Steven Rhoads, a University of Virginia politics professor who specializes in gender and culture, has written about The Emotional Costs of Hooking Up. He notes that a lot of young men share one student’s view that “he was not interested in love at that point because he hadn’t slept with enough women yet.” The capacity to separate emotional intimacy from physical intimacy is something we consider a typical characteristic of male sexuality. For most women, this is difficult if not impossible, and Rhoads notes that most of his female students who have tried casual sex quickly grow to dislike it. As one female student wrote:
We are told not to be sexual prudes, but to enjoy casual sex, we have to be emotional prudes.
Tyler Blanski, a young male musician and writer, shares her view, and suspects that casual sex stunts emotional growth for both men and women:
I wonder if by pretending that sex is emotionally and morally no-strings-attached, a person becomes an emotional prude. An emotional prude uses sex to escape the commitment and vulnerability required in general relationship.
Ideally, emotional and physical intimacy are in balance. For most people, both emotionally slutty behavior (strong emotional intimacy without sex) and emotionally prudish behavior (powerful physical intimacy without emotion) may be said to describe a state of disequilibrium:
Emotional prudery obviously carries great risk – you’re either succeeding in disconnecting yourself emotionally from a human being you’re having sex with, or you’re catching feelings after all. You tell yourself you don’t care if he hooks up with other people, you’re happy to see where things go, blah blah blah, but face it, you’re getting invested and attached. Blame it on hormones – it’s actually possible to get hung up on a guy you don’t even like that much, just from having sex with him.
There is also great risk in emotional promiscuity. You’re not having physical sex, but your emotions are in overdrive as you connect deeply with another person. We usually hear about this happening in the context of the emotional affair. When there’s something lacking in a committed relationship, it can be tempting to get close to someone new, someone who “gets you.” These emotional affairs often start out innocently. Sheri Meyers, author of “Chatting or Cheating: How to Detect Infidelity, Rebuild Love and Affair-Proof Your Relationship” calls it emotional sex:
Emotional sex is a friendship that escalates into something that feels the same as romantic love and can manifest itself in numerous ways — physically, romantically, emotionally, lustfully, verbally, or virtually.
Friendship becomes emotional sex when the feel-good brain chemicals and hormones that are released when even thinking about that person take over. Any contact with the person becomes as potent as a drug addiction.
…Emotional sex can be even more enthralling than physical sex, and it can cause the same havoc, mistrust and betrayal in a relationship as sexual infidelity, often leading to a break-up.
While emotional affairs are generally discussed in terms of their threat to existing relationships, it’s very possible to be emotionally promiscuous when one is single. It happens when you have a platonic connection with someone that suddenly revs up into something much more. If your feelings are requited, you are likely to wind up in the “In Love” box on the top right. However, if your affection is not returned, you wind up in the unenviable state of heartbreak. Most frequently this takes the form of getting stuck in the Friend Zone with someone you’ve fallen for. If you really have a death wish, you’ll have sex with them anyway, sentencing yourself to that particular hell of being in the In Love box alone.
Whether you’re in a friendship with someone of the opposite sex or have met someone new, it’s important to maintain emotional equilibrium.
- Never get more than one step ahead or behind of the other person emotionally.
- Restrict physical intimacy that does not match the emotional intimacy in the relationship.
- Don’t remain in the Friend Zone. If you’ve caught feelings for someone and they don’t feel the same way, rewarding friendship is impossible. Cut your losses and make a clean break.
- Don’t kid yourself into believing you can pull off the Emotional Prude role. You’re not in the 1%.
Remember, every time you get out of whack emotionally, you’re wasting your time and energy. Ideally, you’ll tread the path from Solitude to In Love. That requires enormous self-discipline, and, as always, a bit of luck.
{ 394 comments… read them below or add one }
1 2 3 »
Reminds me of a passage from Arthur Koestler’s sadly-neglected novel of ideas, The Age of Longing:
“Hydie sipped at her glass. Here was another man living in his own portable glass cage. Most people she knew did. Each one inside a kind of invisible telephone box. They did not talk to you directly but through a wire. Their voices came through distorted and mostly they talked to the wrong number, even when they lay in bed with you. And yet her craving to smash the glass between the cages had come back again. If cafes were the home of those who had lost their country, bed was the sanctuary of those who had lost their faith.”
Oh, I’m an emotional slut AND a physical slut! Awesome!
As long as I can remember, if I’ve been close friends with someone, I’ve been in love with them. Either I don’t feel romantic love or I feel romantic love for everyone; since the emotion tends to be fairly similar to what most people call romantic love (YOU ARE SO AMAZING LET ME GIVE YOU PRESENTS YOUR SMILE MAKES MY STOMACH FLIP TELL ME EVERYTHING ABOUT YOUR LIFE), I call it romantic love. Fortunately, I’m very non-possessive; as long as the person I love is happy and continues to spend time with me, I don’t care if we’re friends, lovers, or life partners. If they date someone else, great! Just as long as they’re happy (and still prioritize hanging out with me, I am not THAT selfless).
“…he was not interested in love at that point because he hadn’t slept with enough women yet.”
…Aaaaaand that is one of the most succinct summaries of the ravages of the modern SMP I’ve read in… well, days, but you get the point. Guy is dead-convinced that when he’s 60, he’ll look back on his life and realize it’s not complete because he only slept with two girls in his twenties instead of twenty-two. To be fair, if he spent most of his twenties celibate before marrying some reformed slut after she hit the wall, he would have a point, but is either scenario happier than getting with a great girl when they’re both 20 and sticking with it from there?
Very interesting.
This post actually coincides with something I’ve been think about lately. Everyone hates being caught with unrequited feeling – something I’ve (once again) done recenty. And of course, making the cardinal mistake of doing so before having sex.
Which led to me being more honest with my guy friends, (cause I think a few of them even knew) by questioning them when they felt it was actually appropriate to develope an emotional attachment. (or, should I say, any emotion at all)
Interestingly, the friends of mine having the most amount of sex thought that an emotional connect shouldn’t ever even enter the equation. And every single one of them agreed that one shouldn’t have a emotional investment (of any kind) prior to sex.
This seems to be the general rule, among guys my age. (early twenties)
I don’t believe that a woman catching feelings for a man prior to sex is bad, as long as she then 1) determines whether or not the man also has feelings for her and 2) leaves and does not do anything physical when she determines that the man does not reciprocate her feelings. I’ve had plenty of crushes that went nowhere, and it’s not a big deal because nothing physical ever happened.
Cooper, that is only the norm among your friends. You are not alone in having crushes. It’s totally normal for both young men and women. I’ve talked to tons of people, and everybody (EVERYBODY) has had crushes on somebody before they had sex. It is not bad to catch feelings before sex, but it is bad to stick around a girl who doesn’t reciprocate those feelings. You can have those same feelings again for a different person.
I wholeheartedly endorse this post.
Also:
You tell yourself you don’t care if he hooks up with other people, you’re happy to see where things go, blah blah blah, but face it, you’re getting invested and attached. Blame it on hormones – it’s actually possible to get hung up on a guy you don’t even like that much, just from having sex with him.
That doesn’t just happen to women.
Really interesting article, and I totally admit it, getting out of whack emotionally is always a waste of time. We only have to focus to find that thin line between prude and promiscuity, I know that it is really hard, but it’s the only working way to live a while life.
PS Cooper, if your guy friends claim to have never had a crush on any girl before sex, they’re either lying or have the emotional capacity of a total psychopath.
PPS most guys don’t talk about “feelings” with their male buddies. You’re not going to get a real answer out of most guys about emotional stuff.
@Susan
I can’t believe you passed up this quote from the article:
That has to be the cigarette executive telling their kids not to smoke because it’ll kill you line of the current SMP.
Although the line right before it spoke to me more (mainly because I don’t believe it’s as gendered as we want to think):
This is new. I never heard of Emotional Prudes before.
It is easier for a woman to have a sexual intimacy because it is returned. It is not as easy for a women to have emotional intimacy because that is not the goal of men. Men know that they primarily want sex and the quickest way to get to the friendzone is to get caught up emotionally with a woman. Men get nothing if they are invested emotionally with women. There are only negatives.
Women need to know that emotional intimacy outside of marriage is risky for men. They can turn into Fatal Attractions.
However, I will note that women are emotional cheaters. They will talk about their emotions and intimate relationships with anyone who will listen.
Susan, I like this diagram. Emotional prudery as a prerequisite for promiscuity, quite accurate.
Hope:
I don’t believe that a woman catching feelings for a man prior to sex is bad, as long as she then 1) determines whether or not the man also has feelings for her and 2) leaves and does not do anything physical when she determines that the man does not reciprocate her feelings. I’ve had plenty of crushes that went nowhere, and it’s not a big deal because nothing physical ever happened.
My reply:
You sound like you were a younger version of me long before I married! That was always how I felt when I was younger and dating.
And if anything, long after I got over it, in those few instances when it I ran into those men in the community, chatting with them was not a problem because there was nothing awkward about our past history.
Perhaps in retrospect they felt flattered at the time, but were not interested, unavaible, might have been wistful at what could have been, but I had no regrets about gatekeeping and avoiding sex. I wanted emotional intimacy and commitment with physical intimacy; they were not offering that.
@Jonny
The PC term is “bunny boilers”.
“It is easier for a woman to have a sexual intimacy because it is returned.”
.
And available 24/7 with virtually no effort from her to get it
tl;dr = If you catch feelings for someone, communicate that as soon as possible, with Game always in mind. This minimizes your investment and thus, your negative consequences. It also allows you to get over them faster with less pain, and minimizes the chances that you’ll Friend Zone yourself.
@Cooper:
I don’t know if this will help you or not, but you might want to give it a rip-
The amount of time spent with unrequited feelings magnifies the pain you feel. The beta orbiter of five years is devastated when his crush gets married to someone else. He may never recover fully. On the other end of the spectrum, a guy who gets turned down after a 20 minute conversation feels a momentary sting. He then moves on. This dude won’t even remember these events in a year.
