Sex Differences

September 17, 2012

At the end of the day….

Link.

Let’s keep talking.

  • John G

    Gosh first? I guess the whole confirmation bias thing rears it head.

  • Most of the kerfaffle in the relationship arena stems from the fact that 95% of the female malaise comes from the upper end of the bell-shaped curve, and gets a lot, a lot of attention. After all, when this girl is dissatisfied, it’s Defcon 5 important.

    95% of the male malaise comes from the middle and lower end, so when this guy is dissatisfied, he should Suck It Up, Get Over Ot, or best of all, just Be More Attractive.

  • There is a comedy show called “Defending the Cave Man,” which I have never seen, but did hear who the guy who created it on the radio. He said that while men consider women mysterious, women think men are always wrong. He said a women stood up in audience and yelled, “They ARE always wrong!”

    Women smile when I tell them that. Then I add, “Remember what Jack Nicholson’s character said about understanding women? ‘I think of a man and take away reason and accountability.’ And St. Paul said women are not to teach or talk back.”

    Then they yell, “You’re wrong!”

  • Just1X

    @Susan
    re the cartoon – meh

    this stuff is hilarious though
    http://www.27bslash6.com/missy.html

    It involves a man and a woman. It also describes how their male and female minds interract – so I claim that it falls within the purview of HUS…thoughts?

    • @Just1X

      That is the funniest thing I’ve seen in a long time. I guess I’ve been living under a rock, because I had never heard of David Thorne.

  • Abbot

    The greatest sex difference is the value placed on sex. It became more cheap in the minds of certain women as the market supply of favored males and the artificial ease of access (via BC pills) to them increased. This left coveted women who are difficult to access and thus of high-value

  • Nice image. I think it’s important to note that there are also huge differences in perceptions of “the full range of human experience and knowledge” WITHIN genders…a female INFP and a female ESTJ may experience life in ways that are almost as different as a female ESTJ and a male ESTJ.

  • INTJ

    @ Just1X

    this stuff is hilarious though
    http://www.27bslash6.com/missy.html

    It involves a man and a woman. It also describes how their male and female minds interract – so I claim that it falls within the purview of HUS…thoughts?

    Thats hilarious. Shows how women stay with assholes and try to fix them.

  • INTJ

    It’s interesting how the picture Susan found reflects societal biases. Notice how the range of human experiences for the girl is so much broader than that for the guy. It seems to be implying that the girl is more right than the guy.

  • J

    @Mule

    It’s certainly true that the world falls over itself trying to please good looking people. I’m not sure I understand why you say female malaise is concentrated among the most beautiful women. I was a pretty funny looking kid, and I can tell you that was hell. My looks (and life!) improved as I grew into my face. I probably have less malaise now, but people perceive it as a bigger problem and are less likely to brush it aside.

    @INTJ

    Re #7– Missy is a coworker asking for a favor, not a gf.

    Good catch in #8 though. The slice of experience available to men only is portrayed as much smaller than than available to women only (if such things really exist).

    @david

    IME, some women who belong to the more “masculine” MBTI types are nearly as different from other women are men are. I’m an INTP, and I have trouble relating to certain types of women.

    @J1X

    I love David Thorne and dislike cats. The girliest thing about piece is Missy’s love from her cat. The funniest is her anger at David. The malest thing is Thorne not caring about the cat. That’s funny all together , but I’m not sure that Thorne is demonstrating anything about M/F relationships. The same dynamic (Thorne being an asshole and frustrating other people in a witty way) is played out in the entire book that site advertises. His interactions are the same and the humor derives from just how big an ass Thorne can be and how people are sort of powerless to get im to deal with them on a serious basis. Some of the funniest pieces involve a male co-worker man named Simon, and there’s one where he goes round with a (male) lawyer that’s a scream. You keep asking yourself, “How does he get away with this shit?”

  • @SW

    Let’s keep talking.

    If you’re seeking diversity of opinion and proportionality, then you’re short ~ 30 to 50 female regulars. :mrgreen:

  • Just1X

    @J
    “but I’m not sure that Thorne is demonstrating anything about M/F relationships. ”

    okay, you got me…I was just looking to post the link again (mea culpa)

    the snowboard one is my latest fave
    http://www.27bslash6.com/function4sports.html

    free plasma tv is pretty cute too
    http://www.27bslash6.com/plasmascreen.html

    or the party invite
    http://www.27bslash6.com/matthewsparty.html

  • Just1X

    @J
    the cute ginger cat upgrade just had me LOWOL (way out loud)

  • Deli

    Sorry, but current human society is built on scientific method – i.e. method of finding one true answer to any particular question.
    There is no room for “agree to disagree”, either one person is right or the other.

    I can accept that I am wrong in my understanding of the driving forces behind human sexual behavior … as long as the person proving me wrong can provide an alternative hypothesis, that
    a) satisfies the Popper’s criteria of scientific theories,
    b) predicts sexual behavior of human beings more reliably than my working hypothesis.

    And speaking of working hypothesis: “Game” – if viewed as a hypothesis used to predict sexual behavior of both men and women – delivers reliable results. It does not give a 100% correct forecast (I would hazard a guess that Game correctly predicts probably something like 40-50% of behaviors – in the remaining trials it recommends to cut the losses and go), but it certainly gives a forecast, which turns out to be correct with a probability higher than the probability that could have been achieved making random predictions.

    It is – without a question – incomplete.
    It is – without a question – a purely empirical method
    It does – without a question – require further study and proper scientific analysis.
    But it works.

    Now, what hypothesis can be called a female contribution to the analysis of human sexual behavior?
    What hypothesis can be called an antithesis to Game?
    And most importantly:

    Does It Work?

    • @Deli

      I don’t think anyone here has said that Game does not work. I certainly haven’t. Game is essentially a form of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (when done right, i.e. Inner Game). How well it works is highly variable. The variables include the following:

      1. Genetic traits of male.
      2. Socialized traits of male.
      3. Genetic traits of female.
      4. Socialized traits of female.
      5. SMV of male.
      6. SMV of targeted female.
      7. Sexual history of male.
      8. Sexual history of female.
      9. Sociosexuality of female.
      10. Today’s mood.
      11. Alcohol.
      12. Venue.
      13. Weather.
      14. Random and unseen forces in the universe.

      Now, what hypothesis can be called a female contribution to the analysis of human sexual behavior?

      Oh, is this a contest?

      Mystery is not fit to wipe Helen Fisher’s stiletto heels. How’s that?

      P.S. It’s also important to clarify what you mean by works. Game as codified is strictly STR, and as such does not address the full range of human behavior, or humans who don’t engage in short-term mating.

  • @INTJ

    Wow. I guess that literal measurement of the graphic is your INTJness coming out. Did you use a ruler?

    I call that paranoia.

    For the record, here’s what the male artist said:

    Me though? I’m always right. -Ray

  • J

    Guys, you’ll love the book. My son found the website and loved it so I got him the book–and then swiped it from him. The whole family had read it to pieces; we read it to each other.
    This is a personal favorite: http://www.27bslash6.com/easter.html

  • Joe

    @Deli

    Sorry, but current human society is built on scientific method – i.e. method of finding one true answer to any particular question.
    There is no room for “agree to disagree”, either one person is right or the other.

    Why the complete reliance on step-by-step, black and white, right/wrong solutions? Often the analog solutions are better than the discrete ones.

    I have a quote expressly for you, one that has haunted me for years.

    “The opposite of a truth is not always a lie. Often, it is a larger truth.”

  • INTJ

    Wow. I guess that literal measurement of the graphic is your INTJness coming out. Did you use a ruler?

    I call that paranoia.

    For the record, here’s what the male artist said:

    Me though? I’m always right. -Ray

    No it’s not paranoia. Just INTJ OCD… I remember astonishing a fellow student when I kept spotting extra spaces in a poster presentation we were righting. They just look “off”. And I’m not much of a visual person either. Just a stickler for detail and patterns.

    Honestly, this image was so unsymmetric it was staring me in the face. The green line from the girl almost makes it onto the guy’s head…

  • Ted D

    Joe – “Why the complete reliance on step-by-step, black and white, right/wrong solutions? Often the analog solutions are better than the discrete ones.”

    I as an INTJ simply like it that way. If I could, I would make reality black and white and run by time tested processes without deviation. It would be boring as hell, but it would work like a grandfather clock.

    Susan – “It’s also important to clarify what you mean by works. Game as codified is strictly STR, and as such does not address the full range of human behavior, or humans who don’t engage in short-term mating.”

    Yes and no. Athol seems to be doing a fine job at making “game” fit for the long haul, and other married men (myself included although I’m yet a student) report great success integrating “game” into their marriages. As it is practiced by the typical PUA it IS indeed all STR, but, that doesn’t mean it has no application for the long term game, and so far all indications are that it DOES indeed cover that as well.

    • @Ted D

      I’m not disputing Game’s efficacy for LTRs.

      Here’s a crazy idea – how about we give credit where it’s due. The man who first hypothesized that dominance was attractive to women probably barely stood on two legs 1.5 million years ago. His female counterpart, who first hypothesized that feminine behavior and appearance signaled fertility made an important contribution as well.

  • INTJ

    * Asymmetry. Can’t believe I just said “unsymmetry”.

  • @Susan

    Mystery is not fit to wipe Helen Fisher’s stiletto heels. How’s that?

    Really? As more engineer than scientist, which one is more likely to get me laid on Friday night?

    I’ve tried Helen Fisher’s system as implemented on Chemistry.com. I got no dates or even replies to my emails.

    I haven’t tried the Mystery Method but he cannot do worse (and the book is cheaper than one month on Chemistry).

    It might have been Einstein’s work that showed the atomic bomb and the atomic power plant were possible, but it too a lot of Oppenheimers and Rickovers to make them happen.

    • @Herb

      Really? As more engineer than scientist, which one is more likely to get me laid on Friday night?

      That wasn’t the criteria. Deli asked for a woman who has made a contribution to science re female sexuality.

      I’ve tried Helen Fisher’s system as implemented on Chemistry.com. I got no dates or even replies to my emails.

      I am referring to Helen Fisher’s work on brain chemistry, not her efforts to make you personally appealing to women.

  • @Susan

    Wow. I guess that literal measurement of the graphic is your INTJness coming out. Did you use a ruler?

    I call that paranoia.

    Why? If the opposite had been true we’d have a Civil Right’s Division case about it already, and the offended woman would have spoken about “the war on women” aspect at the DNC.

    • Why? If the opposite had been true we’d have a Civil Right’s Division case about it already, and the offended woman would have spoken about “the war on women” aspect at the DNC.

      Please, can you just lose the attitude for one day? Your tone is precisely what I want readers not to do.

      You’re choking the life out of the conversation, here, Herb. This is not group therapy.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    I think the problem is that Game is the only actionable and testable strategy that’s been presented. Sure, it does have a qualifier of NAWALT, but it does seem to out forth general patterns that we can act on.

    In contrast, other suggestions that we have are often untestable because they try so hard to avoid generalizations that they contribute nothing.

    Finally, there are places such as HUS where we get good solid conclusions, but the advice we get is not rigorously defined in a solid framework the way we would like. It’s too open to interpretation and thus hard to act on. I know this is how women prefer advice, but us men, especially INTJ men, can’t use such advice.

    If you and the HUS commenters working together can come up with a well-defined framework as an alternative to game for relationship-seeking males, it would be a major breakthrough contribution for us all. It’s what I hoped to find when I first joined HUS (and I think Cooper feels the same way).

  • @INTJ

    If you and the HUS commenters working together can come up with a well-defined framework as an alternative to game for relationship-seeking males, it would be a major breakthrough contribution for us all. It’s what I hoped to find when I first joined HUS (and I think Cooper feels the same way).

    This has been requested more than once. For whatever reason Susan and the female commentors have not found it worth doing.

    • @INTJ

      If you and the HUS commenters working together can come up with a well-defined framework as an alternative to game for relationship-seeking males, it would be a major breakthrough contribution for us all. It’s what I hoped to find when I first joined HUS (and I think Cooper feels the same way).

      First, I don’t think you need an alternative. There is no end run around bringing dominance to the table, though I’m not of the school that believes you need to present as an arrogant asshole. There has been lots of helpful advice given by both men and women here, IMO. “Don’t be supplicating” is a good start. Do that and then come back for the next step.

      Second, since I was female last time I checked, it’s likely that my style of advice does not resonate as well for you as a male’s might. I’m sorry there is no male equivalent that is not a sociopath. I will be happy to field specific questions and try to offer actionable advice, and we can open it up to other men here as well.

  • Ted D

    “This has been requested more than once. For whatever reason Susan and the female commentors have not found it worth doing.”

    I don’t know that this is exactly true. But, lets be honest, do you think it is something that women can do at all? I don’t mean this as a “women aren’t smart enough” comment, but instead a male vs. female viewpoint comment. Can women actually riddle out the proper way for a man to attract, acquire, and keep them? We already know that many women don’t seem to even know what their own triggers are, so they can’t even necessarily determine this for themselves, let alone something that would work for the vast majority of women.

    And, on top of that, we would have to take into consideration that the “regulars” here don’t necessarily represent the average person on the street by any leap of the imagination. Game was largely founded on interactions with the typical bar fly. So, although it may not work great on a STEM women (although I speculate that it would work to some extent on her as well) it does tend to work on the average women. As with everything related to people, YMMV.

  • INTJ

    I don’t know that this is exactly true. But, lets be honest, do you think it is something that women can do at all? I don’t mean this as a “women aren’t smart enough” comment, but instead a male vs. female viewpoint comment. Can women actually riddle out the proper way for a man to attract, acquire, and keep them? We already know that many women don’t seem to even know what their own triggers are, so they can’t even necessarily determine this for themselves, let alone something that would work for the vast majority of women.

    Yes. It’s true. Which is why we ask for field-reports from the commenters to try and figure things out ourselves. It’s the best we can make do with.

    And, on top of that, we would have to take into consideration that the “regulars” here don’t necessarily represent the average person on the street by any leap of the imagination. Game was largely founded on interactions with the typical bar fly. So, although it may not work great on a STEM women (although I speculate that it would work to some extent on her as well) it does tend to work on the average women. As with everything related to people, YMMV.

    Actually, it would work brilliantly on most non-immigrant STEM women. They’re probably second only to barflys in terms of susceptibility to game.

  • INTJ

    First, I don’t think you need an alternative. There is no end run around bringing dominance to the table, though I’m not of the school that believes you need to present as an arrogant asshole. There has been lots of helpful advice given by both men and women here, IMO. “Don’t be supplicating” is a good start. Do that and then come back for the next step.

    There’s been a lot of advice in the form of tidbits, but it does not come together as an easily actionable well-defined framework.

    “Don’t be supplicating” is certainly a requirement, but until “supplicating” is defined, it’s not very useful advice. I and most friends I know treat women with respect the same way we treat men with respect, and we do expect respect in return. According to PUAs, treating women with respect is supplication. Given the amount of success we have had with women, the PUAs appear to be correct.

    Second, since I was female last time I checked, it’s likely that my style of advice does not resonate as well for you as a male’s might. I’m sorry there is no male equivalent that is not a sociopath. I will be happy to field specific questions and try to offer actionable advice, and we can open it up to other men here as well.

    This is a good idea. I’ll try to come up with a list of specific questions that would really help.

  • Plain Jane

    Maybe we should just divide up the world and each take half and be done with it. I’ve got dibs on Hawaii.

  • @INTJ & Susan

    “Don’t be supplicating” is certainly a requirement, but until “supplicating” is defined, it’s not very useful advice. I and most friends I know treat women with respect the same way we treat men with respect, and we do expect respect in return. According to PUAs, treating women with respect is supplication. Given the amount of success we have had with women, the PUAs appear to be correct.

    There is no end run around bringing dominance to the table, though I’m not of the school that believes you need to present as an arrogant asshole. There has been lots of helpful advice given by both men and women here, IMO. “Don’t be supplicating” is a good start.

    I think that’s a perfect opening for the female posters.

    Other male posters have argued for the “be an asshole” stand, if not always in those words. Despite my attitude I refuse to think that’s the only path. Yet in the field it’s the one I see working.

    Let’s assume there is a broad space between supplication and asshole. Can some of the female posters describe that space? Specifically, given most of the female posters agree it is the male job to show interest first what does a non-asshole, non-supplicating approach look like?

    Examples for a woman a man knows well (friend in his social circle), knows casually (she’s in the same bowling league), and he doesn’t know at all (woman who rides the elevator with him but does not work at his company) would be helpful.

    Approaches that are non-supplicating and non-asshole for bar-flys probably wouldn’t be as useful.

    • Let’s assume there is a broad space between supplication and asshole. Can some of the female posters describe that space? Specifically, given most of the female posters agree it is the male job to show interest first what does a non-asshole, non-supplicating approach look like?

      Examples for a woman a man knows well (friend in his social circle), knows casually (she’s in the same bowling league), and he doesn’t know at all (woman who rides the elevator with him but does not work at his company) would be helpful.

      Approaches that are non-supplicating and non-asshole for bar-flys probably wouldn’t be as useful.

      This might work if the female posters hadn’t fled the scene or weren’t in hiding. (Hint, hint.)

