standard. Their advice for “standard-issue” human females is disastrous, something they find almost impossible to admit.

    Ever notice most poly people are 30+ with a divorce.

    Poly for many (most?) isn’t how they’re wired. It’s a survival adaptation. You learn you can’t be an exclusive choice but want at least some connection so you sign up for the poly parade.

    It’s not really what you want or makes you happy but you’ve decided it’s the best you can do and learn to deal with it.

    Especially look at how many poly people are someone else’s secondary relationship but that person is their only relationship. Ask them how much that relationship matches what they want. Sure, their barest needs may get satisfied but beyond that?

    They tend to have lots of hobbies and I’ve noticed poly people tend to be cat people.

  • Rum

    Has a mother ever given good accurate advice to her own sons about what attracts women sexually? Of course not. Not once, ever, since we came down off the tree-branches.
    There is a lot to learn from this simple, indestructible fact.

  • VD

    And which of the triad do you believe you and roissy are missing?

    Sociopathy.

  • Dogsquat

    Susan said:

    “I’ll have to investigate whether these could be addressed. Do you think it would grow the forum without harming the home page?”

    Hmm.

    I have seen what I am advocating work other places on the net, but I am emphatically not an expert on this stuff. Please take my advice with a grain of salt. I’d hate to inadvertently harm this place.

    Make sure the forum interface is smooth. If possible, get some people who’ve never used forums before to attempt a comment. Listen to them and remove the obstacles they point out.

    I agree with you on the big comment numbers thing. That is awesome for many reasons. I wonder if there’s not a way to have the comment number on the main site’s page correspond to the number of posts on the forum’s thread for the article.

    Just a thought, anyhoo.

  • deti

    “It’s like the movie Les Liasons Dangereuses – John Malcovich seduces and destroys the Michelle Pfeiffer character, a woman of the highest innocence and moral standing. She’s quite different than all the women he’s had before her (bar sluts) – she’s the ultimate challenge – and she takes a lot more work. ”

    This is evidence of Lok’s second statement: A woman will cheat given the right circumstances.

    The Michelle Pfeiffer character in Les Liaisons Dangereuses was married to a man away on either business or war. Malkovich’s character seduced her after expending extraordinary effort. She cheated on her own husband and in fact fell in love with her seducer. She went down hard, but she eventually went down.

  • Dogsquat

    Purplesneakers said:

    Just out of curiosity Dogsquat- how old are you, and how old is your gf?
    _______________

    I am very early thirties. She’s mid-late 20′s.

  • Sigrid

    @Susan:

    Your argument(s) (and I use “argument” loosely) about female promiscuity and its correlation to a litany of negative individual/societal outcomes notwithstanding, I find your tacit (0r perhaps not so tacit) support of “slut shaming” deeply disturbing. As a PhD student at a large university with two two nieces and one nephew in their first years of college (representative of your primary audience), I cringe that their earnest navigation (whatever that may look like) through the inevitably disorienting and murky terrain of their sexuality and sociality should be so crudely measured on a loaded and psychologically damaging binary of shame vs. exaltation. And I would posit that, indeed, it is the rhetoric and discourse emanating from that binary that exacts the profound negative toll on all of us. To “shame” anyone (although in your case you have a particular penchant for females, it seems) is cruel and counterproductive.

    I admit, I’ve only recently become acquainted with this site, and I have yet to investigate whether you are a proper journalist, a working scholar in the academy, or a self-appointed pundit, but if either of the two former, you should be careful to so readily employ sweeping phrases such as “we all know” and unqualified pronouns (i.e., “they”, “few”…example below). Who, exactly, is “we all” and “they,” I ask?

    “Fifteen years later, we all know that few found “newer, truer, less sexist and more ecstatic ways of being sexual.” They found ways of being sexual that were risky, superficial, awkward and unsatisfying. The sexual double standard is as prominent as ever, being biologically determined and therefore immutable. If anything, men have become hypersensitive to female promiscuity, warily inquiring about a woman’s number before investing one ounce of emotional energy.”

    In addition, do you feel any responsibility to justify your claims to causality/correlation?

    “…female promiscuity is not a problem “for one reason or another.” It is directly responsible for the near disappearance of fulfilling and intimate cross-sex relationships among young people in college, the mistaken and tragic sense that most college students have of themselves as sexual “losers,” the rapid rise of sexually transmitted diseases in the U.S., and the creation of a “spinster class” of women now in their 30s and 40s.”

    I am an unattached woman in my thirties, and I just want to thank you for answering with such unflinching confidence that my status as a…what do you call it?…”spinster”?…. is the fault either of my own “promiscuity” (in my case, a drawn out virginity followed by a personal decision that I’m generally uncomfortable with casual sex, and am better in committed, monogamous relationships, though I’ve experimented some), or a cult of young women who actively engage in casual sex (oh…and maybe their “man-whore” partners…yes, lets *not* forget those). Who knew the answer (which happens to *also* explain the rise of STDs in the US!) was so readily at my hands?! I’m sure your readership breathlessly awaits the quantitative and qualitative data sets you’ve marshaled to support this “argument.”

    Maybe if I include a photo, you can size me up and further illuminate me on my “spinster” status with some added commentary based on my haircut, fashion sense, posture, or general appearance, in the same way you did my colleague, Extragiraffe, who, far from a “douchebag” or “frat boy,” is a kind and incredibly decent human being, a respected and decorated academic-in-training who is well-read in feminist theory/praxis, and a thoughtful discussant on a range of issues pertaining to gender and sexuality. If I wasn’t already put off by your crude category-building and your amateur sociology, your sophomoric, evasive, and baseless response to my friend solidifies that I will discourage everyone I know (but particularly my nieces and nephew and their peers) from ever taking your web site or its logics seriously.

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

    @SW
    “I do not believe there is a large chunk of college students successfully navigating an alternative approach, though I do think many would welcome the opportunity to be in relationships.”

    Another clarion call for the return of normal dating. If I understand your hypothesis correctly, it’s the promiscuous minority of women who have ruined things for the majority. Hopefully, that’s not just a red herring. From what it sounds like, there may be a lot of young people too shell-shocked from alcohol to have meaningful interactions, and too timid or lazy to actually bring back a dating culture. I remember exchange students tended to stick together and have their own social/dating circles…

    So, how did your kids do it? Contrary to the stereotype, I’m sure they spent (long?) periods of time single instead of hooking up with strangers.

  • Passer_By

    @vd

    I think Roosh has too much willingness to make jokes at his own expense to be a narcissist. In fact, I’m not sure he’s any of them. I just think he was disillusioned.

    Also, this reference sometimes perplexes me. Many times I see I see it as narcissism, machiavellianism and pychopathy (which is what I ay which I assume they sociopathy). Other times it’s Narcissism, thrill seeking and deceitfulness (even Susan used this definition in the past). I assume this is incorrect, and that thrill seeking and deceitfulness are simply behaviors often seen in dark triad persons.

    I suppose you could equate deceitfulness, though not entirely.

    Sadly, I think I rate pretty low on all of them, which can be a hindrance. I would especially benefit from an increase in narcissism.

  • Mike C

    A comment like Sigrid’s is enlightening to me in the sense that it is the perfect illustration how someone can be educated and highly credentialied (and of course make that appeal to authority) yet really be clueless as to the real-world dynamics.

    It sort of reminds me of the communism versus capitalism debate and how high-brow intellectuals can marshal all sorts or arguments and thoughts in support of communism and critical of capitalism yet be totally divorced from understanding the operation of an economy in the real world.

    Someone like Sigrid cannot even grasp the market implications/dynamics of various behavior as everything is analyzed through the prism of sociological political correctness.

  • Tony Stark

    @ Sigrid

    Your hysterics = proof that even mild shaming can be incredibly effective.

  • Sigrid

    @Tony

    Your employment of “hysterics” to characterize my response = proof that you’re a dim sexist.

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

    @SW
    “Most guys, especially while young, are not going to turn away hot girls climbing onto their laps in bars. It’s just not realistic to expect men to police promiscuity in any way when it’s offered without strings.”

    A guy need not be promiscious, a “manwhore” as you call it, and still contract something very nasty by doing something like this even once. Doesn’t this drop his mating value? Sleeping with less than hygenic women? As much as women have to police themselves collectively, smart choices have to be made by both genders. Sexual responsibility need not be a women-only club.

  • Mike C

    No matter how logical and rational any player or his advice seems, or how “fair and balanced” he seems, any advice he gives to a man is being filtered through the prism of collective male interest and his own personal interest as a player.

    Touche, and perhaps. That said…honestly, I think some men seem more capable than some women at stepping outside their own perspective and giving advice based on third party interest. LAWYERS DO THIS ALL THE TIME…where they might do their very best arguing a case they don’t necessarily personally believe in. So for example, I can tell a woman she should wait for strong commitment before sex, yet tell a guy he should escalate quickly and be predisposed to moving on. There is no lie there….simply a recognition of DIFFERENT interests. I feel like I need to whip out that Fitzgerald quote again.

    And just to put a finer point on it. I would never in a million years tell a woman to read Rational Male to understand what she SHOULD DO. Its a blog written by a man to provide male guidance. From time to time, I think you’ve blurred the lines there especially in blog posts specifically addressing a male question. Not trying to be disagreeable, just calling it as it is.

    I would argue the second does far more damage, as morality is rarely a concern, and emotional manipulation is his most used tool. The player always seeks to steal something via deception and illusion.

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

      I would never in a million years tell a woman to read Rational Male to understand what she SHOULD DO. Its a blog written by a man to provide male guidance. From time to time, I think you’ve blurred the lines there especially in blog posts specifically addressing a male question.

      And I would never in a million years tell a man to read Rational Male to understand how to achieve an emotionally healthy relationship. I believe that Rational Male is filled with advice that will make most men abjectly miserable, should they follow it. Caveat emptor.

  • Mike C

    I would argue the second does far more damage, as morality is rarely a concern, and emotional manipulation is his most used tool. The player always seeks to steal something via deception and illusion.

    On this second point, you’ve mentioned previously a number of times, again in this thread I believe that morality is NOT your concern, STRATEGY is. Again, not trying to be disagreeable, but you can’t have it both ways here. Either morality is a concern or it isn’t. You can’t ignore it with respect to female behavior, and then invoke it as a way to criticize male behavior.

    I thought in the past you used cad for deception, and player to indicate a promiscous guy who is more forthright in his interactions. Are we changing terminology here?

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

      @Mike C

      Thanks for asking for clarification. I do not address the issue of female promiscuity from a moral perspective, but from a strategic one. I feel comfortable doing this because I don’t actually believe that casual sex is morally wrong, for either sex. I think it is a high risk activity that is poorly suited to most women, and derails women in their search for meaningful relationships. I do not judge men for pursuing casual sex, as long as they do so in an ethical, honest way. So morality does play a part, of course. I have and voice strong opinions on ethical questions of all kinds, and my ethical standards apply equally to both sexes.

      I thought in the past you used cad for deception, and player to indicate a promiscous guy who is more forthright in his interactions. Are we changing terminology here?

      That’s a fair question. Over time I’ve come to realize that I haven’t met or heard of any promiscuous guys who are totally forthright in their interactions. The line between player and cad is a fine one – if you mislead a woman in any way regarding your intentions, you’re a cad. I think to be an honest player, your SMV has to be so high – George Clooney high – that women will basically line up to be pumped and dumped. And there just aren’t many of those guys around. So while the distinction exists theoretically, I don’t think it’s easy to discern between the two IRL.

  • Sleuth

    “Most guys, especially while young, are not going to turn away hot girls climbing onto their laps in bars. It’s just not realistic to expect men to police promiscuity in any way when it’s offered without strings.”

    “A guy need not be promiscious, a “manwhore” as you call it, and still contract something very nasty by doing something like this even once. Doesn’t this drop his mating value? Sleeping with less than hygenic women? As much as women have to police themselves collectively, smart choices have to be made by both genders. Sexual responsibility need not be a women-only club.”

    Precisely why shaming is not needed. Every adult is responsible for his/her own choices. If you contract a disease via an intimate encounter, even if its just once, its on you.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @ Just 1 x
    Doing ok, my brother. It’s been worse.

    @ Cheerful
    I swear when I wrote that I wondered if you were driving form Stockbridge (I’ve never been in that area).
    I never did get John Malkovich in that role. He’s ugly; no guy that ugly could get pussy that good w/o using a weapon.

    About Carole King; I worked on a case against her. She bought a ranch out here (still trying to sell it). Now for years everyone used the road that ran through it, but she locked it. Custer County (my client) declared it open, and she sued in inverse condemnation. I wrote the brief we won on summary judgement, but she appealed. Anyway, this is 1985 and one Sunday night I’m watching “Murphy’s Romance” with James Garner and guess who scored the music-Carole. Next day I’m on the elevator with her and “Tipi” Rick (we called him that because he lived a winter in a tipi on the Salmon river-no mean feat, the guy was a world class outdoor’s man). Well, I was going to say something about the movie but as soon as I got on she hid behind him like a shy 4 year old, peering at me on the short ride to the office. She was awful to the people up there too; had her armed body guards drive people fishing off at gunpoint. She makes a big deal about -being for the “little guy”-yeah.

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

      @Munson

      Agreed – John Malkovich is heinous.

      That’s a funny story about Carole King. It’s not the first story I’ve heard of a nasty hippie.

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

    @SW
    “I’ve often wondered about this. Dads encouraging their sons to be cads, while warning their daughters about the dangers of cads. I don’t think it’s possible. You’re a liar in one case or the other.”

    This is just one of several problems I have with accepting the SDS carte blanche. A dad would basically be telling his son to treat other peoples’ daughters as disposable, as if they’re not every bit as important as his own daughter. Mr. Deti just seemed to resign himself that this is the only way to raise a son. I can’t speak from personal experience, but I’m sure there’s a way to raise a boy who isn’t a predator nor a pushover.

    I think you or someone else said it earlier, that who you choose to date, be friends with, marry, etc. reinforces their behavior, be it good or bad. Shaming (or ostracizing) will only change things if there are real consequences for sleeping around. For men, they’re reluctant to commit to women with checkered pasts. There’s an incentive right there. I don’t see why women can’t do the same thing. Kind of like killing two birds with one stone.

    P.S. — If I hadn’t taken some female advice regarding dating, sex, romance, etc. I’d never have landed my wife. Guys, feel free to put that in your pipes and smoke it!

  • this is Jen

    Has a mother ever given good accurate advice to her own sons about what attracts women sexually? Of course not. Not once, ever, since we came down off the tree-branches.
    There is a lot to learn from this simple, indestructible fact.
    —————————————————————–

    I am giggling after reading this. My husband and I were on a long car trip today and were discussing this. Some band came on the radio and he said he had seen them in concert and I said “with who?” (assuming it was a date). He told me that if he had been with a date it would have hampered his chances of picking up girls AT the show.! And that he knew how women thought, and particularly WHICH women to target.
    He said I t is about time our son learned the ways of the world of women ( he’s 8!). He was serious.

  • Mike C

    I would argue the second does far more damage, as morality is rarely a concern, and emotional manipulation is his most used tool. The player always seeks to steal something via deception and illusion.

    And just to be clear here, I am absolutely unequivocally opposed to deception and lying whether done by men or women. I believe honesty is always the best policy. That said, saying “Yeah, you are a total fat ass” versus “Yeah, you might look a bit heavy” are two different ways of being honest. I’m curious what emotional manipulation encompasses. Manipulation is one of those words that I really dislike because it is so loaded and inherently pejorative yet a good chunk of all human interaction is inherently manipulative. Parents manipulate children all the time. Manipulation simply means trying to get what you want. The real issue is are you acting in blatant disregard for the other person. That is wrong.

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

      @Mike C

      Just to be clear, I used the term “emotional manipulation” in response to Gorbachev’s use of it. Here’s what I think it means:

      Attempting to control a person by zeroing in on their weaknesses or vulnerabilities
      Using any degree of deception to influence a person’s beliefs about your intent
      Achieving personal gain at the direct expense of another person, without empathy or regard
      Failing to consider the benefit to another person in any relationship
      Intentionally causing harm of any kind to another person, including doubt, anxiety, fear, or insecurity

      These behaviors may be “rational” from a purely selfish POV, but they’re unethical and exploitative.

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

    @Mike C
    “So for example, I can tell a woman she should wait for strong commitment before sex, yet tell a guy he should escalate quickly and be predisposed to moving on. There is no lie there….simply a recognition of DIFFERENT interests. I feel like I need to whip out that Fitzgerald quote again.”

    You can’t give that advice to the guy AND the girl if you’d like to see them both end up together : |

    I believe in that quote from Fitzgerald, he was referring specifically to artists being able to function while balancing contradictory positions in their heads. I’d venture to say most ordinary people don’t do this. Artists don’t strike me as particularly monogamous folks, anyway.

  • Emily

    >> “It’s long been my contention that about three quarters of women aren’t even in the game. We might call them beta females.”

    Yes! Considering what a small percentage of the population the promiscuous females actually make up, we sure spend a lot of time obsessing over them.

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

    @Mike C
    “Either morality is a concern or it isn’t. You can’t ignore it with respect to female behavior, and then invoke it as a way to criticize male behavior.”

    Not to defend inconsistencies or anything, but I think Susan has called out women, either specifically or generally, for bad behavior.

    We don’t live in a scientific utilitarian paradise. Anytime people get together and comment anonymously on topics like this, moral and ethical concerns are floating around. They may not be the main focus on the blog, but they’re still present.

  • Passer_By

    @susan
    “Where I reject the use of dread is as preventative maintenance for a healthy relationship.”

    Concur – seems like a lot of work just to make somebody who is good to you unhappy. It also runs so counter to my natural instincts that I would rather just work on other elements of game that are more fun.

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

      @Passer By

      It also runs so counter to my natural instincts that I would rather just work on other elements of game that are more fun.

      Exactly! Game actually makes life more fun. It makes flirting better, sex better and relationships better. I don’t understand the need to go all dark and Sith about it. It’s like killing an ant with an anvil.

  • Rum

    Sigrid
    While you appear to have spent your entire intellectual life sequestered in the academic-feminist-echo-chamber ghetto, Susan has been out in the unfenced scrum of the blogosphere steadily winning points and influence. All on the self evident strength of her character and intellect and not for a second hiding behind some lame credentials.. Which, by the way, can be made up for all we know.
    If you expect to be taken seriously here, you need to learn to do the one thing that cannot be faked on the interwebs… and that is to make a decent argument for your point of view without saying anything about yourself IRL.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    “Women and men were lied to by women and men. I was lied to. I was told that femininity is proof of stupidity and weakness. I was also told that with my Wharton MBA I would “set the world on its ear” and be the desired object of men everywhere. By my father.”

    Sometimes I really do feel alone. What first interested me in my current GF was her attending medical school. During my blue pill days, I harbored a small crush on a girl solely because she said her hero was Ben Bernanke and she understood the principal-agent problem. It was only after that I confessed this to my friends that I realized she was fat (but that still didn’t stop the crush).

    Pardon the self-pity. But godDAMN, there really have to be SOME exceptions to the rules, right? It can’t just be me?

  • Passer_By

    @megaman

    “Therefore, what?”

    therefore study “game” or whatever you want to call it and use those parts appropriate to obtaining and maintaining a LTR. You seemed to be objecting to the fact that Gorby encouraged him to “learn game.” Otherwise, I’m not sure what your point was about needing different skills.

    “A dad would basically be telling his son to treat other peoples’ daughters as disposable, as if they’re not every bit as important as his own daughter. ”

    Not so much. He is telling is son to act in a way that minimizes the potential for other people’s daughters to treat him as a chump – as they have been taught to do by their mothers (and perhaps fathers) and the last 30 years of feminism. If, in the course of that, some of those daughters feel disposable, that’s unfortunate, but my sons didn’t create this environment. Also, I have never seen any father or mother of a woman step up and defend their son in law as she rakes him over the coals in family court, so you’ll forgive me for not feeling too badly here.

    @sleuth

    “I’ve heard many arranged marriages would out just fine. How could that be?”

    Probably because she didn’t ride an alpha carousel before she got married. Otherwise I’m skeptical that it would most of the time.

  • Maggie

    “I was also told that with my Wharton MBA I would “set the world on its ear” and be the desired object of men everywhere. By my father.”

    Wow, this is the exact opposite of what I heard growing up and we are about the same age. I was told to never show I was smarter than a guy and to never beat him when playing a game. Maybe it was a southern thing.

    I’m thinking you were at Wharton the same time as my brother. A girl in my family would never have dreamt of going to grad school.

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

      @Maggie

      I’m thinking you were at Wharton the same time as my brother. A girl in my family would never have dreamt of going to grad school.

      I was there 1981-83. If that matches your brother’s time frame, email me and tell me who he is!

  • Passer_By

    @sleuth

    Also, as a followup, my understanding is that most arranged marriages now are more arranged introductions by a network, wherein both parties have the opportunity to reject. It’s not as if the women are just betrothed with no say so. That would never work in societies that allow no fault divorce.

  • Mike C

    10 to 1 Sleuth is Polyamrous Desi or whatever else her goofy names have been

  • Mike C

    FWIW, the key is the almost obsessive repetition in every single comment. In this thread, every comment is about “adult choices” and “STIs”

  • Passer_By

    “So you’re saying most arranged marriages end in divorce or the wife cheating?”

    Huh? Where did I say that?

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

    @Passer_By
    Gorby said “game” or whatever is useful for a LTR, marriage, or “sleeping with every women you meet” (quote).

    Sounds like a magic potion to me. IMO this mentality works against long-term monogamy. Of course, I don’t believe many men who are happily married actually think like that. I certainly don’t.

    Your description of how other parents hypothetically raise their daughters is illustrative. This is why I’m not attracted to angry ideologies like this. I couldn’t imagine going through life presuming other people I don’t know are out to screw me and my kids over. I picked my wife and my friends carefully in that respect.

  • Mike M.

    A Definite Beta Guy @ 314:

    You’re not 100% off-base.

    Men want sex from an LTR…and more. Affection, aid – and affirmation of their status in society. A hot wife isn’t just physically attractive, having her on a man’s arm is a statement of his status.

    A smart, accomplished woman is another Affirmation.

  • Emily

    Susan,
    I’m starting to get the impression that Sleuth *really* wants you to read that Psychology Today article. ;)

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

      @Emily

      I’m starting to get the impression that Sleuth *really* wants you to read that Psychology Today article.

      That article is by the woman who coined the term “onelie” to describe women who are single by choice. She’s a nutcase. Plus it’s two months old. It was a response to a post I wrote about the Single By Choice movement. This woman believes single life is better than being part of any couple. It’s a political cause for her. Okaaayyyy.

  • Mike C

    I couldn’t imagine going through life presuming other people I don’t know are out to screw me and my kids over. I picked my wife and my friends carefully in that respect.

    On one level, I can really admire that. That said, I always like to have at least some consideration as to how I can get fucked over. But maybe that is a product of experience. I”ve had two instances, one personal and one professional, where I got fucked over good and hard. Now, I always have at least some part of me always on guard. Perhaps a negative, but I won’t end up someone’s meal

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Serve_Man_%28The_Twilight_Zone%29

  • Rum

    Where the need for shaming comes in is that young women can easily make mistakes with their enormous power in the sexual marketplace that are highly destructive of their families and to the rest of their own lives. Talking about “taking responsibilty” is beside the point if the best or only cure is prevention.
    To prevent bad stuff from happening, shaming can be applied. That is better than just locking them up, no?

  • Emily

    >> “10 to 1 Sleuth is Polyamrous Desi or whatever else her goofy names have been”

    That makes sense! I was guessing that Sleuth was the author of the Psychology Today article. :P

  • VD

    Maybe if I include a photo, you can size me up and further illuminate me on my “spinster” status with some added commentary based on my haircut, fashion sense, posture, or general appearance, in the same way you did my colleague, Extragiraffe, who, far from a “douchebag” or “frat boy,” is a kind and incredibly decent human being, a respected and decorated academic-in-training who is well-read in feminist theory/praxis, and a thoughtful discussant on a range of issues pertaining to gender and sexuality. If I wasn’t already put off by your crude category-building and your amateur sociology, your sophomoric, evasive, and baseless response to my friend solidifies that I will discourage everyone I know (but particularly my nieces and nephew and their peers) from ever taking your web site or its logics seriously.

    You’re a maleducated twit, Sigrid. Slinging around that half-baked academy-speak suffices only to demonstrate you don’t understand supply and demand or the burden of debt. It certainly doesn’t cut any ice here. Babbling about “feminist theory/praxis” on this or any Game blog is about as impressive as asserting one’s Keynesian credentials at the Mises Institute. Perhaps if you weren’t so intent posturing on the basis of credentials you don’t even possess yet, you wouldn’t have missed Susan’s core point, which is that due to a surfeit of women being unwilling to man the sexual gates they are biologically charged with keeping, all women are negatively affected by the consequent changes in the sexual marketplace regardless of their behavior.

    Your status as a spinster is obviously the result of a combination of your own decisions and your environment since everyone’s status always has been. Susan has merely provided the service of pointing out the potential consequences of the former while commenting upon the observable changes in the latter. And it’s worth pointing out that “the earnest navigation” of your nieces and nephews, as well as your own, will be judged in the same crude and binary manner as everyone else’s. To fuck or to not fuck, that is the initial question, followed eventually, in some cases, by commit or not commit. And no appeal to “the inevitably disorienting and murky terrain of their sexuality and sociality” is ever going to change that stark reality.

    The herpes simplex virus doesn’t give a damn about the earnestness of one’s navigation. Nor does a future prospective husband or wife. And absolutely no one gives a damn about your almost-degree. As a kind and incredibly decent human being, I will, out of the angelic goodness of my astonishingly generous heart, favor you with a suggestion that may help prevent you from being perceived as the usual academic ass: anytime you begin writing a sentence with the word “As” that refers to yourself in any way, shape, or form, stop immediately and write something that might at least have a remote chance of being relevant instead.

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

      There are few things more personally satisfying to me than watching Vox Day eviscerate nincompoops. By the way, I googled Sigrid. She’s a religious studies student at Penn – hence the snarky comment about Wharton.

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

    @Emily
    “I’m starting to get the impression that Sleuth *really* wants you to read that Psychology Today article.”

    I actually mentioned this to Susan, once, a few weeks ago. As someone who’s enjoyed some stuff on the PT website, I can say it was a hit piece not worth reading…

  • Passer_By

    @megaman
    “This is why I’m not attracted to angry ideologies like this. I couldn’t imagine going through life presuming other people I don’t know are out to screw me and my kids over.”

    They aren’t out to do any such thing. they don’t think they are doing that. But, if pressed, they seem to feel that their daughters are entitled to a set of rights and entitlements which, on the whole, put a lot of men in a very bad position. As they formulated those beliefs, I’m quite certain they never had my sons’ well being in mind.

    I don’t intend to counsel them to be abusive or to treat women as disposable, but nor will they be encouraged to look at life as you do such that as long as they fulfill their beta duty all will be good. You got lucky – great. Luck is not a strategy. Lots of guys did the right thing and didn’t get so lucky – stop discounting their experiences.

  • Passer_By

    @sleuth
    “You doubted most of them work.”

    No, I doubted that a true arranged marriage (where she had no choice) would work if she first spent years sport fucking guys that turned her on more and also had the option of no fault divorce. But you understood that – you’re just a troll.

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

    Passer_By
    Look, you don’t need me to agree with you on this stuff. There’s a bit of circular logic in your reasonsing that doesn’t make sense IMO. I don’t think you even know how I look at life anyway.

    For the record, I reject the beta (or any Greek letter) label. And I didn’t get lucky. I had to work pretty hard to get where I am. There’s no quick and easy path to happiness. There never was, even in the good old days before the hookup scene.

  • Dogsquat

    Mike C said:

    “That said, I always like to have at least some consideration as to how I can get fucked over. But maybe that is a product of experience. I”ve had two instances, one personal and one professional, where I got fucked over good and hard. Now, I always have at least some part of me always on guard. Perhaps a negative, but I won’t end up someone’s meal”

    _________________________

    Be polite. Be nice. Smile. Have a plan to kill everyone in the room.

    Paying attention to situations where you are vulnerable benefits you in a few other ways, as well:

    You’ll be more comfortable when you are actually secure. Security isn’t just a feeling anymore, it’s knowledge.

    Also, by being cognizant of this crap, you can make it easy for people to do right by you. They feel good because they got to actually be “good”, and you get treated well.

    Win-win!

  • Rum

    Slewth=Troll
    We know this because it said that women unable to be attracted to betas should just wait until they wanted to settle down.
    Herpes cannot be undone. It can only be prevented. Most young women are far more influenced by fear of shame than fear of herpes.

  • Dogsquat

    Sleuth said:

    “How about just telling her how he feels, or better yet, ending the relationship? Why would a man want to stick around in any way whatsoever, even in a casual 3 way, with a person who has shown him “outrageous disrespect”? ”

    _________________________

    I’m an advocate of the slow fade, live life well, and be “the one who got away” to a woman like the one we’re discussing. Then, in six months or a year, you can explain why. If you do this right, the girls will ask – oh, do they ask! It’s more clinical, self-focused, and more protective of one’s reputation.

    But….

    There are decent reasons to do just what you asked. The situation, as always, dictates.

    Firstly, some folks just aren’t open-minded. If you disagree with them, you’ll get a pejorative label smacked on you and spend more time defending your character than explaining your actions. There’s nothing less productive than dodging cognitive killswitches.

    Pull the “explain your feelings” thing with some women (people in general, but women in this situation) and you’ll be placed in a hole with unclimbable sides. You’ll hear things like “judgmental, misogynist, insecure, sexist, unnacepting, needledick, Nice Guy TM” tossed back.

    Often in these cases, there isn’t a desire to come to common ground. The woman will not expend effort to understand, because that entails accepting the fact that she’s hurt someone. Instead, she’ll go flank speed at proving your entire perception wrong – it’s easier and more self protective for her.

    The “Dark” way of doing things bypasses all that mess.

    Secondly, the guy’s self-esteem may be well nigh shattered at this point. Some form of in-your-face revenge may be the most efficient/effective way of getting up off the floor. Going “Dark” for awhile will prove viscerally to the man that he has agency with regard to women.

    Guys with high self esteem are more likely to get what they want and be happy, long-term.

    That’s a good thing, wouldn’t you say?

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

    @Mike C
    “Now, I always have at least some part of me always on guard. Perhaps a negative, but I won’t end up someone’s meal.”

    I’m a skeptical, somewhat cynical guy, too. I can appreciate being on guard IRL. Particularly for job security and personal safety. But it’s quite a leap of logic to go from there to presuming all non-related members of the opposite sex are hardwired to take advantage of you. Or think you’re worthless.

  • Dogsquat

    Sleuth said:

    “There is no need to shame anyone for their sexual choices because as adults we are alone are responsible for the choice we make.”
    _______________________

    That’s an interesting point.

    As an experiment, try this:

    Go on a feminist blog. Get into a discussion about relationships in the comments. Tell the people you are conversating with that you are a heterosexual cisgendered male who is uncomfortable with promiscuity in your heteronormative cisgendered female sexual partner, and are thinking of ending the relationship due to this.

    It’s fun, if you’ve got thick skin.

  • VD

    Exactly *how* are *all* women negatively affected? If you say the men they are attracted to are to busy being sluts banging other sluts to notice them, the solution is then to go for the non-sluts.

    Fewer options and a reduced total supply of men willing to commit. You clearly don’t understand Game if you’re simply going to blithely recommend that women go for the less attractive, non-preselected men. And “negatively affected”!=”a complete absence of solutions”.

    Precisely why shaming isn’t needed. Herpes does the trick just fine.

    You are totally incorrect. Do you seriously think herpes slows anyone down, much less the serial sluts or the STD bingo players? Hell, AIDS barely made a dent even back when the media was going on about the inevitable straight AIDS epidemic. The guys who can’t even remember a girl’s name the next day certainly aren’t going to lose any sleep over her future medical status.

  • Mike C

    @Mike C
    But it’s quite a leap of logic to go from there to presuming all non-related members of the opposite sex are hardwired to take advantage of you. Or think you’re worthless.

    I did not make that claim. In any case, I suspect you and I approach life from radically different perspectives so we won’t find much common ground and any further elaboration is pointless.

  • Emily

    Srsly dudes, do not feed the troll!

  • Mike C

    Go on a feminist blog. Get into a discussion about relationships in the comments. Tell the people you are conversating with that you are a heterosexual cisgendered male who is uncomfortable with promiscuity in your heteronormative cisgendered female sexual partner, and are thinking of ending the relationship due to this.

    The funny thing is it is so easy to send the crazy feminists into an emotional rage. If you look at it as sport instead of rational conversation, you could have some fun with it. You can literally feel the blood boiling over the electrons on the Interwebz

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

    @Mike C
    Sorry, I wasn’t suggesting you felt that way. I should have said, “other commenters” around HUS seem to feel that way. Again, my mistake for being unclear on that one.

  • VD

    I recommended they go for non-slutty men OR wait for the sluts to become ready to settle down OR go for older men.

    Translation: reduced supply AND delayed time-preference AND reduced supply + reduced attractiveness. All negatives for all women there. What part of this are you finding hard to understand?

    These people made the CHOICE to sleep with STD invested partners, or partners they at least knew were sleeping around and had a good chance of being STD infested. How does this affect me, you or *all* women?

    It doesn’t and you’re arguing against your own point there. Since STDs don’t affect all women, then obviously they can’t replace slut-shaming as an influence on all women’s behavior. Moreover, we have decades of evidence demonstrating that the threat of STDs is an insufficient detriment to young women becoming sluts.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @dogsquat

    “Secondly, the guy’s self-esteem may be well nigh shattered at this point.”

    Confused here, but self-esteem not shattered. That was my point in bringing up the depression: I’ve dealt with far bigger problems than a girl who wouldn’t put out.

    Got my job, got my friends, got my coworkers, know plenty of girls and some might like the chance to hook up with a decent guy. Had enough Alpha to get this girl: was too sexually inexperienced and it showed, so that fucked me up in the get go, but I’m thinking that won’t be a problem in the future.

    But so far, most of the people I know IRL are sympathetic to her. This is unacceptable. Decent guys should not have to feel second best. If society thinks decent guys should be actively punished, then don’t be surprised when you lose decent guys.

    Actions. Have. Consequences. Incentives. Have. Effects.

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

    @SW
    “They meet someone and have a relationship, then wonder if it’s not unwise to settle down with their first real love. No it’s not unwise! You may never get another chance.”

    This is good advice for anyone who doesn’t want to grow old alone…

  • Dogsquat

    Megaman, being cognizant of the possibility of being treated poorly by a member of the opposite sex is critical.

    To do otherwise is putting a lot of faith in the concept of unconditional love.

    It’s a matter of degrees, though. When I respond to a call at a known gang location and am working on a gunshot victim, you bet your ass I’m paranoid. If my patient lives, they might testify in court, or seek other revenge. Somebody close by has good incentives to shoot me in the face. I am well aware of this, and adjust my actions accordingly.

    Less extreme example:

    A wife may love her husband. At some point, he’s got to know that if he falls into a years-long depression, becomes angry and critical, and makes a series of dumb financial decisions that negatively affect their quality of life – well, those wedding vows aren’t looking so smart to his lady anymore.

    Guarding against being hurt by the opposite sex is perhaps too strong a word. Creating a situation in which it’s easy for them to love you, though – that’s just smart.

  • Rum

    Examples?
    How about this: Slewths doubting that young women are more afraid of public shaming than private herpes is an excellent example of the quality of slewths thinking.
    I ancient Greece, there were occasional outbreaks of suicide epidemics among young women. (Virgin Suicides). How did the ancients prevent this? Whenever a girl killed herself, her naked body was hung up on a city wall and allowed to rot in plain sight. It worked.
    Young women are often more afraid of public humiliation than of actually die-ing, much less getting herpes.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Dogsquat,

    I hope you never get shot in the face. The world needs people like you.

    Guarding against being hurt by the opposite sex is perhaps too strong a word. Creating a situation in which it’s easy for them to love you, though – that’s just smart.

    And the best part is, you can do that by being a person that is easy for you yourself to love. So it’s not like, “god, I gotta keep working at it to keep this broad happy???” No, you just be your best. For you. And she loves you for that.

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

      And the best part is, you can do that by being a person that is easy for you yourself to love. So it’s not like, “god, I gotta keep working at it to keep this broad happy???” No, you just be your best. For you. And she loves you for that.

      Glad you’re back with us, JM. It’s comments like this that make you incredibly valuable and necessary in these comment threads.

  • Passer_By

    “Yeah because cultures that arrange marriages with no choice also have widespread promiscuity and plenty of oppurtunities for girls and young women to sport fuck.

    Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.”

