Or: The Importance of Dating, Part II
Happy Friday, HUSies. I promised a post on the important things I learned from dating men before I met my husband. Most importantly, I learned I didn’t want to marry them. I don’t think they wanted to marry me either.
One of the problems with hookup culture is that very few people are getting a chance to do relationships with training wheels. As we saw in the previous post, during the era when people went steady they were essentially “playing house” as a pretend married couple. If and when those relationships ended, both parties walked away with a set of experiences and hopefully, lessons learned. Of course, some people get lucky and meet the love of their lives early on and live happily ever after. But most of us benefit from the opportunity to do a couple of trial runs.
One helpful thing about the current SMP is that red flags are everywhere! Assuming you don’t grow immune to acts of douchebaggery, a young woman can learn a lot about who not to date, just by observing others. She doesn’t even need to make mistakes first hand! When you do date someone who makes it through the character filter, you’ll learn a lot about loving, compromising, resolving conflict and what you need and want in a mate.
Here are the best lessons I learned while seriously dating men I didn’t marry, in no particular order. Yours will be different.
1. When one person is neat and one person is messy, the messy person should do all the compromising.
I used to be messy. My boyfriend was super neat. My messiness drove hms crazy. In contrast, his neatness was always a pleasant surprise to me, like elves had come in during the night and done all the work. I had to become a neat person, it seemed like the right thing to do. My husband is neater than I am, but on a scale of 1-10 I get a solid 7.5 for neatness nowadays.
2. Stoics and emos don’t mix.
I’m on the emo end of the spectrum. I love pillow talk and mushy moments and romantic gestures. And when there’s conflict I want to resolve it quickly by talking it through. I need a man who has emotions and shows them. I can’t make it work with a strong, silent type.
I am also a sucker for glimpses of the boy he once was. I remember one boyfriend broke his arm, and for some reason I thought he looked so hot with that cast. It was like looking at a 7th grade version of him or something. Adorable. I also fall to pieces when I see a guy’s boyhood bedroom.
3. Sexual compatibility is mostly about sex drive.
As long as two people are open to new things and invested in pleasing one another, I think what to do and how to do it are the easy part. The hard part, in my experience is when. We like to joke that guys want sex all the time, but they do vary. Some guys aren’t up for it when they have a lot on their mind. Some guys want it several times a day no matter what, especially early on.
I went to college during an era when the sexes didn’t have much access to one another on campus. Finding a way to have sex could be a challenge. A car was ideal, but if you didn’t have one all sorts of furtive arrangements were required. This meant that having sex once or twice a week was doable, but there were no lazy mornings in bed followed by brunch. It wasn’t until I went to Europe with my boyfriend that I learned that given the opportunity to have sex six times a day, he wasn’t into it. There is nothing worse than climbing into bed for some sexy time and hearing a curt “Good night.” Of course, he thought I was a nymphomaniac. I thought that was a good thing! Our relationship didn’t last long after that trip.
4. You have to laugh at the same stuff.
Most women say that a sense of humor is very important to them in a mate. But there are many kinds of humor, and many different facets of humor. I love sharing the same funny bone. I dated one guy who found The Three Stooges hilarious. I don’t. I dated another who didn’t appreciate John Cleese’s Ministry of Silly Walks. I do. These small bits of incompatibility kill attraction for me.
In a relationship I like a bit of silliness, inside jokes, goofy nicknames, etc. My husband and I trade funny tidbits every day, and have for 30 years. Laughter is the best tension reducer I know, and it’s not unusual for one of us to start laughing even during an argument. Of course, that only happens if the argument is stupid, but it’s a great way to diffuse anger.
For me, another critical element is the ability to laugh at oneself. I believe this is the genius of Larry David, Woody Allen and Lena Dunham. I love people who can do it, and I generally steer clear of people who are unable to do it.
5. 90% of the time eyes tell the story.
If you look into someone’s eyes and read their micro facial expressions, particularly during intimate moments, you will see a map of what they are feeling. If the eyes are dead or cold, the relationship is dead and cold. You should see a softening, a certain kind of lifting at the corners of the mouth, a longing, and a deep, penetrative gaze. Never marry anyone you cannot read this way.
6. One significant lie in a relationship spoils it forever.
Whether it’s cheating, his not being honest about his past, or some other major aspect of his life, if your boyfriend tells you a whopper, he’s just kicked away a chunk of the foundation, and your relationship is unstable. Before marriage, lying should be an immediate and non-negotiable dealbreaker.
7. If he’s jealous and possessive, the relationship is doomed.
If you are dating someone who feels threatened by your behavior or is insecure in your affection, stick a fork in it. You are either out of his league, too demanding of attention from others, or he can sense that you are not nearly as invested as he is. Some of this often comes up in the early days, and it can help to learn what the other person finds threatening. But if this continues over time, the relationship is not tenable. Either (or neither) party may be at fault, but the point is, it’s not a good match.
8. Passions are a must.
I like men who have strong opinions and strong interests. I recall being super turned off that my college bf had no opinion whatsoever about a Presidential election. I love it that my husband has informed views. I also love it that he is very loyal to the Red Sox (going back to a time when they sucked). Here are some of the things I have found sexually attractive in men:
- deep love and abiding passion for grandparents’ summer cabin on a lake
- loyalty to sports teams
- deep and broad knowledge of music
- a firm conviction that The Beatles are the greatest band ever
- watching Godfather and Godfather II a minimum of twice a year
- keeping the Bill James baseball encyclopedia on the night table
- being a Big Brother
- playing chess regularly
- strong interest in reading history
The only way people can be boring is if they don’t have any interests or don’t talk about them. I’ve dated some boring guys.
9. Impulsive acts destabilize relationships.
Some people like to keep things edgy and unpredictable. I am not one of those people. Crazy plans on the spur of the moment are not fun for me. I’m not talking about skinny dipping, I’m talking about calling in sick to work and flying to the Caribbean on a whim for a week. Or buying a new car when you can’t afford it. Or quitting a job because “those people are driving me crazy.” Or any behavior showing a failure to comprehend that credit card spending will have to be dealt with at some future point.
My idea of crazy is a Bloody Mary on a Sunday morning. Don’t pair up with a dopamine chaser if you’re not one yourself.
10. When it’s right, it feels easy.
Everyone says marriage is such hard work. Meh. I think it’s easy if you marry the right person. If you have doubts, feel angsty, or have a lot of conflict in a relationship, end it. Opposites may attract but research shows they don’t marry well. If you find yourself having fights just to get to the makeup sex, the breakup is long overdue.
You should never, ever walk up the aisle if you don’t feel the urge to run up the aisle instead. You should be chomping at the bit to make your commitment official. One doubt is too many. It goes without saying you should be on the same page re children, including the timing, the number, and how you want to raise them. Never, ever leave a major issue to be negotiated after marriage, and hoping to change someone’s mind after marriage is a fool’s errand.
There will be challenges and crises in every life, including married life. Having a close relationship with your partner helps you weather them together.
{ 677 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 2 3 4 5 »
Sassy, a naturally popular and benevolent alpha guy like that would be swimming in women these days. That’d be competing in a very hot, mainstream market. Personally I went after the guy who isn’t popular but still benevolent and have an alpha backbone, a bit of a “go his own way” kind of guy.
To me there is no point in competing for the natural alpha guys who are totally smooth with men and women. Not that I have anything against them personally, but the thought that other women would be constantly eyeing him and flirting with him is no bueno. I’m coming at it from an introvert’s perspective though, and if I recall correctly you are an extrovert.
Here I always thought life was harder for an introvert. But maybe in matters of romance my introversion helped me avoid the types of men most likely to break my heart.
Here I always thought life was harder for an introvert. But maybe in matters of romance my introversion helped me avoid the types of men most likely to break my heart.
I’m an extroverted and I agree with you. I think it has to be something else not just how E or I you are, YMMV.
@Herb
I haven’t seen Clerks 2. Why?
I remember the clip of Clerks 1 that was posted recently – where Dante freaks out about his GFs’ number.
I’m trying to recall, was there a similar scene in Clerks 2?
@Susan
There is an extended joke about “it’s okay, we’re taking it back” which is what prompted my reply.
I played it very straight but it was meant to get a smile.
I think the whole “taking it back” thing is about the biggest load of crap I’ve heard ever since I learned why Queer Nation was (is?) called that. The chanting of cunt at the end of Vagina Monologues is an even more asinine version. I have yet to hear a cogent explanation of how chanting cunt makes a women more comfortable with her body or sexuality.
Still, if you can’t beat them, join them so when it comes to the two brains joke, “we’re taking it back”.
@Sassy
I totally get the authenticity. That is something that I seek out as well – and something I find exceedingly difficult to find in women these days, at least initially. But we aren’t talking about DBags really, I was already assuming that ‘your’ alpha was not dark or asshole or lacking character. Sure those things follow closely in the alpha package, but few well-adjusted women would want their unicorn to be a true dick. As for peacocking and the other contrived games and showmanship, it may work in the short-term or on women who have yet to understand their attraction triggers, but I wasn’t thinking of those things relative to the women with a history of and/or desire for alpha.
To me, alpha and beta are both natural; we may have a natural starting point on the continuum, but we can also improve ourselves or allow ourselves to slip one way or the other, so for me the ‘natural’ part is already assumed. And the whole point of self-improvement and much of ‘game; from what I understand, is about developing certain traits such that they *appear* natural. Its those blurry things like confidence vs cocky. It is really as much about the observer, the one who attributes, as it is about the one who behaves in certain ways, i.e. your ‘confident’ may come across to me as cocky. That said, men can be Dbags, assholes, dicks, egotists, liars, etc. whether they are alpha or beta. Though I will say that the more alpha the man is, the wider berth (benefit of doubt) he is given in this regard. So the first part of your follow-up description can be alpha or beta in the same way:
“He doesn’t have to pretend to be what he is. He simply is. The respect and admiration that he garners from other people are a byproduct of his innate qualities. He is truly a man of good circumstance and character, so people react to him accordingly.”
For many men, myself included, it is about context. That statement fits me to a T, however if you were to see me in many settings you *may* not see=feel that I am ‘alpha enough’. So what I see as being more significant is the rest of your statement:
“They typically are good looking guys with extroverted personalities who don’t act like douches. They are respected by their male companions because they are worthy of respect. They don’t have to put on an act to be perceived as such either. They are just naturally likeable and admirable.”
Respect is earned through a combination of shared experience and shared values. To an outside observer, men’s behaviors regarding respect can be as slippery as cocky/confident. But nevertheless, it seems that you want a (unanimously) good-looking, extroverted man with high status. Nothing wrong with that. And I appreciate your clarification – because there are women who do want/need their man to compete in some sort of lifelong ego/pissing contest. But I still believe that the practice of searching for and coupling with men of those characteristics but then (eventually) finding a man who feels he differs in deep and meaningful ways can set several challenging things in motion.
I have lived through this: that sense that my career accolades or other status drivers are more important to her than to me – or at least the attention paid to them. You see the competition doesn’t always have to be with/against other actual living, breathing men. It can be with/against her image of me in all of my alpha greatness, which to me is nothing more than a shadow because I have had a lifetime of valuing myself and my accomplishments based on truly internal, innate things. I’m just am. People respect me for my innate qualities, they always just have. But those things alone do not garner the alpha-like status/dominance that you desire. When the sun is shining on me in those rare moments, I could very well cast a long alpha shadow to the outside observer, but to me, I’m just being me. I wouldn’t want to have that shadow lead me around anymore than I would want those times when the sun is high and my shadow is nothing more than an extra-fat pair of shoes. In my case, I had to compete with this desired image, and in my failings I was indeed replaced by a model that was profoundly more alpha to the outside observer. (A model that had been very much like her go-to men leading up to me)
That is where the whole thing about wanting to be YOUR alpha vs AN alpha comes into play. And when a woman demonstrates that the optics of social status are more important than those silent-strengths and/or the qualities that operate outside of peak social contexts are of lesser value, then to me that is a red flag. Maybe this is not how you see it, but your language suggested otherwise. I’m admittedly in a strange spot these days due to my experience in the past as well as my more recent experience in which I find myself seen as an alpha by many women, not alpha enough (in the field of play) by others, and view myself as primarily a highly-disciplined beta with a lot of GMOW tendencies. So, you know, grain of salt and all that.
@Ted D
Thanks Ted, I appreciate the feedback. I sometimes fear that the red pill is kinda stuck in the throat for me, so it may take a while before I develop a more balanced perspective. And I’m often cautious about jumping in here because I don’t want to be one of those guys who scares off the young women that HUS is trained on. And I need to stop with the multitasking so that I can one day deliver a post in under 75 words….ah, I may have just made
@Mike C
I hesitate to offer a quote about this, but I will for the purposes of the discussion:
Spinning Plates doesn’t necessarily mean you’re fucking all of your plates. It’s more of a spreading out of your efforts across a wider pool of subjects. Some will reciprocate, and those you entertain. Others will not, or prove to be less desirable, and those you let fall.
I think the implication is pretty clear, and the men who I have seen and heard describe spinning multiple plates use it to expressly describe fucking more than one woman at a time. In fact, as far as I can tell, that is generally the goal – not preventing one-itis, as a more benign spin might claim.
Speaking for myself, I would never, ever consider having a sexual partner for more than a ONS if he was having sex with someone else. Obviously, many women go with “don’t ask, don’t tell,” which is hazardous from a health standpoint, and often from an emotional standpoint as well. I’m glad that it worked out in your case, but that doesn’t change my advice to women. No double dipping.
To be clear, dating multiple people before exclusivity is appropriate and legit. Having sex with one person while continuing to pursue others is not legit. If it is made explicitly clear – IOW if the understanding is that the sex is casual, by both parties, then each person is only responsible for themselves.
I wonder – if you knew your fiancee was having sex with someone else in the early days of dating you, would you have been OK with that?
I’ll add to the appreciation for Tasmin’s comment. Like so much of Tasmin’s commentary, it’s brilliantly conceived and articulated.
@pennies (#198)
““A woman with N=3 and SMV=6 may have had guys with different SMV ranks—perhaps a 5, a 6, and a 7. Unsurprisingly she ends up in the LTR with the guy with the SMV most similar to her own (the 6), but the Manosphere trope is that 1) she fondly remembers (and why wouldn’t she?) her time with the 7 and 2) that this may have some negative impact on her LTR with the 6. I think the former is a very reasonable assumption, but the latter is more difficult to establish as a general rule.”