      Also, if the men respond either, “You’re an outlier” or “Women don’t even understand their own desires” or “You say that, but that’s not what you do” – well, then, all incentives to be helpful have been removed. Which is pretty much what is going on here.

  • It involves a man and a woman. It also describes how their male and female minds interract – so I claim that it falls within the purview of HUS…thoughts?

    I didn;t found it funny. Why she didn’t do the poster herself is pretty easy on word/paint and she is losing precious time that can be vital to getting her baby kitty back. Even if she tough he will do a better job after the second time at least she should had known he was not going to help and do it herself. What is funny about it, it makes no sense to me :/

    This has been requested more than once. For whatever reason Susan and the female commentors have not found it worth doing.

    You remember things to love about a Beta list? male here were insences and vitriolic about saying that Susan was sabotaging men with a list of the things that won’t get them laid. That is the answer to Susan not touching that one, IMO. She can correct me if she wants to.
    And for us, “Outliers” don’t count.
    As much as many men here praise us no of them want to do the work of weed out the bitches/sluts to find one for themselves. In fact I think most of the outliers here did found their men because they did a lot of work to show their good qualities and took the initiative. Hence why I see a woman should be more proactive about it. Men here say “You are so nice but a man should learn Game to appeal to the majority that is the only logical conclusion” so why would I advice to do the illogical thing? They won’t listen would they?

    3. Keep a diary of your vagina tingling and publish that.

    Again look for the romance heroes discussion we can talk about the Beta parts of our men we love but they don’t believe it, so I’m sure if we say that we tingle for a guy with a nice smile they would call it BS and nitpick it till they find what they believe is what we are attracted to. Maybe is the outlier effect but that is how it works they only believe it if they match whatever they believe at that point, YMMV.

    • @Anacaona

      You remember things to love about a Beta list? male here were insences and vitriolic about saying that Susan was sabotaging men with a list of the things that won’t get them laid. That is the answer to Susan not touching that one, IMO. She can correct me if she wants to.

      This is exactly right. I remember thinking that some of the very qualities that make men good partners are qualities that beta men are anxious to get rid of as them make themselves over.

      I actually wrote that post for women, who responded to it very well, but the protests from the men were loud and persistent, and drew ire from other male bloggers as well.

  • Thin-Skinned

    This gap in experience between specimens is the universal human condition. Everybody suffers from at least a little bit of solipsism.

    How hard is it for people genuinely to share basis for their values and opinions? I like to think that when I enter discussions with other people, such an exchange presents more an opportunity to gain new evidence, whether corroborating or contradicting to refine and solidify my own views rather than just a chance spread “truth” to the world and to”persuade” the other of the correctness of our own worldview. I know how Americans hate “flip-floppers” but what is wrong with refining or revising an view with new insights?

    So is it realistic to ask the kind lady in the illustration on the other end of that spectrum “So sweetheart, I know you have a different view from mine.
    I understand that you are a sensible person and maybe you could have the patience to show me how you got there. Show me those shades of magenta and pink and I’ll show the yellows and greens that I’ve seen.” How hard is that? Probably not impossible, but pretty hard nonetheless. Compassion has limits. Observe the boredom or at least indifference many have to the in reaction to the frequent updates about the latest from their child or cat….

    How much can we share? What is out of reach?

    Unfortunately it all breaks down if people acquire their perspectives more by affinity than reflection. We all acquire our opinions from sources that we trust. If we swallow the dogma hook-line-and-sinker, whether it be from Move-On, the Tea Party, Fox News, Greenpeace, the Chateau or Jezebel this kind of reflexive affinity and trust of our sources is something we can’t easily share with others in dialogue.

    This nonsense that all opinions are valid is equally absurd. If each of us really believed that other differing opinions were at least equivalent to our own, then we would hold another. Our own opinion is always the best, at least for the time being.

    • I like to think that when I enter discussions with other people, such an exchange presents more an opportunity to gain new evidence, whether corroborating or contradicting to refine and solidify my own views rather than just a chance spread “truth” to the world and to”persuade” the other of the correctness of our own worldview.

      Thin-Skinned, I love you.

      I do think that people are incredibly wedded to their views, and the problem is, both parties can easily quote stories, sources, statistics, etc. to further their argument. This happened to me during lunch with a friend the other day as we debated Obama’s foreign policy challenges. I was right, of course, but she was well armed with all manner of deceptive quotes and spun stories that made her seem like she knew what she was talking about. 🙂 J/K

      That’s the consequence of highly specialized media.

  • GudEnuf

    It’s not symmetrical. Women know a lot more about being a man than men know about being a woman.

  • Ted D

    Susan – I was responding to this comment from you:

    “Game as codified is strictly STR, and as such does not address the full range of human behavior, or humans who don’t engage in short-term mating.”

    And your response to me was:

    “I’m not disputing Game’s efficacy for LTRs.”

    Call me whatever you want, but these two statements don’t match up to me. Game may have been created for STR mating, but clearly it applies to STR and LTR relationships. How it was “discovered” is irrelevant to the discussion, although I firmly agree with your “credit where credit is due” comment as well. To be honest, I think we simply forgot our true nature over time as we tried to rewrite our interactions with social programming.

    • @Ted D

      Game may have been created for STR mating, but clearly it applies to STR and LTR relationships.

      Not exactly. Game as codified makes use of such tactics as push-pull, takeaway, flirting with the target’s friend to increase her interest, “agree and amplify” (which is really just clowning around, wink wink), peacocking, refusing to pay for a woman, negging, etc.

      Most of these tactics should be used very sparingly in LTRs, if at all.

      In contrast, Athol – the LTR Game guy – considers the beta traits critical for relationship success. That is not part of Game – in fact, much of it is anathema to Game.

      The only reason that the “discovery” of Game was relevant was that Deli proposed it as a confirmed scientific hypothesis whose importance has no parallel in the field of human sexuality, as researched by women.

      Saying something “works” is really not very meaningful. It doesn’t give me very much information. What is the mechanism? What is the result? Can the experiment be repeated many times with the same result each time? How random is the sample? What other factors have been controlled for? Etc.

  • Plain Jane

    “This nonsense that all opinions are valid is equally absurd. If each of us really believed that other differing opinions were at least equivalent to our own, then we would hold another. Our own opinion is always the best, at least for the time being.”

    True! Who came up with the idea that all opinions are equally valid in the first place? Anyway, I think ultimately what they meant was that all opinions have an equal right to be voiced?

    “Women know a lot more about being a man than men know about being a woman.”

    Maybe that’s a good thing?

  • Just1X

    @Ana
    try a couple of the other links…the snowboard one is pretty cool, as is J’s Easter link…inevitably; YMMV

  • Ted D

    GudEnuf – “It’s not symmetrical. Women know a lot more about being a man than men know about being a woman.”

    that is because male’s “evil” sexual nature has been examined, scrutinized, sanitized, reframed, and shoved on boys for a few decades now. What I see coming from the ‘sphere is that same level of scrutiny directed at female sexual nature, and I don’t think women like it too much. For sure the ‘sphere has its share of jaded, angry men. But, as I’ve said many times, that doesn’t make them wrong. It simply means that their delivery sucks.

    • @Ted D

      But, as I’ve said many times, that doesn’t make them wrong. It simply means that their delivery sucks.

      Well, it sure doesn’t make them right. Bitter, jaded, angry men may be as right as anyone else, though one has to wonder about their degree of openness and intellectual curiosity. However, the issue is where their authority comes from.

      Athol openly credits Helen Fisher with his understanding of female sexuality. He also uses a lot of evo psych. Everything Game includes is covered in those two sources, and Athol has distanced himself from Game quite considerably over time.

      Roosh is a PUA and he posts his results. He is credible, especially for advice on how to pick up women in certain countries.

      Roissy is smart and witty. He is more of a “tough love” coach. His FRs are credible, and he advises men based on his current experience.

      Dalrock appears to be credible in the area of evangelical Christianity and its SMP, which may be enough to explain his rage, IDK.

      Rollo appears to have just made everything up to exact revenge on some woman he’s still not over. Maybe him mom, who knows. He’s a Roissy wannabe without the writing skill, humor or charm.

      It is always appropriate to consider the source, and I am always willing to have that apply to me as well.

    • that is because male’s “evil” sexual nature has been examined, scrutinized, sanitized, reframed, and shoved on boys for a few decades now.

      First, I’m not sure women do know very much about being a man. What is the basis of this claim?

      Second, male sexuality is far simpler than female sexuality. It’s not so hard to understand. You’re all fond of reducing it to looks, i.e. whether a woman passes the boner test. The nature of female sexual investment means that we have many more considerations.

      Kinda like grade school t-ball vs. the New York Yankees. 🙂

  • @Ana

    Men here say “You are so nice but a man should learn Game to appeal to the majority that is the only logical conclusion” so why would I advice to do the illogical thing? They won’t listen would they?

    How many times have I openly said the thing that keeps me at HUS is the belief there is an alternative to Game.

    As for dealing with the majority, that’s what most men encounter most often. Even pointers on where to find atypical women would be good. My dad used to sell church but that doesn’t work.

    Someone a while back suggest an HUS branded on-line dating site and to be honest I thought it was a hell of an idea. Especially if it had E-Harmony/Chemistry like filters built by people here instead of scientists who haven’t been dating in a couple of decades.

    I don’t dispute Helen Fisher’s knowledge but the one attempt to build a tool out of it seems economically successful but not very romantically successful*. That’s why I made the comment about Einstein versus Oppenheimer and Rickover.

    Helen Fisher is Isaac Newton in terms of this stuff. Mystery is a medieval mason’s guild stonemason. However, it was over a century after Newton before bridge builders started to use science based design over the guild member’s rules of thumb because it took that long to develop the engineering, the application.

    Even well into the 20th century direct empirical methods were doing better in bridge building. Listen to the bridge discussion and try not to glaze over on all the software engineering stuff (except for the software geeks who following the link) to get the idea I’m after.

    So, Helen Fisher’s work is genius but in terms of a system for restoring assortive mating and helping individuals achieve their goals Mystery is still winning. The time when he’s not will not be seen by me, and I’m not betting on Susan’s intended audience (18-30 year old women who want to meet, marry, and have children unless I’ve always misunderstood her) will either. If they do, I doubt it will before the ones who didn’t get lucky or have natural abilities that countered the culture find themselves as the next Kate Bollick.

    That is the answer to Susan not touching that one, IMO.

    Not to be rude to our hostess or even our married female posters but what about the huge number of single women reading who don’t post.

    They have a vested interest is helping men their age find them and approach them properly.

    The title of this post is “Sex Differences”. One very common one I’ve noticed is men are much more likely to be pro-active, even in the field of romance. When the 70 cents stat comes up real researchers point out that when you control for things like career fields and work structure choices there is still a gap.

    The most commonly cited cause: men negotiate more for salary than women. Men are pro-active.

    Yet the women on here most successful in terms of finding a man had a plan. You cite one. Susan endorses the idea.

    Having a plan is a way to be pro-active.

    Another way to be pro-active is to seed the field. If I want dandelions in my front yard blowing the seeds off of tons of mature ones is a good first step. While I don’t know which ones will land in my yard and seed it having more out there will.

    Having more men who are clued in and have good methods that aren’t from Mystery or Roissy benefits all those female readers.

    Men have their pro-active strategy. It’s one I’ve said I don’t like. However, it meets men’s needs even if it doesn’t meet womens (and women already have a strategy that does the reverse for them).

    Maybe some attempts to show men something that hasn’t:
    1. Repeatedly failed
    2. Isn’t just telling men to be different might help both groups.

    • @Herb

      How many times have I openly said the thing that keeps me at HUS is the belief there is an alternative to Game.

      Do you think I’m keeping this a secret? Seriously, your treasure map needs revisiting.

      So, Helen Fisher’s work is genius but in terms of a system for restoring assortive mating and helping individuals achieve their goals Mystery is still winning.

      Mystery’s intent is not to promote assortative mating, it’s to help guys punch above their weight. You need to disabuse yourself of that notion right now.

      Not to be rude to our hostess or even our married female posters but what about the huge number of single women reading who don’t post.

      They have a vested interest is helping men their age find them and approach them properly.

      Hellooooooooo! Anybody there?????

      What about them? Could it be that angry middle aged men choking on the red pill are making them think they somehow got to the wrong blog?

  • @Ted D

    that is because male’s “evil” sexual nature has been examined, scrutinized, sanitized, reframed, and shoved on boys for a few decades now. What I see coming from the ‘sphere is that same level of scrutiny directed at female sexual nature, and I don’t think women like it too much. For sure the ‘sphere has its share of jaded, angry men. But, as I’ve said many times, that doesn’t make them wrong. It simply means that their delivery sucks.

    Watch the attitude, man 😉

  • Oops, formating issues made that last bit look wrong.

    Maybe some attempts to show men something that hasn’t:
    1. Repeatedly failed
    2. Isn’t just telling men to be different

    might help both groups.

  • Plain Jane

    “So, Helen Fisher’s work is genius but in terms of a system for restoring assortive mating and helping individuals achieve their goals Mystery is still winning.”

    Is he? He’s a baby daddy who doesn’t even get to live with his own child. He’s attempted suicide multiple times and is frequently on psychiatric drugs. The in-field reviews of his techniques come with mixed reviews, and lets not forget that when stripped of the goggle, eyeliners and furry hats, Mystery is a conventionally good looking, tall guy with a symmetrical face and pleasant, even features which gave him an advantage in the looks-obsessed Hollywood nightclub scene.

    How about Owen Cook aka Tyler Durden who started his own method “inner game”? Has he reached his goals with women? If his goal was to get tricked into being the father of an illegal immigrant’s anchor baby via an “oops my bc pills didn’t work this time”, then sure!

    And would you believe he fell for it? He’s on youtube explaining that sometimes The Pill doesn’t work and in his case it didn’t. I thought “game” was supposed to function as a “red pill” for men? If that’s the case how come those “on top of the game” are such doofuses when it comes to conniving women?

  • Sassy6519

    @ Herb

    I think that’s a perfect opening for the female posters.

    Other male posters have argued for the “be an asshole” stand, if not always in those words. Despite my attitude I refuse to think that’s the only path. Yet in the field it’s the one I see working.

    Let’s assume there is a broad space between supplication and asshole. Can some of the female posters describe that space?

    I’d consider that space to be comprised of a healthy dose of self-esteem, confidence, and self-respect.

    A man is an asshole when he completely disregards how his actions will affect the lives and emotions of others. He puts himself ahead of everyone else.

    A man is supplicating when he completely disregards how his actions towards others affect his own life and emotions. He puts everyone else ahead of himself.

    A man in the middle of these two extremes considers the thoughts and emotions of others, when conducting himself, but also considers his own thoughts and emotions.

    In a way, the thoughts running through a man’s head when he does something shouldn’t be:

    “How will this make her happy?” or “How will this make me happy?”.

    Ideally, the man in the middle will think “How will this make us happy?”

    I would say that my boyfriend (Yay!) is smack dab in the middle of the asshole/supplication spectrum. He considers my thoughts and feelings on issues, but he also doesn’t do anything that would be to the detriment of himself. He’s not afraid of voicing his own opinions, even if they differ from mine. His sole motivation isn’t to make me happy. Sometimes, making himself happy is the best way to make me happy actually. I find joy in his joy. I find pleasure when he is pleased.

    He doesn’t mind telling me “No” sometimes, and that’s attractive. I want a man with a backbone, and I want a man with his own motivations. If a man isn’t comfortable setting healthy boundaries, how can he lead?

    My boyfriend has been able to strike that balance so far, and I’m glad.

    • A man is an asshole when he completely disregards how his actions will affect the lives and emotions of others. He puts himself ahead of everyone else.

      A man is supplicating when he completely disregards how his actions towards others affect his own life and emotions. He puts everyone else ahead of himself.

      Well put, Sassy!

  • Höllenhund

    that is because male’s “evil” sexual nature has been examined, scrutinized, sanitized, reframed, and shoved on boys for a few decades now.

    Those who control whatever amounf of mainstream debate there is about “gender” relations never actually bothered to examine or scrutinize men’s sexual nature, they just concocted BS about it and shoved it down everybody’s throats.

  • Ted D

    Herb – “Watch the attitude, man ”

    LOL. I’m actually in a much better mood this week than last. I was being perhaps a little snarky, but really don’t intend to stoke any flames.

    I can’t help but observe the, well, obvious though. Men have been taking it on the chin for a few generations now in regards to how bad we are. Now that men have stopped to think on it for a second, I think we are realizing that we accepted it as gospel without a thoughr, and that no one ever pointed that same judging finger at the ladies after they got their ‘revolution’. And, since historically speaking women’s sexuality was repressed by societal expectations, it has NEVER been judged on its own merits in Western civilizations history to the best of my knowledge.

    It will be interesting to see how women react to all of their “dirty laundry” being drug out into the street for examination. From what I see now, they really don’t like it one bit.

  • Plain Jane

    Sassy, ” If a man isn’t comfortable setting healthy boundaries, how can he lead?”

    Sassy, this is curious. In what area of your life do you feel you need to be lead? Education? Career? Daily personal habits and routines? Recreation? Religion?