One of the insidious things about unrequited feelings is that they’re usually wrapped in blankets of uncertainty, with a hint of insecurity flavoring. Does she like you? Does she like me more than him? What will her friends think? Will I ever see her again if she turns me down? All that crap runs through your head on repeat.
That horrible wrapping (with new calorie free Insecuritame™ flavor!) gums up your gears. It prevents you from operating in your own best interests. You’re paralyzed, sitting there like an M1 Abrams tank that’s thrown a track. Time passes, and feelings grow….
The closest parallel to this I’ve seen in other avenues of life happens when I give little kids shots. Some little kids are terrified from the moment they enter the building. They’re crying as I take vital signs. They scream all throughout the doctor’s spiel. By the time I come back with a syringe in my pocket, they are absolutely hysterical – lower lip vibrating, hyperventilating, and fighting like Joyce Gracie.
20 minutes of bargaining, bribery and admonishment ensue…and finally physical restraint is decided upon as the last course of action.
Then, I give them the shot. Little poke, that’s it, we’re done.
It dawns on them, slowly at first….it’s over. That’s it? Holy shit! Not as bad as I though. Hey Dogsquat can I get a toy haveapopsicletellmymomtogetmeicecreamblahblahblah….
The kid got his shot. If he’d nutted up and been brave, he’d have been out of there 19 minutes ago, too. Instead, the kid (and parents) allowed the misery to play out for awhile, and the outcome didn’t change a bit. It took a lot longer, and more misery was involved for everyone (once a little girl kicked me square in the balls hard enough that I vomited in the trashcan)….but in the end, what was always going to happen…happened.
Very few things in life are as bad as we think they’re going to be. Resolving unrequited feelings is like that, too, if you do it right.
The worst case scenario is she tells you she doesn’t feel the same. Depending on your world view, you might feel a pang of shame, inadequacy, rejection, embarrassment, or some other sub-awesome feeling. Hell, maybe she tells all your friends, too. Now, you’re super embarrassed.
Let me tell you – that right there is a feature, not a bug.
See, that rejection gets added to the loop that’s playing in your head about her. Yeah, you still think she’s hot or whatever, but now you’re hearing, “I don’t like you….I don’t like you…..I don’t like you…” over and over. If she blabs about it, you’ve just learned that she’s got an element of attention seeking validation whore in her psyche – an extremely unattractive trait.
Let it happen. Let that shit flow over you, embrace it. It is awful hard to like another person who doesn’t like you back. It’s even harder to like people with glaring character flaws (the blabber). It doesn’t go on for long – certainly not as long as when there isn’t that stark knowledge. Hearing the rejection and dwelling on it for a short time is like bad tasting medicine. Bad at first, but it helps you heal faster.
The biggest variable you’ve got control over is how much time you allow to pass before you attempt resolution. If you allow fear and insecurity to rule you, you’re going let the time stretch out interminably. It’s like you’re a member of that tank crew with the busted track – only you sit up in the turret and pray for the Vehicle Maintenance Fairy to deliver you from your travails. No good outcome will happen. Pretty soon, either the war ends and you get left on the road to rust, or Ali Baba drops a few frags into your hatch while you’re sleeping.
If something breaks, fix that shit post-haste. If you catch feelings for a girl, let her know – Game always in mind, of course.
One good technique I’ve used several times is this:
Say you’re horsing around – walking from class or out with friends or whatever. Make her laugh, then say,”You know what? I think I’m getting a terrible schoolboy crush on you.” Then watch and listen. She’ll tell/show you how she feels about it. You then act appropriately – aggressively if she is happy about it (i.e. kiss her right there).
If they reject you, you laugh and parlay the conversation to another schoolkid crush you had – Like when that chick Katie gave you mono in 10th grade or something.
The good thing about this technique is that everyone’s had a schoolkid crush. They don’t always mean something. There’s enough plausible deniability wrapped up in the concept to smooth over most of the awkwardness. Handle it gracefully and the moment is easily swept under the rug. Now you’re free to continue playing Social Circle Game if you want to.
Yours in Loquaciousness,
Dogsquat, King of the Britons
“Emotional prudery as a prerequisite for promiscuity, quite accurate.”
.
A person who is that way or was influenced to become that way is to be avoided for a relationship if you desire good emotional connection. If not, heck, just throw your life to the wind.
Wow, epic blockquote fail! It’s hard typing a comment on my phone..
Susan, see this is why I insist that young women are not interested in actually having a LTR, despite what you hear from the young members of your focus groups.
They simply say they want one while sleeping with guys that, from the very beginning, never showed they want one.
Sure, anyone can assume that if a guy likes a girl that the guy is probably has his sights set on a much too high-SMV women. (comparatively)
But all the women I’ve had unrequited feels for have been of similar SMV. (physically, economically, sociologically)
And, as Jordan said above, its merely having the feelings that kill any possible attraction.
“Men get nothing if they are invested emotionally with women. . . only negatives”
Like I said, it has nothing to do with SMV-comparability, but the fact that young women see a-man-catching-feelings as a demonstration of low-value. A man with sincere intensions dequalifies himself, from a young womens POV.
““Men get nothing if they are invested emotionally with women. . . only negatives”
+1
Emotional investment in a woman who you haven’t been in yet is bad business. Even having been in her might not mean shit.
Cooper, sounds like you’re not qualifying the girl enough or generating enough interest before demonstrating your feelings.
Either that or those girls just didn’t like you for some reason. No big deal. Plenth of other fishes in the sea — that should be your attitude.
“They simply say they want one while sleeping with guys that, from the very beginning, never showed they want one.”
.
“A man with sincere intensions dequalifies himself, from a young womens POV.”
.
Well yeah. A man in the US has a much greater mutual interest level with a woman from the same sexual culture. Unfortunately, those women are largely not in his geographical area; not even close. The local women have been programed to have a blast fucking around [oh sorry, exploring their sexuality] and realize they can do that inside the harem with tremendous ease so why should they want an emotional latch?
Oops that should be “Plenty” not “Plenth.”
Anyway, I bet pvw and Iggles (both of whom are females in relationships) can back up what I said about the guy having feelings not being an attraction-killer.
“Emotional investment in a woman who you haven’t been in yet is bad business. Even having been in her might not mean shit.”
.
Are parents these days really raising such lost souls?
@Cooper
No, it mean men are over estimating their SMV.
Promiscuity and the ability to nail alpha has inflated women’s SMV not only in their minds but in fact. If your SMV won’t buy it, then it’s lower than theirs.
Note, SMV isn’t MMV and one product of promiscuity has been to seriously decouple the two, driving the former down and the latter up for men and the reverse for women in the long run.
If you aren’t getting women to date you’re batting out of your league. That 3s who weight more than a Yugo and don’t bathe have a higher SMV than a guy with a good job, honesty, loyalty, a clean place, and who showers and dresses appropriately make seem fucked up but there it is.
Of course, when it comes to marriage that same 3 thinks the guy above is “settling” when she’d be lucky to be invited to the wedding. That’s she’s pissed about that is her own fault.
@Hope
Women who are already in relationships can tell any guy that behavior X is great to attract women or that the guy is a catch. They having no skin in the game and can offer the guy nothing in a relationship sense.
When what you say is consistently 180 degrees from what women who can offer a relationship are saying/doing he’s going to conclude all the good women (like you) are already off the market and why bother or all women are liars and why bother.
I know it’s a double lose for women in a relationship trying to help guys they like, but there it is.
The number of people who think a high N number equates to a Good Thing is very depressing. Have we really created a society that shallow?
Herb, I don’t think it’s as simple as that. How a guy discloses his feelings is important, as well as who the guy is, who the girl is, what their history has been, what their interactions leading up to feeling disclosure have been like, and so on. The fact that he does so is not a net negative and automatic attraction-killer. I’ve had guys disclose a crush on me, without even bothering to know who I am or talking to me on more than a superficial basis — and I was in a relationship! That’s a dead on arrival. I’ve also had guys tell me they got feelings for me after we’d been talking for hours about deep, meaningful subjects, and we were both single. Yeah I was way open to more then.
Also, not everybody you catch feelings for is going to return feelings. I’ve had guys reject me in all kinds of ways, “you’re too nerdy,” “you’re not white,” “I prefer blond girls,” or “I like another girl better.” Does that mean I should just have never told any guy I like him, or that all guys are xyz? No, it just means those guys weren’t interested. I didn’t hit their attraction buttons, and that’s cool. I’m not everybody’s cup of tea. I peeled my ego off the floor and moved on.
(Though admittedly I’m still a bit butthurt about the blond/white thing.)
+1
@Herb
The hamsterwheeling was painful to behold.
@Jonny
Are you saying that women have more emotional affairs? I don’t think that can be true…
We do talk about our emotions with one another it’s true – that’s the way we analyze and solve problems. But I don’t see how that is cheating.
@Hope
Are all guys like xyz? No, but risk analysis is “odds of something happening” times “the cost of it happening”.
One or the other gets large enough and the risk gets too high.
Admitting feelings first is enough end of a DLV as to be a death sentence for a significant portion of women. So: more than 50% times death sentence equals too risky.
Also, these is an area where risk is higher for men. Think about your statement:
Very true, but because women in general don’t approach the odds of direct rejection and thus experiencing the costs of direct rejection “you’re not white” type incidents is lower (and you’re not white…man, have I not being paying attention).
A female friend once complained it took 100 dates to find a man worth going out with twice. I told her it’s the same for men but we have to ask 100 women out to get the date to begin with. Let’s convert those to probabilities. That is .01 chance of a date being worth a second and .01 chance of getting a date when asking.
So, assuming worst case for her it takes the full 100 dates to find a man worth going out with again. If she goes on a date Friday and Saturday every week she’ll find him in a year.
Let’s assume a slightly better case for me. It only takes 68 tries on average to get a date and 68 dates to find a second date worthy woman (68 was selected because the odds of failure in both cases are 0.99 and after 68 successive attempts the odds of all failing are 0.504 are essentially, the 50% point).
