20 Years Later, Men and Women Are Still From Different Planets

One of the most troubling effects of applied feminist theology has been the demonization of sex differences. Naturally, this denial of biological reality didn’t make sex differences disappear, it just made them off limits for discussion. That’s ironic, because some of the most pronounced differences between men and women may be seen in the way they engage in discussion. It’s very clear here at HUS that men and women communicate very differently. 

Recently I reread one of my favorite books about cross-sex communication, and despite the fact that it was written in the early 90s, I haven’t found anything that tops it. Even after four years of blogging about dating and relationships, I find John Gray’s Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus enlightening. 

I’m not sure if there ever was a time when the sexes understood one another better, but most of the questions I get from female readers are an attempt to figure out what’s going on in a guy’s mind. 

The best advice about men usually comes from men, but I’m happy to pass it along when it’s really good. John Gray is really good. Some of the insights seem a bit dated for today’s culture – that is, the nature of men and women has not really changed in twenty years, but some of our behaviors have. You may need to adjust here and there, but most of this is gold.

When men feel good about themselves, they are most motivated to please a woman.

The more a man’s life is in order, the more he hungers for a woman to share it with.

When a man does something to make a woman feel special, he becomes more attracted to her.

Men are attracted to women who clearly can be pleased. A man does not want to hear a woman dwell on negative feelings or problems. Women should initially share their most positive, autonomous side.

Not to be needed is a slow death for a man. He needs to feel appreciated, trusted and accepted.

Men are motivated and empowered when they feel needed. Given the opportunity to prove his potential, a man expresses his best self. Only when he feels he cannot succeed does he regress back to his old selfish ways.

But: Too much intimacy, too quickly, can cause women to become needy and men to pull away.

When a man is attracted, he gets excited because he anticipates that he can make her happy and that makes him feel really good; it brings the best of him out. The anticipation of more is very important to keep him interested. If he feels completely satisfied, then there is no distance for him to continue traveling to pursue her. Distance not only makes the heart grow fonder but gives the man the opportunity to pursue. Men always need the opportunity for more.

When women “overgive” it compromises their position, and it prevents the excitement of anticipation and romance from building.

While a man tends to question whether he wants to pursue a relationship, the woman tends to question where the relationship is going.

This may make her insecure and she will begin to pursue him. When a man stops pursuing, a woman’s task is to resist the enormous urge to find out what has happened or to do something about it. In this instance, she should stay open to his future advances, but fill her life up with friends.

The male intimacy cycle is like a rubber band. It involves getting close, pulling away, and then getting close again.

A man pulls away to fulfill his need for independence or autonomy. When he has fully separated, suddenly he will feel his need for love and intimacy again. A man automatically alternates between needing intimacy and autonomy.

When a man springs back, he picks up the relationship at whatever degree of intimacy it was when he stretched away. He doesn’t feel any need for a period of getting reacquainted again.

If a man does not have the opportunity to pull away, he never gets a chance to feel his strong desire to be close. If women insist on continuous intimacy then he will almost always be trying to escape and distance himself. He will never get a chance to feel his own passionate longing for love.

When a woman chases a man or punishes him for withdrawing, he feels incapable of fulfilling her and gives up. His fear of her anger or rejection might cause him to give up entirely.

Women need:

  • caring
  • understanding
  • respect
  • devotion
  • validation
  • reassurance

Men need:

  • trust
  • acceptance
  • appreciation
  • admiration
  • approval
  • encouragement

A man’s interest should be active. 

If a man detects that a woman’s mission is to please him, he will also focus on how she can please him. If she wants to pursue him, he will happily sit back and passively receive what she wants to give. This will not make her happy. When he senses that she is unhappy, she becomes less interesting to him and the attraction lessens. A woman who is eager to please a man will find that he is pleased, but not necessarily interested.

Active interest motivates the man to action to achieve a goal, thrives on achievement and comes from a place of desire and confidence.  The more risks he takes, the more invested he becomes.

The way a woman makes him feel good, (and more interested) is by creating opportunities for him to succeed in truly fulfilling her needs. Without her to please, he is a man out of work. He needs a job, needs the opportunity to succeed in a relationship with a woman. This is an enormous boost to his fulfillment in life.

 A female’s interest should be receptive.

Receptive interest is motivated to create opportunities to receive, thrives in response to support, and comes from a place of preference and worthiness. A woman’s receptive interest in a man generates his active interest in her. When she reacts to his advances, he feels more connected to her. Then he is automatically more interested and motivated to get to know her.

