She's Everything a Player Could Want
Two new studies reveal fascinating evidence that manwhores are much more attracted to promiscuous women than to less sexually available women. They don’t settle for them, they strongly prefer them. Essentially, men who are oriented toward casual sex deploy “adaptive, exploitative measures against women they perceive as vulnerable.”
Study 1: Sexual exploitability: observable cues and their link to sexual attraction
Recently published in the journal Evolution and Human Behavior, the research was conducted by proteges of David Buss at the University of Texas – Austin, the most prestigious department of evolutionary studies in the U.S.
The authors begin by highlighting the natural conflict between male and female mating strategies, and posit that exploitation is an evolutionary adaptation that functions to motivate the pursuit of sexually accessible women.
What is an exploitative mating strategy?
An exploitative mating strategy is defined as an adaptive strategy to get sex when a cooperative strategy is deemed unreliable. Cooperative mating strategies are exemplified by mutual interest and consent. There are two primary reasons why males might employ exploitation tactics:
- The female does not want to have sex, while the man does.
- The female wants a relationship, while the man wants casual sex.
Exploitative strategies include four different tactics:
I. Sexual seduction
Sexual seduction is the act of charming or convincing someone into having sex. Seduction differs from courtship, which may include long-term commitment and investment as goals.
II. Verbal or nonverbal pressure
Pressure involves relentless persistence, threats, or coercion to induce an individual into having sex.
III. Deception
Deception is dishonesty about intentions, likelihood of further commitment, or personal characteristics such as those sought by members of the opposite sex—a phenomenon well documented in human mating (Haselton, Buss, Oubaid, & Angleitner, 2005).
IV. Sexual assault
Sexual assault involves using physical force, or the threat of physical force, to force sexual intercourse.
Key Implication #1: Men who rely on exploitative mating strategies are either unwilling or unable to secure cooperative mating arrangements.
What are the hypotheses re exploitative mating?
The authors developed two hypotheses:
- It is possible to identify observable cues that signal which women are exploitable.
- Men will find those cues sexually attractive.
194 college students looked at a wide range of pictures of females conveying specific messages or impressions, and males rated their sexual (short-term) attractiveness.
14 cues were significantly positively correlated with exploitability (in order of significance):
- “Easy”
- Immature
- Intoxicated
- Reckless
- Promiscuous
- Partying
- Flirty
- Promiscuous friends
- Attention seeking
- Young
- Sleepy
- Come hither look
- Revealing clothing
- Touching breast
All 14 of these cues conformed to the pattern of being positively correlated with short-term mate attractiveness while being either negatively or not significantly correlated with long-term mate attractiveness.
The following 7 cues were significantly negatively correlated with exploitability:
- Intelligent
- Shy
- Age
- Old
- Passed out
- Flushed face
- Anxious
Key Implication #2: Men most likely to pursue short-term or exploitative mating strategies are most attracted to women of low intelligence. Men who avoid smart women are likely relationship avoidant as well.
The second important finding of the study was evidence that “the correlations with short-term mate attractiveness were not driven by men simply relaxing their preferences when evaluating women as short-term mates.”
Key Implication #3: Men don’t settle for less when looking for casual sex. Men who prefer casual sex are actually most attracted to women who also prefer casual sex. Sluts find fellow sluts most sexually attractive.
Study 2: Exploitative male mating strategies: Personality, mating orientation, and relationship status
Building on the findings in the previous study, the researchers sought to determine whether there are differences among males regarding perceptions of sexual attractiveness as they specifically relate to short-term vs. long-term mating.
The researchers noted that the men who would have benefited most from a non-cooperative mating strategy are:
- men low in agreeableness (deficient in personal empathy and warmth)
- men with an unrestricted sociosexual orientation
- men not involved in an exclusive relationship
However, they found that the sociosexual orientation piece revealed an important finding.
When a man does not have a committed relationship that could be jeopardized by exploitative short-term mating, possesses low levels of agreeableness, and has a greater orientation toward uncommitted sex, the synergy of these individual differences may activate an exploitative short-term mating strategy.
However, when exploitative short-term mating does not align with a man’s sociosexual orientation, as with men with a more restricted sociosexuality, low levels of agreeableness may be insufficient to activate exploitative short-term mating mechanisms, even among unmated men.
Key Implication #4: Men are hard-wired to prefer short- or long-term mating. Men who are less likely to desire casual sex do not find promiscuity cues sexually attractive, even if they are not getting any.
Personality traits are the strongest predictors of willingness to implement exploitative strategies.
The finding that men’s agreeableness, sociosexual orientation, and relationship status interacted to predict perceptions of the sexual exploitability of women who exhibited high levels of cues to exploitability and women who exhibited low levels of these cues suggests that the higher perceptions of women’s exploitability among these men reflect a general tendency to perceive women as sexually exploitable.
…This is consistent with previous findings that men who engage in sexually aggressive behaviors have a personality profile that differs from other men on multiple personality dimensions.
Key Implication #5: Disagreeable players, also known as douchebags, are highly attuned to potential opportunities to seduce, pressure, deceive and/or assault women.
The bad news: If a player, always was a player, always will be a player.
The good news: He doesn’t want you anyway.
{ 521 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 2 3 4 »
@Cooper
Honestly, I have known from Day 1 that you could never be a player. You’re a one woman man at heart, you’re attractive, and you’re figuring it out. I’ve already said once that you are a supercatch. You should definitely hold out for a woman who meets your standards.
Not all cases are so clearcut. There are definitely some guys who flirt with the dark side – usually because they’re not getting the results they want. They go full bore asshole and have a couple of ONSs, and it’s very, very hard to go back.
@O
I think I mentioned I’m a woman of results. When I decided to have my minor on comparative theology my goal was to find out the truth of faith as practiced by everyone. Once I learned almost everything I needed to learn in theory I spent at least six months taking studies directly from the people of faith: Mormons, Evangelicals, Jehovah witnesses, Muslim (sadly Jewish community in my country is small only two synagogues and they are wary of people approaching at least they were back them so I didn’t got that one), Buddhists, Catholics…The difference was not only abysmal it was impossible to reconcile.
A couple of times I tried to point out some inconsistency and I got at worst anger and at best “oh…okay” with no attempts to improve or change or learn or even challenge their believe. Given that I’m a woman I’m pretty sure any critique of the method they are using because I know “The source” will have similar results so what would be the point?
I don’t consider Roissy or Roosh a saint of game but is the saint of the students of Game, whatever he distilled from it the guys prefer him to The Game, so the real world is filled with his ideas not the original ones. Is the difference between Jesus and Paul to use another biblical example.
So in the end the practical triumphs the theoretical, you cannot erase The Crusades by claiming that there was not enough biblical basis on 90% of their motivation. So I’m mostly being practical studying gamers as they are now, not Game as it was founded because it seems to me that was the first step and we are living farther away from that, if you consider that intellectually lazy so be it.
@Cooper
I never saw Mystery pump himself up at the expense of others. I read about him and have watched most of his videos. He actually comes across as remarkably free of ego, IMO.
@Wudang
Thanks for the book rec. I’ll check it out.
@Megaman
????But I agree completely!
@Leap
It’s a great story and a great read. I read it at the rather tenacious urging of Obsidian, and felt all my reservations dissipate. The guys in The Game are good men, trying to find a way to connect with women. Even when Neil Strauss had 8 (8!) women in rotation, he was 100% honest with all of them.
“Bad boys don’t get married, or if they do they tend to divorce. As you say, it’s a bad strategy.”
You are correct – they don’t get married. With that being said, why do women get pregnant from one and then blame the man for not wanting to marry ? Entrapment through a child is cruel and perverse to child.
Given the level of education, availability of birth control, low failure rate of birth control, and high incidence of multiple abortions. Why are there so many single mothers with illegitimate children ?
Sounds like stupid promiscuous females getting involved with stupid promiscuous males and then blaming the promiscuous male for their own stupid choice for choosing the promiscuous male.
“Again, the point of the study was to examine various male mating strategies. Of course some women are acting slutty, and don’t need to be exploited to have consensual sex. ”
That is the fallacy of the study based in the definition of exploitation and the claim of men are exploiting women: Here is the definition of exploitation:
1. To employ to the greatest possible advantage: exploit one’s talents.
2. To make use of selfishly or unethically:
3. To advertise; promote.
So how are the 14 cues the women are exhibiting are NOT exploitation ?
How is “acting slutty” NOT exploitation according to the definition ?
The study shows – the women use slutty behavior (SEE DEFINITION) to exploite men and blame men for getting “turned on” by a women promiscuous behavior.
“I think girls can definitely bring out alpha in guys. There was a post a while back – Caroline and Josh, I think. She worked to give him positive reinforcement for more dominant behaviors. However, if you don’t bring some dominance you’re not going to have the opportunity to get that girl to work with you. A woman can reinforce your dominant behavior and make you more comfortable about asserting dominance, but a baseline level of dominance is the price of entry. It just is. There is no way around this. The good news is that Game lays it out for you, with lots of illustrative examples.”
About psycopathy. THe numbers aren`t one to one as the finding is that those men have many more sexual partners than average. The ratio would rather be 1:2 or 1:5 or soemthing not 1:1.
And, although alphas get most of their partners amongst the more promiscuous women the number counts of the most promiscuous women don`t match the number counts of the most promiscuous men so those men have to have gotten large parts of their numbers from less promiscuous women. This has been the repeated finding in the studies I have seen about this over the years where there have always been more men with very high numbers than women with very high numbers. Also I know lots of men with very high numbers but very few women who are anywhere near matching them. I have male friends and friends of friends with numbers arround 100 and 150 and know tons of men with number such as 40, 50, and 70 but hardly ever meet women wtih numbers above 30 and only know about one that might be over 100. Almost every guy I know with high numbers also have had more than one virgin when they were in their teens and early twenties. This is also the experience of every guy online I talk to about this who has a high count himself or who have friends who has a high count. They have had several, often many women that where very low count or even virgins. I have also had several women that had had little or no sex outside relationships than except with me. I doubt that I and all of my friends and all of the guys I have ever discussed this with online are anomalies. Its just impossible for me to believe there is a 1:1 matching between alphas and sluts. I highly agree more promsicuous women is where alphas get most of their sex but I think you are conveniantly twisting it too mcuh in that direction. None of the guys will ever buy that story because it counteracts the experience of all of us.
Now, for the actual numbers. This study for example show that more than twice as many men as women have had above 10 partners. That means they have gotten at least half their sex with less promiscuous women.
“more men than women reported having sexual intercourse with 10 or more partners of the opposite sex (27 per cent of men and 13 per cent of women).”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/relationships/sexual-health-and-advice/8958520/Average-man-has-9-sexual-partners-in-lifetime-women-have-4.html
The study also showed a bit more women than men had only had one partner which is also an important fact.
Here is another one showing the same pattern even stronger:
And for the highest number of partners in the study, 8.3% of women and 21.4% of men have had 15 or more partners. While the number of sex partners increased with age, by the age of 24 more than 14% of men and 7 % of women have had 15 or more sex partners.
http://drjengunter.wordpress.com/2011/12/03/how-many-sex-partners-do-people-really-have/
The kinsey institute reports that amongst men:
16% have had 11-20 partners, and 17% have had 21 or more partners
While amongst women only:
6% have had 11-20 partners, and 3% have had 21 or more partners
http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/resources/FAQ.html
Which is a very strong confirmation of what the manosphere has been saying about alphas hooking up with a lot of less promiscuous girls.
So rather than saying alphas sleep with promsicuous women it would be more acurate to say that alphas get about half or less of their sex with promiscuous women and half or more of their sex with moderately and not so promiscuous women.
“I personally think that the “define the relationship” talk should be left to the woman. I’m not saying that the guy can’t be monogamous or anything. But maybe it should be the girl’s job to worry about the actual “boyfriend-and-girlfriend” titles/”Facebook official” stuff.”
