394»

Emotional Prudery and Promiscuity

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.

  1. Never get more than one step ahead or behind of the other person emotionally. 
  2. Restrict physical intimacy that does not match the emotional intimacy in the relationship. 
  3. 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. 
  4. 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.

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

    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.”

  • ozymandias

    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).

  • Odds

    “…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?

  • Cooper

    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)

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ 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.

    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.

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

      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.

      +1

  • Herb

    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.

  • http://justpuppiesorlando.wordpress.com/ Anna

    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.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    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.

  • Herb

    @Susan

    I can’t believe you passed up this quote from the article:

    Cindy Chupack, an executive producer and writer for the HBO series Sex and the City, gives us the details of her sexual escapades in The Between Boyfriends Book (2003) but confesses that she wants to be more than “a notch in somebody’s bedpost”; she is looking for a husband.

    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):

    In Lip Service (1997), Kate Fillion recounts how she retroactively decided she was in love with every man she had had sex with, and how the power she got from sex “was the power to cause myself emotional pain.”

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

      @Herb

      I can’t believe you passed up this quote from the article:

      The hamsterwheeling was painful to behold.

  • Jonny

    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.

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

      @Jonny

      However, I will note that women are emotional cheaters. They will talk about their emotions and intimate relationships with anyone who will listen.

      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.

  • pvw

    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.

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

      @PVW

      Thanks :)

      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.

      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.

  • Herb

    @Jonny

    Women need to know that emotional intimacy outside of marriage is risky for men. They can turn into Fatal Attractions.

    The PC term is “bunny boilers”.

  • Abbot

    “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

  • Dogsquat

    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

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

      @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.

  • Abbot

    “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.

  • Iggles

    I’ve had plenty of crushes that went nowhere, and it’s not a big deal because nothing physical ever happened.

    Therein lies the reason I’ve never desired casual. If I want to sleep with someone I probably have feelings for them (not matter how ‘hot’important a guy is I’ve never wanted to sex up a stranger). Not having those feelings returned after getting physical would crush me emotionally!

    In the past when crushes went nowhere, I know it was easier for me to get over it than it would have been in if sex was in the mix.

  • Iggles

    Wow, epic blockquote fail! It’s hard typing a comment on my phone.. :(

  • Cooper

    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.

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

      @Cooper

      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.

      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.

  • Lokland

    ““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.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    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.

  • Abbot

    “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?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    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.

  • Abbot

    “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?

  • Herb

    @Cooper

    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

    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.

  • Herb

    @Hope

    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.

    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.

  • Mike M.

    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?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    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.)

  • Herb

    @Hope

    Does that mean I should just have never told any guy I like him, or that all guys are xyz?

    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:

    Also, not everybody you catch feelings for is going to return feelings. Also, not everybody you catch feelings for is going to return feelings.

    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.

  • Herb

    @Susan

    Still, it wears the women down – they get tired of how well this “feature” is working.

    Sounds a lot like men’s reaction to “every shoot down means you’re one approach closer to a yes”.

  • Abbot

    “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.

  • Herb

    @Odds

    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?

    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.

  • pvw

    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.

  • Abbot

    “true love conquers all”
    .
    Has become the biggest bullshit sales pitch for slut defenders. What an effin tragedy

  • 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.

    @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.

  • pvw

    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!

  • Lokland

    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.

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

      @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?

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

    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

  • Alias

    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”?

  • this is Jen

    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

  • Gisselle

    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..

  • Abbot

    “Should the appropriate term be “the SMV Bubble”?”
    .
    Yes. And we ALL know how bubbles go
    .
    down with a lot of pain. Stay tuned

  • Dogsquat

    @Gisselle

    To put what you said in a pithy way:

    All relationships end in death or abandonment. Every single one.

  • http://jabootu.net/?p=4714 Pip

    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!

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

      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!

      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.

  • Iggles

    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!

    +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.

    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.

    Glad to hear that.

    My boyfriend is an artist and has dated interracially before, so it wasn’t an issue.

    Lokland,

    Damn. You have identified the female equivalent of being a short guy.
    Meh, we do what we must.

    This made me laugh! It’s kinda true :lol:

  • pvw

    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?

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

    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

  • pvw

    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.

  • pvw

    typo:

    Less drama altogether dating non-black men.

  • Ceer

    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.

  • Alias

    “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.

  • Dogsquat

    @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.

  • Dogsquat

    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.

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

      @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.

  • Karen

    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?

  • Ceer

    @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.

  • Karen

    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.

  • Harkat

    @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.

  • Richard Aubrey

    “”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.

    .

  • Lokland

    @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.

  • http://eradica.wordpress.com Firepower

    Rhoads notes that most of his female students who have tried casual sex quickly grow to dislike it.

    That period of youthful collegiate disenchantment was traditionally referred to as

    post childbirth

  • GudEnuf

    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.

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

      @GudEnuf

      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.

      Sustained by whom? Them or you?

  • Lavazza

    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)

  • GudEnuf

    Lavazza: I just saw the episode where they talk about “graduation goggles”. It’s so true!

  • Lavazza

    “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.

  • Lavazza

    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.

  • Herb

    @Richard

    Given your experience and, given you’re a woman, you’re likely right.
    But, jeez, it sounds demeaning.
    Like training a puppy.

    +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.

  • Harkat

    @Herb @Aubrey Richard

    I don’t know how to quote, but yeah, +1.

    Can we get some female input on this one.

  • Richard Aubrey

    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.

  • Jonny

    @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.

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

      @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.

  • Jonny

    @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.

  • Ted D

    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.

  • Herb

    @Richard

    For married game, see David Cunningham, Keepingherhappy.
    No doubt about the need for it.

    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).

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    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. :P

  • Herb

    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.

  • djb

    @ 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.

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

      @djb

      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.

      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.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    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.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    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.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Here’s the article about mate selection vs. parental appearance:

    http://www.bakadesuyo.com/how-does-your-parents-appearance-affect-who-y

  • Herb

    @Hope

    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.

    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.

  • Harkat

    Let’s all stay here until we figure everything out.

  • Herb

    @Harkat

    Let’s all stay here until we figure everything out.

    Nah, I’m going to a retreat this weekend.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    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.

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

    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.

  • Herb

    @Ana

    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.

    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.

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

    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

  • Tom.s

    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.

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

      @Tom.s

      Welcome, I’m right there with you.

      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.

      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. :-/

  • Herb

    @Tom

    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.

    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.

  • Tom.s

    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”.

  • Tom.s

    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.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Jonny

    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.

    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.

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

      I’ve heard plenty of stories of women who were murdered by their possessive/jealous/psycho boyfriends or exes.

      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.

  • Herb

    @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).

  • Herb

    @Sassy

    You are aware that these kinds of things happen to women as well? Dealing with a psycho is not limited to men.

    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.

  • Jonny

    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?

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

      Isn’t it better for both men and women to be emotional prudes?

      No, it’s better to have healthy emotional investment commensurate with physical investment. That’s the definition of a successful relationship.

  • Sassy6519

    @ 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

    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?

    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.

  • Karen

    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.

  • Herb

    @Sassy

    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.

    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.

  • Herb

    @Karen

    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?

    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 ;)

  • this is Jen

    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

  • Herb

    @Susan

    I would guess that 90% of “stalker” complaints made to police departments are about men.

    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.

  • Jonny

    “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.

  • http://eradica.wordpress.com Firepower

    Hope

    So… I guess my husband only had to run “game” on me once to get me to behave.

    I recall, you’re foreign-born, so your genteel dispostion doesn’t really count for the Standard 21st Century American Girl.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @ 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.

  • http://date-masters.com/first-date-advice-for-men/ John Robie

    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.

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

      @John Roble

      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?

      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.

  • Ceer

    @ 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.

  • GudEnuf

    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.

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

      @GudEnuf

      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.

      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…..

  • Emily

    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! :D

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Emily, yeah I have that blog on my RSS feed. It’s a daily read, and the Eric guy updates a lot!

  • Art of Living

    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

  • sweetsue

    @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.

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

      @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.

  • Esau

    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!

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

      @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.

  • Rosemarie

    @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.

  • Dogsquat

    @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.

  • Dogsquat

    @tvmunson:

    Remember your Frank Herbert:

    “Fear is the mind-killer.”

    Also, ask the infusion nurse if she understands the economics of Spice.

  • OffTheCuff

    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.

  • http://date-masters.com/how-to-attract-beautiful-women/ John Robie

    @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.

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

      @John Roble

      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!

      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.

      Also, noob question: how do I use blockquotes in blog comments? Thanks again.

      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.

  • Bud

    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.

  • Harkat

    @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.

  • Richard Aubrey

    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.

  • Richard Aubrey

    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.

  • http://facebook tvmunson

    @Dogsquat

    When I read you, my soul takes batting practice.

    Chemo in 3 hours.

  • Lokland

    @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.

  • Richard Aubrey

    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.
    .

  • Tom.s

    @ 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?

  • Ted D

    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?

  • 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?

  • Esau

    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….

  • pvw

    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.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    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.

  • Tom.s

    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!

  • Tom.s

    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.

  • Richard Aubrey

    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.

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

      Re the talk of women being subordinate, wiggly puppies etc.

      I was speaking figuratively – my husband is not the ass slapping type. Nor does he call me a girl. But I know very well when I’ve pleased him. I know the look in his eye, the grin, the way his posture shifts slightly. He lets me know that he’s pleased. I take pleasure in that pleasing – his thinking “I’m lucky to be married to her” is my reward.

      It works the other way around too, though the structure of the dynamic is a bit different. When he pleases me I express gratitude, and that seems to lead to his doing more of it. Funny how that works!

      My marriage is egalitarian in most respects, but my husband is definitely more dominant. I actually think that part of the spark comes from his having “tamed” such a feisty female. YMMV.

  • Ted D

    pvw – ” 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.”

    I agree here, and I’m not trying to say that giving validation is bad in a relationship, and certainly not saying that taking someone for granted is a good thing. But as you pointed out, your husband shows his appreciation and gives you validation by simply being involved and helpful towards you. I can completely get that. And for that matter, I tell my SO “thank you” for things all the time. But I don’t think it is JUST validation she wants/gets from the tap to the ass thing. She appreciates the thank you’s, but they don’t get the same reaction as the more “playful” stuff.

    I get that she wants/needs this, and I oblige because it makes her happy. But honestly, I can’t help but feel it is demeaning and juvenile. It kinda makes me feel like she is “looking up to me” in a “fatherly” way, and it creeps me the hell out. I want her to respect and love me, but look up to me? I don’t know. There are very few people in the world I “look up” to, and although I feel like I’m a great person, I don’t know that I’m worth that level of admiration.

  • Ted D

    Hope – “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.”

    Sorry if it came across as me picking on you or any woman that wants the smack treatment. I am simply trying to point out how *I* see it.

    Richard A. – I can’t add anything to your last post but I wanted to say I think you are DEAD ON. My take on “dominance” in the family is exactly as you described it. It isn’t that I don’t have desires/wants/needs, its that most of them are met without having to ask. Why take the time and effort to form an opinion and state it if I really don’t care about the outcome? I don’t care where we eat as long as we eat something. I don’t care what store we go to as long as it has what we need to buy. I find it completely tiring to HAVE to make a decision in these cases because it is energy I really don’t need to expend. But, I find that my SO wants me to make these decisions, which makes me wonder if she trusts her own opinion. If she wants to eat at Wendy’s, why does it matter if I do as well? As long as I’m not against it, she gets what she wants and we are both satisfied. It’s like another form of validation…

  • Ted D

    unless she really doesn’t know herself and is asking me, in which case she should just say she doesn’t care where we eat/shop and I would pick something. In most cases it would be whatever popped into my head first though.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    I’ll say this very, very slowwwly.

    Different strokes for different folks.

    What works for me and my husband may or may not work for other couples.

    Technically, we are both dominant and submissive with each other. We have taken turns putting each other in the puppy dog / kitten / little kid position, with tremendous love, care and sweetness. We do what feels right to us, and we feel like the “man in charge” model works for us. It’s sexy for me to feel sexually submissive and for him to feel sexually dominant. It infuses the rest of our relationship in some ways, but not in others. I love him all the same if he comes to me like a little lost puppy. It just doesn’t get me in the mood for sexytime.

    The primal urges are there because we are embodied souls. We recognize these bodies and biological differences are instructive, and we take it to its logical conclusion. I bear our child while he lifts the heavy stuff. I defer to his decisions and do not second-guess them. If another couple wants to do “woman in charge” or “nobody in charge” or “two headed monster,” they can go right ahead. I’m not here to say “our way is the only way.” But why judge only the “man in charge” model as bad, wrong or evil?

    You can call me “childish” or “immature” for being attracted to male leadership and dominance, but I’ve tried the other methods, and they didn’t work. This just works for me. I feel motivated to keep cooking, keep the house clean, keep doting on my man, keep up sexytime, and he loves the feeling of being respected, admired, looked up to and loved.

    If something else works for you, go for it.

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

    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?

    I personally always find this discussions alien. My husband treats me right when I make a mistake he is patient enough to tell me and wait for me to learn from the experience and I do the same. I always remember thanking him from driving me around since I don’t yet and try to make sure he doesn’t have to do it unnecessarily by taking the bus when possible. He does the same for me in other aspects of our lives.
    But I’m pro-marriage and monogamy and as big fan of romance I can deal with the idea that every couple is their one universe and their dynamic shouldn’t be like every other’s or fit certain standards (with very few exceptions like abuse even if one of the partners doesn’t mind undermine love and marriage as institution the same for swinging or poly) as long as they are both happy. So yeah if slap in the ass makes a woman and a man happy then I don’t see the ill on it. Although I do agree that if a man has to do things too far from his comfort zone to keep a woman interested he should find a better match for him not just “suck it up”, YMMV.

  • Sassy6519

    This recent tangent just seems like another example of men wanting women to be attracted to what men deem acceptable or treated the way men deem acceptable. I don’t get it, but whatever.

    I thought the original debate was about why women like to earn a man’s respect/admiration instead of being given it from the get go. I’ll chime in on that aspect.

    A man giving a woman things above and beyond what should be given, in the very beginning of a relationship, is a little off-putting. If a man gives a woman physical or emotional validation that is disproportionate to what she has given, or what the circumstances warrant, it seems like he is putting the cart before the horse.

    A woman begins to wonder to herself, “He seems overly eager to give himself to me when I barely know him. This is the first date, and he is already bending over backwards for me. What have I done to deserve such behavior besides showing up to this date and being a woman? If that’s all it takes to make him give me the world, he must be very desperate or easy to please.”

    I’ve heard countless stories of men giving extravagant gifts or paying for pricey meals on the first few dates with women, only to lament that the woman wasn’t interested later or didn’t reciprocate the gestures. The problem is the men didn’t hold back on these gestures to allow the woman time to qualify herself first. She needs to earn your respect first, just as you should earn hers, before being willing to give her things.

    I’m a firm believer in escalating the things given to each other (gifts, emotions, sex) as either person earns it. Don’t spend a ton of money on the first few dates. Don’t wine and dine her or show up with a huge bouquet of flowers for the first few weeks. Hold off on that for awhile. Allow yourselves the time to suss each other out. Go on cheap dates the first few times so that the investment won’t be huge if things don’t work out. When she proves that she is trustworthy and worth the rewards, give them to her.

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

      @Sassy

      A woman begins to wonder to herself, “He seems overly eager to give himself to me when I barely know him. This is the first date, and he is already bending over backwards for me. What have I done to deserve such behavior besides showing up to this date and being a woman? If that’s all it takes to make him give me the world, he must be very desperate or easy to please.”

      Yes. Also, a woman begins to suspect that in being so easy to please, he’s barely noticing who she is. He wants to fill in that girlfriend blank and her name is as good as any. One young woman recently told me a story like this. She was asked out by a very good-looking guy, but his social skills were very awkward. Conversation was difficult, and he told her up front that he was extremely shy. They went on three dates, and each time conversation got a bit easier. I gave her credit for being open minded, and giving it time. At the end of the third date he informed her that she could be his girlfriend, and that he had never felt this way before. She couldn’t imagine where this came from – they were still covering the basics! She told me that she had the sense he would have put just about anyone into the role on date #3, as he barely knew her at that point. One week later he was in a relationship with a woman he’d met previously but not dated. It’s been about six months and they’re still together, so I guess it worked out. But I honestly can’t imagine why she thought she’d earned a place in his affections. He’s a lot better looking than she is – perhaps that’s the trade she made, IDK.

  • Harkat

    @Esau

    I’m 16, so I’m not sure it’s a question of the times.

    @Hope @Tom.s

    I’ll agree it’s a fine line. A little dominant playfulness, as Hope said, is certainly no problem (I’m no PC feminist) but I dislike the idea of a girl following my breadcrumb-trail of validation and me having to maintain a strict “master” framework.

    If that’s what women crave at their core, I have no interest in knowing them any more than the minimum amount required to get into their pants.

  • Richard Aubrey

    “This recent tangent just seems like another example of men wanting women to be attracted to what men deem acceptable or treated the way men deem acceptable.”

    Not exactly. It’s not about men “wanting” something. It’s about the how Susan phrased the “slap on the ass”. Sounded to me as if we’re training a puppy. Perhaps her phrasing was infelicitous.

    Women are free to do what they want to do. Men are free to have opinions on the subject. Some of us find it offputting to hear that women want some version of being treated that way.
    I briefly dated a woman who would get me talking about one thing or another not particularly involved and then tell me how smart and well-educated I was. Ran into a mutual friend years later and I ventured, tentatively, that “**** was a bit dim, wasn’t she?” “Oh, no. Honors College”. Usually you know somebody’s in Honors College pretty quickly. Hadn’t crossed my mind and I didn’t find out then.
    I didn’t like it at all. Wondered what she saw in me that convinced her I needed that.
    Oof.
    No need to get defensive. There’s no condemnation of anybody’s arrangements here, generally speaking. It’s just that the depiction Susan provided was creepy.

  • Harkat

    @Sassy @Anacaona @Hope

    Don’t get me wrong here. I’m not arguing for automatically having validation as opposed to having to earn it. Guys being over-congratulating and forking out expensive helicopter rides or whatever on a first date is not something I advocate. That’s really just approval-seeking and clinginess from the male side. Approval-seeking and clinginess is something I’m starkly against.

    What I mean is I – and from the looks of it, Ted, Herb and Richard – don’t like is the idea of a relationship having a core structure of the man carefully treating the woman to the right amount of validation, making her crave it desperately. A la Roissy.

    I can’t relate to anyone who would want that experience, and while I won’t judge those women who do, the notion that this is all or most women’s ideal state disturbs me.

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

      @Harkat

      You’re 16? Wow, you’re incredibly articulate and mature for that tender age!

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    The reactions from the men here to the idea that women may always require a certain level of dominance remind me of similar reacitons from women to the idea that men may always require a certain level of attractiveness. (When this comes up, I always remember my best friend R____, who was very upset at the “sexist” priest who told our high school class, “After you’re married, you should stay beautiful for your husbands.” She couldn’t believe that men would be so “shallow.”)

    Having said that, I think the comments from the happily married women in this thread are proof that every marriage is individual and not as two-dimensional as the puppy/trainer imagery suggests.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Broken record time!

    Different people are… different.

    There are men who love strong, independent, and dominant women who would never “look up” to anyone else, and there are men who love soft, vulnerable and submissive women who show nurture, and “look up” with admiration and a twinkle in her eye at the man she loves.

    If you’re the first type of man, cool. No need to diss the second type of woman. I don’t show this side of myself to anybody else in the world except my husband. Only he gets that look from me, the look of total adoration, admiration, love and respect.

    If you don’t feel like you want that kind of look, that’s cool, too. You don’t ever have to worry about me giving it to you. :P

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    This conversation reminds me of the guys who love sport A not being able to understand why other guys would be into sport B.

    Try putting on someone else’s shoes every now and then. It won’t fit, you won’t feel comfortable in them, but those shoes fit that person just fine. :)

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

      I can’t believe we’re arguing about whether females like dominance in males. They do, and that’s nothing new. While I’m personally not a fan of high T, over the top dominance, I have always maintained that women need a baseline level of dominance to feel sexual attraction. It is what it is.

      Sounds like it’s time for our 3 PM dose of the red pill.

  • Cooper

    Well, I’m glad a bunch of people have already commented on the “puppy” treatment.
    When I read “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,”
    I could not believe my eyes.

    I made a forum post earlier this week asking whether “red pill” (aka learning PUA-game, or having natural-game) is all about being sexist.
    For nice guys, (and by nice, I mean guys who value respect, and believe in equality) that type of “dominance and leadership” is called sexism.
    Anyone care to agree?

    …. and that’s why it’s ridiculous for women to complain about the SMP, when they’re, admittedly, attracted to assholes.

    It’s one thing to say there’s a time and place within a relationship for a “pat on the ass,” but it’s to that’s the validation you like, long for?
    To me, liking that type of leadership is like wanting to be on a leash. Something that has obvious negative connotations in terms of respect.

    Women don’t want to be respect from nice guys, they want to earn the validation from guys who don’t respect them – misogynist.
    But, that’s the way they like it – for him to be *their* misogynist.

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

      @Cooper

      Women don’t want to be respect from nice guys, they want to earn the validation from guys who don’t respect them – misogynist.
      But, that’s the way they like it – for him to be *their* misogynist.

      No, you have that wrong. Women want to earn validation from the man they love or are attracted to. Making a woman earn your affection and respect – that is dominance in itself. Putting her on a pedestal and worshipping her is supplication, and women will punish that harshly.

  • Ted D

    Harkat – “What I mean is I – and from the looks of it, Ted, Herb and Richard – don’t like is the idea of a relationship having a core structure of the man carefully treating the woman to the right amount of validation, making her crave it desperately. A la Roissy.”

    yeah, something like that. I’m starting to see that many “game” concepts are really about finding ways to validate my mate, which bothers me. Why does she need my validation at all? I like when she thanks me for doing things, but honestly I would do them anyway because I care. It is the act itself that to me should show her I love and care about her, and the validation for me is that she accepts those acts and reciprocates in kind. And in fact, this is why I get my panties in a bunch about the “work” of gaming her and not getting the credit. If I’m doing all this, and she doesn’t know it or can’t acknowledge it, then to me it has no value in the relationship.

    Hope – I’m not picking on anyone, and I’m sorry if you feel that way about my comments. I will tell you that I indeed do the smack to the ass thing with my SO because it generates a positive result, but I don’t understand why she likes it, and I would desperately like to understand it. I am dedicated to meeting her needs, but I find it very difficult to do so if I don’t understand why she has those needs. I don’t do things on faith, I need a reason, and right now the only reason I have for some things is “because it works”, which drives me crazy. That isn’t a reason, it’s an outcome. It is another way of saying “the ends justifies the means”, which IMO is total crap.

    I asked the question about “people pleasers” because I genuinely wonder if these displays of validation are something people pleasers want/need. If so, then it makes perfect sense that my SO needs them and I do not. She is a pleaser, and generally I don’t care if what I do pleases anyone unless my intent WAS to please someone. Not to say that I don’t please people, but many times it is a side effect, not a motivating factor. If that validation makes her feel like she is meeting my needs, then I’m completely good with doing them. I certainly want her to know that I am pleased, I guess I just don’t understand how she needs that message to be delivered. I mean, I tell her I love her often, but only because I make an effort to remember to tell her. To me, the fact that I come home every night proves I love her. Saying it almost seems pointless, but I know that she needs/wants to hear it. But me not saying it doesn’t mean I love her any less, it means I don’t value saying it out loud since it doesn’t add any real value.