  • Ted D

    Hollenhund – “Those who control whatever amounf of mainstream debate there is about “gender” relations never actually bothered to examine or scrutinize men’s sexual nature, they just concocted BS about it and shoved it down everybody’s throats.”

    Well I kinda badly implied that with the “evil” added in quotes for effect. It was simply assumed that men were pigs and simply wanted women for sex. So yes, men’s sexuality may never have been fully examined. However it has been covered far better than female sexual nature no matter how you slice it.

  • I don’t dispute Helen Fisher’s knowledge but the one attempt to build a tool out of it seems economically successful but not very romantically successful*.

    You probably didn’t read my blog but I tried a numbers of dating sites before I found the right match. Dating sites are like therapists you don’t stop needing therapy because of the therapist doesn’t work you try and try and try till you find out so I would advice you to try another one if Fisher didn’t worked out.

    As for dealing with the majority, that’s what most men encounter most often. Even pointers on where to find atypical women would be good. My dad used to sell church but that doesn’t work.

    I would be willing if Susan could declare a truce day among the genders we say whatever we think is a good way to spot a real “outlier” and men cannot bitch about it like they like. Hard to accomplish .

    Not to be rude to our hostess or even our married female posters but what about the huge number of single women reading who don’t post.

    True but Susan does her job advising women, advicing men has not being welcomed and the other manosphere bloggers used it as ammo against her wich is exhausting. Were you here when the big Ladrock meltdown happened? It was not pretty Rollo seems to wank to bashing Susan and there is a few men that out of loyalty to the Alpha’s they dream to emulate will follow suit. It just not productive, IMO. Aiming at women works better and give men less chances to go all berserk on the advice, YMMV.

    Yet the women on here most successful in terms of finding a man had a plan. You cite one. Susan endorses the idea.

    I don’t know Susan and I share the having a plan but not all the outliers did J repeats constantly how he found her husband by accident and that she already gave up by the time it happened. Hope mentioned that she disliked online dating because it was too calculated and wanted something more spontaneous and she got it. Jackie seems to be into placing herself out there but it seems that she like Sassy are really hot so their strategy is simpler: Show up, let men approach and filter in and/or out.
    So I don’t know about having a plan being so welcomed I remember Liza whose pro-activeness with the gym guy was “eyefucking” him till he will approach and couldn’t bring herself to try something more.
    So yeah women are more afraid of taking some steps with a man than to be alone I was scared shit of ending up alone having all the scenarios in my head of all the things I could had done to prevent it. My guilty glands are powerful and cruel and they would torture me till the grave so I moved and did everything I had to…I don’t think most women have the guilty gland or maybe the lack of shaming here renders it useless. 😉

    @Ted D

    Any time we mention that men should read a romance novels or a self help books written by females and aimed at females, most men proudly say “I would never read such a dreck” hence you could learn a lot about how women see the world if you decide to “lower yourself” to it.

    • Rollo seems to wank to bashing Susan

      Oh yeah, I’ve known that for a while now. He craves attention from me. There’s a very damaged boy inside that nasty man. Unlike Roissy, though, who is “little boy lost,” Rollo is the mean bully. I wonder if he hurt small animals as a kid.

  • Höllenhund

    Women know a lot more about being a man than men know about being a woman.

    I’m sure it’s safe to say that women, on average, know absolutely nothing about being a man. This is stark contrast to minority of men who existed throughout history and offered accurate insight about women’s nature and behavior.

    • I’m sure it’s safe to say that women, on average, know absolutely nothing about being a man. This is stark contrast to minority of men

      Invalid comparison: “on average” to “a minority.”

      I agree with the first part though. Most women I know admit openly they have no idea how men think, and vice versa.

      There are a minority of women today who know something about being a man. Hillary Clinton, Janet Reno, Jaclyn Friedman. 😛

  • Just1X

    GudEnuf – “It’s not symmetrical. Women know a lot more about being a man than men know about being a woman.”

    Unless you are restricting that to sex (and maybe not even then), I don’t think that this is true.

    I don’t think that women understand men very well, there are very few women in the manosphere that really seem to ‘get’ what da menz are saying. They do exist, but they tend to be older and may well have sons.

    There’s a theory, I’ll put it no stronger than that, around in the manosphere that angry, butch lesbians and radfems project what they think they’d be like with more muscles and testosterone onto men; too aggressive, too pushy. Most men playing it macho tend to run into enough fists growing up that they curb their behaviour – women don’t get the same kind of feedback (shaming being more prevalent in olden days), they tend to run wilder than real men…just an opinion.

  • @Ted D

    Well I kinda badly implied that with the “evil” added in quotes for effect. It was simply assumed that men were pigs and simply wanted women for sex.

    In way, that assumption may have been right, the whole gatekeeper theory. Then men widely got sex from women and decided it wasn’t worth as much as we used to think and now we want them for more.

    Now, I’m serious. The whole idea of chastity for marriage is based on men wanting the sex more than the marriage while women wanted the marriage. Now that sex is freely available men seem to want the marriage (as Susan likes to point out, the majority still marry although I think the tend will end that optimism by 2020).

  • INTJ

    Alright so question time.

    First some context: my target demographic is women who want committed stable relationships, and are ready to have children sooner rather than later/not at all. This is in contrast to the women who want to “play the field”, “find themselves”, seek “experiences”, or put career ahead of family. I understand that this target demographic is quite small, and thus I could use a better strategy than just throwing darts.

    1) Where do such women tend to hang out? What sorts of heuristics can I use to filter for them?

    2) Amongst those that are single, what would be the best way to approach them? It would be helpful to differentiate between the three categories that Herb provided.

    3) When is the best time to show romantic/sexual interest in such a woman? Do I do so from the get-go? Do I become friends and show interest once I’ve gotten an idea of her personality and wether there is a connection between us?

    4a) If the answer to the previous question is to show interest from the get-go, any tips for how to be confident in a social situation which is very awkward for me?

    4b) If the answer to the previous question is to seek a friendship first, how should I avoid ending up in the friend-zone?

    5) Are there any young HUS commenters whose boyfriend successfully approached them rather than vice-versa? If so, how did he do it?

    6) I want someone who isn’t promiscuous. How do I make sure someone I’m with is waiting because of her values? How do I make sure she isn’t just a slut using price-discrimination?

    • @INTJ

      1) Where do such women tend to hang out? What sorts of heuristics can I use to filter for them?

      First, read this post: 57 Ways to Meet the Love of Your Life

      You need to have or develop some interests that you can share with women, then pursue them.

      You want to rule out women who are dressed provocatively, have a flirtatious demeanor, or seem highly extraverted.

      Focus on women who are likely to be compatible – smart, serious, etc. Seek someone whose values appear similar to your own.

      Are you interested in an Indian gf? If so, definitely go to see dance, and get involved with the South Asian cultural scene.

      2) Amongst those that are single, what would be the best way to approach them? It would be helpful to differentiate between the three categories that Herb provided.

      The best approach is always a confident hello or introduction followed by a conversation opener that is germane to the activity. With a stranger at Starbucks or on the elevator, maybe it’s a headline or the elevator news feed. If it’s a girl in your class, ask her something about that. If you feel nervous about making chit chat, think of some potential openers beforehand.

      If you know someone casually, spend time building a rapport, then take it up a level. Go for coffee, walk her to her dorm, etc. Try and get groups of friends to meet up, and get better acquainted with her in a group social setting. Do not under any circumstances go up to a woman you don’t know and ask her out for a dinner date!

      If you know her well, add a bit of flirtation to your usual interactions and see how it goes over. Is she flirtatious back? Or is it super awkward? Only proceed if it’s the former. After a bit of flirting, suggest hanging out soon. Again, this is better done in groups at first.

      When is the best time to show romantic/sexual interest in such a woman? Do I do so from the get-go? Do I become friends and show interest once I’ve gotten an idea of her personality and wether there is a connection between us?

      Don’t ever go with a strictly platonic vibe. Try to get to know her as friends with potential, at the very least. Or you can express your interest right away. Read the IOIs carefully, and expect to get blown out a lot. You are not for all markets. The normal college progression is chatting (with interest), flirting, hanging out in groups, singling each other out in groups, then pairing off to hang out alone. Adjust as necessary for different settings, e.g. classroom vs. library vs. club sport.

      If the answer to the previous question is to show interest from the get-go, any tips for how to be confident in a social situation which is very awkward for me?

      You’re very confident here, so I know that you are funny and smart and very capable of this. You need to practice this a lot IRL. The more natural the opening, the better you’ll feel. Don’t start by approaching the hottie on the shuttle bus. Start by sitting next to a cute girl in class. Make a short comment with eye contact.

      All of this is in Game, BTW. You owe it to yourself to learn Game. It’s a roadmap to what we’re talking about.

      If the answer to the previous question is to seek a friendship first, how should I avoid ending up in the friend-zone?

      I don’t advise friendship as a goal. Friendships can develop into something more but I think that’s a bad strategy. If you are trying to get to know a woman, and getting no IOIs, move on. If you make a move and she friend zones you, walk away.

      I want someone who isn’t promiscuous. How do I make sure someone I’m with is waiting because of her values? How do I make sure she isn’t just a slut using price-discrimination?

      Learn what you can via observation, reputation, etc. As you get to know her, work these questions into conversation:

      6. Sex without love is OK?

      7. Enjoy casual sex with different partners?

      8. Need to be attached to partner to enjoy sex (reversed)?

      Any yes is obviously a dealbreaker.

      We can discuss this more, these responses are just off the top of my head.

      You also want to maintain the frame that you are a prize to be won. Do not offer commitment right out of the gate. Take your time to qualify her, and let her know that.

  • INTJ

    @ Anacaona

    As much as many men here praise us no of them want to do the work of weed out the bitches/sluts to find one for themselves. In fact I think most of the outliers here did found their men because they did a lot of work to show their good qualities and took the initiative. Hence why I see a woman should be more proactive about it. Men here say “You are so nice but a man should learn Game to appeal to the majority that is the only logical conclusion” so why would I advice to do the illogical thing? They won’t listen would they?

    I fully agree with you that women should be more proactive, and that this will yield good results. The problem for me as a guy is that most women aren’t proactive. I simply can’t rely on a woman being proactive. Thus, I have to be proactive. The problem is that when I’m proactive, I’m doing all the work of putting myself on the line and approaching women, and I’m doing so to find the small percentage of women that have reciprocal interest in me and aren’t bitches/sluts. That’s a tall order for someone like me who is both sentimental and an introvert.

  • Höllenhund

    Any time we mention that men should read a romance novels or a self help books written by females and aimed at females, most men proudly say “I would never read such a dreck” hence you could learn a lot about how women see the world if you decide to “lower yourself” to it.

    I recall reading more than one Manosphere article focusing on romance novels and what they say about women. Some of Roissy’s readers even advised average men to read them for that very reason.

    Magazines directed at women also say a lot when compared to those aimed at men. The latter are normally focused on issues like politics, war, sports, economics, culture etc., with occasional pictures of nude or semi-nude women to grap attention. None of these have anything to do with men as a group. Men’s desires, problems and fantasies are not the primary issues.

    Women’s magazines are the polar opposite. They don’t focus on the outside world in any meaningful way, instead they just present fantasy worlds the reader can project herself unto. No wonder women’s magazines almost always have some “fabulous” woman on the cover. Whatever subject you present to a woman, she’ll instantly think its’s about her. For women, the entire world is nothing but a mirror, whereas for men it’s more like a window.

    Another obvious aspect of this is that men in romance novels and women’s magazines are always cartoonish, unreal figures who exist solely to facilitate women’s fantasies; they aren’t presented as autonomous human beings with self-worth, their own emotions, desires, fears, weaknesses, strengths etc.

    • @Hollenhund

      Magazines directed at women also say a lot when compared to those aimed at men. The latter are normally focused on issues like politics, war, sports, economics, culture etc., with occasional pictures of nude or semi-nude women to grap attention.

      …Women’s magazines are the polar opposite. They don’t focus on the outside world in any meaningful way, instead they just present fantasy worlds the reader can project herself unto.

      I disagree with this. There are men’s magazines that project fantasy worlds for men. Playboy, Hustler, all the porn mags, etc. Also, there’s an increase in magazines like Men’s Health, which are basically for mimbos, the equivalent of a woman’s magazine. And then there’s Sports Illustrated, which is hardly serious.

      Meanwhile, a lot of women’s magazines have sprung up that are not about men and fantasy at all. I like Real Simple, for example, and I also like Cooking Light and Bon Appetit. Some fashion magazines have become more intellectually robust – like Elle. And then there are the magazines that women read heavily that are quite intellectual, e.g. The Atlantic, The New Yorker.

      Whatever subject you present to a woman, she’ll instantly think its’s about her. For women, the entire world is nothing but a mirror, whereas for men it’s more like a window.

      Nonsense. Especially since more women are going off to college, and more men are hanging out at home. Men might be looking out a window, but women are stepping through it.

  • @Ana

    You probably didn’t read my blog but I tried a numbers of dating sites before I found the right match. Dating sites are like therapists you don’t stop needing therapy because of the therapist doesn’t work you try and try and try till you find out so I would advice you to try another one if Fisher didn’t worked out.

    I haven’t tried them all but I’ve tried enough: Match.com (got screwed over on their “if you don’t succeed in six months the next six are free”), E-Harmony, Chemistry, Cupid, OkCupid (my picture link was to my OkCupid dating profile), PlentyOfFish…I even paid a dating coach.

    I love to say, “I don’t know what women want but I know what they don’t want, me” 🙂 Sadly, the universe U of potential traits isn’t such that U – Herb is an exact match to what women want. Otherwise I could do a proof by contradiction, write a book, and retire to an island somewhere.

    I also forget to follow my asterisk. Back around 2002-2003 I predicted the dating industry would be to the aughts what the diet industry had been to the 90s. I wish I’d put some stock market money where my mouth was :).

    Further afield, Dave Ramsey used Weight Watchers as a model for his get out of debt classes.

    I don’t know Susan and I share the having a plan

    I don’t remember her saying she had one back in the day, but I do remember her endorsing the idea of having one when you pointed out you did.

    Were you here when the big Ladrock meltdown happened?

    I was. Still, just saying anything contrary to received feminism puts any man under fire any more so sympathy for it being tough out there in the world of relations between the sexes is hard for men to muster for women.

    *shrugs*

    • @Herb

      Still, just saying anything contrary to received feminism puts any man under fire any more so sympathy for it being tough out there in the world of relations between the sexes is hard for men to muster for women.

      *shrugs*

      If you can muster some empathy, stick around. I’m not interested in stoking the fire here. If you are not curious and open to learning another person’s POV, this is not the venue for you. Rants against either sex are off limits.

  • Magazines directed at women also say a lot when compared to those aimed at men.

    Err I didn’t meant those magazines I meant writers William Gibson, Joe Haldeman, the classics like Dickens, Balzac, Shakespeare also porn…. I read a lot of those. Popular magazines aimed at women don’t have the male POV as a rule of thumb if men are buying it in droves then is a good idea of what they are thinking or want.

    Another obvious aspect of this is that men in romance novels and women’s magazines are always cartoonish, unreal figures who exist solely to facilitate women’s fantasies; they aren’t presented as autonomous human beings with self-worth, their own emotions, desires, fears, weaknesses, strengths etc.

    You mean like porn or men aimed books? 😉 I already mentioned that few men’s fiction actually have a real women in them, most of them play the function of love interest and that is it, very few male authors get women. Is not the whole picture but it does shows that men and women fantasies are about what they want or fear from them and not what they actually are. Both genders are guilty of this.
    I accept it I just don’t like it and in some cases like Priscilla Hutchins is downright just too annoying to read more about it.

  • INTJ

    Oh and another question picking up on what Sassy said:

    7. Most of my friends have “a healthy dose of self-esteem, confidence, and self-respect.” But we have terrible relationship success. Why is this? The only reason I can think of (other than that women want assholes) is that we tend to be awkward around strangers, and we only open up once we get to know someone well – but by that time we’re already in the friend-zone. Thoughts?

  • @Ana

    Aiming at women works better and give men less chances to go all berserk on the advice, YMMV.

    So yeah women are more afraid of taking some steps with a man

    Don’t those cancel. It might be easier to advise women but they’re less likely to act on it.

    Also, women could offer alternatives. All the women here have offered advice to dump the GF (I know you don’t like the title but it is what it is) but none have offered advice on how to do better except, well, Game.

    In case you haven’t noticed I can be a dick. Hell, give up the meds and I’m enough of an asshole my own family doesn’t like me much.

    I think if I went off the meds, went bar hoping, and got lucky for the dick I was I’d shoot myself from the hopelessness of it.

    Any time we mention that men should read a romance novels or a self help books written by females and aimed at females, most men proudly say “I would never read such a dreck” hence you could learn a lot about how women see the world if you decide to “lower yourself” to it.

    Does Austen, Bridget Jones, or a wide variety of romcons help. I have the largest collection of the later owned by a straight man in America, and I love the first two.

    @Just1x

    There’s a theory, I’ll put it no stronger than that, around in the manosphere that angry, butch lesbians and radfems project what they think they’d be like with more muscles and testosterone onto men; too aggressive, too pushy.

    I don’t know. The butch lesbians I know are mostly leather dykes. I actually like them. They’re fun, they’re very guy like, and they’re just great to be with. They are often more masculine, in a good way, than a lot of men I know. It’s like being with other sailors more than anything else.