    Exactly. That’s why your point about arranged marriages doesn’t negate deti’s point – he is speaking with respect to Western culture, in particular american culture. That is implicit in everything said, since this website was created to speak to that culture. Feel free to create different website to speak to the culture where arranged marriages are common and work.

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

    @Dogsquat
    “Guarding against being hurt by the opposite sex is perhaps too strong a word. Creating a situation in which it’s easy for them to love you, though – that’s just smart.”

    I get your point. Some amount of paranoia in your line of work makes sense. Same would go for guys in the armed forces overseas : |

    We’re about the same age, I think. For love to flourish, the environment probably requires: having a stable career, a comfortable household, emotional and physical health, etc. Is that the kind of situation you’re referring to? I know there are strong marriages where there isn’t so much financial stability, but I imagine that just makes things harder. If someone you love who claims to love you starts to treat you poorly, I’d say that’s a red flag from hell. Two options remain: counseling or call it quits.

  • Mike C

    And I would never in a million years tell a man to read Rational Male to understand how to achieve an emotionally healthy relationship. I believe that Rational Male is filled with advice that will make most men abjectly miserable,

    Which is exactly my point. You bring a certain perspective to the table. If I went through his blog comments, I could literally link you to probably 50 comments of beta, blue-pill men describing the improvement in their lives….NOT going to “abject misery”. I respect you, but I really don’t understand why you simply cannot say you write advice for women without having to denigrate advice written for men.

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

      @Mike C

      I respect you, but I really don’t understand why you simply cannot say you write advice for women without having to denigrate advice written for men

      Because, as I’ve stated before, Rollo and I approach relationships in a fundamentally different way. I would describe my approach as a “meeting halfway” approach. Let’s call it democracy, both parties get a vote and they have to work it out. Relationships include a trading of many things, including love and affection, sex, loyalty, commitment, resources, etc. Picture two parties sitting down to negotiate, with the ultimate goal of both parties walking away from the table happy. Neither got everything they wanted, but both are better off. Their relationship is strengthened, peace is maintained and an alliance has been created. Examples of this approach at HUS mostly focus on encouraging women to select men of good character and then signal interest clearly, and to be amiable and loyal mates that appreciate men and enhance their well-being.

      In contrast, Rollo’s approach is to make women crawl across the divide. It’s not a negotiation, is a grab for power and dominance. The man can only get what he wants by taking something from the woman, by reinforcing her position as less than himself. She is an emotional prisoner of sorts – if she doesn’t cooperate, all attention and affection is withdrawn. Examples of this include issuing an ultimatum for early sex, and working diligently to keep one’s mate in a state of perpetual, humming anxiety. The man is better off, and the woman is much worse off. I believe that Rollo’s approach is bound to be effective for ONSs and other short-term flings, but is disastrous for LTRs. It’s adversarial and very negative. The woman always pays in Rollo’s world. TBH, I don’t think most men even want that relationship dynamic. It requires a degree of sadism that is not generally found in blue pill men. This is what I would call the Taliban approach.

      In short, Rollo and I preach opposite philosophies, and in the interest of improving lives and relationships for both men and women, I believe it’s important to speak out against the exploitative tactics he promotes.

  • Dogsquat

    Jesus said:

    “Dogsquat,

    I hope you never get shot in the face.”
    _________________

    Me too, Jesus. It’s one of my most fervent desires.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @ VD # 327

    BRAVISSIMO! (Munson rises from his chair, enraptured, vigorously applauding)

    Such nuanced invective! “You’re a maleducated twit, Sigrid.” Channeling James Kilpatrick no less! Keynesian/Mises Institute-man, that Dennis Miller-like slider caught me looking; couldn’t even take a swing at it. You have the precision of a coiled cobra, with much less empathy. In an age that honors meaty roundhouse rhetoric, you show the skill of an AWACS directed surgical strike, killing only those necessary, leaving the rest to their dreary lives of drinking curdling sour goat milk and fucking their grub-like mustachioed women. Your writing is a delight sir. I could not find the post that started the exchange; no matter, the artist rises above his inspiration. And you are no less than that VD.

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

    10 to 1 Sleuth is Polyamrous Desi or whatever else her goofy names have been
    Yeah I think she is acting under Sigfrid too, why troll once when you can troll twice? Now I wonder what does she does in between harrassing HUS? Does she sleeps in a coffin and wakes up with a new personality that the only thing that remembers is HUS? Pondering, pondering…

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

    Sigrid…”I admit, I’ve only recently become acquainted with this site, and I have yet to investigate whether you are a proper journalist, a working scholar in the academy, or a self-appointed pundit”

    “A proper journalist”…you actually think that having a journalism degree and being employed by some media enterprise makes one a credible source?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Now I wonder what does she does in between harrassing HUS? Does she sleeps in a coffin and wakes up with a new personality that the only thing that remembers is HUS? Pondering, pondering…

    Vampires with Selective Amnesia: you should write that story.

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

    Be polite. Be nice. Smile. Have a plan to kill everyone in the room.

    Paying attention to situations where you are vulnerable benefits you in a few other ways, as well:

    Heh this is my attitude everytime I see a woman in my husband’s vicinity I assets the risk (if she smiling too much? Touching her hair and so on…) and then decide the action if she acts around her like a normal human being I relax if she is doing the IOI,s I approach take my husband’s hand, kiss him and introduce myself. If she dares to continue then…that hasn’t happened yet and pray to God that never happens I’m pretty sure it won’t end pretty.

  • Mike C

    That’s a fair question. Over time I’ve come to realize that I haven’t met or heard of any promiscuous guys who are totally forthright in their interactions. The line between player and cad is a fine one – if you mislead a woman in any way regarding your intentions, you’re a cad. I think to be an honest player, your SMV has to be so high – George Clooney high – that women will basically line up to be pumped and dumped. And there just aren’t many of those guys around. So while the distinction exists theoretically, I don’t think it’s easy to discern between the two IRL.

    This is an interesting statement because it clearly shifts the pendulum in the direction of male as perpetrator and woman as victim. And you note this is a change in your views which is consistent with you moving further and further away from the Game type perspective. That is perfectly fine….there is nothing wrong with that but it is worth noting that your views continue to change and evolve.

    Now on to something substantive. Before I met my GF, I had a girl I was fucking, and that literally was all it was. There was no dating. I went over to her house and fucked her. This went on about a month to a month and a half. I actually met my GF during the same time period I was fucking her and there was some overlap. I don’t think I was “totally forthright” if by that you mean I told one “Oh yeah, I was with X last night and fucked her”. In many of these rotation/harem arrangements there is very much a don’t ask don’t tell policy and usually the woman has an idea she isn’t the only one he is seeing. Now if directly asked “Are you seeing or fucking anyone else” I would have answered honestly because I think lying is wrong. Full stop. But there really is no moral obligation to lay every single card on the table if you are not directly asked. I’m not sure if that is what you mean by totally forthright. In the situation above, I realized my GF was the one, and I simply faded from the other girl’s life.

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

      @Mike C

      But there really is no moral obligation to lay every single card on the table if you are not directly asked.

      I totally agree. I’ve often said that if a woman goes with “don’t ask, don’t tell” it’s on her. I am in no way suggesting that men lay all their cards on the table and destroy their hand in the early stages of a relationship. But I think a lot of men go much further than that. When Amber Madison surveyed 1100 guys, around 40% admitted lying outright about their interest in a girl to get her to have sex. Keep in mind, that’s 40% of the total – no apex fallacy here. When you think about the word player – to play someone. The dictionary definition is “Treat inconsiderately for one’s own amusement.” There’s an implication that you’re willing to trick them to get what you want at their expense. Having said that, it’s the responsibility of women to read the signs and some of my posts are meant to educate women in that regard.

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

      @Mike C

      This is an interesting statement because it clearly shifts the pendulum in the direction of male as perpetrator and woman as victim. And you note this is a change in your views which is consistent with you moving further and further away from the Game type perspective.

      I disagree. I’m glad you brought this up, though, because I saw your writeup of the three stages of HUS at Rollo’s. I do believe there’s some truth to it, but I would argue that Stage 3 has largely been a response to “market forces”. That is, an increased degree of hostility in the manosophere directed at HUS, which began the day the Atlantic article came out, and actually has had little to do with my ideas or posts. Even Dalrockgate was made out of a snippet of a comment directed to Doug1 in an argument, rather than any explication of a belief or principle.

      Certainly, I still do have allies among Game bloggers and I value them enormously. But there’s been a sharp increase in haters as well, and it’s been necessary to deal with them head on. The number of “frenemies” in the comment threads – and the sheer number of posts on other blogs that target me with pure invective – have sharply increased in the last six months. The commentary varies from snide mocking (Rollo) to sniping with intent to kill (Dalrock) to jealous accusations in numerous places that I have stolen Game concepts for my own profit. It’s been absolutely necessary to deal with all of that head on, and while I haven’t enjoyed any of it, neither do I regret any of it. As a fellow blogger said to me recently, “You’re setting the agenda, and determining the conversation. Every time someone disses you in a blog post, they’re acknowledging your influence.” Of course, all of this has led to accusations of my trying to demonstrate that I have a big cock, which I take as a compliment.

      I remain as pro-Game as ever, but have found it necessary to speak out vociferously against Dark Game more and more frequently. As I said in a recent thread, when I started blogging, Roissy was the most extreme blogger, and many guys argued, with good cause, that Roissy writes in hyperbole to get his point across, and to wake up beta men. Today, the landscape is very different. Obsidian, with his strong ethical framework, no longer blogs. In Mala Fide changed formats and got a bit crazy. Dalrock writes a blog that picks off women one at a time – it appears to serve no other purpose than to make men rabid. Badger is enraged. Rollo is urging men to “take back what is theirs” and view the female casualties as collateral damage. In short, it’s gotten ugly and brutal, a real war of the sexes. I don’t subscribe to any of those blogs – to be honest I become aware of them only when they link to me or when commenters such as yourself recommend a post by one of them. Sometimes the Google alert on my own name turns up some nastiness. I’ll continue to fight for HUS – I have already learned that ignoring them doesn’t work. The reason is that we do share some readers, so stuff that gets said about me or my views elsewhere usually shows up in a flurry of emails to me and comments as well. How I long for the good old days. Roissy and Roosh seem like puppies by comparison.

  • this is Jen

    10 to 1 Sleuth is Polyamrous Desi or whatever else her goofy names have been
    Yeah I think she is acting under Sigfrid too, why troll once when you can troll twice? Now I wonder what does she does in between harrassing HUS? Does she sleeps in a coffin and wakes up with a new personality that the only thing that remembers is HUS? Pondering, pondering…
    Anacaona´s last [type] ..Redefining Hypergamy: Know the difference between a mistake and error.
    .

    —————————————————————————

    ba ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha now THAT made me laugh

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

    Vampires with Selective Amnesia: you should write that story.

    Heh I’m actually taking notes. But I probably work in a plot for the people that freeze themselves in Alcor and how they will cope with a new world and/or some immortal’s society I had been playing with for some years. So yeah I love when the trolls inspire us. ;)

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    @Sigred

    I didn’t mean to tout my credentials in that manner, but I see how it came off that way, and I regret it.

    You should regret that you beclowned yourself.

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

      @Joe

      You should regret that you beclowned yourself.

      I don’t know if beclowned is a real word, or one that you just made up, but I’m stealing it. That’s brilliant.

  • this is Jen

    Author: Anacaona
    Comment:
    Be polite. Be nice. Smile. Have a plan to kill everyone in the room.

    Paying attention to situations where you are vulnerable benefits you in a few
    other ways, as well:

    Heh this is my attitude everytime I see a woman in my husband’s vicinity I
    assets the risk (if she smiling too much? Touching her hair and so on…) and
    then decide the action if she acts around her like a normal human being I relax
    if she is doing the IOI,s I approach take my husband’s hand, kiss him and
    introduce myself. If she dares to continue then…that hasn’t happened yet and
    pray to God that never happens I’m pretty sure it won’t end pretty.
    ———————————————————————————–

    I adore your style

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @ Cheerful

    Missed the “John the Baptist” ref. Gotta’ admit, that’s a first. Let’s hope there’s no Salomes about. He gave giving head a whole new meaning! ( We need to get some oral sex stuff started. The thread is taking on the solemness of a “New Yorker” letter to the editor column.)

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

    These behaviors may be “rational” from a purely selfish POV, but they’re unethical and exploitative.

    And very effective in weak or damaged personalities. I had an unpleasant encounter once with a psychologist that tried to assess how easy I was to “manipulate” I didn’t see it at the time I just talked to him and was uncomfortable with our interaction and removed myself ASAP. then a girl in the same building started a relationship with him and we became friends years down the line and she told me many details about her relationship. He has her eating of his hand, using his skill as psychologist and she has endured everything from him, public humiliations, forced abortions… and she is still going there for more I don’t know a single person that doesn’t pity her. But if you ask the superficial questions he has been nothing but truthful to her. I think ethics can be twisted in the right dark hands, YMMV.

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

      @Anacaona

      He has her eating of his hand, using his skill as psychologist and she has endured everything from him, public humiliations, forced abortions… and she is still going there for more I don’t know a single person that doesn’t pity her. But if you ask the superficial questions he has been nothing but truthful to her. I think ethics can be twisted in the right dark hands, YMMV

      That reminds me of Svengali:

      Svengali is a fictional character in George du Maurier’s 1894 novel Trilby. He is a hypnotist who makes the title character into a famous singer.
      The word “svengali”, has come to be used as a common noun referring to a person who, with evil intent, controls another person by persuasion or deceit. The Svengali may use pseudo-kindness and manipulation to get the other person to yield his or her autonomy.

      I fear that we have many more Svengalis in the population, and such a novel would hardly get a second glance today. Narcissism really has exploded in the population.

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

    I adore your style

    Heh hot blooded Latina at your service.

  • Rum

    Susan has the right to refer to her Wharton MBA because she does this using her real name and speaks regularly about the importance (or not) of female-career achievement in this modern SMP.
    I often say things about my real life existence but I try to maintain a 50-50 ratio of truth to bs. For my own reasons.
    FWIW, the vilest things I have ever put online I did under my real name. Like encouraging “depressed” people to kill themselves in such a manner that it would be easy for their family to clean up afterwards…but only after searching their nym to check out what else they say about themselves(like being happlily married, etc…)
    See, the real truth about me in real life is that I am a deeply moral person who comes online looking for harmless fun. You can trust me completely on this.

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

    @SW
    “I feel comfortable doing this because I don’t actually believe that casual sex is morally wrong, for either sex.”

    I’ve wondered about this myself. In other discussions, you’ve described promiscuity (for either sex) as a “character issue”, which has the ring of judgment to it (not a bad thing). If it’s not the behavior on it’s own, is it the amount or degree of it?

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

      @Megaman

      I’ve wondered about this myself. In other discussions, you’ve described promiscuity (for either sex) as a “character issue”, which has the ring of judgment to it (not a bad thing). If it’s not the behavior on it’s own, is it the amount or degree of it?

      I don’t regard casual sex, or premarital sex, as a sin. I do believe that these behaviors have natural consequences, which range from social to biological. I don’t think we can have casual sex with a bunch of different people and not be fundamentally changed by it. For that reason, I think people need to know the sexual history of someone they consider as a life partner. It’s relevant and material. But I wouldn’t say the person is a bad person, even as I questioned their fitness for a relationship.

      Does that clear it up?

  • Dogsquat

    @Positive Beta Guy:

    I was speaking in generalities there, not specifically at you. Apologies for the lack of clarity.

    Still, don’t discount the self-esteem thing entirely. You can be super-confident in one aspect of life, yet fearful and timid in others. That bears some careful consideration, in my opinion.

    I’m reading perhaps too far into what you’re writing here, so keep that in mind. I might be wrong! But:

    “But so far, most of the people I know IRL are sympathetic to her. This is unacceptable. Decent guys should not have to feel second best.”

    Fuuuuuuucccckkkkk those people. Seriously, who gives a shit about them? Are you going to need a job from one of them, or have kids with them, or expect them to pull you out of the line of fire in some third-world shithole next month?

    No?

    Right, then!

    Then it doesn’t matter a good goddamn what they think. You do what you can live with. Cut them out of your life, if necessary. Go be awesome somewhere else. People will drown you in the weight of their expectations if you let them. You’ll all die miserable.

    Say it with me, Brother:

    “I don’t care what you think.”

    “No, seriously – I really don’t care at all.”

    If you are a decent human being and live by the Golden Rule, those little statements are tools that will give you tremendous power over your life.

    Start off just saying it to yourself. Say it out loud when you’re alone just thinking about stuff. When you get to be 1000% awesome, you @Positive Beta Guy:

    I was speaking in generalities there, not specifically at you. APologies for the lack of clarity.

    Still, don’t discount the self-esteem thing entirely. You can be super-confident in one aspect of life, yet fearful and timid in others. That bears some careful consideration, in my opinion.

    I’m reading perhaps too far into what you’re writing here, so keep that in mind. I might be wrong! But:

    “But so far, most of the people I know IRL are sympathetic to her. This is unacceptable. Decent guys should not have to feel second best.”

    Fuuuuuuucccckkkkk those people. Seriously, who gives a shit about them? Are you going to need a job from one of them, or have kids with them, or expect them to pull you out of the line of fire in some third-world shithole next month?

    No?

    Right, then!

    Then it doesn’t matter a good goddamn what they think. You do what you can live with. Cut them out of your life, if necessary. Go be awesome somewhere else. People will drown you in the weight of their expectations if you let them. You’ll all die miserable.

    Say it with me, Brother:

    “I don’t care what you think.”

    “No, seriously – I really don’t care at all.”

    If you are a decent human being and live by the Golden Rule (obligation), those little statements are tools that will give you tremendous power over your life (reward for living up to the obligation).

    Start off just saying it to yourself. Say it out loud when you’re alone just thinking about stuff. When you get to be 1000% awesome and comfortable in your own skin, when you say it to people they’ll realize they’ve been rude, rather than offended.

  • Dogsquat

    @Megaman

    “Same would go for guys in the armed forces overseas : |”

    Yep. I used to carry a rifle for a living, as a matter of fact.

    “For love to flourish, the environment probably requires: having a stable career, a comfortable household, emotional and physical health, etc. Is that the kind of situation you’re referring to?”

    That’s undoubtedly part of it, but that is very, very general advice. You can get by easily without a few of those, as long as other things are done.

    It’s also a mistake to create all that and think your work is done. Ask any fairly successful guy who got EPL’ed.

    “If someone you love who claims to love you starts to treat you poorly, I’d say that’s a red flag from hell. Two options remain: counseling or call it quits.”

    If you replace “counseling” with “objective evaluation of yourself and your partner, and seeking good advice”, I totally agree. I’m a little skeptical with the present state of relationship counseling these days. Counseling in general is a very useful tool – don’t get me wrong.

    I’d just be more inclined to steer a buddy toward Athol’s blog than some of the relationship counselors I know.

    Granted, I am not an expert in that field.

  • Dogsquat

    Ana said:

    “If she dares to continue then…that hasn’t happened yet and pray to God that never happens I’m pretty sure it won’t end pretty.”
    _______________________

    LOLolol.

    If I ever lack for work, I’ll remember what you said, Ana.

  • jess

    “Speaking of sluts, does anyone know what happened to Karen Owen? Is she still in hiding or what?

    I heard that she got a job as a management consultant with a prestigious firm. I cannot imagine how. Maybe her Power Point skills?”
    ———
    Because she is a talented and intelligent young woman who was let down by indiscreet friends (and a new virulent media) a year or so ago.

    Happily most people don’t carry such ludicrous prejudices around with them and recruit on grounds of quality and calibre.

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

      @Jess

      Because she is a talented and intelligent young woman who was let down by indiscreet friends (and a new virulent media) a year or so ago.

      Happily most people don’t carry such ludicrous prejudices around with them and recruit on grounds of quality and calibre.

      No doubt she is smart and talented. That’s not the point. The point is that any client who googles her name is going to fall off their chair. The firm that hired her has taken on a great potential liability with the affiliation. I recently wrote about how kids are behaving better on spring break because they fear being exposed on Facebook. Karen Owen will go down in infamy on Google, for the rest of her natural life. Even if an employer didn’t care about her personal life, it’s a risky move in a service business.

  • Odds

    Man, it’s too bad Sigrid won’t be coming back (if we can take her at her word). People like that are so fun to bait and fisk. It’s that “intellectual” style of speech that does it. So many kids, especially in worthless fields like women’s studies, think it makes them sound smart. There must be some course for liberal arts children where they tell them, “communication isn’t about conveying your position in the most precise and succinct way, but about illustrating your fantabulous credentials.” Then they end up saying far more than they meant to, and it reads less like an original argument than a quote mined from an obscure, little-regarded essay. And deep down, in what’s left of their soul, they fervently hope that no one will notice they’ve presented their ideas through vocabulary rather than through arguments, and that they’ve made no argument at all.

    Well played, Vox.

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

    @Dog
    “Granted, I am not an expert in that field.”

    Neither am I. Is Athol a licensed therapist? : )

    As for the EPL phenomenon, I haven’t seen that in action. The few divorces I’ve witnessed firt hand (~5), the writing was on the wall. The women clearly weren’t the marrying types, or rather weren’t the types a guy should’ve married in the first place. And the guys filed for the big D in 2 of those cases. I don’t think every relationship/marriage should last forever, that’s for sure. I’m optimistic about mine, though.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Because she is a talented and intelligent young woman who was let down by indiscreet friends (and a new virulent media) a year or so ago.

    Wait, wasn’t she the one who wrote her Senior Thesis about the guy’s she’d fucked in college? And we’re blaming her friends for being indiscreet?

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

      Wait, wasn’t she the one who wrote her Senior Thesis about the guy’s she’d fucked in college? And we’re blaming her friends for being indiscreet?

      She emailed the Power Point to three friends apparently, and then was shocked. Shocked! When it went viral. Not very smart.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    For love to flourish, the environment probably requires: having a stable career, a comfortable household, emotional and physical health, etc. Is that the kind of situation you’re referring to?

    How about sustainable attraction? All the things you’ve listed are “comfort traits.” You’ve got a hold on all the things that will keep her comfy cozy, but what about the things that will keep her hot and bothered?

  • Tony Stark

    @ Sigrid, 280

    “Your employment of ‘hysterics’ to characterize my response = proof that you’re a dim sexist.”

    @ Sigrid, 337

    “This thread is both ‘hysterical’ and depressing.”

    Ummmmm…is “hysterical” the new n-word, you can use it but I can’t?

  • jess

    Sigrid,

    Fantastic post! Please stick around to give similar insights- there are many who share your views but they kinda get bullied off here sometimes.

    Apparently there are many more lurkers than posters on this site and I think its really worthwhile having a saner POV, like yours, to help marshall thoughts and ideas of those still receptive and reasonable.

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

      Sigrid,

      Fantastic post! Please stick around to give similar insights- there are many who share your views but they kinda get bullied off here sometimes.

      Haha, this cracked me up. Jess acting as the resident hostess of HUS.

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

    @JM
    Good to hear from you again. Those physical and emotional attractive qualities go without saying in a serious relationship. Hence, I didn’t list them, but you’re right of course.

    However… if you asked any elderly couple that’s been married for 50+ years, I’m not sure the women would admit to being constantly “hot and bothered” for decades. Attraction brings two people together, maybe those creature comforts help out too. But there are certain intangible elements of compatibility at work. Companionship, friendship, things like that. They’re hard to measure, but they’re present in any long-lasting relationship. I’d say they’re just as important as attraction.

  • Michelle Lender

    “How about sustainable attraction? ”

    Doesn’t raw sexual attraction fade as the couple grows old and then companionship takes over?

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

    @Ms. Lender
    You read my mind!

  • Michelle Lender

    “Attraction brings two people together, maybe those creature comforts help out too. But there are certain intangible elements of compatibility at work. Companionship, friendship, things like that. They’re hard to measure, but they’re present in any long-lasting relationship. I’d say they’re just as important as attraction.”

    Yeah the advice is marry someone you enjoy talking to because the sexual attraction will wane and when it does you’ll want to be with someone you actually like.

  • Dogsquat

    Megaman, Athol is an RN – a registered nurse. I think he works in behavioral health.

    I’m a paramedic, and there is an age old enmity between nurses and medics…(Lightning, rolling thunder….hawk screams in the distance)

    But I think his credentials and experience count for something. In this business, you see all kinds of people in all kinds of situations. You also talk about things normally considered taboo.

    Oddly enough, I give his observations about people a lot more benefit of the doubt than I would a doctor’s. People still put up a front for doctors. There is a power imbalance there, and people often respond to docs the way they would to a teacher or coach. My perception is that the same thing can happen in a marriage counselor’s office.

    I’m just a dumbass ambulance driver to some folks, and nurses are just the people who give shots. We’re often privy to more honest behavior and talk than “the boss”.

    It’s an eye opener, for sure. I still feel that way, and I’ve been working in healthcare for a few years now.

  • Rum

    Jess
    You did not even read Sigrids post that you are now praising.
    Busted.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Mega,

    Thanks. I agree the comfort traits are just as important. Really, you want to be the whole package. And actually, most of us *are* some form of the whole package… some just need help accessing one or another of the parts.

    Though if things go well, I hope to still be banging my gf at 78 years old between visits from the grand kids.

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

    @JM
    “Though if things go well, I hope to still be banging my gf at 78 years old between visits from the grand kids.”

    I don’t mean to nag, but hopefully you’ll be a man and marry her sometime in the next 50 years : )

    What you just described is one of the reasons Viagra was invented!

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    A Definite Beta Guy “Pardon the self-pity. But godDAMN, there really have to be SOME exceptions to the rules, right? It can’t just be me?”

    Oh there are exceptions to the rules. My husband loved that I was a good player in World of Warcraft. It was one of the reasons why he noticed me. He also thinks I’m really smart, but I’m not so sure about that one.

    There’s nothing wrong being attracted to some substance between the ears. :P

  • Dogsquat

    Jess said:

    “Fantastic post! Please stick around to give similar insights- there are many who share your views but they kinda get bullied off here sometimes.”
    _________________

    Jess, I’ll bet you a cuppa she could have contributed more if she’d cut down the insults by 80% or so.

    She might have learned a thing or two, too.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Hopefully I will.

  • jess

    Jesus Mahoney March 24, 2012 at 9:52 pm
    Because she is a talented and intelligent young woman who was let down by indiscreet friends (and a new virulent media) a year or so ago.
    ——–
    Wait, wasn’t she the one who wrote her Senior Thesis about the guy’s she’d fucked in college? And we’re blaming her friends for being indiscreet?
    ——–
    ———
    She sent a confidential email to 3 close friends who then sent it on.
    .
    Once a secret has passed from primary recipient to secondary recipient the secret is effectively blown.
    .
    So the real indiscretion was the 3 friends and subsequently the media.
    She was foolish and naive to write the powerpoint in the 1st place but sharing sexual exploits is de rigour for both sexes these days. But it should have been read and deleted by the 3 friends. They are just as guilty in my book of hurting the boys concerned. I know she has expressed remorse for the whole thing but she’s no different to many/most western girls on campus these days

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

      sharing sexual exploits is de rigour for both sexes these days.

      I don’t believe that’s true, but if it were it would say something very damning about society.

      she’s no different to many/most western girls on campus these days

      Her count was reportedly 66 at college. That probably makes her the biggest slut on Duke’s campus. So… 1/2500 = .0004%

  • Jesus Mahoney

    I know she has expressed remorse for the whole thing but she’s no different to many/most western girls on campus these days

    Aside from the fact that she sleep with a lot more guys than most other American girls in college.

  • jess

    JM
    I was careful to use the phrase ‘western’ girls.
    I have placed links previously on uk college sex stats.
    I think Karen had 13 for her ppt?
    That puts her at ‘high medium’ at best for the uk

    I meant anyway that having a few flings and sharing the ‘dirty details’ after is almost universal.

    Are her numbers a bit higher than usa average- well I suppose?

    Is she unusual to write a report?- well of course- but she did it as a joke and it backfired in a way she couldn’t have imagined.

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

      I think Karen had 13 for her ppt?

      Only the creme de la creme made it in. The varsity athletes. She was turned down by all the sororities, so she didn’t have much access to frat guys. But she used to go to bars near campus and troll for sex partners, often having sex with more than one in the bathroom out back. (Yes, I have a solid source at Duke.)

  • Underdog

    I was talking with a group of girls today about the SMP and one of them asked me if I was a feminist. I took a pause and said:

    My cock is a feminist.

    Everyone laughed. Sorry if I offended anyone. It was the highlight of my day.

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

      I was talking with a group of girls today about the SMP and one of them asked me if I was a feminist. I took a pause and said:

      My cock is a feminist.

      Everyone laughed. Sorry if I offended anyone. It was the highlight of my day.

      HAHA! Now it’s the highlight of mine.

  • Odds

    @ Tony Stark

    I don’t think she actually understands the word (out of control emotions), she just let her quasi-academic cred slip for a moment and used it in a more colloquial sense. Your original use was correct – if something like this topic “disturbs” her (assuming I’m remembering the word she actually used), she’s probably quite the delicate flower, and so her response was, indeed, hysterical.

    Besides, double standards are the prerogative of our vaunted intellectual betters! Can’t have such expansive minds constrained by the same rules as the proles, now, can we?

  • M3

    Where does one go to cry about probably killing a good friendship because he couldn’t stand the friendzone anymore?

    I can’t go back to it and i don’t want to.

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

    Jess…”The president of the USA finds people who use the word ‘slut’ a bit disturbing too.”

    He certainly hasn’t gone out of his way to object to the use of extremely vile language when deployed against women on the other side of the political aisle. Bill Maher’s use of words like tw*t and c*nt regarding a Governor and Vice Presidential candidate (Sarah Palin) and US Senator (Sarah Palin) did not deter Obama from accepting a $1 million contribution from this creature.

  • Lokland

    @ Susan

    Fair enough I thought the second was weak myself.

    “I’ve often said that all women are susceptible to Game. But some go down fast, and some take work.”

    Clarified, thank you.

    @ a definite beta guy

    I don’t care if its dark and evil and scary.
    Fuck that bitch and invite her sister in. She pulled a job on you return the favour.

    As for other women. Give them the benefit of the doubt.

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

    If I ever lack for work, I’ll remember what you said, Ana.

    LOL!

    I’d just be more inclined to steer a buddy toward Athol’s blog than some of the relationship counselors I know.

    Likewise. Athol has done the leg work the people that went to college can’t because they don’t have the tools and because is not PC. His credentials are all the thank you letters he gets from man that went from almost getting divorced to getting laid like tile.

    You did not even read Sigrids post that you are now praising.

    Jess is a feminist like most of her kind she doesn’t think/read/inform herself she just parrots.

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

      @Anacaona

      Athol has done the leg work the people that went to college can’t because they don’t have the tools and because is not PC. His credentials are all the thank you letters he gets from man that went from almost getting divorced to getting laid like tile.

      Agreed. The proof is right there on his website. If Athol says dread is needed to resuscitate a marriage that is DOA, then I’m buying it. I also totally support Deti’s handling of his crisis. I couldn’t care less about being PC. Obviously :)

  • thefemaleperspective

    Sluts should be shamed. I’m fed up with girls screaming rape in defense to their loose morals. Recently my friend and his fraternity brother were arrested because a sorority girl accused them of assaulting her while she was apparently passed out drunk and “had no memory” of what happened. Needless to say she also had a boyfriend at the time the incident supposedly happened, so she’s unfaithful too. Thus far there has been no evidence found that rape even occurred, which everyone who is close to these two guys believed they were innocent anyways, but both my friend and his brother’s lives are now in limbo. They were humiliated in the school papers, my friend had to drop out of school, and he was fired from his job for something that didn’t happen all because some stupid girl didn’t think about the fallout of her accusations and how she would be ruining two people’s lives.

  • Charm

    @TheFemalePerspective

    That situation is horrible. A girl at my school, got “raped”. She was a freshman, living on campus. She met 3 guys at a party, brought them back to her dorm, swiped them into the building, swiped them into the elevator, unlocked 2 sets of doors with her keys and let them into her room. The next day she said they all raped her. A guy I worked with lived in the same dorm, and knew the girl so he heard it first hand. I openly called it bullshit and said that she was being irresponsible. The guy responds, “Everyone always blames the victim.” I think automatically empathizing with the girl is the PC thing to do which is why people do it. When I called B.S. on it, more than a few people agreed with me.

  • Charm

    people automatically*

  • Charm

    Damn, it was right the first time. Ugh, disregard. Im going to bed now.

  • purplesneakers

    jess- there is NO WAY that Karen Owen is representative of MOST college women. The ones who are fixtures on the hook-up scene, sure. But not even they are cavalier enough to make powerpoint presentations of the athletes they’ve hooked up with. But MOST (meaning a majority of) college girls? No freaking way.

    Mike C-

    Now on to something substantive. Before I met my GF, I had a girl I was fucking, and that literally was all it was. There was no dating. I went over to her house and fucked her. This went on about a month to a month and a half. I actually met my GF during the same time period I was fucking her and there was some overlap. I don’t think I was “totally forthright” if by that you mean I told one “Oh yeah, I was with X last night and fucked her”. In many of these rotation/harem arrangements there is very much a don’t ask don’t tell policy and usually the woman has an idea she isn’t the only one he is seeing. Now if directly asked “Are you seeing or fucking anyone else” I would have answered honestly because I think lying is wrong. Full stop. But there really is no moral obligation to lay every single card on the table if you are not directly asked. I’m not sure if that is what you mean by totally forthright. In the situation above, I realized my GF was the one, and I simply faded from the other girl’s life.

    Long story ahead.. (beta female story?)

    It’s always heartening to hear stories of when men knew they had found ‘the one,’ but at the same time this is kind of depressing, and here’s the story why- the guy I was dating (not that long, but pretty intensely) invited me to a reunion with his college friends. I couldn’t go because it was my cousin’s birthday (and my family is conservative enough there’s no way I’m inviting some dude, let alone some white dude, to come with me and get stared at mad hard the whole night). Saw him the next day and he tells me he ‘ended up’ hooking up with former hookup buddy who had showed up; they were both very drunk (college reunion and I guess they decided to act like it was college again). It seems like he feels guilty about it if he’s telling me, but he doesn’t actually apologize. We hadn’t had an exclusivity talk (we did have a waiting-for-intimacy talk), but we had been seeing each other at least briefly like 3-4x a week so I had kind of assumed he just didn’t have time to be dating anyone else. I react very emotionally, might have cried.. but he tells me he wants to “keep going and see where this goes.” I can’t handle it, we decide to break it off. Heart.. broken. Heard from a mutual friend that he’s been spending a lot of time with former (now current again) hookup buddy. With lots of fucking going on, I’m sure.

    I know there have been posts where you and other commenters talked about this, about how your personal experience was such that girls never really had a problem with the soft harem situation. I dunno. Part of me is wishing he had just never told me and that I could go on in the reverie I was feeling. But most of me feels like I wasn’t some combination of hot/cool/fun/”one of the guys” enough to keep him interested. Like I’m not good enough, and never will be. Maybe this isn’t the case for girls who have actually had sexual partners and long-term relationships during their formative years, or for girls who didn’t grow up being told by family members and queen bee ‘friends’ that they were unattractive on a daily basis. It was also just kind of crushing knowing that the person you’re teetering on the edge of falling in love with was drunkenly sticking his dick in some blonde girl whose facebook picture is of her in a bikini with face-eating sunglasses on, double-fisting fruity drinks with umbrellas in them. I hate wondering about what she must have been wearing, her touching him, the suggestive things she may have said. And now whether they are emotionally bonding, when he said “I like talking to you, you’re so easy to talk to” to me (it’s because I never know what to say so I just ask questions and listen). Hate myself for wondering about this. I just can’t help but feel like the only way into a man’s heart is through his penis.

    os yeah I know sleuth was a troll but that’s why promiscuous women affect other women.

  • purplesneakers

    it occurs to me that it seems like i am just “blaming the other woman.’ ftr, we had met before, while i was dating this person. but i’m still “blaming the other woman” and endorsing a “boys will be boys” attitude, aren’t i? i guess that’s my problem with slut shaming.

    re: the talk of beta females (75% of women) getting left in the dust. how does that work? is it based on looks on a 1-10 scale? even though i thought the popular contention in the red pill sphere was that it was girls in the middle of the spectrum who were sluttiest. but how would that even work, when there is this distinction between ‘hot’ and ‘pretty.’

  • Gorbachev

    Susan,

    When we approach other human beings as immoral or amoral emotional manipulators, we debase them and ourselves too. (Cads are immoral because they actively engage in dishonesty.) I would advise any person, regardless of sex, to run away from such a person as fast as their legs can carry them and never look back. That way lies heartache and degradation, for both men and women.

    Sorry Susan. I was generally referencing and wrote that bit before i read what you’d written.

    I realize I’m basically saying the same thing you are. But with mildly different perspective.