    I’m not looking to vilify anyone’s preferences. I simply want to understand them better.

  • Cooper

    Correction: but it’s another to say that’s the validation

  • Esau

    Hope: Different people are… different.

    Hard to disagree with, but you’re letting yourself off way too easily here. Yes, everyone is different, but you can’t possibly learn enough about everyone you meet to fine-tune how you present yourself to them. Everyone — man, woman, frog, alike — has a default attitude that determines/shapes their presentation before they even get the chance to scope out the situation. More pointedly, often it is the default attitude that will determine whether you even get the chance to gather more information.

    The pointed, general question before the house, then — which you are free to ignore if you want to talk only about yourself — is this: is it evil for a man to adopt the default attitude of “The man should be in charge, for no reason other than that he’s male” in his social interactions with women? Including women that he’s just met and doesn’t know? (hence, “default”).

    Faced honestly (which you are not required to do), it can be a tough choice. If he doesn’t assert sexist dominance then his chances of igniting tingle are greatly reduced; but if he does then he’s philosophically a sexist pig no matter how much attractive lipstick lies on top.

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

      @Esau

      Sexism is the belief that the other sex is inferior. If we don’t place a value judgment on male dominance or female response to it, then it isn’t sexist. The question is about hard-wired and bio sex differences. I don’t believe that it’s sexist to acknowledge them or judge one set of traits superior to the other.

      Misogyny and misandry are a result of judging the other sex as inferior.

  • Ted D

    Cooper – “But, that’s the way they like it – for him to be *their* misogynist.”

    Well that makes a lot of sense based on what I’ve learned since the red pill. Remember, woman don’t like to be “hit on” either, unless it is a guy they find attractive, and then being “hit on” is completely OK. So maybe you’re right. In general women dislike sexiest behavior from men, but they crave it from “their” man.

    And actually, that also explains a lot. In general, it explains why I see a lot of this as hypocritical. If this is true, then women tend to hold men in general to one standard, but them hold their mates to an entirely different set of standards. And by that I mean how they act and behave towards them inside the relationship. They want a “nice” man in public, but a sexiest in the sack.

    So maybe it is the female version of the Madonna/Whore complex?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Harkat, I’m fairly certain that we don’t have a Roissy/Roosh/Rollo Game-style marriage going on or any dark manipulation. He doesn’t carefully measure out his affection, and I’m not like Pavlov’s dogs.

    We’re more like a team in a video game, where (nerd alert) he’s the tank/damage dealer, and I’m the healer/damage dealer. Actually we can both play all the roles, but he prefers some roles, and I prefer other roles. Everybody on the team is necessary and contributes.

    Cooper, OMG! He slapped my butt and doesn’t believe in absolute equality! What a jerk/misogynist/horrible man!

    Absolute equality does not exist. It’s the sort of thing that ignores people’s inherent differences and forcing a shoe that doesn’t fit onto them.

    Chances are, you’re not going to wear the same size shoe as your woman.

    By the way, I slap my husband’s butt, too. He finds it funny when I do it. :P

  • Ted D

    Esau – “Faced honestly (which you are not required to do), it can be a tough choice. If he doesn’t assert sexist dominance then his chances of igniting tingle are greatly reduced; but if he does then he’s philosophically a sexist pig no matter how much attractive lipstick lies on top.

    Thank you for explaining that. This is what I was just trying to get at in my last post when I said a lot of this seems hypocritical. Women say they want “nice, respectful” men, but in private they want a man that sees them as a “woman”, which means in a sexist light.

    So if that is true, why is it OK, but a man that wants a “whore in the sheets but a lady in the streets” is a pig? I see them as the same thing. I’m expected to be respectful and politically correct when in public, but pulling hair and smacking asses in bed. How is that different from me wanting a feminine and demure women in public that rides me like a rented mule in the bedroom?

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Ted
    So if that is true, why is it OK, but a man that wants a “whore in the sheets but a lady in the streets” is a pig?

    I was writing a comment responding to Cooper’s quote about “their misogynist” when I looked up, read that line from you and realized you had already made that point. But I wanted to say it in order to point out that the “dominance” thing (the unfortunate imagery of ass patting aside) doesn’t have to be seen as such a horrible thing.

    I don’t think any woman on this thread has called men pigs for wanting “their whores” (but if I missed a comment, feel free to correct me). It seems to me that female regulars at HUS are very aware of this desire men have and have learned not to vilify it. So that Susan could bring up the female equivalent and suddenly come up with so much resistance is a little surprising. Is it mostly due to the imagery her phrasing conjures up or is the whole concept truly distasteful?

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

      For the record, the ass patting and good girl imagery was Dogsquat’s. I simply responded in kind because I understood the point he was trying to make. He’s already shared that his SO is brilliant and makes six times what he does. I don’t think he treats her like a child. But he is a man with her, professional credentials be damned.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Esau, I’ve gone down this road before. Years ago I stopped believing in the “sexist” charge. If a guy wants to lead because he has the penis, he is free to do so. Likewise I’m free to choose whether or not to follow him depending on his other qualifications.

    I will admit, maleness in itself gives him an edge in my mind. My default mode is indeed to follow a male leader. Maybe that makes me a sexist, too. But I don’t care about the modern feminist way of thought. I grew up on eastern thought, yin vs. yang, and that philosophy runs deep in me.

    There’s an old expression: “know thyself.” I know my inclinations. I like to be a follower, but if the leader is incompetent, in the vacuum of power, and I need to get something done, I’ll step up and lead. I don’t follow idiots, crazies or evil malevolent tyrants. I follow my husband because he is worthy.

    Ted D, can you point out my hypocrisy anywhere in my comment history? I don’t believe I’ve called any guy a “misogynist,” “sexist” or “pig” here even once. I fully advocate being a lady in the streets and a freak in the sheets. I’ve not said anything to contradict this desire in men, and I strive to fulfill it for my husband.

    If other women have done so, that does not invalidate my own position, which has been quite consistent. :P

  • Ted D

    Bellita – ” Is it mostly due to the imagery her phrasing conjures up or is the whole concept truly distasteful?”

    For me there are two issues here:
    1. I am bothered by anyone that requires validation from me to feel “good” about our relationship. Not bothered as in “can’t be bothered to do it”, but bothered as in “why in the hell does she need me to do this? Doesn’t she already know how I feel about her?”
    2. My sense of general fairness trips when I see hypocritical behavior. Again, I agree that no HUS regulars seem to be surprised by the madonna/whore complex, but I’m not dating anyone from HUS (although I must admit I’m slightly envious of several male spouses of regulars here for finding such logical and reasonable women to be with). But no one here can deny with a straight face that my statement above holds true for the general populace. I really wasn’t going in that direction, but was more interested in my first point above.

    “But I wanted to say it in order to point out that the “dominance” thing (the unfortunate imagery of ass patting aside) doesn’t have to be seen as such a horrible thing.”

    I’m not implying dominance is a horrible thing. I’m saying that dominance aside, why would a woman want to be patted on the ass and told she was a “good girl”? Why does she even need that level of approval from her mate at all? I’m not picking on it, I genuinely want to know what need that serves? Because honestly, it strikes me as very similar to a pat on the head and a “good girl” she got from her dad when she brought home straight A’s in school, and it creeps me out. I want to please her as well, but certainly not so I can get her “approval”. I want to please her because I care about her and like to see her happy. the reward is seeing her happy.

    It makes me wonder if she does nice things for me simply to get a pat on the ass, if that makes sense…

  • Harkat

    I don’t want a Madonna/whore, so I’m no hypocrite for disliking this model, personally. I dont find the notion of UNCOVERING TEH FEMINIST LAWYER’S TRUE DESIRES OF BEING BOUND AND FUCKED BY HER DADDY particularly appealing, and distinctly unappealing in the context of an LTR.

    I want a loving girl who acts responsibly and doesn’t want me to be her father figure.

    For the record, I’m not condemning anyone here. To each his own, but I’m concerned that what me and some other guys want is in seriously short supply.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Ted D, if the approval makes her happy, why not make her happy by giving her approval? You don’t care for her approval, but she cares for yours.

    Why does the man and the woman need to do the exact same thing to make each other happy? It’s like saying her boobs make you happy, so you should get boob implants so you can make her happy. Or vice versa… she should grow a penis so she can make you happy the exact same way you make her happy.

    That’s the ridiculous conclusion of absolute equality.

  • Ted D

    Hope – “If other women have done so, that does not invalidate my own position, which has been quite consistent. ”

    I’ve never once claimed you have or were ever hypocritical. In terms of this conversation, I was really hoping you could shed some light on why you enjoy that type of validation. I really wasn’t intending to go down the “nature is bad” road, but I admit I was sucked in.

    If you can explain it, I really would like to know. I understand that to many people, yourself included, it may seem completely futile of me to really want to understand this stuff, but I just don’t operate on being told to simply DO something. I’m completely OK with doing what is necessary, if someone can explain to me WHY it is necessary better than “because it works”.

    And for that matter, if I have ever implied to you or anyone here that their position/opinion was completely invalid because I disagree, then please accept my sincere apologies. I often forget that my standard method of “debate” comes across as very judgmental and alienating. I struggle with it all the time in my personal life. It isn’t intentional, I simply do not present my arguments with emotional considerations in mind. I realize all too well that my opinion of something amounts to nothing in the grand scheme of things. And I certainly don’t want anyone to think I am trying to invalidate their opinions. I’m simply pushing them to defend their opinions, so I can judge for myself just how true they are to their beliefs. If I see someone that has a strong belief in something, I then start to take their opinion seriously. I guess it is a debate shit test of sorts. LOL

  • Ted D

    Hope – “Why does the man and the woman need to do the exact same thing to make each other happy? It’s like saying her boobs make you happy, so you should get boob implants so you can make her happy. Or vice versa… she should grow a penis so she can make you happy the exact same way you make her happy.”

    They absolutely DO NOT need to be exactly the same, and to be honest I imagine a relationship like this would be boring as hell. But I really don’t operate on faith. It really is in my nature to want to know the why of everything, and I really don’t “get over” not knowing why. I can tell you this with no doubt: if I do not understand the why of doing something, I just won’t do it.

    As an example, I got terrible grades in high school, but I aced all my tests. Why was my grade bad you ask? Because I didn’t do my homework? Why you ask? Well, I was getting A’s on my tests without doing my homework, so I didn’t see any logical reason to DO my homework, which of course got me bad grades. However, I didn’t care because the real point of education is to teach, and clearly my A’s proved I learned the material. The grade didn’t prove a damn thing, and I couldn’t care less that they were bad.

    Now I find myself having to deal with the exact same behavior from my son. And, I also am finding myself having to explain, in detail, why that damn grade IS so important. If I had understood why getting an A was so important in HS, I would have done my homework. But, my impression of school was to learn, not PROVE that I learned. See the difference?

  • pvw

    Validation in the marriage, absolutely key and important; each of us enjoys getting and giving it.

    Do I need dominance from him in the form of the playful slap on the butt? I can’t say I need it. I never heard about the notion of “shit tests” until I began reading his blog, yet he has never needed to prove his dominance and masculinity to me; I knew from the start that he had it–masculine competence, and that he knows how to protect his boundaries.

    As for him being the dominant head of the household, we don’t relate to each other that way. We are co-captains; there is no scorecard in the PVW family or tallying of points. We focus more on role specialization because that makes the PVW family team work effectively. In certain instances, and with respect to certain roles, I take the lead, and I talk to him about what I’m doing. In others, he takes the lead, and he tells me what he’s doing. If there is disagreement, it comes down to who has the most persuasive solution/approach. More often, there is little disagreement, because we trust each other’s judgment and sphere of competence.

    So how did it work when we were dating? Esau asked, is it a matter of: “The man should be in charge, for no reason other than that he’s male” in his social interactions with women? Including women that he’s just met and doesn’t know? (hence, “default”).

    I could not have tolerated that, it would have seemed overly domineering and disrespectful of me as an adult.

    So how did that work when we were dating? Quite often, I was the one to come up with ideas of things to do, and I’d get his opinion–he’d say yes or veto, or explain to me his requirements. Then he would make the arrangements about getting us there, ie., driving, paying and so forth. That is the model we still follow even now. We’ve been together long enough, that let’s say I wanted to go see a show, I know what his preference is. I’d tell him about it, order the tickets, and he’d take care of the rest.

    Back to the “slap on the butt,” now here is the funny part, on occasion, he does that type of dominance thing. I don’t mind it; it makes for fun humor because he is not abusive–he is very loving and attentative.

    Just today….I got back from running errands not that long ago, and we were chatting. I asked him whether he had tried something I got him when I went grocery shopping. He said yes, he did, and that I deserved a spanking. I followed up with a joke about it. He then came over and gave me a big hug and a kiss.

  • Dogsquat

    @Richard Aubrey:

    I wrote this comment on Danny’s (Navy Corpsman) blog about military marriage. Danny’s a senior NCO and he advises his first term sailors not to get married for many reasons. I used to do the same thing for my Marines. This goes along with your comment about military guys having a hard time in relationships.

    “Doc, I think young military guys (at least the good ones) are conditioned to be beta as hell.

    I’ve been out for awhile, but I was a grunt Sergeant for many years. An average civilian thinks of a Marine LCpl as some kind of Super-Warrior, but I (and you) know the truth.

    A good grunt Lance Coolie puts his mission first, his buddies second, and himself last. He does what he’s told without complaint, even if it doesn’t make sense to him. He’ll endure incredible hardship without faltering, because that’s his job. He gets a lot of his self-esteem from suffering:

    “Fuck that, Dog! That ain’t shit! This one time, we was up by MSR Sword. It was hot as fuck, and we was almost out of water. The fuckin’ Ell Tee was runnin’ us back and forth, chasin’ some bullshit S-2 fantasy. I din’t get no chow that day on account of Gunny fuckin’ up the head count and Sarn’t P makin’ sure us Team Leaders gave our chows to our guys. Shit was fuuuuucked up, dude! W’unt you know it, I sees Ali Baba talkin’ on a cell phone, all suspicious and shit…right when I get oneathem badass leg cramps. I chased that fucker until I puked blah blah blah…”

    The guy who has it the worst gets the most respect.

    You drop that kid into a marriage with a selfish young woman and he’s going to get his guts ripped out. Not only is he immature in most respects (he’s 18 or 20, after all), but he’s been conditioned to subordinate his ego/desires, put others first, and embrace being miserable.

    What makes him a good Marine at work is exactly the wrong stuff to do in a relationship, especially with an equally immature woman. I’ll bet the young Sailor is exactly the same way, except with more grey paint.”

    I understand much of what you’re saying WRT false vs. real dominance. I went through a similar problem with Game when I first discovered it. This type of dominance is different. It’s the difference between a no-shit assault and reconnaissance. Some of it looks the same (the walking, the sneaking, the bugs and the heat)….but if you have to shoot on a recon mission, you fucked up somewhere.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Ted D, as I recall, your SO is an NF type. In my opinion, approval/validation is more about the NF type than about female nature. There are plenty of women who don’t care to please others (so-called “entitled bitches” in the manosphere — surely you’ve heard of them).

    We NF types have overactive empathy and tend to be seen as “people pleasers” because we can practically read other people’s minds and feelings. I’ve written about it here:

    http://www.rosehope.com/reading-energies/

    Of course, we don’t want to please everybody. We only want to please the ones we care about, and we really, really want to please the one we love.

    My husband craves my approval and validation as much as I crave his. We are both INFJ, so we know to give each other what the other needs, doubly so because we’re able to “read” each other so well.

    I had tremendous difficulty when I was dating an ENTJ because while he had emotional depth, he simply did not care about me and my emotional state in the same way. I intuitively knew we weren’t compatible, despite the fact he was quite dominant, sexually and otherwise, even more so than my husband. But the connection with him always felt “off.”

    I do think it can work between NTs and NFs, but with greater difficulty. OffTheCuff is an NT and his wife is NF. I think he has mentioned that he does the figurative “slap her ass” thing, and he doesn’t care why it works, just that it works. Maybe he’s the one you should be getting pointers from.

  • Dogsquat

    Gents, don’t get wrapped up in the medium – it’s not the message. I’m as likely to hug and kiss my girl as I am to pat her on her very nice bottom.

    By doing so, I am telling her I like her, I approve of her, and I appreciate her. I tell her she’s doing the right things to make me happy. It makes her feel good.

    She does the same for me, just in different ways.

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

      She does the same for me, just in different ways.

      Exactly – in a thriving relationship each party is generously rewarding, appreciating and validating the other. The emphasis is on the giving rather than taking.

      I think Hope’s point is also important – when two people find one another, are compatible and it works, let’s not second guess their gestures of love in a political way. Like every other human behavior, there’s a spectrum.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Ted
    I am bothered by anyone that requires validation from me to feel “good” about our relationship. Not bothered as in “can’t be bothered to do it”, but bothered as in “why in the hell does she need me to do this? Doesn’t she already know how I feel about her?”

    You may be surprised to read that we’re in the same boat. :P I’m not very good at handing out compliments or a lot of things that count as validation. And when I started reading Manosphere blogs (and Helen Andelin’s Fascinating Womanhood, haha), it bothered me that they were all saying that men require more open appreciation and admiration than I normally express. (Heck, Andelin shared a story of a woman who made her children look at every paycheck her husband brought home, reminding them of what a hard worker and good provider he was.) And my reaction was very much like yours: “Doesn’t the fact that I’m with a man tell him all he needs to know? Why the need for compliments/gifts/cuddles/fill-in-the-blank?”

    But it seemed that whenever a woman asked why adult men needed validation, male commenters would cite that as proof that women don’t really understand that men have feelings, too. But isn’t that exactly what we’re talking about here, with the sexes reversed?

    I don’t claim to be able to explain why these things work, but the concept of Love Languages helped me understand then a little better. If your primary Love Language is physical affection and your significant other prefers words of affirmation, then you could spend all day cuddling her in silence and thinking you’ve communicated a lot, but she’d actually be withering inside. (Isn’t one cliche of relationships a wife breaking down and crying, “You don’t love me anymore!” and the exasperated husband saying, “I’m still here, aren’t I?”) Being in a relationship sometimes means learning to speak another Love Language.

    But this probably doesn’t take you further than “Because it works”–and maybe even took you in a circle. :P

  • Ted D

    pvw – “Validation in the marriage, absolutely key and important; each of us enjoys getting and giving it.”

    I get that. I’m just having difficulty internalizing how to go about showing that validation correctly it seems. I derive my validation in an uncommon way, or at least differently than my mate. That isn’t a bad thing, but I can’t wrap my head around it to feel OK simply doing what she needs.

    I also would like to say that the way you describe your marriage is damn close to my ideal.

  • J

    @Richard Aubry re dominance and leadership

    Given your experience and, given you’re a woman, you’re likely right.
    But, jeez, it sounds demeaning. Like training a puppy.

    I’m a woman, and I’m feeling you on this one. I like to see enough of those things from a man to know that he can maneuver in the world, but I don’t want to be dominanted and won’t work for that pat on the ass. My husband is a senior executive at a major corporation. I appreciate the level of social dominance that he exerted to get where he his and provide for us what he does. I’m not interested though in being dominated by him.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    I really believe the thread has been hijacked by a pat on the ass!

  • J

    Whoops, got to the end of thread and see my comment was premature. Sorry, carry on.

  • pvw

    Ted D:

    …I’m just having difficulty internalizing how to go about showing that validation correctly it seems. I derive my validation in an uncommon way, or at least differently than my mate. That isn’t a bad thing, but I can’t wrap my head around it to feel OK simply doing what she needs. I also would like to say that the way you describe your marriage is damn close to my ideal.

    My reply:

    Perhaps as someone suggested, it is the personality difference thing of an NF type as compared to an NT type?

    You might be an INTJ? Fortunately, Mr. PVW and I are both TJ types; I’m an INTJ, he is an ISTJ. We’re less focused on the “feeling”type thing that others might need.

    Thanks for the compliment regarding our marital style!

  • Sassy6519

    I’ll chime in on the tangent instead of the original debate. Here are my two cents.

    I don’t want a man to be the leader of me simply because he has a penis. Any misogynistic attitude is the quickest way for me to never speak to a man again.

    For me, I want a man who can be dominant and submissive, depending on the situation. I admitted in another thread that I am a “wild horse” of sorts. I’m not easily tamed, if it’s even possible for a man to tame me, and I have a very dominant streak within myself. Having said that, there are times when I like being submissive as well. The power dynamic within myself ebbs and flows. Sometimes I want to drive, and other times I want a man to take the wheel.

    If a man wants to pick where we eat sometimes, that’s fine. Sometimes I’ll pick as well. If he wants to slap me on the ass, just for the hell of it, that’s fine. I’ll slap his ass too.

    What I don’t understand is the uproar over what some people like in their relationships. If it works for them, why does it bother anyone else?

  • J

    Heck, Andelin shared a story of a woman who made her children look at every paycheck her husband brought home, reminding them of what a hard worker and good provider he was.

    I’ve never shown my kids a check stub, but I sure show them the bills.

  • Ted D

    Hope – “Ted D, as I recall, your SO is an NF type. In my opinion, approval/validation is more about the NF type than about female nature.”

    You are correct, she turned out to be an ENFJ, which consequently the link Susan posted claimed was a bad match. LOL. I’m getting the impression that the reason for that is exactly this point.

    But, that isn’t a bad thing. I really am OK with it in terms of doing what is necessary as long as it makes sense to me. Its the whole process of “making sense” that becomes my dilemma. I think I will spend some time this weekend reading up on ENFJs. A little bit of “behind the scenes” knowledge goes a long way with me towards making things right in my own mind.

    Belitta – “You may be surprised to read that we’re in the same boat.”

    In that case my condolences. :P

    Truly, getting compliments from people embarrasses me. I’ve learned to hide it for the most part, but giving me a compliment is just about the only way to guaranty my face turns red. And yes, I constantly have to remind myself that other people not only like compliments, but thrive on them. And what makes me feel worse about it is: I can and do remember to give them sometimes. But, if those people knew that I gave them because I remembered they liked them, they would probably be hurt. And it isn’t because I don’t care about them that I sometimes forget to compliment them, it’s that I just don’t see the point.

    I had a conversation with an ex-GF years ago about complimenting her. I made the mistake of explaining to her how I dislike being complimented, and she asked if I meant it when I complimented her about things. I replied that I meant to make her feel good by complimenting her, and she got pissed off because that meant my compliments weren’t “real”. Just because I have to make a conscious decision to give someone a compliment doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate them any more than doing the same about saying “I love you”. But for some reason, most people get pissed off when they realize I have to actually think about doing it to *do* it. Like it’s my fault I don’t walk around all day thinking about saying nice things to people!

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

      @Ted

      You are correct, she turned out to be an ENFJ, which consequently the link Susan posted claimed was a bad match. LOL. I’m getting the impression that the reason for that is exactly this point.

      Mr. HUS is INTJ, I’m ENFJ – supposedly a bad match. Take it with a grain of salt.