The above calculation/speculation is so odd to me. Among my friends and I, when we are in love, we are in love with the person who is right in front of us. With past partners, things didn’t work out for a reason.”
========
Hi Pennies,
I have observed that some Game/PUA participants (as well as some women) would really like to boil everything down to a formula that can be objectively evaluated, adjusting permutations and combinations to control the outcome. Lots of quantifying.
It’s very understandable. Look at all the other areas of life where that works– especially the other realm dealing with the body, fitness. Lots of things in life boil down to a numbers game. It would be really REALLY great if there was some kind of magic formula that you could follow to get “the perfect partner.” Life would be a lot easier (and safer) that way!
But I believe a lot of it boils down to opportunity, timing, getting out there and plain old dumb luck
@ Susan #170
Hi Susan, thanks for having me.
I should clarify when I meant your history, I meant that you dated ‘alpha’ and was quite happy to move past him to something better for you.
Yes my claim is just that and I don’t have studies to back it up. Annecdotal evidence only absorbed through my own experiences and past time in the PUA community.
I know for a fact there’s a few women from my past who keep getting in contact with me and asking more intimate questions despite being involved in relationships with less dominant men. This is years after I was involved with them. But yes, AWALT is a stretch.
By ‘involved with’ I mean casual non-committed relationships, but these all occurred during post-college years. So it fits with the ’5 minutes of alpha’ theory that women are more likely to want to share an alpha than have a beta full time.
I agree that some women are ‘alpha chasers’ from the start. The girls I was talking about from my personal experience weren’t. Their experiences largely involved less exciting guys, so when a more exciting, less needy and dominant guy came along who showed no predisposition to settling down, it had more of an impression on them. An impression that would be hard to overcome. Once the guy leaves their lives, in some ways the next guys would have it even worse because they’re fighting a memory.
I write all this from the perspective of guys being reluctant to get involved with women who are pining away for someone else. They aren’t available for bonding because they’ve already done that with someone else and the bond is either still strong or the mechanism is broken.
Re: Sexual count=Alpha
These two definitions cannot be squared. The alpha getting laid by lots of women is not a benign and benevolent creature. He is agentic, self-focused and manipulative, as are his female partners.
Yes, your description of alpha is probably the most common and mainstream ones out there. I’ve been exposed to other descriptions such as ‘renaissance man’ that promote a more well rounded ideal absent some of the less anti-social elements. You’d probably call it a hybrid of alpha and beta traits. Like Mike C has said, its hard to find pure ‘alphas’ or pure ‘betas’. They make great reference points, but you’re better off talking about ‘alpha’ or ‘beta’ traits.
When exhibiting a mixed combination I’ve seen guys absolutely clean up with women from the non-’alpha chaser’ category, although even those girls can switch targets if they meet in a non-short term mating environment (eg not the nightclub). Some ‘alpha chasers’ see guys with hybrid traits and think its their ticket to committment land and try the ‘good girl’ camoflage and climbing up on the pedestal.
But hybrid guys are absolute catnip to non-alpha chaser girls. With low conscientiousness a hybrid guy can do a lot of damage.
Speaking for myself, I would never, ever consider having a sexual partner for more than a ONS if he was having sex with someone else. Obviously, many women go with “don’t ask, don’t tell,” which is hazardous from a health standpoint, and often from an emotional standpoint as well. I’m glad that it worked out in your case, but that doesn’t change my advice to women. No double dipping.
FWIW, I can respect and appreciate that, and I have no issue with that advice. As I said, it is likely to come with a trade-off.
Having sex with one person while continuing to pursue others is not legit.
Well, I’ll respectfully disagree here. I’ll respectfully suggest you consider the full implications of what you are saying here. Dogsquat alluded to this once in the past. Women are either the gatekeepers or they are not. Full stop. An 18+ year old is either an adult or she is not. Full stop. Again, I absolutely, unequivocally reject lying, but it is on the woman to appropriately determine the situation. I see no moral requirement for a man to stop pursuing other options in any form until there formal exclusivity has been established.
I wonder – if you knew your fiancee was having sex with someone else in the early days of dating you, would you have been OK with that?
An honest question deserves an honest answer. The answer is no. I think that is one of Rambles “different” standard things.
I’d expand on that, but I suspect it would be unproductive. Interesting to me, but I think women break down into two camps on this. Those that are bothered by this and those that really are not. Unlike guys, where there is probably close to universal, visceral problems with this. To be clear on this point, I don’t think any woman is going to sign up to be part of some permanent rotation, but I know, have observed, and have experienced that some women will go along with it long enough to try and win the spot of being the exclusive girl. Very few guys if any are going to be OK with competing with some other cocks for a few months to win the gig as the single cock in play.
And again, on one level I think your position is very sound, and probably minimizes some risk factors. At the same time, in the current SMP, a guy with a high enough SMV simply doesn’t have to play by those rules.
@ Hope
Infantry, are you a new commenter? You like Bellita? She is still single, I believe.
I have a lot of respect for her. She’s put her money where her mouth is and is actively working on developing her femininity. If more girls did what she did then there would be a lot more marriage material girls out there. It would put poor Roosh out of business.
@SayWhaat, Susan
Read my exchange with our friend Abbot from page 1 of this thread. Here’s another example (WITH MY COMMENTS IN CAPS):
“SayWhaat got flamed for making this joke. Is anyone going to take Michael to task?”
========
Haha! Don’t hold your breath! Or maybe, save your breath.
#156
“there are women who can fake this quite effectively”
Then men are being presented with a trifecta
Slut (FROM SOMEONE WHO PROMOTES CASUAL SEX FOR MEN)
Liar (FROM SOMEONE WHO PROMOTES LYING VIA GIVING A FALSE NAME)
Faker (FROM SOMEONE WHO PROMOTES GIVING A FALSE ADDRESS )
I really want to like Abbot! He has a zeal and the passion of a thousand suns for his cause. Also, he supports who want to believe they are worth waiting for. But I am never going to advocate lying or sleeping around. I think using other people for sex and then calling them names is extremely uncool.
My definitions are very Roissy inspired:
An alpha is a man who has options with women, and knows he has them. On top of that, he either: exercises them, has exercised them and then decided to stop on his own volition, or consciously decided not to. Of these three, they are increasingly rare, respectively.
A greater beta can be quite respectable, good looking, confident, and even dominant, but he isn’t an alpha due to missing one of the conditions above. I put my old self in this category. We usually marry young.
Sassy appears to keep running into the more common alphas, and high-T looking lesser betas – insecure males who happen to look really good. In this thread I believe she is really talking about an exceptionally good-looking beta, despite her strong words.
In previous posts she talks about “edgy” behavior which is stereotypically alpha, but I see that as a strong correlation, not a definition.
So yes. Sassy is intentionally fishing in a very shallow pond… about the depth of a puddle on a driveway. But she is super smart and knows it.
@ Susan #207
Wow, that’s a pretty strong endorsement for women escalating emotionally. The more I think about this, the more I think it’s just huge. I don’t know why it took me 3 and a half years to write that post. Yes, it is risky for the woman, but it strikes me as a fair return for the guy’s risk. If she can show that she’s girlfriend material via her actions, rather than demanding exclusivity arbitrarily, she’s building a foundation of IOIs, trust, and investment from the get go. My hypothesis is that this would greatly increase a woman’s success rate, assuming she is choosing wisely in the first place.
In my experience, this is one of the best things a girl can do to show intent and push towards a LTR. If this doesn’t work its because the girl either isn’t high enough quality (MMV) or the guy is not looking for a LTR (‘You’re the type of girl I’d bring home to mum someday…’).
Its a good return on the guy’s risk like you say. I’ve had days where I’m disillusioned by the whole dating process because all the responsibility seems to be put on the guys shoulders to approach, arrange the dates, pay, escalate, manage the girl’s emotions etc etc. It seemed like the girl didn’t have to do anything and could just screen the guy with shittests and enjoy the ride without any risk/cost at all.
But this emotional escalation sounds like a carrot that will keep the guy going.
“Spinning plates” is clearly defined as a parallel dating strategy by olloR, considering and pursuing multiple people at once. Going on chaste dates counts, as does having 3 FWB’s in rotation until commitment is arrived at.
Women do it all the time, because their options are granted by their XX chromosomes. Your pic of “Sandy has 3 loves” strongly implies this. Spinning plates. Women.
My wife was an exception – she only considered one person at a time.
@ J #254
While it is a truly beautiful thing to feel, people shouldn’t pin all their hopes on that kind of feeling because for half of us, when the dopamine production slows, there’s not much left. It’s better to find someone you can still feel attached to as opposed to being on a constant search for that “light” in the face
Yes, I’m aware. It shows bonding for the early part of the relationship. For the record after this phase she would still light up, but less intensely. She was a genuinely feminine women who revelled in treating others well.
I was only with her for 4 years so I can’t speak of what happens after 7 years. Its outside of my direct experience. I’d suspect finding a woman that treats everyone well (within reason) would be a good start rather than someone who just looks after her man. Its the corollary to girls watching to see how the man treats the waiter.
The Beatles were all extraordinarily bright. When they played together in their prime they hit every beat dead on like a carefully tuned Swiss Watch.. No other band has even tried to do that. Charlie Watts of the RS or Frank Beard of ZZ Top or any other great RR drummer would admit to putting out a spread of percussive sounds on the beat to broaden the target for the others. Ringo hit everything on his kit in perfect sync and the others followed that with uncanny precision. That is one of many reasons why no one has even been able to copy their sound – after 40 years.
“SayWhaat got flamed for making this joke. Is anyone going to take Michael to task?”
I’m not taking anyone to task, just putting the two jokes side by side – for everyone else to see.
SayWhaat in response to male birthcontrol pill:
“(And I highly doubt men would be more responsible about taking it, anyway. Please, men are infamous for being of “two minds” — whichever one happens to possess the most blood at the time.)”
Michaels comment in response to being a MGTOW:
“Not an MGTOW. Just someone who thinks with the upper head. I don’t ascribe to any movement.”
Re: Plate spinning
Maybe this is about intent. If the purpose is to create a harem, I can see why girls are repulsed. If the purpose is to avoid oneitis and to concurrently date to find a parter for a LTR, then I think its less of an issue. To be honest I’m in the second category right now.
People should be aware that in the current SMV girls can disappear without so much as a text. Putting any emotions into a girl before she’s showed investment is a silly move. This fits nicely with putting the responsibility for emotional escalation onto the girls.
Dating multiple girls (spinning plates) keeps me level (avoids oneitis) and allows me to more quickly find a partner. I’m not having sex with multiple girls.
My issue is finding girls who sense that I might be seeing more than one girl and are turned off by it (ala Hope). If I go serial dating one after another it will mess with my emotional state and make me less attractive as girls will sense more neediness.
I think the best thing to do is find something in between. Spin plates to find a quality girl more quickly, and then quickly stop spinning plates once that girl has been found, but before she feels that she’s just another plate or that you’re a player. I haven’t come across a girl like this yet. At least not recently.
I’d suspect finding a woman that treats everyone well (within reason) would be a good start rather than someone who just looks after her man. Its the corollary to girls watching to see how the man treats the waiter.
Yes, indeed!
In their day, none of the Beatles could read or make sense of a normal musical score. Therefore, they did not realize their offense or feel enough shame when they made Beethoven Roll Over or Tchchosky sing the blues.
They faced multiple shit tests, for sure, from all sides. And no shit tests have ever been so thoroughly turned into vaporized atomic payback as their performance August 1965 in Shea Stadium/
@Infantry
I agree with this wholeheartedly. A guy with alpha dominance and beta high EQ is the dream. Add in low conscientiousness and/or low empathy and you’re in NPD territory, if not full blown Dark Triad. A very destructive character – and very hard to repel. I’ve said that I pity the woman who gets into the crosshairs of one of these guys – I’ve seen it up close and it was brutal.
My wife was an exception – she only considered one person at a time.
I never dated more than one guy at a time.
I agree with this wholeheartedly. A guy with alpha dominance and beta high EQ is the dream. Add in low conscientiousness and/or low empathy and you’re in NPD territory, if not full blown Dark Triad. A very destructive character – and very hard to repel. I’ve said that I pity the woman who gets into the crosshairs of one of these guys – I’ve seen it up close and it was brutal.
Cosign this. I call this type of men (and some women) Walking Black Holes nothing escapes their event horizon and once inside, it gets divided onto its most basic molecules and can never go back to their former self. *shrugs*
@Mike C
I admit I anticipated this response. My first argument is that in this area, there is no different standard – when couples do have the talk, it usually follows the pattern of “Are you seeing anyone else? Me neither. Great. We’re a couple.” The expectation is one of equal footing. And there is no reason that “seeing” should mean something different for either sex. And I respect the right of either party to find that unacceptable and bail.
My second argument is that if men are allowed to tomcat and women aren’t, then how about the female equivalent, i.e. emotional escalation. While you are sexually escalating with multiple people, the woman might be fostering emotional intimacy with several people. Strong IOIs, focused attention and affection, loyalty, feminine nurturing, generous gestures such as meals cooked, backs rubbed, etc. IOW, a woman auditioning for life partner. Would you be OK with your fiancee doing that with other men while starting to date you?
I believe you get to reject one option or the other, but not both.
That’s fine, because he has adopted a short-term mating strategy, and would (or should) be filtered out as a long-term prospect. I can tell you one thing – the young women I know would be absolutely out the door if they got wind that the guy pursuing them was in a sexual relationship. I’ve seen it happen, and that is considered super shady and manwhore behavior. While I’m sure there are women who look the other way, I haven’t seen it, and even the most promiscuous young women in my focus groups never took the bait from a guy doing that.
As an example from popular culture I offer Hannah in Girls. After banging Adam for 6 months with no strings, she draws the line at sharing him sexually. And he stops.
Women are wired to have a strong aversion to sharing a man. If a woman tolerates it, it’s because she feels her options are limited, and her SMV is lower than his.