    I don’t think in this situation the guy has any obligation to be the one upholding decent behavior, given that the woman was so disrespectful.

    As a guy, I say a man has no obligation to uphold a higher set of moral values when a woman is basically abusing him.

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

      @Gorbachev

      I don’t think in this situation the guy has any obligation to be the one upholding decent behavior, given that the woman was so disrespectful.

      As a guy, I say a man has no obligation to uphold a higher set of moral values when a woman is basically abusing him.

      I totally agree. For the record, I don’t believe any man is required to treat a woman with respect unless she is worthy of it. And I don’t believe in chivalry of any kind. It’s nice when it happens, but it’s a gift, not a requirement. Women should be deeply appreciative of any man’s generosity and good treatment.

  • Gorbachev

    Susan,
    I’ll disagree on the first. First, I think there are probably a handful of men in any city who have game that tight. Roissy and Roosh and the masters of the universe in this regard, and they happen to live in the same city. It’s like the movie Les Liasons Dangereuses – John Malcovich seduces and destroys the Michelle Pfeiffer character, a woman of the highest innocence and moral standing. She’s quite different than all the women he’s had before her (bar sluts) – she’s the ultimate challenge – and she takes a lot more work.

    I’ve often said that all women are susceptible to Game. But some go down fast, and some take work.

    This is true. Some take more work.

    If you want to call some “bar sluts”, that’s okay, but for the men out there: This is an arbitrary designation.

    All women who are straight succumb to the same psychological cues, depending on circumstances. Some just have a higher boiling temperature.

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

    As a guy, I say a man has no obligation to uphold a higher set of moral values when a woman is basically abusing him.

    I actually agree with this but then why extract more sex from his abuser? You say that it will return his self steem but he is still giving her power if his self steem is based on treating her the same way. And if he makes a habit of getting back at every person that wronged him to feel good about himself chances are he will end up in a darker place than he is now. The lesson should be never accept this treatment and find out before investing anything on any other woman. This one should be dumped and forgotten. I personally believe in revenge when there is a point to it, and I will say that I will be more understanding of getting back at her in the heat of the moment he find out he was taken by a chump but getting back at her after coldly calculating how…dunno that sounds too close to sociopathy for men and woman alike. Once the superior brain is involved picking the lower road says a lot more about the person than the offense, YMMV as usual.

  • Gorbachev

    SUsan,

    No matter how logical and rational any player or his advice seems, or how “fair and balanced” he seems, any advice he gives to a man is being filtered through the prism of collective male interest and his own personal interest as a player.

    I would argue the second does far more damage, as morality is rarely a concern, and emotional manipulation is his most used tool. The player always seeks to steal something via deception and illusion.

    Preventing damage to society is not a concern when giving advice to a man. Or a woman.

    Your advice to women takes their interest as central.

    I would say:

    When giving advice to men, don’t consider extraneous factors.

    This is what I oppose. Your advice is naturally shifted towards giving women the best deal. Were it anything else, I’d be shocked.

    I’m not blaming you; and perhaps the same advice given to men is more socially damaging overall. Both are irrelevant.

    When giving advice to men, consider his interests primary in the same way as considering a woman’s interest primary the other way around.

    Men are equal too, right?

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

      @Gorbachev

      When giving advice to men, consider his interests primary in the same way as considering a woman’s interest primary the other way around.

      Men are equal too, right?

      Of course, and for that reason I will never resent a man’s pointing out to me here when I’ve stepped in it. As a woman I try to be fair but I cannot divorce myself from my own biology or gender. However, I do promise to apply reason and reflection to any point a guy wishes to make.

      I understand why guys don’t want me giving advice. Mike C asked me to recuse myself from any discussion advising men. But I get a lot of emails from guys and I’m certainly not going to refer them to Rollo. However, I am happy to air them in the open for men to respond to. Actually, I usually put that right in the body of the reponse – “I’m a woman, let’s see what the guys at HUS have to say.”

  • Mike C

    purplesneakers,

    A couple of thoughts on your story with the caveat that I obviously don’t know how this guy felt about you or the depth of the relationship you had.

    It seems like he feels guilty about it if he’s telling me, but he doesn’t actually apologize.

    Could have been guilt, and could have just been him being honest. He may have felt (quite likely) that he had nothing to apologize for given the fact that you weren’t officially exclusive.

    We hadn’t had an exclusivity talk (we did have a waiting-for-intimacy talk), but we had been seeing each other at least briefly like 3-4x a week so I had kind of assumed he just didn’t have time to be dating anyone else.

    In my opinion, in this SMP, the practical thing to do as a woman is assume the guy is seeing other women until you are officially exclusive. Maybe the most beta of betas still play by sort of the only date one person at a time notion, but pretty much any attractive guy somewhat aware of Game and SMP conditions isn’t going to play by those rules. So I guess my thought would be hold back some emotional investment until you really are officially exclusive.

    I react very emotionally, might have cried.. but he tells me he wants to “keep going and see where this goes.”

    Just want to note this shows some interest because later you say he wasn’t interested.

    I know there have been posts where you and other commenters talked about this, about how your personal experience was such that girls never really had a problem with the soft harem situation. I dunno. Part of me is wishing he had just never told me and that I could go on in the reverie I was feeling.

    Well….I dunno either except to draw on my personal experience. I had a few periods of time in between monogamous LTRs where I was dating multiple women (not necessarily having sex with all of them) and I can say it is hard for me to recall being pushed hard or questioned about what else I was doing or who I was seeing. I think on some level most of them realized it wasn’t serious so questioning me would have seemed off base but I wasn’t seeing a lot of these girls 3-4 times a week. I remember something I learned from listening to David DeAngelo which is that seeing a girl 3-4 times a week or more is going to send her into girlfriend mode even if you haven’t talked about it. You probably perceived yourself more as a girlfriend even though you hadn’t really officially discussed it. I think the lesson there is to have that communication earlier especially if you are getting emotionally invested. Don’t assume anything you haven’t discussed.

    Hate myself for wondering about this. I just can’t help but feel like the only way into a man’s heart is through his penis.

    I definitely don’t think this is true. I’ve covered this though in great detail in numerous previous comments. Sex is important to a relationship, but earning a man’s true emotional investment comes from many other things besides just sex.

  • Gorbachev

    Sigrid,

    Your attempt to embarrass people by calling them ad-hominem nasty names (Sexist! Womyn hater! etc.) in an attempt to shame people, and the tsk-tsking you engage in, may win you points in a debate in academe, where people are trained to self-censor and and adhere to ideological positions without self-criticism.

    It’s not going to go over well here. Susan and troupe are interested in actual results on the ground, not theory. Theory is nice, but theory is what created such a toxic dating environment for the young.

    You may be joyful single and older. Good for you! Exellent!

    But your entire long comment was engineered to say one thing:

    “How dare you shame me for being single, my choice is perfectly legitimate, and just as good if not better than choices other people make. I’m happy! Everyone can be happy this way!”

    it’s the same as the tiny minority of polys, lesbians, gay men and other outliers who want the entire socio-sexual script rewritten to “normalize” whatever any tiny minority wants to do.

    That’s fine – whatever makes you happy, good for you. But the problem arises when this is then extended to the mass of people who aren’t made happy by this situation.

    Incidentally, your entire letter reads like this:

    “How dare you say my choices were not optimal. You can’t judge me!”

    That’s fine.

    When you turn around and give advice to younger women to follow your path, consider:

    Is this the *BEST* advice to give to a random slice-of-the-curve woman 15 years younger than you?

    Stop thinking about yourself and avoiding having others judge you. Their opinions of you should be irrelevant.

    It is well and truly *not* about you.

    Such is the narcissism inherent in all “don’t judge me!” Politically Correct groupthink.

  • Gorbachev

    Susan,

    I see your point. Actually, I have no problem with your advice generally. I think it’s very apt.

    I would just color it with more individual male interest stripped of social responsibility either way. I’m not thinking of how the behavior affects wowen at all; just how it affects male interests.

    Should a woman ask *me* for advice, I’d try to do the same – consider only her interests.

  • Gorbachev

    Susan,
    I want to point that out because in this case, having been treated with outrageous disrespect by this woman, full on dread followed by a dump is entirely fair and appropriate. Where I reject the use of dread is as preventative maintenance for a healthy relationship.

    We’re in agreement, then.

  • Gorbachev

    Susan,

    True: Some men give wretched advice to men, instructing them to basically be evil bastards.

    I’ve always said, personally, that dishonesty in relationships is unnecessary.

    BTW, when I said “Many women” who give advice, it was not specifically referencing you; just the danger in generally taking advice from women.

    You are much more balanced.than most.

  • Mike C

    it occurs to me that it seems like i am just “blaming the other woman.’ ftr, we had met before, while i was dating this person. but i’m still “blaming the other woman” and endorsing a “boys will be boys” attitude, aren’t i? i guess that’s my problem with slut shaming.

    That wasn’t my sense of what you were saying unless that is what you thought and meant.

    re: the talk of beta females (75% of women) getting left in the dust. how does that work? is it based on looks on a 1-10 scale? even though i thought the popular contention in the red pill sphere was that it was girls in the middle of the spectrum who were sluttiest. but how would that even work, when there is this distinction between ‘hot’ and ‘pretty.’

    I’m not exactly sure what you mean by “how does that work”. Maybe you can clarify your question. To your latter question, I think it is 6-7s that are the sluttiest because to put it crudely it is substantially easier for a guy who is a 8 to get fast sex out of a 6 versus an 8 and my guess is some girls who are 6s go that route with the notion they are going to get that 8 as a boyfriend.

  • Emily

    >> ” But most of me feels like I wasn’t some combination of hot/cool/fun/”one of the guys” enough to keep him interested.”

    I think this idea of wanting to be one of the laid-back cool/”one of the guys” girls is pretty much why a lot of girls don’t initiate the “exclusivity talk” when secretly they really want to. A lot of girls worry that initiating any sort of “talk” makes them look desperate.

    I think this is also how a lot of girls let themselves get suckered into Friends-With-Benefits arrangements when they’re actually looking for a boyfriend. “Whatever, it’s just sex. It doesn’t mean anything. It’s cool. …WHY WON’T HE CALL ME??????!!!!!!!!! *sobs*”

  • Dogsquat

    Ana said:

    “I actually agree with this but then why extract more sex from his abuser?”
    B==================D

    One reason is that the guy internalizes the fact that he has a lot of control in the relationship, that he can take what he needs rather than having it bestowed upon him.

    It gets his head on straight. He’s exercising his agency.

    Dudes can read about Game all they want. They can believe in it, think about it, fantasize….

    Actually doing something you’ve only read about – and having it work as advertised hits you right square in the xiphoid process. I think it’s got to be experienced to truly understand how powerful that moment is.

    Like I said earlier, I’m not an advocate of this in most cases. If the guy’s self-esteem is shot and he’s feeling utterly powerless, though, I think it bears consideration.

    I agree with you that most dudes aren’t going to pull it off, though. There’s going to be too much attachment to the girl, too much wishful thinking.

    You’ve almost got to hate a girl to punish them like this. Few guys get to that point until long after it’s possible to pull this off.

  • Dogsquat

    @Mike C:

    Funny you should mention David DeAngelo.

    I was laying in bed the other day, watching my ol’ lady try on bathing suits. I was just musing, enjoying the view, and I suddenly realized that without DeAngelo, I’d never have been as happy as I am.

    Those free weekly emails were my first exposure to Game, and I think his cocky and funny stuff has become a permanent part of my personality.

    I owe that dude a beer.

  • http://alphagamespot.blogspot.com VD

    I didn’t mean to tout my credentials in that manner, but I see how it came off that way, and I regret it.

    You don’t have any credentials, Sigrid. You’ve got a Master’s degree. So does Susan. BFD. And of course you regret it. You didn’t think you’d get caught flashing falsies.

    I’m embarrassed for anyone who boasts anti-feminism, or somehow sees a “Female Supremacy” movement. I’m flat out ashamed of Susan – and while she’s won’t admit moral judgement in her use of “shame”, I decidedly do in my use of “ashamed,” on behalf of many men and women across class, race, and gender, who have benefited from the continuing evolution of the feminist movement.

    So your solution to stop people from shaming sluts is to… attempt shaming them? It would appear that you, for one, believe shaming is an effective technique, which no doubt is why you fear it being directed at sluts. I would ask who in the name of the Ninth Circle of Hell you are to speak for anyone, except I recognize that you’re referring to an entirely nonexistent class of people.

    Although I’m sure you’ll ridicule me, again, for sharing anything about myself, to refute a bit of your criticism, while I currently sit in “the ivory tower” – I am from a working class family, and worked for over a decade in your beloved free-market, in real estate finance and development in New York City before graduate school…not as a secretary.

    More than a decade… so let’s see… so at the very time you were helping the big banks financially rape homeowners, I was warning them that housing was in a bubble and they should not be taking on debt from people like you. Forget sluttiness and shame, you should feel a deep sense of remorse for what you did to hundreds, if not thousands of people. Furthermore, it’s very clear why you’re now in grad school; with the Z1 sector down $3.5 trillion from 2008, it’s a lot harder to find a job in financial parasitism.

    You have the precision of a coiled cobra, with much less empathy.

    You are too kind, sir, too kind. I am only glad to find one who finds some small modicum of amusement in my humble rhetoric.

  • Dogsquat

    Oh, Purplesneakers, my heart goes out to you.

    What you’ve been through is tremendously painful. It is, objectively, a quite horrible experience. It can fuck you up for weeks, months, years. Some people never recover, and you’re never quite the same again.

    It does get better, though. I promise you on everything I hold dear, it does. Every minute Mickey’s big hand moves on your Mickey Mouse watch is a victory. It’s one step further from your personal ground zero.

    A few things that might help/unsolicited advice/a different frame to consider:

    You’ve just been hired at a new job. No, it doesn’t pay anything, and you’ve got to keep doing all the regular stuff you do. At first, you’ll hate this job. You actually can’t quit, either. You’ll be very happy about the opportunities this job allows you eventually….but for now, it’s gonna suck.

    Here are your duties:

    1. Maintain your dignity. No drunken declarations of eternal love, or tearful demands for explanation, ok? That shit won’t get you anywhere, and makes you look foolish. You never know who’s watching, either.

    2. Think of the person as having died. You can’t mend fences with a dead person, and rekindling a physical relationship with someone in that physical condition is legally and morally problematic. You may rage in your head about them, or talk with a close friend, but all other avenues are cut off.

    3. Use your negative emotions as fuel for self improvement. Think of one thing you felt/feel insecure about. Fix that shit. Are you insecure about your weight? Get in the gym. Put some bikini pics up on your own Facebook if you want. Feel dumb? Read some books. Are you confused about how your mind works? Write that shit out on a private blog or journal. You get the idea. Pain and rejection are great catalysts for personal growth.

    4. Go over to Susan’s sidebar and click on Danny from 504. Find his post on Oneitis from Fall of last year. Read it, and read the comments. It will help.

    5. Do not do anything permanent! This is the most important responsibility you have. Anything permanent is defined as:

    -developing an addiction (booze, benzos, weed, etc.)
    -picking up a viral STD
    -failing a class
    -getting fired
    -suicide (more people fuck this up than you would possibly believe)
    -alienating good friends
    -negative contact with law enforcement (assault charges, DUI, restraining order against you, etc.)

    You’ll get another shot at love if you want it. You’re smart and you’ve got a good attitude about this stuff. HUS is a great place to vent about it, too, and I doubt Susan would have a problem with a little off-topic conversation. Most of us have been through it, some many times.

    Above all – It gets better.

    I am a paramedic. Listen to me – I know these things.

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

      HUS is a great place to vent about it, too, and I doubt Susan would have a problem with a little off-topic conversation. Most of us have been through it, some many times.

      I’m glad to see purplesneakers getting support here. I love off-topic conversation. I feel like this is a living room, and people show up, pull up a chair, introduce a new topic. It’s fun. I’m pretty attached to this community, and the relationships here would never have formed if comments were restricted to addressing my musings.

  • Dogsquat

    Emily said:

    “I think this idea of wanting to be one of the laid-back cool/”one of the guys” girls is pretty much why a lot of girls don’t initiate the “exclusivity talk” when secretly they really want to. A lot of girls worry that initiating any sort of “talk” makes them look desperate. ”
    ________________________

    Yep.

    This is a bizzare self-imposed chink in the defenses of many young women. They’re not just shooting themselves in the foot, they’re firing a .338 Lapua right through both ankles. It’s totally insane.

    You’ve got to ask for what you want. You’ve got to perceive the answer.

    Hint – the answer will be rendered in actions.

  • Gorbachev

    It seems to me that “dark game” has nothing to do with game itself, but with the motivation of the guy.
    As Susan knows, game is just a tool. How it’s used is much like the use of a gun or fire. Fire can warm you and game can help you attract a suitable wife. Fire can also burn down buildings and destroy civilization. Game can help you utterly destroy another person’s emotional life and help you sleep with hundreds of women.

    It’s nothing more than a tool. In fact, understanding how easily they’re emotionally manipulated is gold for both men and women.

  • Gorbachev

    BTW,

    Once you learn to decode them, the resident troll showed us all how much pretense and empty rhetoric there is in PC land.

    People throw around the word “misogynist’ way too easily.

  • Mike C

    People throw around the word “misogynist’ way too easily.

    No doubt. And to my dismay, the usage is picking up steam as emotions and disagreement elevate in intergender dynamics discussions. It is one of those words that essentially kills off any rational discussion. It’s like if people are discussing affirmative action, or any other racial question, and someone says “you are just a racist”. Where do you go from there? Essentially, the debate is over as now you’ve cast someone as the villain. Don’t get me wrong. There are people where the label racist or misogynist very much apply. But using it for people you simply disagree with on a substantive issue is simply a cheap rhetorical trick.

  • Lokland

    @MM

    “What you just described is one of the reasons Viagra was invented!”

    Funny story but thats not actually why Viagra was invented.

  • this is Jen

    Passer_By March 24, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    @megaman

    “Therefore, what?”

    therefore study “game” or whatever you want to call it and use those parts appropriate to obtaining and maintaining a LTR. You seemed to be objecting to the fact that Gorby encouraged him to “learn game.” Otherwise, I’m not sure what your point was about needing different skills.

    “A dad would basically be telling his son to treat other peoples’ daughters as disposable, as if they’re not every bit as important as his own daughter. ”

    ————————————————————————————–

    Somehow, my mom got it thru to me to not let men treat me as disposable. I am always shocked when I see women letting that happen. I can only hope I pass that on to my daughters. An attitude like that has gotten me away from a few sticky situations. Thanks Mom.

    As for my son, well, I will mostly leave that to my husband. I want him to turn out like his dad. There is a set of twin girls in his ( second grade) class that my husband will joke about with him in front of me all the time.

  • this is Jen

    on, I’m sure.

    I know there have been posts where you and other commenters talked about this, about how your personal experience was such that girls never really had a problem with the soft harem situation. I dunno. Part of me is wishing he had just never told me and that I could go on in the reverie I was feeling. But most of me feels like I wasn’t some combination of hot/cool/fun/”one of the guys” enough to keep him interested. Like I’m not good enough, and never will be. Maybe this isn’t the case for girls who have actually had sexual partners and long-term relationships during their formative years, or for girls who didn’t grow up being told by family members and queen bee ‘friends’ that they were unattractive on a daily basis. It was also just kind of crushing knowing that the person you’re teetering on the edge of falling in love with was drunkenly sticking his dick in some blonde girl whose facebook picture is of her in a bikini with face-eating sunglasses on, double-fisting fruity drinks with umbrellas in them. I hate wondering about what she must have been wearing, her touching him, the suggestive things she may have said. And now whether they are emotionally bonding, when he said “I like talking to you, you’re so easy to talk to” to me (it’s because I never know what to say so I just ask questions and listen). Hate myself for wondering about this. I just can’t help but feel like the only way into a man’s heart is through his penis.
    ———————————————————————————–

    I wish I had good advice for you, here. I do know how you feel- Its a horrible feeling….it hurts it hurts it hurts. I would have done the same thing you did in that situation.

    wondering what I would tell my own daughter here

    I guess if he moved on that quick, he wasn’t good enough for you.

  • this is Jen

    Dogsquat March 25, 2012 at 4:29 am

    Oh, Purplesneakers, my heart goes out to you.
    ================================================

    Dogsquat,

    Every women should print out that entire thing, and you, sir, should write a book … And raise a gaggle of daughters! Bravo!!!

  • http://Dannyfrom504.wordpress.com Dannyfrom504

    Tia-

    This is why i don’t comment, I’d get drilled.

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

      Tia-

      This is why i don’t comment, I’d get drilled.

      Pish Posh. Your “stay up” mantra is something we could all use around here.

  • Gorbachev

    Susan,

    Roissy and Roosh were entry-level drugs. Most people stop there.

    The problem is this.

    Once you take the red pill, it’s extremely difficult to go back. Society sells such a bad deal to men, so consistently and outrageously awful, especially in dating, that once women and dating is more or less demystified, there’s no rational position left but naked self-interest.

    Aside from HUS, virtually nowhere approaches men and women from a neutral standpoint; and you yourself still place a significant burden on men to “man up” and be decent, though you balance this – occasionally – by requiring the same of women.

    You’re attacked by both sides aggressively for doing this. Feminism is explicitly about rights without responsibilities, and the MRM and game worlds are about opportunities and minimizing costs.

    The problem is that women have huge hand under the age of 20. As men age, they develop massive advantages.

    I share the same vote as other men: Having been screwed over, in my 30′s I’ve got no interest in a balanced equation. As far as I’m concerned, women are in general owed nothing. The frank level of crass ingratitude and expectation among women in America is so fabulously off-kilter that misandry is basically the norm. And we can’t even discuss it in public.

    The rage you get from the men is all a reaction to this. There’s an appreciable hypersensitivity to calls for curtailing male options.

    I’m not justifying it. I’m just telling you what you already know.

    You do this, you need a thick skin. That said, I think you have one.

    And that said – both myself and everyone I know is more or less unsympathetic to the concerns women bring to the table, as a general rule, in the same way that most women are utterly unconcerned with the interests of men.

    You can expect the haterade to become standard issue.
    Apparently, you’re considered a manifestation of delusional true evil by feminists around the country.
    And men who have taken the red pill will be wholly uninterested in balancing things out for women. In fact, the general contempt men have for women complaining in their 30′s and 40′s has solid roots in the punishment most of them men suffered in their teens and 20′s.

    You’re right: it’s a cultural war. It’s taking no prisoners. Both sides are out for their own interests alone, to hell with anyone else.

    Those who take the middle path make enemies of everyone. Good luck with that.

    Personally, I still say when giving advice to men, pretty much the male perspective is all that matters.

    Telling men to be nice and consider what society makes their opponents’ views sounds suspiciously like calls to “man up!” and take one for the team.

    I know you don’t man it that way, but it does come across much of the time like this, given the perspective recovering men generally have.

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

      @Gorbachev

      Thanks for your perspective, it rings very true to me. That’s why, in the end, I write just about every blog post for women. I really don’t presume to tell guys what to do. Where I run into resistance is in telling women which guys to reject. I mentioned this a couple of days ago. There’s a sort of bimodal distribution in the manosphere. A lot of beta guys resent the natural alphas who get all the easy sex. At the same time, they understandably are eager to acquire the traits that would allow them to do the same. Still others would rather find a woman without resorting to such tactics, and hold out hope that they can find a life partner without turning into a major asshole. What happens is that when I write a post for women advising them to kick assholes to the curb, some guys are pleased and others are resentful. I’m not sure how to address this, or if I can. I basically accept that I’m not going to please all of the people all of the time.

  • Gorbachev

    Susan,
    I understand why guys don’t want me giving advice. Mike C asked me to recuse myself from any discussion advising men. But I get a lot of emails from guys and I’m certainly not going to refer them to Rollo. However, I am happy to air them in the open for men to respond to. Actually, I usually put that right in the body of the reponse – “I’m a woman, let’s see what the guys at HUS have to say.”

    On the contrary. I want you to continue giving advice.

    But I think all of the men to whom you give advice need to also be warned that they need a man’s perspective as well. And that the man’s perspective is going to likely favor their interests more generously.

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

      But I think all of the men to whom you give advice need to also be warned that they need a man’s perspective as well. And that the man’s perspective is going to likely favor their interests more generously.

      Fair enough. I like you, I think you’re very fair. I hope you’ll stick around and give advice to men here. Just don’t cross the line into what we all know is Dark Game. There are other sites for that.

  • Herb

    @Gorbachev

    You’re right: it’s a cultural war. It’s taking no prisoners. Both sides are out for their own interests alone, to hell with anyone else.

    While I can’t disagree (I’ve been saying something similar since the dread post) it strikes me as particularly sad this morning.

    Friday night was the last ballet of the season here was James Kudelka’s The Man in Black, a suite of six dances for three men and one woman set to six Johnny Cash songs off the American albums he made with Rick Rubin.

    A couple of the song Kudelka chose are broken romance songs, Four Strong Winds and If You Could Read My Mind. While both are about the heart break and loss of love ending they are both very beautiful and express something deeper than pump and dump, shrewing, revenge, and making sure you can say “I won the relationship” after the breakup.

    I guess it’s no surprise that these songs date from 1963 and 1970 respectively. While some would say the war (the sexual revolution) was in full swing neither side really knew it was a war yet. Thus they could write and to respond to songs about breaking up that were full of sorrow and missed the unique things that could only come from two people becoming, even if very briefly, something greater than merely the sum of the two of them.

    Now we rush to find better tactics to become something less than that sum, briefly, out of a grand strategy of “getting the most immediate good now and I’ll fuck someone else tomorrow.”

    I’m no Pollyanna. We’re far enough gone that the only way out is through and through means a SMP/MMP so nasty it forces our children (or grand children or who knows how long) to recoil in horror and reclaim what we lost.

    But having been remind of an era that I was alive through where love and “romance” meant something other that the best strategy to strip mine the opposite sex for resources by what I consider the most moving of the arts (ballet) using music that captures even beauty in sorrow I’m hard pressed to see much value in all the fighting.

    Even more off topic aside, here the female dancer was Lisa Barrieau who is still only an apprentice and was incredible. Her acting in Sam Hall shows she’s read to move up to the corps.

  • VD

    This is an interesting statement because it clearly shifts the pendulum in the direction of male as perpetrator and woman as victim. And you note this is a change in your views which is consistent with you moving further and further away from the Game type perspective.

    MikeC, Susan has been very explicit about the purpose of HUS from the start. It is by a woman, for young women. There is nothing wrong with this, and indeed, she merits credit for being among the first women to recognize the truth of Game as well as some of its merits. Women need to understand the core truths of Game as badly as men do, they may actually need it worse. The fact that Susan is a decent and fair-minded woman who likes and is sympathetic to men tends to somewhat confuse some of her male readers with regards to her primary purpose, which is to convey wisdom and advice to the cadre of young women with whom she meets regularly.

    One cannot expect complete objectivity from Susan anymore than one can expect it from Roissy, Dalrock, or me. Furthermore, since she is not only a woman, but a mother, she is going to have certain emotional triggers, sensitivities, and reactions that differ greatly from those of the single men who make up the greater portion of the Game blogging population. Just as Athol, Keoni, and I have different perspectives from Roissy, Badger, and Yohami since we are married – we speak with experience of things they know only in theory – Susan’s perspective is even further removed, being female.

    But that doesn’t make it any less legitimate. If she can’t relate as well to the pain of an omega male who has never known any positive female attention from anyone but his mother, neither can we male Game bloggers, no matter how fully we have mastered Game, truly understand the position of the woman who experiences the predatory male gaze from the moment she leaves the house. I don’t always agree with Susan. I don’t expect Susan to always agree with me. But then, that is true of every single male Game blogger as well, and Susan is particularly valuable due to a) her unique perspective, and b) her extraordinarily decent nature. The latter is not a bad thing, not in an intellectual coterie presently dominated by ruthless and cold-hearted narcissists.

    And let’s face it. Much of the spite is actually envy. After all, why should a woman’s blog become one of the primary mainstream faces of Game? But the relative popularity of HUS was predictable by media history and Game theory alike; I believe I even told Susan as much prior to the article in The Atlantic juicing her traffic. In almost every art and science, the first female adaption exceeds its male predecessors in terms of relative popularity because it tends to appeal to a wider audience. Gorbachev pointed out that Roissy and Roosh were entry-level drugs, but Susan is now the alcohol to their marijuana. This is not a bad thing. The audience is growing. More young men and young women alike are taking the red pill, even if some are only imbibing it in a less potent liquid form.

    Not everyone can stomach Roissy’s grisly eloquence, Roosh’s crude brutality, Rollo’s cold reason, Athol’s habitual TMI, or my own intellectual contempt. We are fortunate, therefore, that “Aunt Susan” exists. If she didn’t, we’d be well-served to invent her.

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

    Herb–very well put.

    Going back even beyond than the 1960s and 70s, your comment reminds me of something written by Sebastian Haffner, who came of age in Germany between the wars. Here, Haffner is describing a girl nicknamed (oddly enought) “Teddy,” with whom he fell in love circa 1929:

    “…at a certain stage of life, about the age of twenty, a love affair and the choice of partner affect one’s destiny and character more than at others. For the woman one loves stands for more than just herself; a whole view of the world, a notion of life, and ideal, if you will, but one come alive, made flesh and blood…We all loved her, the bearer of this name, an Austrian girl, slight, honey-blonde, freckled, lithe as a flame…Our circle had a goddess in its midst. The woman who was once Teddy may now be older and more earthbound, and none of us may still live life at the same emotional pitch as then, but that there was once a Teddy and that we established those raptures cannot be taken from us.”

  • chris

    Not sure if you’ve seen this but…

    Has the Sexual Revolution Been Good for Women? No
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304724404577297422171909202.html

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

      @chris

      Thanks, my husband showed me that article yesterday. Interestingly, I found myself agreeing more with the “Yes” writer than the “No” writer about some things. I plan to address it tomorrow. I was disappointed the article focused so heavily on contraception though – that’s obviously a relevant issue today, and the Pill did play a big role, but there’s a lot more to it than that, as we know.

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

        @purplesneakers

        One of the most valuable lessons I’ve ever learned was taught to me by Ramble. I kept bitching about guys walking away, wanting casual only, avoiding commitment, disappearing without explanation, etc. And he kept saying, “That’s a feature, not a bug.” I think that’s the case here.

        You developed a relationship with someone that you felt was emotionally intimate. You made the assumption that he felt the same way you did, and that those feelings of intimacy translated into an intention to be exclusive and in a relationship. His actions make it very clear that not only were you not on the same page, you weren’t compatible. Any of these might be true:

        1. He has no intention of committing to anyone right now – hence the “see where it goes.”
        2. He did not understand that his behavior would hurt you – hence his telling you about it.
        3. He hooked up with an old FWB to instill dread. He was shocked when you ended it.

        Or any one of a hundred other possibilities. The point is, you are fortunate that you did not spend two years with him. You applied a filter and he got caught in it early on. That sucks, but as Ramble says, that’s a feature. Filtering out men who are a poor match for you is a critical part of the strategy for finding a life partner. As Dogsquat says, you will recover from this, and then you will be emotionally available to someone who has more to offer. Remember, you’re looking for ONE mate. You want to disqualify all the others, though admittedly it is not enjoyable.

  • OffTheCuff

    purple #403: What a tough story.

    “Maybe this isn’t the case for girls who have actually had sexual partners and long-term relationships during their formative years”

    I’m not sure if it’s due to experience, vs. fear. My wife had some LTRs before she met me, but I’m pretty sure she insisted on being exclusive, and dumped them if they didn’t agree to it early on.

    I think the key problem here is that you were afraid to ask for exclusivity, when you wanted it. Yes, there is risk that he might say no. As you’ve found out, you can’t avoid this risk by avoiding the question and operating on assumption.

    Men have to learn this same lesson – if a man tries avoid risk by never asking women out (hoping they’ll confess their feelings for us), or asking them out but never sexually escalating… well, he will quite obviously get nothing.

    I think it’s actually a pretty fair division of risk. The amount of men who are giving it all up on platter (freely offering commitment) is going down, and that’s a good thing.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @ Cheerful

    You are the only, the ONLY, woman I’ve ever heard use “pimp” as a verb. Haven’t heard it that often coming form them as a -?-pronoun, noun? Heck, I went to Boise State, not Wharton. And Sigrid, any religious studies major from anythefuckwhere has nothing, nothing to feel/be snarky about.

  • SayWhaat

    purplesneakers,

    *hug* I’m very sorry that happened to you. Trust me — even if things had worked out and that guy had become your boyfriend, it would not have lasted and may in fact have been a terrible relationship. You were incompatible on a fundamental level.

    What happened to you has happened to me and many other girls many times over. One of the stories I’ve shared here was about a guy in college who asked me out on two dates, then stopped returning my texts. I found out much later that he had slept with one of my girlfriends about a week after our last date. Much later after that, he became the official boyfriend of another one of my friends. Every time I saw him with her, I felt a pang and wondered what was wrong with me that I couldn’t be considered girlfriend material. I wondered what I lacked that made him choose other girls instead of me.

    The answer is nothing. I didn’t lack anything; the guy was just a major tool. He dumped my girlfriend after 6 months of dating and blocked her on Facebook, but keeps sending her passive-aggressive emails (despite the fact that she lives across the country now). He even tried to date me again, despite all the tangled history he wove in my social circles!

    Moral of the story: forget guys like this. It sucks now, but later on you’ll shake your head and marvel at how you dodged a bullet. You filtered him out and that’s a very, very good thing.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    purplesneakers, I agree 100% with SayWhaat. Forget the guy, he wasn’t worth your time, and he was NOT relationship material. Be glad he showed his butt face early on instead of after you’ve been fully invested.

    Charm and femaleperspective, yep there are females who are the horrible counterparts to the a-hole males, and they will think nothing of ruining lives.

    This is why I don’t understand why supposedly smart “red pill” men would stick their penises in anything hot and willing. It’s so idiotic. My husband was going his own way because he saw right through that stuff, and he knew there are bad people out there whom he’d rather have nothing to do with than invite them into his life. That’s part of why I respect him so immensely.

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    @Susan

    I don’t know if beclowned is a real word, or one that you just made up, but I’m stealing it.

    Much as I want to, I can’t take credit, Susan. It was made popular by the Instapundit himself, Glenn Reynolds. It is a great word, though. ;-)

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

    No doubt. And to my dismay, the usage is picking up steam as emotions and disagreement elevate in intergender dynamics discussions. It is one of those words that essentially kills off any rational discussion. It’s like if people are discussing affirmative action, or any other racial question, and someone says “you are just a racist”. Where do you go from there? Essentially, the debate is over as now you’ve cast someone as the villain. Don’t get me wrong. There are people where the label racist or misogynist very much apply. But using it for people you simply disagree with on a substantive issue is simply a cheap rhetorical trick.

    ITA. I hereby declare mysoginist, woman hater, ginocentric… Hitler’s card anyone that used this words should be ignored till he/she shows some real arguments or at least a funny joke.

    I fear that we have many more Svengalis in the population, and such a novel would hardly get a second glance today. Narcissism really has exploded in the population.

    Oh intriguing not sure if I can stomach reading it but I never heard of that novel or the word before. But then there is nothing new under the sun isn’t it?

    Agreed. The proof is right there on his website. If Athol says dread is needed to resuscitate a marriage that is DOA, then I’m buying it. I also totally support Deti’s handling of his crisis. I couldn’t care less about being PC. Obviously

    I’m on record supporting a man pretending to being having an affair after his wife gave him the “I love you but I’m not in love with you” talk. I don’t oppose to dread but if you have a perfectly good wife that loves you instilled dread on her makes no sense, can be counterproductive and is just down right cruel if your wife shows the need for the dread, meaning that she has ignored you sexually for quite some time and only when another woman shows interest she gets you laid then by all means, of course keeping such a wife is a problem on itself but then that is a personal choice. We both are in the same page incentive drive behaviour if she is good enough without dread then there is no reason to add it, and she probably will resent it anyway, YMMV.

    Those who take the middle path make enemies of everyone.

    Being moderate sucks big time, indeed. Still we need more of us, extreme have their space but they should never outnumber the sane ones, YMMV.

  • SayWhaat

    This is why I don’t understand why supposedly smart “red pill” men would stick their penises in anything hot and willing. It’s so idiotic.

    Agreed. As Sassy pointed out in another thread, even attractive men will have certain standards for the girls they hook up with or date.

  • OffTheCuff

    Hope: “This is why I don’t understand why supposedly smart “red pill” men would stick their penises in anything hot and willing. It’s so idiotic.”

    It’s idiotic to *commit* to one, sure.

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

      @OTC

      What did SG think of The Hunger Games? I haven’t seen it yet – I loved the book and am afraid to see the movie.