Conventional PUA advice is to not bring up the discussion about relationship status and let her do that when she just can`t take waiting any longer and just HAS to know. That aparently is almost always at the three month mark which suggest to me that there is some sort of hormonal thing going on that forces her to define the relationship or move on.
“Bad boys don’t get married”
But they do tend to end up with a baby her and there. Even american prison inmates have more children than average american men.
“Bad boys don’t get married
But they do tend to end up with a baby her and there. Even american prison inmates have more children than average american men.”
How is this attractive ????? LOL !!!
Female that are “attracted” to this are stupid ( understating this to be kind)
Stupid is forever and ugly.
@Wudang
I have an alternate explanation for this.
The three month mark is the point in time where a man must decide whether or not to toss her or keep her.
It would make sense that the most evolutionarily fit women would be those that inquired at this time.
Let me explain.
I meet Jane now.
We fuck.
Three months from now in my cave with a lil fire goin roastin some mammoth Jane comes to me with her stomach bulging a lil bit.
Claims baby is mine.
At this I must decide whether Jane is faithful to me or if the baby is not mine. If I decide it is likely mine then I commit. If I decide not mine I do not commit and she is in a royally fucked position because I’m the one with tasty mammoth meat.
Therefore it would make sense that woman would seeks confirmation of commitment just before baby bump shows up. It removes all that unpleasantness, especially if she has been unfaithful.
I think 3 months is also the standard time it takes for a man to decide whether a girlfriend is keeper vs. slut pile material. I know for me I throw out “faithful” tests (analogous to shit tests) quite extensively for the first 3 months of a relationship upon which I relax their use (still throw some out even now but not very often).
I think 3 months is also the standard time it takes for a man to decide whether a girlfriend is keeper vs. slut pile material. I know for me I throw out “faithful” tests (analogous to shit tests) quite extensively for the first 3 months of a relationship upon which I relax their use (still throw some out even now but not very often).
Interestingly enough I don’t connect emotionally with anyone (whether friend, lover or enemy) before the 3 or 6 months mark. I mentioned before that I don’t have first impressions and it takes me around that time to say “I think this person is X” My friend (the idiot) used to be a first impressions girl if she liked you the first day she will fell in love in like a week, if she didn’t liked you right away you were doomed forever (She actually had an orbiter for the longest time we all told her he was in love with her and we all though they will end up together…not a chance) I wonder if there is a correlation on how long it takes for people to connect and how that relates to their dating/mating choices…pondering pondering.
@Susan
“I think it was an honest mistake, but if lots of men feel like you do, then what’s required is for women to get more self-conscious about the way they move.”
This can be related to the above.
Let me place this shiny $100 bill (brown, not that shitty green coloured money that all looks the same) between us and take a bet that said couple had been dating for less than a year?
Since I know I’m right (if somehow I’m wrong, please refrain from making me look like an idiot and just nod and smile) I will move on.
The intial stages of a relationship for a man are centred around: 1) getting laid, 2) determining how faithful she is.
1. This is self evident, no explanation required.
2. Now how do we test this.
Our mating is core pair bond with opportunistic cheating.
Best way to test fiathfulness (see above)?
i) Present new girl with opportunity and examine response.
ii) Test new girls ability/willingness to create said opportunity.
Theres multiple ways to do number one but all it requires is the word no. Shorter than yes and easier to say. Not really complex on how to pass that faithful test.
Number two is about as sinister as your average guy is going to get.
Take new girl to place filled with studs wearing provocative clothing (her not them) and test response to given attention.
Examine to see if see seeks said attention.
Either should be a dealbreaker.
As you said accidents happen and I’ll concede the one presented seems entirely reasonable.
However in early dating phase with little basis of trust established accidents can end budding relationships.
If your example had occured in the first few weeks/months of the relationship it wouldn’t have been a fight. He would have dumped her on the spot (assuming he had any self respect).
Later in the relationship it will lead to a fight.
Much later maybe just minor annoyance.
Much, much later it would probably pass unnoticed.
My point was this:
You should suggest to your readers that the intial dating phase (say 6 months) the guy will be subconsciously (potentially consciously) looking for reasons to rule them out as girlfriends.
One of those disqualifiers would definetly be the creation/trying to garner attention from other males. Call it faithful tests which utilize a pass-fail system intially.
Let me give you two personal examples.
The fail.
Couple girls ago I invited a girl for a St. Paddies day weekend in another city at my friends uni (we’d been “seeing” each other for about 1.5 months and she had potential.)
On the way home…
Your friend is really cute……….
Never spoke to her again.
The pass. (My fiance.)
She dislikes slutty clothes. Another party weekend (not the green one but I can’t remeber what), same friend from above in my city.
Bug her to wear something slutty mostly to get cred from the guys.
Show up at a house pre-party.
Playing beer pong with said friend.
She sits on couch in the sexiest, littlest black cocktail dress and basically folds up into a ball. Puts a pillow on her stomach to hide.
Three guys try and talk to her in the hour or so we’re their. She gives them the pleasent but GTFA treatment.
Epic pass with bonus marks and award cookies and ribbons and butterflies and all that jazz.
Note: Friend refers to friends, main friend I’ve known since we threw sand at each others castles back in the day.
“Sorry, that’s a misunderstanding, I wasn’t clear. I meant that is a consolation prize for me, lol. ”
I understand. Just needed to make sure.
P.S Big letters were for attention grabbing not anger.
@ Lokland
Congrats on a bastard child !!! Whoo hoo !!!
There is more to it than what you portrayed.
1. The child is screwed and ends up being aborted.
– Good luck to you and girly getting over the emotional and mental trauma on that one if you ever do.
2. Take the high road
- Keep the kid and marry the gal.
- Odds are against you and her making it. It takes some serious commitment and integrity to hang in there ( btw you just screwed yourself financially, career, and severely limited your options and bought your life instructor. Pretty expensive imo
3. Dont marry the gal and she keeps the kid
- you just picked up baggage financially, emotionally, mentally for the life of the kid or till pregnant psycho gal gets married and some other guy picks up her and your kid.
What about the outcome of the child ? This wasn’t his/her idea to show up. It was Jane and yours.
Permit me to ask a hard question.
Whats your take on 2 peoples “test for a lifelong commitment / encumberment ” starts at the time of hookup and the final decision is based on the wrecking a innocent life ?
@Machael Singer
It was a hypothetical bro…
Sorry bro – what you stated is reality and if you know anyone this has happened to then you have a small circle of acquaintances. Btw, USA government studies back this up.
It has been stated the definition of insanity is repeat something over and over expecting a different outcome. That is a little too kind imo. It should include stupidity is to repeat something over and over again expecting a different outcome.
When people hook up there are “real world” consequences. How many females have abortions a year ? How many repeat offenders ? How many single female parents.
The mark of a real “Man” is one who is disciplined, self controlled, and responsible for his own actions. While he is at this – he will protect women and children not destroy them ( in this case – avoid sluts).
Btw, a man will use his big head to control his little head and not the other way around. Otherwise, a male will eventually destroy himself and those around him.
@Susan
What about Girls’ Episode 6? (see #239)
Why did Lena have Hannah seem so unimpressed by what seemed like sincerity?
I found this discussion about the SMP 20 years ago very interesting and relevant to HUS.
Oops. Here is the link:
http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=193478
@Wudang
good link & insight from “backbreaker
“but i don’t think women per say have changed. i got cheated on, flaked on growing up as well lol. the main issue is that most women have very unrealistic exceptions of their pulling power.
and in reality it’s not their fault it’s ours. we have created a vicious cycle. all the AFC’s out there have told all these hb 7′s that their **** doesn’t stink and they believe it.
i will add this as well. becuase men have been so chumpish the last decade or so, it has stunted the growth of most women. most women are told becuase they look good in tight jeans and have nice tits they don’t have to do antyhing else to attract a top flight man. ”
How this relates to this blog is this.
Based on the definition of exploitation seen in #307 the men are being blamed for exploitation when the sluts are in truth exploiting the guys.
In summary, if a guy thinks with his small head you will eventually get caught up up blamed and pay the price for satisfying a glandular urge without thinking about it and wrecking their lives and the females they come in contact with.
>> “Conventional PUA advice is to not bring up the discussion about relationship status and let her do that when she just can`t take waiting any longer and just HAS to know. ”
Yeah, I know initiating “the talk” always makes me feel very lame and girly. But at least I’m female. I think it just comes across as kind of vulnerable and insecure. I’m not morally opposed to guys initiating the “relationship talk” or anything, but it does come across as very “Beta”.
>> “That aparently is almost always at the three month mark which suggest to me that there is some sort of hormonal thing going on that forces her to define the relationship or move on.”
Haha I did it at the three week mark. :p But the main reason why I brought it up so early was because we live in different cities (not quite an LDR, but still geographically inconvenient) and it was pretty much inevitable that we would be spending the night at each other’s places. I didn’t like the idea of spending the night with a guy unless I knew that we were 100% exclusive.
>> “IOI Bootcamp for women?”
Not a bad idea. I know a lot of the guys think this knowledge should be common sense, but most women Have. No. Clue.
Most of the advice out there is Cosmo type stuff, which is pretty much useless.
“Haha I did it at the three week mark. :p But the main reason why I brought it up so early was because we live in different cities (not quite an LDR, but still geographically inconvenient) and it was pretty much inevitable that we would be spending the night at each other’s places. I didn’t like the idea of spending the night with a guy unless I knew that we were 100% exclusive.”
I think the three month thingy might be dependent on somewhat aloof alpha game. At least on not going in very romantic style etc. Then I think she will ask sooner.
“And I don not feel like I was chosen because he was finished having fun. But maybe it doesnt work that way male to female? Only female to male?”
This is probably a somewhat different scenario. A guy who has finished “having fun” implies he was never, ever serious about those other girls and actually is entering into a serious relationship with you. And yes, he is definitely still having fun with you in a way, but in a respectful way, that fully maximizes and includes you.
What would you say if your husband was regularly taking these women on horse drawn carriage rides in the winter and in the summer to Caribbean islands and grand vacations and he wrote poems and books for these other girls.
For you, he realllllyyyyy only bothers you for sex maybe twice a day, and other than that he barely talks to you. McDonalds for dinner.
When you confront him on this, he says he was once a beta, and then he learned game from the Dark Lord and knows that he doesn’t actually need to do all that stupid stuff to get what he wants from you and his romantic side is dead. He is finally learning to “respect himself.”
“@ADBG
I’m sorry last night was a bummer. Getting blown out sucks. FWIW, I think you’ve taken a huge leap forward just by separating from the ex.”
Thanks, Susan. It’ll be all good. It’s possible that night-game just isn’t my natural forte
But I’ve met, oh, five or six new girls in the past few days, so life goes on.
Oh and Cooper, regarding the whole “reflection on character” thing:
Yes, it is a reflection on character.
It is also a reflection on culture.
No matter how desperate I got, never, ever would I roofie a girl or rape her. Society condemns this as absolutely wrong and this has how I have been brought up.
There is no societal expectation whatosever of refraining from casual sexual activity. In fact you are MOCKED for not wanting to hook up randomly or being a virgin.
My favorite story on this is American Pie. American Pie is actually a story about shame, about guys who feel horribly shamed by their virginity and do whatever it takes to get rid of it, and that includes doing some HORRIBLE things to people. All of them realize that they are wrong, have done bad things, and realize sex doesn’t matter that much. They all get laid anyways, because, you know, in a decent culture you wouldn’t starve your characters of sexual attentin that everyone else is getting. The protagonists do get their reward.
American Pie has instead been twisted into an endorsement of raunch culture where casual sex is the norm.