“there are women who can fake this quite effectively”
Then men are being presented with a trifecta
Slut Liar Faker
Clearly then, women do not believe men buy into “men should love me for who I am” since that really means “love me for all I have done” and even the dumbest woman knows thats not going to fly. Men will not change. Despite the glaringly obvious man shortage, women could try being less desperate.
@OTC
I like your definitions. Especially because the greater beta is not a loser. I also like the idea of an alpha who chooses to be very discerning in his choice of sexual partners, and I agree that is very, very rare.
I don’t think women have multiple sexual partners at a time, or at least it’s rare. Sandy’s three loves, btw, are softball, horses and Tad.
Women keep their dating options open while they shop for a partner, and there’s no reason men can’t do the same. But having sex is a whole different ballgame, IMO. The SDS notwithstanding, the idea of a guy banging some slut the day before taking my daughter on a first date is sickening. At the very least, she deserves to know about his behavior. Certainly, before sex occurs, he is morally obligated to share that he is sexually active with one or more other people. Everyone has the right to know that from a health standpoint.
lol… Interesting introspection
o/t … finally watched all of Pulp Fiction
@Infantry
I agree, and of course it’s true for women as well. I’d venture to say that “why didn’t he call?” is a very popular Google search term.
Bravo, for the record I fully endorse this as a sound strategy that harms no one and benefits you.
I agree this is a good balance. Precisely because so many girls have been burned by a cad or two, many of the ones who are not inclined toward promiscuity become quite wary. That’s why emotional escalation scares them so much – what if they “go all in” and the guy turns out to be a cad? The metaphor of spinning plates, while useful for men, makes women feel in theory and in practice like an object being juggled.
As I said earlier, I’ve had men boast to me directly. “I’m spinning three plates right now!” “I was spinning two plates, but one dropped, so I’m on the lookout. Trying to get two new plates spinning.”
Avoiding one-itis is one thing. Bragging rights is something quite different.
Jackie (way back) at 149: “[H]ave I offended you in some way? …Thank you, Esau, for considering my request.”
Since you ask so politely I’ll try to be more informative and direct. You haven’t offended me personally, but I do think that what you’ve written here adds up to being decidedly offensive in general. I could go on for a while, but let me just highlight two counts.
First let’s recall your spontaneous, unsolicited advice at 97 (formerly 99):
Observe how they narrate the story of their own life. “Victim mentality” = red flag!
At this point there is no reason to suspect that you’re using the phrase “victim mentality” other than in a glib and general fashion. But I’ll give you credit for the more specific version you describe at 149:
Victim mentality is defined as “the fabrication of victim-hood for a variety of reasons such as to justify abuse of others, to manipulate others, a coping strategy or attention seeking.”
Now, do you see the problem here? By recommending that everyone — with you yourself as presumably the leading example — should/can readily identify this specific “victim mentality” in another person, simply by observing how they narrate their own story, you are presuming that you can detect, quickly & reliably, who is fabricating victim-hood and who is not. Really, who set you up to judge the veracity of others so definitively? I would call that a sin of pride, as well as tempting others to do likewise.
The Rochester example you cite fails badly compared to your injunction. Yes, if you have the quasi-omniscient knowledge of the narrative then of course you can identify “victim mentality” reliably. But you didn’t recommend withholding judgement until the full and omniscient truth is available, you recommended Red Flagging people based on narrative style alone (don’t feel bad, though, as you have plenty of company; see below). In effect, putting your above-quoted remarks together with the Rochester quotation, your advice is that anyone who so much as starts a sentence with the phrase “I like to lay half the blame on ill fortune and adverse circumstances…” should be summarily denounced as a fabricator immediately, never mind if he actually did suffer ill fortune and adverse circumstance (as Dreyfus certainly did).
The second count is that you don’t seem to have appreciated the kind of company with which you’re traveling here. Yes, I suppose a case could be made that if one really does observe a sufficient weight of evidence to conclude beyond any reasonable doubt that a person is “fabricating victim-hood” for some poor purpose, then that should constitute a red flag against taking up with them. But, let’s be real here: how many times will people who follow your advice actually judge patiently, fairly and impartially? versus having a different kind of agenda.
I don’t know where you’ve been reading, but if you skate any self-described feminist blogs touching on the SMP then you will likely encounter the “Nice Guy (TM)” canard. The mechanism is admirably simple: any male who complains publicly that he was given short shrift in the SMP despite (or due to) being a good and decent person, will be resoundingly and immediately denounced as a “fake nice guy” who actually isn’t nice at all, and so must have deserved his fate of sound rejection (if not worse). Really, the economy of the device is breathtaking: anyone who complains is automatically identified, thereby, as a criminal who deserves no sympathy. Stalin himself could hardly do better.
Can you not recognize these feminists as being, arguably, your fellow travelers here? What you’re both exhibiting, in my opinion, is a quickness, an eagerness, a reflex to discount men who might complain; to shove them out of the light and out of earshot, to push the blame back onto them as quickly as possible and justify their ignominy (“Red flag!”). Stalin’s motivation was never to have the state be publicly criticized; the feminists’ motivation is to ensure that women, as a group, cannot be criticized. I can’t presume to know your own motivations — maybe you just want people to be happy! and nothing more than that — but your recommended devices share an uncomfortable overlap with some pretty unsavory tactics.
Ah, I misread that then. Thought the book was about choosing from 3 boys.
As for women plate-spinning, again, it’s parallel courtship and/or sex, not just sex. Lots of women use the monkeybar strategy – audition the new boyfriend and get him “on the line” before dumping the old one. Varying levels of intimacy ranging from coy implications to kissing to outright sex.
But the commonality is this: having more than one active courtship going at once.
Researchers have theorized there are approximately 6 of them from way back (based on genotype tracing), including Genghis Khan, that most of the world is descended from.
@Esau
Wouldn’t you be happier just abstaining from reading my posts?
I ask because you are so quick to mock me: You state that you can see no higher ambition for me than a penal colony– can you not see how this is unkind? Does it truly make you feel better to speak sarcastically to others?
As mentioned, I have a great many faults. Is it possible you do as well? Because in my experience, criticism can definitely be wielded constructively, in a way that makes the one receiving it more than glad to change. I wish I could say this after reading your posts.
Esau, have you ever heard the phrase, “People will not remember what you did, they will remember the way you made them feel”?
I will review your latest post and respond when I have a moment. Best wishes in the meanwhile–
Well, I did have multiple “prospects,” but only dated one guy at a time. Dating multiple people, to me, connotes kissing a whole bunch of different people in one month, or something like that, which I just couldn’t do. I’d talk to multiple interesting guys in one month, but often did not even physically touch. This was a personal quirk of mine, however. My kiss N is in single digit as a result.
@Esau
Hi again Esau,
I have formed a rebuttal to your response. When you are able to conduct yourself towards me as a gentleman I will look forward to sharing it with you.
I don’t tolerate men (or women) mocking me or using scathing sarcasm in real life; why should I online? I respect your intellect and discipline enough to hold you to the same standards that exist IRL.
Good night and kindest regards, Esau–
To be a Beatle fan back in the day was to be on intimate terms with words like “World Historic Genius.” or “Sorry about your generation,; trying to suck nourishment from barren tits.”
Bang Bang, Shoot Shoot, Happiness is a warm gun….
White Album. Christmas 1969…
@Susan
Re: Spinning Plates
It’s really just another example of how both sexes compete against each other in today’s SMP of combat dating.
For the record, I do think your advice for girls to avoid guys that spin plates is definitely the best advice FOR THEM. However, telling a guy to not spin plates puts him at a clear disadvantage.
It’s almost impossible for a guy to cultivate the “take it or leave it ” attitude that most girls require for attraction unless he’s getting sex somewhere.
It’s not a case of double or different standards, but simply adapting to the market to maximize one’s leverage to get a desired result.
I disagree with this. All sex is casual unless an exclusive relationship is clearly expressed and defined. To assume otherwise is dangerous for either sex.
Bad strategy. Just because the person isn’t seeing someone else at that moment doesn’t mean you’re automatically a couple. Again, the smart move is to assume otherwise unless the other person clearly shows and verbalizes that you’re a couple.
I’m not discounting what you’ve seen and heard from your focus groups, but I don’t see that to be the prevailing behavior out there… Sure, girls might not like that a guy’s spinning plates, but in the end they as a whole seem to be far more willing to forgive than guys are on this issue. As Mike said, if a guy’s attractive and confident enough, he doesn’t have to play by the rules (which are enforced, or in this case not enforced, by the girls).
We can talk morals all we want, but from a personal standpoint what incentive does he have to share that?
I’ll take your daughter out of the equation, because I don’t want to make things personal…. but what if the either girl wasn’t a slut? What if both girls were just your typical girl who puts out relatively early before commitment, operates on “don’t ask don’t tell”, and takes her time emotionally escalating… and he’s just taking his time trying to determine if either are worth committing to? I can understand why you don’t like that scenario, but can you honestly argue that it doesn’t place him in a more advantageous situation than if he were sexually pursuing either girl exclusively from the get go?
Basically, from a guy’s perspective:
If you’re out looking to buy a new car, and you find two dealerships that are willing to let you keep a car for a month to test drive it before deciding if you’ll buy it or not… you’d be stupid not to take them up on the offer.
I’d tell every buddy I know that they’d be stupid to go back to the old way of buying after only one test drive.
But if one of of my friends owned a car dealership, I’d tell him he was an idiot to let anyone have a car to test drive more than a day or two.
The buyer and the seller are at cross purposes…. what’s good for one isn’t necessarily good for the other. And unfortunately, that’s the kind of SMP we’ve decided to create over the last 40 years.
@Jimmy Hendrix
“We can talk morals all we want, but from a personal standpoint what incentive does he have to share that?”
Aren’t our behaviours now determining the future SMP of our children? I can’t think of any stronger incentive than that.
@Susan,
I think Jimmy and Mike C. have given pretty good insights into the “spinning plates issue”. Heck, even a reformed beta like myself was dating someone else at the time I began dating my wife. The fact I had options was one of the major reasons I had the confidence to pursue more aggressively and with a more devil may care attitude.
” I can tell you one thing – the young women I know would be absolutely out the door if they got wind that the guy pursuing them was in a sexual relationship.”
Don’t ask, don’t tell. It’s how my favorite cads pull off that scenario…the women don’t really want to know and never ask. Shocking…cads acting like cads…since they’re not being penalized for it, there’s no incentives to stop. Another contributing factor is the women themselves are not really looking for a true commitment…a LTR with some guy you might not even be with in 6 months is a far cry from a real commitment. It’s the curse of serial monogamy…the monogamy has become less and less important than the serial part…
“As Mike said, if a guy’s attractive and confident enough, he doesn’t have to play by the rules (which are enforced, or in this case not enforced, by the girls).”
Jimmy nails it here. These guys don’t play by the rules because they are not penalized for it. In fact, women often reward it…
No….
@JH
Hi again Jimmy,
You said in the Father’s Day thread you are pro-life, right? Does sleeping around concern you at all? How do your beliefs affect your actions?
I ask because I have had friends get pregnant on: the pill, condoms, diaphram (Mirena), condom + pill (never missed a day– she was from an incredibly prolific family, btw) and Norplant. These were all women in committed relationships; they all continued the pregnancies, by the way.
If the success rate is 99%, there is still that 1% window. What is your plan if you get someone pregnant from casual sex?
I have never assumed a guy was exclusive with me until he introduced me as his girlfriend (and usually to parents, closest friends and colleagues). I assumed he was dating others; it was a good way of keeping myself from getting overly attached too soon.
I’ve never been able to date more than one guy at a time– it’s just the way I’m made. So I did my best to be focused on my friends and other activities (school and my profession). I can totally understand the tendency to not want to think about it: It’s way more flattering not to know!
As much as I dislike this plate spinning stuff, I think these guys are providing a valuable service. I hope that every girl who could be hurt by casual sex reads this and changes her actions accordingly. This could be a huge silver lining.
@Anacaona:
This works both ways. The sociology of genre fiction (mysteries, thrillers, romance, sci-fi) is one of my research interests, so I have read A LOT of romance novels. Neither the heroes nor the heroines featured in these novels (almost all written by women) seem realistic or appealing to me. The heroes are generally super alphas who behave like supplicating betas. They have alpha characteristics – they are handsome, wealthy, confident, powerful figures – but even the ones who are supposed to be “rakes” or womanizers rarely have any game. Instead, they are very emotional – desperately, crazily, head over heels in love. They are amazingly eager to get married, and willing to pursue the heroine no matter how often they are rejected.
And the hero’s attitude towards sex is perhaps the least realistic aspect of his depiction. As soon as he meets the heroine he instantly loses all sexual interest in any other woman. The most ludicrous scenes I have read involve heroes who are so much in loooove that they are actually impotent with other women, however beautiful. These men are not (usually) currently involved in a relationship with their heroine – the scene is written to show how obsessed and infatuated they are. Not many men behave like that in the real world.
As for the heroines, I often find myself wondering – what does he see in her? The romance hero, whatever his faults, at least has qualities that appeal to women. The heroine’s qualities are not, however, designed to appeal to men but rather qualities that feminist writers want to see in women. The heroine is generally described as “strong” (above all else), “smart,” “feisty”and “independent,” and the hero is supposed to love her for those attributes. He is not supposed to care about her appearance (that is considered “shallow,” although the hero is almost always gorgeous) or about the number of sexual partners she has had (that is “judgmental”). The psychological qualities that really appeal to men – empathy, agreeableness, emotional stability – are de-emphasized or rejected. In real life, of course, men rarely fall in love with a woman’s resume.
As a result of all this the typical romance novel consists of a high status hero (SMV 9 or 10) chasing a heroine who is a 7 at best in most men’s eyes. I understand the appeal of this fantasy, but it is not one that most men would find either realistic or appealing.
@Jimmy Hendricks
I like how you’re comparing women, human beings, to cars, objects. Do we all come with some type of insurance against broken hearts, STDs and bad reputation. Maybe you realize that while you’re spinning plates on your side, other men (like some in this thread) are saying ” yeah, that’s the girl that dated that ‘alpha’ who was dating a bunch of other women at the same time. I wouldn’t touch her with a 10 ft pole.” So you guys need to figure out among each other men what strategy you want to adopt. It is a double standard period! If you want to selfishly consider your interests, then be clear about it. However, hearing about all that bs about how damaged women are when they were simply the losers in some guy spinning cycle is just unfair and convenient. It is actually one of the reasons why, while not being an advocate of casual sex and shaming, I abhor all that pontificating about women’s low count, men insecurity, mythical alphas, and so on. At the end of the day, people do what they want to do.