  • Mike M.

    Vox, you hit that one so hard it’s red-shifted.

    And rightly so. Game is evolving. Pick-up artist Game works…if all you are interested in is cheap sex.

    But you don’t build a stable society on cheap sex. You build it with stable families. That’s been true for all societies, at all times. Which means men need to be learning Courtship/Marriage Game. Currently under development (and in a useable beta version now).

    However, there’s another half of the equation. The Red Pill For Women. I’m not sure it can be called Girl Game – it’s more like Recognizing Good Men. And snagging one, of course.

    And Susan is at the cutting edge of this. She’s doing a whole lot of good for society…more than people may realize at this time.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    OffTheCuff, it’s also idiotic to randomly sleep with girls especially drunk or without a condom, given all the STDs and false rape accusations.

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

    @SW
    “Does that clear it up?”

    Crystal clear. Thanks for the reply. The term “casual sex” is a contradiction in terms IMO, and I wouldn’t equate it with premarital sex either. But I don’t look at these things from a religious (i.e. sin-based) perspective either. This goes for men and women, but the context in which someone chooses to have sex, that’s important in sizing them up for a relationship. I suppose you could judge certain behavior as good or bad, and I’d agree good people sometimes do bad things. How “good” would they be in a relationship, that’s the ultimate judgment call.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Mike C, “I think the lesson there is to have that communication earlier especially if you are getting emotionally invested. Don’t assume anything you haven’t discussed.”

    I definitely agree with this. I also think your situation is somewhat different from purplesneaker’s, since you faded out of the other girl’s life when things were heating up with your girlfriend, whereas in purplesneaker’s case, this guy was having sex with this girl even while they were to the point of seeing each other 3-4 times a week.

    Not to mention he was “very drunk” which is another count against him. Who’s to say that he wouldn’t get “very drunk” the night of his bachelor’s party and sleep with some random girl right before they’re getting married? This is the kind of huge glaring red flag that she is lucky to have seen early on, instead of after they have gotten really serious.

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

      @Hope

      Who’s to say that he wouldn’t get “very drunk” the night of his bachelor’s party and sleep with some random girl right before they’re getting married? This is the kind of huge glaring red flag that she is lucky to have seen early on, instead of after they have gotten really serious.

      Jackie is away until after Easter, but she shared here that her engagement ended when her fiance cheated on her. What a devastating thing to have happen. And yet, true to form (Jackie is so positive) she said that she is grateful she learned before the wedding, not after they had children together.

  • Dinkney Pawson

    @390 jess

    She sent a confidential email to 3 close friends who then sent it on.

    “Two can keep a secret, if one of them is dead.”

    Her mistake, after screwing through the campus varsity, was telling anyone.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Incidentally, just before I met my husband, there was another guy I was interested in who was also “seeing other women” and didn’t make me a priority. So, I didn’t make him a priority either. I actively went out and looked for other men.

    Within a week or so I started developing a crush on my husband. He did have another girl he was talking to, but she had a boyfriend and was really just a platonic friend. We made each other the priority, and we both made it very clear that neither of us was actively dating anyone else. I also shut down my dating site profiles and stopped talking to the previous guy who was seeing other women.

    Lesson: Never make a man/woman a priority in your life when you are just an option.

  • deti

    Susan 329:

    deti: “But if the tingle’s not there in the first place, then he’s wasting his time and money. That is why the tingle has to be there.

    That’s all I ‘m saying.”

    SW: “That completely negates Game. Game is for guys who don’t get the tingle going on first sight (or they wouldn’t need it).”

    But you ignored the sentence I wrote before your extracted quote, which was something along the lines of “Hope, what you’re talking about is a man talking to a woman and the budding tingle germinates, grows and blossoms.” When you put it in that context, it makes more sense.

    She has to have some level of interest in the man, not just as a friend or acquaintance, some guy she knows from class or works with. There has to be something the man can work with. That “something” could be a spark of interest she has for him, a common interest they share, some preselection, some social proof, their being put together frequently for work — something.

    He can’t just whip up interest from absolutely nothing. If he tries to do that, he’s just an organ grinder, a court jester, a hapless dude in a minstrel show. Then he hears LJBF. NEXT!

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

      @deti

      He can’t just whip up interest from absolutely nothing. If he tries to do that, he’s just an organ grinder, a court jester, a hapless dude in a minstrel show. Then he hears LJBF. NEXT!

      Yeah, I’d agree with that, sorry for misunderstanding that. There has to be fertile ground there where the tingle can grow. (Terrible mixed metaphor, I know).

  • Charm

    Lesson: Never make a man/woman a priority in your life when you are just an option.

    +1

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    deti, I think you’re using the word “tingle” as a stand-in for general attraction. There’s another very real physiological female vaginal/uterine tingle that happens. This might be where the confusion lies with the usage of the word “tingle.”

  • Charm

    This is why I don’t understand why supposedly smart “red pill” men would stick their penises in anything hot and willing. It’s so idiotic.

    This. Trust me, I don’t get it either. Its such a huge risk and the payoff doesn’t seem to be worth it to me.

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

    @Ms. Charm
    “This. Trust me, I don’t get it either. Its such a huge risk and the payoff doesn’t seem to be worth it to me.”

    You, Ana, and Hope have voiced this same opinion, which is refreshing. I’ve always wondered why this isn’t more of a DLV, but maybe it is not only because of the STD risk? A guy willing to sleep with any woman who would let him. How does a guy go from that to… “Trust me, I can be monogamous for life.”

  • Stargate Girl

    Susan-
    Hunger Games rocked. It was long. 2.5 hours. I was completely jazzed when I got home. Kept very faithful to the book, as far as possible. There is a lot of details about their district and things that they weren’t able to delve into, but things that were left out were good choices. I initially was skeptical about the actor chosen for Peeta, but ultimately I think he was a great choice. The girl playing Katniss was perfect, and I now know where the mother of all Cylons went. She is Katniss Mom :D Donald Sutherland plays President snow perfect-he plays sleazy soooo well. Didn’t really get to see Effie Trinket in detail like the book, but her character comes right through. Woody harrellson- not one of my fav actors- was excellent as Haymitch.

    definitely think this is worth seeing in the theater. I’d like to see it again. I’ll be at “catching fire” when it comes out too!

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

      @Stargate Girl

      Thanks for coming on and giving me the review! I’m going to make a point of catching it this week.

  • Charm

    @Megaman

    I think it is a bit of DLV to a certain type of woman. Like Hope mentioned in her post above, she noticed her husband because he wasn’t one of those guys that was impressed by the girls eager and willing to put out. Thats what piqued her interest. I think that a fair portion of women might not care about the women and or company you keep, but I’ve always been one to believe that it reflects you. If a guy has banged all type of “hot and willing” women and the thinks he can get with me….uh….it ain’t gonna happen. I’d be turned off. I can relate to Hope in that matter. A guy that remained unimpressed by those easy women would stand from the crowd immediately.

    Looking for someone worthy of filling the role as GF/fiance/wife is a difficult and lengthy process, but sleeping around with a handful of women in the mean time isn’t something I too much respect. If a serious relationship is what you want, then look exclusively for that. Keep looking until you find it.

    I think I’ve mentioned this before, but I’d be upset if I found out someone that was courting me was banging someone else on the side. I’d stop seeing the person. Maybe I don’t have the right to be upset but I would be. Like I said, if Im allowing you to court me, only you would be doing so. It means that I think we have a fair amount of compatibility and that we are using the “courting” phase to get to know each other better before deciding or exclusivity. Maybe Im projecting a bit, but if the feelings aren’t mutual then don’t waste my time as I’d rather not be one of your many plates.

  • OffTheCuff

    Mega: “A guy willing to sleep with any woman who would let him.”

    Wait, now you’re changing the topic. Hot and willing is very different than anybody willing (low standards).

  • deti

    “Susan is particularly valuable due to a) her unique perspective, and b) her extraordinarily decent nature. The latter is not a bad thing, not in an intellectual coterie presently dominated by ruthless and cold-hearted narcissists.”

    Agreed. However, I stand with Mike C and Gorbachev in that I suspect there are a lot of men reading around the manosphere who need to get a little more ruthless, cold-hearted and narcissistic in their dealings with women. And so the Ro’s fulfill their purpose. The men who read them don’t need to become cads to improve their lives and shake off the feminist shackles, and in fact most won’t become cads or players, banging 8s and 9s left and right. Most don’t have the horses or the drive to pull off full fledged Roissy-style game, and some don’t want it. I suspect a lot of them are married and need to go to MMSL.

    What they need is to reach down between their legs, feel those walnut sized thingies, and SACK UP. Some of them need to stand up for themselves and stop putting up with the ridiculous shit their women fling them on a regular basis. Others need to simply get the hell out of their toxic LTRs because it’s not working, it will never work, they need to realize There Will Always Be Another Woman, and find women who will love them for who and what they are.

    Still others need to, as William Shatner famously said, “get a life”. And still others are stuck in the feminist mindset of “be nice, be yourself”, need help getting out of it, and need to realize that BNBY is a recipe for complete failure in this SMV.

    Doing all of this, or even a little of it, means these men will have to develop some brass balls. They will have to get a little ruthless and vigilant in looking out for THEIR OWN interests. They need to develop a mindset of “I am the prize. I don’t have to put up with this shit. I don’t have to stay in a relationship that serves only her interests. I don’t even have to stay in a marriage in which I am routinely deprived, denigrated and disrespected. Maybe I don’t deserve better, but at the very least I don’t have to stay here. If this one doesn’t want me or love me, then I at least have a fighting chance of finding someone who does want me and will love me.”

    Meanwhile, we have the women who routinely write to Susan who say things like “Why don’t I have a boyfriend?”, the number one search phrase that directs traffic here. There are the girls who want their men to alpha up, those who wonder why sex doesn’t get men to commit, and those who wonder why they are attracted to some men and not others. There are the girls who’ve racked up high partner counts and who want out of the slut cul-de-sac.

    (I still chuckle at SW’s statement somewhere, made apparently purely out of frustration, which said something like “I don’t want to hear about why your hookup hasn’t called you back. He isn’t going to call you back, he isn’t going to commit, and he never will commit.” I think SW should just clip that and send it as an opener or closer for all her responses to such young women.)

    All I’m saying is that HUS is better suited for the latter, not the former.

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

      @deti

      The men who read them don’t need to become cads to improve their lives and shake off the feminist shackles, and in fact most won’t become cads or players, banging 8s and 9s left and right. Most don’t have the horses or the drive to pull off full fledged Roissy-style game, and some don’t want it.

      This is a piss poor excuse for the things that get written at these blogs. “Now, now, dear, no worries, those horrendous suggestions won’t ever be acted upon because the audience isn’t capable – they just need the extremism as a wake up call.” When a blogger writes he or she should be taken at his or her word. I’m certainly held to that standard. Every word I write here is parsed to the nth degree, and that’s fair.

      All I’m saying is that HUS is better suited for the latter, not the former.

      I don’t disagree, nor do I presume to tell men what to do here. However, I hear from a lot of guys in college or grad school, and there is just no way in hell I’m sending them to one of those blogs. FWIW, I routinely recommend Game resources, books, and websites. I know enough about Game to suggest what not to do, at the very least. In any case, men write to me after reading here, sometimes for months. It’s not like they don’t know who they’re addressing, or what I stand for. I will happily send guys to read posts by men whom I believe are decent human beings. And I will continue to give guys here an opportunity to help out other guys, which they do, far more than I do.

  • deti

    Hope:

    “deti, I think you’re using the word “tingle” as a stand-in for general attraction. There’s another very real physiological female vaginal/uterine tingle that happens. This might be where the confusion lies with the usage of the word “tingle.””

    That could be, Hope. Fair enough. But to justify male time investment, she needs to have some sexual attraction for him, whether there’s an actual immediate physiological tingle or not. Every relationship I’ve had has been preceded by at least a kernel of female sexual attraction, I suspect.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    OffTheCuff, “hot and willing” is kind of iffy when the guy is drunk. I heard a story about a guy who was apparently really trashed at a bar and got a girl’s number, and he thought she was pretty hot. When the beer goggles came off though…

    The common thread in a lot of hook-ups is drinking. Not every guy experiences temporary blinders that make unattractive people appear attractive when drunk, but enough seem to that it’s gotten its own name.

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

    @OTC
    By “hot”, I didn’t mean 8+ on the attractiveness scale. I was thinking, “aroused”. Damn this English language with multiple word meanings : )

  • OffTheCuff

    Deti: “I suspect there are a lot of men reading around the manosphere who need to get a little more ruthless, cold-hearted and narcissistic in their dealings with women.”

    Not so much. It’s sufficient to drop the idealism, and merely be about 1/10 as self-serving as most women are. Even the kindest woman posting here is way more devious and mercenary on the inside than I ever would have guessed.

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

      Even the kindest woman posting here is way more devious and mercenary on the inside than I ever would have guessed.

      Whoa! Where the hell did that come from? Are you back on painkillers? Or is Yohami feeding you lines?

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

        Even the kindest woman posting here is way more devious and mercenary on the inside than I ever would have guessed.

        Because they dish about their sex lives? My generation didn’t really do that, this one does. It’s not surprising – when sex happens before liking, loyalty, affection or faithfulness reporting on a hookup is no more meaningful than reporting on what you had for dinner the night before.

        Besides, I know for a fact young guys do it too. Heck, frat houses even have a giant whiteboard where they track women and the acts they perform on various bros. I imagine some variation of that occurs among everyone having casual sex.

        I think people are far less likely to share those details when they’re in love.

  • SayWhaat

    What they need is to reach down between their legs, feel those walnut sized thingies, and SACK UP.

    Okay. This is probably TMI, but for a long time I never knew balls looked like that. I always thought they were like, dangly tennis balls or something. Because that’s how guys always drew them.

    Especially right before sex. They don’t even look like balls. More like a halved avocado.

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

      Especially right before sex. They don’t even look like balls. More like a halved avocado.

      What freaks me out is the way they can slip upwards.

  • Just1X

    @SayWhaat

    ‘the last chicken in the shop’ is a traditional English description of ‘the meat and two veg’. A thing of magnificence to look at, rather than a thing of beauty…YMMV with your boyfriend.

  • Passer_By

    @susan
    “Thanks, my husband showed me that article yesterday. Interestingly, I found myself agreeing more with the “Yes” writer than the “No” writer about some things. ”

    Ok, I just read it – albeit very quickly. Perhaps you agreed with the “yes” writer because she made no attempt to answer the actual question. She simply said you can’t put it back in the bottle. Then said the revolution wasn’t supposed to be about what it has become, then goes on to say that if we educate girls and boys better perhaps it will turn out better. The implication is that her real answer is “Not so much, so far, but we can still salvage what was supposed to be a good thing and, at least for me, has allowed me not to have children since I never wanted them.” Shrug

    Even the “no” woman spent 3/4 of the article discussing irrelevant (or, at best, tangentially relevant) social issues. She finally gets around to attempting to answer the actual question at the very end.

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

      @Passer By

      Agreed, the whole feature was disappointing. I’d seen it as a “Tomorrow in Weekend” announcement on Friday, so I was a bit bummed.

  • deti

    OTC: “Not so much. It’s sufficient to drop the idealism, and merely be about 1/10 as self-serving as most women are.”

    Maybe you and I are saying the same thing in different words. But I think men need to be much more self-serving than most of them are. At least I needed to be.

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

    @OTC
    “Even the kindest woman posting here is way more devious and mercenary on the inside than I ever would have guessed.”

    For example?

    The female regulars here don’t strike me as particularly Machiavellian. I mean, do you include your own wife in that assessment?

    If the entire female gender is as self-serving as you claim (10x more than men), why haven’t men taken over childrearing?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Susan, yeah I remember that story. I hope Jackie comes back. She was always really positive and uplifting.

    Charm, I think it’s only prudent. If a guy isn’t going to stop seeing other girls, then he’s not that into you. Why be in a relationship without love? It’d be like having a pizza without any toppings. :P

  • purplesneakers

    ok so after feeling embarrassed about being too TMI about my personal life, I forced myself to read the comments.. thanks for the support and advice everyone. not much time to comment but I recognize that it would have been so obviously better to clarify exclusivity rather than just assuming it. But Susan- it’s still hard to see this as a ‘feature’ of a 24yo STEM guy with a partner count of 4, who got lots of ‘social proof’ from friends who knew him since high school telling me how ‘nice’ he was, who argued with me that karen owen’s fuck list should be seen as flipping the script and ‘empowering,’ especially one who was raised by a single mom. It’s hard to believe that he has ever heard of ‘dread’ tactics or would even know what they are on an innate level. Maybe I completely missed something or am being willfully blind though.

    By ‘let’s see where this goes’ he meant he wanted to continue seeing each other, but yeahh too hurt–this decision isn’t even based on a rational process of realizing that this may not be a good relationship bet, even if everyone is telling me that and I know it on a rational level–even though I still like him a lot, and I don’t even know how I would stop feeling this way. ‘Oneitis’ I guess.

    Emily- “one of the guys” is something everyone uses to describe the girl he hooked up with. She drinks a lot, claims to be bisexual and talks about other girls’ hotness by saying things like “I’d do her” with the guys, and makes lots of fart jokes. Not that fart jokes aren’t funny sometimes.. it’s just not my own style of humor. Though you’re right that I probably also just didn’t want to ‘scare him off’ to a certain extent.

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

      “one of the guys” is something everyone uses to describe the girl he hooked up with. She drinks a lot, claims to be bisexual and talks about other girls’ hotness by saying things like “I’d do her” with the guys, and makes lots of fart jokes.

      And this is whom he’s choosing to spend time with? Gross.

  • OffTheCuff

    Mega: two things – every woman has talked about sex in detail with their friends, both in general and specifics in “comparing notes”. I was raised to keep it private, and never talked about sex with family or friends at all, not when single or married. Those focus groups Sue has where women compare notes are pretty vile, until I realize every woman does it just to varying degrees. They all have at least one friend or family member that hears details.

    Second, every one has a strategy of what they are looking for, and what they will tolerate, and this and that. I dont mean it as evil, just they have no problems unabashedly putting themselves first.

    Personally, I just floated around and hoped to meet someone pretty and kind someday, hoping to find love. No grand strategy or checklist or method. It seems so naïve, compared to what women really think. I don’t know how I didn’t get chewed up and destroyed, honestly.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    purplesneakers “who argued with me that karen owen’s fuck list should be seen as flipping the script and ‘empowering,’ especially one who was raised by a single mom.”

    I’m sorry that this happened to you. I have to tell you though, that’s not a good sign. That means he sees slutty girls as “cool” and “fun.” It’s also why he’s spending time with one. As much as it means he’s a “nice” guy not using this as a dread tactic on you or to deliberately make you jealous, it also means he’s not very smart or discerning.

    My husband is a red pill guy who isn’t into slutty girls at all. In fact he’s really rather judgmental about them, and says that kind of behavior is “trashy.” He sees those types of girls as too flashy and after too much attention. Ironically, one of the reasons why I caught his attention is that I didn’t actively seek male attention.

    Of course you are hurt. You thought he was a guy who was falling for you and above being seduced by some cheap piece (okay maybe I’m judging this girl a bit… ahem), but he isn’t. He’s in thoroughly blue pill territory, more impressed by a girl who is “empowered” and “incredibly sexual” than a girl with real character and who is choosy about potential partners.

    There will be other, better, nicer STEM guys. I guarantee it. Maybe you ought to feel pity for this fellow. He’ll be the one searching the Internet for “Why did she lose attraction for me and cheat on me with my best friend?” years down the line.

  • Passer_By

    @purple

    I find it a little odd that he told you about it right away, but I suspect it was his awkward way of having the conversation (are we exclusive) without having the conversation. In other words, it was intended to avoid the conversation by preempting it, hoping you’d continue with “casual”.

    However, I was struck by the fact that you said you couldn’t take a “white guy” to your cousin’s party. He may have previously picked up on that vibe (or you may have commented on the issue) in a way that made him feel you two would never be anything serious. Just a thought.

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

    @OTC
    So you got lucky meeting your wife? I’d like to think coincidence and being a good person have something to do with it, too.

    That’s a sad attitude to have about an entire gender. Pretty broad brush to paint with, considering the data on marriage and happiness. I floated around like you did for the most part. I don’t see how you can possible prove all women are such cold, calculating, strategic robots, though. Statistically, it just isn’t true.

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

    @SW
    “I think people are far less likely to share those details when they’re in love.”

    My wife and I certainly don’t share the bedroom details with other people (weird?). I think people have gotten used to projecting the worst behavior of the minority onto the entire population. Generalizations are easy to roll out and repeat. Kind of like urban legends. I don’t think they reflect reality much at all.

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

      @Megaman

      Generalizations are easy to roll out and repeat. Kind of like urban legends. I don’t think they reflect reality much at all.

      I can say that I have never shared a single detail about sex with my husband with anyone. Once a close friend confessed that she and her husband only have sex on vacations (!!!!!!!) – which was TMI. Then I told my husband, who said, “Why would you tell me that? I don’t want to know that!” Now I can’t see them without thinking of it, and I’m always stifling a snort when she reports that her husband has suggested yet another romantic getaway.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Whoa! Where the hell did that come from? Are you back on painkillers? Or is Yohami feeding you lines?”

    It’s relative. Let me rephrase that, then. I was way more idealistic and naive about love and and than most women are here. See the above post for some examples.

  • deti

    OTC: “Even the kindest woman posting here is way more devious and mercenary on the inside than I ever would have guessed.”

    SW: “Whoa! Where the hell did that come from? Are you back on painkillers? Or is Yohami feeding you lines?”

    Far be it from me to put words in OTC’s mouth. But perhaps we can say and agree that women act in their own self-interest first. See, I think a lot of today’s men were told as younger men that women are not selfish, are always looking out for others ahead of themselves, and never ever act maliciously. We’re told that women are always, ALWAYS in the SMP for one purpose and one purpose only: to get a husband and a father so she can make babies and a family and live Happily Ever After with her Prince.

    But we know and have learned that’s not the case. If we accept that women are rational actors with full agency, then we must accept that women can and do act ruthlessly in their own self-interest. Do they always do this? No. But they do do this sometimes.

    My own wife admitted to lying about her partner count so as to continue our relationship. We’ve all heard the stories of women turning up their noses at betas while screwing the beautiful alphas. The most extreme of these fables are the cuckolding episodes.

    This is why men are told to smash the pedestal.

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

      @deti

      If we accept that women are rational actors with full agency, then we must accept that women can and do act ruthlessly in their own self-interest. Do they always do this? No. But they do do this sometimes.

      OK, but do you really think it’s different for men? I would agree that for the past 40 years women have been exhorted to act in their own best interests and “be fabulous.”

  • SayWhaat

    She drinks a lot, claims to be bisexual and talks about other girls’ hotness by saying things like “I’d do her” with the guys, and makes lots of fart jokes.

    So, here’s another funny story of mine:

    The first guy I ever kissed was a Korean guy on my dorm floor. We were both sophomores, he was a CompSci major. I thought it was going to lead somewhere because he seemed really into me, but then as it turns out, seeing us together made his ex-gf — who lived down the hall — very jealous. She was a butch bisexual who had dumped him, but she saw me with him and decided she wanted him back. He went back to her without even telling me. When I found out and asked him plainly what had happened, he said that he just hoped I’d figure it out. I read him the riot act. :P

    They stayed together for a while until she dumped him again, saying she was more into girls. The lulz.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    OffTheCuff, well, I will admit that I am rather calculating when it comes to being treated right and not totally naive or innocent. I wasn’t about to play second fiddle, because I had gained some self-respect.

    Sadly I wasn’t always like this, and I had stayed with guys even after they cheated on me, because oh it was just a mistake and it didn’t mean anything. I was 25 when I finally grew a spine. I wasn’t going to martyr myself for someone else or wait around for some guy to realize how great I was. I went out and looked for someone who would know it from the get-go. And it really didn’t take long to find him.

  • SayWhaat

    See, I think a lot of today’s men were told as younger men that women are not selfish, are always looking out for others ahead of themselves, and never ever act maliciously.

    Well that’s pretty dumb. I saw malicious behavior on the playgrounds growing up. I had no reason to believe that there was an entire sex incapable of that.

  • SayWhaat

    What I mean by that is, I learned early on that being an asshole wasn’t limited to one sex. But if I believed all people behaved that way, I wouldn’t have friends or a boyfriend today.

  • SayWhaat

    In other words, your mistake was in believing AWALT. :P

  • Michelle Lender

    Its a shame that innocent young men are being falsely accused of rape but we must be careful about the situations we put ourselves in. We tell women not to take a strange man home, not to drink too much at parties, to stay by one’s glass at all times, not to invite 3 guys you just met back to your dorm room, etc. The same needs to be told to guys now. Don’t go take a strange girl home, don’t accept an invitation from a woman you just met, don’t drink too much, don’t hover around drunk women at parties and consider staying away from venues that have a reputation for rowdy and loose drunken behaviour.

    I can’t feel too sorry for men who allow themselves to be alone with complete strangers and then cry “false rape allegation” later. What was he doing with her in the first place?

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

    @Mr. Deti
    “This is why men are told to smash the pedestal.”

    But why do they have to be told this here at HUS ad infinitum?

    It sounds like you’ve projected from your own personal experiences onto all men. I wasn’t indoctrinated in that manner. WRT to advice on women, my dad used to tell me to “be a man, do the right thing” (no elaboration). My mom just wanted me to settle down with a girl who made ME feel happy, and the family as well.

    The way you describe things, it almost sounds like a MacGuffin.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    SayWhaat, yeah my husband never harbored illusions about girls being perfect little angels, because he was teased and bullied mercilessly since elementary school by female classmates.

    He was very cautious and guarded with me at first because he was like, “she seems nice, but she could still turn out to be a total bitch.” He would have tossed me if I was like that.

    Megaman, my ex was a decade-long liar, too, but I don’t think all men are like him. Though I would probably also be really bitter and think horribly of men if I had to stay because of kids, like deti has with his wife.

    Circumstances dictate subjective reality. The war vet is going to be really sensitive on 4th of July due to fireworks going off, while everyone else is happily celebrating.

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

    @Ms. Lender
    Interesting you mentioning the rape/false rape can of worms. Sex and alcohol definitely don’t mix well. If you get a chance, check out the current PR problems Belvedere Vodka is having due to a recent Facebook ad they posted. I saw the article over at Yahoo…

  • Passer_By

    @megaman
    “Sex and alcohol definitely don’t mix well. ”

    They used to mix fabulously for me! Alas, now that I’m getting a little older they don’t mix as well as they used to. :(

  • Doc

    The March of Shame…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MM3KkF5urY

    “In this species self-destructive tendencies run deep…”

    I ROFLMAO’ed the first time I saw it, and it’s still as funny now – because it is SO true. Especially that Morgan Freeman voice-over… And I like the guys high-fiving afterwards…

    And another take on this wonderful college phenomena… :)

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHszyYbg5Ao

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

      @Doc

      That College Humor vid is hilarious. I agree that the Morgan Freeman narration is the best.

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

    @PB
    Getting older isn’t any fun. I think youth is wasted on the young, and I’m only in my early 30s.

    On the alcohol thing, yeah, lowered inhibitions can get a man into legal trouble these days. But it also inhibits sexual performance to varying degrees, which could get a man into lady trouble of a different kind : )

  • Michelle Lender

    Megaman, that comment was because of the proceeding comments below.

    Thefemaleperspective says she’s, “fed up with girls screaming rape in defense to their loose morals.” She need to be equally fed up with guys screaming false rape allegation in defense of their loose morals as well.

    thefemaleperspective March 25, 2012 at 12:34 am
    Sluts should be shamed. I’m fed up with girls screaming rape in defense to their loose morals. Recently my friend and his fraternity brother were arrested because a sorority girl accused them of assaulting her while she was apparently passed out drunk and “had no memory” of what happened. Needless to say she also had a boyfriend at the time the incident supposedly happened, so she’s unfaithful too. Thus far there has been no evidence found that rape even occurred, which everyone who is close to these two guys believed they were innocent anyways, but both my friend and his brother’s lives are now in limbo. They were humiliated in the school papers, my friend had to drop out of school, and he was fired from his job for something that didn’t happen all because some stupid girl didn’t think about the fallout of her accusations and how she would be ruining two people’s lives.

    400 Charm March 25, 2012 at 1:01 am
    @TheFemalePerspective

    That situation is horrible. A girl at my school, got “raped”. She was a freshman, living on campus. She met 3 guys at a party, brought them back to her dorm, swiped them into the building, swiped them into the elevator, unlocked 2 sets of doors with her keys and let them into her room. The next day she said they all raped her. A guy I worked with lived in the same dorm, and knew the girl so he heard it first hand. I openly called it bullshit and said that she was being irresponsible. The guy responds, “Everyone always blames the victim.” I think automatically empathizing with the girl is the PC thing to do which is why people do it. When I called B.S. on it, more than a few people agreed with me.

  • anonymous

    deti:
    “My wrinkle on it is this: There has to be some attraction there. She has to be physically and sexually attracted to you from the get go. She has to tingle for you from the get go. ”

    Once upon a time, not so long ago, girls and guys didn’t hang out together unless there was already a mutual interest.
    Most of one’s friends were of the same gender, it made life so much easier than now.
    There were less chances of being eternally friendzoned (LJBF), easier to remain faithful to one’s S/O, harder to slut it up and keep your friends, less likely for guys to be taken advantage of if there was no interest, less likely for women to pick up manly behaviors and for men to pick up feminine behaviors, easier to maintain a good reputation and to make one’s S/O secure that nothing fishy was going on, less likely to be shocked that a member of the opposite sex was only hanging out with you because he/she likes you, and it maintained one’s intrigue about the opposite sex..
    but ain’t no way we can put that toothpaste back in the tube because very few would want to go back. They think it’s ridiculous and weird.

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

    @M. Lender
    Admittedly, I haven’t down my homework on the campus rape issue. I’m just trying to reason my way through it. It would seem that false allegations of any kind, where it’s he said vs. she said, hurt both the guys falsely accused obviously (Duke lacrosse), but also women who later make legitimate reports of actual rape. They’re taken less seriously because of this “cry wolf” phenomenon.

    Methinks that if alcohol completely disappeared from the college environment (and high school for that matter), the hookup scene and all it’s assorted problems would be greatly reduced…

  • Michelle Lender

    “Admittedly, I haven’t down my homework on the campus rape issue. I’m just trying to reason my way through it. It would seem that false allegations of any kind, where it’s he said vs. she said, hurt both the guys falsely accused obviously (Duke lacrosse), but also women who later make legitimate reports of actual rape. They’re taken less seriously because of this “cry wolf” phenomenon.”

    That’ll teach ‘em not to hire strippers. A good lesson learned. I’m sick of guys crying false rape allegations as a cover for their loose morals. Don’t wanna get falsely accused? Exercise safety precautions and stay away from women you don’t know well. Duh. Common sense really.

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

      That’ll teach ‘em not to hire strippers. A good lesson learned. I’m sick of guys crying false rape allegations as a cover for their loose morals. Don’t wanna get falsely accused? Exercise safety precautions and stay away from women you don’t know well.

      I agree, this is very disturbing. You don’t have to like or admire the Duke lax players (I don’t) to abhor the way they were falsely accused. Even worse were the Duke 88 who had them strung up without a hearing. Those boys didn’t cry false rape allegations as a cover. They were falsely accused, and had broken no laws.

      As I said above, we’re not into discussing loose morals here. If you insist, we can talk about the complete absence of morals in the woman who made the accusation, not to mention the Duke faculty (headed by the Women’s Studies Dept., surprise surprise).

  • Passer_By

    @ML

    “That’ll teach ‘em not to hire strippers. A good lesson learned. I’m sick of guys crying false rape allegations as a cover for their loose morals.”

    Nobody is throwing these women in jail for their alleged loose morals. You seem to have a very odd grasp of what the criminal justice system is supposed to be about. Deeply disturbing.

    Comments like this (if serious) make me question the wisdom of the 19th amendment (sorry, susan).

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

    “That’ll teach ‘em not to hire strippers.”

    Well, it’s not illegal to be a sleazeball. But given the chance of being falsely accused, you’d think that would be a deterrent for some of these party animals.

    That being said, false allegations trigger the heavy hand of the law. That’s pretty serious stuff, and just plain wrong to intentionaly misuse.

  • Mike C

    ***hat’ll teach ‘em not to hire strippers. A good lesson learned.***8 I’m sick of guys crying false rape allegations as a cover for their loose morals. Don’t wanna get falsely accused? Exercise safety precautions and stay away from women you don’t know well. Duh. Common sense really.

    Wow. Just fucking wow. This is so massively fucked up sick shit I don’t even know where to start. False rape allegations have the potential to totally destroy a man’s life….dragged to the criminal process…get kicked out of school….lose job. Whatever one thinks of the morality of hiring strippers, to even suggest that a false rape allegation is “just desserts” of some sort is just fucking disgusting.

  • SayWhaat

    Methinks that if alcohol completely disappeared from the college environment (and high school for that matter), the hookup scene and all it’s assorted problems would be greatly reduced…

    Definitely. But alcohol will never completely disappear from college campuses. I think it would be better to lower the drinking age to 18. Kids would experiment while still under the direct care of their parents, and the thrill would be lost by the time they got to college. I never drank as much as most people in college, but by the time we graduated, me and most of my friends had significantly cut back on drinking. It just wasn’t as big a deal anymore.

  • Dogsquat

    Susan said:

    “What freaks me out is the way they can slip upwards.”

    __________________________________

    That’s because of the cremaster muscle and the cremasteric reflex .

    My rap name is Cremaster Flash, by the way.

  • Mike C

    Susan,

    Thanks for the responses. There is definitely much in there I want to address, but it’ll have to wait until much later tonight after I get done with work.

  • http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com VD

    I stand with Mike C and Gorbachev in that I suspect there are a lot of men reading around the manosphere who need to get a little more ruthless, cold-hearted and narcissistic in their dealings with women. And so the Ro’s fulfill their purpose. The men who read them don’t need to become cads to improve their lives and shake off the feminist shackles, and in fact most won’t become cads or players, banging 8s and 9s left and right.

    I don’t disagree in the slightest. I have great respect for Roissy. But I also share Susan’s recognition that the nihilist philosophy Roissy and Roosh push in addition to their teaching of basic Game principles tends towards the societally destructive – Roissy himself has stated as much – and I respect her right to refuse to direct her male readers there. It is important to understand the distinction between diagnosis and prescription. The fact that a blogger nails the former beautifully doesn’t mean that the latter will be correct.

    Since I’m more interested in the theoretical concepts than the practical applications, I’m not inclined to be much concerned about who is recommending what specifics. And I don’t think it’s necessary for the various bloggers to waste any time questioning each other’s motivations, much less analyzing their psychologies. If you’re a man wanting to score, read Roissy. If you’re a young woman wanting to avoid getting pumped and dumped, read Susan. If you’re a married man wanting to spice up the old marriage, read Athol. But we’re all essentially talking about the same tool, just different aspects and applications of it, so reading a wide variety is the most effective thing to do. I’ve learned from every single one of the primary Game bloggers and from a fair number of the secondary and tertiary ones too.

  • Passer_By

    @mike

    She’s trying to make a false equivalence between people who (allegedly) don’t feel sympathy for rape victims because they say she shouldn’t have brought some guy up to her room. Putting aside the fact that in this case these posters were talking about women who appeared to be lying for other reasons (i.e., they didn’t think they were rape victims), she simply doesn’t seem to grasp the difference between injustice inflicted by an individual and systemic injustice inflicted by the state. Our country was founded on the concept of taking great pains to avoid the latter.

  • Dogsquat

    OTC and Deti talking about idealism:

    “It’s relative. Let me rephrase that, then. I was way more idealistic and naive about love and and than most women are here.

    ____________________________

    Steel on target.

    Most guys have a fantasy vision of women. There has never been a woman born who matches the fantasy/BS I had in my head when I was 18. I, and many other guys, thought women actually deserved the pedestal.

    I think losing the fantasy is the source of much anger some guys have. It’s worse than finding out Santa Claus isn’t real, or that the Tooth Fairy turns tricks to get by in times of good dental hygiene.

    It took me a long time to arrive at this viewpoint, but:

    That’s not the individual woman’s fault. It makes sense to be pissed at people who perpetuate the myth, but man’s failure to percieve his world correctly is, ultimately, his fault.

    However…

    SayWhaat, don’t underestimate the sheer volume of bullshit that is out there. Look at some commercials. Look at movies. Watch how teachers behave. Flip on your male gaze goggles. There’s a ton of brainwashing/propaganda/white knighting going on.

    Calling men “dumb” for believing this crap is not accurate.

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

    @SayWhaat
    I have no allusions that universities (other than BYU) will go dry. Maybe alcohol should be taxed a bit more, like tobacco, just to be consistent with the amount of damage it does. It was after all the suffragettes who pushed prohibition pretty hard. We’re 180 degrees from those days.

