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.
{ 1398 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 2 3 4 5 … 10 »
@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.
@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.
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.
“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?
@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.
“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.
@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.
10 to 1 Sleuth is Polyamrous Desi or whatever else her goofy names have been
FWIW, the key is the almost obsessive repetition in every single comment. In this thread, every comment is about “adult choices” and “STIs”
“So you’re saying most arranged marriages end in divorce or the wife cheating?”
Huh? Where did I say that?
@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.
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.
Susan,
I’m starting to get the impression that Sleuth *really* wants you to read that Psychology Today article.
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
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?
@Extragiraffe
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.
>> “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.
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.
@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…
@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.
@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.
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.
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!
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.
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?
@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.
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.
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.
@deti
That completely negates Game. Game is for guys who don’t get the tingle going on first sight (or they wouldn’t need it).
@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.
@Herb
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.
Srsly dudes, do not feed the troll!
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
@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.
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.
@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.
@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…
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.
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.
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.
Dogsquat,
I hope you never get shot in the face. The world needs people like you.
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.
“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.
@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
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.
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.
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.
Jesus said:
“Dogsquat,
I hope you never get shot in the face.”
_________________
Me too, Jesus. It’s one of my most fervent desires.
@ 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.
@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.
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…
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?
Vampires with Selective Amnesia: you should write that story.
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.
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.
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
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.
@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.
@Sigred
You should regret that you beclowned yourself.
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
@ 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.)
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.
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.
I adore your style
Heh hot blooded Latina at your service.
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.
@Passer By
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.
@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?
@Maggie
I was there 1981-83. If that matches your brother’s time frame, email me and tell me who he is!
@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.
@Emily
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.
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.
@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.
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.
“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.
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.
@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.
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?
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?
@ 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?
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.
@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.
“How about sustainable attraction? ”
Doesn’t raw sexual attraction fade as the couple grows old and then companionship takes over?
@Ms. Lender
You read my mind!
“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.
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.
Jess
You did not even read Sigrids post that you are now praising.
Busted.
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.
@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!
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.
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.
Hopefully I will.
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
Aside from the fact that she sleep with a lot more guys than most other American girls in college.
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.
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.
@ 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?
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.
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.
@ 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.
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.
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.
@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.
people automatically*
Damn, it was right the first time. Ugh, disregard. Im going to bed now.
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-
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.
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.’
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
>> ” 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*”
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.
@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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@Mike C
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.
Glad you’re back with us, JM. It’s comments like this that make you incredibly valuable and necessary in these comment threads.
@Mike C
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.
@MM
“What you just described is one of the reasons Viagra was invented!”
Funny story but thats not actually why Viagra was invented.
@Mike C
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.
@Joe
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.
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.
@Anacaona
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.
@Megaman
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?
@Jess
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.
She emailed the Power Point to three friends apparently, and then was shocked. Shocked! When it went viral. Not very smart.
Haha, this cracked me up. Jess acting as the resident hostess of HUS.
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.
I don’t believe that’s true, but if it were it would say something very damning about society.
Her count was reportedly 66 at college. That probably makes her the biggest slut on Duke’s campus. So… 1/2500 = .0004%
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.)
HAHA! Now it’s the highlight of mine.
@Anacaona
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
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!!!
Tia-
This is why i don’t comment, I’d get drilled.
@Gorbachev
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.
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.
@Gorbachev
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.”
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.
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.
Pish Posh. Your “stay up” mantra is something we could all use around here.
@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.
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.
« 1 2 3 4 5 … 10 »
{ 1 trackback }