A man gets turned on when a woman’s radiance makes him feel more like a man.

 Feminine radiance embodies the three characteristics of femininity:

1. Self-assurance: An air of grace and trust, self-respect. 

2. Receptivity:  The ability to receive what is given and not resent getting less; ability to benefit or find good in every situation.

3. Responsiveness: A man loves a woman with a smile. He loves to feel that he can make a difference, that he can make her happy.

The wisdom of waiting to be sexually intimate is that a man’s desire has a chance to grow into the higher levels of expression. 

His physical desire expands into the emotional desire to please the woman.

Having an exclusive relationship provides the foundation for lasting intimacy. A woman creates intimacy by honestly sharing more of who she is, and a man experiences increased intimacy by successfully supporting and nurturing more of who she is. As she discloses herself more, he can gradually get to know her. If he continues to be supportive as he gets to know her better, then the love he feels in his heart has a chance to grow.

When a woman becomes sexual before she is ready, she has stopped being receptive and becomes accommodating. She compromises her position. When she gives more in the relationship, she begins to expect more from the man, which makes her very unattractive. Female expectations are a turnoff for men.

 

The thing that surprises me most, though it makes a lot of sense, is the value to a man of pursuing and winning a woman. And the value to a woman of giving him the opportunity to do that.

We can either return to a way of relating that respects sex differences, or we can continue to ignore sex roles, asking women to be aggressors and men to be passive recipients.  While I think that it’s important and helpful for women to offer encouragement and show interest to men they find attractive, both sexes will realize the greatest benefit if women do this in response to male initiative.

  • Bob

    First!

  • pvw

    Second:

    applied feminist theology has been the demonization of sex differences.

    Me: Hmm…I read this and I thought, that sounds like it would be an interesting class at a seminary somewhere in New England, ie., ultra liberal Episcopal Divinity School in the “People’s Republic of Cambridge,” Mass.

    On the other hand, I realize what you are getting at, those who use feminism as a secular religion, and women’s studies departments might as well be seminaries for this type of secular theology….

    I can always tell when I have to get my female graduate students to broaden their perspectives on feminist theory, ie., when they have spent too much time in the “seminary.” A common trait of tunnel vision; I’m seeing it right now with two students as they work on their research papers.

    I had the Mars/Venus book back then; not sure where I put it, though….

  • INTJ

    Nice post.

  • JP

    @pvw:

    “A common trait of tunnel vision; I’m seeing it right now with two students as they work on their research papers.”

    Don’t leave us in suspense.

    Why don’t you explain this a little further…

  • http://loveashley.net Ashley

    I can’t get behind the idea that relationships are best with the woman being pursued. My best relationships would have never happened if I hadn’t made a move, and I think that has to do with the fact that men do not pick up on subtle hints of interest. I can’t tell you how many times I have heard “I had no idea you liked me” even after I tried to show my interest, all but spelling it out for them.

    And the idea that men are on a mission to please her and fulfill her needs…could this dynamic possibly lead to why men feel many women are vain, entitled, and selfish?

    Side thought: Are men actually threatened by women who are attractive, rich, powerful, and self sufficient because they feel they have nothing to offer (since you suggest that a man needs to feed needed). I wonder if this is why so many men are trying to keep women at home and married with kids by 25. I wonder if this is simply what the backlash against feminism is all about.

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

      The conversation here got off to a good start without me, thanks everyone!

      @Ashley

      I can’t tell you how many times I have heard “I had no idea you liked me” even after I tried to show my interest, all but spelling it out for them.

      This is what I was thinking of when I said that some of the advice doesn’t fit the current SMP perfectly. Men definitely approach less than they did 20 years ago. In addition to the understandable fear of rejection, I think that feminism has made it much more difficult for men to get a read on what women want. Is she DTF or someone looking for a relationship? I’ve heard quite a few stories from men who were literally dragged into bedrooms by women at parties. They feel torn – penis says yes, brain says no. Several of these episodes have been aborted by guys midway, I might add. In one case, the guy felt really defensive and said he felt like he was being raped! He finally said no and got the hell out of there.

      The problem is that for people who are not looking for casual, the traditional model of male pursuit is far more effective. Many times a guy does appreciate being singled out for special treatment, and he may happily go along for the ride, but he is likely to invest less because he didn’t have to work for it.

      I’m all for women indicating interest as clearly as they can. That’s what flirting is for. Making actual moves, though – that robs the guy of the opportunity to be the male.