That means if I ask a woman out daily, even on days I have a date, it will take me 4624 days or about 12 years, 8 months to find a woman worth dating twice (there is a reason so much PUA stuff is to get over approaching). That’s almost 13 times longer although I put out 3.5 times the effort (daily instead of twice weekly) and I’m assuming 50/50 case for me and worst case for her.
That a hell of a lot more investment to risk on a death sentence choice (meaning starting that cycle again) about revealing feelings. Even at a 1% chance of revealing feelings first losing her (and I’d say it’s closer to 20%) that’s 46.24 day (or a month and a half) risk in doing it.
@PVW
Thanks
I’ve had women tell me how awkward they felt after a boy never followed up to hang out again, or never called after a goodnight kiss. In some cases, these were boys in the same social circle, so there was a lingering sense of rejection when they were next thrown together socially. I always, always say, “Can you imagine if you’d had sex with him and he avoided eye contact?” So much worse! In fact, I’m certain some of these rejections occurred precisely because the guy was not invited in, in which case, that’s a feature, not a bug! Still, it wears the women down – they get tired of how well this “feature” is working.
@Susan
Sounds a lot like men’s reaction to “every shoot down means you’re one approach closer to a yes”.
“The number of people who think a high N number equates to a Good Thing is very depressing. Have we really created a society that shallow?”
.
This thinking fad came well after all the escalating N numbers. Thus, its a reaction to it, and rather kneejerk. But why? There is no reason to think or state its a good thing unless it somehow benefits or is in the best interest of the person stating it. Clearly they are on the DEFENSIVE…but why? What are they defending? Its gotten so bad lately, these folks actually contrive all sorts of diatribes at best and outright spitting insults and shaming tactics at worst. There is something really sick afoot. And to top it off, they actually state, yes they do…that your an ass for even considering the N when its time to select a life mate.
@Odds
What that last is for most people:
http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1987/01/13
It’s cute and funny, but we’d be better ending lies like “there is someone for everyone” and “true love conquers all” and taught kids some reality about dating, love, and life.
@Dogsquat
I love everything you said about laying it on the line. I’m a big fan of “say what you need to say.” Get it out there, and as you say, it doesn’t need to be some big drama – just a flirtatious quip will do it. It would be great if we could all achieve independence from outcomes, but we can’t, and I’m not sure we want to – it’s a double-edged sword. But attacking the infection early with a thorough cleansing and one good dose of medicine is preferable to letting gangrene set in. (I thought you might like a medical metaphor.)
By the way, I’ve seen guys go from a lackluster initial response to renewed interest on the other person’s part afterwards. And I’ve experienced that myself.
Laying it on the line is brave, and people respect it. The schoolkid crush move is very alpha.
@Cooper
Women want to earn your affection. You must make us work for it, or we will not value you. This is partly human nature (we all want what we can’t easily have) and partly because preselection is a powerful motivator for women, especially in the short-term. When you declare your intentions early, what we hear is, “I’m putting in my bid early, I’m the first one in line, so I hope you’ll pick me!”
I’ve seen men eager to lock a woman down for commitment practically from the first date – to the point where the woman knows that the guy has projected his fantasy onto her, he doesn’t know her well enough to like her that much. This is really repellent to women.
If you catch feelings for a woman right away, don’t show your hand. Spend time getting to know her to see if your initial impression stands up. Make it clear that you are evaluating her for compatibility in addition to physical attractiveness.
Hope: (Though admittedly I’m still a bit but hurt about the blond/white thing.)
My reply:
Oh, do I remember those experiences from when I was dating! Personal preferences are what they are; nothing to be done there, and it can be a peril for women of color in a majority white SMP.
I could understand if there was something about me that affected my smp and which I might be able to change and work on, ie., if I were overweight, but darn, I couldn’t change that I’m a woman of color!
Forget whether or not I’m an attractive, decent, relationship-oriented woman, my racial background was all that mattered; because of my racial background, I might as well have been a zero!
I must say that I could appreciate that although the husband came from a lily-white background, he spent several years in the military and thus became used to a multicultural environment, so he had no problem with dating me.
“true love conquers all”
.
Has become the biggest bullshit sales pitch for slut defenders. What an effin tragedy
@Hope, pvw
Damn. You have identified the female equivalent of being a short guy.
Meh, we do what we must.
And if it makes you feel better white women have always been at the bottom of the totem pole for me.
@Cooper
Story time.
When I first met my fiance we had gone out twice done a bit of physical.
We went out with friends to a club, there was this girl who wasn’t old enough to get in and didn’t have a fake but for some odd reason if she pretended she was my girlfriend her real ID got her in (we were the only white ppl it looked more normal). Worked 2 in 3 times, I’m dead serious.
Anyway, me and this girl had hooked up before.
That night I left my now fiance who at that time was just my friend to hang out with said girl. We were just hanging out and taling shooting some pool.
I remember looking up and seeing my now fiance standing where she just came around a corner, shocked/astonished/mystified and hurt and turning around and running away (literally in my head it could have been part of a movie)
I remember following within about 1.5 seconds finding her with her friend on a nearby couch looking like she was going to cry. I then remember sitting down, her friend told me to leave, I told her to get lost (sidenote: this is now the friend of hers I’d consider myself closest to being friends with).
Convo went on for awhile and all I can really remember is her saying something along the lines of I am not your girlfriend so I am not jealous. Or some such nonsense. I explained to her I was just hanging out with a friend.
In the end I unintentionally created a system in which she needed to qualify herself to me against this competition. To this day this is the only woman from my past that my fiance actively hates and probably wants to burn in a pit of fire.
Lokland
@Hope, pvw
Damn. You have identified the female equivalent of being a short guy.
Meh, we do what we must.
And if it makes you feel better white women have always been at the bottom of the totem pole for me.
My reply:
Thanks; I’m noticing that there are more white men who feel that way than when I was younger–changing cultural dynamics?
It doesn’t bother me nowadays on a personal level, but it does bother me when I hear similar stories from other women of color (primarily Af-Am women) who are looking; the reality is they live/work in a SWPL environment and invisibility can come with the territory.
The “halo effect” that can benefit SWPL women and automatically increase their desirability can make WOC invisible. So the reality that I’m hearing some of the men discuss about women and entitlement in dating can thus sound odd under those circumstances.
Hope and I are talking about experiences that don’t encourage an entitlement mindset!
Hmm.
I told my story but forgot to make a point.
Anyway, this is just a demonstration of what Susan said about making them earn your affection.
Your commitment is your trump card. Bleeding your hand is fucking retarded no matter what game your playing.
You want to hand out monogamy. Women want to hand out sex in monogamy.
Your playing for the same goal but theres nuances in the way women work that quite frankly make absolutely no fucking sense even if your totally shitfaced drunk after taking one to mane E tablets. And thats not a bad thing.
Simply learn how they work and play to those demands. Expect them to learn and play to yours as well.
Theres two parts to the problem, a lot of men don’t expect women to “serve” their needs while serving theirs and don’t know how to serve womens needs.
You have to correct both.
Emotional prudery
Maybe we could use this instead of a slut “you are just an emotional prude” PC kids love “clever” afterall
You sound like you were a younger version of me long before I married! That was always how I felt when I was younger and dating.
Add me to the group I had a ton of crushes that went nowhere. I think that is part of life and living in a coed world.
(Though admittedly I’m still a bit butthurt about the blond/white thing.)
I think the most butthurt I am is about the guys I felt nothing for but still did things that rejected me ( I guess as preemptive measure?). I was like “I can deal with this if I were after you but why are you doing this don’t like you?” things that make no sense stay the longer in my memory. I freaking hate it.
That means if I ask a woman out daily, even on days I have a date, it will take me 4624 days or about 12 years, 8 months to find a woman worth dating twice (there is a reason so much PUA stuff is to get over approaching).
This might sounds crazy coming from me but why don’t you ask women out again? I mean you are in poly anyway must of the guys that have success after years of none claim that is all about detachment of outcome if you think “I will still got laid regardless” you might find something new at least before you hang your dating trousers…just saying. If you have nothing to lose you might have something to gain.
I must say that I could appreciate that although the husband came from a lily-white background, he spent several years in the military and thus became used to a multicultural environment, so he had no problem with dating me.
Half my husband’s girlfriends were non-white (asian, latinas never a blond) I joke that since he is 100% white (26andme stats) his body is trying to make sure his progeny wouldn’t die out of inbreeding or melanoma, making him attracted to colored women hence he picked me, :p
Herb:
“No, it mean men are over estimating their SMV.
Promiscuity and the ability to nail alpha has inflated women’s SMV not only in their minds but in fact. If your SMV won’t buy it, then it’s lower than theirs.”
———
Should the appropriate term be “the SMV Bubble”?
However, I will note that women are emotional cheaters. They will talk about their emotions and intimate relationships with anyone who will listen.
————————————————————————-
I never thought about it before, but this is absolutely true
There are a lot of things we should know more about this before we enter into a relationship and for us to avoid being hurt.. But being hurt is always part of the relationship..
“Should the appropriate term be “the SMV Bubble”?”
.
Yes. And we ALL know how bubbles go
.
down with a lot of pain. Stay tuned
@Lokland
I’m curious – when you realized your fiance was jealous that first time – did it make you think of her differently? She showed her own hand then – did that encourage you to think of her more seriously?
@Gisselle
To put what you said in a pithy way:
All relationships end in death or abandonment. Every single one.
SW: The chart’s pretty good, but judging by some of the cranks on both the pink and blue side, non-stop solitude from one’s teens to one’s 40s does not for emotional equalibrium make!
+1
pvw & Hope – I feel you guys on this!
Never was this more apparent to me than when I joined Match.com. The number of messages I got was nowhere close to what the average woman on that site receives. It was disheartening at first, but ultimately I think if someone isn’t interested or not comfortable getting to know you because color then you really don’t need to date them anyway. I kept looking and found success meeting quality guys elsewhere.
Glad to hear that.
My boyfriend is an artist and has dated interracially before, so it wasn’t an issue.