  • Ted D

    pvw – “You might be an INTJ? Fortunately, Mr. PVW and I are both TJ types; I’m an INTJ, he is an ISTJ. We’re less focused on the “feeling”type thing that others might need.”

    OH yeah, I’m very strongly INTJ, and my SO is a kinda strong ENFJ. I imagine I would get along splendidly with another NT, but they are rare enough without adding in the male/female component. I get the feeling (meaning I haven’t actually looked) that most women are the F types, and female N’s are just slightly more common than a unicorn. I was glad to see she is at least a J, so she doesn’t mind that I’m a judgmental prick at all.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Bellita, this is how I think of NT vs. NF love languages.

    NT: “Isn’t it obvious?”

    NF: “All of the above love languages please!”

    (I look at the 5 love languages quiz, and the only one I could do without is the gifts one.)

    pvw, if you ask my husband about the dominance thing, his answer would be closer to yours than mine. I see him as way more dominant and in charge than he sees himself. Just my quirk, I suppose.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    MBTI type frequencies among men and women:
    http://www.capt.org/mbti-assessment/estimated-frequencies.htm

    There are slightly more N types among men (28-35%) than among women (25-30%). There are a lot more T types among men (55-67%) than among women (24-35%).

    Fun facts: INFJ is the rarest male type. INTJ/INTP are the rarest female types. Overall, INFJ is the rarest type, because all the INTJ/INTP males make up for its rarity in females. :P

  • Harkat

    @Susan

    Oh, sure, I recognize in my interactions with girls that it’s more intuitive for me to take the lead and generally be the more dominant of the two of us. I’m familiar with the red pill and see its teachings in action daily.

    Still, there’s me leading the way and there’s me managing her. I understand we’re splitting hairs here, but to me, the notion of doling out calculated doses of validation to sustain her subordination to me, and thus, her interest in me, is very unappealing.

    Thanks for the compliment on my articulation BTW. Let me reciprocate by saying this blog is extremely helpful to me.

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

      @Harkat

      but to me, the notion of doling out calculated doses of validation to sustain her subordination to me, and thus, her interest in me, is very unappealing.

      Ah, there’s the problem. Do not calculate! It must be organic, a natural ebb and flow in the relationship. I’ve shared this here before – there are areas where my husband has the final word – especially financial matters. He decides whether we can afford a particular vacation (Cape Cod yes, Kenyan safari no). I tend to have the final word re parenting issues. That doesn’t mean we both don’t make mistakes, but each of us has areas where we defer to the other.

      I’m on record as being a gender equity feminist – I’ve managed to disgust quite a few in the manosphere with my egalitarian marriage. That said, I like thinking of my husband as being strong – maybe stronger than me.

  • pvw

    Hope:

    pvw, if you ask my husband about the dominance thing, his answer would be closer to yours than mine. I see him as way more dominant and in charge than he sees himself. Just my quirk, I suppose.

    My reply:

    It is interesting; it seems to me that a spouse who is aware of his/her status as the “head,” ie., a man who is called upon to undertake the traditional role when the egalitarian ethos (of today) can be in vogue, or the woman who earns more than her spouse in the face of the traditionalist ethos, might tend to soften it in the way you describe.

    That makes sense, it seems to me, because it leaves room for recognition that the absolute submission model tends to act as though one spouse is a child. For me, I tend to think of “mutual submission” as the ideal model. To make a marriage work, each spouse must be willing to submit his or her ego for the better of the other and of the team. It can’t be a one-way street.

  • Cooper

    @Hope
    I thought everyone had gotten that the “pat on the ass, “good girl”” (demonstrating leadership) wasn’t necessarily literal. Because metaphorically, it shows that women LOVE earning validation. And that they value a man who withholds it, or sets the mark high.

    When will you girls realize that the guy giving you that the guy giving you that type of craving, the MOST, is the guy that respects you the LEAST.

    @Susan
    It’s not necessarily pedestaling, it’s a matter of having respect for women. I don’t think a man should have to routinely set up hoops for a women jump through, and reward them with a little treat (of respect) – in order for her to feels she had ‘earned’ him.
    Not only do I find that concept never-ending; cause god-forbid I actually come to respect her then she’ll look for someone else that she hasn’t yet earned respect/validation from. But more importantly I think of the whole thing as sexist. I essentially have to think less of her (or women in general) as a human-being(s) in order to have her(them) want to earn me.

    Do you know why dogs ever-want to seek the validation of their owner? It’s cause they’ve been trained (domesticated) to think that their owners are essentially-important to their survival – more so than themselves.

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

      @Cooper

      I essentially have to think less of her (or women in general) as a human-being(s) in order to have her(them) want to earn me.

      But I have also always required men to earn my respect. As well as friends, colleagues, etc. Respect and affection should never be granted unconditionally to strangers unless they are one’s own newborn children.

  • Kaikou

    I just wanted to say hi to Dogsquat. Your comments are highly attractive and I always look forward to your insights. Your girlfriend is very lucky.

  • Esau

    Susan:“Sexism is the belief that the other sex is inferior. If we don’t place a value judgment on male dominance or female response to it, then it isn’t sexist. The question is about hard-wired and bio sex differences. I don’t believe that it’s sexist to acknowledge them or judge one set of traits superior to the other.”

    Sorry, but I think you’re just spinning here at 3600 rpm, to avoid confronting an uncomfortable truth. But you will have to face it squarely, sooner or later: male dominance is a kind of sexism, period.

    Here’s the simple logical chain:

    1. I defined “male dominance” as the male of any MF pair — friends, lovers, just-mets, colleagues, etc — behaving congruently with the belief, that by default, the male should be in charge, not because of any evidence that he has better judgement or proper authority but simply because he is the male.. You can euphemize or equivocate or embroider around it all you like, but that’s the essence of the thing and I think we should all face it squarely.

    2. For anyone who agrees with or approves of this kind of behavior, if that person is logical and non-insane, then it must follow that their default assumption is that the male of any pair, by default, either gas better judgement or is intrinsically more worthy of having his desires followed. (Nearly everyone in the Mad Men age, for example, probably believed both of these reflexively.)

    3. I can’t speak for your values, but I feel I’m pretty safe in saying that most people would take a statement of “I have better judgement than you and/or am more worthy of deference” as a statement of superiority, and hence inferiority from the other side.

    So, no, there is no escape: male dominance is sexism, and you should stop spinning and just recognize it.

    (On a separate note, I would encourage you to adopt a more productive, and perfectly reasonable, notation, to say that a sexist view is simply any consideration that’s sex-asymmetric, regardless if merit or effect; then it’s easier and more direct to turn one’s attention to whether some particular instance if sexism is good, bad or indifferent.)

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

      @Esau

      OK, have it your way. I want to know, I need to know, that my husband is in charge. If there were a crisis, and he panicked, and asked me, “OMG, what should I do?” I would freak out. I look to him for guidance and leadership. I guess I’m sexist, but make no mistake – I was raised to be feminist. This is biology winning out.

  • Cooper

    @Dosqaut

    We get that the “pat on the ass, “good girl”” was a metaphor for rewarding her with validation.

    It’s the fact women crave it. The guys that will have them ‘crave it’ the most are usually ones who have the least amount of respect for them.
    Lower the inital respect>the higher the bar to meet>the more validated she feels.
    This has women seeking misogynist men. (and it has nice-guys turning jaded, by learning they must be disrespectful to be desirable)
    They want a man who makes them feel the most validated, but that is only going to come from a man who had little respect for the opposite sex in the first place.

    Is no one else pickin up on what I’m laying down?

  • Harkat

    Hope:

    “INTJ/INTP are the rarest female types. ”

    Well, fuck me. I bounce between those two. Is the same type always the best fit?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Cooper, I’m happy to report that my husband respects me quite a lot, and in the right way that I want to be respected.

    Simple example: I’m giving my husband some foot rubs the other day, and he’s loving it. He starts rubbing my foot the same way I do for him, and I get tickled and don’t like it much at all, so he stops even though he thought he was doing a good thing.

    Respect is not just how YOU think someone should be treated. It’s about being responsive to the other person. That person has his or her own thoughts, feelings, needs, beliefs, opinions and preferences. Real respect takes all of that into account, does not force your stuff down someone else’s throat, and does not take a one-size-fits-all approach.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Harkat, I don’t know 100% that the same type should always seek the same type. However, research shows that people like people who are most similar to them:

    http://www.bakadesuyo.com/whats-the-key-to-being-liked-and-being-more-i

    “You’re much more likely to be attracted to, have a happy marriage with or just be friends with someone similar to you. You seek out friends who are similar to you. Similarity only increases marginally post-friendship. When you ask people they say they want a romantic partner that is complementary but in reality they pick someone who is similar. The single strongest predictor of marital well-being is perceived similarity.”

  • Cooper

    It’s not women need to stop seeking validation, cause we all like validation. The issue is placing such a high value on it, so much than low-respect becomes an attraction que.

    If anyone is looking for the person who can validation them THE MOST, then they’re going to find it with someone had THE LEAST amount of respect for them (or their sex) in the first place.
    /Bottomline.

  • pvw

    Cooper:

    They want a man who makes them feel the most validated, but that is only going to come from a man who had little respect for the opposite sex in the first place.

    Is no one else picking up on what I’m laying down?

    My reply:

    Perhaps it is because some of us who are responding here just don’t experience what you are suggesting in our real lives. Our husbands respect and validate us; they have plenty of respect for us as women and wives. So disrespect is not the price we pay form validation; validation comes with lots of respect and affection.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Cooper, as Esau pointed out, “back in the day” everybody thought in “sexist” ways. Does that mean all men back then were jerks and pricks? Probably a percentage of them were, but the vast majority were good guys who loved their women.

    Perhaps society was set up that way for a reason. Perhaps we were foolish to revolt against all of the old ways, because the timeline shows that women are vastly unhappier today than they were when society was more “sexist” and “misgynistic.”

    Today, a lot of men who have those earlier attitudes would be more likely to be the more jerkish type, but not all. Women are attracted to male dominance just as men are attracted to good-looking women. It’s not new.

    Today, a lot of women bought into the idea that men should be attracted to their personalities and career status, so they let themselves get fat and unattractive. A lot of men bought into the idea that women should be attracted to them if they’re nice, supplicating and support total equality between the sexes, when a good man who’s dominant and a bit “sexist” in the bedroom is what women are attracted to in reality.

    It’s not that things were perfect “back in the day.” But you can’t train men to find obese women attractive, and you can’t force women to flock to milquetoast men.

  • djb

    I apologize if I haven’t followed the flow of the conversation, but I wanted to address the whole smack-the-ass discussion. I happen to like smacking my wife’s ass as a kind of affectionate love tap. I suppose women like it, but I don’t think deeply about why. Now some men have a problem with this, and again I think this illustrates the whole talk-past-each-other nature of conversations concerning male and female sexual psychology. I do think the point about clear lines is true, but that applies in management as well as relationships. In other words, its not rooted in differences between male and female sexual psychology. I, for instance, would not be able to overcome infidelity, so I told my wife that up front. She thus knows that if she is to engage in it, she better be a damn good liar (unlikely), or expect the relationship to dissolve. It would hurt me tremendously, but I know myself well enough that I could not get over infidelity, and that its better not to drag out the painful process. As to whether its a good idea for a man to invest prior to physical intimacy, I stand by my previous position. A man should know upfront what he is seeking in a relationship when he meets the right woman. Put off physical intimacy if you are at a place where permanent commitment is possible but don’t have sex until you get a good idea of a woman’s character. When you do have sex, a man should know what he wants out of the relationship first but not yet invest. It is possible that you are wrong about the woman’s character, but if you are invested the emotional cost of a break-up tends to hold bad relationships together past their sell-by date.

  • Ted D

    Cooper – “They want a man who makes them feel the most validated, but that is only going to come from a man who had little respect for the opposite sex in the first place.

    Is no one else picking up on what I’m laying down?”

    I’m feeling you, and I’m coming from the exact same angle.

    pvw – “Our husbands respect and validate us; they have plenty of respect for us as women and wives.”

    I’m asking for a lot here, but is there any way you can describe this for me? Honestly, I cannot figure out HOW to make this work. Probably because of my warped sense of validation, I see what is being described here as demeaning and juvenile towards women, because *I* would feel it was demeaning and juvenile if it was given to me by my SO. I”m not saying I don’t respect my SO. I’m saying I don’t know how to respect her while having to “smack her on the ass” to provide validation. (I’m using “smack her on the ass” metaphorically, to be clear.)

  • Harkat

    Whatever we do, don’t start arguing the morality of our biology now. Because I fear that’s close to happening again.

  • Cooper

    @Hope
    Women are more unhappy now-a-days because of “feminized-men.”

    Feminized-men, as I see it, are men that were brought of my mothers they respected, and were told to respect other women as eqaul too.

    It’s the attraction ques that haven’t changed – women are still looking for that man who’ll make he earn him.
    In todays’ world, the ones left offering that are the ones still acting sexist.
    Hense the whole “nice guys finish last.” We, nice guys, were brought up, or adopted, new-age thinking of eqaulity. And since attraction ques haven’t changed, we are punished, by women, for respecting them.

  • pvw

    Ted D:

    pvw – “Our husbands respect and validate us; they have plenty of respect for us as women and wives.”

    I’m asking for a lot here, but is there any way you can describe this for me? Honestly, I cannot figure out HOW to make this work. Probably because of my warped sense of validation, I see what is being described here as demeaning and juvenile towards women, because *I* would feel it was demeaning and juvenile if it was given to me by my SO. I”m not saying I don’t respect my SO. I’m saying I don’t know how to respect her while having to “smack her on the ass” to provide validation. (I’m using “smack her on the ass” metaphorically, to be clear.)

    My reply:

    I’m sorry to hear that you are struggling. So let’s look at it from a different angle. Why not look at validation as an expression of your respect and appreciation? I think you mentioned that she seems to be the type to want you to make most decisions, which is wearing on you; she seems to need you to make most decisions as proof of your competence and care for her? She feels validated when you do? She wants the extra level of validation beyond the mere “thanks,” and so she seems needy?

    Validation might be that you encourage her to be confident in her own judgments and in your faith in her and that you give her the thanks, of course, and that it is very meaningful to you what she does. Perhaps for an NF woman, that might help? Not demeaning, but just in recognition that any spouse might want/need.

    I think that for Me an Mr. PVW, the validation that comes from that mutual respect and dedication is more than enough. It also comes from the little touches, the message I have from him on a daily basis that he is really glad to be with me and that he appreciates me. Now, he doesn’t go on and on every day giving speeches about how he feels, he doesn’t go on bended knee! But it comes from the affection, regard, caring, consideration I get from him….

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Cooper, so why not drop the useless, dead weight like an obese woman losing her fat rolls? It’s not impossible for you to become more attractive, despite your upbringing.

    You seem like a smart guy, and I think you mentioned you were in STEM. In science, if theory A is falsified, you move on to the next theory. You don’t dwell on it just because it was the model you were taught as a kid. The Sun does not rotate around the Earth, the atom is not the smallest unit, and pesticides are not completely harmless to mammals. Likewise with theories of sexual attraction. The equalist model may be newer than flat Earth, but that doesn’t mean it’s true.

    See, I can imitate an NT when need be. :)

  • Harkat

    Hope, Cooper.

    Now we are getting somewhere interesting. Me and cooper have similar views on this. To me, certain personality traits which may be un-optimal for attracting women are valuable. Is that like a fat woman saying her obesity is actually brilliant and men are wrong for disliking it? In any case, it’s hard to let go of.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Hope

    Cooper, so why not drop the useless, dead weight like an obese woman losing her fat rolls? It’s not impossible for you to become more attractive, despite your upbringing.

    You seem like a smart guy, and I think you mentioned you were in STEM. In science, if theory A is falsified, you move on to the next theory. You don’t dwell on it just because it was the model you were taught as a kid. The Sun does not rotate around the Earth, the atom is not the smallest unit, and pesticides are not completely harmless to mammals. Likewise with theories of sexual attraction. The equalist model may be newer than flat Earth, but that doesn’t mean it’s true.

    Exactly.

    If something isn’t working for you, why keep doing it? You can change or try something else.

    If you find something that works, stick with it.

    If you find something that works, yet refuse to implement it, that’s on you.

    I feel like a lot of men and women take the attitude of “People should accept me the way I am” without putting in any work or trying to be the most attractive that they can be. Instead, they mope around wondering why no one wants them or why they can’t keep someone. It makes me shake my head.

    If you know that there are ways to improve yourself, why not do what needs to be done? Don’t become indignant about what people find attractive.

    Either do what you need to do to become a viable participant in the game or get the heck out of the way.

  • Esau

    Hope: Perhaps we were foolish to revolt against all of the old ways, because the timeline shows that women are vastly unhappier today than they were when society was more “sexist” and “misgynistic.”

    I admire you for being willing to take a firm and relatively unequivocal line that’s directly in opposition to American feminism. If you post that sentiment at a feminist blog, self-identified as a female, and then respond to all the replies (until you’re banned, which you will be), I’ll pay you $16/hour just to be able to watch.

    However, my admiration was quickly quenched again with this:

    A lot of men bought into the idea that women should be attracted to them if they’re nice, supplicating and support total equality between the sexes, when a good man who’s dominant and a bit “sexist” in the bedroom is what women are attracted to in reality.

    It’s not that things were perfect “back in the day.” But you can’t train men to find obese women attractive, and you can’t force women to flock to milquetoast men.

    As they say on the Internets, I see what you did there. I don’t like how you slipped “supplicating” in between “nice” and “support[ing] total equality”; I don’t think “supplicating” is part of the same personality at all, and it’s just nasty for you to imply they come together. Same with the equation, that anything other than sexist and dominant counts as “milquetoast”, that’s a wildly false dichotomy, and highly tendentious. Lastly, “a bit sexist in the bedroom” is a mis-direction, following what I wrote above, which was specifically about the appropriateness/desirability of men acting sexist in day-to-day life, well before getting to the bedroom (and, as a way of getting to the bedroom in the first place).

    I normally think of you as one of the better-grounded writers here, but honestly this whole passage is faulty and offensive.

  • Cooper

    @Hope
    I am attractive. (more so than you’d probably imagine) But I’m also stubborn. Men are animals of principle.

    Just because I learn that a honest approach has yielded me no results does not mean I’ll change my beliefs.
    I am a man of dignity, albeit that has also made me a celibate one as well.

    I’m trying to navigate through today’s SMP with keeping my moral compass intact. I may seem a little frustrated at times, but that’s because I’ve been witness to guys with not half the dignity as me score hoards of women.

    Like someone mentioned above, male dominance is sexism. And it seems in today’s SMP, dignity (as in maintaining respect and equality) is not associated with dominance – hense not behaviorally attractive.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Esau, sorry that my verbiage offended you. I meant no offense. As for the dichotomy, I was responding to the general spirit of the conversation, which for females was Madonna vs. Whore, and archetypes in themselves.

    Cooper, my husband is a good looking guy, who was brought up in the feminist, equalist way to be a nice guy by his mother. She loves him and wants the best for him, and she taught him to never put up with crap, disrespect or bad behavior from women.

    He found game / red pill stuff in college, didn’t use it for casual sex, but he did use it to screen out women he didn’t want. He didn’t suck up to me or tell me that he was going to pursue me right away. He judged me as we got to know each other. He only said “my respect for you went up” after I told him I didn’t like dating, wasn’t into stuff like purses and shoes, and demonstrated that I had some smarts.

    Also, to clarify, my husband does not need to exert some incredible amount of dominance over me, because my own dominance level is quite low. On the other hand, I don’t act like a doormat, and I do push back on my husband if I feel strongly about something. We are quite dignified in public, and nobody who knows us would even suspect that he has some “old-fashioned” values. It isn’t something he thinks about either. He’s just “himself,” which is far better than if he was putting on an act.

  • pvw

    Cooper:

    Just because I learn that a honest approach has yielded me no results does not mean I’ll change my beliefs.
    I am a man of dignity, albeit that has also made me a celibate one as well.

    I’m trying to navigate through today’s SMP with keeping my moral compass intact. I may seem a little frustrated at times, but that’s because I’ve been witness to guys with not half the dignity as me score hoards of women.

    My reply:

    It seems to me that part of the problem here is recognizing that there is a continuum of male dominance, from one side to the other.

    One side being the type spoken of earlier in the show Girls, something akin to “If I f*** you, I’m not sure you can handle it…” That type of dominance sounds indignified and demeaning of women; yet some men are successful at it. If that is what passes for dominance in today’s SMP, I don’t blame you for being pissed off; it is not your style. When I was much younger, I experienced that type of so-called flirtation on occasion, and I did not find it appealing.

    The other side is dominance displayed in a respectful manner, ie., male flirtation akin to what Dogsquat has spoken of on occasion and which Dannyin504 has spoken of in his blog. I don’t get the impression that their type of male dominance is one that leaves them with no options. The husband had a type of dominance similar to theirs when we were dating, the respectful kind, and I found that appealing.

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

      @pvw

      The husband had a type of dominance similar to theirs when we were dating, the respectful kind, and I found that appealing.

      That’s a great point. Dominance can be respectful or crass and rude.

  • Cooper

    @pvw

    Was the way that guy, in Girls, was being dominant meant to seem demeaning?
    Cause she (Marnie?) seemed fairly “wow”‘d. You can’t deny that her reaction made it seem as though he made quite the impression on her. He even, presumably, had her thinking about cheating/leaving her boyfriend, Charlie.

  • Harkat

    I see an opportunity to re-derail the conversation.

    INTP here. Any advice based on anecdotal evidence for looking for a girl?

  • pvw

    Cooper:

    Was the way that guy, in Girls, was being dominant meant to seem demeaning?

    My reply:

    I haven’t seen the show, but I think that one can interpret the interaction in various ways, positive or negative. It opens up room for discussion–a key aspect of good programming. Whether the writer(s)/producer(s) intended the scene as a bit of cultural criticism or not, one can wonder, of course. It can be read by a woman of a certain type of mindset as something negative, as a type of male energy that that is threatening, not respectful. As I mentioned earlier, I’d been the recipient of that type of male attention when I was much younger. I’m a fairly quiet INTJ type, if anything, that sort of male energy was scary and threatening.

  • Emily

    I’m so confused about what we’re actually debating. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought everybody wanted/needed some form of validation.

    I could see my bf doing the pat-on-the-butt thing, but it would probably be done in a cheeky half-joking sort of way. (In fact, I could probably see myself doing the same to him. :P)

  • OffTheCuff

    Hope: “OffTheCuff is an NT and his wife is NF. I think he has mentioned that he does the figurative “slap her ass” thing, and he doesn’t care why it works, just that it works. Maybe he’s the one you should be getting pointers from.”

    I don’t like the term dominance, as much as leadership. Looking back, most of our disagreements (not fights, which to me is yelling or violent) were often due to her wanting me to make a decision or exert more control, and my mind was stuck in the equalist mindset.

    So, now if she shows any sort of dithering about something I make the decision. It’s pretty easy. She wants to be submissive, more than I want to lead, but hey, I will do what’s necessary.

    Then again, I literally slap her ass. Hard. I this it amusing to do it in public, like at a party, and gauge people’s reactions to her giggling. They have this look on their face like they’re expecting her to get mad, and then get all confused when she doesn’t. The more feminist the woman, the better!