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

      Are men actually threatened by women who are attractive, rich, powerful, and self sufficient because they feel they have nothing to offer (since you suggest that a man needs to feed needed)

      There is no question that men feel less needed today, and they are less needed, financially speaking. However, there are many ways in which most women do need men in order to fulfill their life’s purpose, and to find happiness.

      Political messages that men and women are the same obscure the real needs the sexes have for one another and make it much harder for people to vocalize them without being shamed. As I covered in a recent post, young men grow up with cultural messages that promiscuity is the goal, and they are made to feel ashamed for wanting connection and intimacy in addition to sex.

      Finally, I will agree with others that the word threatened does not apply here. The man who is secure in his own skin is not threatened by a woman’s achievements. If she adopts an alpha male persona, though, it’s unlikely men are going to find her attractive. This is a serious problem for many high achieving professional women – they have had to behave in very male ways to succeed in a male world. I can recall feeling that way myself when I worked in corporate America and consulting. (In fact, acting female in those environments leads to being harrassed sexually, but that’s another story.)

      So it’s not that female achievement threatens men, it’s that most high achieving females become ball busters on their way up, losing their femininity completely.

  • Lokland

    “I wonder if this is why so many men are trying to keep women at home and married with kids by 25. ”

    *Raises eyebrow*

  • Richard Aubrey

    The pieces of Gray’s work that Susan cites are expanded upon in Crabb’s
    “Men, Women, Enjoying the Difference”.
    There’s a profound, absorbing review of the book on Amazon.

  • http://loveashley.net Ashley

    “*Raises eyebrow*”

    Hey don’t look at me. The “manosphere” is consumed with preaching to women to not wait until it’s too late (their idea of too late if about after 25 when a woman’s appearance starts to diminish).

  • doomwolf

    @Ashley

    “Side thought: Are men actually threatened by women who are attractive, rich, powerful, and self sufficient because they feel they have nothing to offer (since you suggest that a man needs to feed needed). I wonder if this is why so many men are trying to keep women at home and married with kids by 25. I wonder if this is simply what the backlash against feminism is all about.”

    To your first thought, I would say yes, atleast as far as I am concerned. If a woman can look after herself and makes significantly more money than me, what would I have to offer in the mix? This is basically why I have no interest in pursuing a couple women I know going into law & medicine respectively.

    As to the second thought, I haven’t seen or heard anything like that around here, but Ottawa is a government town, so politically correct civil servants abound here, the type that wouldn’t say sh*t if their mouth was full of it. People here can be pretty boring sometimes.

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

    *Grabs popcorn*
    I’m getting the feeling this is going to be one of those posts

  • JP

    @doomwolf:

    “This is basically why I have no interest in pursuing a couple women I know going into law & medicine respectively.”

    Law.

    Uh, not a money/prestige profession.

    More like a “help me escape this career trap” profession.

  • Sassy6519

    *Pulls up a chair next to Anacaona with a package of Twizzler’s pull-and-peel*

    Girl, me too!

  • Passer_By

    @doomwolf

    “If a woman can look after herself and makes significantly more money than me, what would I have to offer in the mix?”

    But does that mean you are “threatened” by her? Or just making a rational assessment of the likelihood of a successful approach and subsequent relationship? I don’t the female obsession with characterizing men as “threatened”, as though the problem is some phobia or psychological inadequacy, when in reality that are just correctly diagnosing a situation (on a statistical basis).

    @ashley

    “I wonder if this is why so many men are trying to keep women at home and married with kids by 25. ”

    That’s a wild overstatement and sounds like that silly “barefoot and pregnant” meme.”

    “I wonder if this is simply what the backlash against feminism is all about.””

    Right, because only psychological inadequacy could possibly make men react negatively to a political movement whose goals (at the top) are to systematically strip them of rights and resources.

  • pvw

    @JP November 30, 2012 at 6:59 pm

    @pvw:

    “A common trait of tunnel vision; I’m seeing it right now with two students as they work on their research papers.”

    Don’t leave us in suspense.

    Why don’t you explain this a little further…

    Me: Applied feminist theology, where each student adheres to some form of liberal feminist theory, ie., finding anti-feminists or even conservative feminists shocking because they are incapable of critiquing liberal feminism, ie., that absolute equality forces women to meet a standard of equality that views equality through men’s eyes–they have to be equal on men’s terms, to be exactly like men–maleness is the standard.

  • JP

    ” I wonder if this is why so many men are trying to keep women at home and married with kids by 25.”

    I’m fairly certain that the children before 25 idea was originally my wife’s idea, not mine.