Now, I have had a very different experience than most people. The books I read and the culture I was exposed to put casual sex in a very negative light. My social circle did not engage in sexual sex, they were mostly AFCs so there was no real social sanction. Again and again I heard people older than me, more experienced than me, saying “I wish I didn’t have all that meaningless sex” or “I wish I saved myself,” etc.
But other people weren’t exposed to this.
It’s tough to be too judgmental about them when they are living in total ignorance.
Wudang:
“The article also mentioned that today about 33% of the men are getting 66% of the children. The men who get the most children are wealthy, smart and educated but get divorced and start several families. One of the topics that has not been covered well at HUS is looking at the remarriage market. ”
———
Whenever the “40% of men vs. 80% of women successfully passed on their DNA” is brought up, I often wonder if rather than women participating in harems, a more likely explanation might be that due to the high rate of women dying at childbirth- the widowers simply remarried and had more children.
Confirmed slut tell
http://www.businessinsider.com/do-tattoos-mean-sex-2012-5?utm_source=readme&utm_medium=rightrail&utm_term=&utm_content=6&utm_campaign=recirc
American Pie
You know I never liked the American Pie movies, bathroom humor is not my thing. I liked the Porky’s movies the best. Not sure how manosphere guys see them, but I found them funnier, of course nowadays with prostitution being illegal I guess it wouldn’t translate well.
Whenever the “40% of men vs. 80% of women successfully passed on their DNA” is brought up, I often wonder if rather than women participating in harems, a more likely explanation might be that due to the high rate of women dying at childbirth- the widowers simply remarried and had more children.
I think is a combination of factors men more prone and encouraged to do things that could and will get them killed (war, hunting expeditions…) and also high rates of deaths during childbirth for young women, plus widows remarrying as well, plus harems. I don’t think it was a matter of just one thing, YMMV.
Confirmed slut tell
There goes my plan for a tasteful tattoo at some point on the future
@ Abbot
That’s nothing new. Any body modifications are a slut tell. Multiple piercings, tattoos, unnatural hair dyes, and drastic haircuts. Basically the more they do to their body, the more likely they’ll let you be one of those things.
It all fits together:
1. Cads look for stupid women.
2. The sons of cads inherit the stupidity of their mothers.
3. They also inherit their promiscuity of their fathers.
So we would expect that, over time, promiscuity would become correlated with stupidity (at least in men). Let me check Google….
…well look at that!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/7339654/Intelligent-men-less-likely-to-cheat.html
@Obsidian
First, I do need to point out that Anacaona, in my experience, is not pretending to be an authority on Game, or even particularly interested in debating its merits. Her own frame of reference reflects growing up in the DR, and dealing with the men in her own community. While her definition of alpha vs. beta is unique to her in these parts (and whose isn’t?), it overlaps with others’ enough to make productive discussion possible, IMO. Personally, I don’t think that reading up on Game would be the most productive use of her time as she works, is a writer, and is preparing to welcome a baby to her family.
Second, I do appreciate your analysis of what really goes on with the cherrypicking among bloggers to distort in self-serving ways. I will be honest here – as you may know, I never write about a study using a secondary source. I always read the published paper, analyze the statistical correlates, etc. There have been many times when I’ve been madly taking notes, outlining a post, and suddenly come upon a piece of data, or an admission by the researchers, that renders my whole argument null and void. Or at least weakens it considerably. It is soooooo tempting to ignore it. I know that it’s unlikely a single reader will do the work to find it and call me out. But I can’t bring myself to do it. I always dial my presentation back to allow for that conflict or uncertainty in the findings.
Roissy has riffed on several studies that I’ve read closely, and I’ve often felt “Aha, I see what you did there.” He often slices and dices to create a whole new (and false) set of conclusions, which always paint women in a terrible light. Naturally, this is always accompanied by self-congratulatory “I told you so’s” or “Science is finally catching up with Heartiste!”
In short, there’s a lot of propaganda and readers should be highly critical and skeptical, particularly when they’ve been advised to alter their behavior. I expect that (and I get it, lol).
@Esau
“Work for it” simply means that you have to earn a man’s affection, respect and commitment. It’s no different than any other relationship that both parties choose to create. We don’t make a stranger at a cocktail party our best friend – we test compatibility and confirm the person’s character – the likelihood that they will be a true and loyal friend.
“Love at first sight” is of course not possible. It’s just a powerful physical attraction. In my experience, most of those relationships don’t stand the test of time. For example, I wonder what percentage of impulsive weddings in Las Vegas end in divorce.
We’re all very familiar with male skepticism of a woman who grants access to sexual intercourse right away. Odds are she’s done this before, possibly often. Her mating value is severely compromised as her partner perceives that he is nothing special – this is just her MO. He may suspect that she is after his resources. (Research shows that access to resources is one of the primary reasons women evolved a short-term mating strategy.)
It’s the same with women and commitment. When a guy goes from 0 to 60 in a date or two, in constant contact, aiming hard to please, possibly expressing jealousy or ownership – the woman perceives herself as nothing special to this man. He offered commitment without even knowing her! She suspects that he is strictly interested in what she has to offer physically. In an era rife with casual sex, this has the added implication that the male is not able to acquire sex elsewhere – a sort of negative social proof.
In short, women want to experience a mutual falling in love based on the growth of real feelings of affection. A man who short circuits the process robs her of one of the most important experiences she will ever have. That may not be his intention, but she is likely to experience it this way.
Relationships are more likely to last if women take their time offering sex and men take their time offering commitment.
@Anacaona
I think this is a critical point. Online Game discussions have veered strongly away from the original source material. In the three years I’ve been blogging, there has been a strong influx of “dark” Game bloggers, and I’ve even seen some of the good guys indulging in moral equivalency to justify dabbling in unethical tactics.
Obsidian’s brand of ethical Game is in danger of becoming extinct.
@Wudang
All studies of sexual behavior among college students show that the numbers are nearly identical for men and women:
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/04/28/hookinguprealities/whos-really-having-sex-in-college/
Also:
http://www.acha-ncha.org/docs/ACHA-NCHA-II_ReferenceGroup_DataReport_Fall2010.pdf
(see question 19 on page 26)
I believe that the sexual habits of young people are distinct from previous generations, so while CDC stats or other sources can be useful, I am particularly interested in the behavior of Americans aged 18-24.
ADBG says
What would you say if your husband was regularly taking these women on horse drawn carriage rides in the winter and in the summer to Caribbean islands and grand vacations and he wrote poems and books for these other girls.
For you, he realllllyyyyy only bothers you for sex maybe twice a day, and other than that he barely talks to you. McDonalds for dinner.
When you confront him on this, he says he was once a beta, and then he learned game from the Dark Lord and knows that he doesn’t actually need to do all that stupid stuff to get what he wants from you and his romantic side is dead. He is finally learning to “respect himself
———————————————————————
LOL, ADBG!
This really did make me chuckle. He told me long ago that he took his prom date to Wendys for dinner.
I have grilled him extensively- I was never the type to date a guy like him. So I was very interested in knowing how that all works.
What I came to learn is that there ARE girls who are willing to sleep with guys like this. HE never promised anything to any of them. As a matter of fact he described a few girl he passed up because he knew they wanted more. He said they had ” stars shooting out of their eyes” for him. He avoided those, and stuck to the type of girl who would come over at 2am.
Now that I think of it, I was more curious about what the girls were really like than anything else. And shocked and so many of the stories of how little it took to bed them.
Well, the studies on the general poppulation show the oposite pattern, alphas getting over half their sex from less promsicuous women. And these aren`t`old studies, they are current ones. THe pattern increased by age but was already crystal clear by age 24:
And for the highest number of partners in the study, 8.3% of women and 21.4% of men have had 15 or more partners. While the number of sex partners increased with age, by the age of 24 more than 14% of men and 7 % of women have had 15 or more sex partners.
So there is no reason to believe this generation has a different pattern wtih the promiscuous men and women aligned in a perfect 1:1 pattern. The reality is, as the numbers show, VERY different from that.
@Cooper
I didn’t like Episode 6. It was the one episode directed and co-written by Judd Apatow. Lena Dunham was careful to mention that she had nothing to do with the parents’ sex scene. For me, the episode just didn’t ring true, and I was truly repulsed by her parents having sex in the shower. Gross. Who wants to watch middle aged people having sex?
However, I think you raise a really interesting point about Hannah and the pharmacist. I think she did find him attractive, she was obviously trying to look her best as she got ready for the evening. As you say, he was cute and nice and stable. But there were two major ways in which they were not compatible:
1. His midwestern life has no appeal to her as an edgy Brooklyn girl. They got pizza on paper plates for dinner. The fundraiser they went to featured her high school friend Heather dancing in an embarrassingly bad way, and the pharmacist was bopping to the music, clearly enjoying himself. I think Heather thought he was lame. She wants a guy with NYC edge. Wasn’t there a scene where she says she’s a writer, and he questions what that even means?
And remember how her mother observes that he doesn’t light a fire under her but he will do for today? (I thought that was an incredibly bitchy remark, btw.)
2. Hannah’s taste in men is suspect for obvious reasons. Even in this SMP, she’s worse off than most women. Marnie can’t believe she keeps seeing this douche Adam that no one has ever met. Also, her recent sexual experience is rather odd, to say the least. Unlike Adam, who is always walking around shirtless and with his jeans undone, the pharmacist was quick to hide his body under the comforter and go straight for missionary. That is very vanilla by any standards, much less Hannah’s. The fact that she would try to insert her finger into his bum at the start cracked me up – what was she thinking? And then asking him if she’s tight like a baby? He was truly disgusted. (I actually thought it was hilarious). So they were not sexually compatible, to say the least.
A woman like Hannah, who is head over heels for a rejecting slacker, is never going to give a guy like the pharmacist a chance.
By the way, I loved how Adam said on the phone, “I miss you. I saw your name on my missed calls and I thought “Where the fuck is that girl?”"
Could it be that Adam is developing real feelings for Hannah? Hope springs eternal!
Re Susan at 333:
You’re re-stating the basic principle here, but you haven’t answered my specific question:
“Work for it” simply means that you have to earn a man’s affection, respect and commitment.
And she earns that affection, respect and commitment by doing what, exactly? What kind of thing do you have in mind? is it anything other than simply catering to all the man’s whims?
@GudEnuf
EPIC comment! So true.
@Wudang
Was there also a difference in the reported mean? Because we all know what that implies…
@Esau
I did answer it. We fall in love when there is attraction and compatibility. Smart people also screen for character. So to earn a man’s affection, respect and commitment, she should have to display compatibility and good character. How one defines those may vary, but a man’s offering commitment to a woman he hardly knows or who has treated him poorly, e.g. flaking, shit tests, is going to be perceived as unattractive.
“Was there also a difference in the reported mean? Because we all know what that implies…”
Not sure. But if you are implying it means that the men are lying, the only study we have looking at this found that women lowered their number a lot and men lowered their number a tiny bit.
@SW
“????But I agree completely!”
Your advice to Coop seemed a little disconcerting, particularly #266. A bit like giving a kid the keys to the car and not caring how he drives, as long as the joyride isn’t in your neighborhood. You did acknowledge the risk, that this might be help “create” more men you’ll ultimately have to warn your target female demographic to avoid. That’s quite a double-edged sword to wield. Hopefully this isn’t taking one step forward and two steps back. I don’t think the current SMP is suffering from an overabundance of commitment-minded guys, quite the opposite.
He obviously has misgivings about game, which is marketed as a catch-all solution. I’ll agree that he can certainly benefit from some focused assertiveness in the right environment, with the kinds of girls he’d find compatible. I probably employed something similar, but it wasn’t around complete strangers. Trying to date an unknown quantity probably has the lowest success rate these days.
“Relationships are more likely to last if women take their time offering sex and men take their time offering commitment.”