More generally, on “commitmentsluts”, I met a guy like that 2years ago, used to go to the same uni. That guy is pure beta, and not even a hot one: beer belly, smoker, lots of debts, no job, forgettable face. Yet he was very quick at putting commitment on the table. I run away after 2weeks of dating because I knew his eagerness to escalade sexually and be in a relationship was just a way for him to secure a permanent sex partner, regardless of who it was (he didn’t really knew me at all). He has had 4 girlfriends since then. I’m actually good friend now with one of his exes. And from what I heard through the grapevine, he wouldn’t have been sexually satisfied with me so happy I dodged that one. Just to illustrate that the obsessive distinction between Alpha and Beta is just a waste of time. That guy was objectifying me just as a supposed alpha cad would do just to get access to sex but without really creating a connection. And let’s face it, if I’m going to objectified by both “alphas” and “betas”, I’d better get a motorcycle ride out of it.
@Ramble:
Gang violence is not a good metric for all violence, and violence is not a function of race. Europe has witnessed a number of not so little episodes of violence, including the Thirty Years War and World War II – not to mention more recent events such as the unpleasantness in the former Yugoslavia. The same can be said for Asia (e.g. the riots at the time when India was partitioned), Africa (Rwanda, anyone?), North and South America or Australasia.
The same applies to intelligence. Not even their severest critics ever suggested that the Nazis were stupid.
For the record, I do think your advice for girls to avoid guys that spin plates is definitely the best advice FOR THEM. However, telling a guy to not spin plates puts him at a clear disadvantage.
It’s almost impossible for a guy to cultivate the “take it or leave it ” attitude that most girls require for attraction unless he’s getting sex somewhere.
This is pretty much it. I doubt this gap will ever be bridged.
While still meeting the girls’ requirements of not having sex with any other girl, the ‘take it or leave it’ attitude can only be met by a guy with a low sex drive, by a guy that is just out of a relationship or by a MGTOW guy who really doesn’t want women in his life.
So the only way for a normal guy can realistically play by the girls’ rules is through a ‘when stars align’ event where he’s just out of a relationship, but doesn’t have baggage that will stop him getting involved with someone else.
Or the girl has to deal with the neediness that comes from a long sexual drought.
The metaphor of spinning plates seems to mean different things to different people. In general, however, I think that it is critical for a man to have options, precisely because men with options are far more attractive to women. Men without options tend to come across as desperate and overly eager to please, and those qualities are the kiss of death to attraction as far as most women are concerned.
Once you are in a committed monogamous relationship you should not be sexually involved with anyone else at all. Anything else constitutes cheating. Every man (and woman) needs to determine how and when this transition occurs. I would say that when you are ready for commitment and feel confident that your partner feels the same way you should exit any other romantic/sexual relationships.
@Jackie
With an economy that’s going to get worse before it gets better and the genuine challenge of finding, attracting, and keeping a girl that meets the high standards to be the mother of my children, I’ve made peace with the very real possibility that I might not have kids.
I’m definitely more of a traditionalist. Both my mom and dad came from devout Catholic families. But I’m also a realist.
The proliferation of casual sex definitely concerns me, but there’s no putting the toothpaste back in the tube. Our society is what it is. Unless you’d like to be a hermit, the best I or anyone else can do is adapt and play by the rules put in front of us. So I choose not to fault anyone for doing that.
Well it doesn’t matter what I’d plan, I have no decision in the matter. And while also acknowledging that I can’t be 100% sure what I’d do until I was actually faced with that situation, I like to think I’d pursue 50% custody.
@Mireille
To an extent, I meant for my example to be ridiculous to illustrate just how ridiculous the current SMP is.
I’d say the same thing. She has the right to have sex with whomever she wants, and they have the right to form their own beliefs about it.
It’s not a double standard. Girls just seem more willing to gamble their best interest than guys are. FWIW, I support Susan’s advice not to do that 100%.
No argument from me.
“a girl that meets the high standards to be the mother of my children”
Thus the low and continually declining marriage rate and the new desperation wave of feminism
@OTC
The “lots of women do it” rationalization is problematic from an ethical standpoint, in my view. This is often the excuse used for men who wish to justify manipulating women into dread, jealousy, or even sex by pretending interest in a relationship. The old “High heels, makeup, push-up bras! It’s exactly the same thing!” Um, no it’s not. The male equivalent is a t-shirt that shows off your biceps or deliberately leaving a day or two of stubble on your face.
This is similar pretzel logic. When you generalize about people using the lowest common denominator, you’re behaving in a way that penalizes them regardless of their behaviors. It’s the “I assume all women are sluts strategy.” It’s a race to the bottom, and likely to catch innocent victims in your net.
But the worst thing about it is that you’re going to miss the opportunity to date someone of quality. A woman with any self-respect whatsoever would not tolerate being treated as some composite wench you’re out to triumph over.
To wake up and see Jackie in the crosshairs of an attack from anyone is surreal. The internet’s kindest, gentlest soul is dodging sniper fire. This unmade my day.
@Jimmy
Of course it does, and he can generally pull it off only by lying by omission. Since you claim that many women don’t mind, why not be up front about his activities and what he is looking for? “Just so you know, you’re not the only person I’m doing this with.” Heck, according to your theory, this should be a DHV.
Having sex concurrently with multiple people is a *huge* risk factor for disease.
That said, I do not absolve women of the responsibility of asking. If a woman doesn’t ask, I have no sympathy for her.
From an ethical standpoint, what matters is *intent.* If everyone is shitty to one another, that doesn’t make the behavior ethical.
If being a good and moral person is not an incentive, I don’t know what to say.
The truth is, sex is never casual, even for men (Helen Fisher). It’s a complex chemical occurrence with many implications for the individuals involved.
Having said all that, I am not in the business of telling men what to do. I will, however, tell women that they should immediately reject any man who pursues them while entangled in a sexual liaison of any kind with someone else. No overlap, no double dipping. This is not a power grab – this is common sense.
That is such a copout. No one decided to create this SMP. Not even the feminists. Every one of us plays a role.
How about this? How about we practice the Golden Rule in dating?
I didn’t think so.
@ExNewYorker
Well you’ve just acknowledged that spinning plates with sex is a cad move. I agree. In fact, “don’t ask, don’t tell” is a cad move and a coward’s move. I’ve heard plenty of stories where guys actually uttered that phrase to defend their actions.
Well, we’re back to NAWALT. I’ll just say that a woman who is avoiding commitment and rewarding a guy for spinning plates is a good match for that guy. They’re both in a strictly short-term mentality, and I have no problem with that. My job is to do what I can do keep women with a long-term mindset from wasting time with cads.
”I’ve learned that I am “marriage material.” This has been reiterated by nearly every boyfriend I’ve had. Ironically, none of them ever proposed, so does that count as a valid lesson? lol.”
I feel for you. The women who insisted I was marriage material never opened their legs for me and would insist on remembering me that some other dude who was a douchebag got it for free, lol.
OMG my day is already getting better! This is so fantastic, I love it. Look for this to show up at the top of a post soon.
The problem is in the conflating romantic and sexual. For the record, I have no problem with this scenario:
Guy has FWB or other sexual activity he is not invested in.
Guy meets girl he would like to get to know better romantically.
Guy takes girl on dates, no sex.
Guy realizes he likes girl and wants to pursue it further.
Guy ends FWB and proceeds with girl.
By the way, there is protocol in hookup culture. Any guy “getting multiple” is quickly branded a manwhore. Naturally, that will attract manwhore lovers.
For everyone else, even making out with two people in the same weekend is viewed as shady. I’ve seen both girls and guys called out for it. This happens when one party is going into the hookup with an eye toward establishing a relationship (true more than 50% of the time) and the other person behaves in such a way that makes clear they’re not on the same page. The one with real interest will then say, “WTF! We hooked up Friday, and Saturday night you left the party with him? You are such a skank.” Similarly, I’ve seen many situations where a girl is hooking up with a guy she really likes, they seem to be getting tight, then one Sunday morning her friends sit her down and let her know that the guy hooked up with someone new the night before. This always causes drama and ends the hooking up.
The most important thing that needs to change in the SMP is sluts getting with non-sluts. That is where all the difficulty arises.
This might just be a philosophical difference between us, but I think “lying by omission” is kind of an oxymoron.
No doubt, but that’s an understood risk anyone of either gender willingly takes by having sex prior to a committed relationship.
I support that advice 100%. No objection.
I just find it weird that in the past you always came from the standpoint that as long as there wasn’t deception, the guy wasn’t a cad and you didn’t have issue with it. Now any guy who’s having sex with more than one girl at once is suddenly unethical?
The real problem is that the social contract between men and women and all the black and white rules for courtship that we had prior to the sexual revolution have been completely blown up and disregarded. Everything takes place in the gray area these days. Can’t fault a guy for adapting to his environment.
@Jimmy
Well, that gets straight to the “lying by omission” problem. I consider that deception. As always, I argue that it comes down to intent.
Is it likely the girl does not know you’re banging other people?
Does she seem like a girl who would object to that if she did know?
Do you ever change the subject or gloss over details to avoid mentioning that you were with other women recently?
Do you feel secure that she considers sex an important act and is not having sex with anyone but you?
Is she someone you would regret giving genital herpes to?
Do you get the sense during sex that she does not view the act as casual?
Do you get the sense that she would be upset to learn that you view the sex as no-strings?
If you can answer yes to any of these questions, you’re deceiving another human being into making a choice without full information, which you possess. Since you’re already getting sex elsewhere, I find it especially difficult to imagine a justification for this.
@Susan
You seem to be advocating exclusivity before a committed relationship is even established.
If that’s the case, I don’t know why any guy who has awareness of the contemporary SMP would sign up for it. Seems like he’s just signing away all his power and giving it to her. That never ends well.
Susan, you are desperate to find analogous behaviour between guys and girls, but our experiences are not analogous.
This is not to say that you shouldn’t defend your position, but that looking for analogous behaviour is always problematic. And, it is one of the reasons why we have Different Standards in that SMP more often than Double Standards.
*signing away* doh
No, that is not the male equivalent. There is no male equivalent. OK, this is going to be my next hobby horse that I drill in as much as possible.
Our experiences are not analogous.
There is no male equivalent to a woman giving birth.
There is no female equivalent to a man getting multiple girls pregnant at the (roughly) same time.
There is no female equivalent to a man being cuckholded.
We are significantly different and with different goals. Our experiences are not analogous.
However, I do understand what you were attempting to say.
Susan,
Found this article on the Huffington Post. I thought you might find the statistics interesting (if you haven’t seen them already…).
“A recent MissTravel survey found that 40 percent of women in their 20s had engaged in a one-night sexual encounter during a vacation — 10 percent having had five or more sexual partners over the course of one week. And Match.com’s 6,000-person survey of American singles discovered that women are actually more likely than men to consider bad sex a relationship deal-breaker.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/25/jilly-cooper-author-claims-women-dont-want-to-have-sex-anymore_n_1624572.html?utm_hp_ref=women&ir=Women
That is such a copout.
Susan, that was not a copout, it was a reasonable argument.
External (physical) traits on average aren’t as important for women as for men when it comes to sexual attraction – that’s a given. Push-up bras and other stuff you listed are meant to mimick high fertility, which in turn is a trait of big importance to men, although only subconsciously.
What is the equivalent to men? Well, how do men mimick the traits that women find attractive? The answer is Game, of course.
Neither is more moral or honest than the other.
Susan, I did not want to say anything when it was originally posted, but that logic is straight Feministing bullshit.
It is the old, “There are no real Nice Guys (TM), so i might as well fuck Alphas” logic.
Am I the only one who thinks thus guy’s an alpha? Alphas can have beer bellies and debts as well, you know.
“By the way, there is protocol in hookup culture. Any guy “getting multiple” is quickly branded a manwhore.”
That’s comforting, it means that the next generation still has scope to lower the bar for what constitutes acceptable behaviour. Give it another couple of generations (max) and we’ll be praising the moral behaviour of bonobos. Jersey Shore will be used as reference material for ethical standards of the sexually repressed past.
Prosecutor to Defendant: So, John, how long have you been beating your wife?
Tasmin – “ I sometimes fear that the red pill is kinda stuck in the throat for me, so it may take a while before I develop a more balanced perspective. “
I’ve been reading ‘sphere sites for well over a year now, and I’m still chocking on a few bits of that pill myself. I never imagined I would be dealing with such major changes at 41 years old. I’m capable, but DAMN it’s hard to change thoughts and behaviors I’ve been living for so long. Don’t get hung up on how long it is taking you, just keep making progress.
On “spinning plates” – I’ve never dated more than one woman at a time. I don’t think it was lack of opportunities. (although once I started dating a girl, I stopped looking for others so I can’t honestly say) But, as I’ve stated many times before, I’m not a very social person, and frankly I HATE dating. I don’t have the energy it would take to spin plates, and I wouldn’t be able to give any of the “plates” enough of my focus to determine how I felt about them. In short, I don’t have the time, patience, or energy to deal with more than one woman at a time, which consequently also helps to keep my eyes from straying too far. I may see a woman that really trips my trigger, but I know damn well that I wouldn’t want to start from the beginning again. I know it isn’t romantic, but the truth is if I’m satisfied with my situation, the amount of trouble/grief/guilt/stress/etc cheating would cause might send me into a nervous breakdown.
I guess now that I think on it, I created my own lack of options by being so antisocial. *shrug* So far I’ve not been without female comfort most of my adult life, so I’m OK with that. I know that if I found myself single again tomorrow, I’d have lots of options I would be less than thrilled to act on.
@Michael
“I feel for you. The women who insisted I was marriage material never opened their legs for me and would insist on remembering me that some other dude who was a douchebag got it for free, lol.”
I’m glad you said that as it saved me the bother. It was my immediate thought when I read the original comment. There are a couple of variations (over here):
if I didn’t have a boyfriend already (who I clearly prefer to you despite being an utter douche)
if there were two of me (the other me would love to go out with your beta arse)
it doesn’t matter if you’re male or female, if you’re not wanted, it sucks. And prettying the lack of ultimate attraction up with lies may make one side feel like a better person, but if the other can read the subtext…oops.