  • pvw

    @JP: Or lots of victimology…not being able to see that women can be dangerous to themselves or other people, ie., when they decided to associate with unsavory men….

  • JP

    “ie., that absolute equality forces women to meet a standard of equality that views equality through men’s eyes–they have to be equal on men’s terms, to be exactly like men–maleness is the standard.”

    Taken to the logical extreme, that would result in a lot of women losing a lot of fist fights.

  • Lokland

    @Ashly

    How do you define “many men”?

    Personally, I would not define “many woman” as cuckolders though they represent 1-2 of every 100 women. A significantly higher frequency than men who are even aware of the manosphere.

    It’s like wondering onto an NBA court and concluding many men are 6′ tall.
    or
    Walking into a mental hospital and concluding many people are crazy.

    If you go to somewhere that aggregates a certain type and then draw a conclusion and apply it across the general populace your bound to be mistaken.

    In my first example, if I watched jerry Springer I could probably conclude many women are cuckolder’s but I would be incorrect to apply it across the pollution.

  • JP

    “@JP: Or lots of victimology…not being able to see that women can be dangerous to themselves or other people, ie., when they decided to associate with unsavory men….”

    This one sounds more amusing.

    What’s the academic logic behind this one and what real world changes are proposed?

  • pvw

    @JP:

    Taken to the logical extreme, that would result in a lot of women losing a lot of fist fights.

    Me: Or the recent lawsuit I heard about regarding servicewomen wanting to go into combat. They want combat roles in order to rise through the ranks, etc. I would have thought those absolute equality chicks would have gotten a clue when Rostker v. Goldberg established that women didn’t have to register for the draft, the ERA failed and, and EEOC v. Sears indicated the rise of cultural/difference feminism….

  • http://loveashley.net Ashley

    My fault, I should have clarified I was referring to red pill men.

  • Lokland

    “rrect to apply it across the pollution.”

    Hmmm.
    That must have been a mental slip on what I think of Jerry Springer.

    *population

  • pvw

    @JP:

    victimology…..This one sounds more amusing.

    What’s the academic logic behind this one and what real world changes are proposed?

    Me: Criminology type stuff…women as girlfriends of alpha gang bangers in places like LA where they can be caught up in the system, an interest in using protectionist policies, ie., they are not the ones involved primarily in the gang bangers, but they are vulnerable merely because of who their partners are–don’t charge them with crimes, ie., as accessories, etc.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    Nice post.

    I do disagree on receptiveness.
    Being only receptive is the equivalent of doing nothing and expecting everything.

    Nurturing is feminine, it is an active state, not receptive.

    A balance of the two is better.

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

      Being only receptive is the equivalent of doing nothing and expecting everything.

      Nurturing is feminine, it is an active state, not receptive.

      There’s already been some good conversation about receptivity vs. responsiveness. I don’t think Gray means to say that women “do nothing.” They must actively create opportunities to invite a man in. They must welcome him and encourage his approach. Then when he takes action, they should reward it with responsiveness.

      Nurturing is feminine, and obviously crucial in a relationship, but it’s not quite what women should be going for in the initial stage before she knows him. In fact, I think women who presume too much in this regard are guilty of “overgiving” in a way that makes men pull away.

      Gray does not use the words dominant and submissive, but we can think of this as a mating dance where the male leads.

  • HanSolo

    Men are motivated and empowered when they feel needed.

    Most men do need to be needed–with some narcissists and similar excluded. I think that’s why a lot of young men are checking out. They didn’t feel welcomed or needed in the more girl-friendly school system growing up. They don’t feel needed by women (and in some ways they aren’t needed, or as much).

    Women may not need men as much financially anymore so women interested in having a good relationship should communicate they ways they do need and appreciate men in general and the specific man they are with or trying to be with.

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

      They didn’t feel welcomed or needed in the more girl-friendly school system growing up.

      This is a good point. When we teach males from birth that their exuberant physicality, for example, is bad and detrimental to the well-being of the group, we create a shame cycle that is bound to reveal itself in mating later on. How could it not?

  • JP

    @PVW:

    “Or the recent lawsuit I heard about regarding servicewomen wanting to go into combat. They want combat roles in order to rise through the ranks, etc.”

    As long as they are using a gun, they are evenly matched against the enemy.

    Unarmed…eh, not so evenly matched against the enemy.

  • Passer_By

    @jp
    “As long as they are using a gun, they are evenly matched against the enemy.”