Agreed. Guys shouldn’t even mention commitment (or whatever euphemism fits) until sex is imminent. I didn’t, even though it was on my mind leading up to T minus zero. But the “gatekeeper” analogy for men vs. women doesn’t completely make sense. The context of first-time sex will to a large degree determine whether the relationship will even happen, let alone succeed. So I agree, women need to be in the driver’s seat on that one.
But commitment isn’t some one-time event. BOTH parties have to agree to it first, and be “practioners” on an ongoing basis. That’s much more significant than sex at the beginning IMO. It seems like apples and oranges to compare the two. Given that about ~ 1/3 of guys these days have either eschewed commitment altogether, or don’t remain faithful once in a relationship, I’m wondering if women can afford to be so picky about which kinds of men are offering exclusivity?
@this is jen
“LOL, ADBG!
This really did make me chuckle. He told me long ago that he took his prom date to Wendys for dinner.
I have grilled him extensively- I was never the type to date a guy like him. So I was very interested in knowing how that all works.
What I came to learn is that there ARE girls who are willing to sleep with guys like this. HE never promised anything to any of them. As a matter of fact he described a few girl he passed up because he knew they wanted more. He said they had ” stars shooting out of their eyes” for him. He avoided those, and stuck to the type of girl who would come over at 2am.
Now that I think of it, I was more curious about what the girls were really like than anything else. And shocked and so many of the stories of how little it took to bed them.”
So nothing he did was unable to make you feel like you weren’t special, he was absolutely into a full commitment with you and treated you well and didn’t treat you like crap. When he was going through his “fun” stage, he just using girl and treating them like crap, essentially. You’re totally different.
The girl who “waits” for me is treating me as totally different, by denying me something that I very much want with her. By the things she WON’T do with me. Because she wants to feel special. Her way of feeling special with me, is literally treating me like crap. Her way of feeling special with me, is saying that she had much more fun with other guys, and is ready for “boring time” with me.
Absolutely no guy wants to feel like that.
Doubly-so for a redpill guy who is having trouble getting relationships. Dogsquat has a post about insecurities in relationships:
http://consideredcarefully.wordpress.com/2012/05/25/on-insecurity/
This type of girl literally confirms every single INsecurity a sexually inexperienced, red-pill guy can have. Every single one. This person doesn’t make you feel whole: They tear you down into a thousand little pieces and make you feel like a child.
It seems guys like Megaman and Tom do not have this kind of insecurity. That is fine for them. Guys like Cooper and myself do. Pairing up with girls who think like this and act like this can easily become a soul-crushing experience.
@ Susan
” So they were not sexually compatible, to say the least.”
What? This is the first time they were having sex and they barely knew each other! Maybe if they actually established some sort of realistic, working relationship and explored somewhat sexually they could find something that worked for them.
Good sex can take just as much effort as a good relationship. It’s not magic!
Oh, also:
“I think Heather thought he was lame.”
Absolutely. I assume you mean Hannah thought the pharmacist guy was lame? I agree entirely. The problem is that Hannah is an immature child that she has no idea what she wants, no idea what “cool” is, and therefore has that very college-like attitude called “FOMO” or “Fear of Missing Out.” Because of this massive immaturity on her part, she is pissing away vast amounts of money and a life most would envy. And probably she would envy, too, if she could her head out of her own ass.
But then again, I don’t like Hannah. She thought she was “in a relationship” with Adam, and then immediately wanted to fuck her boss, who is married. Hannah is a bad, bad, bad, bad, bad person, and even at the end of the episode when she says Pharmacist Guy is good enough “for the day.”
Hannah uses guys.
Hannah uses her friend. That’s why she doesn’t care that Marnie’s relationship was ruined by her writing, except to note HOW AWESOME HER WRITING MUST BE!
Hannah is bad, bad, bad, bad, bad. Eric didn’t dodge a bullet, he dodged a 5-megaton nuclear warhead coupled with a bad case of hemorrhoids.
I think a couple threads ago, you asked me why I called all these girls sociopaths. To be totally honest, I am not sure that is the correct word to use, because I am not all up on the DSM terminology. But every single one of them has shown that they are willing to DEVASTATE other people’s lives and emotions, without even realizing let alone caring about the consequences, all in the pursuit of ridiculous goals like “I am unsmotable” or “I didn’t want him to break up with me” or “I wanted a good story.”
And willing to devastate the lives of the people closest to them! Charlie absolutely loved Marine, willing to do anything. Used. Hannah’s parents love her so, so much. Used. Ex-boyfriend. Used. I guess Jessa is a special case, because the ex boyfriend wasn’t that close to her, but Jessa has demonstrated no emotional connection to anyone.
I know you’re rooting for Adam and Hannah to get together, but I personally hope Hannah has her heart treated like monkey-meat some more, because she so clearly deserves it.
@SW 338
*K.O.’s Susan’s hamster*
“The market is skewed so that dick has no value because guys are constantly offering it”
That is why so many women, especially the promiscuous ones, cannot understand why nearly all commitment-oriented men place value on vagina and how a woman treated it. They fail or do not want to see it from the male perspective, only their own.
@Abbot
Exactly. A woman who can and is willing to see the other side of the coin will empower herself and benefit her sex and dating life. Those who don’t probably just never met a guy who made them confront these truths.
ADBG says.
So nothing he did was unable to make you feel like you weren’t special, he was absolutely into a full commitment with you and treated you well and didn’t treat you like crap. When he was going through his “fun” stage, he just using girl and treating them like crap, essentially. You’re totally different.
—————————————————————–
If you mean what I think you mean here…which is he treated me well, then yes, you described it correctly. BTW I don’t know that he treated every woman before me like crap, but he certainly didnt have to work hard to notch count them.
Then again — I doubt I would have put up with any bad treatment. I was in no way looking for a relationship at that point in my life, havng just been thru a divorce from the first guy I ever slept with. At that time I was soaking up all the info I could about the way women and men interacted.
—————————————————————–
ADBG says
The girl who “waits” for me is treating me as totally different, by denying me something that I very much want with her. By the things she WON’T do with me. Because she wants to feel special. Her way of feeling special with me, is literally treating me like crap. Her way of feeling special with me, is saying that she had much more fun with other guys, and is ready for “boring time” with me.
Absolutely no guy wants to feel like that.
RUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@Susan
Thank you for you comments about my choices.
Obsidian probably already made up his mind but thank you nevertheless.
Since is brought up I want to clarify my interest on Gamers and Men’s rights.
1) I actually want to live in a fair world. I already lived on “Asshole supremacy island” and I didn’t wanted to escape on “Bitch supremacy first world”. As limited as my condition as a woman make me to completely grasp the suffering of the average Beta male I do feel for them as much as I feel for my single female friends back in my country. I do see them as the victims of this situation and I wish to give as little help as I can.
2) I choose to trade my culture for my husband’s and raise a family here. I don’t believe on going unprepared to face any situation I’m learning everything about the challenge my kids will face (male and female) in the future in order to offer them a clear view of the world so at least whatever choices they make they are informed. Sadly in daily interactions PC culture has lead to shallow relationships, people can’t speak of certain things because it will make people feel uncomfortable. Thus I need to dig deeper, I already spent almost two years among feminists (and I still have some feminists I read like The feminist breeder) and I looked for the other side of the argument to find that IMO feminism is in its Age of terror stage and thus I side with the issues and concerns men have about dating and men’s rights places, since I think they are more in need of help than females at this point.
3) I also want to serve as the warning label missing in many of this advices for men. Herb mentioned that the first feminists wavers made the mistake of striving to give power to women and skew personal responsibility, consequences and ethics. Thinking that with power women will choose to be good and fair but like he mentioned women listened to sluts and the man haters instead not the ones that really wanted a gender equal work not some sort of gender supremacy. I know the mission of the manosphere is to help their brothers to not be chumps of women and to find some level of happiness and I think that is good in general terms and I agree with Susan that most gamers won’t cross the dark side… in this generation.
But letting this knowledge out without making sure that there is some controls and understanding on the other side is dangerous. Men of the next generations wouldn’t have any incentive to act any different than modern feminists do now, punishing generations of women to come for the crimes of their ancestors, most like feminist foolishly and unfairly does with the good men of this culture. Men can become corrupted by their attractiveness in the same way women had been corrupted by their own, and end up like my country men (cheaters, neglectful parents, batterers and murderers), in few generations and even though I’m sure many of you might think is the fair thing to happen after decades of abuse or that is impossible (effectively many ancient cultures have tales of times when women ruled and abused their power and hence why they lost all rights, several of them) because is the nature of humanity: the circle of gender interactions, have always a gender trying to make the other gender pay for the sins of their parents. I would feel I would be humanistically lazy if I don’t tell what I had seen and what might happen. I believe firmly that “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”, so I will be the annoying reminder.
I might be just a vulgar Cassandra and nothing I mention touches anyone struggling with the unfairness of the current market, but I will say it anyway, there must be a better way and as long as I believe it and our gracious host allows it, I will be around to tell it, is better than the alternative, IMO,YMMV.
@Susan
By the way, I loved how Adam said on the phone, “I miss you. I saw your name on my missed calls and I thought “Where the fuck is that girl?””
Could it be that Adam is developing real feelings for Hannah? Hope springs eternal!
Here we go again, Susan . . .
@Rone
“Exactly. A woman who can and is willing to see the other side of the coin will empower herself and benefit her sex and dating life. Those who don’t probably just never met a guy who made them confront these truths.”
Mmmm, not sure on this. I’ve tried to explain the male perspective to several women and they refuse to acknowledge it, let alone accept it as legitimate. They don’t even understand it.
Lokland has had similar experiences.
Men are wrong. Men are bad. Men know nothing about relationships or morals. Women cannot do wrong by men, because women are victims.
This is what many women have been told all their lives and, at least among the ones I have discussed some of these issues with, are unable to even consider alternative viewpoints.
@ This is jen
“RUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”
I did.
Though at her request I did make one last attempt to explain her problems to her.
In retrospect, it was hilarious.
Oh, obviously, NAWALT. Proof in point: HUS.
But it’s not a simple matter of just forcing a girl to confront the nonsense she has been taught. She has a vested interest in believing said nonsense, because otherwise she might have to admit she was at fault. This is a natural human condition.
“The trick is stay clear of the “blast site” and not to add fuel to the fire(quicken the course).”
Here is some fuel that is sure to ignite feminists
http://utexas.academia.edu/DavidMBuss/Papers/738778/Evolutionary_Psychology_and_Feminism
.
In my entire life I have seen fewer than a dozen girls dressed in really feminine and demure dresses (or skirt and blouse) that let you know they had a nice body and lots of class….It is so sexy…..However, it very often looks somewhat old-fashioned. Though, for me, that is a big plus, not a negative.
I surprised that you don’t see it often. IME, men really respond to this look.
@ ADBG
“But it’s not a simple matter of just forcing a girl to confront the nonsense she has been taught. She has a vested interest in believing said nonsense, because otherwise she might have to admit she was at fault. This is a natural human condition.”
I simply stopped trying to show women their ridiculousness. It has only been somewhat accepted once, by a friend of mine that was having issues getting over her boyfriend and now lives in Boston. She still has issues, because she has only half heartedly accepted that she’s at fault and refuses to examine her own faults, says that she’s just the way she is, and that if she even examines or tries to change it it’s not “what true love is supposed to be about.” Which was her response AFTER I gave her tough love attitudes AND had her send Susan an email because she hadn’t listened to me and I was tired of saying the same thing repeatedly.
And that’s the best case scenario.
Most often it just blows up in your face.
Just see women as what they are. Don’t try to change them or make them better. Don’t try to open their eyes or take away their hamsters. They won’t thank you for it, even if they listen you’ll get a grudging, resentful thanks at best.
Just NEXT! and find one that gets how a man wants to be treated when you meet her. Who cares if she understands how rare she is or what you had to go through to find her? I doubt she cares about that, or will thank you if you let her know. Show her your appreciation by some commitment in return for the great sex and femininity she’s adding to your life.