  • GudEnuf

    That said, I like thinking of my husband as being strong – maybe stronger than me.

    Strong physically or in what way?

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

      @GudEnuf

      Strong physically or in what way?

      Not so much physically – he’s a string bean, lol. More that he will protect the family. Is that so surprising? Pair-bonding evolved when women recognized the need to select men for stick-around traits – the primary benefits being resources, i.e. food, and protection for her and her offspring. If there were a terrible crisis – like a nuclear winter – I would look to him for guidance. And I’m not exactly a wilting flower – on the spectrum of female dominance, I suspect I’m pretty high.

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

    I don’t think any woman on this thread has called men pigs for wanting “their whores” (but if I missed a comment, feel free to correct me).

    I joke with my husband that I’m a whore with just one client ;)

    Perhaps it is because some of us who are responding here just don’t experience what you are suggesting in our real lives. Our husbands respect and validate us; they have plenty of respect for us as women and wives. So disrespect is not the price we pay form validation; validation comes with lots of respect and affection.

    I’m sure every married woman will probably feel like I do that if my husband wouldn’t had respected me he wouldn’t had marry me.

    Now for some humor
    Hubby sent me this comic: http://xkcd.com/441/ followed by this link: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Baby-Manual-Conception-Haynes-Workshop/dp/1844257592/ref=dp_ob_title_bk Should I worry? ;)

  • Lokland

    @Harkat

    Your a very well spoken young man.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Some decades ago, I got a piece of heavy paper telling me that the then president of the USA “reposed especial confidence in my valor and fidelity” and some other stuff, along with insisting that those subordinate to me had damn’ well better do as I tell them. The Aubreys collect these things, for better or worse.
    So did about four hundred guys a week at Benning, then there was Ft. Sill for artillery, and the ROTC, and West Point….
    I was qualified to push a platoon in Korea if the Norks came south, in Germany if the Russians made a move, or in Southeast Asia.
    So I can dominate, did dominate, took care of business. But it’s not a thing I like to do to anybody short of having a war or something.
    When I chaperoned kids overseas, I would look for people who were trying not to look as if they were looking at us, make eye contact and…presto. No trouble. No purse-snatching, kid-grope, necklace ripping.
    But that’s not a relationship.
    People WANT this dominance stuff? Shudder.

  • Lokland

    @Harkat

    Two things.

    1. You mentioned leading vs. managing a woman.
    You should lead. Your a man that is what you do.
    You should not have to manage your SO. That is ridculous.

    Its not wrong or improper to have your SO looking up to you as a stronger force. (Be her rock type deal.) It is royally fucked up if you need to dose out validation.
    It is not improper for her to want you to be happy with her. The same vice versa.

    2. I am an INTJ as well.
    I would recommend some introspection in determining what type of personality type woman would suit you.

    First is E vs. I.
    Personally I can’t stand loud center of attention girls for more than a few minutes whereas the quiet shy girl captivates me endlessly.
    You have to make that decision for yourself.
    I personally think this is probably the most imortant factor for compatibility.

    My fiance is an INFJ. I find we complement quite well. I tend to be more analytical and logical whereas shes feely and emotional.
    If you choose this route you HAVE TO get in touch with your emotions (she must also learn your thought process). Its not as difficult as it sounds.

    You could also search for another INTJ but I believe those are the rarest types of women.

    Someone else will know more.

    @Ted D

    I’m like you I dislike compliments mostly because I see them as fucking useless. I know when I’m doing a good or bad job I don’t need someone else to tell me. That doesn’t change that some people like the validation of making others happy. I am however a huge fan of constructive criticism.

    —————————————————————————————

    Now.
    Someone explain to me why its wrong for a woman to want her SO to be pleased with her and to acknowledge that?
    I want the exact same thing. I would want a different form of acknowledgement but I would still prefer that acknowledgement.

    What is a good relationship but two people trying to meet both the needs and wants of the other in an attempt to make each other happy. Would it not make logical sense to acknowledge said person is doing a good job so there not stumblin g around in the dark?

    And that was as much blue pill as I can dole out for one day. Off to Roissy.

  • pvw

    Lokland:

    2. I am an INTJ as well.
    I would recommend some introspection in determining what type of personality type woman would suit you.

    First is E vs. I.
    Personally I can’t stand loud center of attention girls for more than a few minutes whereas the quiet shy girl captivates me endlessly.
    You have to make that decision for yourself.
    I personally think this is probably the most imortant factor for compatibility.

    My reply:

    And figure out where/how to meet those type of women that might suit you–the more introverted tyheps. My guess is that in the extremely extroverted environments of bars and so forth, you’re more extroverted “he man” type of male acquaintances/friends are in their element with the “loud center of attention girls” who lap up their type of approach.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Ted D
    Truly, getting compliments from people embarrasses me. I’ve learned to hide it for the most part, but giving me a compliment is just about the only way to guaranty my face turns red. And yes, I constantly have to remind myself that other people not only like compliments, but thrive on them.

    I don’t like receiving compliments, either! Hahahaha! :D

    But strangely, I really, really appreciate feedback. I like to know when I’m doing things properly and when I’m doing them wrong. And when a suggested change seems reasonable, I don’t mind implementing it. So like you, I have a problem explaining the way I think to loved ones who seem to believe every act of love and affection should be completely spontaneous in order to be “real.”

    Just because I have to make a conscious decision to give someone a compliment doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate them any more than doing the same about saying “I love you”.

    I agree! In fact, one could argue that because the action depends on a conscious decision, it actually means more. ;)

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Hope
    Bellita, this is how I think of NT vs. NF love languages.

    NT: “Isn’t it obvious?”

    NF: “All of the above love languages please!”

    Hahahaha!!! I have several NF friends, and THIS EXPLAINS EVERYTHING!

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Cooper
    If anyone is looking for the person who can validation them THE MOST, then they’re going to find it with someone had THE LEAST amount of respect for them (or their sex) in the first place.

    Personally speaking, “validation abilities” are not high on the list of what I expect from a potential mate. That doesn’t mean they can’t enhance a relationship when a man happens to have them.

    But I can still remember how happy it made me whenever I said something witty (without even meaning to) and made my second boyfriend laugh and say, “This is why I love talking to you!” . . . or whenever I cooked something that would make his eyes light up when he tasted it. And these reactions made me want to spend time talking to him and to keep cooking for him. I hadn’t started dating him because he made me feel good, but the fact that he could was a bonus.

    I really think you’re tying yourself up in knots over something that’s hardwired into women but that all the women on this board say they manage to get under control anyway. It’s as if a woman were really upset about a man’s “craving” for an attractive partner and trying to browbeat the men here into accepting that a woman who can be attractive all the time is actually a shallow walking Barbie who puts her appearance before everything else and who will be very likely to cheat on her partner. But we don’t do that because we know that as important as physical appearance is to a man, a man who really loves a woman will stick around even if she is diagnosed with cancer, loses her hair and maybe even has a mastectomy. (Or am I wrong? Are men actually slaves to physical appearance in the way you seem to think women are slaves to emotional validation?)

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Harkat
    To me, certain personality traits which may be un-optimal for attracting women are valuable.

    I believe it was Deti who liked to point out that “attractive” traits for drawing someone and “comfort” traits for keeping him/her are completely separate sets. (I just can’t remember his actual terms.) His point was that everyone needs both, because someone who can only attract but not build comfort will lose a mate, while someone who can only build comfort but not attract won’t even get a mate. And this goes for both men and women.

  • Dogsquat

    Bellita said:

    I really believe the thread has been hijacked by a pat on the ass!

    ________________________________

    To be fair, they are really good pats.

  • Dogsquat

    Cooper, I went back a ways and re-read some of your posts on this thread. I struggled a lot with some of the same stuff, and I know it sucks. It’s frustrating. I hope you don’t give up on it, and I hope you ask/argue/question/ me until you’re sure you understand where I’m coming from – and only then decide to accept or reject these ideas.

    You’re coming smack up against some faulty social conditioning right now, and it’s a cast-iron bitch to overcome. Remember – I’m not necessarily arguing with you – I’m just highlighting where our philosophies diverge.

    Apologies in advance for any redundancy or repetition or covering the same thing.

    Ahem.

    Cooper said:

    “We get that the “pat on the ass, “good girl”” was a metaphor for rewarding her with validation.

    It’s the fact women crave it.
    ________________________________

    Hmm.

    Cooper, women are not so different from men in this regard.

    Napoleon Bonaparte said,”A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon.”

    What is a ribbon? It’s a symbol to other soldiers that an individual soldier has done something – either achieved some martial feat, or survived some noteworthy event. Some “ribbons” feel good to get (most certainly not all – I wish I’d never heard of some I have). The CO gets the whole unit together, then calls you up to the front of the formation. Then, he tells every swingin’ dick there just how badass you are. After the dismissal, your buddies pound you on the back and shake your hand. They let you know they are proud of you, and happy for you. It’s a great feeling – to earn the respect of people you respect in turn.

    Validation, writ large and stripped of all subtlety – that’s all awards and trophies and scholarships and bonuses and medals are.

    Can you see what an intrinsic part of human nature this is? The source of the validation might be different, but the “craving” of it is very human.

    Shit, dude – they even give trophies for eating the most pie faster than anyone else! Fucking PIE, man! Pie should be savored, and anyone with a pie eating trophy is a fucking Philistine and not to be trusted.

  • Dogsquat

    Cooper said:

    “The guys that will have them ‘crave it’ the most are usually ones who have the least amount of respect for them.
    Lower the inital respect>the higher the bar to meet>the more validated she feels.”

    ___________________________________

    There is some kind of fallacy you’re committing here I’m too tired to suss out right now.

    Just remember – a man cannot simply decide a woman should “crave” his validation. He’s got to be/become a man she decides on her own to “crave”. Sometimes that’s a man who wears a goofy hat and spouts canned routines in a bar – and sometimes that means a bazilionaire who runs into burning buildings to save kittens and uses his healing touch to cure malaria.

    The man is in control of who he is, but who she “craves” is decided entirely by the woman. Men don’t get a say in that part.

  • Dogsquat

    Purveyor of High-Quality Oak Casks said:

    “This has women seeking misogynist men. (and it has nice-guys turning jaded, by learning they must be disrespectful to be desirable)
    They want a man who makes them feel the most validated, but that is only going to come from a man who had little respect for the opposite sex in the first place.

    Is no one else pickin up on what I’m laying down?”

    ____________________________________

    I’m not really jiving with you, Daddy-o.

    There are many misconceptions (in my subjective view) in the above quote. One that sticks out to me is the notion of respect. Not everyone rates respect. It’s good practice to be courteous to all, but respect must be earned.

    A person who respects everyone essentially respects no one. Would you offer a retired schoolteacher your seat on a crowded subway? How about a heroin-dealing pedophile who’s healthier than you are?

    I don’t respect some women. I don’t respect some men. Other human beings I respect very much. I treat people accordingly. I desire the respect of some, as well – and work to earn it. I am fortunate to have people in my life who desire my respect as well.

    When a man and a woman desire each others’ respect and are willing to earn it, the seed of real love has a fighting chance to germinate. If attraction and circumstance warrant, a healthy relationship may grow from it.

  • Dogsquat

    Cooper said:

    “When will you girls realize that the guy giving you that the guy giving you that type of craving, the MOST, is the guy that respects you the LEAST. ”
    ________________________________

    Would it surprise you to learn that I’d be happy to work for my girlfriend? Or that I’ve sought her excellent advice (and followed it) several times?

    I don’t waste time on people I don’t respect.

  • Dogsquat

    Cooper said:

    “For nice guys, (and by nice, I mean guys who value respect, and believe in equality) that type of “dominance and leadership” is called sexism.
    Anyone care to agree?”
    __________________________________

    Depends on what you mean by equality.

    Is my SO an autonomous being – capable, intelligent, worthy of my respect?

    Emphatically yes.

    Is she equal to me in every way?

    She weighs about half of what I do (she’s maybe 125, I’m about 240). She’s got more raw intelligence than I do, and a better education. She can’t shoot for shit, and isn’t as good at tough intubations. She’s not as good at people skills, either. She needs a lot more sleep than I do, and has more discipline for routine, repetitive tasks. She’s a lot more trusting of strangers than I am, has never been in a fight, and makes a lot more money. I’ve never lost a game of gin rummy or chess to her. I’ve never beat her at Words With Friends. Little kids like her a lot more, and she’s got a knack for foreign languages that makes me positively verdant.

    What does equality mean in that context?

    Cooper said:

    “Women don’t want to be respect from nice guys, they want to earn the validation from guys who don’t respect them – misogynist.
    But, that’s the way they like it – for him to be *their* misogynist.”
    ______________________________________

    I’m a nice guy – kind to old ladies, sick and hurt people, children, and animals. I’m not a misogynist. I respect my girlfriend a lot – I actually look up to her in some ways, and I’ve learned a lot from her.

    Annnnnd….she likes a pat on the ass and a “Good girl,” whispered right in her ear every once in awhile.

  • Harkat

    We really got somewhere with this thread. FTW.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Dogsquat
    To be fair, they are really good pats.

    I never said they weren’t! ;)

    Napoleon Bonaparte said,”A soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon.”

    Before you explained, do you know what I thought this “bit of colored ribbon” was? The “favor” a medieval lady would tie around the upper arm of the knight she had decided to champion. Even more frivolous and useless than military ribbons, but men have died in jousts for them, too. (We could also argue that jousts are frivolous and useless. They aren’t even real wars.)

  • Dogsquat

    Richard Aubrey said:

    “Some decades ago, I got a piece of heavy paper telling me that the then president of the USA “reposed especial confidence in my valor and fidelity””
    _____________________________________

    Goddamn.

    All I got was a gum wrapper that reposed special trust in the fidelity and ability of…me… and that I had better damn well do what you said. And beat the shit out of anybody who disagreed with you.

    I shoulda gone to college.

    (Just busting your chops a bit, Sir.)

    [Hand Salute]

    “So I can dominate, did dominate, took care of business. But it’s not a thing I like to do to anybody short of having a war or something.”

    It’s not the same thing at all, what we’re talking about.

    You’re thinking of dominance as in imposing your will, both on a bunch of semi-idiots (I can say that because I was one) a few years out of High School, and on a ruthless enemy organized, trained, and equipped to kill you.

    I agree, that shit ain’t fun. It’s less fun in your former boots. I was an Acting Platoon Commander for awhile and it was one of the hardest things I’ve ever done – and I’d been a Sergeant for awhile at this time. I wanted to hug my new Lieutenant when he came aboard. He’s a Captain now, and we still keep in touch. Fuggin’ Good Dude, he is. Ringknocker, too, but from the Academy with a better football team. (Zing!)

    These folks aren’t talking about that. I don’t have the Future Ex-Mrs. Dogsquat stringing daisy chains of Claymores in the trees, and she doesn’t know what a single envelopment is. Poor thing couldn’t even piss off a BTR-60 crew with a TOW-2B. To be fair, she is now extremely proud that she knows where the fuel tanks are on a BMP – we’re working on it.

    She does know that I have likes and dislikes. She knows I have lines that, if crossed, will mean I kick her right off the Dogsquat Express. She knows that I will give her 100% and that I expect the same in return.

    In a way, she’s got all the power. I don’t impose my will unless safety is an issue. She can choose to stay as long as she does a few simple things. Or, she can waltz right off into the sunset.

  • Dogsquat

    @Bellita:

    LOLOLOLOLOL

  • Richard Aubrey

    Dogsquat. They told us at Benning that squad leader was the toughest job in the Army
    “She does know that I have likes and dislikes. She knows I have lines that, if crossed, will mean I kick her right off the Dogsquat Expressy.”

    Well, yeah. Suppose it goes the other way, too. In which case, where’s the dominance, since dominance precludes even-steven? That’s a rhetorical question, btw. Not trying to get into your private life.
    Looking for definitions.

    My Dad said that, if he’d known what being a platoon leader–and occasional company commander, depending on the supply of captains–meant, he’d have refused a commission. Everybody wanted the next higher to show up and take the responsibility, like which squad dies today. He was in the 104th in the ETO, weapons platoon leader. My brother, RIP, was a C130 nav which is a different issue altogether. You don’t have to be dominant–although he was–to cross reference the LORAN or whatever they do.
    Anyway, the point is that dominance needs some kind of definition or we aren’t discussing anything. My military background, or having been a frat grad adviser, or several other things, included dominance. All very well, but why would anybody want to be subject to any conceivable type of dominance?
    Hell, it’s a free country.

  • pvw

    Anacaona:

    I joke with my husband that I’m a whore with just one client.

    My reply:

    Absolutely!

    Did you see the movie Pinero: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3omQ5gs5w4? Talisa Soto and Benjamin Bratt starred. Your comment reminds me of this amazing soliloquy: “I’ll be your whore, papi.” I was not surprised to read that they wound up marrying after making the film together.

  • Abbot

    Doe killers and brick makers

    Emotional bonding, affection, strength of intimacy and deference to men varies between women. The degree of this is significantly a function of her exposure to sex with numerous men. The doe-eyed ga ga feminine sweet nervous girl is gone. She becomes hardened and loses that overt emotional dependence on any one man. A man becomes hardened too and he loses that sexual dependence on any one woman. Its equal, sort of. Do women prefer men who have crushes on them or defer themselves just to get sex? Does a man who seeks a life mate prefer a woman who bonds her body and soul to him; who has retained the ability to focus on him; who really gives him the feeling that she is his woman? If a man meets a hardened woman in May and spends some time with her and then meets the doe in June, will he notice the difference? Of the two types of women, which one would the feminists {all hardened btw] consider to be a roadblock for feminism? The personal is the political. What is their method and strategy to get the doe to become a brick?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    ” Poor thing couldn’t even piss off a BTR-60 crew with a TOW-2B.”

    This is the funniest thing I’ve read all week.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Beta. I suppose I’m dating myself when I refer to an M72 or a 106RR?

  • Dogsquat

    @Richard Aubrey

    “Dogsquat. They told us at Benning that squad leader was the toughest job in the Army”
    ____________________________
    Goddamn. I just read back over this and I am an Infantry Nerd…a Grunt Geek – all the way to my guts.

    Hmm. I don’t know if it’s possible to quantify that. Having been both a Platoon Commander (Acting – nowhere near as qualified or good as a Real Deal Marine Officer) and a Squad Leader, here’s what I noticed:

    Being a Squad Leader is hard for many reasons.

    You don’t get the detachment that comes with larger unit leadership. You’re there with your guys, day-in-day-out. You live with them, sleep next to them, and live in the barracks with them. That means they’re gonna see you fuck up, and they’re gonna see you acting stupid. It means that to be a good one, you’re “on” all the time – even when your unit has the weekend off. The guys are always watching you, every second of the day, and you simply don’t have the space even a 2nd Lt has just to get away and relax. That’s definitely a stress.

    That lack of detachment means you get close to your guys – probably closer than is best for mission accomplishment. It sucks telling one of your best friends to wipe his friend’s blood and hair off the SAW and test fire it. If it works, helping him strip the ammo off his friend’s dead body is necessary, but painful. You just can’t look at these guys as “1 Kilo India Alpha” and continue the mission. I suspect that’s a little easier as a commissioned Officer (not saying it’s ever easy, but you know what I mean).

    You’ve also got to be able to physically impose your will on the guys at times. Good Squad Leaders are loved, but also a little feared by their squads. The smaller, less tough ones work to cultivate fanatical loyalty amongst the tougher Corporals and Fire Team Leaders to compensate. It’s a weird kind of tribal leadership, I guess. The 2nd Lt has a Staff Sergeant and at least a couple of Sergeants who do that for him – if those guys buy into the Lt, the Lt never needs to worry about his orders being carried out. Big “if”, I know – but still – having a long service NCO enforcing your shit is better than counting on a scared, tired, homesick 19 year old to do it.

    Some other things I found challenging about leading a squad was simply controlling everybody. Making sure we didn’t shoot each other on accident or have a few guys get separated and lost is a fucking bitch in urban areas, and only slightly less problematic in jungle/heavy forest. Not all of your maneuver elements will have good (or any) comm, and it sucks.

    Then, you’ve got the simple work that comes with keeping a bunch of guys doing their job – where are we, quantities of beans, bullets, and band-aids, So-and-So’s wife just left him so make extra-sure he’s focused, etc.

    The Lt has all that crap to worry about, too, but he’s got a dedicated staff that helps him out. In a full strength USMC platoon, that will be an 0369 Infantry Platoon Sergeant with a decade or so experience, and a senior Sergeant who’s billeted as the Platoon Guide. The squads are supposed to be led by Sergeants, but it’s rare to have all three led by a Sergeant. Still, even the junior Squad Leader will be a squared-away Corporal.

    I cribbed a little from that to make my life as a Squad Leader easier, usually by stacking my 1st Fire Team with my best (or only, sometimes) Corporal and some senior Marines. Then I’d lean pretty heavily on the 1st Team Leader, expecting his guys to be fairly low-maintenance. That’s got some trade offs, though – leaves you with a weak 3rd Fire Team sometimes.

    Still, by the time you get to this spot, you’ve been a grunt for a few years, and you’ve been in the Fleet awhile. You know how it works, you’ve seen it done in real life – both well and poorly.

    The Poor Bloody Ell-Tee, on the other hand – he’s coming right out of school. Nobody knows him or trusts him. He’s also at the mercy of his subordinates. If I didn’t like/get along with one of my guys, I could trade him off or fire him. Some units I was in wanted our Staff NCOs involved with this practice, and some didn’t care as long as the Marine stayed in the Company somewhere.

    That Ell Tee, though – he’ll get laughed right out of the Company Office if he wants to fire his Platoon Sergeant – especially if he’s still a ButterBar. He’s got way less control than I did in that regard.

    There’s also the sheer volume of information to deal with. I can call in a 9 Line Brief, direct mortars and arty, and I’ve called in gunships and fast movers. Our Lt’s are expected to do all that shit at the same time, while still fighting the platoon. If they make a mistake, somebody dies and it’s their fault. If I made a mistake, the Captain would say,”What the hell was Sgt Dogsquat doing that shit for? He shoulda been leading his goddamned squad! Where. The. Fuck. Is Lt Schmuckatelli? Bring me his incompetent head on a platter!”

    Takes a bit of the pressure off, that does.

    The other thing that’s easier to do as a Squad Leader is gain the respect of your guys. During Phantom Fury, I’d take my turn on being the first guy through the breach/door. I didn’t do it as often as the PFCs, but I did it and the guys respected it.

    If an Lt did that, his guys would think he’s a dangerous cowboy and the CO would directly order him to knock it off. So the only way left for the Lt to earn respect and trust is to be right all the time, commit zero fuck-ups, and make sure his guys win. That is way, way, way harder than kicking a door in, tossing a few frags, and not getting capped by Ali Baba in the process.

    That’s why I always accord Officers the respect most of society gives doctors or executives. Their job is incredibly difficult, in ways normal people can barely understand. Hell, it’s impossible to really, accurately explain what distinguishes a “good” Lt from an “average” one – especially to someone who’s never fired a rifle.