    Even if not hand to hand, combat involves more than just shooting. For one thing, it involves carrying a lot of heavy shit through difficult terrain.

  • HanSolo

    Female expectations are a turnoff for men.

    I am a very giving person and love to do thoughtful and special things for a woman I love. I love her to be grateful and let me know how much she loves that I do those things for her, whether it’s a gift or great sex or holding her when she’s sad or just lifting a box.

    If she reinforces my giving with gratitude and some giving of her own then I will continue to give. She can even in a non-demanding way let me know something she would love for me to do for her within the context of me being free to do it or not and that she’ll love me anyway and I will likely do it.

    However, if all I am feeling is that she is demanding everything and never grateful for it because I’m just barely meeting or not even meeting her demands then I’ll withdraw, at first temporarily and eventually permanently if things don’t change. This is where nagging and entitled attitudes really turn me off and I believe a lot of other men.

    “I loved being with you in Tahiti. I’ll never forget it!” will motivate me to plan the next romantic trip much more than hearing, “We never go anywhere anymore. You’re so cheap!”

    Or, “It’s not where we go but being together” will make me more likely to want to go for the more expensive vacation, knowing that even if we did the cheaper one that that would be wonderful too.

  • HanSolo

    @Ashley

    In this environment of men being seen as potential rapists, creeps and stalkers, combined with nuclear rejections and having been rejected many times in the past, the woman showing more interest is important to put him at ease that she will not categorize him as that. So, good job in showing more interest than you thought might have been needed.

    Men do need to feel needed. I think that being needed emotionally and sexually can make up a huge part of the not being needed financially (as much) anymore.

  • HanSolo

    @Ashley

    Also, there’s a difference between you making enough of a move to give him the green light to pursue and you doing all the pursuing. I think giving him the green light and then letting him do a lot of the pursuing (though not necessarily all) can be good.

    How did things work with you after you made the initial efforts?

  • Tom.s

    “If a man does not have the opportunity to pull away, he never gets a chance to feel his strong desire to be close. If women insist on continuous intimacy then he will almost always be trying to escape and distance himself. He will never get a chance to feel his own passionate longing for love.”

    This sums up my last relationship. I tried telling this to her for over a year. She literally could not understand what I was talking about and always took it as a ‘step backward’.

    Well, I finally gave up after the nagging of continued intimacy took its toll on me. What a shame, she was almost perfect outside of this particular problem… :(

  • HanSolo

    @Tom.s

    You should have played her this song:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0McfH-hweQ

    :D

  • doomwolf

    @ Passer By

    “Even if not hand to hand, combat involves more than just shooting. For one thing, it involves carrying a lot of heavy shit through difficult terrain.”

    100% correct. I’m in the Canadian military, I’ve seen female infanteers in the reserves. With a couple of notable exceptions, they’re not as good as the guys-don’t have the same muscle mass, statistically speaking a higher percentage of them injure themselves. Also, having them around changes the group dynamics among the guys, especially if they sleep around. Given the macho (for lack of a better word) culture of the combat arms, this is a guaranteed way for everyone to lose respect for you. Whether or not that is “fair” is irrelevant, it’s what happens.

    Also, they aren’t treated equally – they have their own (substantially easier) PT test. I have to do a minimum of 19 pushups (which isn’t even that many), a woman my age doing the same job only has to do 9. Relative grip-strength scores are 75 and 50.

  • doomwolf

    @Passer By cont’d

    “But does that mean you are “threatened” by her? Or just making a rational assessment of the likelihood of a successful approach and subsequent relationship? I don’t the female obsession with characterizing men as “threatened”, as though the problem is some phobia or psychological inadequacy, when in reality that are just correctly diagnosing a situation (on a statistical basis).”

    It’s always been more of a feeling with me rather than something I went an analysed, but possibly/probably. I supposed “threatened” would be better meant as “do not forsee realistic chance of success”.

  • Mike M.

    @Ashley:

    There’s a difference between a woman actively pursuing a man, and tactfully inviting him to pursue her.

  • BroHamlet

    @Ashley

    Side thought: Are men actually threatened by women who are attractive, rich, powerful, and self sufficient because they feel they have nothing to offer (since you suggest that a man needs to feed needed).

    Personally, no. I have plenty to offer, even to a woman who makes more than me. I think a lot of people don’t consider that there are other sources of value, and many, many other things that make a person interesting. Anyone who thinks that money or credentials can be used as the sole classification of people has too much faith in the system and the pieces of paper it stamps to give people a place in it. I don’t make a habit of being threatened by any person, mostly for that reason. Wealth, power and social cache, etc. are defined by the prevailing society, but how much bearing should keeping up with the joneses have on your life and your aspirations? My answer: not too much, and you should probably think about where you stand on this and live your life accordingly.