Hello all,
Someone mentioned that all a girl needs to do is “show up”. Well, I have been showing up and let me tell you I see no results. I meet guys, give them my number and never hear from them again. They appear interested at the time, and I always try to give indicators of interests. I really don’t know what I am doing wrong. I am 25 in good shape, dress well,and have various interests. I feel like sometimes the reason why I can’t attract a mans interests is because I’ve never been in a relationship. I am not a reform slut, I am still to this day a virgin. I’ve also tried to meet men older than me but so far no result. Any suggestions?
“I surprised that you don’t see it often. IME, men really respond to this look.”
Absolute irrefutable proof that men today want to be in the culture their lucky grandfathers lived through. Never sell yourself short.
“Someone mentioned that all a girl needs to do is “show up”
Really? Where did you read that? Show up in what context?
A while back he sang a lullaby to his daughter on YouTube and Roissy ridiculed him mercilessly for it. I thought it was incredibly sweet and loving.
It’s been a while since I saw that video, but my recollection of my first impression of it was that he was gaming his daughter. I thought that, with all the references to flowers and candy, it was a bit incestuous at worst, an introduction to game victimhood at best. What’s the “best way to say I love you?” the song asks. Being present in her life? Warning her away from PUAs? Not accostuming her to bs?
@Leap
Yep. I’m done trying to discuss things unless she brings it up and then I’m just going to explain it once and be done with it.
The last girl I saw in anything close to a feminine dress was Elliot Reid on scrubs. Mmmmm. Skip to 5:40
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWYXGa0znBc
Women in real life? Oh, I’ve seen it three times. Once was my sister’s wedding. The other time was March 30, 2006. It was the first warm day of the year, and she had on this beautiful floral pattern dress. Walked across campus with her head held down, because I think she was so insecure about wearing a dress on a slightly windy day. Why, I don’t know, it went down damn near to her ankle, but she still looked beautiful, if a bit old-fashioned.
The other time was on the roof of a building. We had secretly met up. She was wearing an adorable salmon dress that came halfway down her thigh, with a very subdued necklace lined with similar colored gems, each the size of, I dunno, a quarter? It wasn’t quite warm enough, though, not in September in Chicago, so she had to put on blue jeans for the rest of the day.
Why did Lena have Hannah seem so unimpressed by what seemed like sincerity?
Because she’s nuts?
Actually, I cosign Susan’s first comment. She has a big ego investment in being NYC Hannah, not mid-West Hannah. A failed plytwright outranks a successful pharmacist in that world.
I too found her inability to enjoy reasonable vanilla sex was telling of a certain level of screwed-uppedness. He also gave her the option of slowing things down, which she refused to take.
I had also hoped NOT to see Hannah naked again, so I was disappointed.
@abbott :
Now I sound like one of those entitled girls. Umm..…it was mentioned by someone in this tread. I would look it up but I am reading and commenting from my phone. :/
@Abbot #362
LOL. A few years ago, a commenter on Roissy suggested that, if I want to hold on to my husband, I should wear tight, short dresses and heels all the time. I told him I’d be happy to do that in the unlikely event that DH ever requests that. In the meantime, we went to brunch this morning. I wore a short-sleeved (not sleeveless) T-shirt that skimmed my figure, a long, full Indian print skirt and ballet flats. We got a lot of appreciative glances.
Myra, if you are a virgin and you mention it in this thread, you are telegraphing shyness, which is going to put off guys who are interested in STRs.
And that’s pretty much the only guys that do any approaching. The guys who WOULD you want are too shy to approach a shy girl themselves. It’s like middle school, both guys and girls sticking to their own sides of the gym.
But I can’t help you from across the internet, unfortunately.
Women in real life? Oh, I’ve seen it three times. Once was my sister’s wedding.
The other time was March 30, 2006. It was the first warm day of the year, and
she had on this beautiful floral pattern dress. Walked across campus with her
head held down, because I think she was so insecure about wearing a dress on a
slightly windy day. Why, I don’t know, it went down damn near to her ankle, but
she still looked beautiful, if a bit old-fashioned.
———————————————-
You guys ar making me chuckle tonight. This reminds me of a dress I used to have, that I guy I knew dubbed my “ivory girl dress”
are
But seriously have you seen the dresses 17 year olds are wearing to prom these days? Its appalling- they look like tramps! Why are moms and dads letting their kids wear that trash??
“Why are moms and dads letting their kids wear that trash??”
That is the core reason women take on an then defend promiscuity…poor parenting. Mal raised women. If ya can get passed the infamous “yech factor” then you’re contending with the raising of YOUR children. Good luck gentlemen
Because 17 year olds are dumb and think they know everything. And they refuse to listen to other people that know better.
I remember when I graduated high-school and thought I knew everything. Someone gave me a book called “Wisdom for a High School Grad.” In it, people said again and again that they thought they knew everything and then learned they were morons.
And then I realized I was probably not the smartest guy in the world.
Re: David & Abigail
I always thought Bathsheba was the real love of David’s life.
Expect to see more writing like this in the very near future
http://www.amazon.com/Domestic-Tranquility-Brief-Against-Feminism/dp/0965320863/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
.
@Belita
David had a few wives. Abigail was the smartest of the bunch.
I might suggest a re-read ( David took her as his wife when he a was wanted man).
“Men who are not wired for short-term mating do not find slutty girls hot, even when they want to mate and haven’t.”
Despite everyone saying “Duh” .. this is actually really useful to me! I have often felt uneasy and kind of down around my guy friends who eagerly express how much they find girls who are revealing way too much skin, being super sexual on the DF, drunk, eyeliner smudged, just generally messy- really attractive.
I was despairing going, how am I ever going to be attractive to anyone if that is what men want? I couldn’t behave like that even if I wanted to because I would repulse myself.. Now I can relax – because those are NOT the kinds of men I want to be with.
Thank you Susan! x
This study seems hopelessly jejune. It overlooks completely the irrelevance of male prefferences if the females are not down for it. Guys looking for stable, long term relationships have generally learned a long time ago that sluts are not likely to want to fuck them because sluts as are hypergamous as their more continent sisters and what they offer is not hot enough tonight when she wants to fuck tonight.
Yes, women do want to fuck tonight, some of them sometimes anyway.
Men learn to avoid going where they are not wanted.
If sluts really wanted to fuck the average Nice Guy (TM) -like, in some alternative world- the “study” would have turned out different.
ADBG said:
“It seems some guys do not have this kind of insecurity. That is fine for them. Guys like Cooper and myself do. Pairing up with girls who think like this and act like this can easily become a soul-crushing experience. ”
________________________________________
Two useful questions to ask oneself when confronted with an opposing viewpoint are:
1. What does that person want to be true?
2. To what extent does that desire effect their objectivity?
I like doing this little exercise especially when I don’t have a dog in the fight. It’s a good way to learn about people. Please forgive the slight alteration in your quoted passage.
ADBG said:
“But every single one of them has shown that they are willing to DEVASTATE other people’s lives and emotions, without even realizing let alone caring about the consequences, all in the pursuit of ridiculous goals like “I am unsmotable” or “I didn’t want him to break up with me” or “I wanted a good story.”
___________________________________________
Dude, every single person on Earth is three missed meals away from being an animal – a murdering, thieving, lying, cheating, bash-your-head-in-with-a-rock-and-steal-your-food-to-survive animal.
Even the crunchiest hippie/vegan Save The Whales college sophomore will shank your ass if it comes down to you or her…and she thinks she can get away with it. Your priorities are not her priorities. She’s descended from thousands of generations of tough, resourceful, lucky, and ruthless people – people who were cunning and strong enough to survive and reproduce successfully in a rough environment.
Tigers do not rule the world. That nice, sweet, 120lb girl does. A practical man keeps this in mind.
@ ADBG
If you’re not seeing women in dresses, you need to visit more parks in the spring/summer. Specifically parks with 20′s women/hipsters. They’re a small part of the population after you filter overweight/slutty/masculine/jeans and t-shirt women, but they still exist. Also, women that you start flirting with, tell them that you find the rare woman able to still keep in touch with her soft, feminine side through her fashion and clothing…. She’ll do it if she’s into you. She’ll dig out that summer floral print or pastel colored dress. If not, you’ve learned she both can’t take hints and/or doesn’t do feminine. Or she simply doesn’t like your leadership. Next her.
@ Myra
Show up in decent shape wearing the kind of fashion/dress I just described above, have a soft, demure, feminine personality to match. Then put your hand on the elbow of the guy you’re attracted to, make eye contact, then smile softly and look down while blushing.
If he doesn’t get the idea, he doesn’t have a penis.
@ Dogsquat
“Tigers do not rule the world. That nice, sweet, 120lb girl does. A practical man keeps this in mind.”
I would alter it to say her emotions/opinions do. Then the legion of white knights make it happen. I’m not sure if I blame entitled women or white knights more; I think it depends on my mood.
@Michael
I know what advice you’re giving and I agree with you about Abigail being a good woman, but from a woman’s point of view, marriage to a man who already has several wives (and a future affair with Bathsheba about to happen) just isn’t an inspiring love story.
Leap of a Beta said:
“I would alter it to say her emotions/opinions do. Then the legion of white knights make it happen. I’m not sure if I blame entitled women or white knights more; I think it depends on my mood.”
_________________________________
Yes, that argument can be made.
I’m referring to something slightly different, though.
Mindset.
My example of the tiger and the hippie chick was perhaps poorly chosen.
I was trying to contrast the most (apparently) harmless creature I could think of with the most dangerous and lethal. The human’s gender in the example is unimportant.
One is endangered, and the other is not. The reasons for this are worth considering.
@ Dogsquat
Ah, ok.
Gotta love contrast of that ruthlessness with a society empowered to ‘not hurt anyone’s feelings’
Oh, except all those men that are losers and don’t know how to get a girlfriend. We meant everyone else’s feelings.
@Belita
David was married at the to Micael ( Sauls Daughter) of whom he probably hasn’t seen in awhile.
Abigal was a fabulously wealthy widow yet she accepted Davids marriage proposal ( what wealthy widow would want to marry the most man in the nation and chased by special forces including the king himself ?) What sane woman would do that and place herself at risk with a Bad Boy like David and his Mighty Men.
When all was said and done – she was Davids first queen and Michal was out.
Bathsheba was a bimbo and the downfall of David and the trouble of a lot of pain for him and his house. He was never the same after that. There is a major consequence lesson to learn from.
I always thought Bathsheba was the real love of David’s life.
I always though that His Penis was the real love of David’s life. I think I had this combo with J but is worth repeating biblical patriarchs are not meant to be perfect. God commit to his word and the people he chooses to but that doesn’t mean they are without sin, the only one without sin in the bible is Jesus. The rest might help God’s work but they were doing it with a lot of human flaws that shouldn’t be imitated or overlooked, because they are part of the “God’s plan”, YMMV.
@ABDG
Yes. I know any women when confronted with their own clockwork put up a brick wall and toss a picture of a fluffy kitten on it.
Thats not unique to women though. See probably 90% of the male population and game. Some will outright reject it, others will read but not employ.
Its not a chick thing. Its a people thing.
Its called stupidity and needing to hold onto whatever ideals get them through the night.
@ADBG. Leap, Dogsquat
As for women being ruthless.
So are men.
I like DSs description but he is missing one thing.
Leap hit on that.
Women tend to be more devastating to others not because their any nuttier than men but because they have government, law, white knights etc. enforing their ideas/views/opinions on how the world should exist.
Your average guy can scream and yell, throw a punch. If he is really pissed light a fire or shoot somebody. Thats peanuts compared to an entire society alligned against you.
Do I enjoy said power imbalance? No.
Do I live with it? Until my contracts up.