    I do say with great pride that I’ve “broken in” 5 boot Lieutenants. 4 are still alive, and 3 are Captains now. That’s probably the best thing I’ve ever done for the USMC, and getting an email from one of those guys means more to me than all my medals and college money and other bullshit combined.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Dog. Kipling has a poem about that. Can’t recall the name on account of having a glass of wine in me, but the refrain is, “the backbone of the Army is the non-comisssioned man”.
    My father told me why there is an officers’ club. That’s where you get your plausible deniability while the NCOs are performing counseling.
    Montgomery–or maybe it was Slim–said that an officer should have and value commanding a platoon, a battalion, and a division. Easy for him to say. The thing about a platoon, he said, was that you get to know each man better than his mother did. That’s garrison work, as opposed to, say WW I where you’d be lucky to get his name.
    But if you do, and if you take that platoon into contact, you’ll be losing guys who are a cross between brother and son.
    As my father ages, he is reminiscing about the less cheerful stuff.
    My brother was a C130 nav. One of my Dad’s brothers flew B24 in the Pacific. He wasn’t hurt, but a couple of his gunners will killed. He called on their families when he got home and it didn’t go as in the movies.
    My mother had two brothers, one ended up a Marine O5 with five landings, more than his ration, and malaria that bothered him all his life, but no wounds. Her other bro was in the first Coast Guard OCS class, and had a cutter in the North Atlantic. He said that McLean’s “HMS Ulyssies” gets it right. Ran into a shipmate of his/theirs when I was at Valley Forge, guy with some VA issue.
    My Dad’s the only one left, Silver Star and three Purple Hearts. But when I heard them reminiscing, the take away was that God’s noblest work was the American soldier. “They never quit,” my father said more than once. I recall being home on leave one Christmas when my mother got the mail and said, sadly, that another card to one or another of his guys had been returned. I think he’s the only one left in the battalion, too.
    Victor Mature, who claimed not to be an actor and said he had thirty-seven films to prove it, was Chief on my uncle’s cutter. He had a way of dealing with the recalcitrant. Strangely, it was said he demanded a stunt man to open a door on the set.
    My sister is the daughter, husband, niece, sister, cousin, aunt, and soon to be mother of soldiers. There’s got to be a better line of work.
    When my brother was killed, I got off orders and ended up in Air Defense. Among other things, I ran the notification and survivor assistance roster.
    Many years later, I happened to see a notice in the paper that the Lapeer County vets were putting up a Viet Nam memorial. I called the guy in charge and discovered they had contacted nineteen of twenty families, mine being the exception. Figures.
    So I started chasing them around. The brother in law was Navy, but he was retired, so that was no help and we didn’t have the ‘puter stuff we have today.
    Eventually, I found them by calling the funeral home where we’d buried Joseph H. Marshall III, ILT INF, KIA 18FEB70.
    On the way, I discovered two things. Civilians I encountered wondered why I was bothering and veterans said, even if they couldn’t help, “God bless you, brother.” About the nicest thing anybody’s said to me, given the circumstances and the folks involved.
    You go through this stuff and then you hear women want you to be masterful in choosing the restaurant or they think less of you….
    Fortunately, I married the high school valedictorian, Phi Beta Kappa–no I don’t know what on earth she sees in me, but there it is. She doesn’t need that dominance stuff.

  • ginnungagap

    ^ Now that’s perspective.

  • Dogsquat

    Richard Aubrey said:

    “You go through this stuff and then you hear women want you to be masterful in choosing the restaurant or they think less of you….”
    ______________________________

    I just sort of accept it, I guess. It works.

    I wonder if I have less of a problem with it because I learned about this stuff as I was getting my shit together after The Sandbox.

    I’ve said this before on here, but I was a mess back then. I was called up off of Individual Ready Reserve a little after 9/11. While I was over there, I had a medium-rough time, my fiance got pregnant (not my kid – the ex never was good at math) and I got blown up.

    So I was a wreck – body fucked up, mind fucked up, etc. Eventually, I figured stuff out, and got things going again. One thing that helped me a lot was Game. It made sense of what had previously been a very mysterious, painful area in my life. It gave me some control over my outcome.

    I think a lot of guys make the mistake of thinking Game describes more than it actually does. At best, it’ll give you sort of a technician’s understanding of things. Push this button, that happens – if not, try this.

    The technician is not the engineer who built his machine, nor the scientist who discovered the principles behind it. The technician knows how to run the gear, do some simple troubleshooting, and has talked a bit with the scientist and the engineer. That’s it.

    So I can’t tell you definitively why it works, or what it means. I’m just a tech. A pretty good tech, but a tech nonetheless. I’m okay with that. I understand some very good concert violinists can’t build a violin, either.

    The Officers will figure all that shit out anyway, and sooner or later we’ll saddle up and move out. Meantime, I’m gonna get some chow and some sleep, maybe have a few laughs with a really cool chick.

  • http://shanewegner.bandcamp.com Shane Wegner

    There might be some truth to this, but it leads to weirdness if you interpret it literally. Example:
    “We have had lots of meaningful conversations and I caught feelings for you. Therefore, my penis needs to be in you soon or things will be ‘out of balance’ .

    I think it’s helpful to realize that it is possible to lean in either direction, but up to each person to decide how to handle it once they realize it. It can be good practice to dabble in both sides in some cases. Getting stuck on either side for years at a time is where things really get bad.

  • Ted D

    DS – “So I can’t tell you definitively why it works, or what it means. I’m just a tech. A pretty good tech, but a tech nonetheless. I’m okay with that. I understand some very good concert violinists can’t build a violin, either.”

    That is my problem right there. I get the “tech” mentality fully. But in becoming a computer tech, I took the time to learn now the actual circuits are made, what is inside the CPU chip, and the principles behind how a computer works. At 13 years old when I first heard a synthesizer used by Kraftwerk to make music, I scoured libraries and book stores looking for books on analog synthesizers, and by 15 I built several small analog synth circuits to fully understand how they made music. I’ve helped a person build a drummer from scratch.

    I am never satisfied with simply knowing how to operate something. If I care about operating it at all, I want to know exactly what makes it tick. Surely I understand some things better than others, but anything I take the time to learn and practice (as in driving, playing drums, or building PCs) I go full bore on until I feel satisfied that I know enough about how it works to be a competent tech. I never simply learn how from another tech. In fact, techs often get frustrated with me because I ask them why pushing the buttons work, and most of them can only say ” because that is what the button is for.” to me, that is not an educated answer.

  • Ted D

    Lol I helped a drummer build his set from scratch. Although, since I play drums, I guess I built a drummer too. :-p

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    “You go through this stuff and then you hear women want you to be masterful in choosing the restaurant or they think less of you….”

    Almost of my friends came from shit-holes where freedom, or even security, is nothing more than a concept. A couple from Pakistan, some from Eastern Europe, China, India, Sri Lanka. My brother-in-law’s family is straight out of the Balkans. The only one who isn’t a second or first generation immigrant is Jewish, so you can probably guess how his family history played out.

    I am extremely grateful that you guys helped create and preserve a nation where these guys and girls were able to live out their lives safe from psychopaths.

  • Doe

    Fascinating stuff. I am an INTJ, didn’t realize it was so rare. My partner is also an INTJ so no problems there. I asked him how he would feel if I asked him to slap my ass and call me good girl and he said as long as it was playful and not daddy issues-related it was fine. We’re both highly educated, reasonably successful people who respect each other so why would we need to begrudge each other a few ass pats. I am not a people pleaser by nature but I do so love to see that he notices what I do for him. For me, a thank you is a bit too stiff and formal and that’s why I prefer the more teasing stuff. I also think there’s an element of wanting it to be about us, not about the action. “Good girl” is a different kind of praise than “thank you for doing X”. Same argument applies to why the wife wants to hear “I love you” instead of just watching you walk in the door every evening. It’s about her, not about what she does for you.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Dog.
    As Susan would, and probably did, say, “It is what it is.” A lot of things is what they is and I accept that, but that doesn’t preclude being disappointed.
    Doe. The ass slap is metaphorical. What it means is the dominance, masterfulness dynamic, the framework the man sets, that women need. Or, as Susan says, else.

  • Dogsquat

    Ted said:

    “I never simply learn how from another tech. In fact, techs often get frustrated with me because I ask them why pushing the buttons work, and most of them can only say ” because that is what the button is for.” to me, that is not an educated answer.”
    ______________________
    Again, you and I are wired in a similar manner. You work on computers, I work on people.

    It drives me insane when other EMS people insist that 3 doses of sublingual nitroglycerin is the max, for example. They aren’t keeping in mind what nitro actually does – just that you’re supposed to give it for chest pain (unless dude’s rockin’ some Viagra) every 5 minutes until the chest pain is gone or the systolic blood pressure gets below a certain limit.

    Nitro is not pain medicine. It opens up the arteries, allowing more blood to get to the cardiac muscle. The pain goes when the cardiac muscle stops bitching about wanting more blood. Then the heart works better.

    Knowing this means you ought to intuitively consider nitro in many other situations, but sadly, lots of EMS types never do.

    The thing about Game/Red Pill stuff, though, is that it’s in it’s infancy. Computers have been around a long time, and so have cardiologists. There are solid, no-shit FACTS about HAL-9000 and this cold, unfeeling black thing in my chest.

    With most Game/Red Pill stuff, we’re still dealing in hypotheses. There’s some data, some experiments, and maybe even some facts – but not many. Half this stuff is so situational and subjective I can’t imagine how you’d definitively prove some hypotheses, anyway.

    By default, you almost have to assume the incurious technician role. There’s simply no engineer to talk to, and the scientists all disagree on the “Why?” part, anyway.

  • Dogsquat

    Ted and Richard, if you haven’t seen this, take a look.

    http://badgerhut.wordpress.com/2011/01/25/the-five-stages-of-game/

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    I asked my husband this weekend, “Do you think you’re the one who wears the pants in our relationship?” (Asked while rubbing his back and neck.)

    He replied, “Yes, of course I do. In many ways we have a very traditional dynamic.”

    You can twist this up and down all you want and claim he’s a jerk or doesn’t have military experience or whatever, but in the end, it is the traditional family model.

    In fact, it works for similar reasons that militaries and organizations have leaders and hierarchies instead of total egalitarianism.

  • Ted D

    DS – “By default, you almost have to assume the incurious technician role. There’s simply no engineer to talk to, and the scientists all disagree on the “Why?” part, anyway.”

    Man, assume is a four letter word to me. I DO NOT assume anything if I can help it at all. In fact, I like to tell my children to never assume becuase:
    It makes and ASS out of U and ME. ;-)

    I get what you are saying though, and I understand it. But, I’m not willing to experiment with my relationship and/or on my SO.
    If I was going to experiment on people, it would have to be ones I don’t know or care about. Which is why people that know me well, like that I like them. LOL

    But yeah, much of my mental chaos around all this is the fact that there are no concrete facts, there is no tried and true method, and there is no process plan to follow. This is exactly the kind of “work” I avoid like the plague. Of course, the reason I have this problem at all now is I can no longer simply believe that “relationships just happen and work magically”, so mentally I can’t allow myself to ignore the fact that I have nothing to work with here. Prior to the red pill, I naively believed in all that crap, or at least I allowed myself to NOT look at it deeper for fear of what I’d find. Well, I found the mess under the bed and now I have to find some way to make sense of it. I’ve always envied people that truly can function on a leap of faith because it just seems so damned easy for them to jump off the cliff. Of course, those people also tend not to beat themselves up when they miss the target at the bottom, while I would spend the next month telling myself what a dumb ass I was for jumping without figuring out the proper trajectory to hit the target…

    In short, this is all “touchy/feely” stuff, and I don’t do emotions if/when I can help it. I can’t “feel” my way through this, because I don’t feel my way through anything. In fact, it is odd if/when I actually acknowledge that “doing” something makes me feel any particular way at all.

    I’ve seen that link before, but for the fun of it here is MY take:
    1. Denial – Yeah, that one is pretty spot on.
    2. Anger – Ditto
    3. Bargaining – Here is where I start to diverge/choke/get stuck. At this point we are talking about “putting the plan” into action. Since I don’t have a plan, and there isn’t enough real data to make one, I am sitting a bit in limbo on actual “game” tactics short of a few very small things I am OK with, which are basically just different ways of stating my intentions and whatnot. I get that, because frankly I am not a great communicator, especially to people that expect some type of “feeling” to be passed from myself to them.
    4. Depression – Yep, I’ve been in and out of this phase for months as well, probably because I’m stuck at 3.
    5. Acceptance – I’m totally willing to accept that my old “methodology” is totally worthless, but I can’t accept this new frame until I can logically decide it is correct, which is damn difficult without any real data. Too many variables unaccounted for, to much left to interpretation. I’m not looking to turn myself into a life-long con artist, so unless *I* believe it (which means I have to prove it to myself) the best I can do is the “fake it” part.

    Truthfully this is why I’ve started to just stop focusing on “game” and instead am putting the effort into improving myself. There is plenty of info on getting into better shape, and getting back to writing and making music has gone a long way toward making me feel more comfortable in my own skin. I get why some guys are all over game. Plenty of people go for get rich schemes too, and I bet some of them actually get rich doing it. But, that doesn’t make it a good idea, and certainly doesn’t mean *I* will get rich the same way. In fact, knowing myself, I would be willing to bet that those methods would not work for me at all.

    And thanks for the nitro lesson. I tend to enjoy the medical discussions I have with my SO because like IT, medicine is based in a lot of data and process, so I can relate on some level. If it wasn’t for the gross factor, I might have done well in medicine instead of IT. But, when working on PCs, the only blood I encounter is my own, and I like it that way.

    (for those of you that do not regularly build PCs, I found that many times a small blood sacrifice is necessary to make the machine function. The need for one usually increases as my patience trying to get a PC to work drops. It is my price for losing my intellectual detachment and allowing myself to get frustrated. LOL)

  • Richard Aubrey

    Hope. Are you referring to organizational efficiency or to the emotional need for dominance Susan says is common in women?

  • Dogsquat

    Ted said:

    But yeah, much of my mental chaos around all this is the fact that there are no concrete facts, there is no tried and true method, and there is no process plan to follow. This is exactly the kind of “work” I avoid like the plague.
    __________________________

    You’re in a tough spot, no doubt. I started thinking about this stuff when single, and sort of “experimented” with it in a few different relationships.

    I do recommend some dedicated people watching and eavesdropping, though. Go sit on a bench in a mall for an hour every week or so, and discretely watch and listen to how couples interact. The grocery store kicks ass for this, too. I suspect you’ll notice many things you’ve never picked up on before.

    Might be some expectation bias, but still….

    Ted said:

    “Truthfully this is why I’ve started to just stop focusing on “game” and instead am putting the effort into improving myself.”
    __________________________

    Steel on Target

    I think for what you and I are interested in that this is about 98% of it. Why mimic confidence when you can just get good at shit? Why ape scarcity when you’ve got a lot going on?

    Honestly, I barely ever pull Game stuff on my SO. I guess I naturally like joking around and teasing, but doing stuff like disappearing for hours with no explanation? Not my style at all.

    I will admit to being fairly calculating and tactical at first, being mindful of some concepts I’ve learned (couple three shit tests at the beginning especially), and paying very, very close attention to her without showing my cards, but I don’t think my outward behavior changed too much. I’m still the same dingdong I’ve been for years, just with a much better sense of timing.

    It’s funny – I’ve had a lot more spare time recently and I’ve spent more time here, and I notice I get a little hypervigilant about it in real life if I’m not careful.

    Again, I my SO and I are in the same (very broad) social circle, and I doubt this would play out the same in a bar scene or something.

    Ted said:

    5. Acceptance – I’m totally willing to accept that my old “methodology” is totally worthless, but I can’t accept this new frame until I can logically decide it is correct, which is damn difficult without any real data. Too many variables unaccounted for, to much left to interpretation. I’m not looking to turn myself into a life-long con artist, so unless *I* believe it (which means I have to prove it to myself) the best I can do is the “fake it” part.
    ___________________________________

    I know very little about computers so this analogy might BSOD, but:

    Maybe you ought to think of Game and Red Pill like this:

    You know in MS Windows how you open up the Resource Monitor and can see stuff like CPU usage and network utilization? You can watch how different processes effect your machine, and figure out what’s detracting from it’s performance.

    Think of all this stuff you’re learning as having a few processes you’ve never seen before appear. Maybe you’re not an expert on spoolsv.exe (whatever the hell that is) but now you can at least click on it and see if the graphs get all wiggy.

    If there’s an issue and all your regular troubleshoting has failed, you can look at the list of previously hidden processes and start figuring them out. Before, you never even knew they were there.

    Your Game plan could be 1)start kicking ass on yourself, and 2)just keep an eye on her. Enjoy! It ain’t broke, don’t mess with it – your stakes are too high to be meddling without cause. If things start running like crap, hop on Google and see if anybody’s dealt with that specific issue before.

    But I’ll make you a bet:

    You start creating more things you’re proud of and building self esteem in other ways, she will take care of all that stuff for you.

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

      @Dogsquat

      It’s funny – I’ve had a lot more spare time recently and I’ve spent more time here, and I notice I get a little hypervigilant about it in real life if I’m not careful.

      I totally get this – the heightened awareness effect. I have always wondered how guys square some of the really stark red pill stuff, with real life. In fact, I don’t understand how a man can read Rollo and still have a relationship. If HUS leads to hypervigilance, some Game blogs must lead to paranoia.

  • Dogsquat

    Hope said:

    “You can twist this up and down all you want and claim he’s a jerk or doesn’t have military experience or whatever, but in the end, it is the traditional family model.”
    ____________________________

    Just to be clear:

    I don’t look down on people with no military experience. Honestly, there are so many idiots in the military that being a life-long civilian is often a plus in my eyes.

    I just did it for so long and never talk about it in the real world that I probably blab too much here.

    I might laugh at a guy who plays a lot of FPS games telling me I was a newb for “camping”, but, when it comes down to it – when I was in uniform, he was my the boss of my bosses, and paid my salary to boot.

    And Hope, if you ever feel like I’m looking down on your husband for having a good relationship, post some military divorce rates and tell me to stuff it. Or ask me where my fiance went.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Richard Aubrey, I’m hesitant to say anything here, lest I set off another bomb. :P But I will try to elaborate/elucidate.

    There are movies like Gladiator, Braveheart, 300 and Spartacus that appeal to men’s desire to see leadership, masculinity, courage, valor, strength, etc. It’s not purely about strategy and efficiency, but also about cohesiveness, loyalty and emotional appeal.

    That kind of inspiration works on both men and women. Many women are also moved by those displays.

    In these movies, is the male protagonist soft, submissive, and never leads and always follows? Always runs away from responsibilities and making decisions? Always follows… women?

    (The new Avengers movie was a lot of fun, by the way. Superheroes / alpha males with a lot of dominance apparently clash when they get together without a hierarchical structure. There was also a very subtle touch: Nick Fury and his female subcommander were like captain and officer, minus any hint of romance.)

    People yearn for heroes, leaders and authority figures. Traditionally, hierarchies existed, and men all knew or figured out where they stood in it. They also subscribed to the notion of every man being the “king of his own castle” (quoted in the Russell Crowe version of Robin Hood).

    A man who has the “kingly” status in the eyes of his woman is generally happy. This is partially why men talk about wanting to be respected and looked up to, because this legacy is still deeply ingrained in people. Historical romance as a genre is very popular with women, by the way.

    Household organizational efficiency can surely be achieved with a dominant wife in charge and making all the decisions, and the husband following without question. But emotionally (and sexually), does this kind of man appeal to other men and women?

    None of this is politically correct, of course.

  • INTJ

    @ Dogsquat

    I might laugh at a guy who plays a lot of FPS games telling me I was a newb for “camping”, but, when it comes down to it – when I was in uniform, he was my the boss of my bosses, and paid my salary to boot.

    I think there’s a joke somewhere here, but I don’t get it. Did your boss order you to camp around enemy spawn locations?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Dogsquat, that part about the military was not directed at you.

    My husband’s step-father was a Vietnam vet, and his friend since he was about six also served in Iraq. He grew up knowing more about guns and so forth than most guys, though he doesn’t really like shooter games.

    I think part of my respect for my husband is that I know he would be quite capable in a fight or survival situation. I respect what you and guys like you do. Certainly it is not something I would personally want to have anything to do with, and that is a part of the survival program in my brain.

    When it comes down to it, the woman’s desire for leadership/dominance in a man is about ensuring he has enough testosterone/manliness to be able to protect his family/offspring in case of wars/conflicts/fights/battles, whether with invaders from a neighboring state or aliens from outer space.

    It’s all tied together. If you tear this out, then you basically are saying women should be the ones who make up the majority of combat troops in the military, be the commanders in the military, fire the big guns, rockets and cannons, and so forth. It just doesn’t jive with biology.

    We’re the life-givers. You’re the life-protectors.

    Is that a good enough WHY for the guys here?

  • Ted D

    DogSquat – “I do recommend some dedicated people watching and eavesdropping, though. ”

    Now that it is getting hot outside here in Da Burgh, I’ve been going to the local mall to get my afternoon miles in. Right now it isn’t too busy at lunch, but school will be out soon and it will be crawling with people. I do have to admit I love just watching people interact. Far more than I enjoy actually interacting with people in fact.

    “I think for what you and I are interested in that this is about 98% of it.”

    Yep, and I can see the effects of my own self improvements in our relationship much more clearly than with any particular ‘game’ tactics I try to use. And since I can clearly quantify the results of my efforts here, I feel much more comfortable putting it into action. I can’t say I will or won’t ever put more time/effort/energy into “game” in general, but if i can do what is necessary without it, all the better.

    Now, that being said, like you I can’t simply forget what I know. And, I will use what I know to be more vigilant (that sounds menacing but accurate all the same…) about how I interact with my SO and for any red flags that might present themselves. I’m just not going to initiate actions based on what I consider untested theory. I won’t say game doesn’t work, because clearly it does for some things with some people. But, I can’t mentally justify it at this time, so it will remain an intellectual curiosity to me for now. If nothing else, I do feel a little better knowing the info. I guess it’s like other things in life, just because you know something about it, doesn’t mean you have to do anything with it. I mean, I can look up how to build a nuclear bomb, and as much as I may enjoy knowing the details, I still have no intentions of building one.

  • Ted D

    Hope – “Is that a good enough WHY for the guys here?”

    I just wanted to point out that dealing with my (and some of the other guys here) WHYs is simply preparing you for life as a mother. All kids go through the WHY stage, some of us never grow out of it. ;-)

    However, those of us that don’t grow out of it eventually start asking really hard questions to answer.

  • Abbot

    “People yearn for heroes, leaders and authority figures”
    .
    Yes – benevolent stand-your-ground macho men

  • Richard Aubrey

    “People yearn for heroes, leaders and authority figures”
    .
    Yes – benevolent stand-your-ground macho men

    God and the soldier
    All men adore.
    In times of trouble
    And no more.
    For when war is over
    And all things righted,
    God is neglected,
    The old soldier slighted.

    Yeah. We need Leonidas to lead the equivalent of an SS battalion to protect western civilization. Nobody would want to live with those bastards, had they survived. All honor to them. From the safety of distance. Patton is considered, outside of various military types and not all of them, to be a barbarian.

    So, yeah, those are good examples for something or other, but the connection to relationships is not demonstrated.