Women define the SMP, Men the MMP. There is no equality in either.
@Susan
I consider the above scenario close to ideal, with a valued FWB. I’ll differ in considering a good FWB is more valuable than a fledgling relationship candidate. I have no problem waiting months for the new relationship to grow roots before leaving the FWB and sleeping with the new girlfriend, but, being realistic, there’s probably going to be some overlap.
Practically, male sexual escalation helps prod women to emotional escalation. There’s the female orgasm factor, the N-investment, and that “hard to get” ends once you’re gotten. I’m sure women can escalate emotionally without sex, but I’d wonder what the probabilities would be. (Aside, it helps explain how women get burned in a casual SMP.)
Travis at 370 – Wow. That was depressing… It comes across as “older married woman don’t want to have sex, but they enjoyed it immensely when they were in their 20′s and hooking up on vacation.”
At least I know I’m getting used to all this wonderful news now. Back when I first found the ‘sphere, this kind of thing would have upset my stomach for a bit. Now? I’m really just kinda numb.
I can say this, I will never allow myself to stay in a relationship that does not have a healthy dose of sexual intimacy. I’ve made that clear from the get go in my current relationship. I’ve pretty much determined that this is a top 5 requirement for me at this point. I’ve gone without, and it clearly showed that for me sex is the glue that holds my intimate relationships together. Without it I start viewing my SO as a roommate, with the added resentment of sexual frustration to deal with.
@Susan
Just curious, is it a lie by omission if a girl doesn’t announce her count to a potential bf before he commits to her? After all, that’s information that will help him make an informed decision… Using your standard, I would think she would have to explicitly state that info before commitment (“Before you commit, you know I’ve had sex with 12 guys before you, and 8 of them were casual”), otherwise she’s unethical.
You might disagree with me on this, but I think most people would rather dip into the grey area of ethics if it gives them a substantially better chance of success than to be a martyr for the cause or an ethical loser. Not saying that’s a good thing, but that’s human nature, IMO.
Just wanted to clear this up… I’ve used that example on here a lot, but definitely not in that context and have definitely not advocated for lying or deception. I’ve used that example to counter the arguments that game is evil manipulation. The argument is, “If game is manipulation, then so are makeup, pushup bras, etc. since both aid the primary driver of attraction in the opposite sex.” Of course I don’t believe either are manipulation, it’s just meant to illustrate how ridiculous the original argument is.
Yeah. Some people in the Manosphere started to notice that average betas basically serve as “whipping boys” for the “crimes” of alphas and omegas.
Listen carefully to women who regularly complain about men, any you’ll find their resentment, anger, disgust and contempt is always directed at the top 10% of men and the bottom 10% of men. The source of female discontent is the same: lack of male investment. Neither alphas nor omegas invest in women, because neither have any incentives to do so – the alphas can get what they want from women without that, and the omegas can’t get anything from women either way.
Women notice alphas because they are attractive. They also notice omegas because they are revolting and are also the only group of men that are always open about their views on women, calling them bitches etc. After all, they have nothing to lose by not “playing nice”.
The middle 80% – the betas who invest in women, avoid insulting them, the commitment-minded honest men who don’t escalate sexually – are invisible to women.
So what happens is that women are outraged by the 20% of men they actually notice, assume all men are like that and then demand that something be done about it. Hence the “man up!” campaign, claims that “good guys are just bad guys without options”, demands for more and more draconian laws curbing men’s freedom etc.
@Ted
“At least I know I’m getting used to all this wonderful news now. Back when I first found the ‘sphere, this kind of thing would have upset my stomach for a bit. Now? I’m really just kinda numb. ”
I did it differently. I divorced which delivered the numbness, whenever I learnt something from the sphere a little lightbulb would go off in my head – “aaah that explains it!” and the numbness receded a little.
@ Ian
I consider the above scenario close to ideal, with a valued FWB. I’ll differ in considering a good FWB is more valuable than a fledgling relationship candidate. I have no problem waiting months for the new relationship to grow roots before leaving the FWB and sleeping with the new girlfriend, but, being realistic, there’s probably going to be some overlap.
There’s significant numbers of ancillary accounts from PUAs that reveal many women use this system themselves during their search for a LTR.
Its probably rationalised and I would never expect women to admit this strategy as it violates the cardinal rule of sexual discretion, but it makes sense to me.
@Jimmy
You have gotten me thinking. I’m scrapping my intended post for today and I’m going to research lying. I’ve already discovered that lying by omission is by no means roundly rejected by philosophers – opinions vary. In fact, Kant seems to imply it’s necessary for the good of society. It’s a fascinating subject. Anyway, I promise to come at it fairly.
@Ted
congrats, another point of agreement
“Without it I start viewing my SO as a roommate, with the added resentment of sexual frustration to deal with.”
Don’t need that in my life. Quid pro quo, with a distinct limit on the investment of emotions. A relationship with a woman should be like custard on spotted dick, nice to have but not essential.
(p.s. http://www.videojug.com/film/how-to-make-spotted-dick is SFW)
Just1X – ” I divorced which delivered the numbness, whenever I learnt something from the sphere a little lightbulb would go off in my head – “aaah that explains it!” and the numbness receded a little.”
To be honest, I think the “sickness” I felt so often early on was a result of the dread I felt knowing what I may have to become if I wanted to be successful with women. In addition, I am my own worst enemy. I tend to read stuff like that and bring it into a personal context, which really sends my thoughts flying. I sometimes have to literally fight the urge to mentally imagine whatever slight I’ve just absorbed with my SO in the scenario, and it triggers all kinds of anger/depression/dread/jealousy. To be frank, this is precisely why I have such an issue with a woman’s past. Once I learn of it, I will literally spend weeks mentally picturing and cataloging it all. And I found out, that it is WAY worse if I meet one of those former partners. Not former spouses mind you, just casual sex partners. For whatever reason, so far I am completely OK with meeting and knowing former LTR partners. I guess on some level I’m not intimidated by them because I KNOW I’m a better partner than they were. But, since I avoided casual sex my entire life, I don’t have the knowledge to feel confident in comparison to a FWB or ONS type situation. I can’t understand it, so I fear it.
I’m not a fan of this “spinning plates” concepts.
Finding someone is hard enough, now I gotta learn how get these saucers twirling on top of these 5ft poles – ugh – just to have a “take it or leave it” attractive attitude.
MGTOW reason #342
Regarding the “spinning plates” concept, I’ll chime in.
I’ll admit that I have dated several men at one time. When I say that, I mean that I have been on dates with more than one man in a reasonably short amount of time. I don’t think that there is anything wrong with that, for either men or women.
I do have a problem with, however, the idea of dating one person while sleeping with others. That just seems kind of iffy to me.
If people want to go on dates with different individuals, that seems perfectly fine. Throwing sex into the mix clouds the water.
@Rambling,
You really deserve your handle in here. Don’t get mad because your fellow male comparses are ruining the field for you. I have to read a bunch of BS from a lot of guys here, especially that Abbott guy, about how women are just plain evil. Everybody likes to lament the failures of the other sex. However I don’t believe there aren’t quality men around, I see plenty of them everyday; beta or alphas, they get caught up in the game of running after women, regardless of the quality and are just prone to a higher count. That was my point. I know men I would consider have all the nice alpha with low game, and beta douchebags with high numbers who are smart at finding an angle, I call it the “lion and hyena syndrome”.
Not all betas are that great and not all alphas are bad.
@Jimmy,
How is a woman telling you her count the same thing as you being honest about the number of people you’re SIMULTANEOUSLY shagging? That you both admit to one another your numbers is one (inappropriate) thing. But sleeping with several women at the same time, risking to pass on to them STDs, and then taking your time to decide which one you’re going to choose is plain questionable, even if that’s what is going on today. You’re adding to her N count.
People who spin plates belong in circuses. Like Susan said, if someone is sexually escalating with multiple women, then women will not feel bad accepting dinners and flowers from whoever gives them. Where does that leave us.
Wow, that thread depressed me to the enth degree with all that double standard and lack of perspective.
Sassy – FWIW I agree with you on this. If dating is simply going out with people, then I don’t see an issue with having multiple people in your dating pool. If you are having sex with any one of them, then it is entirely a different matter to me.
@Mille-feuille
Just excellent.
Mireille – “That you both admit to one another your numbers is one (inappropriate) thing. ”
Can you clarify this? Are you saying it is inappropriate to discuss the number of former sexual partners, or something else?
I’m a huge fan of discussing N, relatively early on in the relationship, but after exclusivity is on the table. I am not ashamed to admit I use N as one of the many deciding factors when it comes to choosing a mate.
”Women define the SMP, Men the MMP. There is no equality in either.”
The irony is that by the time men are in a position to offer a secure marriage(the financial security marriage-oriented women are seeking for) women’s SMV has already dropped considerably.
For example. Yesterday I was hanging out near one of my classrooms. This older woman, probably in her 40′s approaches me to ask where the women’s bathroom is. I indicate that it’s right in front of her, she enters it, locks the bathroom’s door, I her the stall’s lock closing up too.
I mean, if I was a pervert, wouldn’t I be far more likely to be pervy for the women who are in their sexual prime – women I’m surrounded by every – instead of sexually desiring a woman who is so close to menopause?
Other situation. This morning I went to my local coffee shop to get an icecream. I’m there, waiting to be serviced and this mid 30′s woman who was nothing special to look at(and was confused for a grandma by an elderly woman who still had her wits about, LOL) was ”scared” of me, honestly acting like I was sexually interested in her.
I didn’t even see her there, not until she began with the dramatic roleplay!
I don’t understand how the sex that spends so much of their lifetime with low self-esteem and adds artificiality to their looks(high heels, push-up bras, Brazilian waxing etc) can assume that a 20 year old man would rather look at them than at the 20 year old average chick that fill up my city.
Women do control the Sexual Market, but their reigns as genetic queens is very short. From age 15 to 30 at most, is what they can pull off in terms of men losing control of their sexual desires to proceed to sexually pursue them. We can’t forget that the man’s age plays a pivotal role in how women’s future is going to play out.
I have friends in their 30′s who are healthy and aren’t addicted to porn but they don’t pay much attention to the very hot chicks. They’ll look, admire, but they won’t chase after women, put up with women, or pay for women’s stuff in hope of getting some in return like they did when they were 14-25.
@ Cooper
Finding someone is hard enough, now I gotta learn how get these saucers twirling on top of these 5ft poles – ugh – just to have a “take it or leave it” attractive attitude.
It takes some getting used to, especially if you aren’t an extrovert that enjoys sustaining multiple shallower relationships. The benefits are:
1 – The take it or leave it attitude; also called abundance mentality. Girls will naturally pick up that you are a man with options. This makes you more attractive and it also allows you to be pickier. Its a win for you and a win for attractive girls who are sick of dating needy men.
2 – You can screen more women for LTR potential rather than through serial monogamy.
There’s also other benefits depending on if you want to go down the harem road and avoid committed relationships, but that’s better discussed on PUA sites.
As for the heroines, I often find myself wondering – what does he see in her? The romance hero, whatever his faults, at least has qualities that appeal to women. The heroine’s qualities are not, however, designed to appeal to men but rather qualities that feminist writers want to see in women. The heroine is generally described as “strong” (above all else), “smart,” “feisty”and “independent,” and the hero is supposed to love her for those attributes. He is not supposed to care about her appearance (that is considered “shallow,” although the hero is almost always gorgeous) or about the number of sexual partners she has had (that is “judgmental”). The psychological qualities that really appeal to men – empathy, agreeableness, emotional stability – are de-emphasized or rejected. In real life, of course, men rarely fall in love with a woman’s resume.
Actually this is a function of feminism invading romance, if you read classical romance (from the 80′s and down and pink romance and latin telenovelas) you will find that most of the leading ladies are virginal, very pretty and nice. But many modern women label the classic ones Mary Sue’s or Manic Pixie Girls as a way to derogate the men’s tastes and added their own “I made mistakes to become the empowered wonderful woman I am now and the perfect man will know it …”fantasy. The bitchy, fat, short, slutty woman that gets with the handsome devoted millionaire doesn’t sell that well anyway, if you take a look at the HUGE best sellers they are more in line with the “ideal woman for men” than the other way around, YMMV.
”by the 20% of men they actually notice, assume all men are like that and then demand that something be done about it. ”
Not so much as assuming that all men are like that, but more feeling(and feeling is the prime directive in women) that those who have male genitals but aren’t part of the top 20% of the male population do not qualify as men, they qualify as clay, a mold they can shape to whatever they need at the time.
The heterosexual beta male is the sexual immateriality of the Homosexual male; it serves it’s purpose as a beast of burden and receives nothing more than a ”thank you,” very much like the homosexual men who hang out with straight women.
Susan,
I’m going to address two things in this comment….your response to my response to the question you posed, and this concept of “lying by omission”.
Let me take the “lying by omission” first. Really, the expression is nonsensical. Lying implies false words being spoken, not the absence of providing information. I think Jimmy’s point about a woman not revealing her partner count was an excellent point that forced you to think more deeply about it rather then thinking viscerally about what you think a woman is entitled or not entitled to know. The issue isn’t lying or deception, but what is a person’s ethical obligation in terms of revealing information to another person. I think there are some black and white situations like if my basement structure is rotting I am ethically obligated to tell a potential buyer before selling the house, or if someone has AIDs and knows it they are ethically obligated to tell a potential partner about having the disease. Other things are more grey. Did you know that investment advisors and brokers are NOT held to the same standard of revealing information. A broker does not have to reveal he may have some financial incentive to sell a particular investment to a client IF the investment is deemed suitable. I could go on and on an on an on and on rattling off example after example of various levels of revealing information.
So the crux of the issue becomes one of what to reveal and not reveal in the current SMP as it stands. And it isn’t a copout to suggest that. Ethics change depending on the environment, and sort of what the overarching rules of the game are. I would argue although I won’t fully develop the argument in this comment that the complete unleashing of young female sexuality free of parental oversight, societal shaming, norms and restrictions radically altered the landscape and with it completely changed what the ethics of male obligations are.