    @doomwolf

    To your first thought, I would say yes, atleast as far as I am concerned.

    So, your only value is a paycheck? Come now. There are people who toil in obscurity doing humanitarian work in third world countries, and I would count those people MORE important to the world than a corporate lawyer busting their ass to make partner and the high six figure income it promises.

    I wonder if this is why so many men are trying to keep women at home and married with kids by 25. I wonder if this is simply what the backlash against feminism is all about.

    Who is trying to do this? The <1% of the total population of men that make up commenters on "manosphere" blogs? No disrespect, but this is such an overplayed and unfounded meme that it can't even be taken seriously anymore. Men (and women too) are actually less interested in marriage and kids these days until much later in life, and men don't want to keep women from doing anything. Many of us are too busy building our own futures to worry about a woman's. Feminism has run it's course, and largely isn't about equality, or even about the interests of the average woman anymore, and that much has been explored in depth on this blog if you read back in the archives.

  • http://7thseriesgongshow.blogspot.com Mr. Nervous Toes

    Ashley:

    Best way to encourage a man, hands-down: make eye contact, look away FIRST, then smile demurely. Super easy for the woman because you don’t have to smile and give eye contact simultaneously; gives the man confidence by putting him in the dominate frame. If you make a man break eye contact first, you fail.

    When women do this to me the first thing I do is look at their ring finger. Then I say hi if I like what I see.

  • Clarence

    BroHamlet:

    “Feminism has run its course…”

    Yeah, why don’t you tell our politicians that as the feminists are more plugged into the political process than ever, esp. when it comes to laws involving marriage/divorce and family formation. I see someone sticking their head into the sand and at the same time throwing a few million men and women whose lives or families or both have been ruined under the bus…

    As far as women pursuing men, I’m all for it. I think every woman should do an “active pursuit” at least once just to get a freaking idea of what it is like and I fully encourage the woman who like gentler or shyer (or awkward) men to at least try approaching those men, and by “approach” I don’t mean send a hairflip signal or something I mean actively chat up or even ask out.

    I will never shame a sexually aggressive woman, nor will I ever shame a woman for approaching me, and while I don’t mind other men’s preferences in pursuit/pursuing if I ever see some guy shaming a gal for an approach I’ll treat him just as I would a rude woman and show my disapproval in very vocal and cutting terms.

  • JP

    “As far as women pursuing men, I’m all for it. I think every woman should do an “active pursuit” at least once just to get a freaking idea of what it is like and I fully encourage the woman who like gentler or shyer (or awkward) men to at least try approaching those men, and by “approach” I don’t mean send a hairflip signal or something I mean actively chat up or even ask out.”

    I grew up thinking that this is how life worked.

    Meaning the woman pursuing you part of things.

    It never occurred to me that I should be going out of my way to meet women, so to speak.

    Number of times I asked out a woman with any chance that I would be recjected? Zero. Nada. Zilch. That’s right. Zero.

    How does this not happen to Cooper?

  • JP

    “Yeah, why don’t you tell our politicians that as the feminists are more plugged into the political process than ever, esp. when it comes to laws involving marriage/divorce and family formation. I see someone sticking their head into the sand and at the same time throwing a few million men and women whose lives or families or both have been ruined under the bus…”

    Hey, this is one of those comments that says “delete me”.

    I think I’m getting the hang of this comments section.

  • Clarence

    JP:
    I have no idea what you are babbling about.

    Who is Cooper?

  • Lokland

    @Clarence

    “Who is Cooper?”

    We all felt a distinct lack of figure-headed-ness.
    Susan is the creator of this fine blog but we all needed someone to worship.
    Susan subsequently created Cooper.

    Cooper now serves an all-purpose representative of HUS.

    However, you can’t look him in the eye or directly speak to him or you burst into flames.

    Susan said so.

  • Joe

    Girl, me too!

    Sassy & Ana, forget that nonsense. You two are in the middle of this discussion whether you know it or not! ;)

  • INTJ

    Are men actually threatened by women who are attractive, rich, powerful, and self sufficient because they feel they have nothing to offer (since you suggest that a man needs to feed needed).

    Only if she has the attitude that she doesn’t need a man. An attitude which such women usually do have.