    I did notice that transfer students (myself included) from community colleges drank a lot less once they got to the univerity. I bet they hookup a lot less to. Lesson for the parents, send your kids to community colleges. You’ll save money and help the kids avoid those freshman/dorm pitfalls.

    Lowering the drinking age won’t help much, if Europe is any guide.

  • Passer_By

    You know, they could eliminate this whole “walk of shame” stuff by simply allowing the guys to stay over at the sororities (or where ever else they are staying). Then, the guys could enjoy a glorious ego-boosting walk of conquest in the fresh morning air – everybody wins.

  • Passer_By

    @saywhaat

    “I think it would be better to lower the drinking age to 18. Kids would experiment while still under the direct care of their parents, and the thrill would be lost by the time they got to college. ”

    Man, what sort of sheltered high school did you go to? High school has obviously changed since I was a kid.

  • Passer_By

    @ML
    ” Stay away from random strangers.”

    Fine advice, and I would give it to my son. But I’m not attempting to control what a random stranger does (nor would I have likely ever hooked up with one), and I get that random strangers might do crazy things. That’s why I protect myself by not walking alone in dangerous places at night. I’m worried about how the state apparatus (and the university, in this case), with all its power, handles what the random stranger says.

    “A random stranger doesn’t give a rat’s ass about what the criminal justice system is supposed to be about for you.”

    I don’t expect the random stranger to give a rats ass. I expect the criminal justice system (and university discipline system) to give a rats ass about how it is supposed to work. That’s what people are railing against.

  • Tony Stark

    @ Michelle Lender

    Do you honestly see nothing wrong with potentially sending an innocent man to prison for nothing more than “loose morals”?!

    If so, I’m at a loss for words. I guess we should thank you for so clearly highlighting the fascist nature of modern feminism.

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

    @DS
    “Calling men ‘dumb’ for believing this crap is not accurate.”

    I think she was calling blanket generalizations about all men being this way or all women being that way dumb. That used to be called sexism, if the generalization was a negative one.

    Regarding popular culture (movies, television, commercials), maybe it’s just me but I recognize them for what they are: large enterprises trying to get me the consumer to part with the money in my wallet. I don’t think it takes a genius to figure that out. I’ve never looked for life lessons or profound understanding of the opposite sex in base commerce. Stereotypes sell products, plain and simple. I’m a proud capitalist, but marketing that attacks peoples’ self esteem turns my stomach.

  • Passer_By

    No, Tony, as I said, she’s obviously trying to draw a false analogy to people who tell women not to take strange men up to their room if they don’t want to risk rape. Unfortunately, what she doesn’t get is that it would only be analogous if, after spending time with the strange man but refusing him sex, the strange man could call up the cops, have them hunt her down and then hold her down while he raped her, all with the blessing of the court. We could then say to her, “Well, if you hadn’t spent time with a strange man, they wouldn’t have been able to do that.”

  • Dogsquat

    Megaman, have you always been so savvy about marketing?

    Put yourself back in your 12-15 year old shoes.

    In addition, marketing/Popular Culture is only one vector the infection travels through, as I stated earlier.

    I’m being nitpicky about this because it’s important that people understand it.

  • Mike C

    Regarding popular culture (movies, television, commercials), maybe it’s just me but I recognize them for what they are: large enterprises trying to get me the consumer to part with the money in my wallet. I don’t think it takes a genius to figure that out. I’ve never looked for life lessons or profound understanding of the opposite sex in base commerce. Stereotypes sell products, plain and simple. I’m a proud capitalist, but marketing that attacks peoples’ self esteem turns my stomach.

    You recognized this in your pre-teens, teenage years, and early 20s? I consider myself a pretty intelligent and insightful person, but I certainly didn’t have the wherewithal to recognize all the bullshit I was being fed in commercial/cultural messages in my formative teenage years in the 1980s/early 90s.

    Saywhaat’s comments actually point in the direction of something Rollo says which is that men are the true idealists and romantics while women actually mature faster in terms of being shrewd realists. That is actually a positive for women. Which highlights the other point OTC and deti alluded to which is that guys have catching up to do in terms of flushing idealism down the toilet.

  • Mike C

    Megaman, have you always been so savvy about marketing?

    Put yourself back in your 12-15 year old shoes.

    In addition, marketing/Popular Culture is only one vector the infection travels through, as I stated earlier.

    I’m being nitpicky about this because it’s important that people understand it.

    DS, yup, funny….I posted my comment before reading yours….looks like you and I are on the same mental wavelength when we read that. To expect a teenage boy to filter through what is true and commercial marketing is just unrealistic.

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

      To expect a teenage boy to filter through what is true and commercial marketing is just unrealistic.

      I think the same is true for women. If women were shrewd realists, they wouldn’t bother with alpha males.

  • OffTheCuff

    I smell Plain Jane again.

  • Mike C

    I smell Plain Jane again.

    Ha, I think you are right….you beat me to the call OTC :)

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

    @DS
    One thing that I believe helped tremendously in avoiding the teen consumer culture is that my folks never gave me an allowance, or a credit card (cell phones weren’t around yet). I had to get a paper route, or some other job if I wanted to spend money. And I saved most of it for college, anyway. That’s right… they didn’t pay for that either.

    Again, maybe it was just my particular case, but being unpopular with girls, I never had this wonderful, mystical vision of the universal goodness of the opposite sex. As in the case of Hope’s hubby, I rarely saw the good side growing up. There were nice girls I liked, but they usually already had BFs (always the case). So I only pursued individual women I really took a liking to. And I was never played for a chump, either. I guess I wasn’t good-looking enough : )

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    @Michele Lender

    They fantasy myth of the ideal woman does a disservice to women as well. We are not goddesses or superhuman. We are ordinary people full of the same faults, frailties and desires as anyone else.

    As someone who was very guilty of this “pedestalization” in my youth,I have to point out that this isn’t what’s going on. No one was ever asking anyone to be either a goddess or superhuman. We were asking you to be “not evil” and kind.(Actually, something the opposite of “goddess” was desired.)

    Granted, it’s only fair to ask that if it comes back to you in return, which clearly doesn’t always happen either. But nevertheless, it seems pretty clear to me that the anger you see in men who have taken the red pill is a reaction to their disappointment. They took it because they never saw kindness.

    Youth is blind to that sometimes. It took years of reflections to remember those times when kindness was offered to me, but I just missed it. It would be a shame to confuse inexperience and ignorance for evil intent.

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

    @Mike C
    I probably came to that realization when I was in college ~ age 18. Which goes to prove you can learn stuff in the social sciences. From my early teens (early ’90s), I don’t recall constant messaging that girls were good and boys were bad. I do remember Baywatch being popular on television. Was that the ideal of feminine beauty? Doubtful, but that could have been aimed at guys or girls I suppose.

  • Charm

    One thing that I believe helped tremendously in avoiding the teen consumer culture is that my folks never gave me an allowance, or a credit card (cell phones weren’t around yet). I had to get a paper route, or some other job if I wanted to spend money. And I saved most of it for college, anyway. That’s right… they didn’t pay for that either.

    +1

    I grew up poor my whole life where basic needs weren’t always met, so I don’t have a taste for lavish things. The most lavish thing I own is my Iphone. I admire really nice things, but I can’t justify buying them. Its such a waste.

    I also have to pay for college as well. Though, Im not bitter about it, but it must be nice to have parents who pay for it. And I plenty of people who take it for granted.

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    @Michelle

    You mean you ignored those who offered you kindness? They never registered on your radar?

    I mean I sometimes didn’t recognize that a kindness had been offered to me. Sometimes they were just doing the best they could at the time.

    The point is that others’ reaction to you is just that – a reaction, not an action that came out of the blue. Anger in return may not be justified.

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

    Jess…personally I have a pretty high opinion of both Palin and GWB. One of the reasons they get such vitriolic negative reactions from certain people, I think, is that neither of these individuals is overly impressed with education-based credentials and hence their success represents a psychological threat to those whose identity is significantly wrapped up in their own credentials.

    Probably getting too far off-topic, though..

  • OffTheCuff

    For what it’s worth, I don’t begrudge women for their superior handling on the realities of love… after all, it comes with territory of being in demand sexually that age.

    All I have to do is point my boys to HUS when they are about 14 or so and say “this is what women really think about boys, now watch out for yourself” — no reason to send them to Roissy.

  • Joy

    As a virgin in my twenties, I am in the demographic that supposedly should be onboard with “slut shaming,” but it makes me uncomfortable.

    When you read the gospels, Jesus was always taking flak for refusing to engage in “slut shaming.” Instead, he surprised both promiscuous women and religious authorities by affirming the basic human dignity of these women. He didn’t condone promiscuity, but he always saw the person and responded with compassion rather than condemnation.

    What bothers me the most about the word “slut” is that is seen as a green light to degrade the person given that label. That is cruel, and we cannot degrade another person without harming ourselves.

    The solution to changing hook-up culture is not shaming people, but instead learning to value people more. For me personally, this means thinking about how I can use my sexuality to honor a man and give him pleasure. I know that I could love a man in sickness and in health, the way Munson’s wife loves him. It would sadden me to have sex if I was not free to love this way.

    Susan, I know that you are looking at “hooking up” through the lens of strategy not spirituality, so I hope that it is okay that I offered that perspective!

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

      @Joy

      Of course it is OK! I welcome all perspectives, and there are quite a few religious folks who are regulars here. We often have the same goals, even if our motives may be slightly different.

      Thanks so much for leaving a comment.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Because they dish about their sex lives? My generation didn’t really do that, this one does.”

    You admit to talking about sex in the abstract with your girlfriends even as young teen for an entire evening, after watching “Grease”. That counts, too.

    “Besides, I know for a fact young guys do it too. Heck, frat houses even have a giant whiteboard where they track women and the acts they perform on various bros. I imagine some variation of that occurs among everyone having casual sex.”

    I think you’re confusing the top guys, with all guys again. I think the *most* I ever heard was a quick admission about who hooked up with who, and no details. No extended play by plays.

    It’s odd to grow up thinking you’re the “perv” because you’re male, and then realize women dish much worse than you ever have. I’m all for equality… Men should behave as bad as women do!

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

      You admit to talking about sex in the abstract with your girlfriends even as young teen for an entire evening, after watching “Grease”. That counts, too.

      I do? That doesn’t ring a bell. In any case, girls talking about sex in the abstract during slumber parties? You bet.

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

    jess, find Obama without his teleprompter and you’ll find someone no better or worse than GWB or SP.

    Truth is, none of them are particularly clever. They get their political status through being flavour of the month, and yes, whenever a politician makes a gaff (especially if their politics are different to the media presenters) you see that repeated over and over again.

    Economically GW was doing exactly the same thing as Obama before the change of government.

    Definitely off topic.

  • Lokland

    @ Joe

    “The point is that others’ reaction to you is just that – a reaction, not an action that came out of the blue. Anger in return may not be justified.”

    Inaction is still worthy of anger. You basically just said that doing nothing is always acceptable.
    It rarely is.

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

    @Joy 567
    Joy, shaming those who were outside the bounds of social convention was standard operating procedure in the ancient world. Jesus didn’t have to do “slut shaming” because there weren’t a lot of sluts around.

    “Slut shaming” is presented as a secular form of social control because the moral paradigm that Jesus operated in doesn’t exist anymore, and in the US hasn’t for a very long time.

    A general rule of thumb is, “encourage activities you want to increase,” and “discourage activities you want to decrease.” Women should give attention to men who act with restraint and respect, and shun men who act like cads. Men likewise should reward with attention women who display dignity, modesty, and kindness while shunning sluts. Unfortunately neither takes place.

    As Chesterton put it, “It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”

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

      Jesus didn’t have to do “slut shaming” because there weren’t a lot of sluts around.

      But he did tell the adulteress to sin no more. Jesus was not a fan of casual sex. And he was also known to shame sinners, i.e. moneychangers.

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

    @OTC
    “I’m all for equality… Men should behave as bad as women do!”

    I think we’re already there… a race to the bottom is one I’d prefer to lose.

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

    jess

    One, I’m a New Zealander, so I don’t have a horse in that race.

    Two, persuasive and charismatic communicators generate their own perception of authority and competence even when they have none.

    Three, did you really use integrity and politicians in the same sentence?

    To borrow from Chesterton again, “It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged.”

  • deti

    deti: “If we accept that women are rational actors with full agency, then we must accept that women can and do act ruthlessly in their own self-interest. Do they always do this? No. But they do do this sometimes.”

    SW: “OK, but do you really think it’s different for men? I would agree that for the past 40 years women have been exhorted to act in their own best interests and “be fabulous.””

    No, it’s not different for men. In fact, it’s exactly the same for men. Men act in their own self interest and in fact are treated as chumps and losers if they’re not looking out for Number 1. That wasn’t my point. My point was that I was taught as a young boy that women are all altruistic creatures, existing only for the good of all, never doing anything to harm anyone, with no malice aforethought, never self-interested or selfish, and seeking only to Find A Man, Marry Him and Make Him Happy. Men often find out the hard way that that’s not the case, not at all.

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

    As the old Sumerian joke goes, “brick on brick was this house built, belly on belly was it torn asunder.”

  • OffTheCuff

    Troll: “Who the hell taught you that bullshit? Were you homeschooled in the middle of a remote jungle?”

    It’s called “church”

  • Charm

    Re women dishing about their sex lives

    Yea, I don’t get this. Its so inappropriate to do and I’ve never done it. I don’t get why people think its their business to know. I would be humiliated if I found out someone I was sleeping with was giving the details of those encounters to someone else. You don’t need to know, how/when/where or how Im sleeping with someone. I’ve been apart of conversations where women were divulging this information, and if men knew what got said, they’d tell their SO to shut the hell up. Nothing is really off limits. Just thinking about this happening makes me shudder. Ick!

  • Dinkney Pawson

    @jess

    1) The American media all want to be Woodward & Bernstein when they grow up. Instead they wind up being Dan Rather. (Why is anyone stupid enough to give Dan Rather a job? Its not like he needs the money.) Their coverage of anybody tends to be assembled from the blooper reel. Gotcha journalism.
    2) The American media align mostly left, and therefore Democrat. Republicans get less slack than Democrats.
    3) Foreign media have even less motive to show POTUS in a good light, so you get the high(low)lights from the blooper reel.

    GWB got better grades than John Kerry.

  • Charm

    I think the same is true for women. If women were shrewd realists, they wouldn’t bother with alpha males.

    I think a fair portion of women are realistic when it comes to alpha males. They know they aren’t going to get a real commitment from one, so 5 mins of alpha is better than nothing.

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

    Jess….”You don’t have to be an intellectual to know the names of your country’s major newspapers…. or to know what country you are addressing at a state function…”

    Barack Obama referred to Austrians as speaking some language called “Austrian”. …he also referred to America in the 1860s as having built something called the “Intercontinental Railroad.” These remarks did not receive anywhere near the US media attention they would have received had they been made by GWB or SP, and I bet the same is true of the UK media.

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

      @David Foster

      Did you see the article about how the Danes have called Obama out for saying they were “punching above their weight?” He said this with great aplomb, apparently, as if it were a stroke of wit and good cheer. It turns out he has used the exact same expression for just about every country he’s visited. It’s his favorite pickup line.

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

    @Michelle 579

    This particular mythical figure is presented as someone who would not slut shame even if he had to. In fact, there were plenty of prostitutes around and according to the myth, he hung out with them, gave him respect in his fold, and imparted his teachings to them and they accompanied from village to village preaching his message.

    Despite it all being a myth, there are ethical lessons to learn from it, that is afterall what myths are created for.

    The Jesus myth is a good story about compassion that we can all learn from.

    To correct. There is precisely zero evidence to support the case of the Jesus mythicists. We have, in order of details, the four gospels, the writings of Paul, mentions by Josephus and mentions by Tacitus and Pliny to support the case that in first century Palestine there was an individual called Jesus, from Nazareth, who went about as a itinerant Rabbi, was crucified under Roman law, and within a very short time of his death was worshiped as a god; to borrow from Pliny.

    What do the mythicists have? Precisely nothing.

    Their claimed analogies with ancient pagan figures don’t line up, their claims that Paul didn’t mention Jesus aren’t true, their use of the early Church fathers is simply wrong. Contrary to their claims neither of the quotes from Josephus can be put down to fabrication and they barely even mention the additional information.

    The case for the historical Jesus is as strong as the case for many other ancient figures, and remarkably good for an individual who held no office. Meanwhile the case for a mythical Jesus is non-existent.

    Arguing that we can learn “ethical lessons” from a myth, as opposed to using a story to illustrate an previously agreed ethic, is wrong-headed. In terms of ethics Jesus was an innovator. Can you imagine how ridiculous it would be to say, “you shouldn’t stone a woman caught in adultery,” when your only source of authority is a myth?

    Jesus was kind to many people, including tax-collectors and prostitutes. More than he was to many of the religious authorities he encountered. However we don’t see the people he was kind to going back to their prior immoral ways.

    Jesus did indeed use shaming language in the rhetoric he used against his (religious) critics. I would agree that he wouldn’t engage in “slut-shaming,” but as I already said, the world he lived in, with strict social controls from the approval/disapproval of your social group, doesn’t exist any more and you can’t appeal to the moral values he expounded as grounds to refrain from slutting it up unless you previously agree that he is a source of moral authority, which of course you don’t.

    I don’t think Susan advocates being deliberately mean to sluts (or mansluts), she just doesn’t want them held up as any sort of example for people to follow.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    We should also note that while Jesus prevents the mob from stoning an adulteress, he tells the woman afterwards to, “go and sin no more.” So while he does indeed help , he also leaves her with a small, subtle bit of shame.

  • History vs Myth

    “To correct. There is precisely zero evidence to support the case of the Jesus mythicists. We have, in order of details, the four gospels, the writings of Paul”

    Jesus is god. How do you know? The bible says so. That’s circular logic my friend.

    “mentions by Josephus and mentions by Tacitus and Pliny to support the case that in first century Palestine there was an individual called Jesus, from Nazareth, who went about as a itinerant Rabbi, was crucified under Roman law, and within a very short time of his death was worshiped as a god; to borrow from Pliny.”

    It may be such a figure existed. The mythical part is all the woo-woo associated with him; virgin birth, resurrection, being god, etc.
    Krishna existed in history too. Lifting Govardhan on his pinky for 7 days? We can’t say that is a provable fact.
    Nevertheless both figures offer much inspiration to humanity today.
    I’d say between myth and history, its often myth that is more powerful, meaningful and transformative for us on a personal level. I am not anti-woo woo or anti-unscientific miraculous stories that inspire. They definetely have there place, but its not in science.

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

    Jess,

    Obama didn’t say that Austrians spoke AUSTRALIAN; he said they spoke AUSTRIAN….in reality, of course, they speak German. (It has been argued in their defense that they speak a distinctive dialect; of course, there are lots of distinctive dialects of German, but they’re still called “German”)

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

    @SW
    “I think the same is true for women. If women were shrewd realists, they wouldn’t bother with alpha males.”

    Most don’t bother with them, but look luck convincing anybody around here. With so much lamenting the state of things, and all this male vs. female posturing, it seems the order of day to discount a huge portion of the population (2/3) that’s getting along just fine. This isn’t a reflection on you at all. Your site is a fantastic resource, but these discussions aren’t always uplifting : |

  • SayWhaat

    Fair&Luvly Inside is Plain Jane. 99% sure of it, she posted a link and “Fair & Lovely” is a fairness cream popular with Indians.

  • SayWhaat

    I think she was calling blanket generalizations about all men being this way or all women being that way dumb. That used to be called sexism, if the generalization was a negative one.

    Yes, that is what I was trying to say. Thanks for clarifying.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    jess,

    Just saying that the dude wasn’t above inducing a bit of shame at times. FWIW, I don’t think the purpose of slut-shaming is to make women feel terrible about themselves… It’s more a way of telling women to, “go, and slut no more.”

  • SayWhaat

    Man, what sort of sheltered high school did you go to? High school has obviously changed since I was a kid.

    Haha, you got me. :P Yeah, my high school experience was definitely very sheltered. I made it to college believing that sex-until-marriage was a fully viable option and something most people did. I don’t think I even knew that getting “stoned” and “high” were the same thing until I was 17. -__-

    Anyways…I probably shouldn’t extrapolate my high school experiences to the general population.

  • purplesneakers

    Susan-

    And this is whom he’s choosing to spend time with? Gross.

    Sadly, I feel like I have no idea what’s even “normal” anymore. I’m from the generation (and from a very liberal place) where a lot of the girls growing up ‘experimented with their sexuality’ and this was seen as perfectly normal behavior. I guess boys are used to this by now.

    Hope-

    I’m sorry that this happened to you. I have to tell you though, that’s not a good sign. That means he sees slutty girls as “cool” and “fun.” It’s also why he’s spending time with one. As much as it means he’s a “nice” guy not using this as a dread tactic on you or to deliberately make you jealous, it also means he’s not very smart or discerning.

    Despite what I said above in my response to Susan, I actually hadn’t consciously considered this. It makes sense.. at the same time, it’s hard finding a guy who doesn’t actually think this way (and not just the ones who are bitter about women having rejected them when they were younger).

    There will be other, better, nicer STEM guys. I guarantee it. Maybe you ought to feel pity for this fellow. He’ll be the one searching the Internet for “Why did she lose attraction for me and cheat on me with my best friend?” years down the line.

    I legitimately hope that never happens.. the world doesn’t need more MRAs. And to think, I was doing the typical girl thing of fantasizing about where the relationship would go and how I could get him to fulfill my more ‘dominant man’ fantasies (I guess OffTheCuff is right about women being more calculating in that sense..).

    SayWhaat-

    She was a butch bisexual who had dumped him, but she saw me with him and decided she wanted him back…They stayed together for a while until she dumped him again, saying she was more into girls. The lulz.

    yeah.. bitchez be crazy. ha. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve witnessed girls getting more interested in a guy they used to have a crush on after finding out that he’s been with some other girl recently.

    I find it a little odd that he told you about it right away, but I suspect it was his awkward way of having the conversation (are we exclusive) without having the conversation. In other words, it was intended to avoid the conversation by preempting it, hoping you’d continue with “casual”.

    However, I was struck by the fact that you said you couldn’t take a “white guy” to your cousin’s party. He may have previously picked up on that vibe (or you may have commented on the issue) in a way that made him feel you two would never be anything serious. Just a thought.

    !! I hadn’t considered that. I had never brought it up, but he did ask about it (jokingly), and I was honest that I knew at least my mother was holding out hope that I’d marry an Indian guy (of the same ethnicity and caste.. yeah keep on dreaming mother. my dad otoh says ‘just marry a boy.’ lol). But even that is changing now as the kids I grew up with are actually getting married and it’s not always what the ‘dream’ was, including non-indian people.

    I think it took him by surprise getting used to the ‘brown person stare’ phenomenon (height differential only made it worse). we tend to stare a lot at other brown people. once an indian dude came up to me at a bar when he’d gone to the bathroom and asked ‘are you really going out with this dude?’ and was still there when he got back. that was awkward. but i made it clear it didn’t matter to me at all.

    otoh, the fact that he’s from a part of the u.s. where the whole ‘bleached blonde’ ideal reigns supreme and that’s who he hooked up with.. well that doesn’t exactly make *me* feel better.

  • Underdog

    Jess

    “Underdog,
    Be prepared for St Peter to be asking you some very awkward questions about ‘let he who is without sin cast the 1st stone’ when the time comes. He may point out to you a certain blog entry at 9.46 Mar 25th 2012 in the year of our Lord.”

    I’ll just tell him I was trolling and didn’t mean it.

  • SayWhaat

    purplesneakers,

    I was honest that I knew at least my mother was holding out hope that I’d marry an Indian guy (of the same ethnicity and caste.. yeah keep on dreaming mother.

    LOL my parents are the same way. I sense a Red Pill in their future…

    once an indian dude came up to me at a bar when he’d gone to the bathroom and asked ‘are you really going out with this dude?’ and was still there when he got back. that was awkward. but i made it clear it didn’t matter to me at all.

    That was really rude, and none of his business. I haven’t actually had to deal with rude Indian guys interrupting my dates, though I remember one time this guy burned holes with his eyes in the back of my date’s head, lol.

    Funny aside: Bangladeshi guys hit on me all the time. As soon as they find out that I’m not Muslim, they lose ALL interest. :P

    otoh, the fact that he’s from a part of the u.s. where the whole ‘bleached blonde’ ideal reigns supreme and that’s who he hooked up with.. well that doesn’t exactly make *me* feel better.

    Please don’t feel bad about this. Really, there’s nothing you can do about it anyway. I grew up thinking Blonde is Queen too, and only recently have I realized that we Indian girls have a lot of exotic appeal we can harness. Besides, the grass isn’t always greener on the other side. There are smart blonde girls out there who have to work against the whole Sorority Slut stereotype. No one really has it that good.

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

      @SayWhaat

      There are smart blonde girls out there who have to work against the whole Sorority Slut stereotype. No one really has it that good.

      +1 :)

  • SayWhaat

    SayWhaat, don’t underestimate the sheer volume of bullshit that is out there. Look at some commercials. Look at movies. Watch how teachers behave. Flip on your male gaze goggles. There’s a ton of brainwashing/propaganda/white knighting going on.

    Here’s the thing, Dogsquat…with Disney and Bollywood and overprotective parents, my ideas about love were the equivalent of fucking Lisa Frank rainbows and kittens and neon unicorns. And even with all that, I could see that the boys didn’t care much for smart girls, unless they were very hot. And if there was a hotter dumb girl, then that cute smart girl was shit outta luck.

    The only difference was that I kept denying it until I could deny it no longer. And then I made some changes. But I don’t blame men for being attracted to hot girls; now I know that’s only half of the equation when it comes to LTRs.

  • SayWhaat

    I think you’re confusing the top guys, with all guys again. I think the *most* I ever heard was a quick admission about who hooked up with who, and no details. No extended play by plays.

    Maybe…but guys will go into extended descriptions of a woman’s body. I always get uncomfortable when guys talk about how “awesome” a girl’s rack is. :/

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

    Wait, now you’re changing the topic. Hot and willing is very different than anybody willing (low standards).

    For some women the idea that your only criteria to stick it on someone is for her to be hot is low standards. I never even kissed a guy just because I though he was hot. He had to be more than that for me to share physically with him, so anything under that is low standards for me, YMMV.

    Okay. This is probably TMI, but for a long time I never knew balls looked like that. I always thought they were like, dangly tennis balls or something. Because that’s how guys always drew them.

    Heh not level of porn prepares anyone for the real deal, specially since porn has a “type” of men. The regular ones do all sorts of strange things that are so fascinating.

    What freaks me out is the way they can slip upwards.

    Oh boy totally freaked out the first time this happened to hubby I was mortified that I had vagina dentata or something along those lines that make him go up.

    SayWhaat, yeah my husband never harbored illusions about girls being perfect little angels, because he was teased and bullied mercilessly since elementary school by female classmates.

    Hubby generally thinks all women are innocent till proven otherwise but he never believed that they are uncapable of evil and he won’t cut slack to any just because they have a vagina if they earn being punished for doing bad stuff. How did he learned that? I’m afraid to ask. I’m sure it wasn’t fun.

    +1
    I grew up poor my whole life where basic needs weren’t always met, so I don’t have a taste for lavish things. The most lavish thing I own is my Iphone. I admire really nice things, but I can’t justify buying them. Its such a waste.
    I also have to pay for college as well. Though, Im not bitter about it, but it must be nice to have parents who pay for it. And I plenty of people who take it for granted.

    Raised poor too. I paid for everything clothes, college, graduation, wedding. Never liked to be a burden to anyone let alone my parents.

    Jess…personally I have a pretty high opinion of both Palin and GWB. One of the reasons they get such vitriolic negative reactions from certain people, I think, is that neither of these individuals is overly impressed with education-based credentials and hence their success represents a psychological threat to those whose identity is significantly wrapped up in their own credentials.

    I don’t have a high opinion of Palin or GWB but I do agree that social groups hate seen outliers win without using their same tools,policies, methods… whether feminists, intellectuals, liberals…no one is an exception. They just hate them.

  • SayWhaat

    And I am paraphrasing when I say “awesome”.

  • purplesneakers

    Please don’t feel bad about this. Really, there’s nothing you can do about it anyway. I grew up thinking Blonde is Queen too, and only recently have I realized that we Indian girls have a lot of exotic appeal we can harness. Besides, the grass isn’t always greener on the other side. There are smart blonde girls out there who have to work against the whole Sorority Slut stereotype. No one really has it that good.

    yeah i guess one bright spot about being indian is people will assume you’re a nerd to begin with! haha, i keeeeed, i kid.. but only a little bit.

    it’s just very new to me.. i grew up in a very multiracial, multiethnic place (i think there were maybe a handful of light-haired kids in my entire elementary/middle/high school experiences) and it was weird getting to college and meeting all these people who described some hot girl as “tall, blonde” as if that was supposed to explain everything about why she was hot to them. tbh i didn’t really understand the minority-kids-from-white-suburbia, who i always felt kind of had a chip on their shoulders about this. but i ‘get it’ more as i meet more people and go to different places.

    at the other end of the spectrum, I tend to assume that even american-raised indian guys won’t find me as attractive since I am darker-skinned. effed up, right? then personal experience makes me realize that most guys who aren’t just looking for a ‘trophy wife/girlfriend’ or don’t have an unhealthy relationship with their moms don’t care.

  • Abbot

    “the genie has definitely escaped, whether it make guys uncomfortable or not”
    .
    Now, why would “guys” [the minority who are getting laid by passing around all the escaped genies] be “uncomfortable?”
    .

  • SayWhaat

    at the other end of the spectrum, I tend to assume that even american-raised indian guys won’t find me as attractive since I am darker-skinned. effed up, right?

    Yeah…growing up, my mom would tell me to not play outside for too long because I was darker-skinned than my other Indian girlfriends and I would not look attractive. Once, I went on a 3-day school field trip to the Keys and came back almost completely black. My dance teacher and parents were horrified. We had a show the next week, and I was instructed to wash my entire body with some homemade lemon and sugar scrub to “scrub the tan off”. For the dance itself, they placed me in the back.

    Hmm…I wonder if that has anything to do with why I like white guys. White guys –> fair-skinned babies.

  • Joy

    @Jess 570

    I’m sorry that Christians fail to act like our Christ, but I’m glad that you agree that degrading attitudes are contrary to Christ’s teachings.

    @Jason 572

    Jason, I’m not sure that I agree with your assertion that there were few promiscuous women in the ancient world. Different ages have different temptations. Women in the ancient world had far fewer educational and economic opportunities than women do today, and fewer social supports available if the men in their lives died or were unable to care for them. They may not have had a “hook up culture,” but in hard times these women faced the temptation of using their sexuality as a means of securing their own livelihoods. Education has given me the ability to provide for myself in a way that is in line with my values. In that regard, I face less temptation than many of them did.

    To return to your remarks, Jesus did not refrain from “slut shaming” because he figured that his society already had the matter under control. On the contrary–Jesus directly challenged the “standard operating procedure” of his day when he refused to shun these women and offered them grace rather than condemnation. See John 8: 1-11, John 4:1-42, and Luke 7:36-50.

    You quoted Chesterton– “It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”

    Christ said, “No one is good–except God alone.” (Mark 10:18) Christ also refused to cast a stone.

    I do realize this is a secular blog, and that I am offering a different perspective. I am conservative in my own sexual choices but do not want to condemn others, and have difficulty explaining this without talking about Christ.

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

    Oh boy Plain Jane is attacking us with multiple personalities again. Susan you don’t need an IP blocker you need a cybershrink!

  • SayWhaat

    *sigh* looks like being a prude doesn’t work even when dating guys from your own culture…

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

    Oh, boy. The only way this thread could get more convoluted is if the New Atheists, anti-porn crusaders, and Objectivists all show up…

  • purplesneakers

    Yeah…growing up, my mom would tell me to not play outside for too long because I was darker-skinned than my other Indian girlfriends and I would not look attractive. Once, I went on a 3-day school field trip to the Keys and came back almost completely black. My dance teacher and parents were horrified. We had a show the next week, and I was instructed to wash my entire body with some homemade lemon and sugar scrub to “scrub the tan off”. For the dance itself, they placed me in the back.

    Hmm…I wonder if that has anything to do with why I like white guys. White guys –> fair-skinned babies.

    I *still* get chastised for ‘getting dark’ when I spend more time outside, and even for wearing make-up that supposedly makes me look darker (when the reality is.. I just don’t wear make-up five shades too light for me that makes me look like a ghost like they do). Only realized recently that the actresses in most indian movies/tv shows are like 20 shades lighter than I am and I look nothing like them.. cognitive dissonance much?

    I was very resistant to dating non-south asian guys for a while. Then I realized I was only meeting indian guys, who while I thought were super-hot, were dumb as f**king rocks and trashier than even my parents’ worst dreams. The smart ones from out of state who grew up in white suburbia still have those chips on those shoulders and I can’t deal with that.

  • purplesneakers

    American dudes, thank your lucky stars you don’t have to deal with Indian women like I do. Not only are they prudish, they are stuck up as hell. And talk about status obsessed! You haven’t seen it til you’ve dated an Indian girl or any South Asian girl. Pray I don’t get stuck with one for life.

    LOL… same to you dude.

  • Lokland

    @MM

    “Oh, boy. The only way this thread could get more convoluted is if the New Atheists, anti-porn crusaders, and Objectivists all show up…”

    I volunteer myself for all three just to make it interesting.

  • Herb

    @jess

    Underdog,
    Be prepared for St Peter to be asking you some very awkward questions about ‘let he who is without sin cast the 1st stone’ when the time comes. He may point out to you a certain blog entry at 9.46 Mar 25th 2012 in the year of our Lord.

    I’m so disappointed that you only did the second most common “shaming Christians by selective quotations” quote and didn’t go for the Sermon on the Mount.

    The select quote to imply Christ condemned judgement of men by men missing much of his message. In fact, he calls upon the faithful to judge in the Sermon on the Mount immediately after cautioning about judgment:

    Matthew Chapter 7
    1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

    2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured unto you.

    3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

    4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me cast out the mote out of thine eye; and lo, the beam is in thine own eye?

    5 Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.

    6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast your pearls before the swine, lest haply they trample them under their feet, and turn and rend you.

    The second verse is crucial to understanding the action you like to half quote. As JM points out he then tells her go forth and sin no more.

    Christ is not condemning their judgment of the adulteress but how they desire to act upon that judgment. By casting the first stone they are opening themselves to the same punishments for their sins: “and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured unto you.”

    He thus condemns them and the adulteress in the same way, the former with the judgment that they have sinned and should thus forgive her instead of compounding their own sin and to her by judging her sin and commanding her not to compound it.

    At the Sermon on the Mount, however, he does instruct us to judge that which is worthy of our forgiveness and aid and to not give it to thus who would destroy us. Avoiding sin and embracing forgiveness are never implied to include giving evil license to destroy us.

    As for standing at Saint Peter, I know I have a lot to answer for including times I have judged harshly and meted out for things I have done as well. Such is the human condition for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Salvation is a gift, the ultimate act of generosity and it is why above abstaining from judgment Christ instructed charity including the charity of suspending the meting out of justice after judgment.

    There is no generosity or aid given in a facile non-judgmentalism. That is to give license to the wicked to destroy the weak (which is arguably what the parable of the adulteress is about…Christ protecting the weak). Such facile non-judgmentalism is usually a fraud anyway, as your usage amply demonstrates, allowing the user to judge while hiding behind the skirts of Christ. You have assigned the judgment that the Throne will give in the name of non-judgment.

    A fully informed judgment that includes knowledge of our own unworthiness that leads to both forgiveness and aid in avoiding future misdeeds (“go forth and sin no more”) is a more mature, honest, and Christ-like (which should be the goal of all Christians) stance.

  • Abbot

    “men have become hypersensitive to female promiscuity, warily inquiring about a woman’s number before investing one ounce of emotional energy.”
    .
    How does this fact create a problem for anyone?

  • South Asian Guy

    Sorry Purple but Indian girls are not laid back and easy going. You know that. Biggest nags on the planet.

  • purplesneakers

    Sorry Purple but Indian girls are not laid back and easy going. You know that. Biggest nags on the planet.

    I actually don’t disagree, but…

    NAIWALT (I for Indian) and all that :p

  • Herb

    @Abbot

    “men have become hypersensitive to female promiscuity, warily inquiring about a woman’s number before investing one ounce of emotional energy.”
    .
    How does this fact create a problem for anyone?

    Because it means a woman’s choices have consequences that might mean she can’t have everything she wants.

    And women having to make choices and priorities is sexist. After all men get to do whatever they want and never suffer consequences for it. It’s called male privilege. Any Woman’s Studies major can explain it to you.