The norm of this SMP is EXCLUSIVITY does NOT exist until formally established. Full stop. Anyone operating under a different premise has had their head in the ground that last 20 years. You can no longer assume that if I am dating you I am only dating you and vice versa. Introducing the issue of whether sex is or isn’t taking place is a false issue, and simply reflects the differing priorities of men and women with men valuing sexual access much more highly (which is why as I think Ian pointed out a guy is going to value an existing FWB more highly than a potential good relationship that may NOT develop).
Regarding your questions. First, good job on leading the witness
I stand by my differentiation of the situation. To your question about emotionally escalating with other guys, would it have bothered me? Probably, yeah. Would it have led to a different future outcome? I don’t know.
I think the particulars are unimportant. To me the crux of the issue, is the VERY REAL DIFFERENCE in the nature of male investment versus female investment. After all this time, and my many attempts, I still think you don’t really grok this. I would point you to some of Lokland’s comments, and to one comment VD made about some of the mental issues when he committed and basically took all other women off the table permanently. When a man commits to a woman (presumably a quality good one) he most certainly gets something. But he loses something as well. I suspect I will never be able to get you to understand what I am saying by that. Where I am going with this? The point is I don’t want to, and I suspect most guys do not want to commit to any woman who has played a game of making him compete for her, either her emotional attention, sexual attention, whatever. If I had to compete to win her even really from Day 1 with other guys instead of her being really into me than I am going to have reservations about choosing her as the one that I forsake all others for the rest of my life. This gets to the issue of emotional escalation, and frankly I don’t know how a woman could sincerely emotionally escalate with multiple guys simultaneously unless there was something wrong with her emotionally. On the flipside, the situation isn’t parallel with men because I don’t think the issue is one of immediate, exclusive investment but the acid test comes more down the road in how willing the guy is to cut off./break off with all other women for good. I’m really not sure if I am articulating this perfectly but I suspect guys like Jimmy and Ian know exactly the gestalt of what I am saying.
At least to me, it seems like you want to enforce some standard of “fairness” that really is only fair from the female perspective and female priorities such as a committed monogamous relationship being 1000x more valuable than sexual access. Clearly, sexual access is important to men. Its why prostitution is the world’s oldest profession, and you really have little to no male prostitution except for homosexuals. Your framework of what is “ethical” is guided by the idea that a woman has to get a committed, monogamous relationship on her terms, conditions, and timeline with little to no consideration that a guy is going to value regular, ongoing sexual access to the extent possible. I’m not saying you are wrong, but at least be aware your ethical framework is at least in part guided by your objectives and what you see as the optimal good outcome.
Do you think that those authors were virginal or that they simply preferred that kind of contrast (virginal, innocent girl versus a dominant, successful male)?
2 – You can screen more women for LTR potential rather than through serial monogamy.
One of the issues I have with this strategy is that I don’t think is that effective if you are dating 5 sluts you will naturally will pick the “best” of them to commit. But it will still be the lesser of two evils. Isn’t it better to identify objectively what is the best person for you, screen out and discard fast anyone that doesn’t fit in your standards? I think that is more effective IMO.
Of course I really can’t find the strategy completely unsound if women are finding men without options unattractive and they are not having a second date then complaining about the men having options actually exercising them makes no sense. If you don’t like to date men that “spin plates” giving a chance to a supplicating guy to get over it, is a better strategy. I do think men eventually get more confident if they know you are not going anywhere I think hubby was a lot more secure by seeing that I was not losing interest and wanting to get him to know him, it took a while but since he had the other qualities that I find attractive I was not going to let him go, people are always nervous when they do things the first times, confidence is born out of expertise and success,at least that was for me.
But it seems that most modern women can’t stand being in the presence of a supplicating guy or cannot see past the supplication to see the potential. I should make a post about that: Supplication shouldn’t be a deal breaker…I’m sure I will get hate mail over that though :p
At some, early, point in dating, either a man is coming off a dry period, or he’s seeing one or more other women. In the latter case, is the fact that other women find him worth their time an indication of some value? He is not needy, if he has other women in his life, right? And not being needy is a Very Good Thing, at least as opposed to seeming needy.
Other practitioners have spoken of the implied vetting when a woman discovers other women in the new guy’s life. If they–even if she doesn’t know them–think he’s okay, then at least the worst of red-flag possibilities probably aren’t in play, which is good to know and not always obvious early on.
Another question ref alpha/beta:
In a sales training meeting some years ago, the instructor was talking about personality types and separated them into categories. Although the term alpha and beta weren’t used, the categories included the descriptions so widely used in relationship discussion.
Category 1, for example, would be an alpha, 2, a beta, 3, something or other else.
While, for sales purposes, the personality distinctions were different than for relationship purposes, the 1 and 2 categories corresponded to alpha and beta pretty closely.
From which a number of guys asked the following; Is there such a thing as an ex-alpha, a guy who’s been an alpha in earlier times but, in order to deal with normal people, has had to ratchet it back?
IOW, are there guys walking around looking like betas because kicking ass and taking charge and being dominant are tiresome, rude, and annoy people? In certain circumstances, that’s the thing to do. But when it’s not necessary, why bother?
Presumably, when necessary, the alpha side comes out but in day-to-day life, that’s rarely necessary.
The possibility of encountering a hidden alpha, presuming he’s a beta, in sales is one thing.
Is the hidden alpha any kind of frequent in relationship issues? He’s not likely to orbit uselessly, but he’s also not likely to go out of his way to impress anybody, either. Unless, of course, SHTF which he would rather it not.
Infantry – “The take it or leave it attitude; also called abundance mentality. ”
But you don’t have to spin plates to have this. All it takes is for a man to realize that the woman in front of him right now isn’t the last one on earth, and if she were to leave tomorrow, he could replace her in time. Surely spinning plates is an easy way to keep Onitis away, but it CAN be done without that added step. I won’t say its easy, but I think men would be better served by learning it without the plates. That way, if/when they find themselves in a LTR, they can still have that abundance mentality while remaining faithful to his commitment.
Of course this doesn’t at all discuss how you can easily feel so and at the same time love and care for someone, which to me is really the hard part. IMHO it would be easy to be aloof if I had several woman at the ready. But after being with one woman for a decade I know being nonchalant about losing her is much more difficult. And I think this is one of the most crucial things to learn in LTR “game”, that even though you have shared history, long years of love and commitment, and a life together, you can still replace her if you had to. It breaks my romantic heart to say it, but I think it really is key.
Susan,
I think these are the same thing. If a woman experiences intense desire and attraction to an alpha male, even if it’s an experience she didn’t necessarily want or need, I think it’s hard for her to go back to a less dominant, less socially adept, less tingle inducing male. Now, you and I are on the same page regarding a ONS or so with a supposed alpha; this isn’t the ’5 minutes of alpha’ that I’m talking about. But if a girl dates an alpha, has a prolonged fling with an alpha, or even has a past relationship with one, I don’t think a different kind of guy will do.
I’ll say that the entirety of my experience regarding this is with females age 18-25, but I’ve noticed this situation way too many times for it to be a coincidence.
@Michael,
Wake up and remove yourself from that equation; you have no idea if those women have suffered sexual assault or abuse before. Not everything revolves around cougars trying to jump you. Or are you that hot? Let’s get real lol
@Mireille
A woman’s true N would be a clue to the man about his risk of receiving an STD from her.
It’s about truth and honesty from both sides. Both sides want to avoid STDs. Men don’t want to invest in sluts. Women say they want to avoid cads.
“That you both admit to one another your numbers is one (inappropriate) thing. ”
If you believe in truth, let’s make it truth from both sides about everything – let’s not be having double standards (a claimed pet hate of feminists) where a woman’s high N is sacred, private knowledge, but a man’s caddishness is required to be made public.
I don’t really see the difference between 3 plates right now and 3 plates seperately in the last 3 weeks.
Do you think that those authors were virginal or that they simply preferred that kind of contrast (virginal, innocent girl versus a dominant, successful male)?
I think is a mix, both of the authors having little experience themselves or if they had experience valuing virginity or idealizing the man they lost their virginity to and playing around with the concept of their love story being different. I also think that those were written where women actually paid attention to what men seeked on a woman to commit, nowadays is the other way around “men should commit to me because I want it, not because I earn it” so to speak.
Lets not forget the market a lot of teenager women used to read this novels and they were virgins at the time if you have a slut in the leading role they won’t be reading it or able to get inside the story as easily, only sluts like to read about sluts, IME.
Adding to that pink romance is not explicit ,they usually have “innuendo” for sex, you cannot fill pages and pages of innuendo (I think my mother once told me that she was afraid of kissing a man because in a romance novel she used to read they had a scene where the girl kissed her boyfriend and then later on she had a dizzy spell because she was pregnant and she though kissing lead to pregnancy! Times have changed mate) with different men and don’t get your readers tired, is more than enough with just one, thank you very much.
This is an important point, with the VERY FEW men being the ones who are mostly unaware of their true value, for whatever reason. High value men learn quickly that spinning plates is the optimal gameplan in this SMP.
Mireille – Wake up and remove yourself from that equation; you have no idea if those women have suffered sexual assault or abuse before. Not everything revolves around cougars trying to jump you. Or are you that hot? Let’s get real lol”
What the hell does previous sexual assault have to do with this? So, it’s OK for a woman to see all men as potential rapists because she was raped by a single man once? I’m a judgmental bastard and I make no apologies for it. However, even if I am standing next to someone that makes my skin crawl (for whatever reason) I still do my best to NOT show outwardly that I am at all affected by them. Partly because it isn’t their fault I’m “creeped out” by them, but more importantly because showing them that their presence changes my behavior actually gives them power over me. That woman looking at Michael oddly was actually signalling to him that she was intimidated by his presence. To most normal guys, I suspect that would weird them out, and frankly such a woman should try to get a grip on her behavior IMO.
@Ana
Times they are a-changin’
I watched the film ‘John Carter’ a few months ago (yeah, well, it was a visual spectacular) and then read the first 1 and a bit of the original books (much poorer writing, really pretty bad). Dejah Thoris, Princess of Mars, in the film is a full on kick-arse female warrior princess hacking down creatures multiple times her size (yougogrrrill), in the book stunningly gorgeous SAHP (Stay At Home Princess). Now I don’t see that that sort of film ever being a chick flick, but they still had to ram home the 90lb woman being equal to every 220lb man (except Earth man John Carter Southern Gennleman). If even 100 year old crap SciFi isn’t sacred, what is?
Anacaona, I don’t like supplicating men either. I think that’s a no-go for most women.
The solution is really just to ask. I don’t understand people’s aversion to talking about things clearly. My husband and I talked about everything including partner count, who else we were seeing, future plans, and the various compatibility fundamentals that Susan has mentioned in this very post. All before we shared a kiss! It’s so much easier to be honest. Don’t have to think or watch out or try very hard not to mess up…
Of course I really can’t find the strategy completely unsound if women are finding men without options unattractive and they are not having a second date then complaining about the men having options actually exercising them makes no sense. If you don’t like to date men that “spin plates” giving a chance to a supplicating guy to get over it, is a better strategy. I do think men eventually get more confident if they know you are not going anywhere I think hubby was a lot more secure by seeing that I was not losing interest and wanting to get him to know him, it took a while but since he had the other qualities that I find attractive I was not going to let him go, people are always nervous when they do things the first times, confidence is born out of expertise and success,at least that was for me.
But it seems that most modern women can’t stand being in the presence of a supplicating guy or cannot see past the supplication to see the potential.
Anacoana, as usual, you drop the wisdom and sense.
Mike,
Interesting. I’ve been asked twice I think, but it’s definitely been rare. I’m not sure of the reason behind this, but it might be that they assume I am or they don’t want to hear the answer. On the flip side, most guys don’t actually date multiple females, so they may just be making this assumption as well.
I know these girls are looking for exclusivity in most cases, but they don’t verbalize it or push for it. I think this is a symptom of the SMP right now.
If even 100 year old crap SciFi isn’t sacred, what is?
Yeah I noticed to that too when I watched John Carter…of Mars. Most of retelling of classics (Snow white and the huntsman, Alice in Wonderland, Enchanted…) have the woman kicking other men’s derriere. I haven’t watched Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter (on the fence about watching it) but I think even Mary (his future wife) is kicking ass, killing vampires.
I don’t mind the action girl trope if done logically (Elizabeth Swan started pretty incompetent but then learned to fight on the POTC movies, Snowy was stumbling around getting protective to fight the Queen only on SWAT and even Bella had to become a vampire to get her action girl moment) but is the “I just took a sword for the first time in my life and I learned self defense and I can take men twice my size” that is really unrealistic. I took karate and once one of the guys I was practicing with accidentally punched me, no to mention my brothers and I use to mock fight once in a while before puberty turned them into giants. Trust me I know that if I try to fight a man running or shooting him are my only chances to be “empowered” so I usually just roll my eyes and try no to think about it much, YMMV.
I’ve been tripped up on this point in real life a few times.
Nothing is worse than meeting a guy, going on a few dates with him, then discovering that he is sleeping with someone else. That bums me out in the worst way.
I’ve thrown a few guys like that back into the dating pool. I’ve liked them, but I’ve never been able to get over the ick factor associated with them. The more that I date, the more that I’ve come to realize that I am as sexually territorial as some men are. I don’t care at all if a guy is going on dates with other women. If he is sleeping with someone else, however, I just can’t get past it.
I personally don’t believe in pre selection; I have liked and had plenty on crushes on some guys people called weirdoes and so on. Last time I was subject of this might have been in middle school but it was to get the upper hand on other girls, really don’t care about this 15 years later.
@Ted,
To answer your question, I do not need to know my partner’s count in order to assess their character. There are so many other tells, most guys get dismissed before you get to that part, even then some cards trump the others. I require a clean bill of health, an healthy attitude toward relationships and common values regarding our life together. I believe men like to reduce women to their vagina mileage ( gotta trademark that one) because they lack intuition and subtle observation skills. While I’m sympathetic considering their helplessness, I do not agree that they let that inability blind them to the point that they focus solely on who/what some woman did sometime in the past. It turns into psychoses where ANYBODY that was “better” than you on some level is a threat when the proof is in the pudding, they’re gone and you’re here now. So what if I dated George Clooney before? GC doesn’t want to marry or have children; you think he dumped me because he is the “alpha”. In reality, I probably dumped him, he didn’t have the same goals as I; you think I downgraded to you but in my mind, I upgraded to a better partner, someone who wants the same things, with whom I can build a future and enjoy the full life I want. I think some guys need to themselves the service of letting their envy/hate relationship with the guys that came before, the alphas and all that. To many people you don’t know are deciding for you.