@ADBG
True, but the scene was written to show Hannah as wanting to experiment from the get go, talk dirty, etc. As we’ve seen, she’s hardly the type to hide under the covers. The pharmacist went at it almost furtively, it seemed to me.
Plus, it was clearly just a ONS – not the beginning of a relationship.
@ADBG
I reluctantly concur re the entitlement, narcissism, and general fucked up-edness of the girls on Girls. But I don’t think they’re alone. Hannah’s ex was gay! If being in a relationship with her in college wasn’t using her I don’t know what is. Marnie definitely used (abused) Charlie’s love for her. Shoshanna wanted to use a guy as a virginity swiper. Jessa is clearly an opportunist.
Still, I can’t hate them. I loved “I am unsmotable.” We’re not meant to admire these people, we’re meant to laugh at them.
@Myra
Are you meeting men who have demonstrated an interest in commitment? If you’re meeting guys who are looking for casual and you don’t come across as slutty, they’re not going to follow up. It’s very important to focus on the right kind of men. Where do you go to meet them?
OMG, I never even thought of that! It’s been ages since I saw it too, but I recall Roissy basically calling him a chump for being a “dad.”
LOL, I’ve watched the show with girls that age and they all shout EW! when Hannah’s boobs are revealed yet again. They love how comfortable she is with her body but have seen enough, thank you very much.
@Different Hope
You are most welcome, I too found that very interesting. If a woman can find a guy who says, “I would never get with a slut” she’s way ahead of the game.
The same guys who find those messy girls hot don’t want them for relationships, though. They totally disrespect them. Those guys aren’t likely to want relationships at all, so women benefit from understanding that any effort directed their way is wasted.
@ Leap Re: Feminine dress
Funny you should say that about the hipsters, one of the girls I saw in that feminine dress style is now a hipster. The other has two hipster sisters.
Where do you go in Chicago to find these unicorns? Just any park? Maybe I’ll stop by Millennium today.
@Everyone Re: Women being ruthless
Susan’s got the right idea here. Of course women can be ruthless. Everyone can be ruthless.
I’m just talking about the Girls on Girls. These girls are being ruthless in the almost-vain pursuit of ego bursts that are ultimately going to mean nothing because these girls are vastly immature, emotionally undeveloped, and willing to screw their own best friends over for…what?
I’d stay far away from those girls. Maybe Marnie and ShoSho are approachable.
Also, Susan, in one of the inside-the-episode segments, LD was saying that these characters are meant to be sympathized with and she is taking a risk because girls with character flaws are not looked highly upon.
Now, I love my girls and women with character flaws. The Kids Are All Right is one of the best movies I’ve ever seen. But those women had some pretty obvious redeeming features.
These girls…if I could make it analogous to a war film, it’s like watching a squad of guys burning small villages at complete random because it makes them happy, and then they get pissed off and “so sad” when once in a while one of them takes some shrapnel to the face.
But, hey, I guess maybe that’s what dating is these days. I dunno!
It’s not just girls who do this. One time a guy asked me if the girl he was interested in had hooked up with any other guys. I knew that she had, and I also knew that she was trying to poach my current crush (despite knowing that I really liked him). I told the guy what I knew, warned him that he didn’t hear it from me (which he of course ignored), and then was promptly assailed by the girl in question. They were official the next week.
The ironic ending to the story is that he eventually dumped her, saying that “she wasn’t wife material”. YOU THINK?!
You can’t reason with people when they believe they’re in love.
I know that I’m asking to be flamed by saying this, but I don’t entirely blame Shoshanna for that.
@ ADBG
I spend most of my free time in the area’s between Wicker Park and Logan Square, around Millennium park, oak park beach, in barnes and nobles cafes, or in coffee shops. Helps that when I’m not working at a job site, I get to do most of my drawing/drafting where ever I please. Lots of hipsters in those places. Sadly, majority of them still are overweight or suffer from hipster’s inability to dress oneself – clothes that clash in ways that are unappealing, hide all of their body, or show off bodies that are out of shape. Still, they’re the most likely group to have the rare feminine girl in a dress.
As such, yesterday I got to day approach three women. One blew out, had a positive close (but no number because I wasn’t interested in it though she showed she was), and the last had a change of venue when she and the guy friend she was with joined me for some stoop drinking. They couldn’t resist the idea of some home made kahlua in last nights heat, and the conversation was good, so we moved it from coffee shop to my stoop.
I’d like to point out that this is exactly how girls are drawn to guys who are obviously bad for them. Adam is clearly a douche, but he doesn’t act like a douche all the time. The times that he doesn’t act douchey (i.e. shows that he listens to Hannah, flirt-jokes with Hannah, and calls her to see where she is) are the times when Hannah comes back, even after she’s resolved not to. This is exactly the kind of behavior that makes women think, “does he? doesn’t he?” and wish desperately that the former is true.
I think every woman is hardwired to feel this hope every time. Even the hot ones (as Zach pointed out in another thread). Contrary to manosphere myth, women are not being pursued by guys 24/7 — as soon as a (non-offensive) guy starts showing interest, she will also become interested, even if those displays of interest are minimal (see: Grace and Brady). Every person, man or woman, has that fear of being alone. It takes a truly strong and perceptive woman to be able to stand up against that fear to avoid being toyed with by a guy like Adam.
@ SayWhaat
Haha. Hilarious, if annoying for you, story in its naivety. Though I’d change your statement from “You can’t reason with people when they’re in love” to simply “You can’t reason with people.” Too many people have been told to be their unique snowflake, follow their heart/emotions/dreams, and to ‘just be true to yourself.’ I get where it comes from, but no one in America has any idea of ‘moderation’ between emotions/rational thinking, so you get the majority that think only with emotions, and a few only with reason.
So much easier to simply learn to appeal to people’s emotions.
@Susan
“Could it be that Adam is developing real feelings for Hannah? Hope springs eternal!”
Are you really going to be fooled twice?
Haven’t you realized that this show is NOT serving to be a love-story; and rather attempting to be more like a wake-up call?
Re: Him not fitting her Brooklyn lifestyle.
” Wasn’t there a scene where she says she’s a writer, and he questions what that even means?”
I think there was more to this scene. I think it started with him asking how she’s been managing without her parents money, or simply what she does for work. And she complained about how unstable her employment has been. Then he suggested why not move home if it’s not working, cause he knew of a local job he could get her. And she is quick to decline cause she is a “writer,” as if it is was her source of income. Which is why he said “what does that even mean?”
Because up till then they’d been talking about “what it is she does” in terms of earning money and supporting themselves. Her saying “I am a writer” spoke a thousand words, IMO.
It outlined her entire outlook. She would rather chase something non-existent than choose something available and practical. Her choosing to be unemployed in Brooklyn saying “I am a writer,” is way better than taking an available local job (the sure thing); similarily to her liking Adam or him.
Don’t you see Lena is purposefully portraying Hannah as chasing what is non-existent? It’s this “edge-factor” than she craves, which is prohibiting her from seeing the practical options available to her.
(the show was named “Girls” and not “Women” for reason – don’t cha think? Dunham is purposefully protraying the irrational immaturity of these young women, no?)
@SayWhaat
40 years ago and more, the psychologist B.F. Skinner was floating the idea that the surest way to create an addict was to use a random schedule of positive reinforcement. When you reward a bird with birdseed every time for pecking on a button, he’ll peck until he’s sated. Reward him randomly for pecking and he’ll never stop pecking.
Ouch.
These festers and walkers never actually admit what it is they want so they couch it as
“we wanted to address issues of sexual assault and victim blaming.”
But it seems that what they want is for men to accept women any which way they are presented and to completely overlook what they have done in the past. This goal is so overwhelming that they have created all these fests and walks yet their demands are vague, purposely or otherwise.
“race and class intersect with gender and sex-negativity to contribute to sexual violence”
So, being negative about sex leads to violence. Okaaay.
“ConsentFest 2011 was planned as a day-long event, combining a SlutWalk with a day in the park where entertainers and speakers could make their messages heard.”
Heard by whom? Who is the target listener? Why is there never a clear and consistent list of demands for men to consider?
http://www.consentfest.ca/about/
.
@Susan
I try to meet guys through my friends house parties. Also, by meeting mutual friends of my coworkers and networking events in my area. Its funny that you mention short term relationship guys, recently a friend/guy that I had a thing for told me why I don’t go out there and have “more fun”.
It didn’t take long after that to me to realize what he wanted. I keep my distance from him now a days.
“Reward him randomly for pecking and he’ll never stop pecking.”
And struggle with stopping even when attempting to adapt to a fixed schedule [marriage]. Do not marry a conflicted person. Step away form the hookup cauldron when its time for a wife.
Great posts!
#344 (Megaman), #345, #346 (ADBG), #347 (Feral)
It outlined her entire outlook. She would rather chase something non-existent than choose something available and practical. Her choosing to be unemployed in Brooklyn saying “I am a writer,” is way better than taking an available local job (the sure thing); similarily to her liking Adam or him.
Ohh this might make me interested on the show. Most people I know that “are writers” have steady non glamorous jobs to pay the bills while they wait for the writing to make them big enough to pay the bills or just consider it extra cash income. It would be interesting to see how that works in the show…I’m curious now.
(the show was named “Girls” and not “Women” for reason – don’t cha think? Dunham is purposefully protraying the irrational immaturity of these young women, no?)
Is like the movie Little Children in that aspect then. Stupid adults acting like Little Children.
“ConsentFest 2011 was planned as a day-long event, combining a SlutWalk with a day in the park where entertainers and speakers could make their messages heard.”
*HeadMeetsPalmMeatsDesk*
Reward him randomly for pecking and he’ll never stop pecking.
This is interesting in the book Mating in Captivity that I also read the writer recommends certain level of distance to keep a man sexually interested. I dunno I didn’t recommended it because the advices were a bit…odd. Just wanted to mention the book in case anyone knows it.
@ A Definite Beta Guy
“Mmmm, not sure on this. I’ve tried to explain the male perspective to several women and they refuse to acknowledge it, let alone accept it as legitimate. They don’t even understand it.
Lokland has had similar experiences.
Men are wrong. Men are bad. Men know nothing about relationships or morals. Women cannot do wrong by men, because women are victims.
This is what many women have been told all their lives and, at least among the ones I have discussed some of these issues with, are unable to even consider alternative viewpoints.”
I’ve had those experiences also, but my positives have outweighed the negatives. The late Patrice O’Neal had a satellite radio program called “The Black Phillip Show” that spoke about game and relationships.
When women can’t see outside of themselves, it’s typically from an emotional stance. I “feel” this way, so I don’t want to consider the other side, or because I “feel” this way, your stance has no merit. Patrice O’Neal described cutting through the emotion with logic as “medicine,” or giving women another option on how to think and feel.
I’ve applied this to my relationship and gotta say, it’s worth the persistence. In order to shift the balance to have your needs and desires met, it’s a must that you give her another way of thinking so that she can’t just blow you off as if the male’s point of view doesn’t matter. This isn’t going to happen in one conversation, but requires you to give her “medicine” eating through her desire not to see your point of view with logic.
And once you alter the rules of engagement for her to confront you on a logical standpoint rather than emotional, you have to keep it there and not entertain anything that tries to blow up your stance from a strictly emotional point of view.
So I don’t think of it as trying to explain something, I look at it as my duty to prioritize what I want and need. I feel what I feel, so if she doesn’t understand it, that’s fine. But I damn well make sure she acknowledges it, because my thoughts and needs are every bit as valid as hers.
“I “feel” this way, so I don’t want to consider the other side, or because I “feel” this way, your stance has no merit.”
Is that why the Constitution and the Republic itself is now being compromised? Half the population seem happy to create rules that govern the entire way of life on feelings rather than necessity.