Lokland,
This made me laugh! It’s kinda true
Anacaona:
the guys I felt nothing for but still did things that rejected me ( I guess as preemptive measure?). I was like “I can deal with this if I were after you…I freaking hate it.
My reply:
That happened to me a few times as well. I was surprised–they did come off as pre-emptive strikes which in my mind were really unnecessary…
Anacaona, Iggles, it is interesting that we all share something in common:
me:
I must say that I could appreciate that although the husband came from a lily-white background, he spent several years in the military and thus became used to a multicultural environment, so he had no problem with dating me.
Anacaona:
Half my husband’s girlfriends were non-white (asian, latinas never a blond) I joke that since he is 100% white (26andme stats) his body is trying to make sure his progeny wouldn’t die out of inbreeding or melanoma, making him attracted to colored women hence he picked me, :p
Iggles:
My boyfriend is an artist and has dated interracially before, so it wasn’t an issue.
Hope, I’m guessing you are in our crowd as well, women of color with white boyfriends/husbands?
Hope, I’m guessing you are in our crowd as well, women of color with white boyfriends/husbands?
I think so yes.
I always preferred white men (I already explained why is common in my country and all my girlfriends that are married married lighter men than themselves) I did felt atrraction for darker men but nothing ever came out of it, did you always dated outside your race? Or did you had colored boyfriends too?
PS
Today another Dominican friend of mine married a white gringo…we have a “brain and hottie’s drain” there :p
Hope:
I did felt atrraction for darker men but nothing ever came out of it, did you always dated outside your race? Or did you had colored boyfriends too?
My reply:
As for those Af-Am men I felt attracted to, nothing happened, ie., in the college environments where I have spent most of my adult life, there was lots of competition for the fewer men who were around. Less drama altogether. I was mostly buddies with the Af-Am men I knew in school, totally platonic. But all the men I dated were white; there were just more of them in the environments I was in.
typo:
Less drama altogether dating non-black men.
I’ve come across something like emotional prudery before. My typical experience is that when I talk to a woman, eventually bring up the possibility of seeing her at some other time. This puts her rationalization hamster into overdrive, and she comes up with some reason why that’s not a good idea, even though she’s clearly enjoying my company.
Previously, I’ve just put it into the anti-slut defense basket…even though the venue is usually something public, and non-sexual. Emotional prudery, as I understand it, is an interesting concept because as a less charismatic guy I seem to trip it. Even though I’m committed to real chastity before marriage, and marrying only to find a true mate…it doesn’t seem to matter because there’s no way she can know about that yet.
I agree with the OP that emotional and sexual prudery are quite different…sometimes even seem at odds with one another.
“Hope, I’m guessing you are in our crowd as well, women of color with white boyfriends/husbands?”
———
Count me in too.
I’m mixed anyway- so I never felt I had to narrow my opportunities to land a good man by color. Some of my friends who did- remained single.
Found mine early and kept him.
Yes, pvw, minority hetero men in college were plucked right out of the running- tout suite, esp. if they graduated.
@Susan re: Laying it on the line
No doubt, you and I are on the same page there.
I hadn’t realized just how much that strategy depends on outcome independence until you pointed it out. It’s also counter to what a lot of guys are saying here. I can see how it’s not congruent with a lot of Game.
I just hope some guys reading here think about it a bit. It’s never gone bad for me – not one time. Even the girl who turned out to have a boyfriend (don’t know how I missed that. Situational Awareness FAIL) turned bright red, bit her lip, and kissed me on the cheek as she shot me down.
And I got over her quickly, which is the contingency goal of the tactic.
Susan said:
“Women want to earn your affection. You must make us work for it, or we will not value you.”
_____________________________________
This remains of paramount importance at the beginning of a relationship, too.
Gents, some chick telling you she’s not currently banging anyone else does not mean “For richer, for poorer, ’til death do you part. Amen”
Fuck that.
She’s still auditioning for that role, and you need to tell her what you want.
A concrete example that’s worked well for me is to set expectations about contact. If a girl I’ve just started seeing exclusively goes out drinking with her friends, I expect a call (not a text) before she goes to sleep at the end of the night. I want to know she’s somewhere safe. If I don’t get that call, I’m done. That’s a hard limit for me – no second chances.
Your limits might be different, but you need to make them clear. Don’t be angry or threatening about it, but make them known.
It seems kind of weird, but I’ve found women like and appreciate a reasonable framework to work within. A hard thing for a guy with a tendency to pedestalize to realize is that women are often just as insecure as men at the beginning of a relationship. By offering some limits, you’re in effect saying,”Do these things and don’t do these other ones, then I’ll think you’re a good girlfriend.”
A girl who likes you will bust her ass to meet your standards. She’ll feel better about herself and more secure in the relationship, too.
Just don’t go all emo when you recognize when she’s done that. Saying,”Ohmygod thank you sooooooo much for doing that! It means so much to me!”
Just a pat on the ass and a “Good girl” will suffice.
I am an emotional prude because men like it that way. Whether pre-dating, casually dating or boyfriend, men have gotten scared when I revealed to them any signs of emotional depth. They wanted to see me bubbly and giggling all the time. I am a generally happy person but not giddy. Sometimes I get into meloncholy moods and sometimes I get depressed. Any sign of these two causes men to flee from me. I have tried to hide my real feelings from them, fake it, pretend everything is alright and I don’t need support, but I can’t, I just can’t. This is why I don’t date anymore. I don’t believe I will ever meet a man who can deal with me being anything but demonstratably happy all the time.
“Women need to know that emotional intimacy outside of marriage is risky for men.” How so? And how is it any less risky for women?
@Karen
This comes to mind: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100727081058AAOYFCB
Something like that even being possible is a scary thing to many guys.
Coming from a male perspective, I understand that women (just like everyone) have good days and bad days.
I remember a conversation during high school when I was whining to a classmate. He replied that he understood that I was upset. That’s fine, it happens to everyone. What isn’t okay is to focus on it in such a way as to make it visible to everyone. I thought about what he said, and I figured that he was probably right.
Ceer, but I want to make it visible to a man if I’m in relationship with him. I want and need his support during that time. I’ve resigned myself to being single forever. Getting dumped for being real is something that I don’t have the emotional stamina to go through anymore.
@Karen
I hate to NAMALT, but honestly, it’s really odd that you’ve had trouble finding a guy who’ll listen to your being melancholic or depressed. Maybe you reveal this stuff too quickly or too suddenly? I wouldn’t want to hear about that on a first or second date, but in an established relationship, I value openness, and I think many of guys do too.
Good point! While one’s emotional and physical investment are in balance, they’re both low, and that’s not a condition for human happiness.
@Dogsquat
Yes, that’s dominance and leadership. We like it. We like doing what’s necessary to get that pat on the ass. It feels good.
“”Yes, that’s dominance and leadership. We like it. We like doing what’s necessary to get that pat on the ass. It feels good.”"
Given your experience and, given you’re a woman, you’re likely right.
But, jeez, it sounds demeaning.
Like training a puppy.
Hate to think like that. As I remarked about a woman remarking about a minimal and temporary scar…if she was really upset, that’s lame; if she was doing the battlescar visceral thing, that’s lame. If she was trying to impress me with her sympathy, that’s lame. It was a minor ding and none of the responses were proportional. So what the hell am I supposed to think about her? Lame. Too bad, too, since she was quality in other–but not all–ways.
But the scar thing set me thinking differently.
Point is, some things which are true–I presume–ain’t all that wonderful to have to believe.
.
@Susan
“when you realized your fiance was jealous that first time – did it make you think of her differently? She showed her own hand then – did that encourage you to think of her more seriously?”
Yes but she handled it differently than your avg woman.
Shes really cute. Amongst her friends she is known as the cute one. Shes bubbly, giddy all that nonsense.
When she gets sad she looks like a kitten who just had to take a bath. Its adorable.
She looked sad and scared, like she was in need of protection (sidenote: one of her nicknames for me is bodyguard). When I talked there wasn’t even a touch of anger in her voice only sadness.
If she had been a bitchy jealous or even shown a tiny lil bit of anger the result would haave been different.
What happened was me and her dancing for the rest of the night and her coming back to my place.
That period of youthful collegiate disenchantment was traditionally referred to as
post childbirth
Well I guess I’m an emotional slut. I like sharing my feelings with women and feeling that connection with them. It is a pretty effective mating strategy although it leaves a lot of collateral damage.
How I met Your Mother has an episode dedicated to “emotional sluts” called “Hooked”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooked_(How_I_Met_Your_Mother)
Lavazza: I just saw the episode where they talk about “graduation goggles”. It’s so true!
“In the end I unintentionally created a system in which she needed to qualify herself to me against this competition. To this day this is the only woman from my past that my fiance actively hates and probably wants to burn in a pit of fire.”
Which is really weird. She should thank her, because without her the odds for you becoming a couple would had been much lower.
@GudEnuf
Sustained by whom? Them or you?
I think Lokland’s story shows how many or most good beta guys end up in relationships with women at similar och slightly higher SMV. Either the woman has had a crush on the guy when her SMV was lower for some reason, and he was less interested, or other circumstances, for a moment, give her the impression that he has a higher SMV than he normally has.
When this happens, but the woman later loses interest, when she understands that she was the “victim” of a misunderstanding, the woman with a similar or slightly higher SMV than him will stay in his mind for a very long time.
@Richard
+1
The saddest thing, to me, about married game is it assumes women aren’t fully grown adults who can overcome their natural urges in pursuit of higher goals but instead need men to feed those urges in dribs and drabs.
Really, if marital bliss depends not on a woman’s ability to not shit test (to pick one example) but on a man learning to recognize and shut down shit tests why get married. You don’t have a partner, you have a child.
Note, I’m talking the idea that this is a constant, not something in times of stress only. People failing to have perfect control when stressed is one thing (although the ability to limit that is a feature of maturity and thus should improve over time). But if it’s a normal, day to day background thing it’s a deal breaker.
@Herb @Aubrey Richard
I don’t know how to quote, but yeah, +1.
Can we get some female input on this one.
Herb. If the idea of married game–or any game outside a bar–is valid, you’re right.