  • I haven’t tried them all but I’ve tried enough: Match.com (got screwed over on their “if you don’t succeed in six months the next six are free”), E-Harmony, Chemistry, Cupid, OkCupid (my picture link was to my OkCupid dating profile), PlentyOfFish…I even paid a dating coach.

    I will do my best to help but I need some answers first:
    What did the dating coach said?
    It will be good to check your profile write up to see if there is any red flags or inconsistencies. Most of the time is not the product but the presentation that self sabotage people.
    Also what is the most important trait you look for in a mate top 10.
    And what are the most important things that define yourself as a person top 10.
    I will recommend as a reading falling in love for the right reasons and Dogsquat blog. You might have a case of “captain save a ho” and you are picking the women that will cook your heart and eat it as a hamburger out of boredom. Those exist too and some men are attracted to them like to the mythical sirens.

  • Jonny

    “very few male authors get women”

    Maybe that’s the problem. On the other hand, women don’t either. Best to ignore what women say they want and only give what they actually want like “50 Shades of Gray”.

    The graphic is telling. Each gender has its own version of reality. No one is particularly wrong. Each experiences the world a different way. Sometimes that is the way things are. A man like myself will never have a woman buy me a drink. Then again, these days women are not expecting such gestures. It will be nice for her to compliment me more on things that “just are” like the color of my hair and how I dress. (joking).

  • Höllenhund

    There’s a theory, I’ll put it no stronger than that, around in the manosphere that angry, butch lesbians and radfems project what they think they’d be like with more muscles and testosterone onto men; too aggressive, too pushy.

    I’d say it’s a mixture of plain old projection and the apex fallacy. Feminist women subconsciously know that under their rule the entire planet would turn into a hopeless, savage shithole of oppression, amorality and prejudice, plus they project their own natures, “morals” and intentions unto the top men. So eventually they assume that a world “ruled by men” i.e. the patriarchy cannot possibly be anything else than…a hopeless, savage shithole of oppression, amorality and prejudice, so it must be fought by all means.

  • Just1X

    @INTJ

    LJBF? – you have to walk away. Took me a while to learn that one, but it’s poison for the guy…imho. Have you seen ‘When Harry met Sally’?

    when harry met sally – men and women can’t be friends
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJz1f8hPRGc
    a later meeting
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=509-PoZdtxY&feature=related

    I think that it’s true…don’t do LJBF, it’s crap for the man

    And just for laughs…fake orgasm
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-bsf2x-aeE

  • Jonny

    “The butch lesbians I know are mostly leather dykes. I actually like them. They’re fun, they’re very guy like, and they’re just great to be with. They are often more masculine, in a good way, than a lot of men I know. It’s like being with other sailors more than anything else.”

    You would think very masculine women would be fun to be around, but they are not. Masculinity does not mean LOUD and OBNOXIOUS. Women usually more developed with their communication skills. This was always true. They bring the crude level to beyond crude to nasty. Mean girls with a nasty tinge. Cutting and personal is not fun.

  • Just1X

    @H
    “Feminist women subconsciously know that under their rule the entire planet would turn into a hopeless, savage shithole of oppression, amorality and prejudice”

    ahh, so you’re a fellow optimist then? Harrison Bergeron looks like a viable model for their utopia. Never aim high and allow excellence, make sure that nobody can excel at anything.

    Based on the short story Harrison Bergeron by celebrated author Kurt Vonnegut, 2081 depicts a dystopian future in which, thanks to the 212th Amendment to the Constitution and the unceasing vigilance of the United States Handicapper General, everyone is finally equal… The strong wear weights, the beautiful wear masks and the intelligent wear earpieces that fire off loud noises to keep them from taking unfair advantage of their brains. It is a poetic tale of triumph and tragedy about a broken family, a brutal government, and an act of defiance that changes everything.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKHzFWkH0Po

  • @Ana

    What did the dating coach said?
    It will be good to check your profile write up to see if there is any red flags or inconsistencies. Most of the time is not the product but the presentation that self sabotage people.

    She wrote my OkCupid profile. We worked on introduction emails to about 10 women she thought would be good matches for me based on my talks with her.

    Results were a big zero.

    Top 10 things I want in a partner? I’d have to think about it any more as most of the ones I used to list are in operative. I’m pretty much down to “nice to me”, “knows how to handle money”, and “can cook and would be willing to sometimes.”

    Top 10 things that define me? Catholic, veteran, mathematician, musician, ADHD (I wish it didn’t but it does), gamer, collector of books and Fortian stories…well, that’s six.

  • Don’t those cancel. It might be easier to advise women but they’re less likely to act on it.
    Yep it seems like that.

    Also, women could offer alternatives. All the women here have offered advice to dump the GF (I know you don’t like the title but it is what it is) but none have offered advice on how to do better except, well, Game.

    We need more background men are more general women are more particular I already asked you some questions so I’m willing to chime in as much as I can.

    Does Austen, Bridget Jones, or a wide variety of romcons help. I have the largest collection of the later owned by a straight man in America, and I love the first two.

    Austen is good but my best advice is to find the top 10 most read books by women and read them all. I was trying to find the list but it seems that no one has actually made one: odd that…or not. 😉

    Maybe that’s the problem. On the other hand, women don’t either. Best to ignore what women say they want and only give what they actually want like “50 Shades of Gray”.

    Now that 50 mania has arrived at DR (we are slow, I know) I noticed that the things my friends are swooning about is how much Grey changes because of Anastasia and how happy they are he is not longer acting like an asshole master and this is an all girls conversation no reason to…would you buy that as part of what women want? Most men here say that the book is only successful for the asshole part and ignore the changes out of “true love” so yeah as long as we have an open mind about that that is a good rule of thumb.

  • INTJ

    @ Just1X

    I must confess to not having watched it. Guess what I’m going to do for the next 90 minutes though! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZNTzG3lHD8

  • Just1X

    @INTJ
    it has some great moments, I recently bought someone a copy of the DVD

    Enjoy…

  • Guavaberry

    Women have more experience about being a men because not all women are pretty, charming and enchanting.

    My example: I grew up in S. America, most of my life up to my later teenage years I was pretty damn quirky. I was too smart and too knowledgeable for my own good. I didn’t care much appearances, never did my hair, wore make up or knew how to walk in heels. I was essentially invisible to guys, specially the ones I considered my equals in smarts and looks (even though I needed some grooming). I saw how the girls who always showed up to school with makeup and perfect hair, who acted dumb on purpose get all the boys. I saw the ones that would flirt and tease shamelessly get the male romantic attention. I also saw how the promiscuous ones got attention based on their promiscuity.

    I had to learn girl game. I learned how to do my hair, wear makeup, dress in a flattering way, wear heels, fake being flirty and at ease and soon enough I had a boyfriend.

    I’ve partially lived the male and the female sexual experience. How many guys can say that?

  • She wrote my OkCupid profile.We worked on introduction emails to about 10 women she thought would be good matches for me based on my talks with her.Results were a big zero.

    Only 10?! You should ask for your money back. This is like being unemployed and sent your resume to 10 companies I would say that close to one hundred is best to get one or two answers. The dating market is worst than the job market nowadays.
    Also this shouldn’t be just what you think are a good match it should be the best matches get the first messages, then second best matches, heck I would say is better to work on negative, If it doesn’t have deal breakers message her all in the same time period don’t want for responses of the best. Make it short and sweet. “I saw your profile and you seem interesting and I will like to get to know more about you”. The end, nothing that creeps out just a simple interest and then forget about it till someone responds, YMMV.

    Top 10 things that define me? Catholic, veteran, mathematician, musician, ADHD (I wish it didn’t but it does), gamer, collector of books and Fortian stories…well, that’s six.

    I will drop out the ADHD from the profile and first dates for the moment I didn’t told my husband was a terrible housekeeper right away… or maybe I did don’t remember. Not that you are lying but some people are prejudiced and will paint a mental picture of yourself that might not match the reality. Give them the chance to weight you out first and then add the rest and they will have a more accurate assessment.

    This in a five minutes Google search now mind you some of this places have a very disadvantage gender ratio against males, so it is hard, but if dating was easy we wouldn’t need so many dating sites would we?
    Catholic: http://www.catholicsingles.com/, http://www.catholicmatch.com
    Veteran: http://www.militarycupid.com, http://mingle2.com
    Mathematician: sciconnect.com, nerdpassions
    Gamer: http://www.videogamerdating.com, http://www.gamingpassions.com/,http://www.gamerdating.com/
    Booklovers and collectors: http://www.singlebooklovers.org/, http://alikewise.com/

  • Ted D

    Ana – “Any time we mention that men should read a romance novels or a self help books written by females and aimed at females, most men proudly say “I would never read such a dreck” hence you could learn a lot about how women see the world if you decide to “lower yourself” to it.”

    But, Ana, you have to admit, telling a guy to read romance novels to figure out women is like telling women to watch porn to figure out men. There is a WHOLE lot of picture being missed.

    Just1X – “Unless you are restricting that to sex (and maybe not even then), I don’t think that this is true.”

    I kinda assumed we were only talking about sex. If not, then I’m with you: women know about as much in regards to living as a man as men do about living as a woman.

  • Höllenhund

    I learned how to do my hair, wear makeup, dress in a flattering way, wear heels, fake being flirty and at ease and soon enough I had a boyfriend.

    That has nothing, zilch to do with the general male experience.

  • But, Ana, you have to admit, telling a guy to read romance novels to figure out women is like telling women to watch porn to figure out men. There is a WHOLE lot of picture being missed.
    I watch porn remember? The message I got is that men want visually appealing women whose juices melt their panties in their presence and can’t help but kneel down and suck…well is that true or not?

  • Ted D

    Susan – “Also, if the men respond either, “You’re an outlier” or “Women don’t even understand their own desires” or “You say that, but that’s not what you do” – well, then, all incentives to be helpful have been removed. Which is pretty much what is going on here.”

    Ok. In all sincerity and without any attempt to start some flame war, I ask you this:

    The Red Pill and the ‘sphere at large teach/preach over and over to NEVER listen to what a women says, watch what she does. Now I’m not saying they are smarter than you, or any woman in particular, but, observation does tend to prove that theory out: that indeed women often DO things that go against or do not jive with what they SAY they will do/want to do.

    Can you see how guys like me that are seeing some success with ‘sphere information have a very difficult time taking your word at face value? I’m not saying it is right, but it comes down to perception once again. Perhaps you and the regular ladies here DO NOT act this way (saying one thing and doing another) but if the men here tend to be interacting with those types for whatever reason (self selection, geography, SES, etc.) how do we figure out which things you say are legit, and which ones are hamster?

    Again, not trying to poke the bear here, and not trying to call anyone a liar, cheat, slut, skank, or any other derogatory name meant to start tempers up. But it is a damn fine pickle to find yourself in. The men with success (however you want to frame that) saying one thing, and the women most willing to talk to us saying another.

    • @Ted D

      The Red Pill and the ‘sphere at large teach/preach over and over to NEVER listen to what a women says, watch what she does. Now I’m not saying they are smarter than you, or any woman in particular, but, observation does tend to prove that theory out: that indeed women often DO things that go against or do not jive with what they SAY they will do/want to do.

      Have you never realized that advice applies equally to men? Don’t listen to what a cad says, watch what he does. He says you’re special to him, but he didn’t call when he said he would. Don’t listen to what a nice guy says – that he likes hanging out as friends – because he wants to get in your pants and at some point he is going to furiously explode that you won’t give him sex.

      Or the boyfriend who tells you that he will never cheat. He has cheated on someone before, and he knows how wrong that is. Then he cheats.

      I recall sharing the story here of Tom and Jane – he played the boyfriend role with two girls in two cities at the exact same time.

      You really think guys are better about doing what they say they will?

      The men with success (however you want to frame that) saying one thing, and the women most willing to talk to us saying another.

      This is the crux of the problem right here. The men generally settle on success as being attractive to many women, i.e. # of lays. That means that the unrestricted male is the embodiment of success, and the restricted male is the SMP loser.

      Here we have restricted females who think the restricted male is more attractive. (Please see recent post.) If we had a bunch of sluts here, they’d confirm what guys like Wudang say.

      What’s interesting, though, is that most of the males here are restricted in their sociosexual orientation. They are grappling with their own orientation, and they have mostly put all women into the unrestricted pile. Take off the blinders!

  • Just1X

    @Susan
    “This might work if the female posters hadn’t fled the scene or weren’t in hiding.”

    can that happen? 8)

  • Ted D

    Ana – “The message I got is that men want visually appealing women whose juices melt their panties in their presence and can’t help but kneel down and suck…well is that true or not?”

    ROFL! Fine, you did learn everything you needed to know about men from porn. 😛

    Susan – “This is exactly right. I remember thinking that some of the very qualities that make men good partners are qualities that beta men are anxious to get rid of as them make themselves over.”

    Ahhhhh. I see! I was one of the guys that got upset by this post, and I understand how we crossed wires. Your “list” was about what makes a man a great partner, which is true. However, most if not all of it DID NOT help a man be more attractive, which is primarily what MEN are concerned with. Further, all those beta qualities are terrific IF there is already a strong attraction from the women towards the man. Meaning, he has to already be “manly” enough to get her tingling, or your list is useless.
    YOU are concerned with what happens after attraction is established. I and most men are more concerned with the attraction part, even after the initial relationships starts. Of course I want a great relationship, but I won’t have that if my wife isn’t attracted to me, no matter how well I iron our linens.

    Your advice IS sabatoge to men THAT ARE ALREADY BETA! It might be great for the typical alpha “asshat” type guy, but he isn’t interested in changing anyway. So I guess I’m wondering what the point of the post was at all now, since it seems like women should know that a guy capable of housework is a better mate than a guy that can’t boil water…

    • @Ted D

      Your “list” was about what makes a man a great partner, which is true. However, most if not all of it DID NOT help a man be more attractive, which is primarily what MEN are concerned with.

      I disagree. Being a good potential partner does make a man more attractive. Just not to the women they want, apparently.

      Further, all those beta qualities are terrific IF there is already a strong attraction from the women towards the man. Meaning, he has to already be “manly” enough to get her tingling, or your list is useless.

      I think the dominance required for most women is quite low. A good dose of self-esteem and self-respect will suffice. The “good man” qualities should be visible from the start if you hope to attract good women.

      Your advice IS sabatoge to men THAT ARE ALREADY BETA! It might be great for the typical alpha “asshat” type guy, but he isn’t interested in changing anyway. So I guess I’m wondering what the point of the post was at all now, since it seems like women should know that a guy capable of housework is a better mate than a guy that can’t boil water…

      Doing housework is not a beta trait. Nor is being unable to boil water alpha.

      Most importantly:

      I wrote the post to women to point out that they will be happiest when they select men with long-term partnering strengths.

      I wasn’t even addressing men, and I stand by everything in that post as excellent advice to women.

      Beta males are dads. They are more collaborative, cooperative, caring, smart, funny, have higher EQ, faithful, stay married, want kids, are healthier, and mentally healthy.

      In contrast, alpha males (as defined by researchers) have good qualities like leadership and strength, but they’re also more likely to work poorly with others, be narcissists, be manipulative, lack empathy, cheat, divorce, are usually Type A and stressed out, are only one-third as likely to have kids, are intimidating, competitive, aggressive, arrogant, stubborn, close-minded, critical of others, impatient, see themselves as above the rules, and engage in more risky behaviors. Other than that, alphas are perfect!

  • Guavaberry

    @Höllenhund

    In my humble opinion the male sexual experience is that only a few can get what they want sexually. You can’t because you’re not good enough. You’re constantly teased by your peers about you inadequacy. You are mocked when you try to do some kind of sexual advances on someone else to whom you’re not good enough. You’re taunted by the prospect of always being alone and you have three choices:

    1) Deeply change yourself and adapt to the market needs.
    2) Settle for something that you don’t really feel attracted to.
    3)Be forever alone.

    Isn’t that the choice self-proclaimed beta males have to make?

  • Guavaberry

    As much as I disagree with a lot of Roosh’s and VK’s treatment of women, I find these two pieces very insightful about being on the two sides of the spectrum for women.

    http://www.rooshv.com/how-it-feels-like-to-be-a-hot-girl

    http://vksempireofdirt.com/?p=967

  • This is exactly right. I remember thinking that some of the very qualities that make men good partners are qualities that beta men are anxious to get rid of as them make themselves over.

    Yep. One of the reasons I mention Athol so much is that he is not like other Game endorsers that seed the men to hate their former beta selves and kill them, and blame it on all their dating issues on it Beta = bad, bad, bad. Which I think is why men hate the Beta traits so much. Athol says “Being Beta is not bad, you just need to add equal amounts of Alpha and you got it” That is a lot more friendly and I think probably the best approach for men that actually want relationships and not a string of ONS, but what do I know I’m just a woman after all.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “Most of these tactics should be used very sparingly in LTRs, if at all.”