The Constitution brings necessity within itself, making everything necessary to do constitutional. It does not adopt the squeamish attitude that something is constitutional because it is moral and necessary to do outside the Constitution. Ignoring necessity leads to ruin or to hypocrisy. If necessity is left outside the Constitution, principles shrivel to wishes or “values” or “feelings.”
@ Joe:
Bingo.
If there is any “empowerment” we must arm young women with, it should be the ability to recognize and detach from a futile situation.
Granted, it takes a lot of inner strength and maturity…
If there is any “empowerment” we must arm young women with, it should be the ability to recognize and detach from a futile situation.
Granted, it takes a lot of inner strength and maturity…
That would be a good post for HUS. The trap of the “push and pull” or “If he is ambiguous and erratic RUN!” I think 80% of the success of the players is probably do to this “feeding hope” at random intervals so everytime the woman is emotionally on the edge of moving on she gets sucked in. That was problem with stupid Smallville. One brilliant episode (usually the season premiere and the finale) and then 15 episodes of pure suck sprinkling some good ones between them to keep me hooked. Never fucking again.
@Susan
The issue is that even if Adam does develops whatever he calls affection for Hannah you think he will wake up become a responsible mate, propose, buy a house and have 2.5 children with Hannah? It doesn’t matter if he falls for her or not that matters is who he is. No to mention that I’m sure that if Adam woked up one morning being the perfect boyfriend Hannah would probably treat him like the pharmacist, anyway. Relationships or commitment don’t fix fucked up people, IMO, YMMV.
“even if Adam does develops whatever he calls affection for Hannah you think he will wake up become a responsible mate?”
Nope.
“if Adam woked up one morning being the perfect boyfriend Hannah would probably treat him like the pharmacist, anyway.”
Yup.
Speaking of Girls, did anyone catch the latest episode??
Me neither. For starters, though he didn’t take the bait, most guys don’t object to being used for sex. It’s not like she risked hurting his feelings or anything.
@Cooper
Yes, I totally agree. She’s acknowledging the entitlement, narcissism and immaturity of 20-something women in America today. ADBG doesn’t find the characters sympathetic but I do, actually. Both the girls and the guys. Most of them are knuckleheads, stumbling along.
We might wonder what the hell Hannah is thinking to stay broke in NYC and get hung up on an unavailable jerk, but we feel empathy for her just the same. At least, I do. If the show goes on for several seasons, it will be interesting to see whether the characters mature, or just stay the same (like they did in Seinfeld).
@Susan
“For starters, though he didn’t take the bait, most guys don’t object to being used for sex. It’s not like she risked hurting his feelings or anything.”
Bad mindset to take.
This can lead to
most women orgasm when being raped. It’s not like he risked her pleasure or happiness or anything.
@Myra
Those are good places to meet guys. Stick to your guns, and don’t give up. The most important thing is to select the right man, and then to give him unmistakable IOIs. Lots of times women think they’re being obvious or even aggressive and the guy has no clue. In your case, I think the right man is going to be someone of limited sexual experience himself. There are plenty of men your age and older who have not been players, and who don’t have casual sex. You need to find them – those guys are going to value your virginity, not treat it as a burden or indicator your being “no fun.”
@Joe
“40 years ago and more, the psychologist B.F. Skinner was floating the idea that the surest way to create an addict was to use a random schedule of positive reinforcement. When you reward a bird with birdseed every time for pecking on a button, he’ll peck until he’s sated. Reward him randomly for pecking and he’ll never stop pecking.”
Is this gender-specific? Because it’s usually mentioned as something which works on women. Maybe because women don’t usually aim to do it with men?
Or as a more realistic, less dramatic example.
With proper treatment HIV is nearly impossible to pass on. most people won’t get HIV if their partner is medicated. It’s not like they risk hurting their partner by not informing.
PS This is a serious debate going on in Canada right now. It may become legal to not inform someone of HIV status. (The chance of passing it on when medicated now is literally infintismal. I still dislike it.)
An old article but a read of the comments shows how consistent the arguments are when it comes to this topic. The women seem to want to remain pissed off rather than make adjustments and its going to get worse for them as men are becoming more defiant.
http://www.askmen.com/dating/curtsmith/42_dating_advice.html
.
“You think that short skirt says to guys, “I’m a fashion billboard!” Think again. Chad tells girls how guys see such fashion statements as advertising something completely different than a hip dresser. Chad wrings out every ounce of experience from his colorful life and uses it to help teens make informed choices.”
More books like this are sorely needed
http://www.amazon.com/Truth-About-Guys-Chad-Eastham/dp/1400309689
.
@Lokland re: The Aids
Yeah, HIV is sort of becoming a serious, chronic condition rather than a death sentence.
The one that scares me is hepatitis, Fuck, one time I was doing CPR on a heroin dealer/user with multiple gunshot wounds. Somehow, blood squirted into my mouth. He died despite our efforts, and it turned out he had HIV and 2 forms of hepatitis (you know there’s a hep D? Fucking blew my mind. Viruses are amazing).
That was a long, long year. I almost quit working in health care. Nothing happened to me, but it’s still in the back of my head every time I get an STD screening or a physical.
@Lokland
I don’t see it. The two barely knew each other, it was clearly a no-strings hookup. She told him she was a virgin. She wasn’t really using him in any other way than how people use each other in every casual sexual encounter.
“We might wonder what the hell Hannah is thinking to stay broke in NYC and get hung up on an unavailable jerk, but we feel empathy for her just the same. At least, I do. If the show goes on for several seasons, it will be interesting to see whether the characters mature.”
I don’t share the empathy. I think it would be a damn shame for Dunham to highlight all that is wrong with them, then let them escape unscaved. I think with the direct this show is heading, their all for a whole bunch of hurt.
(not that I wish it upon them)
I think Marnie is going to get to see Charlie find someone special and severely regret not appreciating him. I think Hannah is going to keep getting strung along until Adam literally disappears from her life without notice. (and his absense of formally saying goodbye will truly let Hannah know what he thought of her the entire time.)
Jessa will probably end up pregnant with that married mans’ child. It’s only Shoshanna that I feel may be used an example of what was they should have done.
Bottomline, this show has a ton of heartbreak lined up for these girls – that the feeling I get with nearly every scene. (again, not that I wish it on them – but the writing is on the wall)
I just get the sense that if they don’t have big heartbreak endings that all the highlighting of immaturity will be of no importance.
@SW
“If a woman can find a guy who says, ‘I would never get with a slut’ she’s way ahead of the game.”
I also thought this was the most interesting part of the study. Especially, the *even if they are not getting any* part. The stereotype still lingers, wrongly I might add, that guys will take it wherever they can get it. And if they can’t get it from the “easy” chicks, they still want it anyway. I’d describe my guy friends as on Team R, in the marriage market. We never used to go out looking for these kinds of women. I guess we never took them seriously WRT dating.
@Marie
I’ve never seen anything that says woman, as a class, are more prone to addiction than men, as a class. There are indications that men get addicted to different things than do women, though.
I have seen that there’s a tremendously wide variation among people. Some are just going to become addicts to something, no matter what you do. Others never will. From a non-definitive source:
“There are indications that men get addicted to different things than do women”
Women can and do get addicted to casual sex more than men do. Men would at the same rate if it was cheap, easy and always available on a whim, but for men that is not the case.
Who wants to commit to such an addict, “former” or otherwise?
@Dogsquat
Fucking crazy story. Glad you’re okay, bro.
@DS
That must have been really freaky.
@Susan
I’ve never seen the show.
I’m more against the logic of
X probably doesn’t care about Y so its okay. (Don’t mean this to an extreme point obviously. I want my suprise parties with the little horn thingies and paper hats.)
@SayWhaat
I’ll be watching last nights episode tonight.
@Susan
Do you really think that this show, or at least this season, can end happily?
What example would that be sending?
See I think may be the difference between the sexes; despite all their previous indiscretions women hope to, or would more happily, see all end well. (as in some triumph that love conquers all)
Where as I, and Im not sure about the rest of the guy viewers, would much rather see that the universe corrects itself – and see that those, deserving indeed do, get what they deserve.
@SW
I reluctantly concur re the entitlement, narcissism, and general fucked up-edness of the girls on Girls.
It’s a generational thing. Teens – post-college age kids are all narcissists. It’s the fault of our generation sadly.
but I recall Roissy basically calling him a chump for being a “dad.”
All a part of Roissy’s “charm.”
They love how comfortable she is with her body but have seen enough, thank you very much.
I share that feeling. The first few times it was brave; now I’ve seen enough. I’m also hoping that Lena will earn enough money from “Girls” to laser off those damn tats.
Could it be that Adam is developing real feelings for Hannah? Hope springs eternal!
I believe he has feelings for Hannah. I also believe he’s a fairly fcuked-up individual. She should stay clear, but she won’t. They’ll do some sort of bizarre little dance that briefly gets them into a relationship that will damage them both.
@Tasmin
Yes…
And convenient is the word I’ve been missing. We become visible when
it’s convenient to the woman.
@Obsidian
Oh, kinky swingers exist and play dates exist and play partners who
aren’t exactly romantic partners exist.
But, they tend to all be much better about negotiating limits and
making sure both parties understand and agree to those limits. In
that sense there is a difference. People don’t go to the club and
play thinking that play date will get them a partner long term. It
might but people still see it as a step. The more casual the playdate
is the less likely it is to happen. If I see you at the club and we
negotiate a quick scene for whatever reason you might not even talk
again. If we meet at an outing like a munch and spend the next month
seeing each other twice and negotiating a playdate for a party at the
end of that month, well yeah.
Because we were dating up to that point.
That’s our adavantage. Because what we do is out of the mainstream
and we openly negotiate limits, what’s allowed, and so on we have to
communicate. You see someone three or four times before playing to
negotiate the odds of you talking about things outside of BDSM get
higher.
Add in how much it is expected behavior to read and go to classes on
relationship and you see that it isn’t the BDSM per se making the
difference but the culture around it. It’s that being out of the
mainstream we don’t think we know it all and thus accept we have to
learn.
Here’s a great example (and it ties back to reading The Game as
is being discussed). Here is a partial list of relationship (not
erotica) books on my shelf that I’ve either read or have in the
reading queue (partial because I’m not at home and might forget some).
The Bottoming Book, The Topping Book, SM 101,
Screw the Roses, Give Me the Thorns, The Loving
Dominant, At Her Feet, Slavecraft, The
Surrendered Wife, and Living M/s. That leaves out books
that are strictly physical how-to books although some of the above
have some how-to. Still, that’s nine books and they are not all
submissive specific. Two, in fact, are aimed at dominants/tops.
If you don’t have a boyfriend/girlfriend how much reading are you
doing about how to be attractive to the opposite gender, how to
behavior, and, perhaps most importantly, how they think? If you think
by being born, straight, and available you know it all I think I see
one of your problems.
Notice the big relationship skill above I talked about was
negotiating? You have to be open about what you need, want, and are
willing to compromise to negotiate. You need to learn to talk about
things you’re afraid to discuss.
Negotiating should be part of every relationship, from a vanilla first
date to an M/s couple’s final contract at collaring.
Oh, I’m an outlier. Then again, the Dom men and sub women in the
community are probably outliers too in terms of being fringe.
BTW, The Story of O is much hotter than I suspect Fifty
Shades of Grey hopes to be. If you want some S&M porn it, Anne
Rice’s Beauty books (which were my gateway drug), and Laura Antoniou’s
Marketplace books are a great start. While I’m listing, if you’re
open to gay male porn Mr. Benson is really, really hot.
Speaking of Stephan and O, in the S&M world you’ll often hear people
refer to a couple’s honeymoon phase as their “Sir Stephen and O”
phase. It’s in learning to go beyond that phase and maintain the
relationship (and roles within it) that is hard.