For married game, see David Cunningham, Keepingherhappy.
No doubt about the need for it.
I think that, before I went exclusive, I gathered a bunch of IOIs which, due to other issues, I missed altogether. Didn’t figure it out for twenty years and only then when two of them were more or less confirmed. The reason, IMO, it happened, was that I missed less obvious IOI, or didn’t chase the women in circumstances where that might have been expected.
IOW, at the least, I didn’t look needy, which is a good thing. If there was a pat on the ass, it was verbal and related to a shared objective outside our relationship–which could be characterized as “congenial colleague”. So, if Susan is correct, I was doing what seemed like it. Seemed to work, too.
Sheesh. Depressing.
@SusanW “Are you saying that women have more emotional affairs? I don’t think that can be true…
We do talk about our emotions with one another it’s true – that’s the way we analyze and solve problems. But I don’t see how that is cheating.”
I’m not calling it emotional affair, although emotional affairs are subset of emotional cheating. When a woman is in a relationship with a man, why does she poor out her heart to her girlfriends or her beta orbiters. The woman analyzes her relationship in minute detail for any clues about her relationship. Everyone in her confidence group knows about her boyfriend or husband’s personal issues. Some might even know his penis size.
In my case, I felt my breakup in my first marriage was a decision developed between my ex-wife and her close girlfriend. Actually, my ex told me what has happened. She asked her friend if it was alright to break up with me. She said it was okay. Then boom, the decision was made and I never had a chance to respond. Looking back, I realized that this was payback from her girlfriend, who wasn’t in any relationship and wanted my ex back into her club of single friends.
Women also place enormous attention to hashing things out to anyone who would listen. I felt my ex was an emotional basketcase. She did do her emotional garbage dump on me with “testing” to make sure I actually listened. Of course, I wasn’t supposed to give her solutions because it means I wasn’t empathetic enough. Then again, she might ask me for solutions anyways in a test. The worst thing about the emotional garbage dump was it affected me a lot. Once someone tells someone else about everything that troubled them, it made the relationship seem to be on thin ice, which proved to be true.
Cheating (defintion) is about losing one’s confidence in another.
@Karen ” “Women need to know that emotional intimacy outside of marriage is risky for men.” How so? And how is it any less risky for women?”
Whatever risk the woman bears, she will dump it on the guy, thus the risk to the guy.
I already pointed out “Fatal Attraction”, which happened in real life with the female dentist who pulled out all her ex-boyfriend’s teeth. There are the penis cutters. Recently, a woman tried to rip out her exboyfriend’s testicles.
Other risks are clingy women and stalkers. I had my share of clingy women who just won’t leave me alone.
Typically, men just want the sex. If he gets his lover emotionally attached and he isn’t ready for a relationship, it gets messy.
Herb – cosign. This is exactly the line of thought I’ve been having. It really comes down to how much I want/need a relationship versus how much work I will have to put in.
By work I mean “game” and manipulative crap. I’m completely on board with the ‘work’ I have always assumed was part of a relationship, which for the most part is a dual responsibility, meaning both of us are equally responsible to clean the house, cook, whatever. However, all this “game” stuff is really something *I* have to do specifically to keep her interested, which means it is not an equal distribution. I’m not even totally off the reservation there, but it irks me that she doesn’t know it, wont acknowledge it, and won’t give me some type of credit for doing it.
So, I’m not putting much effort into “gaming” her anymore. I have bigger fish to fry with getting into shape, getting involved in writing/performing music again, finding some way to bring enjoyment into my work life, and generally just making myself happy. Certainly I will do my best to make her a part of it, but for now I’m done trying to focus on “gaming” her, and I’m putting it on what I need to do for myself. That doesn’t mean I will neglect her, treat her badly, or change how I behave towards her. It means I’m done spending so much of my mental energy trying to figure out how to make her happy. I’m going to make me happy, and by proxy she should be happy as well.
@Richard
Geeze, from his bullet points:
Why and how women test men constantly, no matter how good things get, and what to do about it.
Why women need drama in their life, the difference between a normal woman and a “drama queen,” and why a normal woman will be horribly insulted if you call her a “drama queen.”
And people wonder why I’ve already decided this is my last rodeo.
I’d rather spend my time on adults (which apparently women can only be if you’re not romantically involved with them).
Married game shouldn’t be about shit tests or constant vigilance. My husband stresses out about his plants in the yard, not about me or what I do.
He does wear the pants and leads the household. If you ever meet a couple where the woman obviously wears the pants, that is not us. We have a harmonious marriage and don’t do the power struggles.
If a woman starts fights or argues about dumb little things, that probably means she’s immature and has low self-awareness. I used to be that way when I was younger (late teens to early 20s), so it is really common. I actually did try to do some of it when my husband and I were still in the boyfriend/girlfriend stage, but he shut me down quite quickly.
When we first met, my husband said that he didn’t think most girls his age were relationship material. Later he clarified this; in his mind a good woman is like his mother, mature, smart, wise, stable, not prone to emotional outbursts, communicates clearly/honestly/openly, doesn’t play passive aggressive games, and able to manage a household.
Now, his mother is a Boomer and has over 30 years on us, and he never knew her when she was younger, so I had to be way more “advanced” for my age group. When I tried some crap on him, he did not tolerate it at all, and that was the one and only time he walked out on me. I was stunned, and I apologized and never pulled anything like that again.
Though for what it’s worth, it wasn’t over trivial matters but a fight about finances; he likes to spend more than my frugality is comfortable with. But now we talk about it like civilized adults, along with any other subject that might be troublesome.
So… I guess my husband only had to run “game” on me once to get me to behave.
And another thing about that site Richard pointed me to…
He has a smiling picture with his wife and she’s smiling.
He’s telling the entire planet she’s a child and needs drama to be happy and that he has to manage her like her would a child.
And she’s smiling and happy.
OMGWTFBBQ…really, I mean really…does she have any self-respect? Forget the feminists, Jane Austen is spinning in her grave so fast she could generate enough electricity to light London.
@ Karen
“Sometimes I get into melancholy moods and sometimes I get depressed.”
Happens to my wife one week out of every month. It’s not a big deal because I am mentally prepared for it. I do have to co-sign previous commenters who said it is preferable for a man to have sexual intimacy before emotional intimacy. And I also believe the opposite is generally true with respect to women. I’m at the extreme of the continuum when it comes to separating sex from emotional investment. I think the ubiquity of porn makes it less likely that the men of this younger generation will compromise their wants and desires in this regard. I know in my generation most men (at least Betas like me) committed in order to get sex. I am ashamed to say that I “faked it to make it” until about age 30, when I was able to separate my desire for sexual release for an honest appraisal of my wife’s worth as a mate and mother. I don’t think I would see any reason to “fake it” were I younger. I can’t help but come to the conclusion that male and female sexual desires are incompatible with pair-bonding – the occam’s razor of human behavior. There was a brief period when men were committed to the “patriarchy,” which requires a sort of willful blindness (the term “blue pill” hadn’t come into use when I was young). When women said “no mas,” the red pill was the natural result. There is really no dicussion that will resolve or ameliorate this fundamental incongruity. Though I admire Susan Walsh’s willingness to engage the topic, I can’t help but think that even she is beginning to question the purpose of any such discussion.
pvw, I am Asian (just realized my avatar is kind of yellowish… some kind of subconscious thing maybe). I dated non-whites as well, and my first boyfriend was a STEM black guy who was into quantum physics and technology back during DOS days.
Dogsquat, yeah my husband does the pat on the ass and “good girl” thing on me, too. I work hard to meet his approval, and it does increase my attraction to him. And because we’re both giving people that care a lot (both NFs), it’s a very loving dynamic and not filled with dread or nervousness.
Lavazza, the girl seemed like she already had feelings for him, but didn’t show it visibly until that incident. If it hadn’t happened maybe it would have taken more time. Girls don’t randomly get jealous of girls talking to guys they have no attraction for, so I think in Lokland’s case it wasn’t preselection effect but possessiveness effect.
Herb, about the child thing, I agree that being childishly immature as an adult is not cool. But at the same time people do want to let out their “inner child” and have that dynamic with their spouses. Men like to bury their heads in the woman’s bosom like mommy held him, and women like to be protected and disciplined as daddy treated her.
Studies have shown men choose wives who remind them of their mothers, and women (only those who have a good relationship with their fathers) choose husbands who are similar to their fathers. In some ways many of our romantic attractions and relationships harken back to those first love bonds with our primary caretakers. Freud was apparently not entirely nuts when he proposed those theories.
There are stereotypes about mommy/daddy issues for a reason. In my own case I had an absent father but a loving grandfather and two uncles who served as adult male figures. So I didn’t grow up cynical toward all men and was still able to form relationships. I did fear abandonment because of those daddy issues, and I had insecure attachments when I was younger. I dealt with these via introspection and self-reflection, as well as help from others.
Women who grew up and formed an adult, mutually respectful relationship with their fathers probably have an easier time transitioning to such a relationship with their husbands. Whereas women whose father left at a young age are still looking for a father-replacement figure and re-enact that childish behavior. Just a pet theory of mine.
Here’s the article about mate selection vs. parental appearance:
http://www.bakadesuyo.com/how-does-your-parents-appearance-affect-who-y
@Hope
Then the majority of men under 30 are fucked and those being born today are double fucked…we’re rapidly approaching a 50% overall illegitimacy rate. That’s a lot of daughters without fathers to do the early bonding and a lot of boys being taught how to be men by…well, by no one.
Let’s all stay here until we figure everything out.
@Harkat
Nah, I’m going to a retreat this weekend.
Herb, I think the effect can be somewhat mitigated by other male relatives or father figures. Socioeconomic background can also help, as my husband and I both came from divorced families, but both of our mothers were also college educated, I have a college degree, and he has a post-graduate degree.
But yes, the overall picture is not pretty.
He does wear the pants and leads the household. If you ever meet a couple where the woman obviously wears the pants, that is not us.