    I really don’t know about this statement at all. To me, I’m actually putting a decent bit of “game” flavor in my marriage, based on how I acted in my prior marriage. (by that I mean, the amount of “game” type behaviors I am implementing to keep things interesting long term, like letting my facial hair “grow out” at my wife’s peak of ovulation, which so far is working extremely well.) Now, maybe you are taking a hard line at what constitutes “game behavior” and wouldn’t include my little experiment as such. However, at this point I consider any behavior or trait I am “changing” to increase my relationship satisfaction “game”, including the weight loss, my minor experiments, and even some of my actual behavior in interacting with my wife. Perhaps you underestimate just how pervasive these “behaviors” become as a man makes these changes. More and more, I’m realizing that the Red Pill IS NOT just about learning how to interact with my wife. Instead I’m finding applications for it in all facets of life. And, interestingly enough, I’m getting over the “fake it” feeling and am now starting to simply act.

    I don’t know what else to call it other than Game, but perhaps you see it more as “self improvement”. I learned it all at the same time, so for me it is all Game.

    • @Ted D

      (by that I mean, the amount of “game” type behaviors I am implementing to keep things interesting long term, like letting my facial hair “grow out” at my wife’s peak of ovulation, which so far is working extremely well.

      I specifically listed the Game behaviors that I do not believe are appropriate for LTRs. I did not say all Game behaviors are. Making yourself attractive to your wife is common sense, and so is giving her dominance when she’s ovulating.

      Neither of those tactics is emotionally dishonest.

  • @Susan

    This is exactly right. I remember thinking that some of the very qualities that make men good partners are qualities that beta men are anxious to get rid of as them make themselves over.

    Isn’t that the attraction/relationship dichotomy. If a relationship requires attraction first that attributes that are relationship positives but attraction negatives are going to go by the wayside.

    I do think that people are incredibly wedded to their views, and the problem is, both parties can easily quote stories, sources, statistics, etc. to further their argument.

    I love how being wedding to the view PUAs and Game are long term losers for men is making me part of the problem 🙂

    If women cannot offer a set of attributes that can make a man attractive to the general population the PUAs can. Yes, PUA success is less than optimal for most men both in achieving STR results and the fact the successes are still STR. However, low but positive is greater than zero.

    • @Herb

      If women cannot offer a set of attributes that can make a man attractive to the general population the PUAs can.

      You seem to think there’s some magic bullet, like the acai berry. Game has a lot of good advice within it in terms of displaying dominance. In addition to that, be fit, dress well, have interests that lend themselves to sharing with women, get out and meet people regularly. There is no easy answer, this stuff is hard work. It’s a massive effort at self-improvement.

  • Just1X

    @Guavaberry
    thanks for the roosh link, I wish he’d take these excursions off mission more often as it was interesting to hear that he didn’t like the experience very much.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “Bitter, jaded, angry men may be as right as anyone else, though one has to wonder about their degree of openness and intellectual curiosity. However, the issue is where their authority comes from.”

    I agree. I don’t know how most folks do research, but I tend to try and find as many sources of information on the subject as possible, absorb as much of it as I can, and then try to find the commonalities between the sources to find the truth. That way, a lot of the built in bias and tone (angry, bitter, etc) can be removed and what is left is generally the truth. I very much like to compare notes from other ‘sphere sites to what you and the regulars here think in part for that counter-bias, so to speak.

    In terms of authority? I’ll be honest, this stuff is so new and understudied that I don’t trust any of the sources mentioned here or elsewhere in the ‘net fully. Evo-psych is very untested, and we’ve covered how/why I don’t put faith in studies that rely on polls and honest answers. For that matter, we don’t even know a whole lot about the biology of sex when it gets to the chemical level, and we have a lot left to discover about how much of all this is nature, and how much is nurture.

    Put another way, this entire field of discussion is a bit of a crap shoot, and I’m doing my best to find the most likely truth. To me, the way to find it is: listen to the most extreme on each side of the debate, moderate it with a few less extreme voices, then find the common ground. In all likely hood, THAT is will be the truth, or at least pretty damn close to it.


  • ROFL! Fine, you did learn everything you needed to know about men from porn.

    That is what he said 😉

  • @Ana

    Only 10?! You should ask for your money back.

    Oh, I emailed way more than 10 but you can only mail so many a day.

    Plus, women share these things and post what they consider form emails so you have to hand craft each little snowflake her own email. I get that. They’re people as well.

    However, when your outbox contains north of 100 emails and your inbox contains south of two responses you wonder why. I can hit 10,000 email with a form email and as long as the success rate (ie, gets a response) doesn’t drop below 1 in 10,000 you’re better off.

    This was a leading indication for me that women get much picker as they get older. If less than 1 in 100 think it’s worth while to even answer you’re email to say “sorry, not interested” WTF.

    Make it short and sweet. “I saw your profile and you seem interesting and I will like to get to know more about you”. The end, nothing that creeps out just a simple interest and then forget about it till someone responds, YMMV.

    Have you seen the rants women post on online dating sites about “one liners” and “didn’t mention anything about my profile”. They expect a three paragraph letter like a cover letter for a job and then demand the right to ignore ones from unsuitable males.

    There is a theory that most women use dating sites not for dates but ego strokes. I spend 20 minutes reading your profile and writing a nice letter and you get an ego boost. I have invested time and energy into you and you don’t have to do a damned thing in return.

    I know you’re trying to give good advice but long ago I decided dating industry stuff is just that, dating industry stuff. It’s not in their interest to help me find someone. It’s in their interest to pretend to help me and keep collecting the check. It’s like the late 70s/early 80s movie psychiatrist whose answer to a break through is always, “we’ll work on that next week”. Once the patient is whole the money quits coming.

    It goes well beyond dating, but the core idea is never hire someone to help you succeed who gains more if you keep failing.

  • @Susan

    What about them? Could it be that angry middle aged men choking on the red pill are making them think they somehow got to the wrong blog?

    Message received…

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Game as codified makes use of such tactics as push-pull, takeaway, flirting with the target’s friend to increase her interest, “agree and amplify” (which is really just clowning around, wink wink), peacocking, refusing to pay for a woman, negging, etc.”

    I’m going to disagree.

    push-pull- fairly normal human behaviour
    takeaway- necessary everytime a woman shit tests you
    flirting with the target’s friend to increase her interest- agreed
    agree and amplify- seriously. this is my thing. needs to be done daily.
    peacocking- homos
    refusing to pay for a woman- depends on the stage of a relationship but there are reasons to do this
    negging- agreed. Of course game states this is only for women who have already made enough money off their looks to retire comfortably to the island they buy in the bahammas. so mostly irrelevant.

    • @Lokland

      I don’t mean to suggest abandoning normal human behavior. I talking about making your wife wonder if you love her or not, keeping her guessing as to your level of interest and commitment. Obviously, this tactic is important in the beginning of a relationship, but has no place in an LTR, IMO.

      How does takeaway, e.g. “I’ve gotta run,” work to deflect shit tests? How about “Stop being silly, I have no intention of doing that.” Of course, when your spouse is being annoying, simply walking away is often a good idea, but that’s something a bit different.

      Agree and amplify: I think guys overdo this. It’s a very transparent tactic, very PUA. If it works for you, fine, but using it to evade questions your partners has a right to ask is dishonest. A&A can be used to give an impression of exclusivity when the opposite it true, or more often can be used to act a bit shady in order to instill dread.

      Of course game states this is only for women who have already made enough money off their looks to retire comfortably to the island they buy in the bahammas. so mostly irrelevant.

      Wow, I guess the guys at the bar didn’t get the memo. The most overused and misused Game move.

  • Plus, women share these things and post what they consider form emails so you have to hand craft each little snowflake her own email. I get that. They’re people as well.

    You don’t want women that think like that. That is the essence of entitlement a complete stranger should be spending more time in me that I would do him just because I’m oh so awesome…no red flag right there.

    This was a leading indication for me that women get much picker as they get older

    Yes they do. This is the deal breaker part if she is old, fat and single mother or borderline spinster and is asking for his own version of Christian Grey then don’t message her. Work with the reasonable ones.

    Have you seen the rants women post on online dating sites about “one liners” and “didn’t mention anything about my profile”. They expect a three paragraph letter like a cover letter for a job and then demand the right to ignore ones from unsuitable males.

    You don’t want this women, see red flag description above.

    I know you’re trying to give good advice but long ago I decided dating industry stuff is just that, dating industry stuff.

    Am I asking you for money? Didn’t I meet my now husband and father of my unborn child online? Am I happy? Did I ever gave the impression that he is not happy as well? I’m spreading the good news.
    I’m just trying to give you what you asked an alternative to your GF so you don’t have to put up with her crap any longer than you should. See your response and tell me if this encourage women to give advice to men? I know you are in a bad place right now and totally understandable but you are projecting your past experiences with my sincere desire to help. I got nothing out of this but maybe you being happier and having that woman and child you obviously want. So what results you think closing yourself to a possibility no matter how slight to get out and find what you want, will get you?

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Did you see my questions? (#57, #62)

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    On why beta men hate beta traits.

    I’ll try and make you understand. Most of the guys I’ve known who have been dumped/cheated on etc. weren’t assholes. They were good guys (lets not use the N word). Most of the women left these good guys for assholes.

    You’re prescribing beta traits as necessary for relationships when in reality most of these guys have those traits in spades. We could argue about whether it was too much beta or too little alpha that caused the actual problem but beta traits are not enough to seal the deal.

    I suspect most beta men view their traits as not just lacking but inherently negative to their relationships. Which is somewhat sad.

    PS This is from the promiscutiy thread but I gotta go.

    ADBG mentioned his friend. Girl dumps him, fucks new guy, tries to come back.

    You called this behaviour normal (or some derivative of that, maybe typical?).

    I’m curious. Do you realise that that was likely a subconcious attempt at cuckolding?

    • @Lokland

      ADBG mentioned his friend. Girl dumps him, fucks new guy, tries to come back.

      You called this behaviour normal (or some derivative of that, maybe typical?).

      I’m curious. Do you realise that that was likely a subconcious attempt at cuckolding?

      I don’t think I called it normal, I simply stated that she was most likely never even attracted to the first guy. I don’t think this is unusual. Both sexes do it – though differently, of course. Guys agree to date a girl even though they’re aware they will never fall for her, because they get sex.

      In each case, one party got what they wanted, and the other didn’t.

  • Iggles

    @ Sassy:

    I would say that my boyfriend (Yay!) is smack dab in the middle of the asshole/supplication spectrum. He considers my thoughts and feelings on issues, but he also doesn’t do anything that would be to the detriment of himself. He’s not afraid of voicing his own opinions, even if they differ from mine. His sole motivation isn’t to make me happy.

    Aww!!!! So glad you guys are official and doing well 😀

    My boyfriend falls in the middle as well! He’s assertive — not arrogant and not supplicating.

    He doesn’t mind telling me “No” sometimes, and that’s attractive. I want a man with a backbone, and I want a man with his own motivations. If a man isn’t comfortable setting healthy boundaries, how can he lead?

    Co-sign 100%

    I get what you mean. Admittedly, sometimes I get annoyed when I don’t get my way but I do love that he pushes back. I wouldn’t have it any other way!

  • Ted D

    “I suspect most beta men view their traits as not just lacking but inherently negative to their relationships. Which is somewhat sad.”

    This is a key element that I think every man experiences at some point during the Red Pill process. But, when they come out the other side, they hopefully realize that those beta traits are still their “meal ticket” if they want a successful LTR. However, they ARE NOT what will attract a woman to him, and they will not keep her around for long without some form of alpha to balance it out. It is a tricky thing to find the right mix if you are a guy that is completely unsure of himself, and new to the material.

    In some ways, finding the ‘sphere while in a LTR helped me in that respect. While single guys are learning all this and trying to apply it to as many women as possible, I only had to focus on applying it to one woman. IMO that was still a hefty process (still in the works in fact), but probably far easier than the daunting task of trying to make all women world wide attracted to you.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    that he likes hanging out as friends – because he wants to get in your pants and at some point he is going to furiously explode that you won’t give him sex.

    *Facepalm* Seriously? You really think this is how it goes?

    • @INTJ

      *Facepalm* Seriously? You really think this is how it goes?

      That’s the Nice Guy TM meme. I didn’t invent it. That is exactly how Nice Guys are perceived. As complaining that they’re owed sex because their girl pals have spent time with them, used them for friendship and emotional support, etc.

      Full disclosure: I have seen this happen firsthand in groups where I have known both the girls and the guys. When the guys didn’t get it in, they got really, really pissed off, called the girls bitches, etc. There is at least some merit to this claim.

  • Not about this but I’m tempted to watch this series. Anyone is a fan?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16K6m3Ua2nw&feature=player_embedded

  • Ted D

    Sassy – “He doesn’t mind telling me “No” sometimes, and that’s attractive.”

    The thing is, to me I shouldn’t ever have to tell my wife “NO”, because as a responsible and reasonable adult, I kinda expect her to be able to realize what she is asking for isn’t doable/proper/doesn’t make any sense without me having to be the bad guy for saying no. It is very much how I have to treat my kids when they ask for me to buy them stuff while standing in line at the store. It is the pushing of boundaries that irritates me, because to me adults shouldn’t be testing those waters out. (hence my total frustration with the concept of “shit test”, which is nothing other than a specific bump on a man’s boundaries for the intent and purpose of seeing if he will cave.) Maybe its just me, but I always feel like that kind of testing indicates a lack of respect.

    To give an example, I shouldn’t have to say “no, we cannot afford a new living room set this year” because she can see the accounts just as well as I can, and she knows our bills and what we need to save for. So, her asking in spite of all that is putting me in the position of being “dad” to explain reality to her.*

    *Note: I have not had to have this discussion with my wife, because she actually understands household fiscal responsibility. My ex did not. However, this was just one example of the many ways a situation like this can play out, and they all do not revolve around money.

  • VD

    Nonsense. Especially since more women are going off to college, and more men are hanging out at home. Men might be looking out a window, but women are stepping through it.

    I don’t think college attendance is an effective rebuttal to either solipsism or narcissism, as there are few people on the planet more observably solipsistic than American college students of either sex. I’m always amused by those who are genuinely amazed at the discovery that not everyone went to college. And no amount of exposure to the world will necessarily convince the solipsistic individual that it does not revolve around him.

    And before anyone assumes this is sour grapes, I have a degree from a fine, second-rate private university.

    • @VD

      I don’t think college attendance is an effective rebuttal to either solipsism or narcissism

      You’re absolutely right, it’s not. I just chose to interpret the mirror and window thing literally. Aside from college attendance, 20-something American women are doing more than American men their own age. It’s the men who are more insular. Which of course has nothing to do with solipsism or narcissism, per se.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “What’s interesting, though, is that most of the males here are restricted in their sociosexual orientation. They are grappling with their own orientation, and they have mostly put all women into the unrestricted pile. Take off the blinders!”

    I don’t know… My own personal struggle is finding the right balance to keep my wife attracted (and as attracted as possible) and yet manage to keep enough of “myself” so that I still feel like I’m being true to my nature. It may sound silly to you, but for me it really is a serious struggle. I don’t put all women in the unrestricted pile, but I do believe that the same attraction triggers those unrestricted women are drawn by are exactly the same ones the restricted women find tingle worthy. The difference is that the restricted women ALSO expect a high level of beta behind the scenes, and probably don’t need as much (or as pronounced) alpha.

    So, even if Game is designed to work on unrestricted women, it will still attract restricted types, but by itself it won’t keep them around very long. That is where the beta traits come in. The trick is, a man can never let the alpha stuff slip away, because the beta just isn’t attractive enough to work on their own. And, what constitutes alpha varies a great deal from women to woman, which to me means that “game” within a LTR is probably much easier than going the full on PUA route. You’re right that a good LTR shouldn’t need much game, but it will always need some.

    • @Ted D

      So, even if Game is designed to work on unrestricted women, it will still attract restricted types, but by itself it won’t keep them around very long. That is where the beta traits come in. The trick is, a man can never let the alpha stuff slip away, because the beta just isn’t attractive enough to work on their own. And, what constitutes alpha varies a great deal from women to woman, which to me means that “game” within a LTR is probably much easier than going the full on PUA route. You’re right that a good LTR shouldn’t need much game, but it will always need some.

      I agree.

  • Just1X

    @TedD

    I think that there are other types of shit tests in addition to “specific bump on a man’s boundaries for the intent and purpose of seeing if he will cave (on a living room set)”, which appears pretty childish to me.

    I believe that there is also the “I’m going to trust this guy a hell of a lot, and must be sure that he is the person that I believe him to be”.

    Your version pisses me off as well, but mine (if you can discriminate the different nature at the time) is the action of a sane woman.

    I suspect that there are other shit tests that the man is supposed to pass, supposed to fail, just have no explanation to a rational mind…but they’re not all of the manosphere ‘does this dress make my (fat) arse look fat?’ ilk. Where ‘yes’ = “what a bastard, I hate him” and ‘no’ = “what a liar, I hate him” YMMV

  • VD

    To give an example, I shouldn’t have to say “no, we cannot afford a new living room set this year” because she can see the accounts just as well as I can, and she knows our bills and what we need to save for. So, her asking in spite of all that is putting me in the position of being “dad” to explain reality to her.*

    You’re totally missing the point, Ted. That’s your job as head of the household and she is implicitly recognizing your authority. What you see as explaining reality is simply her wanting you to take responsibility for what she already knows. I get this from my employees, male and female, on a regular basis, who know a hell of a lot more about the details than I do.