BTW, I want to reiterate something I know I’ve said but I suspect some
people will miss: I do not argue any superiority to BDSM (unlike
some) in bringing these results. Any degree to which that community
does better than society as a whole is a by-product of being outside
the mainstream and people entering it assuming they need to learn “how
to do it”. Even then, the relationship stuff initially seeps in as a
side effect of going to classes on “how to do S&M” when what they
really want is how to use a flogger.
@Abbott
There is a reason over 20% of my relationship books are oriented
towards the type of people I want for a partner. Knowing how they
think is crucial for me getting what I need and want.
Game does that for mainstream straight men. What are all the ladies
who come to HUS after googling “Why don’t I have a boyfriend?” doing
to understand how men think and what men want.
Do you know how powerful that knowledge is? As I said in an early
post I answered a general discussion question at SJW using knowledge
drawn to a large degree from HUS and explained the male thinking that
shaped my answer. Yesterday I learned that on the feedback my insight
into male thinking (27 people, 22 female at SJW) was very helpful. In
fact, I’ve been asked to present at SJW next year because of it.
If women really want that answer not only should they read HUS for
strategy and tactics but the Rs and others for insight into male
thinking.
Look at the trouble “this is Jen” is having grokking why waiting makes a guy nuts (although she did get it at the end).
I ran the scenario by my gf today: woman has been hooking up by date three but wants the new guy to wait six weeks because he’s special. Her answer, “you want to start doing that don’t have sex with anyone for a year first.”
@Ana
Austin Kleon’s Steal Like An Artist (about being a working artist) has an entire chapter called “Be Boring: It’s the only way to get work done” with headings like “Take care of yourself”, “Stay out of debt”, “Keep the day job”, and “Get yourself a calendar”.
When I saw him speak last month I first thanked him for including it and asked if he got push back on that chapter. He said the only people who did (wanting to embrace the starving, carefree, risktaking artist) were people who weren’t successful. Everyone actually making money from their art (full or part time) that has commented on it has told him it is spot on.
@SayWhaat
While I don’t disagree that’ll be a hard sell. Right now we’re empowering them to demand everyone else conform to their fantasies. That’s a pretty heady brew.
@Say Whaat
I’d like to point out that this is exactly how girls are drawn to guys who are obviously bad for them. Adam is clearly a douche, but he doesn’t act like a douche all the time.
That is called intermittent reinforcement. It works on guys too B.F. Skinner discovered it before Roissy did.
@Cooper #397
Great post!
@Joe #398
I see you got to Skinner before I did!
@Susan
I think you have captured why the show doesn’t interest me.
I hated Seinfeld.
Everyone’s description tells me I’m in for the same kinds of characters.
@Lokland & Dogsquat
This is a big issue for gay men because it has driven efforts at prevention way down. Between a sense of fatalism about getting it anyway and the fact it’s a survivable condition people are taking it much less seriously.
Plus, we’ve never treated AIDS/HIV in a public health way the way we should have. Standard procedures that are used in any outbreak were illegal for privacy reasons which were just the gay rights community using it to push legal changes. You can see it in the gay male attitude about conventional STDs in the late 80s in NYC and SF (when getting anal gonorrhea was a badge of honor in sticking it to the normals). The fact that they achieved their aim on a pile of bodies has bothered some in retrospect but not most.
Indeed I did. In fact, I’ve had the vaccine for Hep (A&B only if memory serves…Sir Dogsquat will know more) because my doctor thinks I’m gay. Seriously, being open that you’re into S&M while 40ish, single, and in Midtown Atlanta equals being gay. Why he thinks I’m okay with being open about being into S&M but not about being gay escapes me but there it is.
@J
Most women don’t dress for men, they dress for other women. This is how 3/4+ of the 80% non-casual sex women wind up looking like sluts and thus only attracting men who want sluts.
@Cooper
The network will insist on a SitC ending where a decade of rejecting decent men, slutting it up, and being horrid icons of consumer culture result not in STDs, single motherhood, and being alone but fantasy rich guys sweeping you off your feet. See my point about entitlement equaling everyone else has to play in your fantasy world.
@SW
“If the show goes on for several seasons, it will be interesting to see whether the characters mature, or just stay the same (like they did in Seinfeld).”
I thought the Seinfeld gang actually got *less* mature as the series went on. It was intentionally absurdist, at least that’s what Seinfeld and Larry David have said. Seemed like they were combining a modern setting/subject matter with attempts at old-fashioned schtick.
Most women don’t dress for men, they dress for other women. This is how 3/4+ of the 80% non-casual sex women wind up looking like sluts and thus only attracting men who want sluts.
It’s funny. When I was in my teens and early twenties, nothing made me happier than hearing, “Oh, J, where did you get that?” from another girl. Then I realized that impressing other girls really doesn’t get a straight woman what she wants.
“We become visible when it’s convenient to the woman.”
That would make a good post topic. But the strategy for men is to avoid this crowded field of blatantly insincere convenience mongers.
“tales of self-indulgence, wanderlust, foreign escapades”
Noted additions to the slut-tell list
@ Susan
It’s hard to feel empathy because they feel no regret of their actions, they are totally, 100% wrapped in their own pain. They are inflicting massive pain on the other people in their lives, though.
Plus, they do not show any redeeming virtues. What’s good about Jessa? Nothing. What’s good about Hannah? Nothing.
I can feel sympathy for the following younger characters, in order, and explain exactly why:
Charlie: Come on, do I have to explain why? He’s a good guy that just doesn’t know how to work a relationship.
Ray: He’s looking out for his buddy and knows the value of McDonalds and how full of shit Marnie is.
Adam: He’s a functional automaton, that’s having a casual relationship with a girl because that’s exactly what she wants. He does have a small tiny bit of compassion for Hannah.
Shosho: Well, she doesn’t have positive value, really, but at least she isn’t crazy.
Marnie: She sets up the party for Jessa when she comes home. She plans the Abortion Date. She at least tries to explain the problem with her relationship to Charlie.
So, not a complete lack of sympathy. Just almost a complete lack.
@ Herb
“I ran the scenario by my gf today: woman has been hooking up by date three but wants the new guy to wait six weeks because he’s special. Her answer, “you want to start doing that don’t have sex with anyone for a year first.””
Well, you don’t understand. Girls want male attention. The men who don’t really care about you really want sex badly, so she has to give it away so she can have male attention and validation. But because you care for her so much, she can with-hold the sex, which also makes it more special, so you should take it as a compliment.
This makes perfect sense…from a woman’s point of view, completely ignoring a man’s point of view. I am also a guy. I also want to have sex with you. Even more so because I care about you, so I actually want sex with you MORE than those other guys did. But you think you can make me wait, so you do it anyways. I am being charged a higher price for the same thing.
Austin Kleon’s Steal Like An Artist (about being a working artist) has an entire chapter called “Be Boring: It’s the only way to get work done” with headings like “Take care of yourself”, “Stay out of debt”, “Keep the day job”, and “Get yourself a calendar”.
Added that book to the must read list, thanks!
. I personally noticed that when I’m not working in a boring job I can’t write as well. In fact the most busy the more prolific so I totally endorse this idea.
“I am being charged a higher price for the same thing.”
That in addition to being strategically duped. But only a life-long non-member of the harem can pull that off graciously. Sleep-around girls have no practice and pretty much give themselves away unless the guy is an absolute moron which is probably all that such a woman will wind up with anyway – a perfect dupee.
@ADBG
I think you misunderstood. She thinks a woman who has been relatively easy who want to hold men off for a while should quit having sex for a year. If she’s had sex in the past year it’s reasonable for a guy today to get it at the same speed guys in the past year have gotten it.
Was being sarcastic my good man.
And a little treat for everyone:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Series/Girls
“If she’s had sex in the past year it’s reasonable for a guy today to get it at the same speed guys in the past year have gotten it.”
That bar keeps getting lowered. Soon it will be just a month needed to cool her genitals
Despite Jessa’s immense trampiness, I have to admit that the gal is eminently feminine. Another true-to-form observation from Dunham: the glamorous slut is full of feminine charm.
I hope not, and it may be too early to say this but I don’t think the show will head in that direction. The only misstep the show has taken so far is the one episode that was directed by Judd Apatow (I don’t think he actually “gets” the show’s MO — and I do think that it has an MO).
Y’all need to watch the latest ep already so we can chat about it in more detail!!
Re: ms anacaona:
You know, i dont have any problem whatsoever with what ms anacaona does or does not believe-thats her right and honestly i couldnt care less.
But what i DO have a ginormous problem with is her intellectual dishonesty-which is part of the reason why i dropped out of the discussion a long way back. Ms anacaona is more than free to beleive whatever she wants but she is NOT free to make up her own facts. The problem here is that when it comes to game concepts she is flatout wrong and ive proven why i make such an assertion. That she chooses to go on believing whatever in light of these facts says something about her that has reduced my respect for her intellectual honesty to rubble.
Nor am i in any way swayed by the fact that ms anacaona is w/child and/or otherwise really busy-not when i can at random pull up any number of posts here at hus and see her peppered throughout the comment threads. If she has that kind of time to research such things then she has the time to know what she is talking about. There is no excuse for wilful ignorance, and i for one wont tolerate it.
Ms anacaona is wrong about game. Ive proven how and why this is so. Ive also proven how and why people like roissy are a poor representation with which to render a judgment about game. That ms anacaona still wishes to believe whatever misinformed things and ideas about game is a problem i can or should solve at this point.
Just wanted to say that.
Ideologues are a serious bonerkiller.
O.
Note from the comments here that men
will. not. change.
http://www.dearcupid.org/question/how-many-is-too-many-sexual-partners.html
.
In review of the “so called study” a old French tem came to mind:
– Agent provocateur
Agent provocateur – Provocative agent’ – employed to induce or incite a suspected person or group to commit an incriminating act.
Please explain how exploitation (14 cues of women) is classified as “exploitation” ? LOL….
It is ” reciprocal promiscuity” ie Hedonistic courting and nothing more than a devolved Rite of Spring & Fertility.
History is self repetitive and all the so “called study” is attempting to do is “gold plate” a turd.
At first glance, the title may read like a tautology, but after thinking about it for a minute, I appreciate the message here.
As the post mentioned, people assume that players go after weak prey because they have to settle only after the more “high value” women turned them down. However, the article makes the premise clear that the first choice of the player is the weak prey.
I never really thought of it that way. This is great news for a lot of women, especially for me. I always have great convos with a lot of friendly people at parties and bars, but often go home wondering why certain guys never bothered to seriously flirt. Coming away from a party not having been swooped down upon by these jokers might mean that your perceived “value” is too high. Heck, I’ll take that.
@SayWhaat
I’m now caught up with Episode 7.
What were your thoughts?
Once again, I could believe what Hannah did. And Charlie/Marnie situation went down as I predicted.
(Im not to keep the thread spoiler free, I guess – forum thread perhaps)
@Coop
“Why wouldn’t anyone who has experience with the SMP, and is LTR-oriented, not be eager to get out of it?”
You made this comment up-thread, and I must have missed it. You’ve hit the nail on the head for pretty much every single friend I have, especially the ladies. There used to be a time when most young people enjoyed dating (not sleeping with) a good portion of the opposite sex. I think that mostly disappeared after 1990.
The primary objective these days is to meet someone reasonably compatible (not perfect, but pretty good), and NOT spend years dating for no particular reason. A strong second is to exit the SMP and no longer be single! That may seem like a bad reason to settle down, but I totally disagree. It’s a hostile dating environment out there, particularly when it comes to strangers, and it doesn’t get any easier as you get older.
@Royale
Honestly, you’re right. I’ve done plenty fellas nights and thrown parties and when a dude is in the mindset of “What can you do for me tonight?” 9 times out of 10 he’ll realize from the jump whether the woman he encountered is a long-term project or temporary. If the goal of the night is no strings attached fun, the long-term project, while desirable, doesn’t jibe with the objective in front of him.
« 1 2 3 4 »
{ 1 trackback }