My husband and I joke that the pants of the relationship are in a drawer somewhere on the room, neither of us wants to win we just want to live in peace. I do try to encourage him to be a bit more of a leader but mostly because if we have a boy he will need a bit of that to deal with the crazy as much as I like to think NAWALT it seems the majority is (I actually do a lot of field research talking to women here and I had found most of the manosphere prototypes than outliers even among my college educated peers) so even if I don’t need leading the boy needs to learn it at home or he will be screwed up big time, YMMV.
@Ana
Can we develop a test and then a broach or something for those women to wear. Want to talk about increasing your MMV, being a certified low maintenance woman would do wonders.
@Jonny
Thanks for explaining what you meant. I’m sorry to say that does happen a great deal among women. Any woman who allows her envious friends to dictate her choices is an absolute fool. I can’t believe how many people take advice from people who haven’t been successful in their own relationships.
Can we develop a test and then a broach or something for those women to wear. Want to talk about increasing your MMV, being a certified low maintenance woman would do wonders.
Heh there was an old sci-fi series pilot were the people wore crystals that according to the color meant that you could safely date them because their genetics matched yours and you could bear forever young people. Crystals sound cooler and shinier :p
@djb
You are incorrect!
To be clear, I think the incongruity is built-in and adaptive. So I don’t think it’s something that can be resolved or mitigated. I do think there’s a place – “vive la difference” – where men and women are in equilibrium. It’s a fulcrum, though, and is easily disturbed. My own interest lies in that balancing point.
I am really happy to have heard Dogsquats advice on how to show attraction while not creating TOO much of an investment. I feel that some of the people commenting here who believe that men should not have emotional investment before sex are the beta guys that have been shut out of sex all together and are now overdosing on PUA game. It’s toxic, especially to the people here. Susan Walsh is interested in creating healthy relationships, not tricking sluts into being girlfriends.
This board is comprised of women, the exception or not, that are representational of the women we want to marry. We should be seeking the women similar to them, rather than seeking women who will be a low investment and quick pleasure. If you’re frustrated with women, then Dogsquat’s approach will allow you to get out of the friend zone quickly and move on while she’s still just a crush.
And really, the approach is about allowing you to lower your emotional investment, while testing the water. At the end of the day, you want to get to know your potential girlfriend before you commit. Just imagine if you duped some slut into being your girlfriend…
If you’re only interested in sex though, and not a healthy relationship, I really don’t know WHY you would even read this blog. I seriously don’t understand some of the posts I read from people who obviously believe in the roissy crap. Especially when most of his following are (I’m guessing) beta guys who want relationships. He does serve a good purpose of giving the red pill though, and that sure is important. But to many people are not taking it with a grain of salt, and proliferating promiscuity among both sexes, something DATA shows to LOWER successful marriages.
@Tom
I will address this one, because you’re right about the relationship stuff.
To get a relationship/marriage you have to get a date.
Let’s say we have the nice guy method we’re all taught and the PUA method.
Nice guy has a 95% of a successful relationship but only a 1% chance of getting a date (which is required to get to the relationship, remember).
PUA has a mere 10% chance of a successful relationship but a 95% chance of getting date.
Odds of a successful relationships for men who aren’t already attracting women:
Nice guy: 0.95%
PUA: 9.5%
For a guy already having a gf, PUA is the wrong choice. For a guy who can’t attract a gold digger with $10,000, the PUA method is much more likely to succeed despite it’s poor odds.
Athol may teach game for the already married, but only the PUAs are teaching guys to get dates. Without dates, no relationship so the PUAs have a corner on the market.
Herb, this is correct, but remember, it has to be with a grain of salt!
And really, it more boils down to confidence. That’s what all good women want. PUA are confidence artists. PUA are also assholes. Women who are attracted to that should be avoided.
That’s where the grain of salt comes in. You just have to become confident in showing your attraction with women. Although, admittedly, it’s a big “just”.
If you hang out on roissy for too long, you start to gain an unhealthy view of women.
It’s toxic, and destroys more attitude than it creates confidence.
@ Jonny
You are aware that these kinds of things happen to women as well? Dealing with a psycho is not limited to men.
I’ve heard plenty of stories of women who were murdered by their possessive/jealous/psycho boyfriends or exes.
I’ve dealt with my fair share of mentally unstable men as well.
Making it seem like men only experience these types of situations is telling only half the story.
@Tom.s
I’m not saying the PUA does work like that, but remember, their core audience is men who are getting nothing but rejection from women. No matter what, if you are getting zero dates you get zero relationship.
Plenty of people are telling guys already in relationships how to function better, but no one but the PUAs are offering to teach how to get a date.
So that’s where those guys go.
You’re right, over time it creates contempt for women and the confidence it creates isn’t that you’re a good and worthwhile person, but that you’re dealing with essentially children you can manipulate because you’re smarter.
It’s not healthy. I don’t read Roissy even though I knew about him long before I knew about the ‘sphere in general (from the Weekly Standard article back in ’09 or ’10).
But for a lot of guys they are the only person offering a method to attract women (and one that does work to some degree) as well as an explanation for all the problems they’ve had other than “you’re a loser” (and most of these guys aren’t losers, just very mis-informed).
@Sassy
Here’s the difference…
About 10 years ago the Boston Phoenix ran radio ads for their personals service which started, “she said she’d love you forever, even after the restraining order”.
I though it was funny and posted on an email list I was on that people should check it out. I got excoriated about how “violence against women and rape weren’t funny” (by the same woman who early did the whole “I didn’t think it was a date, I thought you were being nice” shit).
Go back and read the tag line. It’s not a guy doing it, it’s a guy who’s a victim.
But that can’t be. Guys aren’t victims, they’re always the abuser.
Or try this experiment. Call every battered spouse shelter pretending to be a guy being beat up by his wife/live in gf. See how many can take you in. When they say, “we’re a woman’s shelter” ask about a men’s shelter.
There aren’t any, even though women initiate domestic violence as much as men (they do lose in it more often, I’ll concede).
As a woman you have a huge support structure ready to move heaven and earth to help you.
If you’re a guy you just need to man up and deal and should be flattered.
Sassy6519 “You are aware that these kinds of things happen to women as well? Dealing with a psycho is not limited to men.
Making it seem like men only experience these types of situations is telling only half the story.”
This tells me that it is best for women to limit their emotional investment in men. Isn’t it better for both men and women to be emotional prudes?
@ Herb
I agree with you that the amount of support for victims varies significantly by gender. That wasn’t may point, however.
I was simply stating that it seemed weird to lament the chances of men dealing with a psycho without also acknowledging that women face the same risk.
It’s akin to how I consider it odd whenever men lament being dumped, like it’s solely something that men can experience. It’s like they fail to acknowledge that women are dumped as well, all the time.
Playing the “which gender has it worse” game is tedious and frustrating, for both genders, because neither side seems necessarily keen on admitting that the opposite gender shares many of the same risks that they do.
@ Jonny
In a way, yes.
Getting emotionally wrapped up in a person that you barely know, or who you haven’t thoroughly sussed out, is a fool’s errand.
Men often let their sexual attraction to a woman blind them to any red flags that pop up, while women often let their fantasies of a man being “the one” preemptively blind them to any red flags as well.
For me, I take a detached approach to dating. Not being overly invested in the outcome of a budding relationship is wise. Viewing all men and women through “rose tinted glasses” is the quickest way to ending up with someone who isn’t good for you.
Seems people think men have it harder. What about bringing a guy home to see your sparse apartment and he questions why you don’t get a “real job” so you can live higher on the hog? I’m a (very) small business owner for a reason. I value freedom and money never motivated me, ever. I work because I have to eat. Beyond that my freedom and creativity is my life line. Between being real about my emotions and being happy living a simple but free life, I can’t tell you how many potential mates I’ve lost. People no longer value simplicity and genuineness.
@Sassy
I wasn’t stating it in “guys have it worse” but in a “the risks are higher for me due to lack of support structures when it happens”. Remember, as I harp constantly, risk isn’t just the odds of it happening but the odds times the cost…in most SMP issues where men have it “worse” it’s not on the odds side, but the cost side. I think women need to keep that in mind, that often men don’t have the support women do. It shapes their costs, and as a result, their long term reactions to things in different ways than women.
@Karen
At least he didn’t do it in the Wall Street Journal?
I know women have a ton of issues in the SMP as well (hell, half of the traditions we’ve been dismantling were in part created to “correct” the one biology creates: pregnancy is a female “problem”). I even think a lot of things we’ve done to make things better for woman have made it worse for them overall.
It’s not for nothing that writers as far back as the late 90s were claiming the outcome of the sexual revolution was optimized for 18 year old men (especially charming and attractive 18 year old men).
However, complaining about money grubbing guys to men is probably not one that will go far
@Tom.s
Welcome, I’m right there with you.
I can’t understand it either. Some guys say they benefit from reading Roissy and diluting it by 90%. But I think you’re right – Roissy is telling guys how to get laid, not how to get or maintain a relationship. It seems like a huge number of guys have come to view all women as having terrible character and such a flawed nature that they’re only good for sex. There is one blogger who’s married and has a daughter (!!!!!!) who takes that view.
There used to be more of those guys here, but not so much lately.
If you feel put off by it, you can imagine how the young women feel. :-/
Can we develop a test and then a broach or something for those women to wear.
Want to talk about increasing your MMV, being a certified low maintenance woman
would do wonders.
————————————————————–
I’ll bet these women aren’t hard to spot amongst the sluts
The ratio of George Huguelys to female murderers has got to be close to infinite.
I would guess that 90% of “stalker” complaints made to police departments are about men. I’ve known three college students personally who had to get restraining orders against exes, and I’m aware of the circumstances in each case. These guys were insane, at least temporarily.
No, it’s better to have healthy emotional investment commensurate with physical investment. That’s the definition of a successful relationship.
@Susan
Yes, but what percentage of those are BS.
I have one and I can prove I was over 50 miles away at the time (on air on the radio then at work) but the police didn’t bother including that in their report.
“The ratio of George Huguelys to female murderers has got to be close to infinite.”
This doesn’t tell you it is prudent to have an emotional investment.