  • INTJ

    On another note, I was curious about what Mr. Nervous Toes said about attractiveness on PoF and OKC. So I created a male and a female profile on OKC, and looked at the selection of matches. No comparison. The male profiles were way better, both in terms of photo attractiveness and profile content.

  • Sai

    …I didn’t realize men wanted/needed so badly to do things this way.
    I guess I need to be really grateful if somebody holds another door for me. (I do that for people too, though.)

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Hello Ashley,

    It is a nice to hear from a new person :)

    Successful women are not intimidating to me, personally. I am used to successful women. My mother is a high-ranking accountant at a Fortune 50 Company and my sister is a doctor. On the other hand, my father is a college dropout and my brother-in-law is a stay at home dad.

    I also am a child of the UMC, and am quite familiar with women who have a lot of successes. National champion debaters, etc…

    Your successes aren’t really that intimidating. If anything, on their own, they are a plus. I like successful women, as I would also like successful daughters.

    The intimidating part about women is quite different!

    -I could cry at my grandfather’s funeral, and get dumped for not being manly enough
    -I could commit myself fully to a woman, and she could drop me at a moment’s notice for the new hot model
    -I might try to be nice to my girlfriend, and then get dumped because it turns out I failed a shit test
    – I could try to be nice to a girl I am dating, but she stops because it is “too nice too soon.”
    -I could invest a lot into a girl, and delay sex, only to realize she’s been regularly banging dudes within hours of meeting them (very painful for a guy)

    And worst of all…

    I know this can happen, but it seems the culture I am living in is now designed in a way where women view me as the enemy. That my feelings don’t count for anything. That, even being nice, I am viewed as an oppressor, or creepy, or a potential rapist. That I am nothing more than a plaything or an emotional tampon. That I am disposable and girls do not really want to commit to me. That I could be openly mocked for even THINKING of getting with certain girls.

    For me, career success has absolutely nothing to do, at all, with my disdain for feminism or my former fear of women.

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

    Sassy & Ana, forget that nonsense. You two are in the middle of this discussion whether you know it or not

    Lo siento no hablo ingles ;)

  • Sassy6519

    @ Joe

    Sassy & Ana, forget that nonsense. You two are in the middle of this discussion whether you know it or not!

    *Throws twizzler at Joe’s head*

    Shhhhhhhhh! I can’t enjoy this thread with you distracting me. :P

  • Susan!

    Susan, I don’t get it. Why am I banned yet again? By the way you said you deleted the posts on the previous thread last night of me and Just1z having a pissing contest, but we didn’t, and you didn’t.

    You deleted my posts about precocious puberty in boys and its possible links to porn, which I was curious to get your opinion on . Then Just1z chimed in with his thoughts on the matter. There was no “pissing contest”.

    What gives Aunt Sue?

  • doomwolf

    @INTJ

    ‘Are men actually threatened by women who are attractive, rich, powerful, and self sufficient because they feel they have nothing to offer (since you suggest that a man needs to feed needed).’

    “Only if she has the attitude that she doesn’t need a man. An attitude which such women usually do have.”

    That’s what I was trying to convey earlier.

  • Joe

    [Ducks, affixes thumb firmly to nose and says...]
    PPPTHTHTHTHPPPPP!!!!!

    What? You think this thread isn’t about you two too???
    BTW, Thank you; I love twizzlers!

  • Susan!

    “Best way to encourage a man, hands-down: make eye contact, look away FIRST, then smile demurely. ”

    Doesn’t work on extremely shy or introverted guys. They might like it, sure. But they won’t approach, or very rarely so. We must approach them. Ashley knows what she’s talking about.

    I never bought into this pop culture conspiratorial “war of the sexes” meme. I’ve never felt myself separate from my husband or any of the men I dated and became close to. We were as one.

    All the other propaganda is meant to alienate men and women from one another.

  • Susan!

    Its similar propaganda to the bizarre American concept of new fathers being “jealous” of their brand new infant babies. Don’t wanna sound prejudice against my fellow citizens but I’ve honestly NEVER heard such nonsense being spread in any other country. Obviously there was a profit to be made somewhere out of couples believing that.

  • Susan!

    Mr. Nervous Toes, I left a comment a week or two ago aimed at you and your universalization of British Victorian values when it came to female sexuality and “hysteria”. In other words, that fraud was propagated by Victorian British “doctors” and and others trying to make money off of the demonization of masturbation and other forms of sexuality beyond repressed Victorian “missionary” position. Create the problem – provide the solution = profit for oppurtunistic scam artists.