    And before you claim, “wait, what about what happened to this guy” as it was explained to me, “just because you fucked up and ruined your life doesn’t mean you don’t have male privilege.”

  • purplesneakers

    South Asian Guy,

    FWIW I think that ‘indian princess’ attitude is borne of growing up seeing marriages that (from the outside, to most kids) seem devoid of physical and even emotional intimacy. Everything is practical and rational, and every decision made for those reasons only. Marriage and kids are assumed to be a fact of life, but that’s exactly why both the 2nd-gen girls and guys have trouble adjusting to the american SMP, because they’re *not* facts of life in America and haven’t been for at least one generation.

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

    @Lokland
    Well, diversity of ideas is a good thing, I suppose. I’m just doing my part to inject a little communitarian sentiment around here. And be the resident Orson Welles fan : |

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

    Hmm…I wonder if that has anything to do with why I like white guys. White guys –> fair-skinned babies.

    Nah liking people from other races is explained because you have access to a higher variety of genes so it makes sense they will make you hot, so you are not racist you are worst you are exotificating white men… :p

  • South Asian Guy

    “at the other end of the spectrum, I tend to assume that even american-raised indian guys won’t find me as attractive since I am darker-skinned. effed up, right? then personal experience makes me realize that most guys who aren’t just looking for a ‘trophy wife/girlfriend’ or don’t have an unhealthy relationship with their moms don’t care.”

    What’s that last line supposed to mean?

  • Lokland

    @ Ana

    At first I read quality not variety and I had a conniption.
    Shame on me.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I don’t know about you guys, but I have it awesome. Pleasure comes from every moment. Wake up in the morning, feel the blanket rub my skin. Butter on my toast just melts on my tongue. See my coworkers, talk about our March Madness bracket and how my bracket based on a dream is kicking their ass. Talk to someone on the phone, make a conversation about how great the weather is. Take a piss because it just feels awesome to empty your bladder and not have to worry about that anymore.

    Gotta take pleasure in the little things and be grateful for what you have. Keep comparing, then you’re going to feel like shit.

  • South Asian Guy

    “FWIW I think that ‘indian princess’ attitude is borne of growing up seeing marriages that (from the outside, to most kids) seem devoid of physical and even emotional intimacy. Everything is practical and rational, and every decision made for those reasons only. Marriage and kids are assumed to be a fact of life, but that’s exactly why both the 2nd-gen girls and guys have trouble adjusting to the american SMP, because they’re *not* facts of life in America and haven’t been for at least one generation.”

    Sorry don’t buy it. How would any of that explain your status consciousness? Even Saywhaat’s cottonball fever stems from status consciousness. Are you willing to give an FOB a chance? Doubt it.

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

    At first I read quality not variety and I had a conniption.
    Shame on me.

    LOL… you are probably tired.

  • purplesneakers

    What’s that last line supposed to mean?

    The first part or the second part?

    The first part- my brother spent more of his formative years in South Asia than I did, and used to say that his ‘ideal’ wife would be rather light-skinned. Now that he’s actually married it doesn’t matter as much.

    The second part- I know guys who have led on indian girls for several months, not telling them about a non-indian girlfriend they’ve had for longer, all because they wanted to make their mothers happy or at least stop them from all that nagging. That’s what I mean when I say ‘unhealthy relationship with mother’–allowing them to dictate their lives.

    Sorry don’t buy it. How would any of that explain your status consciousness? Even Saywhaat’s cottonball fever stems from status consciousness. Are you willing to give an FOB a chance? Doubt it.

    Oh please. We all have our own personal experiences. And your description of yourself as ‘tall, dark, and handsome’ and leveraging that to get play from non-indian girls (the ones who are completely oblivious to status, of course) doesn’t reek of status consciousness?

    One of my biggest crushes was on a guy who was technically a ‘fob.’ I’ve dated other ‘fobs’ before. But I haven’t dated the ones who don’t spend their free time doing anything but watching indian movies on their laptops or skyping with their friends back home, or who don’t make any effort to learn about american culture or have any curiosity about it at all, or who think that just because a girl drinks means that she’s “loose.”

    Now, when was the last time you dated a fugly girl?

  • Herb

    @Anaca0na

    so you are not racist you are worst you are exotificating white men… :p

    Is there a place where you can sign up to be exotificated retail instead of just wholesale with all the other white guys.

    Because, I might be willing to do so…for scholarly purposes only you understand :)

  • SayWhaat

    Nah liking people from other races is explained because you have access to a higher variety of genes so it makes sense they will make you hot, so you are not racist you are worst you are exotificating white men… :p

    What can I say? I have an albino fetish. :P

  • SayWhaat

    South Asian Guy,

    I find your disdain for “cottonball” men interesting. Do you perceive yourself to be lower status to white guys?

    As for giving FOBs a chance…the reason I don’t is because I have less in common with them than I do with American or Indian-American guys. And FWIW, I have dated Indian-American guys. I don’t have so much of a problem with them as I do with their mothers.

  • Lokland

    @ Ana

    That I am

    ——————————

    Pleasent dreams all.

  • South Asian Guy

    “The second part- I know guys who have led on indian girls for several months, not telling them about a non-indian girlfriend they’ve had for longer, all because they wanted to make their mothers happy or at least stop them from all that nagging. That’s what I mean when I say ‘unhealthy relationship with mother’–allowing them to dictate their lives.”

    Great. Goris complain that we string them along only to dump them for an Indian girl to please our mothers and now here you come saying we string Indian girls along only to dump you for goris. Can’t we ever get a break?

    “Now, when was the last time you dated a fugly girl?”

    Why would you expect me to date someone I thought was ugly? Do you date guys you think are ugly?

  • South Asian Guy

    “I have dated Indian-American guys. I don’t have so much of a problem with them as I do with their mothers.”

    Ahhh here we have it. The evil mother in law. And I’ll bet if you have a son you’ll be just as domineering over him as you perceive my mom to be over me. Indian girls are not without their family and cultural baggage either. One of the reasons I don’t date them. You can never just relax and be in the now.

  • SayWhaat

    Great. Goris complain that we string them along only to dump them for an Indian girl to please our mothers and now here you come saying we string Indian girls along only to dump you for goris. Can’t we ever get a break?

    How about you just stop stringing women along? :P

    And I’ll bet if you have a son you’ll be just as domineering over him as you perceive my mom to be over me. Indian girls are not without their family and cultural baggage either. One of the reasons I don’t date them. You can never just relax and be in the now.

    *shrug* Maybe. Maybe not. Won’t know until I actually have children.

    If you’re so vehemently against dating Indian girls…why be bothered that purple and I are interested in white guys? That just leaves more white girls for you, no?

  • SayWhaat

    South Asian Guy, you never answered my first question: do you perceive yourself to be lower status in comparison to white guys? If not, why is this even an issue for you?

  • South Asian Guy

    Because your reasons for dating them are materialistic. You’re essentially using my white brothers.

  • purplesneakers

    Great. Goris complain that we string them along only to dump them for an Indian girl to please our mothers and now here you come saying we string Indian girls along only to dump you for goris. Can’t we ever get a break?

    Well.. as long as you’ve personally never actually done that, you have nothing to worry about, right? You kind of remind me of a cousin of mine, who also had ‘game’ figured out wayyy back in middle school and has been getting laid like tile ever since, even though his mom didn’t want him to “date” at all. If that’s the case for you too, how would what your mother wants you to do even make a difference to you?

    Why would you expect me to date someone I thought was ugly? Do you date guys you think are ugly?

    Of course I wouldn’t expect a guy to date a girl he thought was ugly (and I would hope he wouldn’t do that, actually). But asking that is the corollary to you ‘accusing’ women of being morally repugnant in some way for not dating guys who you assume that the women presume to be lower in status, when women have a hypergamous instinct. This gets tossed around a lot as an accusation, but just like a man’s physical desire for some hot young thing, women have a biological desire for men who display dominance over them in *some* way. I changed myself a lot to accommodate what men want, and lots of guys become better versions of themselves after discovering game and attract more women as a result. I will recognize that it was probably a lot easier for me to make these changes than it was for most men to learn game, but at the same time, I wish people would stop accusing women of being sooooo superficial for being attracted to dominance (not necessarily caddishness or dark game) while at the same time not at least paying lip service to the fact that men are just as superficial when it comes to visual and sexual triggers.

  • SayWhaat

    How is it materialistic to date and have a loving relationship with a guy I am attracted to?

  • Charm

    If you’re so vehemently against dating Indian girls…why be bothered that purple and I are interested in white guys? That just leaves more white girls for you, no?

    Do you just love how people do this? It happens in the black community as well. Just because we are born with a certain shade of skin does not mean that we must reproduce within that race. I’ve never dated a black man. Its never worked out that way. It blows my mind how upset people get at interracial couples. Its even funnier when the person that is upset, is also dating outside their race. I’ve heard stories of black men making a fuss if a black women is dating a non-black man, while they are dating a non-black woman. People need to learn to mind their own damn business.

    @Herb

    The exotification of white men already exists in a ton of countries. Especially white American men. It seems like its white women that don’t appreciate you.

  • purplesneakers

    How is it materialistic to date and have a loving relationship with a guy I am attracted to?

    I’m pretty sure all that SAG is basing these accusations of materialism on is because of the mention of fair-skinned babieeeeeeez.

  • SayWhaat

    South Asian Guy, I really don’t understand the animosity when you have already stated that you don’t date Indian girls. I have no problem with Indian guys dating non-Indian girls. In fact, I’m friends with a few couples who are that exact combination. So what’s your beef? (pun?)

  • OffTheCuff

    SW: “Maybe…but guys will go into extended descriptions of a woman’s body. I always get uncomfortable when guys talk about how “awesome” a girl’s rack is.”

    You hung out with the cool crowd, I see. Not everyone does. (Well, I do *now*.)

  • SayWhaat

    I’m pretty sure all that SAG is basing these accusations of materialism on is because of the mention of fair-skinned babieeeeeeez.

    Lol. FWIW, I find fair-skinned Indian men quite attractive as well. ;)

  • Charm

    Because your reasons for dating them are materialistic. You’re essentially using my white brothers.

    Lolololol. Okay.

  • SayWhaat

    OTC,

    Nah, I think that’s just how our generation is. I didn’t consider that particular crowd to be “cool” at all.

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

    @SayWhaat
    Has Bollywood done a version of “The Bonfire of the Vanities”? This exchange is giving me the impression that various cultures aren’t so different after all : |

  • SayWhaat

    Charm and Herb,

    The exotification of white men already exists in a ton of countries. Especially white American men. It seems like its white women that don’t appreciate you.

    I think it’s more like, white women are just used to white men. In the way that black women are used to black men, Korean women are used to Korean men, etc.

    But yes, I believe Bellita touched upon this in a thread some time ago. White people are just perceived to be “better”, for whatever reason (in Asian countries, probably because they’re very wealthy and fair-skinned).

  • Dogsquat

    @SayWhaat:

    You and I have gone ’round and ’round before about the misinformation that’s out there. I’m certainly not attempting to play Oppression Olympics with you. This stuff is the very definition of subjective, anyway.

    I acknowledge that things are tough for both (all?) sexes. For the record, I’m glad I’m a man. I’ve got a lot more control over my attractiveness, plus I had/have more time to do something about my situation. In that respect, men have it “easier” than women do.

    It is harder for men, though, to come to a place where they figure it all out. A man has to get “lucky” in a way. In my case, it was googling stuff after I’d had my heart ripped out. I happened upon some Game stuff, and it started making sense. If I’d happened upon some Cosmo stuff, or The Good Men Project, no doubt I’d still be lost in the sauce.

    You’ve almost acknowledged as much in your own post – you got a half-dose of Red Pill just by observing/participating in life. Look at the Disney cartoons you cited, for example – all of the princesses are hot. Even Ariel the Mermaid has awesome…..scales.

    Yes, there are people telling you,”It’s the inside that counts!” but every fairy tale features a beautiful princess. Knowhamsayne?

    Men, on the other hand, are lied to by a greater variety of people, and there is less evidence for them to pick up on in popular culture.

    From a utilitarian view, this means that men (on average) figure out how things work at a later age and have more bad mental programming to get rid of. Sequelae include disillusionment and much more anger, a greater sense of betrayal.

    I suspect even “natural” alphas go through a truncated version of this.

    I’m mentioning this stuff at all (and again) because I believe it’s important for women to keep in mind. At some level, lots of good girls are paying for it. There exists, even in many good men’s hearts, a layer of contempt and anger toward women. I don’t believe it’s a permanent fixture, but it’s there for awhile.

    You gals should plan/adjust accordingly.

  • SayWhaat

    Megaman,

    Has Bollywood done a version of “The Bonfire of the Vanities”? This exchange is giving me the impression that various cultures aren’t so different after all : |

    Nope, some things are cross-cultural. :P

  • Underdog

    “men have become hypersensitive to female promiscuity, warily inquiring about a woman’s number before investing one ounce of emotional energy.”

    I can attest to girls being hypersensitive to men being hypersensitive to female promiscuity. Many college girls I talked to in bars and clubs brought up their “good” sexual history / low number to me way before I could even ask. Even when the conversation was still light and casual. Many girls nowadays are really pushing for the good girl image instead of the “liberated” girl image. I don’t know if I trust them, though…

    Anyway, this is weird, but I’ve been thinking about my sexual history and I think I’ve dabbled in something that can only be described as “slut-turning”.

    You see, I entered college a clueless beta and learned enough game along the way to be juggling 4 very hot girls by the time I left. During my learning process, right when I started getting results, I was so happy with every single lay that I treated these girls with the utmost gentlemanly / beta-like behavior. Basically, I had enough game to not look like a beta from approach to close, but during and after hook up, I had no idea how to act so I just fell back onto my natural beta instincts. Which meant I actually made love to these girls, kissed them, ate them out, made sure they came before I did, gave them warm towels afterwards, cuddled, took them out for breakfast before dropping them off, talked to them like human beings, etc… I did this with every girl I took home for 6-7 months until I finally got jaded and stopped giving a shit like an asshole.

    During that time, a lot of these girls wanted to see me again and “hang out” more. I could feel their demeanors shifting from fun-girl mode to wifey mode. They wanted to go on dates, some cooked for me, one of them even brought me medicine from her internship when I got sick. I eventually stopped fucking them and moved on. But the funny thing was, nearly all of them left the hook up scene soon after. A few even managed to get boyfriends (mostly chodes) after years of hooking up.

    I think I should start doing this again and I’d advise guys here to do the same. A lot of us are tired of the current SMP and we all need to bust a nut once in a while, right? What better way to hit 2 birds with 1 stone (no pun intended?) than to game the fuck out these party-girls, take them home, put on your best beta behavior while you pump and make them think about their life choices while you dump. The world will be a better place because of your actions and the future generations will thank you for your service.

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

      @Underdog

      I think I should start doing this again and I’d advise guys here to do the same. A lot of us are tired of the current SMP and we all need to bust a nut once in a while, right? What better way to hit 2 birds with 1 stone (no pun intended?) than to game the fuck out these party-girls, take them home, put on your best beta behavior while you pump and make them think about their life choices while you dump. The world will be a better place because of your actions and the future generations will thank you for your service.

      By all means, get what you can from women who will give it to you. But don’t stoop to self-soothing pablum like that last sentence. Just admit you’re going the jaded asshole route again, living just for your own pleasure and dumping other human beings by the side of the road.

      Just a thought – why not go after a woman who isn’t a slut?

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

    White people are just perceived to be “better”, for whatever reason (in Asian countries, probably because they’re very wealthy and fair-skinned).

    Well white people had conquered other people’s countries for a while and become the dominating class. So if you see a lot of wealthy educated people in one group after the wars are over and they are not killing you and your kind in mass you start to percieve them as better. In some ancient cultures people painted their teeth black and considered them more attractive because the upper class with access to so much food and sugar but not having created dental care, got rotten black teeth very easily, same principle.

  • SayWhaat

    Dogsquat,

    From a utilitarian view, this means that men (on average) figure out how things work at a later age and have more bad mental programming to get rid of. Sequelae include disillusionment and much more anger, a greater sense of betrayal.

    Okay. I can’t 100% grok it, but maybe other girls can. I can accept that this is how it’s happening for men currently.

  • Herb

    @Charm

    The exotification of white men already exists in a ton of countries. Especially white American men. It seems like its white women that don’t appreciate you

    Ah, white girls don’t like me retail but non-white girls like me wholesale ;)

    Now that I think about it my favorite Navy story is how a girl (and I think girl is correct over woman but that could be an old man’s fancy talking) pulled me onto her float in a parade in Cartegena, Columbia on my first deployment. If a recruiter had been there I would have reenlisted for life right then and there.

    Fortunately none was.

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

    @DS
    “There exists, even in many good men’s hearts, a layer of contempt and anger toward women.”

    I’m just wondering where this contempt for the opposite sex is coming from. It’d be rational if directed at only those women who’ve done you wrong. I’ll admit to a certan amount of bitterness and resentment back when I was single, lonely, and searching.

  • Charm

    I think it’s more like, white women are just used to white men. In the way that black women are used to black men, Korean women are used to Korean men, etc.

    Oh yea, this is very true. People have the easiest access to people who look like them, so they are more likely to take them for granted. Though for me, I think its cultural too. I don’t really like the culture a lot of AA ascribe to. Because of this I don’t spend a lot of time around black people in general. I hate being around people who perpetuate stereotypes.

  • Herb

    Charm and Herb,

    The exotification of white men already exists in a ton of countries. Especially white American men. It seems like its white women that don’t appreciate you.

    I think it’s more like, white women are just used to white men. In the way that black women are used to black men, Korean women are used to Korean men, etc.

    And I was mostly just making a joke.

    That said, in terms of physical appearance I tend to find Indian women (mostly but not only Bollywood types) and Persian (Iranian/Aryan whatever is the current correct term) very beautiful.

    I think some of that is cultural on their part as, at least the ones I see as a male in the US have yet to adopt the two major strains of attractiveness in US women: hot over pretty or “I refuse to be attractive”. I noticed when I was in HS in El Paso Texas that women who were culturally Mexican (regardless of which side of the border they lived on) put more effort into being attractive than American women.

  • purplesneakers

    dogsquat @ 636

    I agree with you. I’m always surprised when I hear male friends and acquaintances say things like ‘I can’t believe she likes him/that’ or even, like I mentioned, at least outwardly approving of slutty behavior. There are a ton of cultural influences affecting how men view gender dynamics, and I can’t even imagine being in the position of trying to break all that down. I think as girls it’s hard for us to understand that sometimes because, well, a lot of us don’t even know why we’re attracted to what we’re attracted to (early on in college a cousin complained about her boyfriend being “too nice” and wondering what was wrong with her). But there’s something else- we also know what our darkest fantasies are, and I guess we assume that’s what men want too. It wouldn’t have occurred to me at age 16 that so many men would feel uncomfortable displaying dominance because, well, it just seemed so obvious to me that that’s what girls wanted.

    I wrote above about how it was probably much easier for me to change in such a way as to accommodate men than it is for most men to learn game. I think it helps that I grew up being told things like “you need to lose weight to find a husband” and “learn to cook and clean for your husband,” (oh and was also told straight out “don’t have sex with boys”) and in which there was a presumption of assortative mating (no “you deserve a prince” or any of that. No matter how much I rebelled against those ideas I knew they must have been true on some level. I can imagine it would be harder to swallow if a girl grew up in a household steeped very much in modern American culture and more liberal mores though.

    also re: your previous comment- it was very helpful. thanks for the advice. don’t worry, I haven’t done anything rash as a result of this. Maybe drank a little more than usual this weekend, but I’ve waited too long to go do something stupid that I could never take back at this point. I also have too much pride (or, according to South Asian Guy, am your typical stuck-up indian girl) to go demanding explanations in drunken 3am phone calls. :P

  • Dogsquat

    SayWhaat and PurpleSneakerPimp, you ladies are saintly. I admire your patience and tact in dealing with South Asian Guy.

    Bravo Zulu, and all that.

  • SayWhaat

    Re: hot over pretty

    Pretty girls have no trouble becoming “hot”. Seriously, dress ‘em up in the right clothes and makeup and BAM! Sex bomb.

    I’m not sure the same holds in reverse. You can look like a hot sexpot but how much makeup did it take to get you there?

  • Passer_By

    @sag
    “You’re essentially using my white brothers.”

    On behalf of your white brothers, I want to spread the news . . .
    that if it feels this good getting used . . .
    Oh you just keep on using me . . .
    until you use me up . . .
    Until you use me up.

  • Herb

    @Underdog

    Many college girls I talked to in bars and clubs brought up their “good” sexual history / low number to me way before I could even ask. Even when the conversation was still light and casual. Many girls nowadays are really pushing for the good girl image instead of the “liberated” girl image. I don’t know if I trust them, though…

    Interesting…the woman I’m seeing now (we’re both in our 40s) asked me my number and upon hearing declared we won’t be discussing hers. The best I can get out of her is it’s in the range of 3x of mine.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Megaman
    “I’m just wondering where this contempt for the opposite sex is coming from.”

    Earlier on in this thread, I brought up my own personal example of a bad girl wanting to reform with me, and how that ends up making me feel like crap.

    Oh, it gets worse when it goes the other direction. My good buddy dated a nice religious girl for two and a half years. 30 seconds of oral sex. In two and a half years.

    They broke up, and a few months later she heads off to a wedding, and lo and behold some “perfect guy” sweeps her off her feet and she’s eagerly gobbling up his manseed. Until it’s over, and he doesn’t call, and since she still talked to her ex, guess who she turned to for help?

    She still doesn’t understand why he is pissed. It seems very few women can. Even the “nice” ones.

    It’s difficult to trust a group of people, when so many of them have a mindset that is actively hostile to your mental health. It’s difficult to trust a group of people who feel entitled to “explore” with some bad boy and then saddle you up with the emotional wreckage and tamer sex because you HAVE to accept them because you’re a good boy and that’s what you are supposed to do.

    That’s why it’s generalized. It’s a damn crying shame. There are some decent women out there, I’m sure, and there are women who have taken the red-pill and can understand how to make a relationship work. Those kind of girls can make a man feel valued. But it’s hard, hard, hard work to trust after you have been horribly violated.

  • Charm

    I’m not sure the same holds in reverse. You can look like a hot sexpot but how much makeup did it take to get you there?

    I was just about to ask this. I’ve seen many of “hot” women, that looked horrible without makeup. Pretty girls are generally relying heavily on their natural looks (little to no makeup), while “hot” women are usually relying on revealing clothing, heavy makeup and extensions to draw attention away from their ugly mugs. Club girls in 6 inch heels generally aren’t very attractive in good lighting.

  • Mike C

    VD,

    MikeC, Susan has been very explicit about the purpose of HUS from the start. ****It is by a woman, for young women.**** There is nothing wrong with this, and indeed, she merits credit for being among the first women to recognize the truth of Game as well as some of its merits.

    Right. Agreed. I know this…you know this…but does the college guy writing in for advice know this (Susan said she gets more questions from men)? That she is writing FOR WOMEN from a woman’s perspective. I want to be emphatically clear on this point. I believe Susan has good motives and intentions and does NOT give “bad” advice to women or men. That said, it is crystal clear to me her advice does come from a female interest first perspective, and she is unable to separate herself from that to give a male advice from a male perspective. Her first thought is always going to be from the female side of things in relationship versus the male side. Now I don’t believe she has any sort of ethical obligation to refer a male writing in to her to bloggers she finds wrong or distasteful such as the Ros. My view as a man is a guy needs to evaluate multiple sources of information and then integrate them to his personal beliefs and moral/ethical structure. On some level, if one particular guy is stupid enough to take one person’s view or advice as gospel and not search out other sources of perpsective, than that is on him. I guess for me I put myself in the shoes of maybe a guy who is a bit naive and ignorant, and trying to figure all this shit out, and certain information or perspective was being filtered out for me. There are tricky ethical questions when you hold yourself out as an advisor. I work in the investment field as an advisor. One of the concepts is that I am a fiduciary. My responsbility is to the client’s best interest. My personal beliefs, feelings, whatever should not enter into the equation of what is in the best interests of the client.

    Women need to understand the core truths of Game as badly as men do, they may actually need it worse.

    Right. For no other reason than to understand themselves and their drives. I believe one of the most important things in life is “Know thyself”. Unfortunately, most people pass aimlessly through life not really knowing themselves. I’ll give you an example. In my case, I quite intentionally minimize the amount of temptation I expose myself to. I am high T, attractive, with a pretty strong desire for variety yet I’ve been successfully faithful and monogamous. I simply don’t put myself in situations where I can make bad decisions. A big component of young women making better decisions is really understanding their weaknesses (and knowledge of Game can help with that) and then avoiding bad situations.

    But that doesn’t make it any less legitimate. If she can’t relate as well to the pain of an omega male who has never known any positive female attention from anyone but his mother, neither can we male Game bloggers, no matter how fully we have mastered Game, truly understand the position of the woman who experiences the predatory male gaze from the moment she leaves the house.

    This is all true. Where things get tricky though is when you wear different hats, the analyst hat, the advisor hat, the pundit hat, the polemicist hat, and you sort of switch hats. Some people aren’t smart enough to know when someone is changing hats

    and Susan is particularly valuable due to a) her unique perspective, and b) her extraordinarily decent nature. The latter is not a bad thing, not in an intellectual coterie presently dominated by ruthless and cold-hearted narcissists.

    Agreed.

    And let’s face it. Much of the spite is actually envy. After all, why should a woman’s blog become one of the primary mainstream faces of Game?

    Possibly. But honestly, I’m not so sure of this. My sense is most of the male bloggers including you (correct me if I am wrong) write their SMP blogs as a hobby. They’ve got established money making careers elswhere. They are not looking to monetize it in any way, and I’d actually be surprised if many of them, any of them, really cared about page views and media attention of their blogs. Do you really give two shits about Alpha Game versus HUS in terms of a competition? I think it is less about envy and more that a deep philosophical divide has occurred. Which is natural in the evolution of anything. My family background is Eastern Orthodox (although I abandoned religion long ago). That emerged as a break with Roman Catholicism and the two patriarchs excommunicated each other, and than another break with Martin Luther. The breaks were about philosphical disagreements, not personal status.

    In almost every art and science, the first female adaption exceeds its male predecessors in terms of relative popularity because it tends to appeal to a wider audience.

    Interesting. Could you give another example of this. I wasn’t aware of this phenonemon.

    We are fortunate, therefore, that “Aunt Susan” exists. If she didn’t, we’d be well-served to invent her.

    Agreed. And I’ve said a number of times, that I think what Susan is doing here is a good thing. I still believe that. There is no doubt there has been a shift in overall philosophy (as I described in my Stage analysis at Rollo’s). Just about every intelligent guy has noticed it. Nothing wrong with that. But Susan and this blog are a good vehicle for presenting a more palatable version of “the truth”. Whenever I think of the SMP and intergender stuff, I”m reminded of A Few Good Men, and Nicholson screaming “You can’t handle the truth”. The reality is most people cannot and therefore a more sanitized version is useful.

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

      @Mike C

      First, if you look at my posts, it is generally very clear that I am addressing women. Recently, in writing about instilling dread, I stated so specifically at the top of the post to avoid confusion. I didn’t tell men not to use the dread tactic – I advised women not to date men who do so. I really don’t see how a young guy could become confused.

      That said, it is crystal clear to me her advice does come from a female interest first perspective, and she is unable to separate herself from that to give a male advice from a male perspective.

      How about we adopt a human perspective? It’s precisely this Team Woman, Team Man mentality that I reject. Rollo is like Mystery on Dark Game steroids. Game was never written for these nefarious applications. In my view, this mentality drives the sexes further apart and destroys relationships. It probably works fairly well for short-term flings with head cases.

      I’m also interested to hear an example of where you think I’ve steered a guy wrong – held myself out as an advisor, and then advised a course of action that would serve him poorly.

      Just about every intelligent guy has noticed it.

      Oh please. Intelligence may be a common thread, but not the only one. Every one of those guys has a history of faring poorly in the SMP, one way or another. Intelligent maybe. Pissed off and dare I say it – bitter? Yes.

      The latter has been demonstrated by the constant refrain that is blaming in nature. It’s not enough to understand female nature, the guys you refer to have a real beef with it. The red pill went down and a lot of bile came up.

  • South Asian Guy

    If PS and SW were to be honest they would tell you that white people are not considered high status by South Asians at all. The opposite. Our families think white people have no culture, no upbringing, no family values, etc. When we date white people we either have to keep it secret or boldly stand up to our families and risk much. It is seen as marrying down to marry a white. Indian girls who date white guys demand the richest of them and she might still dump him for an even richer Indian. An ordinary lower middle class guy from anywhere will never do.

  • Herb

    @Megaman

    I’m just wondering where this contempt for the opposite sex is coming from. It’d be rational if directed at only those women who’ve done you wrong. I’ll admit to a certan amount of bitterness and resentment back when I was single, lonely, and searching.

    To sum it up in a nutshell I think it’s because I have yet to meet a woman who I don’t have to explain why men find the following quote offensive:

    Women have always been the primary victims of war. Women lose their husbands, their fathers, their sons in combat.
    -Hillary Clinton

    If women, as a whole, can’t understand why women find that quote offensive how can they be surprised men hold them in contempt.

    I don’t mean to say that quote is why, just that the inability of any woman I’ve discussed it with to understand why I find it offensive without me explaining it tells me at some level none of them see men as human.

    How can my natural gut response not include contempt?

    Ladies, read that quote and figure out why it offends men. Once you do, you have more value than you can know in the serious relationship market although it won’t matter in the SMP.

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

      @Herb

      I believe that any woman who is not a feminist apologist, and even some who are, would find Hillary Clinton’s remark contemptible. Personally, I find HC herself worthy of contempt.

  • South Asian Guy

    Passer_By, you’re ok with being used as an ATM by materialistic women?

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

    @ADBG
    Sorry to hear about your ordeal. Again, I can understand feeling contempt towards those particular women. Projecting that anger against women in general doesn’t seem like the best way to go about find an honest, caring, loving girl, if that’s what you’re looking for.

    I guess I was spared a lot of heartache by being very careful who I fell for. There were a couple of girls I knew were bad news and didn’t want to get involved with on any level. Wouldn’t say I got lucky though, because I spent half of my adult life single.

  • purplesneakers

    If PS and SW were to be honest they would tell you that white people are not considered high status by South Asians at all. The opposite. Our families think white people have no culture, no upbringing, no family values, etc. When we date white people we either have to keep it secret or boldly stand up to our families and risk much. It is seen as marrying down to marry a white. Indian girls who date white guys demand the richest of them and she might still dump him for an even richer Indian. An ordinary lower middle class guy from anywhere will never do.

    Good lord someone has a chip on his shoulder. Where did you grow up, Montana?

    For the record, South Asian Guy, I don’t give a shit about any of this. My parents in fact don’t want me to be “dating” at all. My dad has said a half hour of talking with someone should be sufficient before deciding to marry them (kind of hypocritical, considering he and my mother eloped, but anyway…). I have never ever talked with my parents about boys or dating. A lot about my life has to be different from what they dreamed for me, because I live in 21st century urban America, not 1970′s India.

  • Mike C

    It is harder for men, though, to come to a place where they figure it all out. A man has to get “lucky” in a way. In my case, it was googling stuff after I’d had my heart ripped out. I happened upon some Game stuff, and it started making sense. If I’d happened upon some Cosmo stuff, or The Good Men Project, no doubt I’d still be lost in the sauce.

    Dogsquat, just wanted to highlight this excerpt because I agree emphatically. What you’ve outlined here is why I guess I’m somewhat sensitive to the notion that men shouldn’t be exposed to certain ideas or perspectives.

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

      @Mike C

      What you’ve outlined here is why I guess I’m somewhat sensitive to the notion that men shouldn’t be exposed to certain ideas or perspectives.

      You’ve just contradicted yourself. If Dogsquat had been exposed to Cosmo or The Good Men Project, he’d still be lost. I would argue that tactics tending toward the manipulative and exploitative can get a guy just as lost. In any case, there’s nothing wrong with being exposed to all ideas, even ones that are morally wrong. As reasoning, rational, moral beings it’s up to us to choose our path.

  • SayWhaat

    SAG,

    If PS and SW were to be honest they would tell you that white people are not considered high status by South Asians at all. The opposite. Our families think white people have no culture, no upbringing, no family values, etc. When we date white people we either have to keep it secret or boldly stand up to our families and risk much. It is seen as marrying down to marry a white.

    Agree and disagree. If white people were not considered “high status”, why did every white person receive star treatment when I was visiting India a couple months ago? Go to the Taj Mahal and see how many ladies ask the tall white tourists to hold their babies in photos. :P

    That being said, white people are not considered “high status” in the sense that they are preferable for marriage over Indian guys. That is an issue of a cultural divide. However, this cultural divide is much smaller between Indian-Americans and non-Indian-Americans; we’re all American, and we identify with the American experience foremost. My childhood Indian friend is getting married to a white guy next month. :)

    Indian girls who date white guys demand the richest of them and she might still dump him for an even richer Indian. An ordinary lower middle class guy from anywhere will never do.

    Disagree and agree. We can provide for ourselves; wealth is of little importance when dating white guys of the same socioeconomic status. Agree, though, that I would never date Trailer-Park Tom. The key isn’t race, it’s socioeconomic status. And that’s something that isn’t limited to Indian girls, or girls in general, for that matter.

  • Herb

    @South Asian Guy

    Passer_By, you’re ok with being used as an ATM by materialistic women?

    I got through part of the rough patch after my divorce by being a stripper’s regular…I paid her to pretend to like me and talk to me (hell, I didn’t even get the “dances” I paid for 90% of the time) and she made money.

    That probably counts as being okay with being used as an ATM by a materialistic woman. My ex-wife, on the other hand, I still resent for it.

    Why the difference? I knew the stripper was just pretending to like me and that the money was a fee for that service. My ex (and a few GF before and after before I got a clue) pretended to have affection for me and I gave gifts out of what I thought was mutual affection.

    If it’s just raw commerce, though, why be upset…you read the menu and get what you want and can afford.

  • purplesneakers

    Pretty girls have no trouble becoming “hot”. Seriously, dress ‘em up in the right clothes and makeup and BAM! Sex bomb.

    I think ‘hot’ also requires a certain level of confidence and a certain attitude though. Maybe not to men just on a purely visual basis, but body language and all that does make a difference… mini-dress that you’re constantly pulling down or heels so high you’re stumbling ruin the effect. Whereas girls who have the “yeah I’m hot and I know it and I know you know it” attitude… well, it’s tough to foster that attitude for a lot of girls.

  • SayWhaat

    For the record, SAG, my boyfriend earns less than I do.

  • Charm

    If it’s just raw commerce, though, why be upset…you read the menu and get what you want and can afford.

    Damn. This is depressing.

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

    @Herb
    I can only say that Ms. Clinton doesn’t represent all women. If she did, she’d obviously have won the nomination in 2008 and might be the president today. I was just a teenager at the time, but even back then I thought NOW sold its soul to the Devil when it supported her husband no questions asked.

    Should women view men collectively with contempt because of someone like John Edwards? They could, but what does that get them?

    If I’m the victim of a violent crime (and I have been), should I assume everyone’s a criminal out to get me? I could, but I’d be miserable.

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

      @Megaman

      even back then I thought NOW sold its soul to the Devil when it supported her husband no questions asked.

      I’d been disillusioned with feminists for a while, but that was absolutely the last straw for me.

  • SayWhaat

    Whereas girls who have the “yeah I’m hot and I know it and I know you know it” attitude… well, it’s tough to foster that attitude for a lot of girls.

    This is really stupid, but…once I’m in a hot dress and heels, all I need is one drink before I go, “fuck yeah, I’m Beyonce.” :P

  • purplesneakers

    I was just about to ask this. I’ve seen many of “hot” women, that looked horrible without makeup. Pretty girls are generally relying heavily on their natural looks (little to no makeup), while “hot” women are usually relying on revealing clothing, heavy makeup and extensions to draw attention away from their ugly mugs. Club girls in 6 inch heels generally aren’t very attractive in good lighting.

    I know lots of pretty girls who I feel like look more ‘hot’ but less appealing overall when they dress to go to the club. But it’s become to the norm. I agree with the general point though, pretty–>hot more probable than hot–>pretty.

    anyway.. intra-race war on HUS! fun times!

  • Herb

    @Megaman

    I can only say that Ms. Clinton doesn’t represent all women. If she did, she’d obviously have won the nomination in 2008 and might be the president today

    You missed my point…I’ve had women this past week not understand why that quote upset men.

    So it’s not ten years ago it’s today. Women don’t get why that quote is offensive to men today, right now.

    Should women view men collectively with contempt because of someone like John Edwards? They could, but what does that get them?