” it’s better to have healthy emotional investment commensurate with physical investment. That’s the definition of a successful relationship.”
Success is measured by what you get out of it. Sex is not always equal a relationship especially in today’s hookup culture.
I never thought that anyone having sex becomes an entitlement to have an emotional relationship, but this does harken back to tradition. If we think tradition is a good thing, there should be more pre-sex marriages instead of pre-marital sex.
Men used to talk women into sex by faking love and interest. Now that that is passe, what if the men doesn’t feel it and the woman does? There is no relationship in this situation, healthy or otherwise. It is just sex.
I recall, you’re foreign-born, so your genteel dispostion doesn’t really count for the Standard 21st Century American Girl.
@ Dogsquat
“Very few things i life are as bad as we think they are going to be.”
Brother, did I ever need to hear that.
Sweet, a diagram! I request a Venn diagram for the next post.
Seriously though, one question: can you explain what exactly you mean by “emotional manipulation” in the bottom right corner? Is the girl doing the manipulating in this scenario? Or the guy? I don’t follow.
@ Karen post 62
You’re not wrong to want a man who will help cheer you up when you are down. Everyone gets like that from time to time, and it’s not a big issue unless there’s something medically wrong.
If you’re having repeated trouble with this, I’d say that examining your actions may be helpful. You could be unintentionally running into any of several issues:
– Selecting for boyfriends with low emotional tolerance (charismatic men with options may not be the best for deep emotional relationships)
– Lack of tact in how you display your bad moods (good one, Harkat)
– Not properly allowing yourself to be cheered up once you have communicated your mood to your partner. (focus on helping him show him how to lift you up to his level so you can be happy together)
I don’t know you well enough to know if any of these are a problem in your situation, but if any of them is, don’t feel bad. Once you identify the problem, that’s the first step in fixing it.
Susan “Sustained by whom? Them or you?”
Them. A lot of women think that if you share your emotions with them, you want to date them. So they get disappointed when that doesn’t happen.
Hope (87),
That blog you posted is SO COOL! I’m definitely going to be bookmarking it and I’ll probably be reading through the archives as well. Thank you for sharing!
@GudEnuf
Oh, that makes sense. They probably need to reread He’s Just Not That Into You. If he’s not trying to have sex with you…..
@John Roble
Well, I addressed the post to women so in this case the girl is. She’s pretending to be cool with no-strings, but she’s almost certainly not. Drama is probably coming down the pike, perhaps with some psycho histrionics for effect. Guys do it too, when they pretend they *do* want a relationship to get sex. But I don’t condone women pretending to want casual to snag some high value guy and then call him out as a douchebag when he doesn’t want to become exclusive, or he booty calls her, etc.
Emily, yeah I have that blog on my RSS feed. It’s a daily read, and the Eric guy updates a lot!
Maybe we just take relationships too seriously. I found this funsmart advice for what to do about difficult partners.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nt8zX5udPw&feature=relmfu
@SW I would guess that 90% of “stalker” complaints made to police departments are about men. I’ve known three college students personally who had to get restraining orders against exes, and I’m aware of the circumstances in each case. These guys were insane, at least temporarily.
Given the wealth of resources out there for men who are being abused or stalked combined with myth perpetuated in society that when a women “stalks” someone unless it gets to the extreme Glenn Close – Bunny Boiler stage – she has fallen for you, she’s crazy about you. The man is a major player and a real ladies man, a hunk, a stud – she can’t get enough of you etc. In short women have to get violent or behave illegally before authorities and society takes it seriously. It is getting better but the burden of proof is more on a man who is being stalked to document and prove it. It is an unfortunate double standard.
Men are less likely to report stalking because of these perceptions; and because men are viewed as better able to take care of situations on their own i.e. it is weak to need help or ask for help. Plus if there are very few resources out there to assist men being stalked if a report is filed – what is the point of reporting it. Except in extreme cases reporting stalking changes almost nothing for men.
This is not discounting that the stalker complaints mentioned above; merely pointing out that many “stalking” cases just like many rapes probably go unreported. Women have to do more before they are taken seriously as a stalker; the threshold for being considered a stalker is lower for a man. The laws are written to be balanced but the reality is that it is not applied in that fashion.
@Sweetsue
You make a good point. In fact, my brother’s ex once came to his apartment with an axe after he ended their relationship. They were both in grad school. She literally hacked her way in. When he called 911 and said an ex-gf was breaking in with an axe, they laughed (this was 1985). He said he was really scared. He talked her down after a while, but he could not believe his request for help was ignored. They did not get back together.
Susan, do you remember when the phrase “stab-worthy” was coined on _Seinfeld_? Taking sharp objects to a man who’s just broken up with you — funny!
@Karen & Ceer. I can relate. My normal disposition seems to turn men off so I’ve faked it. I’ve heard “act more feminine” whatever that means. I interpreted it as softening my voice and smiling while speaking. Can you imagine how idiotic it looks to smile while talking about foreign policy in a whispery voice? I’ve also had to censor my topics around men. To be fair I’ve heard my brothers say they often have to censor themselves to when on new dates with women. But what’s the point when if you move into a relationship the real you is going to come out anyway?
Its all so confusing. But yeah, I’m also done with faking it.
@Herb, Richard Aubrey, Harkat re: game means women are like puppies
__________________________________________
Do you guys like good looking women?
I do.
How about a good looking woman who’s a sweetheart, funny, smart, and loyal?
Sign me the fuck up.
Girls like that have influenced me in all kinds of ways. I go to the gym, watch what I eat, push myself at school and in my career, and learn useful skills. I grow my hair out rather than just shaving my head once in awhile. I live in a nice place rather than the Tuff Shed and Port-a-Potty that would be perfectly adequate.
I wouldn’t do half of that bullshit if it weren’t for desirable women. I don’t think I’m less of a man for that.
That’s a girl version of Game, by the way. Different type of stimulus, similar response.
@tvmunson:
Remember your Frank Herbert:
“Fear is the mind-killer.”
Also, ask the infusion nurse if she understands the economics of Spice.
Unloading your emotional problems or your not-yet-boyfriend is a great way to ward off sane guys who don’t want crazy. That’s diferent than sticking around after someone you love reveals serious issues, and that’s a good thing. When I learned of my wife’s (then girlfriend) abuse and other issues I didn’t up and dump her. But it had been many months and she had earned my trust.
Had if she came out with that on week one of two of the relationship I’d seriously be scared off. I imagine that feeling is like when men go all beta on a woman too soon – creepy. Too much intimacy of the wrong type at the wrong time.
Keep your crazy bottled up until later.
@Susan
“Well, I addressed the post to women so in this case the girl is. She’s pretending to be cool with no-strings, but she’s almost certainly not. Drama is probably coming down the pike, perhaps with some psycho histrionics for effect. Guys do it too, when they pretend they *do* want a relationship to get sex. But I don’t condone women pretending to want casual to snag some high value guy and then call him out as a douchebag when he doesn’t want to become exclusive, or he booty calls her, etc.”
Thanks for clarifying. Yep, emotional manipulation (from both guys and girls) means there’s some drama in the very near future, no doubt. But that’s usually ok, because emotion-manipulators tend to attract emotion-manipulators – we get sit on the sidelines and eat popcorn while we watch the emo-ju-jitsu-kung-fu-manipulation battle kick off. Weeee!
Also, noob question: how do I use blockquotes in blog comments? Thanks again.
Hey women put in a lot of effort to attract us too. Ever notice once they get us they let themselves go? Well that’s what they’d always be like if they weren’t trying to attract men.
@Dogsquat
OK, so you’re saying that getting with women is an attractive enough prospect to be worth self-improvement. I agree, but that’s not the point me, Herb and Richard were making. None of us are accusing gamers of being “less of” men.
The point is, it’s hard to take women seriously when they want to be treated like puppies with a slap on the ass and a “good girl”, especially in an LTR. That kind of behavior feels fucking weird to me, and I can’t respect or deeply care about anyone who wants to be treated that way.
Harkat. Exactly right. It’s a disappointing view of women. In fact, in other circumstances, a good many women might object. Even if it were true. Even if they knew it was true.
Oh, yeah. I don’t know if it’s true, although some things I’ve seen can be explained that way. And others not.
It is what it is, but I hope it isn’t that way.
If it is, I’m disappointed.
@Esau
I don’t recall stab worthy, but I take your point. I wonder what the source of the humor is – is it because women are the weaker (but more devious) sex? Larry David is no feminist, so I can’t imagine it’s straight misandry.
@Dogsquat
When I read you, my soul takes batting practice.
Chemo in 3 hours.
@Harkat, Richard
Its fairly normal to want validation even moreso from your spouse.
I enjoy hearing when I’m doing something right (Ohh no’s I’m a beta) and frankly when I do something stellar for her I like when she reciprocates (replace that slap on the ass with a steack and blowjob, now we’re talking).
I fail to realize how wanting things and then being pleased to recieve them makes a person a puppy. I could understand if you claim that what women want are the same things as puppies but thats fine because there women not men they will want different things.
Lokland. Read Susan’s description.
@Dogsquat
“It seems kind of weird, but I’ve found women like and appreciate a reasonable framework to work within.”
“Yes, that’s dominance and leadership. We like it. We like doing what’s necessary to get that pat on the ass. It feels good.”
No reference to, among other things, the value or virtue of the thing being done. Just whatever gets the pat on the ass. A framework. Like the subordinate position in a pack–of two, usually.
I like being validated, but I don’t act so as to get validation. That’s a way of being manipulated.
As the old saying I made up goes, “Virtue is its own reward because there isn’t any other.”
Now, if Susan can think of a different way to explain what she means, there might be a different reaction. Depending on what she means.
.
@ Rosemarie
I personally would like to hear more of what your behavior is like when around men you are attracted to.
My own frustration in the market place is from not being able to show IOI’s. I get all serious because I don’t want to show nervousness, and because I’m more introverted than extroverted. I’m pretty sure this intimidates women away.
Is it safe to say people tell you to become more feminine, because you are too serious and maybe intimidate men before you even get to know them? Would you attribute it to the same reasons as me?