    “We have a problem and we need to make a decision. What should we do?”

    “Okay, let’s sort this out. Fill me in. What are our options?”

    “Option A is the obviously sensible thing to do, as it won’t cost much and will solve the problem without too much trouble. Option B is incredibly stupid, will cost 10x more than Option A, and there is no guarantee it will work anyway. Only a complete idiot would go for it. So, tell me, whatever should we do?”

    Definitely Option A! I insist upon Option A. My decision is final!

    “Great idea! We’ll get right on it!”

    Now, these are smart people. They know perfectly well what to do. They simply want to be relieved of the responsibility for the decision. That is the real role of the executive, not making decisions per se, but rather relieving one’s employees of the burden of making decisions so they can focus on tactical implementation without constantly worrying about getting in trouble for the failure of the strategy. That’s basically what your wife is doing. She knows what reality is, she just doesn’t want it preying upon her mind. Remember, women can’t compartmentalize the way men can, so it’s important for you to help her out in this way.

    When she asks you something obvious, just state it in a firm, authoritative tone of voice, as if you’ve made a serious decision. That’s likely all she really wants in that situation.

  • @ Susan,

    “I wonder if he hurt small animals as a kid.”

    Also set fires and pee the bed. That’s the real Dark Triad, the ones that almost all psychopathic serial killers have in common (and people wonder why I snicker at that “Dark Triad” nonsense).

  • I think it would be helpful if we defined ‘Game’ as _anything_ that builds attraction in the opposite sex. Game can be instinctual or it can be learned behaviours. I.e., “men invented game but women were born with it.” Obviously that’s a generalization because everyone’s on a spectrum with regards to how much natural game they have. For whatever reason, evolution has found that the human race has the highest fitness when 80 % of the men aren’t born with game. If you’re a natural beta like me, time to learn.

    My experience is, alpha is the initial sales pitch, but beta is what closes the sale. If you can’t show that you’re a potential long-term partner, you’re probably not going to get a first or second date with a quality woman. When I say quality, I mean 1.) attractive, 2.) worthy of respect and admiration, i.e. she’s good at stuff, and 3.) loves herself. When a quality woman starts asking you personal questions, she’s qualifying you as a potential long-term partner. At this point, being a douchebag is going to get you no-date status. That’s why flirting is so hard for guys and why why our sexual value takes so long to peak, because it takes a lot of experience to develop the sense of ebb-and-flow.

    If you really struggle with social interaction, to the point that you could be diagnosed with social anxiety, Dr. Thomas Richards has a set of tapes that are a cognitive behavioural therapy program to deal with it. I’ve used it personally and it’s by far the most comprehensive CBT self-help system I’ve experienced. It’s not like I’ve outgrown the techniques I learned from Richards or yoga though, I still use them every day.

    This weekend I was out of town and had an opportunity to flirt with a group of women, so personal anecdote time. At one point, we’re swimming outdoors and attractive lady is making a ruckus about how cold the water in one pool is. She’s up just past her ankle, so I reached for her hand and gently started pulling her in. She resisted and did the usual little-girl behaviour of squeaking and giggling, but her nipples also became very pert and highly visible through her bikini (and she had the nicest bosom I’ve seen in awhile). She said some stuff about the cold water, but really, the soft invasion of her personal space is what turned her on. She managed to get in up to her chest later and suffered no such physiological reaction the next time. The bad thing for me is that she was embarrassed because she lost her fig-leaf of plausible deniability in front of some female friends (hence the cold water comment). She spent most of the rest of the day being girly with her BFF, so while I still got to chat, it’s hard to do much more then lightly flirt with two women at once without being over-aggressive.

    That goes to show that while game works there’s all sort of social interactions that can trip you up that you have no control over and nicely illustrates just how hard a time woman give men when the woman isn’t tipsy. Am I going to manage to get a date with her? I dunno, if I encounter her again in another social setting probably. If I have to resort to e-mail I think my chances are pretty low.

    A few years ago, I was less athletic (so I was less physically prestigious, both in terms of maintaining good posture and muscle tone) but moreover I didn’t have the confidence or game knowledge (i.e. less mentally/emotionally prestigious) to deal with such a woman and I would have been awkward and intimidated. Now I can be more open and witty without the assistance of alcohol.

  • Mike C

    This is exactly right. I remember thinking that some of the very qualities that make men good partners are qualities that beta men are anxious to get rid of as them make themselves over.

    I actually wrote that post for women, who responded to it very well, but the protests from the men were loud and persistent, and drew ire from other male bloggers as well.

    Just for the record, I do believe there are beta traits that make men good partners. That said, I think it is of utmost importance to distinguish those traits that make someone a good LTR candidate versus the traits that are more related to raw, visceral attraction. I think often these get conflated in discussion, and that is what can be confusing to guys. For example, I think being responsible with money is a good trait for a woman (AND a man) for a LTR, but that trait isn’t going to make my dick hard. Badger covered this quite well recently:

    http://badgerhut.wordpress.com/2012/09/10/the-mainstream-trains-men-in-compatibility-not-in-attraction-where-most-men-need-work/

    I think a post like that is more for women because it encourages them to engage their higher level thinking in selecting men over those primal attraction triggers, but for guys who already bring enough of those solid LTR beta traits to the tables (more then a few male commenters here I think) their deficiency lies in having too little of the pure attraction traits.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    I’m beginning to realize how out of touch I am with modern game because put simply none of your defintions square with my own. I was pretty much a pure day gamer. (Four LTRs- physics class, library and two via friends.) Short guys and bars don’t mix.

    “I talking about making your wife wonder if you love her or not, keeping her guessing as to your level of interest and commitment.”

    Obv’sly. I expect the same.

    “Agree and amplify.”

    I can’t define it but I can give an example which doesn’t square with your defintion.

    When me and my wife first moved in together and she wanted something she had this habit of fluttering her lashes. Really cute, hard to say no to.

    I first called her on it, jokingly.
    Later on, she asked me for something. I stared at her and said “No babe. I’m not really feeling well. Can you get me X?” while blinking furiously. (Swear to god think I was gonna start seizing.)
    AA was always a method for funnily(this def ain’t a word) calling out a shit test.

    “Wow, I guess the guys at the bar didn’t get the memo. The most overused and misused Game move.”

    Not to be a complete douche but no shit sherlock. Bars + booze don’t necessarily preselect for intelligence or common sense.

    “Of course, when your spouse is being annoying, simply walking away is often a good idea, but that’s something a bit different.”

    This is what I recommend takeaway for and yes I view annoyance as a shit test. However, I would also define non-action as takeaway. Ex. you mentioned girlfriend shit testing and leaving bf on laptop and coming back an hour later and he is still there.

    Not giving her the rise she is looking for is a form of takeaway.

    The other method I have for dealing with shit tests is exactly as you described.

    • @Lokland

      You probably know more about agree and amplify than I do. Here’s how I’ve seen it used.

      Girl asks guy, “Are you seeing anyone else?”

      Guy: “Oh yeah, babe, I have sex with a different chick every night, isn’t in obvious?” Puts his arm around her waist and pulls her close.

      Girls laughs and kisses him.

      Guy bangs different chick the next night.

  • @SW

    What’s interesting, though, is that most of the males here are restricted in their sociosexual orientation.

    I should allow no sister of mine to accept such a situation.

  • Herb,

    Just say no to online dating.

    It’s a total crap-shoot for all men. You can’t assess timing or mood, or any of the other critical body language cues. Most women can’t write a profile to save their life, so establishing hooks for a conversation or using humour is damn near impossible. It totally wrecks the casual dating vibe because there’s so many hoops to jump through before you get to the ever exciting coffee date. The whole purpose of casual dating is to have some light-hearted fun while you get to know someone. Online dating is so unsatisfactory because it forces us to try and pigeon-hole that perfect person for whom every box on the list is checked off just right. Most women online are looking for Mr. Right and don’t realize he’s just a figment of their expectations, so they disqualify _everyone_.

    My only use for online dating nowadays is to get my ass out of my chair and out of my apartment. I go online, and check through the ladies: landwhale, neurotic girl, entitled princess, party girl with herpes, seperated single-mom looking for a ‘friend’ to help her through her divorce, shy girl who’s nice when you get to know her (which is never), sarcastic bossy girl who think she’s an 8, religious girl with daddy issues. Ok, I’m done looking at woman rejected by everyone now, time to go out into the real world where the quality women are.

    Just say no to online dating.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    That’s the Nice Guy TM meme. I didn’t invent it. That is exactly how Nice Guys are perceived. As complaining that they’re owed sex because their girl pals have spent time with them, used them for friendship and emotional support, etc.

    Full disclosure: I have seen this happen firsthand in groups where I have known both the girls and the guys. When the guys didn’t get it in, they got really, really pissed off, called the girls bitches, etc. There is at least some merit to this claim.

    Fair enough. I guess it’s kinda like women claiming they just want confidence and us guys pointing out that we’ve seen firsthand that confidence isn’t good enough and asshole is what girls like.

  • Sue: “The men generally settle on success as being attractive to many women, i.e. # of lays. ”

    Nope. Argh, so close, yet so far away!

    Success is indeed that first half (being as attractive to many women) — but not necessarily the second half (high N).

    Having the first half is the foundation to either a) choosing from the best alternatives (low N!), or b) simply choosing them all in a smorgasbord (high N).

    High N is evidence of success, but that’s only half the story. It’s sufficient, but not necessary.

    • @OTC

      Success is indeed that first half (being as attractive to many women) — but not necessarily the second half (high N).

      Having the first half is the foundation to either a) choosing from the best alternatives (low N!), or b) simply choosing them all in a smorgasbord (high N).

      Seriously, this is music to my ears. I’ve been making this argument all along. The most desirable guy in the world can be a one woman man, and that doesn’t mean he’s not a “winner” in the SMP.

  • MikeC,

    A lot of the men on here are showing off not their beta-ness but their omega-ness. We need a flow-chart:

    Alpha male behaviours = budding attraction in a woman

    Results in: qualifying questions (flow splits)

    Appropriate response: exhibition of beta comfort-providing potential.

    Inappropriate response: exhibition of omega-supplication.

  • Sai

    Some interesting conversations are going on here… I wish I could be more helpful (Herb, can you get your $ back?) but all I can do is list some things that I do NOT like. I know, women say one thing and chase another, but these made me feel nothing but bad toward the people who inflicted them on me:
    Insults (I honestly can’t tell if/when it’s playful -you could be smiling because you’re a prick who likes insulting people. I need to work on this)
    Bad grammar (I was raised by an English teacher and some of it rubbed off)
    B.O. (that one’s obvious, right? Haha)
    No intellectual curiosity (yes, the economy sucks but libraries are free and many bookstores will let you read too)

  • Plain Jane

    ” What’s interesting, though, is that most of the males here are restricted in their sociosexual orientation. ”

    “I should allow no sister of mine to accept such a situation.”

    And why should it be every woman’s duty to make sure no male is restricted? Sorry, Obama is not going to assign you a factory model girlfriend, no matter how many times the Manosphere calls him a “socialist”.

    The US doesn’t do Sexual Marxism. We do Sexual Venture Capitalism.

    🙂

  • Plain Jane

    INTJ, “Where do such women tend to hang out? What sorts of heuristics can I use to filter for them?”

    Yoga centers. Your home state is full of ’em. Filter out the single moms.

    Susan to INTJ, “Are you interested in an Indian gf? If so, definitely go to see dance, and get involved with the South Asian cultural scene.”

    Susan, I already told him to do that last week and he made some lame excuse about single women at in the SA cultural scene being radical right wing religious fanatics, which is NOT true, especially in uber liberal California of all places!

    One more place I’d recommend for him to meet SA women, and a wide variety of ’em, are at the annual Yoni Ki Baats. They certainly won’t be radical religious wingers, if that’s his concern.

  • Plain Jane

    INTJ: *Facepalm* Seriously? You really think this is how it goes?

    Susan: That’s the Nice Guy TM meme. I didn’t invent it. That is exactly how Nice Guys are perceived. As complaining that they’re owed sex because their girl pals have spent time with them, used them for friendship and emotional support, etc.

    Full disclosure: I have seen this happen firsthand in groups where I have known both the girls and the guys. When the guys didn’t get it in, they got really, really pissed off, called the girls bitches, etc. There is at least some merit to this claim.

    Yeah, if a “nice guy’s” aim is not genuine friendship, don’t even go there in the first place.

  • Guy: “Oh yeah, babe, I have sex with a different chick every night, isn’t in obvious?” Puts his arm around her waist and pulls her close.

    Experiment time!
    What if the girl doesn’t laugh look at the man in the eye and says: I’m not playing I need a serious answer to that question.
    What would be the answer of the guys here? Dump=she is too serious, Respect and real answer= she knows what she wants and she should have an honest answer…or anything else?

    • @Anacaona

      What if the girl doesn’t laugh look at the man in the eye and says: I’m not playing I need a serious answer to that question.

      From your lips to God’s ears. This is where players get away with murder. Women are eager to confirm exclusivity, so in an exchange like that, they feel reassured because to question further is to call the character of the guy into question, and most women are reluctant to do that. That’s why A&A works – it assumes most people won’t play hardball. It’s a way of finding a vulnerability in a woman and exploiting it.

      Of course, it’s only exploitation if the guy is banging other women. He might have oneitis and say that to maintain his frame as the least interested party. I don’t categorically reject the tactic.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Iggles

    Aww!!!! So glad you guys are official and doing well 😀

    Thanks!! He asked me to be his girlfriend this past Friday. I accepted happily.

    @ Plain Jane

    Sassy, this is curious. In what area of your life do you feel you need to be lead? Education? Career? Daily personal habits and routines? Recreation? Religion?

    I personally don’t need to be lead in any of those areas. I simply like a guy who can lead, if the situation calls for it. I never know what kind of situation I may end up in during my lifetime. If there should ever be a time when I can’t lead, or can’t make a decision, I want to be sure that I have a man who is capable of taking the reins. I wouldn’t want a man who would crumble, in that regard.

    @ Ted D

    thing is, to me I shouldn’t ever have to tell my wife “NO”, because as a responsible and reasonable adult, I kinda expect her to be able to realize what she is asking for isn’t doable/proper/doesn’t make any sense without me having to be the bad guy for saying no. It is very much how I have to treat my kids when they ask for me to buy them stuff while standing in line at the store. It is the pushing of boundaries that irritates me, because to me adults shouldn’t be testing those waters out. (hence my total frustration with the concept of “shit test”, which is nothing other than a specific bump on a man’s boundaries for the intent and purpose of seeing if he will cave.) Maybe its just me, but I always feel like that kind of testing indicates a lack of respect.

    I didn’t mean saying no to me for questions or requests that are odd, irrational, or irresponsible. I meant that he doesn’t mind telling me no sometimes for minor things that concern him.

    If he is tired, he doesn’t mind telling me that he would rather stay in than go out. If he has other things on his plate, he doesn’t mind telling me that he can’t see me. He doesn’t mind asserting his needs, and he doesn’t always bend over backwards to please me. His wants are important to him too, and he doesn’t mind voicing them.

    I interact with him the same exact way. It’s about balancing the desires of others with one’s own desires.

  • Plain Jane

    Deli September 17, 2012 at 11:06 am

    Sorry, but current human society is built on scientific method – i.e. method of finding one true answer to any particular question.
    There is no room for “agree to disagree”, either one person is right or the other.
    ———-

    If that were the case religion and belief in God would be extinct. The fact remains that even the most intelligent and productive members in any society are often believers in God and even sometimes full fledged members of an organized religion.

    And there is plenty of room for “agree to disagree” wrt religious preferences and opinions.

  • Abbot

    On sex differences by ratio.

    http://drrobertepstein.com/downloads/Epstein-SEX_AND_THE_SOCIETY-DISCOVER_Oct_2012.pdf

    “Too many women: Post–World War II births led to a shortage of men and the rise of feminism in the 1960s and 1970s.”

    “Too many men: A shortage of female babies in the 1970s led to the rise of conservatism in the 1990s.”

    Does these birth patterns also impact the way women and men treat each other socially and sexually?

    .

  • J

    Hi Herb,

    I’m reading your conversation with Ana, and I feel bad that you are having such a rough patch right now. My impression in talking to you online is one of an interesting and intelligent person; I think that’s a huge positive in your favor. I don’t have much to say about succeeding at online dating, but here are some things that I think work IRL:

    1) Have a large social network. People with a lot of friends also tend to have what looks like great luck, but really they are reaping the benefits of knowing a lot of people who can hook them up. Ana mentioned that I met my husband by chance when I had just about given up and that I had no plan. All true. What I did have though was a lot of acquaintances. I got dragged to a party I didn’t want to go to and met a man who was literally a “friend of a friend.”

    2) Have a varied network of friends, young,old, male, female, married, single.

    3) Let people know that you’re looking.

    4) Project happines and completeness. I was sort of in Kate Bolick territory when I met DH. I had given up and was concentrating my efforts not on a desperate push to meet a guy, but on a steady flow of building an independent life. I was done mourning and was looking for things to be positive about. My lack of desperation was attractive; ironically not giving a damn made me hotter.