@ Ana
One of the issues I have with this strategy is that I don’t think is that effective if you are dating 5 sluts you will naturally will pick the “best” of them to commit. But it will still be the lesser of two evils. Isn’t it better to identify objectively what is the best person for you, screen out and discard fast anyone that doesn’t fit in your standards? I think that is more effective IMO.
I turn over girls very quickly if they don’t meet my standards for a relationship and my screening is quite efficient. I know what I want, so its not the best of a bad bunch for me.
What I am worried about is not being able to focus enough energy into any particular girl. I don’t want an abundance mentality to the point where girls become interchangable because it won’t allow me to evaluate them as people I might want to establish a deep connection with. For this reason I aim for 2 girls at any one time, max of 3.
I also don’t want to give off a player vibe which can naturally happen if you have too many girls on the go at once. I want to be confident and non-needy, but I don’t want to scare off girls for whom players are anathema.
If you don’t like to date men that “spin plates” giving a chance to a supplicating guy to get over it, is a better strategy.
Yes, in a perfect world this would happen more often. I assume by supplicating you mean a guy without any immediate options. Girls in general won’t think this far ahead unless they’re red pill trained. They will just go for ‘most attractive’, unless she’s wired as a beta chaser.
But it seems that most modern women can’t stand being in the presence of a supplicating guy or cannot see past the supplication to see the potential.
Heh, you pretty much came to the same conclusion. Early in my red pill days I used to wish girls would give me a chance to get over my approach anxiety and nervousness so they could see who I really was. It never happened. I only ever got attention when I displayed confidence.
@Ted
I won’t say its easy, but I think men would be better served by learning it without the plates.
No. I never really learned abundance mentality until I started spinning plates several years ago. Then I really internalised that there will always be another woman and neediness disappeared.
Now, once its been internalised Yes, to a degree the abundance mentality will stay with you until the day you die. That said, having no other options except the one girl you are seeing will make you more clingy regardless of having the abundance mentality in the back of your mind. I know this from prior experience.
Of course once a relationship has been established and bonding begins, this ceases to be an issue.
And I think this is one of the most crucial things to learn in LTR “game”, that even though you have shared history, long years of love and commitment, and a life together, you can still replace her if you had to.
YES. This is exactly right and is the mainstay of male defence against betaisation. Knowing that you don’t have to put up with the situation and can leave AND will likely be able to find future happiness with another woman is what allows men to keep the respect of their women. Susan herself has said that her husband turned their marriage around by putting his foot down and saying a sexless marriage is not one he wants to be in.
I don’t mean the ability to walk should be exercised willy nilly. Its not there to get the girl to do anything you want via dread. What it is there for is the attitude modification it brings to a man in reinforcing his self respect.
In the worst case, when all else has failed, he can tell his partner he will leave her if things do not change and she WILL believe him.
@Jimmy
“You might disagree with me on this, but I think most people would rather dip into the grey area of ethics if it gives them a substantially better chance of success than to be a martyr for the cause or an ethical loser.”
Caveat: I’m assuming “success” means forming a committed relationship….While this is obviously a slippery slope and part of the logic that can lead men into darker things, I have to agree with the theme. After awakening at 35 in the current SMP, I have been confronted with this feeling time and again. And after three years of observing which behaviors are rewarded and which are merely “custard on a spotted dick” (Just1X), I continually feel foolish for living too far in the custard and not enough in the dick.
I have seen these grey areas play out repeatedly; the don’t ask don’t tell relative to all kinds of questions: numbers, relationship with ex, emotionally available, dating other people, goals of dating, goals of life, etc. and have been repeated shocked by how little thought people put into these things relative to the direct and potential impact on the relationship prospects with someone new. It is all about getting theirs, having fun, and preserving and/or enhancing their power. E.g. While I have yet to see a situation in which someone has a FWB or out-of-town F-buddy and manages to form a healthy new relationship while these things are in motion, I have dated (gone out on dates) with several women who have either lost significant time/opportunity (and thus SMV) because of these other spinning plates, are unavailable but either don’t know it, won’t admit to it (but willingly go out on dates), or won’t cut off those other ties. And all of them had no idea that I (or other men) may find these things to be somewhere between a red flag and a non-starter.
Honestly, it never occurred to me to date multiple women at the same time, I may not even be capable, but even so, my question is this: if it is soooooo hard to find good men/women, then how are all of these people lining dates up like some kind of carnival kissing booth? I mean, is there no pre-screening at all? Just straight into dating, sexual escalation, and then reject/hold/orbit/repeat? And if the “good” part can only be found via dating and comparing to other dates-in-motion, then aren’t we asking an awful lot of our ability to discern these critical things and consciously invest in someone (or not) in such a self-imposed dynamic environment?
I know, a lot of this is red pill 101, but in light of the disclosure and plate-spinning discussion, it seems like the problem as it relates to forming a healthy committed relationship isn’t finding “good” people to date, but rather how people are choosing to “date” those people.
The old school courting process has been bastardized into the instant-gratification, obsessive optionality, self-preserving/serving, hedging mentality of the modern SMP. Having options is great, cultivating oneself in order to increase opportunities is great, but really, at some point in the modern SMP the cultivation and exercising of those options became the priority and the relationship/commitment became the gravy and what we have is a perennial date-fuck-date-fuck cycle where the positive reinforcement comes from the feeling of multiple options and/or easy sex (for men) and emotional outsourcing and attention hoarding (for women) instead of from the mutually beneficial formation of a relationship. It is no wonder that the concept of relationship formation has been rendered to some paradoxical fifth dimension between hopeful utopia and fleeting nostalgia.
Anacaona, I don’t like supplicating men either. I think that’s a no-go for most women.
I’m not asking to like them, just to not kick then to the curb if you really hate the idea of dating a guy that might be seeing or having sex with other people. But then I suspect that given the choice they will hate dating the supplicating man more than the man with other women on plates.
I rather give a chance to the duplicating guy than date a secure man I don’t know where his dick is going to be between our encounters, but that is just me.
@MikeC
“most guys do not want to commit to any woman who has played a game of making him compete for her, either her emotional attention, sexual attention, whatever. If I had to compete to win her even really from Day 1 with other guys instead of her being really into me than I am going to have reservations about choosing her as the one that I forsake all others for the rest of my life. This gets to the issue of emotional escalation, and frankly I don’t know how a woman could sincerely emotionally escalate with multiple guys simultaneously unless there was something wrong with her emotionally. ”
I think that this is the basis of a lot of female porn – Twilight FFS. Multiple super alpha men competing for the heart of a pretty mediocre hotty.
Personally? I agree with you completely. Michael was saying about friends of his refusing to chase – all cool stuff. Chasing is DLV. Demanding to be competed over is Demonstrating Lower LTR value, because it is emo-game playing…men hate that shit. And the men that women want shouldn’t be feeding her I-am-worth-it hamster.
Interesting point.
”Wake up and remove yourself from that equation; you have no idea if those women have suffered sexual assault or abuse before. Not everything revolves around cougars trying to jump you. Or are you that hot? Let’s get real lol”
Cougar is a woman who is attractive to young men. Or at least bearable enough for a young man to have sex with her. I wouldn’t touch them with my enemy’s dick. They weren’t ugly nor fat. It’s just that I am a young man. It’s not natural for a young man to be attracted to women who aren’t ”out of this world.” Would I bone Angelina Jolie? Yes. Most women older than me by 10 years? Never.
Hm, I don’t consider myself hot because the majority of the women my age, younger, and slightly older don’t consider me hot. Most women above the age of 25 would bang me, yes, but that’s because I’m in shape, I’m easy in the eyes, and most of the older guys are chasing and bedding women near my age, so women who are in their late 20′s and upwards are kinda looking for some, but the Alpha males are too busy banging 18 year olds.
@ Sassy
Nothing is worse than meeting a guy, going on a few dates with him, then discovering that he is sleeping with someone else. That bums me out in the worst way.
Yeah it sucks. Even if they have that vibe about them that they’re willing to consider you for a committed relationship, the fact they’re knocking off someone else is very difficult to get past.
So we’re stuck with people that can hide their other sexual partner(s) from you (harder the more experience you have in the SMP) or the rare attractive person that’s between partners.
At least us guys can try fishing in bookstores for introverted feminine girls. You’re going to find it a lot more difficult to find alphas between partners.
Sassy,
I think this should be your default assumption, tbh. You are obviously going for upper echelon guys in your niche and sexual access is just too easy for guys like this.
@Ana
“Supplication shouldn’t be a deal breaker…I’m sure I will get hate mail over that though :p”
My prediction
women will applaud the sentiment and keep right on treating supplicating men like beta crap.
blue pill men will kiss your booties, as you are reinforcing their “just be a nice guy and she will value your kindness” (suckers)
red pill men…mmmmm not a positive reaction(! colour you surprised). Not because you should be wrong, but because you are wrong in reality.
How well do those predictions tie in with yours? lol
Interesting. I’ve been asked twice I think, but it’s definitely been rare.
Funny. I was talking to a guy last night, and he echoed the same sort of thing.
I’m not sure of the reason behind this, but it might be that they assume I am or they don’t want to hear the answer. On the flip side, most guys don’t actually date multiple females, so they may just be making this assumption as well.
I’m speculating, but I am pretty sure many women who start seeing/dating a guy who looks a certain way and acts a certain way….they probably know on some level the odds are probably pretty high he has someone else he could be talking to, seeing, or even having sex with. Despite Susan’s insistence (and I have no problem with her advice to avoid men who spin plates) that many?/most? women will walk from this situation immediately, my experience simply doesn’t jibe with that. Again, everyone has to pursue the strategy that is optimal for them. If you were to form a 2X2 matrix (oversimplified) of high and low SMV men, and high and low SMV women, the optimal strategies are different because of the somewhat differing objectives and opportunity sets. The issue I have is with taking the high SMV male strategy and basically saying it is unethical and just a bunch of bad men with character issues because it doesn’t directly serve the strategies on the female side.
At any time, a woman has the option of going down to a lower SMV man who is going to be much more eager to lock it down on day 1, and much more unlikely to be involved with anyone else at that time
@Ted,
The thing is you have no idea or no need to know her internal workings. She’s creeped out by you, that other guy standing around the corner, and the other one with his hands in his pockets, whistling in the wind. Why take it Personnally? Some people are creeped out, got nothing to do with you per se, it’s just their mental state. Think about as someone who has schizophrenia; they in constant state of alarm.
@Hope,
I like your point of view; however when I told guys that’s how I see things some said that it is too soon to talk about this. Mind you, they’d like to date and sleep with you a bunch of times before having those conversations. Don’t have the time for this.
Yes, in a perfect world this would happen more often. I assume by supplicating you mean a guy without any immediate options. Girls in general won’t think this far ahead unless they’re red pill trained. They will just go for ‘most attractive’, unless she’s wired as a beta chaser.
I think the idea of supplicating I have is a guy that constantly says thinks like “I’m so lucky for you to be with me” and I mean constantly like six times or so. But I get the feeling that women mean more like you definition though wich is not so bad IMO. Like I said I wasn’t born confident I learned throw small victories and achieving personal goals I don’t expect anyone to be confident out of breathing, that is arrogance IMO and I really don’t like arrogance.
Heh, you pretty much came to the same conclusion. Early in my red pill days I used to wish girls would give me a chance to get over my approach anxiety and nervousness so they could see who I really was. It never happened. I only ever got attention when I displayed confidence.
Sad to hear that but then incentive drives behaviour so its not surprising.
I think that this is the basis of a lot of female porn – Twilight FFS. Multiple super alpha men competing for the heart of a pretty mediocre hotty.
The love triangle was not about competition, FYI. No one I know actually enjoyed it there more hating on Jacob for not learning to understand that he was out of line, hating on Bella for not knowing what to do and hating on Edward for not setting his vampire feet and putting a stop to it. The women that read it as “let’s you and him fight” are just forgetting key plot points for the sake of personal “DRAMA!” , YMMV.
@ Tasmin
I know, a lot of this is red pill 101, but in light of the disclosure and plate-spinning discussion, it seems like the problem as it relates to forming a healthy committed relationship isn’t finding “good” people to date, but rather how people are choosing to “date” those people.
Its very rare to come across an attractive girl that through experience you’re pretty sure isn’t seeing anyone else. If I found someone like this and we were compatible… well I’d stop caring about my other plates pretty damned quickly.
I didn’t make the rules of the game, but I need to play by them to best of my ability. At my current point in life I’d prefer the 1950′s style of dating even though I have the skills to live a successful player lifestyle.
Too many choices have been shown to make people suffer from choice paralysis. The modern dating scene is all about an abundance of choices, which lead to shallow, fleeting connections, not conducive to lifelong bonding. Online dating sites especially promote this sort of “line up” of opposite sex interviewees.
The circumstances of my husband and I meeting was a small group of less than 30 people. Over the course of a month we had intermittent contact on a regular basis. The fact that it grew “organically” and slowly over time added greatly to the romance. He wasn’t dating, so he wasn’t fatigued from talking to a whole bunch of girls at the same time.
He didn’t have the “abundance mentality,” because I was one of two girls in that group. But he did have the “take it or leave it” attitude, because he was fine being single. He also has high standards and is very picky about people he lets into his life, and about things in general (he likes to say he is a man of discerning taste :p). That particular attitude was very attractive to me, as it was the opposite of supplicating and needy, but without the stench of promiscuity / sexual debauchery.
That is also about self-respect. I think his attitude was a version of “going his own way,” because as I said before, he had learned about game (David DeAngelo, evo psych, etc.) back in college, but he would rather not play in the muddy waters just to get laid.
Interesting point.