@John Roble
Haha! You might be right about that – Helen Fisher says that high dopamine types are drawn to one another, and I imagine that most emotional manipulators are high dopamine types.
It’s clear that both sexes feel that any kind of emotional investment is extremely risky – that’s why we do see so much emotional prudery. I think there’s only one approach that makes sense, for both sexes. Slow everything way the hell down. Men, do not offer commitment up front. Mete it out slowly only after a woman has proven her worth in every respect. Women, do not offer sex up front. Same deal. That would result in equilibrium. Of course, if you don’t want a relationship, this won’t apply, but that’s exactly what taking it slow does – it allows the other party to realize you don’t want a relationship, and to seek someone who does.
The HTML code is to put the word blockquote in brackets: And of course, insert the / in the second one.
I’ve hired a tech person to audit and improve the blog – redesigning the comments section is at the top of the list.
Harkat – “The point is, it’s hard to take women seriously when they want to be treated like puppies with a slap on the ass and a “good girl”, especially in an LTR.
That kind of behavior feels fucking weird to me, and I can’t respect or deeply care about anyone who wants to be treated that way.”
Yeah I’m the same here. I find it hard to view anyone that wants a smack and a nod for a good job as a mature adult.
Lokland – “I fail to realize how wanting things and then being pleased to recieve them makes a person a puppy. I could understand if you claim that what women want are the same things as puppies but thats fine because there women not men they will want different things.”
That is the rub. It isn’t that women need/expect things in a LTR, it is the things themselves that I take issue with. I can’t help but feel like the need for validation as described (a smack and a “good girl”) just seems so damn juvenile that I can’t believe a grown adult would find that a positive experience. To me it is downright demeaning, and I can promise if she did that to me and meant it as a legitimate “reward”, I’d have a few words to say. Seriously, the smack and comment even gets followed up by puppy-dog eyes and/or a giggle! I find it SO difficult to see that and still view her as a mature adult. It just strikes me as childish and immature.
Richard A. – “No reference to, among other things, the value or virtue of the thing being done. Just whatever gets the pat on the ass. A framework. Like the subordinate position in a pack–of two, usually.
I like being validated, but I don’t act so as to get validation. That’s a way of being manipulated.”
Cosign. It is the fact that the “validation reward” is the motivation for the behavior that bothers me. I have to find ways to motivate myself, and very rarely do I *do* anything simply for the “reward”. If I’m doing something, it is because it needs to be done. Although I do have some interests I pursue on my own that really aren’t necessary. But for me, again, the reward is getting it done. I certainly don’t go to work for a pat on the ass and a “good boy”. Now we can argue that my reward for going to work is a paycheck, and I wouldn’t deny it. However, I see that as a “mature” reward for doing my job. When I set out to write a new song, I do it for the sense of accomplishment it brings, not so someone can tell me what a great song it is. Do I like hearing that? Surely, but I would do it regardless. I do it for me and my own sense of accomplishment.
I guess I’m just not a people pleaser. I’m starting to wonder if that is my disconnect here. I surely love when my SO acknowledges when I do something above and beyond for her, but I don’t expect it. And, I may do things simply to make her happy on occasion, but the reward for me is: She is happy! I don’t need the feedback, but it occurs to me that “people pleasers” maybe do.
Does this make sense? Anyone here that enjoys this type of validation want to chime in? I’m actually pretty damn curious about what motivates someone to want this. Keep in mind, I have to remind myself to tell my children “good job” for getting good grades and whatnot as well. Growing up it was simply expected of me, and I did not get rewarded for doing what was expected. I didn’t need the extra motivation of praise, but my son does. He just doesn’t see the sense of accomplishment as a reward like I did. But, I assumed this was because he was a child, and now I’m wondering if it is a personality thing. Do some people simply require validation for a ‘job well done’ to feel accomplished?
Herb, Lokland, Dogsquat, Richard, Ted and me are on an interesting tangent here. Can we get some female input up in this biatch, so to speak?
Count me in, FWIW, with Harkat, Aubrey and Herb. Treating the woman I’m with as a subordinate, or a pet, or a large child, or a second-class being, or however you want to describe it, feels very wrong and weird to me. I wonder if it has to do with us all being of a certain age? (curious for Escoffier’s opinion here). Back in the 1970′s, any man taking the attitude of “I’ll be in charge here because I’m the one with the penis” — which, if you’re honest, is what’s being proposed here — would be swiftly and certainly condemned as the very face of evil. My, but how times have changed….
Harkat:
Herb, Lokland, Dogsquat, Richard, Ted and me are on an interesting tangent here. Can we get some female input up in this biatch, so to speak?
My reply:
I’ve been lurking since participating earlier in this thread, but I might be able to shed some light from a female perspective.
Yes, men and women who value relationships seek to maintain themselves so that they can find, attract and keep valuable partner, as Dogsquat spoke of (a real cool list, by the way), the reasons why he does all he does in taking care of himself: “How about a good looking woman who’s a sweetheart, funny, smart, and loyal? Sign me the fuck up. Girls like that have influenced me in all kinds of ways.”
However, once the relationship has reached the “signed, sealed and delivered phase,” next comes the most important aspects, as an older long-married female relative once told me “how do we keep this going?” How do we stay together and happy after all these years? She has been married almost 40 years this year.
That comes from constant validation, that neither spouse takes the other for granted. So, that is what I see going on in what Dogquat is describing; he appreciates that she is his “good girl.”
Drawing upon my own situation, I feel personal validation in being “a good wife,” it is true that I don’t need external validation to do what I was raised to be (I posted this earlier in a chat I had with Anacaona and Alias on one of the other posts; on the similarities in our upbringing–women of color from immigrant family backgrounds), but I appreciate knowing Mr. PVW does not take me for granted.
Is it a slap on the butt and a “good girl,” no, that is not his style. It might be something else, ie., giving me a quick hug and kiss while I’m in the kitchen cooking and he is coming in to get a cup of coffee. It very well is that if I ask him for something, whatever it is, including to help me with something or to do something for me, he will do it, no questions asked, because he appreciates me and he likes being able to take care of me.
In any event, it is a matter that in our day-to-day lives, we express our appreciation for each other in all sorts of ways.
I have known of marriages where spouses take each other for granted; they don’t validate each other, they do what they want and don’t seem to care that what they do might affect their spouse. They want what they want, the see things how they see it, and it is the other spouse’s problem that they don’t get it. Anger, sadness and bitterness follows.
Well, I already said in an earlier comment that I like the slap on the ass and the “good girl,” playfully and teasingly done. Whether other people like it or hate it is none of my concern. I am not married to other men. I’m married to my man who is awesome, treats me with respect, and also allows me to let out my inner playful little girl. I am usually a totally serious person, but I have a fun and cute side that only comes out for my husband.
Anyway, it’s not an isolated thing. Everything has to be looked at in a larger context. I wouldn’t tolerate a guy who was only taking and not giving, or who thinks of me as inferior and can cheat on me, abuse me or hurt me. But add some fun and dominance to a man who is good at heart and who considers me his soul mate, and that is just awesome.
I think it’s a fine line we’re arguing about here. Because my ex was really good at ‘validating me’ by looking up to me or acting impressed with me.
It may have made her ‘appear’ like the subordinate, but damn, it felt good for me!
PVW said it right. It helps keep the relationship alive. I know mine had been heading down hill for other reasons. But her validation in me always renewed the spark!
But I see it from the other side of the fine line too. From Herb, Lokland, Dogsquat, Richard, Ted etc.
Acting like a baby basically. Shit tests. I was too much of a feminist to feel comfortable to ‘lay down the law’, and so I allowed her to be a complete princess. And the frustration with dealing with that ultimately ended the relationship.
As the noted gender studies expert, Henry Higgins, once remarked, “Why can’t a woman be more like a man?’
Hope. The slap on the ass, as Susan seemed to describe it, was metaphorical, not literal. IOW, congratulations on doing the right thing. Now, you should always recognize doing the right thing, if only by not remarking on it. If you act as if it’s normal, then that raises the bar of the expected.
“Yeah. You blew up the German tank. That’s your job. Have you done an ammo count?”
Or recognizing accomplishment some other way. Always recognize it in some way.
The point is the Susan’s view of “we” women and her phrasing puts some of us in mind of a puppy wriggling excitedly.
Dominance is another issue that bothers some men. Many of us are willing to do the dominance thing, if we have to. The question is why it’s necessary. Isn’t that demeaning the other party?
I talked to a MSW in family counseling years ago. His view was that, especially with ex-soldiers, and guys with tough physical jobs, or a history of them, there’s a problem. His examples included the idea that the guy’s comfort zone for temperature runs from 65-80 on account of what he’s used to. So when Mama and the kids are arguing over whether 71 or 72 is better, he has no dog in that fight. Says nothing. He’ll be comfortable regardless. Nobody in the family hears him say anything about what he wants. He’s getting it without asking for it, or demanding it. There are other examples–he’ll eat anything so he doesn’t require this or that, or forbid that or this–so nobody hears him ask or demand anything for himself at dinner.
Add in the desire to be a good husband and father and let the rest of the family have their way as much as possible and he doesn’t demand much of anything from them for his own sake. Nobody says “we have to wait to go on vacation because Daddy has a golf tournament”. It would be absurd.
My MSW friend says that way lies total lack of respect for Dad. He said he sometimes thought of suggesting Dad make up something he could demand, just so the family could get used to the idea that Dad was a person or something. He didn’t do it, either because that’s not ethical or the consequences of being found out would be bad, or most guys would find it stupid to have to do.
That’s the point. From the point of view of an ordinary guy, that is stupid, playing dominance over another full human being seems kind of icky. It demeans the other person. It even goes to possibly infantilize. If the SHTF, wouldn’t you want somebody who could operate without being told what to do? Who had the mental habit of taking care of business?
When I was dating, I had a lot more fun in a relationship with women who acted mature and not little-girly and requiring big, strong me to tell them what’s what. The latter was a shivering turn off.
1 2 3 »