    I would find it natural if a woman had to explain to every man she discussed it with why women find John Edwards’ behavior offensive that over time she’d view men with contempt, yes.

    But how many women have that experience?

  • Passer_By

    @SAG
    “Passer_By, you’re ok with being used as an ATM by materialistic women?”

    No, just as a sex toy. But it was a joke. Lighten up.

    “If PS and SW were to be honest they would tell you that white people are not considered high status by South Asians at all. The opposite. ”

    Yes, this is the impression I have as well. As a group, for whatever reason, you seem to feel you are racially superior, notwithstanding the relative success of the two societies over the last millennium. Part of me suspects this is mostly Indians of upper “caste” descent. But, cheer up, you’re don’t seem as bad that way as the Persians, especially Persian Jews.

  • SayWhaat

    anyway.. intra-race war on HUS! fun times!

    Yeah. It’s like 11 am in India now so SAG’s got a full day ahead of him (shouldn’t he be studying?), but I’ve got work in the morning so I’m calling it a night. And in the morning I’ll call my gora boyfriend. :)

    Later, y’all.

  • Herb

    @Charm

    If it’s just raw commerce, though, why be upset…you read the menu and get what you want and can afford.

    Damn. This is depressing.

    Why? Is a man visiting a stripper not engaged in raw commerce.

    What is depressing is how many people approach “dating”/”hooking-up”/”relationships” this way…how many keep a mental balance sheet…how many move on when the ATM runs out of cash/good looks/hot sex/”fun”/whatever.

    That we have commercial transactions isn’t depressing. That more and more all we have are commercial transactions, and most of those not even openly, is depressing.

  • purplesneakers

    This is really stupid, but…once I’m in a hot dress and heels, all I need is one drink before I go, “fuck yeah, I’m Beyonce.” :P

    Haha.. damn I need to lower my alcohol tolerance somehow.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @megaman
    “Sorry to hear about your ordeal. Again, I can understand feeling contempt towards those particular women. Projecting that anger against women in general doesn’t seem like the best way to go about find an honest, caring, loving girl, if that’s what you’re looking for.”

    I know. No worries about me, everything is going to be okay. But it isn’t an isolated case: this seems to be a general trend among women who have not taken the red pill. Most women do not seem to have taken the red pill, either. Even when it is explained to them, they still do not understand. They respond with shaming language.

    It is going to be very difficult to respect women with that kind of response. I understand it, I forgive it, I can work around it, because now I know if some girl doesn’t give me what I want then I can just work on myself and find some other girl that is a better fit for me, but if the vast majority of women I know IRL are literally incapable of understanding the male perspective, it’s difficult to feel secure, trusted, and valued.

    Half the time I come here, it’s just to remind myself that NAWALT.

  • Passer_By

    @megaman
    “Should women view men collectively with contempt because of someone like John Edwards? They could, but what does that get them?”

    Women were the primary driver behind his candidacy. Not men. I have yet to meet a man who didn’t find him smarmy and repulsive. I’d suggest you find another example.

  • Mike C

    VD

    I don’t disagree in the slightest. I have great respect for Roissy. But I also share Susan’s recognition that the nihilist philosophy Roissy and Roosh push in addition to their teaching of basic Game principles tends towards the societally destructive

    An interesting question/thought experiment is how do you remake something. Do you try to make incremental positive change, or do you just try to blow it up and start anew? If you look at the 20th century and the communism versus capitalism debate, you see that communism had to blow up to really expose it as a failed ideology. I”m not necessarily making this argument, but one could argue that self-interested nihilism aids in exposing a flawed ideology. It is sort of the big picture notion that a drug addict has to hit rock bottom before they can get sober.

    Sometimes I wonder what human society will look like in 500 years and what the history books will say about the last 50-100 years.

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

      @Mike C

      An interesting question/thought experiment is how do you remake something. Do you try to make incremental positive change, or do you just try to blow it up and start anew?

      This framework applies in a comparison of HUS to some other blogs. I clearly believe in the approach of making incremental positive change. I am trying to build something, not destroy it. You can give the example of communism, but it doesn’t always go the “right” way. I referenced the Taliban earlier – they blew up society and started anew. The Women’s Movement basically blew up society and started something new.

      The problem is, once you destroy things like families and relationships, you have no idea what “new” looks like. Most of the consequences will be unforeseen.

  • South Asian Guy

    “My parents in fact don’t want me to be “dating” at all. My dad has said a half hour of talking with someone should be sufficient before deciding to marry them ”

    Yeah PS that’s what I mean. Your father believes a half hour is enough to decide because that’s all the time you need to find out how much a guy earns and what sort of lifestyle and status he can provide you. Like I said, Indian girls come with a lot of family and cultural baggage. If they get over the initial shock, your parents will go easier on a white guy than they would an Indian. An Indian would have to measure up to all their Indian criteria.

    SW taking photos of white tourists at the Taj Mahal is a novelty pastime for Indians. Those same photo snappers would threaten suicide or murder if any of their kids tried to marry them. Who needs that kind of drama in their life? Not me. I’ll pass on Indian girls and their families thankyou very much.

  • Dogsquat

    SayWhaat said:

    Okay. I can’t 100% grok it, but maybe other girls can.
    ___________________________________

    I know what you mean, even if Valentine Michael Smith would have no clue. There are things you gals experience that I can only guess at.

    I often wonder what that moment of acceptance feels like for women – the moment when they realize they aren’t conventionally attractive. And there’s nothing much they can do about it.

    Like, what was prom like for Janet Reno? How do unnatractive Olympic athletes feel? It’s not like they can go to the gym and bump up their numbers a bit – they’re in the best shape of their lives already.

    Depressing. I don’t know how I’d deal with that.

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

      Like, what was prom like for Janet Reno?

      OK can’t resist.

      Why is Chelsea Clinton so unattractive?

      Because her father is Janet Reno.

  • SayWhaat

    One more thing:

    This Brahmin Indian girl thinks white guys make for rather…impressive…sex toys.

    /asianvagina

    Good night!

  • Dogsquat

    MightyMightyMegaMan:

    “I’m just wondering where this contempt for the opposite sex is coming from. It’d be rational if directed at only those women who’ve done you wrong. I’ll admit to a certan amount of bitterness and resentment back when I was single, lonely, and searching.”
    ________________________________

    Look around the Manosphere. There are zillions of guys who’ll tell you.

    I’ll admit to a short period of contempt for women after something particularly nasty happened to me. I felt betrayed and let down by one woman, and my tiny monkey-brain had a hard time not seeing her as representative of all uterus carriers.

    Somebody (you, maybe?) pulled up some old stuff our own Jesus Mahoney bashed out not 6 months ago. Ask him why he felt that way – he’s been admirably open about it.

    I agree that it’s not rational. Neither is the platypus or Keynesian economics. We’ve all got to deal, though, especially if you’re calculating your tax withholdings while wading in Australian waterways.

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

      @Dogsquat

      I’ll admit to a short period of contempt for women after something particularly nasty happened to me. I felt betrayed and let down by one woman, and my tiny monkey-brain had a hard time not seeing her as representative of all uterus carriers.

      I give you a ton of credit for understanding and acknowledging this. I think a fair number of my male readers fit into this category, particularly the ones over 30. It’s understandable – it’s why I feel empathy for most MRAs even as I avoid interacting with them.

      Very few of us are entirely objective – we are all looking at the world through our own lenses, and our perspectives can also change over time.

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

    @Herb
    Beyond anecdotes, do you know of any survey that shows a majority of women consider themselves the victims when male soldiers are dying on the battlefield?

    You’ve got to have facts before you condemn an entire gender beacuse of a stupid comment by Ms. Clinton. I mean, conservative families are probably over-represented in the military. That’s just how it is, and I respect that. Are you really saying conservative women don’t understand the value of service to one’s country?

  • purplesneakers

    Yeah PS that’s what I mean. Your father believes a half hour is enough to decide because that’s all the time you need to find out how much a guy earns and what sort of lifestyle and status he can provide you. Like I said, Indian girls come with a lot of family and cultural baggage. If they get over the initial shock, your parents will go easier on a white guy than they would an Indian. An Indian would have to measure up to all their Indian criteria.

    …. but I’m rejecting my dad’s “dating” model. I want to actually get to know someone and be attracted to them and be compatible with them. I think that makes my dad the materialistic indian girl in this situation… oh wait.

    I’ll pass on Indian girls and their families thankyou very much.

    I think you’ve made that abundantly clear. I don’t really care, and I doubt SayWhaat does either.

  • Dogsquat

    FootwearPerson:

    “I wrote above about how it was probably much easier for me to change in such a way as to accommodate men than it is for most men to learn game.”
    __________________________________

    Be careful, my Dear, in how much you compromise. A little might be necessary, too much is disastrous.

    “also re: your previous comment- it was very helpful. thanks for the advice. ”

    You are welcome. I do hope you venture over to Danny’s blog and find the Oneitis post. There is some excellent advice there, too, and it’s easily transferable to your gender.

    I’m a bossy motherfucker sometimes, aren’t I?

  • South Asian Guy

    “Passer_By, you’re ok with being used as an ATM by materialistic women?”

    No, just as a sex toy. But it was a joke. Lighten up.

    Then you’ll really be disappointed if you date an Indian girl.

  • South Asian Guy

    “This Brahmin Indian girl thinks white guys make for rather…impressive…sex toys.”

    And you’re caste conscious to? Yeah really modern. Really American.

  • purplesneakers

    dogsquat- by accommodating men I just meant working on physical attractiveness (losing weight and benign neglect of hair allowing it to grow. figuring out most flattering wardrobe and make-up a tiny bit harder). probably the only thing that comes close to a man’s process for learning game is becoming more feminine and quashing the “ball buster” instinct, and getting over extreme introversion and fear of rejection to give ioi’s, but even that i know on a rational level is nothing compared to men approaching and getting shut down.

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

    @DS
    “Look around the Manosphere. There are zillions of guys who’ll tell you.”

    Somebody else dredged up JM’s old quotes. I believe he doesn’t even recognize those sentiments as his anymore…

    I prefer to stay away from this manosphere. Bear with me for a second… the internet by definition is one big self-selected survey. People login at their own choosing and converse. I know from my statistics days that self-selection is no indication of what the whole population is like. Isn’t it reasonable to conclude that a lot of angry, bitter people get together and vent their frustrations? The internet’s a magnet for stuff like that. Do happy, content husbands and boyfriends by and large come on the internet and say how wonderful things are? Probably not nearly as much. I think we’ve got an over-represented sample of a minority of men making a lot of noise. I’m sure a lot of it’s legitimate. I’m just not sure the internet is the best therapy tool.

  • Mike C

    but I would argue that Stage 3 has largely been a response to “market forces”. That is, an increased degree of hostility in the manosophere directed at HUS, which began the day the Atlantic article came out, and actually has had little to do with my ideas or posts. Even Dalrockgate was made out of a snippet of a comment directed to Doug1 in an argument, rather than any explication of a belief or principle.

    No, I really do think it is about ideas, beliefs, and principles. Again, just as examples you’ve gone down a different road with idea. You’ve sort of adopted the Jesus Mahoney view that alpha doesn’t really exist ot at least gone down a different path in terms of alpha-beta. You’ve kind of changed what most perceive about hypergamy. Again, you are totally entitled to hold whatever views you want on those, but I think it is incorrect to maket his about personal drama instead of just different perceptions on principles. Just recently, you were arguing something as a DLV that pretty much no Red Pill guy would argue is DLV. Anything related to social proof/preselection is going to be DHV. Whether something is moral is another question, but to argue something is DLV because you find it distasteful is a different point. You’ve come out hard against the idea that there is any “trading up” component to hypergamy and that it simply means meeting some threshold. So really, on a great number of core principle such as what is alpha versus beta man or what is female hypergamy, you took a left turn and went down a totally different road.

    The number of “frenemies” in the comment threads

    Interesting. I”m not sure who these are…but I know guys don’t think in terms of “frenemies”. I can argue with a friend whether John Stockton or Magic Johnson was a better point guard and call him a stupid dipshit, but once that is over its over….no reason to personalize it.

    I remain as pro-Game as ever, but have found it necessary to speak out vociferously against Dark Game more and more frequently.

    I’ve noticed. :) And I suspect that will continue as you expand what you consider to be part of “Dark Game”.

    Dalrock writes a blog that picks off women one at a time – it appears to serve no other purpose than to make men rabid.

    I really don’t want to make this about Dalrock, but this is an interesting description. Many of his posts are simply about highlighting what someone is saying with their own words such as the Sheila deal, and now the stuff at the Christian Forum. Its really about shining a flashlight on stuff where people think they are saying things under the cover of darkness. I think the quote is something about daylight being the best disinfectant.

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

      @Mike C

      After I read your comment about “Stage 3″ I started digging up writings of mine from the early days to prove my perspective hasn’t changed. Then I realized there is nothing whatsoever I can say to convince you of that, so I won’t try. I will address the specific things you mentioned.

      You’ve sort of adopted the Jesus Mahoney view that alpha doesn’t really exist ot at least gone down a different path in terms of alpha-beta.

      My view of alpha/beta has been 100% consistent since I first understood the concepts, and where the men in my life fell according to Game theory. I can recall praising my beta husband and being mocked for making zero sense, because women hate betas. That never made sense to me, and it still doesn’t. Now Rollo is doing the mocking. I think his understanding of female nature applies to a small sliver of the population.

      Back when Athol first started MMSL, which was around the same time I came on the scene, I read his alpha and beta traits material and knew I had found the framework that beautifully laid out the traits. Athol went far beyond the Game community to write that – he had done his homework re evo bio, evo psych, and often quotes Helen Fisher and other researchers.

      I have always maintained that there is a baseline level of dominance that is required to stimulate female sexual attraction. I also believe any dominance in addition to that is often problematic and generally not conducive to healthy relationships. I have written many posts saying so. I do not particularly relate to Jesus’ claim that there is no such thing as alpha, though I do like what he has to say about inner game. My view is similar to Dalrock’s in “So You Want Alpha.” Anacaona also describes it well, IMO. I would also point out that it’s not one or the other – the best long-term partner is a mix of alpha and beta traits. I like more beta in my guy, other women will like more alpha. There is no one universal female preference.

      You’ve kind of changed what most perceive about hypergamy.

      That is incorrect. I have always viewed and discussed hypergamy as a real feature of female mating strategy. I have never subscribed to the belief that all women are so hypergamous that their mates have to create anxiety to keep them in check. In fact, I never even heard that stuff until recently, other than at Roissy’s site. When I wrote about it a couple of years ago, there was consensus that it was all hyperbole and that a man of good character would not deliberately instill dread. I perceive a widening leak of this view in the manosphere, a toxicity that is seeping into HUS. This has necessitated my rebuttal of the concept, including the idea that women never stop looking to trade up to higher status mates. I contend that when a woman employs a long-term mating strategy, her conditions for hypergamy must be met and maintained. Problems may arise when the man’s status falls or hers rises relative to his. I have concluded that through research and study, and I have never claimed any other position since I started the blog.

      I am open to differing points of view, provided there is some evidence to support it. An MRA talking about hearing story after story doesn’t cut it. As Megaman said, there’s a massive selection bias in the manosphere. I believe that makes people eager to grasp onto concepts that match their world view. That is no excuse for abandoning intellectual rigor. For example, when I first started blogging I heard endlessly about the apex fallacy and the 80/20 rule. Yet nowhere in the manosphere could I find a single piece of evidence for it. It wasn’t until I spent 20+ hours gathering and interpreting data that I was convinced a variation on it was true.

      The same is true of Dalrock and frivolous divorce. Though that’s his primary reason for blogging, to my knowledge he has never produced one piece of data to support his view. It wasn’t until after Dalrockgate that I spent the time (again, 20+ hours) searching for relevant studies and combing through them for data. The result was the post on EPL divorce, which quantified how many frivolous divorces there are.

      All the sound and fury signifies nothing.

      Just recently, you were arguing something as a DLV that pretty much no Red Pill guy would argue is DLV. Anything related to social proof/preselection is going to be DHV

      Yes, and it is my contention that openly flirting with women outside your marriage or LTR is not a source of social proof. You are not preselected in that case, you are advertising and looking for takers. As I stated clearly, the preselection occurs this way:

      1. I find my husband attractive. I am a discerning of woman of good taste, so I assume that my opinion is valid, for a woman of my SMV.

      2. Other women seek my husband’s attention for conversation and pleasantries. He is interesting and appealing on many levels. Some may flirt (which is inappropriate), but they don’t need to for me to understand that women are drawn to interact with him.

      3. Other women confirm that I am fortunate in my choice of mate.

      All of these are related to preselection. The first because it was preselection that made him initially attractive to me, and the others are example of preselection now.

      It is unnecessary for my husband to flirt – which is telegraphing sexual availability – to communicate that women find him attractive. In addition, he would shame me, his wife, by doing so, and cause me to lose status among other females, which I would resent.

      If you care to argue the logic of this, I’d be interested to hear it. I have yet to have a single male respond to this argument and explain why a husband’s flirting is necessary to communicate high value, when it is the attention of women that does so, not his attention to them.

      but I know guys don’t think in terms of “frenemies”.

      There are several men who have commented here in the past (and one or two at the moment) who come to HUS and are cordial and respectful of me and of other commenters. Then they go off to a different blog, with a different point of view, and argue a completely different stance, mock me personally, or criticize me harshly. It’s two-faced, which is something that I think guys can understand.

      Now let me make this clear – I have no problem with anyone disagreeing with me. But to be a regular at this blog and claim to value the community, and then make fun of me elsewhere, or go onto Vox’s blog and say I don’t know shit about Game – that’s not OK.

      We’re all friends here. We can disagree and still be friends. I have no interest in welcoming foes to my own living room. Anyone who disagrees with my mission or sees me as an adversary to men doesn’t belong here. Since banning several of those folks, the quality of the discussion here has improved, and the feedback I’m getting from readers confirms that.

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

        Sorry my comment is so damn long. I thought about making a post out of it, but it really would make zero sense to most of my readers. So I’ll leave it here as a personal reply to Mike C.

  • Herb

    @Megaman

    Beyond anecdotes, do you know of any survey that shows a majority of women consider themselves the victims when male soldiers are dying on the battlefield?

    You’ve got to have facts before you condemn an entire gender beacuse of a stupid comment by Ms. Clinton. I mean, conservative families are probably over-represented in the military. That’s just how it is, and I respect that. Are you really saying conservative women don’t understand the value of service to one’s country?

    I don’t date “all women”. I date individual women I meet. How I approach women in that specific realm is based upon a simple set of statistics, my previous experiences.

    I generally find a way to bring up the Clinton quote as a screening question…it helps tell me if a woman thinks men have value outside of what they can do for women (see manning up articles). In the years I’ve used it no woman got it. To me thinking it’s worse to be a widow than be a dead man tells me men aren’t real in some way to that person.

    Lots and lots of men have had similar experiences with women not seeing men as real, or at least their feelings as not being real. As a result they do what humans do: extrapolate and form an opinion.

    You asked why men feel this way. A couple of us have tried to tell you. Your response has been “well, you don’t have stats to prove that so your feelings are invalid” (taken to its base that’s what you’re saying).

    Notice my comment in response to your John Edwards question which you ignored. Yes, if a woman only met men who didn’t get why women considered his behavior was offensive to women developed over time contempt for me men I would understand it.

    Do I think most men would deserve it? No, but I wouldn’t question the validity of her feelings based on multiple prior experiences.

    I realize in our culture men don’t deserve that kind of respect even from other men but women get it for free. So do a lot of other men.

    That realization isn’t helping their feelings move the direction you’d like either.

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

    @Herb
    I didn’t say anyone’s feelings were invalid. I just don’t see how you go from A) women I’ve known are uncaring of men’s feelings to B) all women must be like that. That’s the sentiment I’m picking up on, and it’s one I can’t relate to. Why are so many men happy with their wives and GFs if those same women are cold and uncaring? Facts do matter in a discussion, I hope.

    John Edwards, his name popped into my head because you mentioned Clinton, that’s all. I’m not sure how many people think he’s sleaze, or if they even know everything he was involved in. They’d have to have read the papers or listened to the news to get the whole story. I wasn’t defending him or Hillary.

    Would you care to answer my question to you about conservative women and how they view military sacrifice? If that’s a particular concern of yours, maybe you should consider dating them. They’re certainly more family-oriented.

  • Mike C

    Susan,

    I totally agree. I’ve often said that if a woman goes with “don’t ask, don’t tell” it’s on her. I am in no way suggesting that men lay all their cards on the table and destroy their hand in the early stages of a relationship.

    Just for the record, we are on the same page here then.

    But I think a lot of men go much further than that. When Amber Madison surveyed 1100 guys, around 40% admitted lying outright about their interest in a girl to get her to have sex.

    That’s absolutely wrong, no doubt.

  • Dogsquat

    Mike C said:

    “One of the concepts is that I am a fiduciary. My responsibility is to the client’s best interest. My personal beliefs, feelings, whatever should not enter into the equation of what is in the best interests of the client.”
    _________________________________

    I work in medicine. I do all kinds of objectively horrible, painful stuff to people (mostly) in their best interest.

    It’s funny how “looking out for people” bleeds over into other areas of life, isn’t it?

    I find it extremely difficult to turn off.

  • Herb

    @Megaman

    I didn’t say anyone’s feelings were invalid. I just don’t see how you go from A) women I’ve known are uncaring of men’s feelings to B) all women must be like that.

    Are you a human being? That’s an honest question because if what I’ve quoted above is true, that you don’t understand that thought process, then I have to question it.

    Human beings make invalid generalizations that they then use to guide their choices all the time. Personal experience is the primary source of those generalizations and reinforcing evidence cements them. In fact, if enough reinforcing evidence occurs before contrary evidence appears they begin to disregard contrary evidence as outliers.

    You asked why do men feel this way. You’ve gotten a couple of examples. You have dismissed them because they aren’t based on peer reviewed controlled statistical surveys. People’s feelings are not based on such surveys. Despite your claim otherwise by telling them their feelings are not based on such surveys so why do they have them you are telling them their feelings are invalid.

    Regardless of how well their feelings map to reality they are valid because they are feelings not fact. Facts do not refute or change feelings and trying to do so only makes you look insensitive at best and is not persuasive.

    The way to change people’s feelings on matters like this is to provide personal level contrary evidence. Show a large outcry of women to the above quote would be a prime example. Others are left as an exercise for you.

    John Edwards, his name popped into my head because you mentioned Clinton, that’s all. I’m not sure how many people think he’s sleaze, or if they even know everything he was involved in. They’d have to have read the papers or listened to the news to get the whole story. I wasn’t defending him or Hillary.

    I never claimed you were defending anyone. You asked if women should hold all men in contempt because of his behavior. I said if a woman had an experience similar to mine, then yes, I would expect her to develop said contempt over time. If I wanted to show her otherwise I would point out how male supporters deserted him over it, how these men she knew stated publicly he was more than just an ass but a cruel and manipulative man, and so on. I wouldn’t ask, “have you seen a survey of American men showing the majority think his behavior shouldn’t have hurt his wife?” even if one existed.

    Would you care to answer my question to you about conservative women and how they view military sacrifice? If that’s a particular concern of yours, maybe you should consider dating them. They’re certainly more family-oriented.

    Megaman style answer: I can’t as I lack a survey of conservative women showing how the majority feel.

    Now, to give you my answer. My theoretically conservative ex-wife, who spent the majority of her marriage as a military wife, probably wouldn’t get why men think it’s offensive.

    It’s because the issue isn’t military service per se. It is understanding that while women loss sons, husbands, and brothers they are not the primary victim because those sons, husbands, and brothers are dead and the dead men are the primary victims of war. In fact, I believe a peacenik woman might get that quicker because she’s not seeing glory and men doing their final act of duty but death and destruction.

    Besides, the question is a proxy for a large phenomena I and other men encounter: the value of a man to many women isn’t his value as a human being but what he can do for her. A more recent example, and probably a better one both for this convo and screening, is the increasing number of “man up” articles. They complain men aren’t doing what women want to be valuable husbands to those women. Note, they aren’t articles to men who are complaining “why can’t I get married” explaining “because women are looking for this in a husband and you aren’t this.” No, they are mostly (but not always) from women and regardless of source their attitude is “I want to marry a man who provides X and men aren’t so men better man up and give me what I want”.

    Can you see the difference?

  • Dogsquat

    @Mega:

    “I think we’ve got an over-represented sample of a minority of men making a lot of noise. I’m sure a lot of it’s legitimate. I’m just not sure the internet is the best therapy tool.”

    _____________________________________

    Sure, that’s a totally valid point.

    I originally found this place, though, because LOTS of the kids in my classes are miserable. (I’m an “old guy” in undergrad because I was in the military for a long time, and went to a trade school before). It might not be a majority, but a sizable minority of them are affected by issues discussed here.

    Again, my sample size is small, but a bunch of guys (including me) I knew in the military got hosed by women partially through ignorance of Game. Lots of the young guys in my classes are bewildered and a bit angry, too.

    Those dudes aren’t going to post on a PUA website, but get a few beers in them and listen to them bitch….

    Some guys I work with can’t believe my girlfriend feeds me, either. Sometimes she makes me lunch, and sometimes she comes by the station and brings me food if it’s a slow day. They think I’m some kind of wizard who conjured up a hot chick who likes to cook for me.

    The tools to make these guys as happy as I am are on the internet. Most of them are talked about here. Self selected or not, the internet is a great place to sample different viewpoints, to gain a glimpse into a different way of thinking.

    The internet isn’t a perfect avenue for therapy, I agree. But sometimes, you don’t need therapy. You just need some different information to chew over.

  • Dogsquat

    @Herb and Mega:

    “Would you care to answer my question to you about conservative women and how they view military sacrifice? If that’s a particular concern of yours, maybe you should consider dating them. They’re certainly more family-oriented.”
    ____________________________

    I think you two gents have such different viewpoints on this particular issue that it’s an unproductive avenue to pursue.

    “Military sacrifice” means something different to people who’ve just read about it.

    For my brother from the Silent Service:

    Herb, Mega is looking at you judging a bunch of people. You’re thinking about 750 feet of water over your head, being so tired you can’t think, and horrible, rapid death if a $0.60 bolt fails.

    I get what you’re saying, man, but I think you ought to come up with a less personal screening question, if possible. At some point you’ve just got to accept that people who haven’t Been There, Done That aren’t going to see it like you do. It’s totally theoretical to them. In fact, it’s so alien a concept that I almost don’t believe anything people who haven’t humped a rifle or stood a watch say about it at all. They just don’t know.

    Try to look at that blissful, innocent, ignorance as a gift you’ve given them. That’s what I do. Helps a bit, sometimes.

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

    @Herb
    I believe a majority of women do value the men in their lives as full human beings, not tools to use and take for granted and discard. Hopefully, that’s unambiguous enough.

    Apparently, I’m not much of a human being because I don’t think women as a whole are so heartless. I probably don’t fit the definition of what a real man is, as defined on the internet.

    Good luck finding your needle in the haystack, unless that’s too optimistic to say. I’ve no idea why HUS has become an echo chamber for this kind of thing. I think it’s best if I took a break anyway.

  • Dogsquat

    Mega, I mean you no disrespect by my above post. I’m not Walter from The Big Lebowski waving a .45 in your face or anything.

    I just think that you’re asking what you believe to be a fair, clinical question that, considering the person you’re asking, is not clinical at all.

  • Dogsquat

    Mega, I hope you don’t go – or if you do, you come back quickly.

    Many, many guys benefit from hearing about dudes who have good women in their lives.

    Disagree about methodology and outlook all you like, but don’t forget you’ve got what lots of men yearn for. That counts for a whole lot.

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

      Mega, I hope you don’t go – or if you do, you come back quickly.

      Many, many guys benefit from hearing about dudes who have good women in their lives.

      Good God, yes. We need Megaman for balance.

  • http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com VD

    On some level, if one particular guy is stupid enough to take one person’s view or advice as gospel and not search out other sources of perpsective, than that is on him. I guess for me I put myself in the shoes of maybe a guy who is a bit naive and ignorant, and trying to figure all this shit out, and certain information or perspective was being filtered out for me. There are tricky ethical questions when you hold yourself out as an advisor. I work in the investment field as an advisor. One of the concepts is that I am a fiduciary. My responsbility is to the client’s best interest. My personal beliefs, feelings, whatever should not enter into the equation of what is in the best interests of the client.

    Correct. No one need have sympathy for such literalists; Roissy overtly mocks those who apply his words literally as spergs. And while your point is not irrelevant, Susan need have no qualms about her responsibilities to her male readers until they actually start paying for her advice.

    Some people aren’t smart enough to know when someone is changing hats.

    MPAI. I lose no sleep over it. Nor should anyone.

    Do you really give two shits about Alpha Game versus HUS in terms of a competition?

    Not a bit. My objective is for all of the Game-related blogs to grow alongside each other and expand the overall red pill population. Civilization desperately needs it. And if you don’t mind a brief religious history lesson, I can assure you that the Orthodox-Catholic split was actually personal rather than philosophical. In fact, it basically all came down to the Patriarch, Michael Cerularius, being “a narrow-minded bigot” and Pope Leo sending the worst possible ambassador, Cardinal Humbert of Mourmoutiers, to go to Constantinople to resolve the filoque and Papal primacy issues. Humbert and his two colleagues were such idiots that they actually excommunicated the Patriarch and the Orthodox hierarchy in public at St. Sophia as the pinnacle of their diplomacy, which they didn’t have the authority or power under canon law to do.

    The reason we know the philosophical issue could have been resolved amicably is that Photius I and Pope John VIII managed to do so without too much trouble 200 years before.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @ Cheerful #566
    If men were just as clear eyed, they’d steer clear of hotties. Hotties bring drama.

    #566
    True that. Jesus did not say “You are forgiven, now you can go out and re-fill your sin quota.”He said “Sin no more” i e CHANGE. Makes perfect sense; even God can’t change the past.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Mega,

    I’m just wondering where this contempt for the opposite sex is coming from. It’d be rational if directed at only those women who’ve done you wrong. I’ll admit to a certan amount of bitterness and resentment back when I was single, lonely, and searching.

    You’ve answered your own question. Some men are single, lonely, and searching. And they’re clueless about how to get what they want. Or else they’ve don’t have enough faith in themselves to give women what they instinctively know they want.

    Listen to deti about how he grew up thinking about women:

    My point was that I was taught as a young boy that women are all altruistic creatures, existing only for the good of all, never doing anything to harm anyone, with no malice aforethought, never self-interested or selfish, and seeking only to Find A Man, Marry Him and Make Him Happy.

    This view of women is absurd. No human being could possibly live up to that description. Deti apparently didn’t understand what women wanted because he thought that women didn’t actually want anything. It’s a view of women that simultaneously exalts and debases them. Yet it can’t be the whole story, because Deti, along with most “nice guys” (my former self included) realized, on some level, that women *wanted* something. They had to–or else how would you explain the fact that women seemed to want other guys but not them?

    There’s a lot of self-loathing hidden under the bitterness (thought don’t expect anybody to acknowledge it). And it’s easier for a man to say, “women are bitches,” than it is for him to say, “maybe I’m the problem.”

    Of course there’s nothing nice guys can do if the problem really is that women are bitches. The only way to move forward is for nice guys to realize how they’ve been bitches.

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

      Deti: My point was that I was taught as a young boy that women are all altruistic creatures, existing only for the good of all, never doing anything to harm anyone, with no malice aforethought, never self-interested or selfish, and seeking only to Find A Man, Marry Him and Make Him Happy.

      Jesus: This view of women is absurd. No human being could possibly live up to that description. Deti apparently didn’t understand what women wanted because he thought that women didn’t actually want anything. It’s a view of women that simultaneously exalts and debases them.

      I can tell you that I never behaved this way, and I’m quite certain I was never perceived this way. I made at least some boys miserable from kindergarten on. I was self-interested and feisty, and could be rather cruel to boys. Over time I became more empathic, but honestly, my husband never thought he was getting someone who only wanted to Marry Him and Make Him Happy.

      I don’t see how this message could have been successfully delivered to boys, when as girls we were being told to stop acting feminine and subservient, and start growing a pair. How could boys not have noticed that girls were being raised to follow an entirely different script?

  • http://lgfonevolution.blogspot.com Lucas

    Slut shaming is good for everyone.

  • Herb

    @Susan

    I believe that any woman who is not a feminist apologist, and even some who are, would find Hillary Clinton’s remark contemptible. Personally, I find HC herself worthy of contempt.

    First, thank you for getting the point I was after.

    Second, you would hope your belief is right but that’s not my experience. My exchanges tend to be something like this.

    Me: Did you hear Hillary’s quote about war?
    Her: No, she’s against it?
    Me: No, she says women are the primary victims because they lose the men in their life to battle.
    Her: Hmmm, okay.
    Me: I think that’s kind of offensive.
    Her: Why, it seems reasonable?
    Me: Well, what does it mean to lose your man in battle.
    Her: Hmmm
    Me: I figure it means that man is dead or maimed. I find it pretty offensive saying it’s worse to be a widow than dead.
    Her: Oh, yeah, I guess I’ve never thought of it that way.

    I don’t think most of these women are feminist or feminist apologists. What is going on is they live in a society where feminism is so pervasive it’s like fish and water. They haven’t been encouraged to think of men as full partners.

    Unlike a lot of the manosphere I think that is what is going on in things like ELP, divorce law change resistance, and so on. It’s not that women are actively anti-man but are in water so long that they don’t recognize it as such.

    That’s why more and more when it comes to things like numbers, slutting up, and so on there is a lot of value for a young woman (immediately post college) to really get why these cultural assumptions are turning off more and more men.

    We talk of the SMP and numbers and all that so I want to bring in another sales term: unique selling point. It’s the one thing that differentiates your product from the rest of the market. I think women who get why modern feminism turns off a lot of men (an event that seems to be happening about the time women are looking to marry in the late 20s) have a much better USP than even a low number. It’s a great signal that you are able to see your spouses POV and thus be a real life partner instead of a co-worker.

    @Megaman

    Apparently, I’m not much of a human being because I don’t think women as a whole are so heartless. I probably don’t fit the definition of what a real man is, as defined on the internet.

    I have no comment on the reality of your manhood, but it is astonishing that you can let go of fact based, big picture evidence long enough to understand how most people (as shown in the very kinds of studies you like) do integrate their experiences into how they manage life.

    You’re not wrong in saying “you lack evidence all women are like that”. What you just can’t seem to get is that life experiences can trump studies and that a large number of men have life experiences where men’s value, especially in the range of feelings, have been so ignored by women they’ve made a generalization.

    Clearly, I cannot communicate that idea in a way that speaks to you so I’ll just let you conclude men who believe it are wrong and do it for no reason. I will caution you that such an approach is unlikely to create converts.

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

      @Herb

      You’re not wrong in saying “you lack evidence all women are like that”. What you just can’t seem to get is that life experiences can trump studies and that a large number of men have life experiences where men’s value, especially in the range of feelings, have been so ignored by women they’ve made a generalization.

      True, but most of those men have one bad experience to share, maybe two. How can they know whether their experience is indicative of the nature of that woman or the nature of all women? And what about the fact that men often select women of poor character?

  • deti

    JM:

    “My point was that I was taught as a young boy that women are all altruistic creatures, existing only for the good of all, never doing anything to harm anyone, with no malice aforethought, never self-interested or selfish, and seeking only to Find A Man, Marry Him and Make Him Happy.”

    This view of women is absurd. No human being could possibly live up to that description.”

    Of course it’s absurd. But when this is what you’re explicity and implicitly told this on a number of occasions, you start believing it until you see something different. The unmistakable message was that if I was being consistently rejected then the problem was that I was not being nice enough. Women don’t reject men who are nice because they aren’t capable of it and they want men to be nice.

    I know from writing and reading here that I’m not the only boy who was misled so grievously. I think we ignore things like this at our peril.

    Maybe all this makes me pissed off and bitter. Anger and bitterness, when properly harnessed, can prod men to do great things. That anger and bitterness has gotten me more marital and sexual success in the past year than I had had in the 25 years before that. That anger and bitterness spurred me to do something about it, refuse to put up with shit from the women in my life, and do something different — something that will actually work.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Deti,

    My bitterness prodded me to do great things as well. I wasn’t criticizing you personally(after all, I was one of those “nice” guys, too)–just using what you wrote to illustrate a point to Megaman.

    For your own sake, I hope that the success you’ve been having over the past year will allow you to let go of the bitterness eventually. Anger can be a great motivator, but in the long-term it can eat away at your soul–not to mention your body.

  • Escoffier

    I hear this a lot, that men were all lied to about the true nature of women, mostly by other women. I don’t doubt that people are reporting their experiences accurately. However, it’s curious that this never happened to me. By all rights it should have, given where I grew up (liberal granola town), who raised me (first wave feminist mom who started law school the year I was born and went to work full time when I was three), and where I went to school (one PC-lib institution after another, including the one I consider the International Mothership).