    5) Look your best. Drop weight, dress nicely, upgrade hair style, etc.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Guva
    “In my humble opinion the male sexual experience is that only a few can get what they want sexually. You can’t because you’re not good enough. You’re constantly teased by your peers about you inadequacy. You are mocked when you try to do some kind of sexual advances on someone else to whom you’re not good enough. You’re taunted by the prospect of always being alone and you have three choices:

    1) Deeply change yourself and adapt to the market needs.
    2) Settle for something that you don’t really feel attracted to.
    3)Be forever alone.

    Isn’t that the choice self-proclaimed beta males have to make?”

    Oh, it’s so much deeper than that. Guys not only cannot get what they want sexually. They also cannot get what they want emotionally. I know that the whole Beta Orbiter thing is a huge myth, but that’s because that’s what HURTS THE MOST. For the most part, if you’re a beta guy, girls will ignore you entirely. You will rarely enter a girl’s orbit, but when you do, you will become enthralled, and you will naturally want the sexual side too.

    And then you get rejected.

    Most Betas do not want to pursue unlimited sexual encounters. They want sex and cannot satisfy it, but they also want the emotional intimacy, too, and the lack of sexual intimacy betrays a lack of emotional intimacy. If she isn’t fucking you, she doesn’t really care that much about you.

    Maybe that doesn’t process to you, but it does to guys. It’s very primal.

    Also, the options we see are:

    1. Adapt and Change (which is impossible)
    2. Be settled FOR
    3. Forever Alone

    The two is the big difference. You are saying the Beta Guy is doing the settling. It’s the opposite. Beta Guy thinks the girl is settling FOR HIM. Beta Guy is convinced that the girl is much, much more interested in guys hotter than him, but can’t pull, and now he’ll do. That’s why you see all this obsession about 80% of the girls going for 20% of the guys. It’s a big statement that NO girls will find MOST guys attractive, and therefore most guys are going to be settled for.

    That’s the big Beta fear, and being settled for means not being special which means….

    No emotional intimacy.

    Betas by and large want all that Disney-crap, too. But Beta Guys don’t feel it when NONE of their sexual needs are being met, ever, and when they think girls think of them as second-rate.

    It’s not just sex.

    It’s intimacy.

  • VD

    What if the girl doesn’t laugh look at the man in the eye and says: I’m not playing I need a serious answer to that question.

    That’s a reasonable question, Ana. My answer to that was always “nothing serious, how about you?” Since any woman I’d be attracted to would always possess at least three orbiters, that would lead directly to a lengthy and tedious soliloquy on her part explaining the precise nature of each orbital relationship and why it should not interfere with our prospective relations. By the time she finished, she would invariably have forgotten all about her original intention of digging into the details of my life. Because women tend to be solipsistic, it is trivially easy to redirect them by the simple mechanism asking them to talk about themselves.

    I never once had to admit anything about anyone else or lie… and there was always someone else. Let’s face it, very few women can resist the urge to discuss their favorite subject in as much detail as their interlocutor will permit.

    • @VD

      Because women tend to be solipsistic, it is trivially easy to redirect them by the simple mechanism asking them to talk about themselves.

      I remember Ferdinand beating this drum quite frequently. Googling “solipsism,” dictionaries lead the results:

      sol·ip·sism (slp-szm, slp-)
      n. Philosophy
      1. The theory that the self is the only thing that can be known and verified.
      2. The theory or view that the self is the only reality.

      No mention of solipsism as it relates to women is found until the 9th page of Google results, where a post by Private Man is listed.

      However, when one Googles “female solipsism” the results on the first page are as follows:

      1. Alphagame
      2. Rational Male
      3. Rational Male
      4. Private Man
      5. Alphagame
      6. MGTOW forums
      7. Alphagame
      8. The Spearhead
      9. Cane Caldo

      What evidence can you offer that “female solipsism” is not just another manosphere circle jerk?

  • Mike C

    I disagree. ***Being a good potential partner does make a man more attractive.*** Just not to the women they want, apparently.

    Susan,

    I suspect we are back to the confusion about “attractive” versus “sexually attractive”. I think it would be to your benefit and greater understanding, if EVERY SINGLE TIME you see a guy use the term “attractive” he means sexually attractive, not the more ambiguous attractive that I think you and women mean when using the term.

    This seems to be the one “sphere” guy that you’ll listen to what he says

    http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-logical-fallacy-of-female-attraction.html

    This is good clarification and it’s really not a very difficult concept to understand. A woman may love her children and she may love her dog, but she is not turned on by them. She may love certain BETA traits and even seek them out in Long Term Relationships, but they do not turn her on. As a general rule, anything that inspires the same “awwwww” reaction as children and puppies is something that belongs in the BETA LTR box and not the ALPHA juices like wine box.

    I believe the primary reason it is hard to get women to understand this distinction between “that which I love” and “that which turns me on” is that for women, sexually turning on is a delicate process that is largely a black box to them.

    • @Mike C

      I suspect we are back to the confusion about “attractive” versus “sexually attractive”. I think it would be to your benefit and greater understanding, if EVERY SINGLE TIME you see a guy use the term “attractive” he means sexually attractive, not the more ambiguous attractive that I think you and women mean when using the term.

      First, I do listen to Vox, but that doesn’t mean I agree with everything he says.

      Second, female attraction does not have two ladders. There is not a cad ladder and a dad ladder. There is simply a gate, and the man with the right mix of traits makes it through the gate.

      I have been repulsed by the traits you define as sexually attractive. Of the women in my focus groups, I’d say 2 or 3 have attraction triggers that closely track those traits – they are the women with very high N. For the other women, dad traits are essential before a man is allowed into their lives. IOW, asshole arrogance will result in rejection every time for those women. Their attraction switch is not flipped without some indication that they are dealing with a “good man.” And that means beta traits, more or less.

      Bottom line: Attractive means what is going to get you through the gate. For most women, the traits you define as ambiguous are prerequisites.

  • That’s a reasonable question, Ana. My answer to that was always “nothing serious, how about you?”
    Let’s play this scenarion a little further if it entertains you’
    Mmm What if she says: “Define the “no serious” part.

  • Abbot

    1. Adapt and Change (which is impossible)
    2. Be settled FOR
    3. Forever Alone

    Thats about it on 9% of Earth’s land area…
    Thats it within a group that is 5% of Earth’s population…
    Thats it if you remain a captive audience volunteer…

  • Plain Jane

    1) Deeply change yourself and adapt to the market needs.
    2) Settle for something that you don’t really feel attracted to.
    3)Be forever alone.

    AND

    1. Adapt and Change (which is impossible)
    2. Be settled FOR
    3. Forever Alone

    ___

    As an average gal, I faced the same options. In fact, I was “settled for” in one very entangling relationship and I know how it feels and it sucks.

    That’s the risk I took when I shot above my weight in looks with this one particular man I did not have a lot in common with.

    He was even more unrealistic than I was. At least in the beginning I tried to veer him towards women who were more his type, but he said he was “done” with them. Later I found out he wasn’t “done” with them as much as they were done with him and he felt he couldn’t compete in that market due to a lack of status and money, so he aimed for the average not his type gal whom he had little in common with. He even hinted that I should be “proud” to show him off to my friends. Obviously the women he preferred wouldn’t feel proud to tell their friends what sort of job he had, but he figured since he was better looking than me then at least he’d have a woman who was “proud” of him in some way.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    First, read this post: 57 Ways to Meet the Love of Your Life

    You need to have or develop some interests that you can share with women, then pursue them.

    You want to rule out women who are dressed provocatively, have a flirtatious demeanor, or seem highly extraverted.

    Focus on women who are likely to be compatible – smart, serious, etc. Seek someone whose values appear similar to your own.

    Are you interested in an Indian gf? If so, definitely go to see dance, and get involved with the South Asian cultural scene.

    Already do this. 🙂

    I don’t prefer an Indian gf in particular, but since there’s a higher likelihood that she has matching goals/moral values, I should get involved more with the South Asian scene.

    The best approach is always a confident hello or introduction followed by a conversation opener that is germane to the activity. With a stranger at Starbucks or on the elevator, maybe it’s a headline or the elevator news feed. If it’s a girl in your class, ask her something about that. If you feel nervous about making chit chat, think of some potential openers beforehand.

    That’s already how I meet people in general (including girls). 🙂

    If you know someone casually, spend time building a rapport, then take it up a level. Go for coffee, walk her to her dorm, etc. Try and get groups of friends to meet up, and get better acquainted with her in a group social setting. Do not under any circumstances go up to a woman you don’t know and ask her out for a dinner date!

    If you know her well, add a bit of flirtation to your usual interactions and see how it goes over. Is she flirtatious back? Or is it super awkward? Only proceed if it’s the former. After a bit of flirting, suggest hanging out soon. Again, this is better done in groups at first.

    Don’t ever go with a strictly platonic vibe. Try to get to know her as friends with potential, at the very least. Or you can express your interest right away. Read the IOIs carefully, and expect to get blown out a lot. You are not for all markets. The normal college progression is chatting (with interest), flirting, hanging out in groups, singling each other out in groups, then pairing off to hang out alone. Adjust as necessary for different settings, e.g. classroom vs. library vs. club sport.

    Ahh this is stuff that I need to work on. I’m simply not used to subtle non-platonic communication.

    You’re very confident here, so I know that you are funny and smart and very capable of this. You need to practice this a lot IRL. The more natural the opening, the better you’ll feel. Don’t start by approaching the hottie on the shuttle bus. Start by sitting next to a cute girl in class. Make a short comment with eye contact.

    Oh I’m perfectly confident in general. It’s just that I find it awkward speaking with a stranger until I get a feel for his/her personality or communication style. It’s not the approach itself actually. I naturally have stuff to talk about for an opening. The problem is keeping the conversation going. I see people who’re naturals at this, and I just can’t do that. 🙁 And it’s not that I get tongue-tied around hot girls or something. It happens with all strangers.

    All of this is in Game, BTW. You owe it to yourself to learn Game. It’s a roadmap to what we’re talking about.

    Yes. The problem is that Game as espoused on PUA blogs comes with a lot of other stuff I don’t care to learn, and it’s hard to separate the wheat from the chaff.

    I don’t advise friendship as a goal. Friendships can develop into something more but I think that’s a bad strategy. If you are trying to get to know a woman, and getting no IOIs, move on. If you make a move and she friend zones you, walk away.

    This is the something I need to keep hammering into myself. I’m probably having a hard time giving it up because it is in direct contradiction to what I was told by my mom growing up.

    Learn what you can via observation, reputation, etc. As you get to know her, work these questions into conversation:

    6. Sex without love is OK?

    7. Enjoy casual sex with different partners?

    8. Need to be attached to partner to enjoy sex (reversed)?

    Any yes is obviously a dealbreaker.

    Straightforward enough. 🙂

    We can discuss this more, these responses are just off the top of my head.

    It’s been really helpful. I’ll absorb it and ask for clarifications or addition answers later if I need any.

    You also want to maintain the frame that you are a prize to be won. Do not offer commitment right out of the gate. Take your time to qualify her, and let her know that.

    I’ll try. I know I’m a prize, but it’s hard to maintain that frame when it’s always the man’s job to be proactive.

  • VD

    Let’s play this scenarion a little further if it entertains you’ Mmm What if she says: “Define the “no serious” part.

    “To me, being serious is about love and commitment. I haven’t been fortunate enough to find it yet, but I’m not afraid to keep looking. I think it’s worth it, don’t you? [Oh, totally, she interjects and nods.] So, what about you? I have no doubt you’ve got an extensive fan club. How many boyfriends are you keeping on a string these days?”

    If she’s already given the orbiter list, this will prompt a denial that she is keeping anyone on a string as well as a discourse concerning her last two or three “serious” boyfriends. And by “serious” she means “nominally exclusive”.

  • We are playing okay
    “To me, being serious is about love and commitment. I haven’t been fortunate enough to find it yet, but I’m not afraid to keep looking. I think it’s worth it, don’t you?

    Totally so are this not too serious women also sharing moments like you and I do?

    So, what about you? I have no doubt you’ve got an extensive fan club. How many boyfriends are you keeping on a string these days?”

    I like to keep my energy in one person at the time. Many people involved can get messy.

  • INTJ

    For old Star Trek fans, here’s a funny comic that George Takei (aka Sulu) just shared on Facebook. It’s amazing how much insight some kids have into relationships. https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/488250_524334560929335_328301953_n.jpg

    And here’s the more cynical manosphere type of comic that he posted: https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/206311_524212187608239_1714909630_n.jpg

  • VD

    Totally so are this not too serious women also sharing moments like you and I do?

    Not at all. Not like this.

    I like to keep my energy in one person at the time. Many people involved can get messy.

    Energy? Is that what you call it? But let’s not be too quick to reject messy. In fact, I’d go so far as to suggest that if you’re not making a mess that requires a federal hazmat team to clean it up, you’re not really doing it right. I have this friend… [tell funny story, could be about friend or about self using friend as plausible deniability.]

  • Abbot

    “The most desirable guy in the world can be a one woman man, and that doesn’t mean he’s not a “winner” in the SMP.”

    Mainly because he had to work for it. Getting a woman to agree to go out with him and then seduce her into sex is a job skill that is transferable to other matters that require effort. If he always got it willy nilly by just saying yes over and over for years, well, he would not be so worthy for commitment

  • Not at all. Not like this.
    I hope you don’t think I’m dumb *giggles* but exactly what you mean?

    Energy? Is that what you call it? But let’s not be too quick to reject messy. In fact, I’d go so far as to suggest that if you’re not making a mess that requires a federal hazmat team to clean it up, you’re not really doing it right. I have this friend… [tell funny story, could be about friend or about self using friend as plausible deniability.]

    Respond with sad story about a messy relationship ending up in suicide and murder preferably both (and you know I have those to spare VD ;)). “I guess we have different takes on messy being good for the soul…so I’m to think you are making a mess with me or those girls or both?”

  • VD

    From your lips to God’s ears. This is where players get away with murder. Women are eager to confirm exclusivity, so in an exchange like that, they feel reassured because to question further is to call the character of the guy into question, and most women are reluctant to do that. That’s why A&A works – it assumes most people won’t play hardball. It’s a way of finding a vulnerability in a woman and exploiting it.

    Keep in mind, however, it is easy for a player to turn her questions around on her. Most women have a few “platonic” BETA friends orbiting them, with whom they are always going to the shopping mall or whatever. If she’s got even one such male friend, she will very seldom be able to pin him down even if he is keeping a large stable of casual sex partners. Once she admits to having male friends with whom she goes out and socializes, it is simple to say, “hey, so you know how it is.” It is much, much easier to conceal a stable than a serious girlfriend because they don’t intrude on a man’s life, and because in casual conversation, it’s impossible to distinguish “female friend” from “female sex toy”. Of course, the converse is true; I always assumed that when a woman mentions a male “friend” she means someone who either had sex with her or wants to have sex with her.

    I have never met a woman who is bold enough to simply ask “have you had sex with anyone else in the last two weeks”. For the very good reason that it would be an obnoxious and intrusive question that no woman would want to face answering herself even if she’s a virgin. Instead, there is always dancing delicately around the subject and asking what “serious” means, the sort of thing that any man with reasonable verbal skill can adroitly avoid. Again, once she’s talking about herself, she’ll won’t go back to the subject.

    • I have never met a woman who is bold enough to simply ask “have you had sex with anyone else in the last two weeks”. For the very good reason that it would be an obnoxious and intrusive question that no woman would want to face answering herself even if she’s a virgin. Instead, there is always dancing delicately around the subject and asking what “serious” means, the sort of thing that any man with reasonable verbal skill can adroitly avoid.

      Yes, that’s a fair summary. Even a woman who would like to know the answer to that question wants to avoid looking like (or being called) a psycho.

  • VD

    I hope you don’t think I’m dumb *giggles* but exactly what you mean?

    What I mean is that the last time I had a conversation like this, it was with a prosecutor. What is it that you’re trying to hide? [At this point, if you’re still asking questions and not answering any, I’ve probably mentally checked out of the conversation and begun looking to escape it.]

    I guess we have different takes on messy being good for the soul…so I’m to think you are making a mess with me or those girls or both?

    No, this is not a mess. We haven’t been arrested, have we?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ PJ

    I am terribly sorry. Really am. Getting settled for is…oh my fucking god. It’s like getting stabbed in the heart. I’ve never had a girl I care about cheat on me, but I imagine it must be something like that, because your view of the relationship is just shattered. It doesn’t seem real anymore.

    @ Susan

    Seriously, this is music to my ears. I’ve been making this argument all along. The most desirable guy in the world can be a one woman man, and that doesn’t mean he’s not a “winner” in the SMP.

    Agreed 100%. Quality over quantity for sure.

  • Susan,
    I actually think A & A is more “shady” when it’s practiced in a “getting to know you” setting vs. a LTR. I think it was Lokland who said he uses A & A as a way to respond to shit tests, and my BF definitely does that too. For example we’ll be watching TV and a particularly hot actress will come on, and I’ll say something silly like “I bet you want to fuck her.” In response he’ll say “Oh yeah. In fact every night when you think I’m working the night shift, I’m in Hollywood having sex with actresses.” My response: “Ohh really??” with a grin. Him: “You’re a goofball baby.”