    It’s no different from looking at a particularly rowdy the DIV I football player who gets respect from his teammates. Sure, all that macho stuff, loyalty, courage, whatnot. But he’s not likely to be used as an example of relationship leadership, dominance, circumstance-framing or what have you.

    I accept, grudgingly and with some disappointment, that many women have to be treated “that way” as described by Susan. But combat analogues do not compute.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Hope

    “”When it comes down to it, the woman’s desire for leadership/dominance in a man is about ensuring he has enough testosterone/manliness to be able to protect his family/offspring in case of wars/conflicts/fights/battles, whether with invaders from a neighboring state or aliens from outer space. “”

    If you were to talk this way to feminists or their male cabana boys, you’d get a potload of sneering from people who have no idea they’re living in a cocoon made and protected by better people than themselves. When attention is drawn to that fact, we hear it’s the evil patriarchy and if that could be fixed, we wouldn’t have any problems.
    IOW, no connection with your point. Some don’t get it, really, and some understand that addressing it might ruin all they hold dear. So they don’t.

    Also, does the need to be reassured about this stuff wrt hubby or the SO generate the quarterly macho check, aka shit test?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Richard Aubrey, I care not for political correctness. I’m interested in how people tick and what makes people tick.

    Masculine traits have actual connection to testosterone levels, just as feminine traits are correlated with estrogen levels. In men high T levels signify good health to be able to withstand those levels, and such men have higher symmetry. In women high E levels signify good health and fertility, and such women have higher symmetry.

    Research has shown high testosterone is also correlated with lower fear response (courage), faster reaction times, lower rates of depression, higher self-confidence, higher competitiveness (status in the hierarchy), higher bone and muscle density (height and strength), higher libido, sperm production and motility.

    The effect is also behavior-based: working out and behaving in a dominant manner increase testosterone levels. Even sitting upright in posture increases confidence and T levels. Testosterone levels do not remain static, and a man behaving in high T manners will increase his levels, causing him to be more attractive to women. Likewise a woman behaving in a feminine way will increase her E levels, although a woman’s levels also fluctuate throughout her cycle.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digit_ratio

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306453004001702

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=and-postures-effect-on-testosterone

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120402093750.htm

    http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2012/03/scoring-goals-spiking-testosterone.html

    And lots more…

  • Richard Aubrey

    Hope. We know this. Problem is two-fold. One is that those traits, useful as they are, do not correlate with suitability for a relationship. They do not connect with Susan’s dominance views.
    Without annoying details, I can say I react quickly, I’ve done this or that which, afterwards, other guys seemed to think was pretty gutsy. Perhaps it was lack of imagination. All very well, but the connection is not obvious.
    The other question is whether the need to be reassured generates the quarterly macho check

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Richard Aubrey, the first part:

    Suitability for mating and producing offspring = attraction traits. Suitability for relationship = comfort traits.

    A person needs both.

    Woman keeps herself in shape and feminine = attraction. Man keeps himself dominant and masculine = attraction.

    Being loving, honest, ethical, and good partner = comfort and long-term stability.

    Second point about shit tests and macho checks.

    The macho check from the woman to the man is like the man wanting the woman to dress up sexily every now and then. Sure you know the sexiness exists, but you want to see it on display sometimes.

    It’s a mating display. Sometimes if one person goes too long without doing it, the partner does something to ask for it. Ideally they can communicate about it and not make a huge deal about it.

    The door is always open if you hate putting on a sexy show for your significant other.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Hope. Still no connection. It’s one thing to ask for a sexy outfit.
    But if you have to openly ask for a display of manliness, you have a problem. The guy’s doing as he’s told, which is not the same as dominance or manliness.
    As in, “You never stand up to me when we disagree.”
    “Okay. Next time we disagree, I’ll stand up to you.”
    Does that satisfy?
    Probably not, but not being a woman, I can’t say for sure.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Hope
    a sexy show for your significant other

    That’s an interesting (and alliterative) way of putting it. The men here who have been down on displays of dominance* that are just for show have a point that these are not really of substance, especially when compared to actual heroics in wartime. But then again, they’re not meant to be.

    *I would have written “displays of leadership” because I think it’s the better term, but I wanted to meet Hope’s alliterative bar. :)

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

    “But then again, they’re not meant to be.”

    I agree, but if that is true, what is the point of them at all? If the point of “dominance” is to prove a man can “protect his family”, then wouldn’t a man proving he is capable of killing other men be a better bet than a guy that rides a motorcycle?

    Here is the thing: I completely understand why a woman would want a man to protect her and their children. Makes perfect sense to me. But, where it breaks down is that women are NOT looking at traits that actually prove the man is at all capable. Being a loud asshole does not equal good in a fight. Riding a motorcycle and/or wearing leather does not mean he can defend himself or anyone else. Most of the things women tend to claim show ‘dominance’ are actually false bravado, and many of those same guys would turn tail and run at the sign of any real danger.

    Meanwhile, that “milquetoast” guy over in the corner used to be an army sniper. Who do you think would be a better protector, alpha asshat or former sniper? Which is more likely to attract female attention with minimum effort?

    This is why men (especially those that are military or in dangerous lines of work) get so frustrated with the whole “dominance gets them wet” trains of thought. It just isn’t logical in the least.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Richard
    It’s one thing to ask for a sexy outfit.
    But if you have to openly ask for a display of manliness, you have a problem.

    This reminds me of the joke about the bridegroom asking the priest to restore the word “obey” to the bride’s wedding vows, “Because my fiancee wants it there and I do everything she tells me.” :P

    Setting the issue of leadership aside for a moment, I’m also reminded of some comments someone left on my blog last year. He said that any change men demand from relationship-worthy women amounts to little more than paying attention to health and hygiene, while the change women demand from relationship-worthy men amounts to a complete personality transplant.

    It not only seems unfair, but I also agree with him that it is unfair. Yet short of a personality transplant among women themselves, the attraction triggers are there to stay. Awareness and maturity can keep a woman from demanding that her significant other be 100% attractive, 100% of the time, but if any deal that’s better than that is probably available only in a perfect world.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Ted
    “But then again, they’re not meant to be.”

    I agree, but if that is true, what is the point of them at all? If the point of “dominance” is to prove a man can “protect his family”, then wouldn’t a man proving he is capable of killing other men be a better bet than a guy that rides a motorcycle?

    And I agree with you! When I wrote that comment, I was thinking about the man who is capable of killing other men (for the sake of his family, of course) buying a motorcycle. :P

    Well, not literally. Hahahaha! I don’t think I completed my thought until I wrote Comment 292 to Richard. I was assuming that the man who is not currently displaying dominance is already a great long-term partner. I was also assuming (perhaps idealistically) that a woman who becomes aware that the dominance she thinks is the real deal is no more than “a sexy show” will adjust her filters accordingly and go for men of real substance. But it would be nice if those men could put on those sexy shows, too.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Bellita.
    Okay. Agree. Still disappointed.
    From time to time, you’ll see women saying, “I want a man who’ll stand up to me”. Or “call me on my crap.” Or not be a “pushover” or a “doormat”.
    Thing is, if you have something important, something that will gain money, please the family, grow the roses, avoid legal trouble, you would not want to be stood up to, overwhelmed, defeated in arguing. If you expect to be right, you’d not want to be the loser in a disagreement.
    To be stood up to presupposes ancipating giving the guy crap that’s wrong, that he should resist. Which, by extension, means if he doesn’t, you lose money, kill the roses, offend the family, or get into legal trouble.
    IOfurtherW, talk like this anticipates starting arguments about subjects in which you deliberately take the known wrong side and get personal and nasty in support of it.
    Great to look forward to.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Richard Aubrey, that’s the point of the female “shit test.” It’s designed so the man would prove his dominance without her asking for it by name. Women are notoriously bad at direct-style communication. My husband has also urged me to speak my mind more.

    Ted D, I never said anything about loud assholery, motorcycles or leather jackets. These displays are different for different women. Think of it like how some men get off on heels, other men love lace, and still other men love slinky gowns. Some women like motorcyclists… I personally can’t stand them.

    I already know the stuff my husband is made of, so I don’t need most of those tests tests. I know in the middle of the night when there’s a big noise, he will jump up and grab his gun and spring into action, because he’s done it. I don’t need him to make all the decisions on the day-to-day stuff, like choosing the restaurant. He does it most of the time, but I don’t mind choosing.

    Bellita, I think men don’t like the idea of “acting dominant” because it can actually be physically dangerous for them to do so. That, and most guys online tend to be on the introverted side, and they think of the obnoxious loud guy who is the center of attention. My husband does not come across that way, and we are certainly not “life of the party” types.

    I also don’t want personality transplants. I encourage a single man to find the woman who loves him at a comfortable level of dominance instead of wanting to change him completely. It would be the equivalent of advising a woman that if she happens to be naturally on the weighty side, to not get with a man who wants more thinness, or vice versa if she’s usually thin, to not get with a man who wants more heft.

    I’m tired of people strawmanning some caricature of the macho man, as if the leathered up biker is the only thing women can find sexually attractive. For the record, it’s a bit repulsive to me.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    While writing my last two comments, I remembered a fitness test I pulled on my second boyfriend when we were still together.

    He was a Buddhist who truly believed in non-violence. It didn’t bother me at the beginning of our relationship, but after a heated discussion about guns with a mixed group of friends, it suddenly bothered me a lot. So I asked him, “If we were walking home late at night and some thugs came out of nowhere and tried to attack us . . . and I pulled a gun out of my purse to defend us but got knocked out by a brick . . . and the gun fell at your feet just as I was about to get stabbed as well . . . would you use it or would you let me die?”

    He refused to answer for a long while, reminding me that he doesn’t like guns, that he never wants to be responsible for taking another person’s life (which I did respect about him), that he’d have us both back at the dorm at a safe hour anyway . . . But I wanted to know that he would use the gun if he had to, so I kept pushing. Finally, he said, sounding really, really frustrated: “Maybe I would use it. I don’t know. I’ve never been in that situation before and I have no idea what I would do in the heat of the moment.”

    I’m not proud of what I did to get that “sexy show” . . . and I concede that it wasn’t very sexy at all.

    But would it have been avoided by him choosing the restaurant more often, to take an example given in this thread? I doubt it. I was far less self-aware in college, and I don’t think anything would have stopped that fitness test back then. I share this story because I know what it’s like to demand the show and have no idea that it has no real relation to substance, but also what it’s like to know what the things of substance are but still kind of hope I get the show.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Bellita. Your last graf at 5:06 is unclear.

    You didn’t pull a shit test, nor, for that matter, a dominance test. You asked a straightforward question about a guy’s suitability as a partner, or, for that matter, anything more responsible than babysitting somebody’s pet rock.
    His answer, whichever way it went, didn’t apply to dominance within the relationship.
    It would appear that a shit test is designed to assess dominance within the relationship. The connection to protection against outside threats is tenuous.
    Hell. Think of the false positives. A really dominant, positive guy on a date who gets a shit test could decide that, instead of the conventionally-desired reaction, he would end the date politely and never call again. Is she worth this crap on a regular basis? Maybe he has options.
    A guy who is competent and dominant enough to handle the important issues might consider reacting to the little stuff a waste of energy.
    Does a guy who’s demonstrably competent and dominant in the outside world have to keep this stuff up when he gets home?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    I think we’re also going in circles here because we have men who are already in relationships taking issue with what women want in their relationships which have nothing to do with them personally.

    Richard Aubrey, serious question. If you don’t have to go home and worry about the “little stuff” with your wife, why worry about what some random women online want? We’re not in a relationship with you, or any other guy here.

    And really, if my husband and I are happy with what we have going, why do you feel the need to question it?

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Richard
    You didn’t pull a shit test, nor, for that matter, a dominance test. You asked a straightforward question about a guy’s suitability as a partner, or, for that matter, anything more responsible than babysitting somebody’s pet rock.

    This is the second time I shared a detailed story about a fitness test I thought I pulled, and the second time I was told it wasn’t a fitness test! Just when I think I finally had it figured out . . .

    Now my worry is that I won’t ever be able to stop myself from pulling fitness tests on a decent man because I don’t know what they are!

    His answer, whichever way it went, didn’t apply to dominance within the relationship.

    I brought it up with respect to dominance because I was trying to get him to say he’d be more dominant if he had to face those theoretical thugs, and not necessarily more dominant with just me. (And I think I felt more dominant, being the gun owner in the scenario.)

    I was also riffing off Ted’s point that women often demand “showy” dominance/leadership/strength because it is supposed to be an indicator of a man’s ability to protect and provide, when the best protectors and providers are not showy at all. Inasmuch as my second boyfriend really would not have had me walking the streets at a late hour, we can say he was already doing that part of his “job” with that proverbial ounce of prevention. But I wanted a gun in there when it wasn’t necessary, which was like a demand for a “sexy show” of bravado.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Hope. Don’t get defensive. You’re not so important that I’d be interested in questioning your personal life. Really.
    I’m interested in the question in general for a couple of reasons, one being that the requirement for dominance in situations not–to the male mind–requiring it is disappointing.
    Another is that Susan, whose views I respect, seems to think it’s so important that if we men don’t do it, women will punish us.
    Thirdly, I prefer that things make sense at least internally.
    Shit tests, for example, make no sense unless you posit other issues such as the female need for being dominated one way or another. With that assertion, shit tests make internal sense, as annoying as they may be. That means the reality of the need needs to be demonstrated or explained.
    Nothing to do with you.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Richard Aubrey, refer to my post above #154 and #161. This discussion kept going after that, with increasing demands of explanation for why the women here want displays of dominance from men.

    It would be akin to women repeatedly asking men why they want displays of sexiness from women. Why do women have to look attractive? It has no “connection” to real fertility. A woman can get pregnant even if she’s in a potato sack wearing a burka.

    I’m tired of this circling. Feel free to carry on, but I’m done here.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Bellita.
    A fitness test may include, I’m coming to think, shit tests, but also includes issues of the world outside the relationship.
    Protection is dominance against the outside world. Your pacifist boyfriend’s answer is relevant to fitness. But the shit test has nothing to do with the outside world, being an annoyance having to do only with the guy in question. I saw a woman trying to convince her husband they could get to the mall and back in the twenty minutes before a meeting. It was a dumb idea, the mall being fifteen minutes one way and everybody knows it. If she’d nagged hubby into doing it, she’d have gotten him to do something they both knew was stupid. What could be better/worse than nagging hubby into doing something he knew was stupid? She could have said we can miss the first part of the meeting, which would be arguable. But she wanted hubby to do something stupid. She kept saying they could do it. Both knew they couldn’t, having lived in the area for years.
    He eventually answered briskly and she walked away with a smile.
    Sheesh. The quarterly macho check. Can you blame men for getting tired of it?

  • SayWhaat

    Heh, if it’s any consolation Bellita, I’ve shared a couple shit tests here that apparently weren’t shit tests, either. :P

  • Dogsquat

    Richard Aubrey said:

    Does a guy who’s demonstrably competent and dominant in the outside world have to keep this stuff up when he gets home?
    _________________________
    No, he doesn’t. Most of this junk happens at the beginning of relationships, before everybody settles into their roles. Also, don’t forget that different people have different preferences for traits.

    I’m mostly just my own goofy self around my SO. She seems to like that fine. I have a female friend, though, who thinks I’m a wuss. She’s a former stripper, attractive, and quite promiscuous. If I ever went insane and ended up dating her, I’d have to change my behavior quite a bit (one reason that will never happen).

    Richard, think of shit tests as active sonar pings. They’re for quickly gathering information about a man. Like active sonar, they’re not used all the time. There’s a slight risk she’ll piss the guy off, and they’re not the only sensor operating.

    The gal pings a few times and analyzes the return. If the guy fails, she’ll either loose attraction to him and leave, or give him some opportunities for remediation ( she calls the shit howitzers and they fire a battery 6 – not pretty).

    If the relationship is going well, nobody’s bored, and the guy doesn’t become a supplicating couch potato, the woman has no need to ping him.

  • Dogsquat

    Now Herb is going to school my dumb ass on towed arrays, magnetic anomaly detectors, and SOSUS.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Dog.
    I figure a good response to certain shit tests is to go along with them. The opposite of a good idea I may have been thinking about for some time is not necessarily a good idea, especially if the woman in question has only had a few seconds to think of another way to do it.
    So, “Okay, we’ll do it your way,” amounts to a challenge, since she’s being asked to back up what she said, that having been figured out practically instantly without benefit of some of the relevant factors. Make it clear I’m not being nagged into it, but challenging her. IOW, I see the game. Backing up what she hauled out will be difficult.
    Sort of, “careful what you ask for.”
    Probably save arguing.

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

    This is the second time I shared a detailed story about a fitness test I thought I pulled, and the second time I was told it wasn’t a fitness test! Just when I think I finally had it figured out . . .

    I want to try too.
    I remember that recently after I married I used to ask my husband about major decisions as I was raised to (Like moving, changing jobs, working more hours… things that will affect our online dating schedule), but he was a bit distant and neglectful and I think he told me I could do whatever I wanted (I need to mention that my husband’s mother is old school feminist so I think he though it was wrong for him to have input in major decisions as he owned me) so one of my friends got a nice boob job and borrowed one of my audition for modeling dresses and she looked fantastic on it when I mentioned that I wished I could fill it up as well she offered to help me to get a 50% discount to get the same results. Now I had some money saved for when I lived here and I though about asking my hubby but given that he told me not to I casually mentioned that I very likely was going to get a boob job. He was not happy at all but try to nicely tell my that my B cups were perfect I usually get myself convinced really easily, I want to please him after all, but I was a bit annoyed by his behaviour before so I stood my ground and say that I really wanted to have the job done and that maybe I could get modeling jobs while living on USA and that would be more money… I say that he managed to “negotiate” in a way that he didn’t felt like he was ordering me around and I think after that he doesn’t mind me asking his input on big things but I have to admit that I was totally pushing the issue farther. I do think he feels more comfortable about being the man of the house now because he knows that if I really want something I will say it and that I enjoy pleasing him but it was after the “boob job” incident.
    So that was a shit test?

  • Sassy6519

    @ Hope

    This discussion kept going after that, with increasing demands of explanation for why the women here want displays of dominance from men.

    It would be akin to women repeatedly asking men why they want displays of sexiness from women. Why do women have to look attractive? It has no “connection” to real fertility. A woman can get pregnant even if she’s in a potato sack wearing a burka.

    It seems that asking men to be dominant and display dominance is asking for too much, hence all the complaining.

  • Dogsquat

    Dog.
    I figure a good response to certain shit tests is to go along with them.
    ___________________
    Ask 1000 guys and you’ll get 1000 answers.

    Again, I’m no PUA so take what I say with a grain of salt:

    I think the best results come from shining an absurd, funny spotlight on them. The classic example is if the woman tells you where to park.

    “Ugh…Are you gonna park here?” – note – that’s not,”Ooh! I see a good spot over there!”

    I like to (safely) speed as fast as possible to the furthest possible spot. If she’s excited or scared, I’ll park, tap her on the shoulder, yell “You’re It!” and run into the store. If she gets crotchety, I’ll forgo tag and just say,”C’mon. You need some exercise.”

    I barter for homemade cookies a lot, too, stretching negotiations out as long as possible. That’s an easy go-to if you can’t think of something else funny. Thank you for that one, Athol.

    In Ana’s case, one must be much more careful. Lot’s of gals have body image issues, etc. It’s tough to have awesome sex when your SO is convinced you think she’s ugly. A woman might have a very similar conversation yet be looking for validation, so tread lightly.

    I think I told this story here months ago, so sorry if I’m again repeating myself.

    I dated a girl who started talking about getting fake boobs a lot. I thought she was shit testing me one day when she wouldn’t drop the subject. I acted shy at first, then got all enthusiastic, then I insisted she get one DD and have the other reduced to an A – best of both worlds! I was on my game, too – acting like I was so happy someone would do this for me and it was a big fantasy of mine blah blah blah.

    AAAaaannd she started sobbing.

    Turns out she’d seen pictures of an ex who had bigger boobs and became very insecure. A sub optimal outcome, to be sure.

    And really, shit tests don’t happen all that often in good relationships. At the beginning you might get a few, but if you’re 6 months in and catching them every day something else is wrong.

  • Lokland

    @Sassy

    “It seems that asking men to be dominant and display dominance is asking for too much, hence all the complaining.”

    Not to be a douche but many woman don’t want to be sexy for their SO either.

    @DS

    Your right a shit test comes along every once in a while in a good relationship.

    You’ve also identified one major problem. Shit test vs. actual problem.
    Its easy from the womens POV ‘all he has to do is say behave and I’ll be happy’

    Mans POV ‘if I say behave it might settle her down or she could get upset and ….’

    ———————————————————————

    Last Herb mentioned un-needs a while ago.

    Shit tests definetely qualify as things no guy wants to deal with. Excessive shit testing (say >1 a month) make a relationship bad. And single > bad relationship.

  • Dogsquat

    Susan said:

    I have always wondered how guys square some of the really stark red pill stuff, with real life. In fact, I don’t understand how a man can read Rollo and still have a relationship. If HUS leads to hypervigilance, some Game blogs must lead to paranoia.
    _____________________________
    Lots of us turn into assholes for awhile. I did, at least by my standards. Like I said the other day, the Ro’s are like digoxin. To much kills the patient, too little and they die anyway. I respect those guys, too, but I don’t agree with everything they say.

    I wonder how long the average reader sticks with the ‘sphere. Do you have any sense? There’s got to be a cycle – get dumped, be sad for awhile, find answers in the ‘sphere, learn some stuff, get a girlfriend/MGTOW, go back to Reddit.

  • pvw

    Susan:

    I totally get this – the heightened awareness effect. I have always wondered how guys square some of the really stark red pill stuff, with real life. In fact, I don’t understand how a man can read Rollo and still have a relationship. If HUS leads to hypervigilance, some Game blogs must lead to paranoia.

    My reply:

    Which is why I try to steer away from reading those types of sites, ie., whose was it that had the post on “slut tells,” and the long list included, foreign travel, she is a lawyer, she is black, all this craziness…They are so down on all women that normal women are put into the slut category.

  • Lokland

    @pwv

    That was Roissy.
    I remember reading it and the only one my fiance hit was foreign travel.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Back when I was dating, I was seeing a woman with whom I drove a lot of places. Part of it was the we lived some distance apart, part was that’s the kind of dates I was figuring up–coincidence–and part was a project we were involved with.
    She had a thing where, out of nowhere, she’d say, with concern and energy as if something were wrong, “turn here!” Invariably, it was the wrong place. Parking lot with no other exit, one-way street, just plain wrong street to turn on. She had been reading one time, looked up and said it, dozing another time.
    As a guy, I presumed that people say things like that to be useful and have a pretty good idea of what they’re talking about and so I would turn. Wrong.
    She always claimed she “thought that….” and so she wasn’t really wrong.
    I had to start running a kind of low-power alertness when we were driving, consciousness of the possibility so that I wouldn’t “turn here”. It was wearing and distancing and, probably not related, we stopped seeing each other.
    Point is, maintaining that alertness to the “turn here” or the next out-of-nowhere shit test is a handicap to the relationship.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “In fact, I don’t understand how a man can read Rollo and still have a relationship.”

    Most of his articles are not that harsh, but they do have a degree of coldness. Check out his lastest 3 articles on ultimatums and chumps, ignore any comments, and tell me if there is anything you disagree with. (I’m not setting you up here.)