    However, my mother was always very blunt about the nature of women and never fed me any BS on that score. This is a silly little anecdote, maybe, but it sticks out in my head. There is a scene in Empire Strikes Back when they are about to freeze Han Solo and Leah says “I love you” and he says “I know.” My mother loved that scene. She said to me more than once, “Remember that, girls don’t like boys who are too ‘good’, you have to have a little ‘bad’ in you,” or something like that. She thought Luke was a patsy.

    My dad is an irascible scoundrel of sorts, not genuinely mean or devious but “street smart” and far, far from a pushover beta. Way more like Han than Luke. They are happy, needless to say.

  • Kathy

    “How about we adopt a human perspective? It’s precisely this Team Woman, Team Man mentality that I reject. Rollo is like Mystery on Dark Game steroids. Game was never written for these nefarious applications. In my view, this mentality drives the sexes further apart and destroys relationships. It probably works fairly well for short-term flings with head cases.”
    Yep. Well said Susan.

  • Underdog

    SW

    “By all means, get what you can from women who will give it to you. But don’t stoop to self-soothing pablum like that last sentence. Just admit you’re going the jaded asshole route again, living just for your own pleasure and dumping other human beings by the side of the road.

    Just a thought – why not go after a woman who isn’t a slut?”

    That entire last paragraph was meant to be taken in jest. I don’t think I can ever show that kind of affection to random hook ups anymore. I think once a guy goes from a sexless beta to someone who can consistently pull off ONS, a part of his mind resents and judges the girls he hooks up with because he’s aware that they fell for his asshole tactics and not his naturally “nice” self. And once sex is no longer a rare commodity to him, these girls become disposable and worthless in his eyes.

    As for why I’m not going after a woman who isn’t a slut. I am. I haven’t had casual sex in over a year and consider myself off the market for now.

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

      @Underdog

      As for why I’m not going after a woman who isn’t a slut. I am. I haven’t had casual sex in over a year and consider myself off the market for now.

      Thanks for clarifying. I’m glad you were saying that tongue in cheek. Reformed players are welcome here. :)

  • OffTheCuff

    Esc: “She said to me more than once, “Remember that, girls don’t like boys who are too ‘good’, you have to have a little ‘bad’ in you,” or something like that.”

    That’s actually pretty good stuff and can go a long way, but I never heard an ounce of that. My parents said “just be yourself” and tossed me in church abstinence class. You think church is going to tell you to “be a little bad”?

  • Jesus Mahoney

    That’s actually pretty good stuff and can go a long way, but I never heard an ounce of that. My parents said “just be yourself” and tossed me in church abstinence class. You think church is going to tell you to “be a little bad”?

    My case was different. My mom acknowledged, like Escoffier’s, that girls liked boys who were a bit bad (“like your brother,” she’d say), but she also told me that I wasn’t one of those boys.

  • Herb

    @Underdog

    That entire last paragraph was meant to be taken in jest. I don’t think I can ever show that kind of affection to random hook ups anymore. I think once a guy goes from a sexless beta to someone who can consistently pull off ONS, a part of his mind resents and judges the girls he hooks up with because he’s aware that they fell for his asshole tactics and not his naturally “nice” self. And once sex is no longer a rare commodity to him, these girls become disposable and worthless in his eyes.

    I think you’ve captured my key problem with the whole Game idea. When did it become that you have to be that divorced from your natural self to be someone’s partner.

    I read what deti posts here and MMSL and think, “could that have saved my marriage” and in my next thought “if having to be an asshole I’m not every day is what it would have taken to stay married the price I’m still paying isn’t that bad of a deal.”

    I read some Game blogs and I’ve been on Vince Lin’s mailing list forever (not sure if he’s consider Game or not but I figure he’s in the same country if not the same town) and all I can think is…when it comes to sex just make prostitution legal and when it comes to intimacy…well, I don’t think it exists anymore. How can I have intimacy with someone who I have to treat badly to keep around to begin with?

  • deti

    Esco:

    Glad to hear you weren’t misled. Many, many men were, though. If they had been taught properly, the manosphere wouldn’t exist.

    Want to know the entire sum and substance of what my mom taught me? “Be nice and just be yourself. And women want to marry up. That means you need to earn a lot of money so she will want you and you can take care of her.”

    The entire sum and substance of what my dad taught me? “Keep your d**k in your pants until you’re married.”

    Now go, son, and make your way in the world! The women will flock to you because you’re so nice, and you’re so great Just. The. Way. You. Are. You don’t have to be interesting, you don’t have to be in decent shape. You don’t have to be a good man. All you have to do is be a nice man. All you have to do is offer yourself, your checkbook, a ring, and holy matrimony to some lucky woman out there and you’re set for life.

    And if girls are not nice to you, it must be because you’re not nice to them. You’re breaking the cardinal rule of how men must treat women — You must be nice and kind at all times. You must give her everything she wants, all the time, every time, everywhere.

    Don’t listen to those guys out there who are getting laid left and right. That’s only for bad girls. Only bad girls do those things. The things those men do to get those girls into bed– only sluts and bad girls like that. There are good girls and there are bad girls and sluts, and you don’t want a bad girl.

    This kind of advice sets up a young man to fail. When he does get lucky, he gets used and screwed over.

  • purplesneakers

    I think once a guy goes from a sexless beta to someone who can consistently pull off ONS, a part of his mind resents and judges the girls he hooks up with because he’s aware that they fell for his asshole tactics and not his naturally “nice” self.

    Why be bitter towards the women because they were attracted to what they’re naturally inclined to be attracted to?

    I’m not bitter towards men for liking 125lb me over “naturally 175lb” me. I will admit that I was at first…. but I think about what even I’m not attracted to in men, and it seems fair enough.

    It seems like you should be more glad that you got it figured out.

  • Herb

    @OffTheCuff

    My parents said “just be yourself”

    Ah, yes, the most damaging thing we’re teaching our children. People don’t want you to be yourself, they want you to be either them or whatever everyone else is claiming to be.

    That goes way beyond the SMP too…”just be yourself” is arguably the most evil thing most parents say.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Herb,

    I don’t think Athol ever tells guys to be assholes. I haven’t read him in a while, but that didn’t seem to be part of his strategy when I was reading.

  • deti

    I know that no one here is saying the opposite, but:

    Let’s dispose of the notion that Game only works on sluts, party girls, frat house hangers-on, and girls who hang out in bars. Not so, not so at all. Just from reading here it’s very clear that Game is astonishingly effective on all kinds of women, from college freshmen to women married 30 years with grown kids to divorced women to career girls to 30+ count sluts to attention whores to church girls. In fact it especially works on church girls.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    deti,

    Yes. Game works on them all. But to be fair, there’s no one “game strategy.” There are loads of strategies for attracting women: and not all will work on all women–and even when they are successful, they need to be adjusted for the specific woman. Also, the fact that women will “respond” to game does not mean that they will put out without commitment for the men with the tightest game.

  • deti

    JM:

    I can’t speak for Athol but my reading of him is this: He doesn’t tell married men to be assholes but he does tell them to push back hard when she’s being insolent, intractable or just plain bitchy.

    One of the implicit messages of the MAP, particularly when a man gets the “I love you but I’m not in love with you” soliloquies, is this: “You’ve told me you don’t want me. I’m improving myself to make myself more attractive in general. I’m hoping you notice and this increases your attraction to me. But (and this is key), if you are not attracted to me, perhaps someone else will be. And if you don’t want me, then I will find someone else who will want me.” So it’s dread-lite.

    from my experience I can tell you what’s worked on my wife:
    1. If she doesn’t want sex, just walk away. Don’t beg, don’t plead, don’t cajole, don’t complain.

    2. Ramping up the “I don’t have any intention of putting up with your shit” speeches.

    3. “I don’t have any intention of putting up with public disrespect from you. You can say anything you want to me privately. You may not, however, disrespect me in public or in front of the kids. If you do, I’ll correct it right then and there, in public.”

    4. I just talk less. I don’t go on and on about much of anything.

    5. I don’t feel the need to explain everything I do or feel, like I used to. I don’t owe her an explanation for everything I do, say, or feel.

    6. I don’t ask for much anymore in the way of sex. I just do what I want, I tell her what I want and I expect to receive it. I make it clear that “now it’s sexytime”. As above, if she says no, I push some. If she still says no, I walk away. If that happens too often, I’ll simply note to her that if this continues, I’ll consider it to be marital abandonment and deal with it accordingly. I have told her that one of her obligations to me as my wife is to provide regular sex at reasonable intervals. Barring medical issues, I expect it. If I don’t receive it, she’s not holding up her end of the bargain as a wife and that needs to be rectified now.

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

      @Deti

      Do you think your wife’s attraction to you has increased? Is she more compliant about sex, or has she started initiating it more herself? I would think your approach would make you sexier to her, but something about what you just said made me wonder.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    You’ve told me you don’t want me. I’m improving myself to make myself more attractive in general. I’m hoping you notice and this increases your attraction to me. But (and this is key), if you are not attracted to me, perhaps someone else will be. And if you don’t want me, then I will find someone else who will want me.” So it’s dread-lite.

    This isn’t dread-lite. This is reality.

  • Underdog

    purplesneakers

    “Why be bitter towards the women because they were attracted to what they’re naturally inclined to be attracted to?

    I’m not bitter towards men for liking 125lb me over “naturally 175lb” me. I will admit that I was at first…. but I think about what even I’m not attracted to in men, and it seems fair enough.

    It seems like you should be more glad that you got it figured out.”

    Because my game back in college wasn’t “I’m a confident alpha” game, it was “I’m a bigger douchebag than these frat boys” game. It attracted a certain kind of girls.

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

    @Dogsquat
    That’s actually my wife’s favorite Cohen Brothers film (I liked Blood Simple). And you’re right, we civilians don’t really have a meaningful opinion when it comes to military service, other than to thank you for it.

    It’s not judging I have a problem with. It’s prejudging based on some immutable characteristic. I’ve got what many men already have, but so do you, and JM, and a few other guys around here. That’s my point. What’s amazing, repeat amazing, is that at the same time I’m allegedly discounting men’s feelings of contempt, back in the real world, the millions of men (at least 50 million of them) in good, quality marriages and relationships… aren’t acknowledged whatsoever. Or their success is discounted, or explained away, or they’re labeled as outliers. They just “got lucky”. They don’t represent anything. It’s like they don’t matter in any of these discussions. And its bunk, it isn’t true. They count for a lot, and so do the women in their lives.

    I was single for quite awhile, dated a bit here and here, and lonely too. But I guess I’m not supporting men if I’m also not still marching in this parade of indignation. If I’d had that negative attitude towards women (i.e. they’re all selfish and they sleep around), I probably would’ve written off my SO when we first met. That’s the logical conclusion to assuming the worst about someone in advance. At least you admitted that it’s irrational to hate women who’ve done nothing to hurt you. It seems like male optimism WRT women is an unwritten crime.

    I’ve always tried to temper my view of the people I meet with information on what’s happening on the ground in the real world. Unlike some people, I’m willing to admit when I don’t have enough knowledge to form an opinion. I don’t know how everything works, and prefer not to regurgitate stereotypes because they sound good. But if facts don’t matter, I’ve nothing to contribute.

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

      back in the real world, the millions of men (at least 50 million of them) in good, quality marriages and relationships… aren’t acknowledged whatsoever. Or their success is discounted, or explained away, or they’re labeled as outliers. They just “got lucky”. They don’t represent anything. It’s like they don’t matter in any of these discussions.

      This is my major problem with the generalizations made about marriage, and especially about who women marry. I read this stuff about women hunting for alphas during ovulation and settling for beta providers when they’re expiration date arrives. That we’re hypergamous creatures with unquenchable lust for dominant males. Honestly, we sound like vampires or zombies half the time.

      Then I go out for a walk in my urban neighborhood, and the park is chock full of beta dads and beta moms with their little kids in the playground. I see people in their 20s walking around and holding hands – just normal people. Not particularly good looking, or charismatic. Yes, the marriage rate is declining, but it’s the betas who are getting married. And a small percentage of them are getting divorced. It’s important to hold one’s assumptions up to the light of day from time to time. It doesn’t mean the horror stories aren’t real – but perhaps they’re not typical. They’re certainly not in my world.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    1. If she doesn’t want sex, just walk away. Don’t beg, don’t plead, don’t cajole, don’t complain.

    This is the way to do it. After a bit of push (which you mention in #6).

    2. Ramping up the “I don’t have any intention of putting up with your shit” speeches.

    I think you should just refuse to put up with the shit. If the speeches are effective for you, then awesome, continue to use them. I think that in some cases it can be perceived as “weak.” (For the reasons you suggest in #5). Refuse to accept “shit” enough times, and the message will come across loud and clear.

    3. “I don’t have any intention of putting up with public disrespect from you. You can say anything you want to me privately. You may not, however, disrespect me in public or in front of the kids. If you do, I’ll correct it right then and there, in public.”

    Why accept disrespect in private?

    4. I just talk less. I don’t go on and on about much of anything.

    That’s virtually impossible for me. I love talking to my gf.

    5. I don’t feel the need to explain everything I do or feel, like I used to. I don’t owe her an explanation for everything I do, say, or feel.

    This is terrific advice, I think.

    6. I don’t ask for much anymore in the way of sex. I just do what I want, I tell her what I want and I expect to receive it.

    I think this shouldn’t only apply to sex. I think it’s fair to make your desires and expectations clear. I think this is good advice for both men and women. It’s one thing if you’re asking your partner to do something special… that’s a favor and you can ask nicely for it. But sex is a reasonable expectation and there’s no need to “ask” for it.

  • Herb

    @deti

    I read your list of what works and my first thought is, “So, success in marriage is being willing to keep her in her place and not really talk to her.”

    I do not question your results and I’m glad that strategy works for you and your wife. My question is, why bother being married if it’s just someone I have to keep in her place and can’t talk to her about things. It seems like a lot of work for, well, just sex and not much more.

    At this point in my life my annual bonus is higher than the median income. If all I want is sex on my terms on my schedule I’ll just purchase it and be done with it.

    What I wanted was someone who I could have pillow talk with after sex and in 25 years when life is running down we can both look back and say we shared the best parts of each other and were better for it.

    Guess I haven’t swallowed the red-pill yet…or maybe I have and when I was out of the Matrix just realized that reality wasn’t any better than the Matrix, just a different kind of shit.

  • deti

    “Why accept disrespect in private?”

    Wives get wider berths than GFs. Wives need a safe place to speak their hearts, uncensored, and that includes spewing. But the place to do it is behind closed doors, in private. Much better to deal with it there. Mrs. deti has said things to me that would (and have) caused immediate nuclear breakups were she just a GF and not a mrs.

    Had mrs. deti said her “I’m just not physically attracted to you ” speech when we were dating, there would have been no more dating. In fact the speech probably wouldn’t have happened; one of us would have just broken it off or faded out.

  • deti

    Herb:

    “So, success in marriage is being willing to keep her in her place and not really talk to her.”

    Not really. If you had said “success in deti’s marriage to mrs. deti is deti being willing to stand up for himself and grow a spine, not emote all the time, and take his rightful place”, then I’d agree.

    I don’t keep Mrs. deti in her place. I took my rightful place as the dominant partner. That tends to demonstrate mrs. deti’s submissive place.

  • deti

    Another thing is all this massive effort some people put forth to keep an LTR going. I did this once with an LTR I was with for four years. We were long distance. We met in my senior year of college. We were together one year then went long distance for three. She wasn’t attracted, The sex was almost nonexistent. We fought all the time. I wanted to stay with her and would literally beg and plead. I was doing all the work. She was hanging on because I was in grad school with the potential to make a good living when I got out and she was pushing hard for marriage, but I could never commit because of school.

    Sometimes, there’s just no point. Despite all the sunken costs, when you get to this point in a relationship you have to just cut your losses and get out. There’s no reason to expend such enormous effort in keeping something going that’s obviously not working for any number of reasons — you’re at different places in your lives, you want different things, she’s not really attracted to you, you’re too busy for a relationship, you’re sexually incompatible, you have different interests, whatever.

    If I could talk to 22 year old grad school deti I’d say “cut this one loose now. There Will Always Be Another Woman.”

  • Herb

    @Susan

    The Women’s Movement basically blew up society and started something new.

    The problem is, once you destroy things like families and relationships, you have no idea what “new” looks like. Most of the consequences will be unforeseen.

    Not to mention explosions usually create lots of casualties and you’ll spend a lot of energy tending to them (even if said energy expenditure is indirect).

  • Underdog

    JM

    “Yes. Game works on them all. But to be fair, there’s no one “game strategy.” There are loads of strategies for attracting women: and not all will work on all women–and even when they are successful, they need to be adjusted for the specific woman. Also, the fact that women will “respond” to game does not mean that they will put out without commitment for the men with the tightest game.”

    This.

    First of all, there are different variations of game, requiring you to calibrate your alpha/beta behavior depending on your environment. In college for example, game is primal, cavemen-like, pure id, this is the tactic that yields the best results. MM and your average PUA routines will get you blown out and laughed at in college.

    Second, there is no doubt that “game” works on all heterosexual girls in term of stimulating their attraction mechanisms. How these girls choose to respond to their attraction mechanisms being stimulated dictate how much respect they should be treated with. Girls that put out as soon as they are attracted to your game deserve little respect and are pump-and-dump materials. Do not develop any emotions for these girls. Girls that feel attracted to your game and reciprocate by offering you a chance to bond with her emotionally before putting out are the ones you should be keeping.

  • Escoffier

    Mega, I agree with you completely about what I have found elsewhere in the ‘sphere. There is a general reluctance … no, that is the wrong word … loathing to admit that good women and good marriages exist anywhere. Any time they are confronted with a man claiming to be happy with a good woman, you can expect two responses: 1) “She’s cheating on your with her divorce lawyer and the kid is not yours, you’ll be served with the papers tomorrow, you deluded chump, then you’ll see”; 2) “Shut up about your happiness, why come hear to brag you a-hole, that’s not what this site is about, it’s about telling the truth about women, so go away mangina/white knight.”

    This is not ALL you will hear but there is so much of it that it constitutes a trennd.

    deti, I dunno man, I’ve just never had to deal with that kind of crap from a woman, certainly not from my wife. Even the most difficult GF I had was difficult in a wholly different way (in ways that, incidentially, validate game theory, just not the ways you are describing).

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Girls that feel attracted to your game and reciprocate by offering you a chance to bond with her emotionally before putting out are the ones you should be keeping.

    Well said.

  • purplesneakers

    First of all, there are different variations of game, requiring you to calibrate your alpha/beta behavior depending on your environment. In college for example, game is primal, cavemen-like, pure id, this is the tactic that yields the best results. MM and your average PUA routines will get you blown out and laughed at in college.

    Or you could re-calibrate your game to be more LTR-oriented and have a relationship with a girl who doesn’t ride the hook-up circuit and would love to have a committed, loving, sexual relationship. You said yourself that the game you used to play- “being the biggest douche of them all”- attracted a certain kind of girl. Why wouldn’t a different sort of game, even in college, attract a different sort of girl? Of course once you’ve played successful caveman game and gotten the “best success” in terms of sleeping around as much as possible, it may be difficult to re-calibrate to a softer, gentler game, and I recognize that.

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

    deti – My childhood teachings of women match yours, except I grew up with a single mother, so no “dad” to tell me to keep it in my pants.

    Yep, I grew up thinking if I was just good enough, made enough money, and treated a woman “right” I should never have relationship problems. Its funny, because I managed to get and keep two LTR (4 and 4.5 years respectively) before getting and staying married for 12 years, while still working on a head full of total BS about women. To be honest, I think its because my particular ‘brand’ of beta didn’t really become super annoying until about the five year mark. My marriage started tanking about 6-7 years in, so that may be the case. Of course, I’ve also read many places that women’s serial monogamy instinct seems to kick in about the same time… The mind boggles.

    Susan – Ok, Mike C has really dug into this subject, but I’d like to mention that for my part, most of my angst here lately has been ALL from your femcentric view. I get that your target audience is young women, but are you sure that THEY are the ones you can help the most? Honestly, if you are indeed getting lots of emails from young men, is it perhaps because they see you as a trustworthy woman to provide THEM with good advice FOR THEM? If so, then please consider that what you feel is best for them in terms of relationships may not actually be THEIR best course of action.

    I’m honestly saying I think you mean well, and for young women you are probably the only voice of reason out on the “interwebs” at the moment. But, if young MEN are coming to you for help, PLEASE do your best to keep the femalcentric views out of it, or send them to someone else. I believe you are indeed trying to do good, but the root of the matter is the way for a woman to fix her chances and the way for a man to increase his are dramatically different. And although I fully know that you are well educated on the subject matter, I don’t believe you fully understand the male perspective, and I don’t expect you to. Make sure any guys coming to you for advice understand that at least, so they can take your advice with a grain of salt.

    I’d love to tell you who to send these guys to, but I don’t know of any ‘sphere bloggers currently taking in apprentices that wouldn’t likely turn them into woman haters.

    Much respect to you Susan, for real. I think myself and many of the men here are simply concerned that you are not taking your “team woman” views seriously enough when it comes to talking directly to men on these issues. I’d rather they come to you than any hate page, but I would really like to see them talk to guys like Munson, JM, Deti, Mike C, or really just about any of the male regulars. I’d talk to them, but I know that my pessimistic views are not the best way to introduce the red pill. New guys will find their anger and negativity on their own, they don’t need me pushing it down with the pill itself. ;)

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

      @Ted D

      Ok, Mike C has really dug into this subject, but I’d like to mention that for my part, most of my angst here lately has been ALL from your femcentric view

      OK, I have some questions for you:

      What does femcentric mean?

      Do you believe that it’s either-or? One sex grabs from the other? Are you suggesting that I am encouraging women to take something from men?

      Do you expect me to give advice here that prioritizes the male experience over the female experience?

      What advice have I given to a male that you disagree with?

      Have I limited access to any male regulars?

      Do I limit the expression of opposing views?

      In other words, please state very specifically what you would like to see changed here.

  • Herb

    @Susan

    Very few of us are entirely objective – we are all looking at the world through our own lenses, and our perspectives can also change over time.

    Thank you, that’s what I was trying to get through to MegaMan early this morning. He asked why some men thought the way they did.

    Now I’ll try again.

    @MegaMan

    It’s not judging I have a problem with. It’s prejudging based on some immutable characteristic. I’ve got what many men already have, but so do you, and JM, and a few other guys around here. That’s my point. What’s amazing, repeat amazing, is that at the same time I’m allegedly discounting men’s feelings of contempt, back in the real world, the millions of men (at least 50 million of them) in good, quality marriages and relationships… aren’t acknowledged whatsoever. Or their success is discounted, or explained away, or they’re labeled as outliers. They just “got lucky”. They don’t represent anything. It’s like they don’t matter in any of these discussions. And its bunk, it isn’t true. They count for a lot, and so do the women in their lives.

    You still aren’t hearing what I’m saying. Susan has inspired me to try a different tack.

    If you can try reading a book by Martin Seligman called Learned Optimism. It summarizes his study into optimism and pessimism, how they develop, and how to help people be more optimistic.

    His discovery was pessimism is a learned behaviour, a learned helplessness. It leads to thought processes that he characterizes as three PPP: negative events are personal, permanent, and pervasive while positive events are the opposite: impersonal, impermanent, and isolated.

    Now, think about how I answered your question. Men who have negative experiences start to draw conclusions and over time see positive events as isolated.

    So yes, when you say “but there a million men who aren’t experiencing what you’re experiencing therefore you feelings are wrong” you are discounting that person’s feelings. You may have objective evidence that their learned helpness with respect to women is wrong but that is now how the human mind works. They are not working from facts per se but their explanatory style.

    Now, the real reason I pointed you the Seligman’s book is not his work on the front end, explaining things, but on the back end and why facts don’t matter, at least not in the manner you describe them. The book is not meant to be simply explanation. It allows you to redo the same testing he does on subjects and then works you through various exercises to change that attitude. This is a form of cognitive behavioral therapy. If you look into those methods they don’t attack facts directly experienced with “but other people have experienced different things” but by asking people to interpret their own experiences in a different way. It does it in small steps that build on each other.

    Going all the way back to the beginning, you asked “why do some men feel this way” which can be rephrased as “why do some men interpret the world this way.”

    You were given answers.

    Your immediate response was “well, other people aren’t experiencing that so you’re wrong”. Later on you even tried the weasel superiority, “well, I don’t know enough to form an option but, btw, you’re wrong”…the whole “I’m not judging anyone, but you’re wrong to judge” form of judgement.

    You can say huge numbers of people have invalid experiences, chide them for having had invalid experiences, then say you’re not judging and look at how superior I am and you losers need to be like me. Suits me fine.

    Or you can say, “have you thought of looking at your experience this way and try thinking about it this way the next time it happens.” Guess what, that is what Game theory guys have done for themselves and others. They’ve taken one kind of self-talk, “I’m a loser because I can get women interested in me” and replaced it with “women are wired this way so it’s not your fault”. When this new self-talk provides a better explanatory theory it gets adopted.

    If you don’t like their replacement self-talk instead of telling the men they appeal to “you’re wrong” how about providing different self-talk.

  • Herb

    @Susan

    The same is true of Dalrock and frivolous divorce. Though that’s his primary reason for blogging, to my knowledge he has never produced one piece of data to support his view. It wasn’t until after Dalrockgate that I spent the time (again, 20+ hours) searching for relevant studies and combing through them for data. The result was the post on EPL divorce, which quantified how many frivolous divorces there are.

    I think the issue with ELP divorce isn’t just the odds but the cost. If you do risk analysis it’s not just the odds but the product of the odds and the cost (hell, you can probably school me on risk analysis given your background).

    Thus, even if the odds of ELP are low the cost of divorce in what the manosphere calls marriage 2.0 are so high any ELP divorce chance creates a huge risk to men.

    I think, in the long run, the issue isn’t ELP as much as marriage law and that’s the point to attack (in this I disagree with Dalrock who is pretty much the last sphere blog I read on a regular basis outside of Captain Capitalism who is much less manosphere oriented) because ELP isn’t going way any time soon because of how we’re raising girls. While some of your work attacks at the margin (lots of casual sex leading to a harder time bonding) I doubt it affects the core. Plus, I think you’re on the right track that we have a new assertive matting based on slutiness/cadishness (which also explains MegaMan’s happy couples although I’m leary about trusting that for people in their 20s today…social inertia is winding down).

  • Alias

    Megaman
    ” I didn’t say anyone’s feelings were invalid. I just don’t see how you go from A) women I’ve known are uncaring of men’s feelings to B) all women must be like that.”
    ———————–
    Herb:
    “Human beings make invalid generalizations that they then use to guide their choices all the time. Personal experience is the primary source of those generalizations and reinforcing evidence cements them.”
    ——–
    > Herb,
    Then you must disagree with the previous posters who stated that the media served as *their* primary source for generalizations.

    What makes you think that most people AREN’T basing their generalizations on personal experience?
    An experience that people are multifaceted, with varying degrees of good AND bad all rolled into one.
    Many of us aren’t intentionally trying to undermine others here, we’re just having a hard time understanding their way of thinking.
    Even if one was alone on a deserted island, wouldn’t one be aware that one’s thoughts are composed of both good and bad thoughts?
    Demonizing everyone is just as dehumanizing as pedastalizing.

    It’s absolutely prudent to be cautious about people until they’ve proven to be trustworthy. *I think* this is healthy.
    But how does one go from everyone was good to everyone is bad?
    For many of us, this thinking is difficult to relate to, that’s all.

    Signed
    Alias, the poster formerly known as “anonymous”

  • Herb

    @Susan

    I don’t see how this message could have been successfully delivered to boys, when as girls we were being told to stop acting feminine and subservient, and start growing a pair. How could boys not have noticed that girls were being raised to follow an entirely different script?

    Time lag and geography? Isn’t modern hookup culture men responding to women being taught that?

    I think men our age often had mixed messages and probably where they learned it was different. JM had a feminist mom who was honest about it. I grew up mostly in Wyoming until HS, a place arguably a decade or two behind the coasts. If I’m correct you grew up in Greater Boston so probably had something similar to JM.

    Thus in the 80s we had a mix of people hitting their 20s, some of whom grew up late 50s/early 60s and other who grew up 70s. Thus, a lot of men (and women) came to college (which will tend to track the coasts in general) without a lot of exposure to the new ways and hit the wall.

    By the late 90s what had started in the cultural centers had defused out and men started hitting college seeing the message girls will getting. That hookup culture hits about the same time is probably no accident (although it was already starting at Trinity when I went there in 85-86).

  • http://chuckthisblog.wordpress.com Joe

    @Susan

    I don’t see how this message could have been successfully delivered to boys, when as girls we were being told to stop acting feminine and subservient, and start growing a pair.

    That’s an easy one. All you have to do is make sure the boy gets the message that his [mother's/sister's/female cousin's/female neighbor's] feelings and perceptions are the only one’s to be considered. Make sure he knows that they are acting right and he is acting wrong when he’s outside getting dirty and playing rough. He’s he “man”, so he has to be tolerant and non-physical with girls, and above all, he has to sit still in school even when every bone in his body wants to be outside running and jumping.

    Oh, and when his sister comes home with better grades, make sure his grades are compared to hers! That’ll help.

    Then you will have successfully created a young man who knows his place and who can be counted on to consider himself inferior.

    Yeah, okay – that’s a formula that no one is applying intentionally, certainly not parents. Consider, though, that it’s also the basis of the elementary school pedagogy we’ve been applying almost universally for decades now.

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

      @Joe

      Thanks for clarifying that. Family pressure and the schools – that’s huge.

  • Underdog

    purplesneakers

    “Or you could re-calibrate your game to be more LTR-oriented and have a relationship with a girl who doesn’t ride the hook-up circuit and would love to have a committed, loving, sexual relationship. You said yourself that the game you used to play- “being the biggest douche of them all”- attracted a certain kind of girl. Why wouldn’t a different sort of game, even in college, attract a different sort of girl? Of course once you’ve played successful caveman game and gotten the “best success” in terms of sleeping around as much as possible, it may be difficult to re-calibrate to a softer, gentler game, and I recognize that.”

    This sounds good in theory, but when you’re a horny guy who sees that girls in college typically put out for assholes instead of getting into relationships, you tend to calibrate your game so that it has the best chance of success in such environment.

  • deti

    “I don’t see how this message could have been successfully delivered to boys, when as girls we were being told to stop acting feminine and subservient, and start growing a pair. How could boys not have noticed that girls were being raised to follow an entirely different script?”

    You’re viewing it from a macro perspective, the way girls relate to the world. I was told this is the way girls relate to sex and relationships.

    Your view — macro.
    The instruction I received — micro.

    Several reasons. Youth, naivete and stupidity.

    More importantly, the message on girls good, boys bad was explicitly applied to sex and relationships. “Girls are just as smart as you and just as able to work as you are, but when it comes to sex and relationships, they are pure as the driven snow. When it comes to sex and relationships, all they want are husbands and everything they do in dealing with you men is to get husbands. So you have to be nice so you can be good husbands.”

    As boys, we were presumed to be violent, predatory and intractable. We boys were much more reined in and controlled than girls. Girls did not need to be restrained since they were incapable of acting in any manner other than for the greater good of others, when it came to sex and relationships.

    “If you can’t get a girl, it is because you are not being nice enough.”

  • Alias

    Herb:
    “It’s because the issue isn’t military service per se. It is understanding that while women loss sons, husbands, and brothers they are not the primary victim because those sons, husbands, and brothers are dead and the dead men are the primary victims of war. In fact, I believe a peacenik woman might get that quicker because she’s not seeing glory and men doing their final act of duty but death and destruction.”
    ——-
    This IS sad if you have to actually explain this to anyone.

  • Herb

    @Alias

    Then you must disagree with the previous posters who stated that the media served as *their* primary source for generalizations.

    What makes you think that most people AREN’T basing their generalizations on personal experience?

    Okay I’m not sure what is directed at me and what at MegaMan but I’ll take a shot.

    1. I think media is part of our personal experiences. Story telling has long been a way to transmit culture and shape attitudes. When the stories quit being epic poems orally transmitted and become TV shows that effect doesn’t change. Media creates expectations and provides models. For men today, who often lack a consistent male figure in their life, this effect is probably greater than it was for my generation who still larger had fathers in their home.

    2. Acting on the generalizations formed from experiences isn’t inherently demonizing or pestalizing. What it does do is affect how we read different things (I just had a huge weekend of this, btw, so it’s forefront in my mind) and how we react. My personal experiences with women have generally been that their attraction to me is either an act to get something or an acknowledgement of their low value. Thus, I suspect that a woman attracted to me will stop if she gets what she wants or sees her value increase.

    Does that mean I think all women are mercenary bitches? No, it means I suspect all women who decide to show attraction to me are mercenary bitches and I should protect myself accordingly. Part of that is the things I ask and observe to determine how much to open myself to someone, which is where this all got started.

    3. I think you need to give people more credit to view different spheres of life differently. This morning I put an add on Craigslist for people to form an ethereal band. Would I love for one of the people to respond to be a woman who signs along the lines of Sigrid Hausen, Kit Messick, or Summer Bowman? You can believe I would. Would I hold them in contempt? Hell no, I’d be honored to work with someone who captures the style of music I love and wanted to work with me. I would assume she wanted to make and perform beautiful music.

    Yet, with that same woman if I instead met her as a potential romantic interest I would be on my guard about her agenda, her intentions, and how much to trust her.

  • deti

    Herb 747: great point.

    I grew up in a very small town in the midwest. My entire frame of reference on girls and relationships was centered on a town of about 3,000 people in the middle of nowhere. Everything I knew was based on the attitudes and mores of people I’d known from my earliest consciousness.

    Add to that a simpering beta father and a domineering shrew of a mother who clamped down hard on her only son, telling him he had to “be nice” or he would never ever amount to anything. She herself was the product of a mother who was widowed at an early age and from a family where all the men were either drunks, criminals or dead. So her mother made the rules in her family; and my mother decided she would make the rules in hers. Her children followed the rules or suffered her wrath.

    That’s another reason why the “girls are self interested and want things out of their lives” message didn’t get through.

  • Jesus Mahoney

    JM had a feminist mom who was honest about it.

    Actually, JM’s mom isn’t a feminist. JM’s mom is a alcoholic hairdresser who spends her free time reading romance novels. Easy to confuse the two, though.

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

      @Jesus

      Well someone in the gene pool was smart and gifted. I’ll assume it’s on the Irish side. :)

  • Jesus Mahoney

    Mike C,

    I missed this until I saw Sue replying to it:

    You’ve sort of adopted the Jesus Mahoney view that alpha doesn’t really exist

    It’s not so much that I don’t think that alpha doesn’t really exist. It’s more that the terms alpha and beta have come to mean so many different–and conflicting–things to so many of the people here that they’ve become worse than meaningless, they’ve become a barrier to clear communication.

    Sue gets flak for saying she loves her beta husband…. because guys hear “beta” and think “wimp.” Sue says every woman wants 5 minutes of alpha, but most don’t want it to extend to 10 minutes… and guys hear, “every woman wants a short fling with an asshole but a long term relationship with a decent man.”

    If we could pin them down in terms of meaning, I’d be happy to use the words.

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

    Susan – “I don’t see how this message could have been successfully delivered to boys, when as girls we were being told to stop acting feminine and subservient, and start growing a pair. How could boys not have noticed that girls were being raised to follow an entirely different script?”

    As much as you can’t understand it, take my word for it that it happened. Why? I believed my mother, grandmother, and aunts more than I believed my own eyes as I was growing up. And, I met a few women along the way that weren’t raised “with a different script” to keep me believing it for years. My mother got pregnant by falling for a player, and I believe that she and the other women in my life decided when I was born that I would NEVER grow up to be like him, so instead they made me into a beta chump. I had no male role model to follow, as the only stable man in my life growing up felt it wasn’t his place to teach me to be a man.

    I never understood why women loved to hang around me, talk to me, tell me their “guy troubles”, but if I even mentioned wanting to go out with them, they looked at me in horror and made some comment about dating their brother. I have never in my life had a shortage of female attention. The problem is, most of it was beta orbiter attention. And I was working under the assumption that I was on the right track the entire time. All I needed to do with any one of those young girls is pull back on the “be nice, be myself”, and just be a bit of an ass, and I could have been humping like a rabbit. I should have told them to suck it up or quit dating assholes when they came crying to me about getting dumped, and it probably would have gotten me laid. But, instead I was sympathetic, understanding, and angry at those guys for taking advantage of her.

    And now I feel like a total fool for wasting years of my life following the direction given by misguided woman. And the worst part is they were/are all women I love and respect, which makes it a very bitter pill to swallow.

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