You should watch some Spanish soap operas the ideal feminist leading lady is 9 times out of the 10 the villains that has sex “like a man”, and goes for what she wants no matter what it needs to be done cuckolding, lying and she ends up dead, in jail or in a madhouse, not empowered with the leading man. The contrast of the heroine that is 9 times of of 10 a virgin, can’t sleep with any other man, and wouldn’t do anything unethical no matter what the gains might be. There has been a few changes like they being hard working professional, but poor and if she is too old to sell the virgin thing they do a cope out like she becomes a widow early on the story or is already a widow, but they still have many of the classical marks, is an exercise on cultural contrast. Like watching Bride and Prejudice the Bollywood version of Pride and Prejudice they changed many things to fit the culture and still works, IMO.
I think what we’re talking about is yet another example of women wanting the proverbial fried ice. The average woman wants a man who a) is wanted by many other women b) refuses to sleep around.
Mike C,
Based on my experience as well, women WILL NOT run from that kind of situation. In fact, I’ve seen it excite an even greater eagerness to ‘win’. While I haven’t been asked if I was seeing others very often, I have divulged this info voluntarily in a few circumstances and it’s almost as if I’ve been rewarded for a period. Now, I will say, once the info was divulged the women didn’t stay in the ‘harem’ forever, but they stuck around long enough to see if they had a legit shot.
Because I’ve experienced things like this I fully understand the disgust for this SMP by so many guys, becuase I’m sure all the girls I’m talking about had plenty of orbiters.
@Susan
I feel like you’re leaving us men without any options other than MGTOW. Things were fine back in the day when the SMP/MMP was well regulated and commitment was enforced. Sure, there was a mating marketplace which allowed assortative mating (none of the communist everyone is equal bs). But we didn’t have the capitalist selfish marketplace we have now. These days people can lie about commitment with impunity. In fact, only a small minority of men are cads, but from what I’ve seen the majority of women have a very active hamster which allows them to lie to themselves about actually wanting to commit to a man. Then when they meet a hot alpha they’ll dump their boyfriend and trade up.
It feels like I have three options.
The first is the beta option, which I view as the fairy tale option. I can be a white knight and hope I’ll end up with the entitled princess. But chances are miniscule that I’ll actually make it that far. I’ll be viewed as unattractive and will likely end up in multiple relationships in which I’ve been dumped after being strung along for emotional validation.
The second is the player option. I can accept that the SMP is adversarial and try to maximize my position in it. This means pushing for sex early and withholding commitment until someone demonstrates LTR potential. This works because if a non-slutty girl is willing to have sex with me early, then she must really be into me. It puts me in control of the relationship unlike the beta option which puts the girl in control of the relationship. The dangers of this are STDs and accusations of false rape. Additionally, I could hurt a girl who is genuine LTR material but turns out to be incompatible with me. The worst part is that casual sex is unappealing to me.
The third option is MGTOW. This allows me to avoid the risks associated with the above options but means I’ll probably end up lonely, cynical, and angry.
Can you suggest another option? I’m honestly looking for a better option, but can’t find any.
I like what Tasmin said @ #417 – very true.
—-
The more I think about ‘spinning plates’, and it’s “take it or leave it attitude” or this “hey, I can find happiness with someone else, easily” mentality, I’m starting to think it is a shade a dread. But it’s also seems vital to estabishing a attraction. So, do women require a small amount of dread to respect that their man has options?
I still do not complete understand the apeal of ‘options.’
/ someone, quick, I need a glass of water! The pill is lodged, again.
@ Michael,
You crack me up young man, how old are you? Angelina is 37, probably well above those 10 years up you’re talking about.
The truth is I have always filtered for father qualities in all the men I have dated or was interested; none made the cut, some where close. Now that I’m close to 30, I meet much more marriage minded men, who display those qualities and I enjoy spending time with them. However, the uncertainty about the future keeps them in the low pressure casual sex cycle. I can see some of them are as anxious as women. We’re all victims of these hard times.
Spotted Dick with Custard analogy
basic life = Spotted Dick (an English Dessert – stodgy with some fruity bits – laugh it up)
women = Custard
The idea is that your life should be perfectly acceptable within yourself. Adding a woman to it should improve it (why do it otherwise?), but shouldn’t be required to make life worthwhile.
Suicide after divorce is more a male phenomenum than a female one. Men shouldn’t be that committed to relationship that they kill themselves when it’s over. (The theory works for women too, I suspect, but men are clearly the true romantics over marriage).
@ Infantry
Don’t I know it man. Don’t I know it.
@ Jason773
Yeah, but I hate having to do that. I just have no desire to get involved with a man who is sleeping with other women, whatsoever. Like Infantry said above, my strategy so far has been to pray to the heavens that the men I’m attracted to are between relationships. That has proven to be a strategy with a very low success rate, so far. I don’t know what else to do though. I can either continue to hold out for a unicorn man to fall into my lap, or I can settle for a man that I don’t really want simply because he is available.
Given the two options, I prefer the first one by far. I’m sure that men appreciate it too because I’m not wasting their time. I’d rather go after what I want and potentially fail than to settle for something I don’t really want. Men have feelings too, or so I’ve heard.
“I can remember once being out at lunchtime with a younger work colleague in the late 80s. She suddenly ducked into a shop doorway saying she didn’t want to see a guy who was about to walk past us. When I asked why she said “because I had sex in the shower with him in Ibiza”
Self slut shaming is a real lesson teacher. Female lurkers take note.
That is a comment from this
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2161003/More-40-women-30-admit-having-night-stand-holiday.html#ixzz1yGrclo7n
.
Anacaona, I don’t like men who have no backbone and will allow any remotely attractive woman to walk all over them. The idea that he’s “lucky” because she is talking to him is just no good. If he doesn’t screen me with careful discernment, then how do I know he would screen other girls? What if some time down the line, we’re together, and some other hot chick shows interest in him? If the guy doesn’t have tough judgment and a strong spine, he might just succumb.
I’ve read cheating stories, including a “nice” husband who cheated on a good wife (it wasn’t a case where she withheld sex) with a slutty type who tried to blackmail him and deliberately got knocked up, then sued for child support. Meanwhile, my husband would see right through that crap from the start and tell the girl to scram. A guy who is easily flattered and not choosy can be a bigger cheating risk than a guy with real integrity and self-respect who is not easily impressed.
You might want to be on the lookout for Korean dramas. I don’t speak Korean, but from the little I have seen, they take things like Honor quite seriously (weirdos).
Also, the female characters, depending on the writer (obviously), will present, in their aggregate, an interesting combination of demure femininity and brassy “I am not going to take your shit”.
”At least us guys can try fishing in bookstores for introverted feminine girls. You’re going to find it a lot more difficult to find alphas between partners.”
Their timidity is just a cloak. This morning I went to my local bookstore to search for Edgar Rice Burroughs, I see that this young woman had a copy of the book I was specifically looking for(A Princess of Mars) and I couldn’t find another copy so I asked her if I could borrow it, as she was kinda short on cash(was on the phone) and wasn’t sure which book to bring home.
I asked her how long she has been a fan of burroughs just to get her to give me the book and she wouldn’t keep her mouth shut henceforth. Seriously, from a simple request to 2 hours of conversation, ranging from literature to Ancient History, spacial exploration and the state of the current youth(I had the impression she was against the hook-up culture).
She was bangable worthy. Thin and cute. Had crooked teeth, yellowed out, weak hair, and didn’t sport much of a body, though. Just goes to show that if you be an Alpha depending on the woman and what she’s into.
Mireelle – ” So what if I dated George Clooney before? GC doesn’t want to marry or have children; you think he dumped me because he is the “alpha”. In reality, I probably dumped him, he didn’t have the same goals as I; you think I downgraded to you but in my mind, I upgraded to a better partner, someone who wants the same things, with whom I can build a future and enjoy the full life I want. ”
LOL. First of all, most lower sex rank woman are NOT the ones to terminate the relationship. In reality, you may TELL yourself you dumped GC, but he probably just stopped interacting with you once he got tired of you and to save face you “broke up” with him. and even if your story is true, you are still settling because what you REALLY want is GC to marry you and make babies. I don’t want to be your second choice thank you very much. I’ll spend the rest of my life wondering if GC showed up with a ring if I would feel the breeze as you ran out the door into his arms.
To me it makes no sense to try and compete with something you can’t beat. Period. I wouldn’t take my six cylinder Chrysler to the track and expect to beat pro cars, and I have NO chance of snagging and keeping a woman that is looking for GC level alpha. Sure, she may try to convince herself that I’m a better deal since GC won’t marry her, but then I am most assuredly the second choice at best. Right from the gate my job of keeping her interested and happy is doubly hard because I’m not GC. As it is I find most of this red pill knowledge utterly tiring and energy consuming. The last thing I want is to add to that challenge by punching above my league.
It really isn’t about my fears of being a lesser man. Like I said, I know what I’m good at, and what I can’t change. I can’t be any more handsome than I am short of plastic surgery. (well I’m still losing weight so technically that isn’t correct. But at some point I will have no more gains left to tap…) If a woman wants that level of handsome, I’d be a fool to even try with her EVEN if she “decided” I was a better deal. She will be much more likely to cheat and/or simply walk out if/when she meets a better looking guy that is willing to get with her.
Now I’ve been told time and again that for women, looks isn’t everything. I actually believe that. But, doesn’t it make sense for me to find a woman that actually thinks I’m decently attractive AND finds herself attracted to my character as well? It is one less thing I have to “work” to achieve with her, since in my natural state she is already interested. Yes, I get that after you left GC, you might meet me and just love my charming wit and sense of humor, and that may actually get you falling for me. BUT, what if a GC look alike shows up AND he has a great sense of humor AND he is willing to commit? I’m screwed.
I’m really starting to feel like it is a man’s best interests to settle down with a woman that has a slightly lower sex rank. Honestly it just cuts down on a lot of drama right off the bat, since both people know where they stand from the start. Perhaps in that case, the woman might be a bit more concerned about losing what she has. Because to me that is what this all boils down to: the best way to keep a woman around is to be the absolute best man she can get if she went back on the market today. In this example, a woman that once pulled a GC is going to always believe she can do it again. And that may very well drive her to bail the second she thinks she has an opportunity.
I VERY much dislike thinking this way, but its either that or I go back to sticking my head in the sand.
”that if you be ”
That you can be an Alpha male.*
She didn’t have a ring on her finger but she might have just taken the ring and gone to the bookstore trolling for dick, lol.
@Ana
My Milage is not going anywhere near the book, movies or twilight-moms.
It sounds like I chose the wrong dreck for my example, I bow to your greater knowledge ‘Oh Wise One’! Have you a better example that I should have used? I feels like such a true meme, but I can’t think of an example
Cheers
”elf slut shaming is a real lesson teacher. Female lurkers take note.
That is a comment from this”
But it doesn’t count as sex because it was just a random liaison.. Strange how things work for the promiscuous women. One woman I went out on a date with told a friend of mine I was her boyfriend, when I the date itself was a bunch of guys and girls hanging out together, but she wanted to be seen in a good light by my friend(he was marriage material).
@Jimmy Hendrix
” Our society is what it is. Unless you’d like to be a hermit, the best I or anyone else can do is adapt and play by the rules put in front of us.”
Why not choose better? Why settle for the lowest common denominator? Besides, aren’t the “rules put in front of us” ever changing? It seems like we can’t seem to agree on them here!
I think that people see (or more often, read or hear about) people sleeping around, behaving like crap, and extrapolate the bad apples to *everyone*. And many folks shrug their shoulders and say, Well, everyone else is…
and act like sheep. (Or rather, lambs to the slaughter, unfortunately!)
I don’t expect anyone to agree with me, but my experience of deciding on high standards and holding yourselves to them is worth it. Even if the world appears to be crumbling around you, you have your integrity and from that you draw inner strength and like-minded people.
Jimmy, you say you believe you may not get married and have kids due to not finding a woman up to your standards. Is it possible that there are women up to your standards around you *right now* who you are repelling through “LCD” (lowest common denominator) beliefs and acts?
You’ve heard the famous Gandhi quote, right: Be the change you wish to see in the world.
“Supplication shouldn’t be a deal breaker…I’m sure I will get hate mail over that though :p”
“I rather give a chance to the suplicating guy than date a secure man I don’t know where his dick is going to be between our encounters, but that is just me.”
I’ll aplaud this, even if no one else would.
You might want to be on the lookout for Korean dramas. I don’t speak Korean, but from the little I have seen, they take things like Honor quite seriously (weirdos).
Didn’t I mentioned that I quit Korean Dramas in my third “every good girl/guy dies” viewing? I really prefer my leading people to live happily ever after even if is not realistic than getting cancer and dying after having “one day” of happiness.
@Hope
Being supplicating IMO is not a personality trait but fruit of nerves and/or lack of experience. The man with the most backbone can get nervous in front of a woman he really wants to make it work, is not a function of any woman is a function of how many times had this guy experienced real success with women. Nothing else and nothing more. You are assuming this “nice” betas were really nice but it could as well be like Herb’s ex that he accepted in her lowest SMV and was just waiting for improvement to jump ship. They might had settled themselves for a lower value woman and as soon as someone hotter appeared he went in and got busted. I know plenty of Alpha types that won’t say no to sex regardless just because they are not used to saying no to sex. Supplication and lack of integrity are not mutually inclusive, YMMV.
@Ramble
“You might want to be on the lookout for Korean dramas. I don’t speak Korean, but from the little I have seen, they take things like Honor quite seriously (weirdos).
Also, the female characters, depending on the writer (obviously), will present, in their aggregate, an interesting combination of demure femininity and brassy “I am not going to take your shit”.”
=======
Ramble, you are awesome! Korean dramas, music (not just K-Pop) and literature is so great.
(This is totally tangential, but have you read _Nothing to Envy_ about N. Korea? Or seen the VICE magazine videos Inside N. Korea. I am beyond fascinated by their culture.)
Its very rare to come across an attractive girl that through experience you’re pretty sure isn’t seeing anyone else. If I found someone like this and we were compatible… well I’d stop caring about my other plates pretty damned quickly.
Infantry,
Yup, this was pretty much experience. I met my fiancee at the gym after she had lost close to 100 pounds. Now as the weight loss progressed I know she started to attract more and more male attention and had done more dating in the months before meeting me. To tell you the truth, I really have no idea if she was going on other dates during our first few dates. But it became clear very quickly, she was very interested as she did the emotional escalation quickly, and we were very compatible personality types. It didn’t take very long for me to drop the other plates for good.
« 1 2 3 4 5 »
{ 2 trackbacks }