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

      @OTC

      Check out his lastest 3 articles on ultimatums and chumps, ignore any comments, and tell me if there is anything you disagree with. (I’m not setting you up here.)

      I don’t think I can bring myself to do it. Perhaps those posts are softer in tone, IDK. IMO, he trades in shame. As a woman, one must either be ashamed of oneself, or ashamed of him. I am in the latter camp.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “I totally get this – the heightened awareness effect. I have always wondered how guys square some of the really stark red pill stuff, with real life. In fact, I don’t understand how a man can read Rollo and still have a relationship. If HUS leads to hypervigilance, some Game blogs must lead to paranoia.”

    I find it very difficult to read here and MMSL regularly without feeling the effects in “real life”, and I simply cannot read most other ‘sphere sites regularly at all without feeling paranoid. But, as DogSquat pointed out, those places serve a purpose. Most guys I know seem to need a good knock on the head before they will truly accept the truth sometimes, and the R’s are pretty damn good at knocking heads.

    For me, reading there hurts spiritually, as in I sometimes feel like a small piece of my “goodness” dies when I plow through posts and responses. But, the truth is, perhaps I need to lose some goodness for my own sake. Perhaps under all the dislike of “people”, the layers of protection in front of my gooey emotional center, the cold logic, I am simply too kind and good to people. Of course not “people”, but the few that I allow into my inner world. I sometimes think I give them too much credit, or that I expect them to be too kind/nice/caring of me and my needs/concerns because I am so concerned with theirs. Until the red pill, I never thought about the fact that perhaps I should be just a little wary of my SO’s thoughts and intentions. It never occurred to me that she might act on her own best interests before what is best for our relationship, because I honestly believed the relationship came first in all things. I was naive about women’s nature, and I needed a little poison to make me aware. Anytime I need/want to steep myself in the worst of female nature, or if I just need a kick in the ass, I know where to go.

    I like being here because I want to understand women better, and HUS has a great collection of very self-aware and thoughtful women of varying outlooks and opinions. I’m working on simply taking those outlooks and opinions in without being argumentative, but being argumentative is how I learn to understand people. I don’t have a single friend that I haven’t grilled on multiple subjects over the course of our relationship. I find the best way to really gauge a persons integrity is to simply disagree with them, and make them defend their position. I liken it to the scene in the Matrix Reloaded when Neo fights with Seraph. Seraph apologizes in advance for starting the fight, but explains afterwards that to truly know a man, you have to fight him. To me, to truly know a person, I have to intellectually fight him/her.

    In that regard, I have a great deal of respect for you and the regulars here. You have been and continue to be a very gracious host, and everyone here (even those I completely disagree with) have been good sports. I often forget that some people take disagreement very personally, and if I’ve ruffled any feathers it was certainly not my intent.

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

      @Ted

      I find you to be a gracious guest – even at your most exasperated, I don’t think you ruffle many feathers. I don’t think anyone expects debate about these issues to be free of conflict – it comes with the territory.

  • Cooper

    @Hope #286

    Everyone tries to justify male dominance by correlating it with testosterone levels, and thus healthy genes.

    You know what else is correlated to high testosterone levels?

    Male Pattern Baldness. I don’t see women toting that as a indicator of healthy genes, and thus inherently attractive.

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

      @Cooper

      You know what else is correlated to high testosterone levels?

      Psychopathy. Agression. Violence. Inability to work in a team or get along with others. Criminality.

      I’m not sure what it means to have good genes if you’re likely to die in a violent encounter at a young age.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Susan. If you buy ev psych, the only field of scientific endeavor except for exo-biology to have no data whatsoever to work with, the high-T guy will have impregnated a number of females before he’s offed, probably by another high-T guy, or a beta who’s finally had enough. The high-T male kids will be raised by a beta. That makes the Oedipus/Freud thing backwards.

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

      The high-T male kids will be raised by a beta.

      No, they’re being raised by single mothers, but I take your point. It’s the description of the genes as “good” that I question. Not “sexy sons” but “thug sons.”

  • Ted D

    Susan – “The high-T male kids will be raised by a beta.

    No, they’re being raised by single mothers, but I take your point. It’s the description of the genes as “good” that I question. Not “sexy sons” but “thug sons.””

    But that is a recent development. I would wager that historically speaking, plenty of “alpha” children were raised by a non-biological beta father. In fact, it seems to me that if alphas asshats are as difficult to partner with as described, their best method of reproduction is to impregnate as many “attached” women as they can and hope those men never find out. In essence, the alpha male is like a dodo bird. They aren’t good at raising their own, so they rely on someone else to do the job for them.

    Is it any wonder why men are SO concerned about cuckolding? Go to any poor area of the U.S., and you can see this in action. How many “thugs” have children to multiple women. Sure they are all mostly single mothers now, but in the past how many were “happily” married women getting some “sexy” on the side?

  • Richard Aubrey

    Up until, maybe, a couple of centuries ago, a kid raised by a single mom wasn’t going to be raised for very long before he died of starvation. She had to find somebody, and under current terminology, it was probably a beta.
    Ev psych goes back at least a million years, longer if you get into the lizard brain and whatnot.

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

    I would wager that historically speaking, plenty of “alpha” children were raised by a non-biological beta father.

    Aside from Sparta historically women had tons of disadvantages if they couldn’t have a male invested on their offspring and there were a lot of controls for both women and men to keep them separated to avoid this no to mention virginity value I admit that some women and men are really clever but the idea that Alphas were cuckolding everyone doesn’t make sense. First Alpha’s except in my country are minorities, second betas had to reproduce to a certain level of success to be able to pass their genes. So how come you don’t have a huge population of thugs running around in the world if cuckolding was the norm, and betas were having the end short of the stick? Doesn’t make any sense there wouldn’t be any Beta’s left to create civilization.

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

      @Anacaona

      So how come you don’t have a huge population of thugs running around in the world if cuckolding was the norm, and betas were having the end short of the stick? Doesn’t make any sense there wouldn’t be any Beta’s left to create civilization.

      I wondered this too. I’ve heard it said that the reason so few men reproduced throughout history was that many were killed in wars and conflicts. I would think most of the alphas would have been in that group. The beta provider for alpha offspring just doesn’t add up. Similarly, I don’t have much faith in the contemporary notion that women ride the alpha cock carousel then look for a beta provider. I think alpha chasers continue chasing alphas, and beta providers marry women who like more beta guys.

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

    So did my example was a shit test or not? Come on be honest.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Cooper, okay. You’re totally right, and females are retarded for being sexually attracted to male dominance. That what you want to hear?

    Like I said, I’m tired of this. I’ve got an awesome relationship with my husband, and I don’t need to argue about it with random people on the Internet.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Anacaona
    So did my example was a shit test or not? Come on be honest.

    I’m obviously not the best authority on fitness tests (or on shit tests, which I’ve realized are not necessarily the same thing), but if my gun story doesn’t count, then your implant story doesn’t either.

    Both are examples of women beating around the bush and perhaps even picking fights with men who don’t understand what we really want to hear from them. It’s very sneaky, but it seems more of a trap than a test.

    Why couldn’t I have just said to my boyfriend, “It really bothers me that you might be so anti-violence that I couldn’t count on you to protect me when violence might actually be justified”? One reason is that I didn’t see it that way at the time, but perceived it as an offshoot of the very spirited debate about guns our whole group of friends had just had. (And why do people debate? To win.) Another reason is that I didn’t like having to ask for that security from my boyfriend, in the same way that you probably didn’t like having to ask for validation that you are attractive to your husband. And every woman understands why this is so, even if it must sound bewildering to men.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Hope
    I think that’s actually a different Cooper.

    The first Cooper we were responding to in this thread hasn’t been back since.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Susan, have you seen these?

    http://www.nature.com/news/2009/091208/full/news.2009.1131.html

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/8885586/

    Scientific papers that show higher testosterone levels are positively associated with social success rather than with aggression.

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

      @Hope

      Thanks for the links, that’s really interesting. I’ve always seen information to the contrary. Will have to investigate further!

  • pvw

    Re. my post:

    “slut tells,” and the long list included, foreign travel, she is a lawyer, she is black, all this craziness…They are so down on all women that normal women are put into the slut category.

    Lokland

    @pwv

    That was Roissy.
    I remember reading it and the only one my fiance hit was foreign travel.

    My reply:

    There might have been others that in his view would have made me a “slut,” but that one was the most troublesome, and especially as I saw how the posters over there dealt with people who challenged them on their bigotry.

    I thought about generations of black women raised by their mothers not to be sluts as part of the “politics of respectability,” that because they were women of color they did not get the “halo effect” accorded to SWPL women.

    So they had to be extra careful as the default view was that they were sluts regardless of how respectable they were. I recalled a source I read in a women’s history text way back when i was in graduate school.

    This was a married African American woman living in the llate 19th c. early 20th c. South talking about her life. She said: “A colored woman, no matter how respectable, is always lower than a white prostitute.”

    And then to read that post on “slut tells,” the blatant and casual disdain was breathtaking…

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    As well, the modulating effect of cortisol on aggression:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/16950214/

    In other words, high T in itself is not the cause of thuggish, violent or criminal behavior.

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

    Another reason is that I didn’t like having to ask for that security from my boyfriend, in the same way that you probably didn’t like having to ask for validation that you are attractive to your husband.

    Actually I wasn’t looking for that I wanted him to understand that big decisions on a marriage shouldn’t be taken unilateral. He was very “do what you want” at the beginning and I didn’t liked that one bit. As off now he understand that as much feminist he is if I showed up home with a new car that I bought with our savings without asking he would be pretty upset, the boob job was mostly a red herring, not that I wasn’t thinking on getting the job done (I mean 50% off!!!) but it was not a hard thing to dismiss.I know my breasts are perfect. :p

  • Ted D

    Ana – “So how come you don’t have a huge population of thugs running around in the world if cuckolding was the norm, and betas were having the end short of the stick? Doesn’t make any sense there wouldn’t be any Beta’s left to create civilization.”

    First of all, when I said historically, I’m talking about all the way back to the “time before writing” when it was probably easier to cheat and get away with it. (I don’t think cave men checked for virginity, and there were likely plenty of opportunities to stray while out doing daily stuff like foraging) Second, while I believe alpha cuckoldry is in play, I also fully believe that the beta men these women attached to were also successful at reproducing, it’s just that all of their children probably weren’t really theirs. Remember, to be successful the women would have to hide true paternity from her provider lest he might kill the child.

    Susan – “I’ve heard it said that the reason so few men reproduced throughout history was that many were killed in wars and conflicts. I would think most of the alphas would have been in that group”

    Yes and no. I’m sure the more “noble” alphas died very often in war and fighting, but how many “dark” alphas do you think put their necks out for the “good of the tribe”? Those would be the men that stayed behind hiding while the men went to battle, so he could swoop in and plant some seeds with little fear of being caught and killed. and further, would primitive women had the intelligence to even know that the resulting child was the cheaters?

    I think most of the modern limits placed on female sexuality was precisely BECAUSE cuckolding was a serious threat once humans started “owning” property, because they did NOT want to pass it on to some other man’s child. If cuckoldry was never a huge threat, why did humanity go through SO many hoops to find ways to control women’s sexuality?

    Of course you nor I can prove or disprove this. But, I find this theory to be at least as credible as any other I’ve seen floating around. Yes, I’m sure many alpha chasers continue chasing alphas in modern times. But, back when a woman literally depended on a man to survive, I’m thinking those same alpha chasers were more than happy to “commit” to a beta and keep chasing alphas on the side. It mostly depended on opportunity verses risk of getting caught.

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

      @Ted D

      Those would be the men that stayed behind hiding while the men went to battle, so he could swoop in and plant some seeds with little fear of being caught and killed.

      And some of their descendants are now bloggers! :P

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Anacaona
    Actually I wasn’t looking for that I wanted him to understand that big decisions on a marriage shouldn’t be taken unilateral.

    Well, okay, but that just begs the question of why you didn’t just tell him that big decisions in a marriage shouldn’t be unilateral? Instead, you set up a scenario where you wanted him “to fail” in some way, either by betraying the feminist principles he learned from his mother or by watching in silence while his wife ruins her already perfect breasts. ;)

    And that last sentence shows why you and I thought that your trick with the breast implants and my trick with the gun were fitness/shit tests. I accept the male commenters’ verdict that they aren’t, but I’m sure these kinds of tricks/traps are no less fun to deal with.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “And some of their descendants are now bloggers! ”

    You made me LOL for real. Not that the people around my cube don’t already know there is something wrong with me, but random laughter tends to make them wonder if I’ve gone off the deep end.

    the worst part is: I can’t disagree with what you implied.

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

      @Ted D

      You made me LOL for real. Not that the people around my cube don’t already know there is something wrong with me, but random laughter tends to make them wonder if I’ve gone off the deep end.

      Especially since IT work is generally not hilarious in nature.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Ted
    If cuckoldry was never a huge threat, why did humanity go through SO many hoops to find ways to control women’s sexuality?

    A couple of weeks ago, on another blog, I joined a discussion about women and femininity. I said that I had started thinking that all the strictures of past societies had less to do with keeping women “down” than with keeping women feminine. Because feminine means attractive.

    I think something similar could be said here. If different civilizations all over the world went to great lengths to control women’s sexuality, it was not because it could threaten men, but because it could turn them off. That is, even a woman who would never cuckold her husband would have trouble getting a husband if she had had 20 sexual partners in the past. This is not even considering the effect such a lifestyle would have had on a woman, just the perception men would have of her. Someone figured this out and after a century or so, it became institutionalized in ways ranging from Chinese footbinding to the intricacies of Victorian etiquette.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Ref alphas getting killed off. Gibbon said war is “dysgenic”.
    A book, “What Women Want–What Men Want” by Townsend, goes into shit testing from an empirical view.
    It was questionnaires about dating issues.
    Some it women said they did start arguments or flirted with other guys in order to see/test their date/SO reaction.
    Others said they did not until getting into the post-date questionnaires.
    That’s different from not asking for something directly.
    My wife used to ask for what she wanted and tried to make it a logical, objective thing. But when you try to dress up what amounted to a “want” as if it were a need, it looks kind of dumb. To go along with it, I’d have to agree to believe varioius things which were obviously false.
    I asked her to tell me when she wanted to be indulged on one thing or another and I’d be happy to do it. I didn’t like going along with something obviously nonsensical as if it made perfect sense.
    She does that now and things are better.
    She should have trusted me enough to just ask from the get-go.

  • Ted D

    Bellita – “That is, even a woman who would never cuckold her husband would have trouble getting a husband if she had had 20 sexual partners in the past. ”

    I can see this being true as well. Like most things, it is probably a combination of both with a few other things mixed in as well. But if alpha assholes are so unsavory, they are reproducing somehow. Yes, plenty of single mothers to be found today, but not so much in the past. Probably many married and simply cheated, but I’m sure a good number just did their best to imitate Johnny Appleseed and sowed everywhere they went. And I would also suspect that “happily” married women have always been an appealing group for some alpha types (Casanova comes to mind, but I’m sure there were/are plenty) because those women are less likely to cause turmoil since they have much to lose. If/when one of those women got pregnant, I’m sure they didn’t rush to tell their husbands about the ONS they had with some random guy 9 months ago.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Ted
    if alpha assholes are so unsavory, they are reproducing somehow.

    Now I wonder . . . Is it really alpha-begets-alpha and beta-begets-beta? A promiscuous rake never fathered a boy who could listen to his conscience? A family-oriented man’s untimely death never guaranteed that his widow (a kind of single mother) wouldn’t end up raising thugs?

    I don’t expect us to answer any of the big Nature vs. Nurture questions in this thread, but it seems to me that there is more to the “alpha” population than enough women falling for cads in each generation.

    Having said that, it will be interesting to see what happens when male birth control becomes widely available.

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

      Now I wonder . . . Is it really alpha-begets-alpha and beta-begets-beta?

      And what about the daughters of alphas? What kind of sons do they beget? I recall Roissy had a post about these women with their prominent brows and enormous mandibles.

  • Ted D

    It has occurred to me that our society may only be part of why we appear to have an abundance of betas in our population. I would also suspect that perhaps the gene pool is being “watered down” by hundreds of years of societally sponsored beta breeding programs. By that I mean, forcefully containing female sexuality throughout the ages may have culled much of the “alpha gene” from our heratige. Perhaps natural alphas are so rare because over centuries we have forced those traits out of humanity by artificially creating environments were “beta” males had more success breeding.

    Put another way, forcing women to marry particular types of men and bear thier children may have greatly changed our genes over time. Much like the way we created such a variety of dogs from a single common ancestor, only instead of making more diversity, we actually made ourselves more common and vanilla.

    Of course it is complicated without adding in the nature versus nurture debate. I certainly believe that some alphas are “made” by environment and some are “born” that way, but most probably fall somewhere between the two.

  • Ted D

    Susan -”And what about the daughters of alphas? What kind of sons do they beget?”

    From a biological view it makes sense that the “alpha” gene if there is a set of genes responsible would be passed down from father, to daughter, to grandson. But, it also makes sense that passing on “alpha” to a female really isn’t that important since if/when alpha was more common and natural it is likely that the daughters mate would be alpha himself and pass along his version of the gene.

    If that is the case, it simply means that beta reproduced more successfully than alpha over the course of time. I don’t see that as a surprise since alpha often correlates with bad long term relationship happiness. Betas simply had more access long term to a mate, while alphas tended to reproduce by opportunity and chance. And, it would also tie into why alphas may have used cuckoldey as an advantage when they could. They weren’t naturally good parents, so they impregnated women that had a good provider at hand. They get to pass on thier genes, and didn’t have to stick around to raise the child. Plus, they got the advantage of another man’s labor to assist in passing his genes on.

    If humans have a varied sexual strategy, I don’t see why this wouldn’t work for a subset of men. They would never be the most prolific, but to be successful they only need one child to grow to adulthood.

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

    @Bellita
    “Is it really alpha-begets-alpha and beta-begets-beta?”

    Interesting thought. I was going to bring this up in the current discussion on “mansluts” settling down, but… guys with higher partner counts and multiple partners apparently produce less sperm, and thus have lower fertility rates. At the same time, guys with lower partner counts statistically have the most children. I’m not a fan of the simplistic alpha/beta distinction, but what does that say?

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

      guys with higher partner counts and multiple partners apparently produce less sperm, and thus have lower fertility rates. At the same time, guys with lower partner counts statistically have the most children.

      That’s very interesting. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that women can sniff that out (if they’re not on the Pill).

      Re the alpha/beta thing, I understand that it’s mostly just shorthand for who gets the most partners. Does anyone have any information on the real role of alpha and beta males in prehistory? Or was this fabricated a few years ago? I ask because I saw a blog post on an evolution blog saying the whole notion is a myth.

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

    why did humanity go through SO many hoops to find ways to control women’s sexuality?

    Bellita said one reason but you forget that men have less requisites for sex and more for commitment than women. Women are not controlled for themselves but to control men. Look how many modern Alphas that can rake numbers are trying to use their free time to better civilization. They don’t, if they had to earn their sexuality with hard work and obeying the laws (Beta way) they would do it. The reason matriarchy never created huge civilization and became rare is that a low male investment society doesn’t go beyond the bronze age. This is the trick: women need to be controlled so men can serve society for access to women. Women desire and need commitment more than they need sex so for them playing along with the rules benefited them too. I always said that the rules were probably negotiated among the genders and not imposed to either. was

    Well, okay, but that just begs the question of why you didn’t just tell him that big decisions in a marriage shouldn’t be unilateral?

    I actually did but he was convinced that his way “be free whatever you want” was better for our marriage in the long run. My guess is that he though that if I consulted him for everything I will resent him, feel trapped or something like it. I kind of went to extremes to show him were his way could end up.

    And what about the daughters of alphas? What kind of sons do they beget? I recall Roissy had a post about these women with their prominent brows and enormous mandibles.

    I’m an Alpha daughter and I think I don’t fit much of Roissy’s predictions of looks and behaviour. Of course he might had meet extreme examples and I really hope that my kids don’t inherit any Alpha traits for their sake and my sanity.

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

      @Anacaona

      I’m an Alpha daughter and I think I don’t fit much of Roissy’s predictions of looks and behaviour.

      You do not, you are very feminine. Roissy’s poison pen relies heavily on hyperbole. In fact, his list of slut tells is pretty ridiculous. As if a woman trying to hide her sexual past is going to “do that thing with her tongue on the underside.” Then again, Roissy likes them dumb, so who knows.

  • Dogsquat

    @Ana

    Yes, I think that was a pretty good example of a shit test. You weren’t clear where his boundaries were, so you pinged him with boobies.

    @Bellita:

    I’m not so sure about the gun thing. Questioning him on that was part compatibility gauge, part personal safety, and maybe a smidgen of shit testing.

    His answer actually makes me cringe. “I’m a pacifist and I don’t know what I’d do in that situation” translates to “Well, I’ll be so paralyzed with fear that I’ll watch them rape/kill/rob you. Then, they can kill me if they want.”

    My probable answer makes me cringe also, now that I think about it. I’d have kept you there for 45 minutes, enthusiastically developing Immediate Action SOPs, pontificating about close combat techniques, and proselytizing about the .40calSW for situations occurring at sub 30 meter distances.

    Of course, I’d hint some stuff about tactical flashlights – but just enough to keep you tantalized .

    I know how to show a girl a good time, believe me.

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

    @SW
    “Does anyone have any information on the real role of alpha and beta males in prehistory? Or was this fabricated a few years ago?”

    No idea. To the best of my knowledge, it’s traditionally been associated with hierarchical social animals (primates and canines), where the behavior is very clearly identified. The alpha of the group has the highest rank, which basically which dog is the strongest. They get to eat first, and mate first, and in some cases is the only one that gets to mate.

    But if you apply this description to humans, the “alphas” of history (I can’t speak for prehistory), political and military leaders, well, for the most part they just schemed or killed their way to the top. But they were probably a reflection of their respective socities (Caesar for instance). And if you look at the Ancient Egyptian “alphas”, they were inbreeding to keep the royal blood (and genes) in the family!

  • Richard Aubrey

    The concept of the alpha male is common in zoology. It doesn’t apply to solitary animals like tigers and leopards, or harem animals like horses where a single stallion collects a number of mares.
    Social animals like wolves and gorillas, but not gibbons who pair, have an alpha male at the top of the pack. I’ve heard that non-alpha wolves are not even sexual. Not sure about that.
    Heard of a bull which could not get anything going with the cows. Another bull was introduced to do the necessary. The first one ran off the newcomer. Then he was servicing the cows satisfactorily. The psychological connection between studliness and studliness seems vaguely real in other breeds, especially humans, but we don’t often think of it in reverse as with the bulls.
    That example was, iirc, from Ardrey talking about the importance of the instinch of territoriality.
    Paleontologists like to watch baboons because that’s the closest it is thought to pre-humans.
    Anyway, the idea is that alpha male in human is likely, and we’d need to see some hard evidence that it isn’t, because of its existence in our antecedents and apeish relations. IOW, prove it doesn’t exist, that for some reason we’ve dumped it due to evolution or something.
    Having said that, the connection to what some call the alpha male and evolution is speculative.
    It makes sense, given certain presumptions.
    Alpha males need the necessaries; size, strength, aggressiveness, courage and some ruthlessness.
    What we call the alpha male seems to exist. Whether there is anything in ev psych that is connected is interesting but not relevant.