    Basically, it’s a way to let me know I’m kind of being paranoid or too jealous (or whatever) without being direct, and it actually turns what could have been a negative interaction into a positive one.

    It’s funny, I actually think women don’t respond that well to direct confrontation and prefer to keep things light (NAWALT of course). It seems like A & A was developed to work with a very common female communication style. Not that I think it should be used as a deception technique.

    • @Olive

      Basically, it’s a way to let me know I’m kind of being paranoid or too jealous (or whatever) without being direct, and it actually turns what could have been a negative interaction into a positive one.

      That makes sense, it can actually be a way of offering reassurance in an LTR where faithfulness really isn’t in question. I know that when I have felt paranoid, hearing that I’m being silly is very reassuring.

      Who knew A&A was so versatile? In the end, it always comes down to intent. Is someone reassuring you because they care for you, or are they misleading you to maintain a harem? :-/

  • Höllenhund

    What evidence can you offer that “female solipsism” is not just another manosphere circle jerk?

    Yeah. It’s entirely reasonable to expect that various public and private organizations would fund scientific research focusing on something called “female solipsism” in a culture where feminism and the blank-state theory are the law of the land.

    Honestly, who are you trying to fool, Ms. Walsh? You know absolutely well that such ludicrous demands for scientific evidence are nothing but an attempt to stifle debate on female nature.

    • Honestly, who are you trying to fool, Ms. Walsh? You know absolutely well that such ludicrous demands for scientific evidence are nothing but an attempt to stifle debate on female nature.

      I didn’t ask for scientific evidence, but the list of Google results is very telling, IMO. The concept is only recognized by a handful of manosphere bloggers. Surely, a sound, tested and observed concept would be known outside the ‘sphere? As I said, there are many pages of results discussing solipsism as a philosophical concept without regard to gender. I daresay that when it was conceived, it strictly described men.

      I have made a habit of digging into the source of certain claims in the ‘sphere, and what I usually find is a complete absence of intellectual rigor. Instead, there is a sort of high-fiving among male bloggers on principles that are completely unsubstantiated.

      Unless someone can offer me some rational explanation for saying that women are especially solipsistic, I don’t accept it.

  • What I mean is that the last time I had a conversation like this, it was with a prosecutor.

    You dated a prosecutor that is interesting

    What is it that you’re trying to hide?

    I’m just asking a question why are you so paranoid?

    [At this point, if you’re still asking questions and not answering any, I’ve probably mentally checked out of the conversation and begun looking to escape it.]

    What a coincidence! Likewise 😉

    No, this is not a mess. We haven’t been arrested, have we?
    Not yet…the night is young. 😉

  • Mike C

    What evidence can you offer that “female solipsism” is not just another manosphere circle jerk?

    Here is the easy to understand definition of solipsistic:

    http://www.yourdictionary.com/solipsistic

    Solipsistic describes a philosphy that nothing is real but the experiences you have. (adjective)

    An example ofsolipsistic is a belief that you can only know what you have personally experienced.

    Here is my evidence….the comments on this blog by a variety of female commenters… even intelligent ones such as yourself, Hope, Anacoana. If you really want me to dig through comments I will but hopefully you’ll recognize the accuracy. I can’t even begin to quantify how many times a discussion is going that is dealing with purely abstract, general concepts and either you, or some other female commenter has the default assumption we are speaking about your relationship, or your husband, or your boyfriend. It happens so regularly and predictably that I do assume it must be some ingrained element of female wiring. I’ve observed and remarked on this phenomenon of “personalizing” abstract points a great number of times actually.

    • @Mike C

      I can’t even begin to quantify how many times a discussion is going that is dealing with purely abstract, general concepts and either you, or some other female commenter has the default assumption we are speaking about your relationship, or your husband, or your boyfriend.

      I don’t think anyone does that. The only time I assumed anyone was talking about my marriage was when Yohami said, “Your marriage sucks, I would never want a marriage like that.”

      We may say, “that’s not my experience, here’s how it is with me.” But you do that frequently as well. Your days as a bouncer, your buddy with the N > 200, your personal experiences with your fiancee.

      Isn’t personal experience the lens through which we understand the world?

      Abstract concepts have little meaning if they don’t resonate at a personal level.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Question to the females.

    I can relate to requiring Beta Traits to experience honest sexual attraction. When I was single, I definitely required character traits for that sexual attraction to really flower.

    Since being in a relationship, I have found that more girls have become more sexually attractive. I don’t mean I want to stray, I just say that I can see a whole lot more girls as attractive. My guess-timate would have to be that this is somehow emotional, and part of my promiscuous side saying “you got something stable, now get something on the side.”

    Do any women have that mechanism? Or other guys? Or am I just weird?

    • @ADBG

      Do any women have that mechanism? Or other guys? Or am I just weird?

      I think that’s the male desire for sexual variety. The female equivalent is probably buying Bride’s magazine long before it’s called for.

  • VD

    What evidence can you offer that “female solipsism” is not just another manosphere circle jerk?

    Observation and superintelligence. But I’ll gladly devise a practical scientific experiment to support the hypothesis if you like. I have observed, over 20 years, that one simply cannot talk to most women about most subjects without her either a) discussing how it reflects upon her, or, b) attempting to change the subject to herself. Anyone who talks to women on a regular basis will have observed it. In college, I used to amuse myself by counting the numbers of “I” and “me” whenever a female professor was lecturing; it was usually a multiple of those utilized by the male professors.

    It is a concept that is no more intrinsically dubious than the observation that women prefer taller men to shorter ones or that men prefer younger women to older ones. Remember, science doesn’t create reality, it merely codifies our observations of it.

    • I have observed, over 20 years, that one simply cannot talk to most women about most subjects without her either a) discussing how it reflects upon her, or, b) attempting to change the subject to herself. Anyone who talks to women on a regular basis will have observed it.

      I have observed the exact same behavior from male commenters here for four years, on a blog that isn’t even directed at them. A post written expressly for women, couched in language addressing females, generates a flood of response from men talking about how the post fits into their lives, and then we’re off to the races. Pages and pages of reports of being shortchanged by others.

  • My guess-timate would have to be that this is somehow emotional, and part of my promiscuous side saying “you got something stable, now get something on the side.”

    I think Athol mentioned that humans are wired in general to have a steady monogamous partner and get opportunistic sex in the side once in a while. Not sure if he has evo-bio evidence but it seems you are experiencing that you got one down so your body might be craving for the other part. Don’t listen to it though it will only bring you problems and you might end losing out on both, YMMV

  • Mike C

    It’s funny, I actually think women don’t respond that well to direct confrontation and prefer to keep things light (NAWALT of course). It seems like A & A was developed to work with a very common female communication style. Not that I think it should be used as a deception technique.

    Olive,

    Exactly! Direct earnestness is a non-starter for most women, plus to the example you gave, there are only 3 options:

    1. Pretend you didn’t ask the question and ignore it with no response 2. Qualify yourself with a “Oh, no baby I only have eyes for you” which is at the least a subtextual DLV 3. Play up the Agree and Amplify like your boyfriend did which playfully makes fun of the question

    3 is the right move every time.

  • Mike C

    have observed, over 20 years, that one simply cannot talk to most women about most subjects without her either a) discussing how it reflects upon her, or, b) attempting to change the subject to herself. Anyone who talks to women on a regular basis will have observed it.

    Well….I don’t have 20 years, but I have seen (a) and (b) over and over and over and over in the couple years I’ve been commenting and reading here. For example Susan, when the Instill Dread subject came up the first thing you did was talk about in the context of your husband and your relationship.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Who knew A&A was so versatile? In the end, it always comes down to intent. Is someone reassuring you because they care for you, or are they misleading you to maintain a harem? :-/

    This is women should avoid those who use A&A during the “getting to know you” stage. People have a hard time making blatant lies, so one should be wary of anyone who tries to dodge the question like that. Sure, it could just be playfulness, but it could just as easily be someone misleading you about maintaining a harem.

  • @VD
    I assume that you got bored with our play, naturally, can I say the moral of the exercise for the kids in the audience?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Ana

    I was actually thinking that myself. Which is odd. I was wondering whether this is something most people experience all the time, or if they are just “switching modes” on occasion.

    I dunno. FWIW, I have no intention on any cheating and attraction is pretty easily controlled at this point. I’m a grown-ass man

  • Plain Jane

    Mule Chewing Briars September 17, 2012 at 8:45 am

    Most of the kerfaffle in the relationship arena stems from the fact that 95% of the female malaise comes from the upper end of the bell-shaped curve, and gets a lot, a lot of attention. After all, when this girl is dissatisfied, it’s Defcon 5 important.

    95% of the male malaise comes from the middle and lower end, so when this guy is dissatisfied, he should Suck It Up, Get Over Ot, or best of all, just Be More Attractive.
    —-

    Wowzerz! That girl is probably the closest thing to a 10 possible. Love the hair!

    Funny but when I clicked on your “this guy” it said not allowed to access AverageMan.jpg on this server.

    They must’ve gotten cyber word that I’m an average gal who shoots above her weight in the SMP. LOL!

    But what about the True Forced Loneliness brigade on youtube?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Xg8nek158w

    Just listen to that guy’s attitude and look at him!

  • Plain Jane

    However, when one Googles “female solipsism” the results on the first page are as follows:

    1. Alphagame
    2. Rational Male
    3. Rational Male
    4. Private Man
    5. Alphagame
    6. MGTOW forums
    7. Alphagame
    8. The Spearhead
    9. Cane Caldo

    —-

    Bwahahahahahaha! That is absolutely hilarious!

  • your buddy with the N > 200,

    I’m curious about that guy I would guess he most be reaching 300 at this point or he is “settled” with rotating the same partners?

    And before anyone assumes I’m focusing on the players I’m curious about many people that used to come here and how their lives had turn out Aldonza, Jesus M., Dogsquat, Filrabat, Liza…I just don’t know who to ask.

    • @Anacaona

      Aldonza, Jesus M., Dogsquat, Filrabat, Liza…I just don’t know who to ask.

      I miss those commenters. Aldonza left due to the negative attitudes towards women here. She emailed me to say goodbye. Jesus M. had a similar experience – all the red pill talk was seeding doubts about his own relationship, and opening old wounds. Dogsquat is MIA at the moment in general, I hope he’s back soon. Filrabat vowed never to return to HUS after I wrote a post explaining that I support relationships and marriage. Liza – I don’t know. I had forgotten about her until she was mentioned in this thread. She was fun, I’m sorry she’s gone.

  • Is someone reassuring you because they care for you, or are they misleading you to maintain a harem?

    Honestly, it doesn’t seem that hard to differentiate. It’s all about context. The whole point of A & A, when used deceptively, is to avoid lying AND avoid telling the truth. So if you’ve already had a discussion and agreed to be exclusive, there’s no reason for a guy to use A & A to hide the fact that he doesn’t want to maintain exclusivity. Plus there’s the whole “player vibe” thing. Honestly, having read some harem stories around these parts, I get the sense that a lot of the girls who are part of harems are looking the other way at least a little bit.

    • So if you’ve already had a discussion and agreed to be exclusive, there’s no reason for a guy to use A & A to hide the fact that he doesn’t want to maintain exclusivity.

      That’s why I originally said it was strictly a STR tactic.

      Honestly, having read some harem stories around these parts, I get the sense that a lot of the girls who are part of harems are looking the other way at least a little bit.

      No doubt, there is some plausible deniability.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    It’s hard for most people to relate to something they can’t personally experience. My guess is that only the NXJs can really do that.

    Plus we like to talk about ourselves. I can talk about N count in men not being the end all be all. Pull out the stats, happiness charts, etc. It’s a lot easier to talk about my personal experience, where with a 3rd base N=10, my life was an utter disaster. That feels much more personal and resonates a lot more strongly, even to my ENTJ side.

  • Mike C

    Second, female attraction does not have two ladders. There is not a cad ladder and a dad ladder. There is simply a gate, and the man with the right mix of traits makes it through the gate.

    Ehhhh……and I thought we were making some progress to a common understanding based on the previous thread discussing attraction versus sexual attraction. I didn’t say anything about two ladders or gates. I’m talking raw visceral “I’m totally turned on by that guy”. So let me get this straight. Your position is the guy patting the head of the 5-year old demonstrating Dad traits starts to get your vagina wet? Is that what you are telling me? That the guy who is gentleman and holds the door open for the old lady entering the restaurant and demonstrates politeness gets your vagina wet? Is that what you are telling me? That’s what I want to know. Which specific traits get the vagina wet thinking I want to fuck that guy,…not that he is a good guy for a LTR. I really don’t understand the confusion/conflation on this simple point/distinction.

    • Your position is the guy patting the head of the 5-year old demonstrating Dad traits starts to get your vagina wet? Is that what you are telling me?

      No man has ever gotten my vagina wet until we were making out, at least. And I require a mix of alpha and beta traits in order to make out with a guy. So yeah, that’s what I’m telling you.

      The whole wet panties myth is an embarrassment. If you want to hook us up to porn, sure. But no woman’s vagina every got engorged or slippery looking at a guy at the bar. It doesn’t work that way.

      Do you get it now? You’ve got to trip the switches to make it to first base, and for many women, beta trait switches are in the mix.

      For me? Guy with a baby? Oh yeah…that’s hot.

  • INTJ

    @ Olive

    Honestly, it doesn’t seem that hard to differentiate. It’s all about context. The whole point of A & A, when used deceptively, is to avoid lying AND avoid telling the truth. So if you’ve already had a discussion and agreed to be exclusive, there’s no reason for a guy to use A & A to hide the fact that he doesn’t want to maintain exclusivity. Plus there’s the whole “player vibe” thing. Honestly, having read some harem stories around these parts, I get the sense that a lot of the girls who are part of harems are looking the other way at least a little bit.

    Exactly.

  • Mike C

    Isn’t personal experience the lens through which we understand the world?

    Abstract concepts have little meaning if they don’t resonate at a personal level.

    That isn’t what we are talking about here. I’m not talking about using personal experiences as part of inductive reasoning to broad principles. I’m talking about discussing a particular point or concept and a female reader responding as if the guy was talking directly to her about her relationship or her husband. The solipsistic leap is when the assumption is made that the guy talking about some general idea is specifically referring to her personal situation. My time is too valuable to waste going through past threads looking for examples but this has happened a great number of times. If you question this, I am going to make it a point to call it out every single time I see it happen in the future. I’ll admit this is where I get frustrated because it seems like you never want to concede anything but continue to argue a point where you are demonstrably wrong.

    • @Mike C

      The solipsistic leap is when the assumption is made that the guy talking about some general idea is specifically referring to her personal situation.

      Even if true, that’s a far cry from this:

      Metaphysical solipsism is the “strongest” variety of solipsism. Based on a philosophy of subjective idealism, metaphysical solipsists maintain that the self is the only existing reality and that all other reality, including the external world and other persons, are representations of that self, and have no independent existence.

      Can you name a single instance where a female commenter disavowed the possibility of an experience different from her own? That her reality was the only possible reality, and that your reality did not even exist? That is what solipsism is.

      If you question this, I am going to make it a point to call it out every single time I see it happen in the future.

      You’re on. My guess is that your comments, which often come across as accusatory and confrontational, generate a defensiveness in females here. But let’s dissect it when it happens. I’m more than happy to be proved wrong.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Your position is the guy patting the head of the 5-year old demonstrating Dad traits starts to get your vagina wet? Is that what you are telling me?

    What’s she saying is that the primal sexual urges for the most part do not trigger unless a man displays some beta behavior. It’s not that the beta behavior is attractive, it’s that it lowers women’s defenses and allows sexual attraction.

    Do you play any RPGs? Think of it as a de-buff spell.

  • INTJ

    @ Mike C

    That isn’t what we are talking about here. I’m not talking about using personal experiences as part of inductive reasoning to broad principles. I’m talking about discussing a particular point or concept and a female reader responding as if the guy was talking directly to her about her relationship or her husband. The solipsistic leap is when the assumption is made that the guy talking about some general idea is specifically referring to her personal situation. My time is too valuable to waste going through past threads looking for examples but this has happened a great number of times. If you question this, I am going to make it a point to call it out every single time I see it happen in the future. I’ll admit this is where I get frustrated because it seems like you never want to concede anything but continue to argue a point where you are demonstrably wrong.

    Yes, I’ve seen plenty of female commenters do this, and don’t recall any male commenters doing this.

    However, I do not believe Susan has ever done this.

  • INTJ

    @ ADBG

    What’s she saying is that the primal sexual urges for the most part do not trigger unless a man displays some beta behavior. It’s not that the beta behavior is attractive, it’s that it lowers women’s defenses and allows sexual attraction.

    Do you play any RPGs? Think of it as a de-buff spell.

    ROFL!

  • Höllenhund

    I didn’t ask for scientific evidence, but the list of Google results is very telling, IMO. The concept is only recognized by a handful of manosphere bloggers. Surely, a sound, tested and observed concept would be known outside the ‘sphere?

    You want proof that female solipsism has been tested and observed. Which anyone would call, in other words, asking for scientific evidence. What are you expecting your readers to dig up, really? A 135-page peer-reviewed essay published in some obscure medical journal scientifically proving and detailing the phenomenon of female solipsism? You know very well that such issu