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

    Yes, I think that was a pretty good example of a shit test. You weren’t clear where his boundaries were, so you pinged him with boobies.

    I win! Although that means that if shit tests are conscious then women cannot claim they don’t know what they are doing, I knew exactly what I was doing. The implication is not good.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    It seems a little wrong that I’m so happy that Dogsquat confirmed that my story had “maybe a smidgen of shit testing.” Hahahaha!

    @Dogsquat
    His answer actually makes me cringe. “I’m a pacifist and I don’t know what I’d do in that situation” translates to “Well, I’ll be so paralyzed with fear that I’ll watch them rape/kill/rob you. Then, they can kill me if they want.”

    That was actually good enough for me, because I had presented some similar scenarios to our group of friends, exaggerating the threats in proportion to the anti-gun sentiments of each listener, and one girl actually said that she didn’t care if the person in danger of being gutted was her mother. She’d rather run for help and risk coming back to a dead body than touch a gun. (In fairness to her, however, I’m sure that if I had armed her with a cricket bat, that she would have used it with deadly violence.)

    So to me at that time, “I don’t know what I’d do in that situation,” at least meant that there was some chance he would defend a loved one who was in danger, even if it meant violence.

  • Richard Aubrey

    If I picked up the gun, that would mean all those falls in the dojo were for nothing.
    What a conundrum.

  • Ted D

    There are just some people in this world that will NOT willingly participate in violence under any circumstance. While I respect their desire to do the “right thing”, I cannot logically and emotionally understand the mechanisms at work behind that decision.

    I am by no means a violent person, but I can assure you that anyone intent on harming my SO or my children, or even by their own stupidity willingly puts them in danger, will get to see just how well I can disconnect my empathy and feelings for a person to get a job done. I have never once in my entire life had to use a firearm as a defense weapon, but I certainly enjoy unloading plenty of ammo into targets as recreation, and I know how to use one well. There would be NO hesitation in my actions to use one if necessary to protect my family/friends.

    In fact, I fully believe that under the right circumstances I could have been made into a fairly successful sniper or assassin (provided they could ever teach me to be agile and stealthy LOL) because I can easily separate “feelings” from action. That is, if I truly believed the target needed to die, I would have no moral qualms about performing the task. The key here is, *I* would have to believe their death was necessary and/or just on some level. Yes, I feel killing is morally wrong, but I am also willing to behave immorally for the “greater good”. Again, the key is I have to actually believe it IS for the greater good.

    All that being said, I really dislike violence and physical confrontation. Sure, I don’t like getting hurt, but to me it is more about the wasted effort of fighting along with the unsatisfactory results. A fist fight might have a clear winner and loser, but after it’s all over the issue that started it is rarely ever resolved. I much prefer to simply work out the issue and save the energy used fighting on something else. I see it as a failure if fists become a negotiating tactic.

    It takes a LOT of agitation (or something drastically dangerous) to get me to the point where violence is my solution. But once I’ve made that decision, there is no second guessing on my part. And Lord help me if I ever have to pull a gun out, because if I do I’ve already decided that I’m shooting to kill.

  • pvw

    TedD:

    In fact, I fully believe that under the right circumstances I could have been made into a fairly successful sniper or assassin (provided they could ever teach me to be agile and stealthy LOL) because I can easily separate “feelings” from action. That is, if I truly believed the target needed to die, I would have no moral qualms about performing the task. The key here is, *I* would have to believe their death was necessary and/or just on some level. Yes, I feel killing is morally wrong, but I am also willing to behave immorally for the “greater good”. Again, the key is I have to actually believe it IS for the greater good.

    My reply:

    This is interesting. I’ve gone out with the husband and the in-laws (sisters and brother in law and father in law) for target practice, and I remember saying that if I were a man and had to be in the military, I would have wanted to be a sniper. I liked the idea of perfecting one’s ability to shoot with precision and hit a target a far distance away but not be involved in having to shoot and fire and close range. I remember watching with the husband a PBS program on elite snipers and I was just in awe.

  • Richard Aubrey

    pvw.
    There’s an additional dimension to sniping. In some cases, you’re watching the target for hours, or even days. Some guys who could pull on a form in an enemy uniform who just pops up have a problem with pulling on somebody they’ve been watching for some time.
    It’s said that the Munich Olympic fiasco resulted in part from the German cop snipers’ having identified and identified with the guys they’d been watching during the stand off.
    Most of the sniping in the current unpleasantness seems to be of the kind where a fantastic marksman commands a space at a distance against guys who try to use it, or get into it or cross it. Kills them and denies the area to the rest of them. It’s not the watch and report and watch and report for hours or days that causes some guys to get buck fever.

  • pvw

    R. Aubrey:

    There’s an additional dimension to sniping. In some cases, you’re watching the target for hours, or even days. Some guys who could pull on a form in an enemy uniform who just pops up have a problem with pulling on somebody they’ve been watching for some time.

    Most of the sniping in the current unpleasantness seems to be of the kind where a fantastic marksman commands a space at a distance against guys who try to use it, or get into it or cross it. Kills them and denies the area to the rest of them. It’s not the watch and report and watch and report for hours or days that causes some guys to get buck fever.

    My reply:

    The PBS program I saw addressed both types; the first type, the snipers didn’t feel a connection although they had been watching them for days.

    But I could see how they could develop that ability to slow down, watch carefully for a long time, discern and learn to anticipate the target’s movements so that they could shoot and hit at how many thousands of feet or yards away. In this type of sniping, the target didn’t even know the sniper was out there. How cool was that!

    The second typed seemed more high adrenaline, where two marksmen were shooting at each other from shorter or similar distances, but they needed to be expert marksmen nonetheless, to do just as you say, control the perimeter and block all entrants.

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Richard
    If I picked up the gun, that would mean all those falls in the dojo were for nothing.

    Point taken. :)

  • Ted D

    “but they needed to be expert marksmen nonetheless”

    To be clear, I am in NO WAY saying I am even partially good enough with a gun to be a sniper. Not to mention I don’t know how well I would function in the military. Too much “do as I say” without explaining why. And you know that WHY is very important to me. LOL

    I was talking more about the attitude and mental state it takes to knowingly and willingly kill another human being. It takes either a total sociopath, or someone that can very cleanly compartmentalize empathy and feeling for other humans. As I’ve said many times, I generally don’t like “people”, and as crass as it is to say it, I really don’t look at “people” as humans first anyway. I tend to see them as a collection of living beings, and only by getting to know a person do I start to see them as something more. This is why I say “people suck” all the time. Until proven otherwise, I kinda assume they do.

    So, given enough incentive (protecting my family/serving some “greater good”) I don’t think I would have much trouble with killing. Of course, this is total conjecture on my part being as I have never killed another human being (at least not to my knowledge…) But I have had to put down a few animals, and I don’t put “people” above loved pets. In fact, I have gotten teary eyed watching Humane Society commercials. I have no reaction at all to simple aggravation when I see infomercials about people starving in Africa. I know, it makes me heartless. I’m OK with that.

    I’d like to think that after the fact I would have some kind of mental breakdown/freakout/guilt session, but I honestly don’t know.

  • Richard Aubrey

    pvw.
    I saw couple of docs on snipers and sniping. None of them addressed the other function of a sniper. They are trained in camo, infiltration, stalking, and scouting. Some of what they do may be to slip into a hide and watch somebody for days, presumably on the longer end, or a unit, and report back. They may or may not take a shot.
    In fact, if you can’t fool another sniper in infiltration, it doesn’t matter how good your marksmanship is, you flunk out.
    This means some of the guys may be watching a known individual for some time. The German snipers in the Munich thing were cop snipers and possibly not screened for the ability to put aside common humanity.

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

    It’s said that the Munich Olympic fiasco resulted in part from the German cop snipers’ having identified and identified with the guys they’d been watching during the stand off.

    That is a great idea for a movie script. We have a guy that follows a mark and starts to find things in common with him, all through the sight and the conflict of knowing he was going to kill him…STOLEN! :p

  • Ramble

    Does anyone have any information on the real role of alpha and beta males in prehistory?

    Susan, I am no expert on pre-history, so, I can’t answer this, but…

    “Alpha”

    Are you talking about the pre-historic George Washington?
    Napolean?
    Blackbeard?
    Robert E Lee?
    some silverback?
    some sneakyfucker?
    some pre-historic Steve Wosniak (hey, look, I just invented the wheel)
    some pre-historic Steve Jobs (hey look, I just gave it cool rims)

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

      @Ramble

      I was wondering more about the origin of the term, which is that men lived in tribes, and the most dominant male was the acknowledged alpha. It really does mimic wolf pack behavior, including the claim that betas don’t get sex from willing women. I have only seen this claim in Game circles, not in the evo literature (not that that’s data based either).

  • Emily

    I’m kind of wary of a lot of the evo-psych stuff. I agree with some of the general conclusions, but I also think that it’s possible to find a historical or animal example that can be used to justify just about anything.

    I also think that some of the high-T vs. low-T stuff sometimes gets over-emphasized. There are a lot of very girly hipster guys out there who manage to get laid way too often. :S

  • SayWhaat

    I also think that some of the high-T vs. low-T stuff sometimes gets over-emphasized. There are a lot of very girly hipster guys out there who manage to get laid way too often. :S

    You don’t say! :P

  • INTJ

    About sniping and dehumanization, I remember watching this interview of one of the top female snipers of all time (I think it was Rosa Shanina, but not sure). Her first kill was when a German soldier had walked out of his trench joyously whistling. Her second kill was another German soldier who tried to retrieve that soldier’s body. It was so sad.

  • Ted D

    “Her second kill was another German soldier who tried to retrieve that soldier’s body. It was so sad.”

    But effective.

  • Ramble

    I was wondering more about the origin of the term, which is that men lived in tribes, and the most dominant male was the acknowledged alpha.

    Ah, I hear ya.

  • Ramble

    I’m kind of wary of a lot of the evo-psych stuff. I agree with some of the general conclusions, but I also think that it’s possible to find a historical or animal example that can be used to justify just about anything.

    Emily, this is somewhat similar to statistics. You can get statistics to say almost anything you want. But, at some point, you are going to find statisticians who provide you with information that actually does meet up with what you are seeing the real world.

    This is one of the few areas where Baseball Geeks have been helpful. They have worked overtime to get a family of stats that are genuinely helpful in describing what really is useful in real world baseball.

    I also think that some of the high-T vs. low-T stuff sometimes gets over-emphasized. There are a lot of very girly hipster guys out there who manage to get laid way too often.

    I have said this many times, but the guys who have the easiest time in getting quality ass are slightly feminized wanna-be rockstars.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Ramble. I’d be interested in your opinion of why the women are so interested in slightly feminized rock stars. There can’t be all that many of the latter, so your sample probably includes a bunch of local rock not-stars who are also doing well.
    It would be particularly interesting if you could relate it to the dominance issue we beat half to death.

  • Ted D

    RA – “It would be particularly interesting if you could relate it to the dominance issue we beat half to death.”

    There are a few things here I think:
    1. being a musician tends to give guys a ‘mysterious’ appearance, especially if they are also really laid back and aloof (as many are, probably because half of them are strung out on drugs…)
    2. Being a musician demonstrates some type of skill mastery (or at least in some cases. I’ve heard some “music” that sounded like it was made by cats running through a music store.)
    3. Social proof – Musicians are popular, or at least get a lot of attention, and it adds a bit of credence to their social worth.

    I know guys that were living in their cars and/or sharing a studio with 5-7 other men with little to no money that still managed to score a lot. Some of them even managed to have semi-long-term girlfriends, which was usually how they managed to eat something other than ramen soup and lunch meat meals all the time. These guys spent years essentially broke, but their girlfriends “believed” in them all the same. I see no problem with supporting your mate’s efforts, but at some point I would think they might get tired of always having to be the adult. Of course, that is assuming either of them were ever the “adult” in the relationship.

  • Schala

    Ted D said, on May 4th:

    “1. I am bothered by anyone that requires validation from me to feel “good” about our relationship. Not bothered as in “can’t be bothered to do it”, but bothered as in “why in the hell does she need me to do this? Doesn’t she already know how I feel about her?””

    I’m a people pleaser, always been. It’s in my nature to generally be docile, seek to please when I see the aims of the person in authority as laudable (I’ll rebel otherwise and just go Lone Wolf if it seems like the only way), and seek to be rewarded with being actively seen as desirable and useful. I will seek this a lot more with people I hold in higher regards (my boyfriend) than with people I barely care about (my father).

  • Schala

    And you said it’s similar to a pat on the head from bringing home straight As. Well, what I got was a speech about how I could do better, when I got A- or B+ instead. Never congratulations. I have daddy issues partly due to that. Motivating me through neglect does NOT work. I was just that awesome in school naturally, thankfully.

  • Ramble

    Ramble. I’d be interested in your opinion of why the women are so interested in slightly feminized rock stars.

    Well, for one, I said wanna-be rock stars. And I am not trying to be funny about that. Like you implied, there are only so many actual rock stars, feminized or not.

    Whereas, there are tons of wanna-be’s out there.

    But, to answer your question, I am not knowledgeable enough as to why they strike a specific chord. But, I can offer some guesses:
    1.) Unlike athletes and “artists” (i.e. painters, sculptors, etc.), your average wanna-be performs in front of girls with his face easily visible. (Most girls could not care less about the intricacies of baseball and hockey to actually watch the sport. However, i am not implying that your average fit athlete is alone, crying, in his mothers basement).
    2.) In his “art”, he can almost literally feed them the crap that they want to hear. This can be romance, dominance, pseudo-intellectualism, whatever.
    3.) Supply and Demand – In any given musical venue, there can be only one lead singer (Bass players simply don’t get the ass that “lead” singers, “lead” guitarists and [lone] drummers do). This even goes for guys playing guitar in their dorm room. There is usually only one guys singing, “I gave my love a cherry that had no stone …”
    4.) Natural rebelliousness – Football players may be the epitome of masculinity, they are veritable NAZIs following very specific orders from their coaches. This goes, to a lesser degree, for other sports as well.
    5.) Unlike, say, the written word, music is visceral. We immediately start tapping our foot and swaying to the music when the melody get’s going.

    ====================================

    p.s. Ted, your points are valid as well, except, I am not sure I agree with point 2. Mastery and skill would make sense, but, I am simply not seeing much correlation. I am sure that you know more about this than I do, so, I would like to hear your examples, but…that kid from China that is brilliant at the Piano or Violin is not getting anywhere near the ass as your 23 year old douchebag neighbor who prattles on about those girls that cheat on him. However, the fact that you CAN play guitar definitely helps. But mastery is rarely important.

  • Ted D

    Ramble – that was poorly worded. What I was trying to say is, I know of a few women that seem to have a musician “type”, by that I mean I know one women that is nuts for drummers, a few that go for the lead guitarist (as you mentioned), and actually I’ve known one woman my entire life that was attracted to bass players. Now, they really didn’t know how well these guys “mastered” their particular instrument, but for some “mastery” is subjective.

    I agree with all your points as well, and there are probably a few more left unmentioned yet. And that kid in China? Well, he certainly shows mastery, and I bet there are women in the world that find it hot, but the problem is he has little access to those women, and frankly it is mastery PLUS all the other stuff that gets them laid. Showing skill is a small part of the bigger picture.

  • Ramble

    I’ve known one woman my entire life that was attracted to bass players

    I believe it.

    … and frankly it is mastery PLUS all the other stuff that gets them laid …

    Again, I chafe at the word “mastery”. I think that “mastery” plays little into it. For some, mastery will get them going, but a baseline of skill is usually what is needed in that specific department. Especially when we are talking about getting the hottest and tightest 19 year old girls.

  • Ted D

    Yep. Like I said, “mastery” is subjective. To your average 19 year old hotty, anyone that can play three chords with a guitar in time to a beat is a master. *I* don’t consider myself a master of anything musical, and I’ve been playing and singing most of my life. But, I can tell you that I have impressed young women with what I have. And, I’ve seen some pretty piss poor musicians score all the same.

    Basically, when all you know about music is you like to listen to it, it doesn’t take much to impress. :P

  • Richard Aubrey

    Knew a woman in college who was fifteen on a ten scale. Had to expand to cover the figure. Outstanding.
    When I was in the Army, she wrote me a letter about various items including going shopping for clothes with her mother. “That dress makes you look like a cow,” Mom said. I think she was jerking my chain. So to speak. Fun person, really.
    Honors College. Later an English MA and an Ivy MBA. Runs her own business.
    Those who worked with her commented that she did not suffer fools gladly. She never blew a hole in a fool–she was polite–but after hearing some self-iimportant blowhard going on, she’d be absolutely hilarious, without, I think, meaning to be.
    Hardnosed. Sharpeyed. Fun, if you were a friend.
    She was going with a guy named Freddie. At one point, during our project, Freddie mailed her a box the size of a brick full of beer can pull tabs, which came off the cans, back in that day. Showed her what he was doing, and, by extension what he thought of what we were doing, which was pretty serious.
    As level-headed as she was, she got all mushy talking about Freddie. I guess his Deal was being rebellious or something.
    So they married.
    Twenty years later, working on a reunion issue, I tried to contact her family. Got an uncle, tried to identify myself by saying I knew she’d married a guy named “Freddie”.
    He interrupted me. “Freddie. That son of a bitch. Don’t know what she saw in him. He was never the marrying kind.” Which I presume he was playing around. Then I discovered the marriage had lasted a year. Which means Freddie didn’t want to come home to THAT?????? from the get-go. And that it was likely everybody was telling her not to.
    But she did, and dumped him after a year.
    If somebody as sharp as she could fall for Freddie and overlook his failings, pointed out in detail by her family and friends, it’s hard to make any sense of the whole attraction thing.
    The only issue that might have led her to settle for Freddie is that she was so far over a ten in attraction and about 400 in IQ that most reasonable prospects–who you would think would be doing somersaults or whatever to get her attention–backed off, intimidated, so she didn’t have the choices she might have had otherwise.
    Freddie asked, I guess, when nobody else did.
    Shame, all things considered.

  • SayWhaat

    actually I’ve known one woman my entire life that was attracted to bass players

    Now you know two! :P

  • Ted D

    SW – “Now you know two! ”

    LOL. Hey, as a drummer (and bass abuser, I wouldn’t call what I do to a bass guitar “playing”) I totally understand the female desire there. It’s all about the rhythm! If my SO wanted, she could spit out a tempo and I could get pretty damn close to setting it within seconds. Years and years of playing to a metronome. I can tap 120 BPM on my foot without thinking. LOL

    And I have to say, to me bass is a LOT more fun that guitar. (I don’t do lead at all, but I imagine that is probably pretty damn fun) You can slap the shit out of it, look cool doing it, and sound fantastic while goofing around on stage if you are in a typical rock band. Other types of music? Not so much. Bass gets pretty damn complicated when you start moving up the music food chain. (not implying rock is at the bottom, it is one of my favorite genres. But in terms of musical complexity, rock is mostly very basic unless you are into Tool, Primus, or Prog metal in general. Those guys are sickly talented)

    But if you really want the attention, either lead guitar or lead singer is where its at. Like I said, I don’t do lead guitar, but drums aside my primary “instrument” is voice, and I’ve very much enjoyed some time in that spotlight.

  • rudiger

    Tell me that finding a healthy relationship is not so complex, risky, and contingent upon luck!

    I’m beginning to think, at 39, this is an impossibility. Not get attached, do get attached. Get attached before sex, after sex. DOnt get married when your young but dont wait too long. How is anyone suppose to make this work Nothing simple, nothing straight forward. No formulas for sure. Is this luck? Good upbringing?

    I just spent a year at the pua thing, but couldnt keep detached for long. I did for a while but got overly involved with 34 year old party girl who slept around. A guy I knew likes his women to sleep with other men, so he can be honest about sleeping with other women. It disgusts me. I would love to be that detached, but I don’t think I could.

    But I get burned , so? Maybe there is a happy medium?

  • Sara

    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…

  • http://bloggingbellita.wordpress.com Bellita

    @Ted D
    I’ve known one woman my entire life that was attracted to bass players

    @SayWhaat
    Now you know two! :P

    Actually, he knows three ;)

    I’m always interested in the bass player because it’s my own favorite instrument. Right now, I’m saving up to buy a really good quality electric bass.

  • Penny

    wow .. What a nice blog! really like it … Thanks for it …

  • INTJ

    @Penny

    Welcome. Hope you stick around!

  • Ted D

    Bellita – Nice! Honestly, if your primary interest in playing bass if for an average rock band, anyone that can keep time to a beat and remember some basic fingering can do just fine. Not knocking anyone here, just my take on it. I don’t know how to actually play guitar other than power chords (for metal and rock music of course…) and I couldn’t tell you which fret is which note on a guitar or bass, but I’m good at figuring out bass lines simply by listening and matching notes (relative pitch) and have on more than one occasion sat in on bass for small jam sessions at parties and such. Best part, since bass in rock music usually isn’t too complex, I can still manage it and sing backup vocals as well.

    I really want to buy a decent acoustic guitar and learn how to actually strum real chords. I’m getting too old for any kind of metal band thing, but I can certainly get into a little quartet “coffee house” kinda gig with a few folks and some acoustic instruments. Besides, being able to pull out a guitar and play around the camp fire really is cool. Not much use for a full drum kit at camp. LOL

  • Emily

    Ted, it looks like you have an “edge” after all! :D

  • Ted D

    Emily – “Ted, it looks like you have an “edge” after all! ”

    LOL thanks. Looking back at my stupid youth, I would wager that the only reason I ever had luck with women was:
    1. I was a musician
    2. I was “brooding” and “mysterious”, they just didn’t know it was because I was anti-social.
    3. I am a cocky, sarcastic, and rather funny (if I do say so myself) bastard when I’m in my comfort zone.

    In a million years I NEVER considered any of that to give me an “edge”. In fact, I can’t remember one single instance where I actually took advantage of the “social proof” being in bands gave me. In fact, when we would play out, I was more often than not found between sets hiding in some dark corner chatting with one or two “regulars” (that is, people we knew that came out to see us) than chatting up young women. I can clearly see that I totally missed MANY opportunities to cash in on that and “score” a ONS. The truth is, most of that time I was in a LTR, and I was so blue pill that I didn’t see any of it. Plus, as I’ve said before I get embarrassed when people compliment me. It was DAMN HARD to mingle after a set with everyone patting me on the back and saying how good we were. Usually I made it to the bar, got a beer, and found my dark corner. And, as far as it goes, I know guys who are the real deal. My “edge” is completely fabricated social BS, so I don’t consider it anything to brag about. ;-)

    Besides, I never once said that I didn’t have an “edge”. I am completely capable of pulling off every bit of “advice” the ‘sphere has to offer. My issue isn’t the ability to deliver, it is that I don’t want to fundamentally change things about myself simply for the ability to get laid.

  • Sheesh

    Hearing about how men are so heartless with women and can stick their dick into one they don’t give a shit about and have no emotional attachment to is totally heartbreaking. It really is.

    Of course, I know the other side of the coin to and how women manipulate.

    I think I’m going to just stay single, it’s too risky to my heart.