    It was by no means universal.

    Many of the rest of the world had figured by puberty how to produce orgasm through masturbation WITHOUT having to pay some dude to use “appliances” on us.

    Really, its not rocket science. Trust me on that.

  • jlw

    “Most men do need to be needed–with some narcissists and similar excluded.”

    I struggle with this comment. Don’t most classic narcissists drink in being the needed and important guy?

  • HanSolo

    @jlw

    Yes, they need the adulation.

    I meant to say that most men need to be needed and will respond fairly positively when they are needed.

  • HanSolo

    The narcissists and manipulators and attention vampires will be the ones that take and take and don’t give anything or much in return to the giver. These are then the men that some women complain about in saying that you shouldn’t give to men.

    Related to this is women who give a lot to men who are out of their league and don’t get much in return and wonder why. The classic example of this is the woman who gives sex to the man who is 2+ points higher in value and “needs/wants” him for a relationship and doesn’t get it.

  • Susan!

    “Related to this is women who give a lot to men who are out of their league and don’t get much in return and wonder why. The classic example of this is the woman who gives sex to the man who is 2+ points higher in value and “needs/wants” him for a relationship and doesn’t get it.”

    I married and always dated at least 2 points higher in looks than myself and always got what I wanted from the relationships. No complaints really, except from, ironically, the guys who were only 1 point higher or my equals.

    Great looking guys often get a bad rap and I chalk that up to sheer jealousy. They are often the sweetest and kindest guys around.

  • JuTR

    Man’s role has traditionally been that of protector and provider, but today, you’d better find some way to provide utility in some other fashion, or you won’t fare well in today’s SMP.

    The government provides all the protection women need today. Men are dangerous, and government appointed authority figures are trustworthy, as all children are taught in school.

    Provisioning as an masculine asset is minimal in this society. We live in a land of plenty, where 80% of our folks in poverty sport air conditioning, and even the 20% without still have cellphones and TVs. Wealth transfers through government coffers ensure a minimal degree of stigma and a great degree of privacy.

    So yeah, with all these strong, independent women, some men will struggle to find some way to feel like they are adding value and will avoid relationships which will leave them feeling inadequate.

  • INTJ
  • Cooper

    “all but spelling it out for them.”
    *chuckles*

    @Ashley
    I definitely think you do the “approaching” and still allow a guy to pursue. A shy guy may require spelling it out for them…
    Like how Susan related it to a rubber band – girls can initiate the back and forth.

    @Lokland
    Drinking and blogging, this evening? (Wtf? Lmao)

  • HanSolo

    @INTJ Watching more Game of Thrones? I want the new season!

  • HanSolo

    @INTJ

    Good article about the pushover husbands thinking they’re pleasing their wives by doing that. My dad is definitely that way. I’m not sure what % of husbands are that way but there is a certain “wisdom” amongst many married guys that you have to just not argue too much and really pick your battles to keep harmony in the home. This phenomenon is real. I wonder how widespread it is amongst different SES and racial demographics. (And there are women who are in similar situations as well.)

    I don’t put up with nonsense from my mom and so she rarely tries it with me (and she is a good woman so not trying to rag on her). I just think she would be happier in the long run if my dad was a bit more assertive, though she’d argue and not like it in the short term, once she got used to that things would be better. Not sure how to get my dad to realize it since he’s so bought into his identity as the sacrificing pleaser. The plus side is he is a very kind, good guy.

  • Susan!

    Susan, I thought you’d be interested in this;

    http://postmasculine.com/does-promiscuity-ruin-you-as-a-potential-husband

    Read the comments. Athol Kay leaves a comment and the reaction of the other, young men reflects perfectly the difference between the younger (hotter, tighter), more liberal PUA mindset and the Manosphere’s often stuffy conservativism which borders on bitter revenge. Athol doesn’t strike me as bitter per se but Dalrock and the other conservative MRA guys certainly do.

    I’m socially and sexually conservative too (by choice, not by force, hence I’m not bitter), but I’d take a laid back, chilled out PUA over them any day. Of course they would cry, “see! even plain janes want ‘alpha assholes’ ” but those guys are neither alphas nor assholes.

    They are just young, happy liberals.

    And that right there is the huge gaping chasm between the PUAs and the angry MRA right wingers who want to control women and return to some fictional 1950s fantasy. Its also the reason why “game” will never work for the old MRAs. Game denotes play. Playfulness requires some level of joy.

    You don’t get a sense of joy out of the MRAs. None whatsoever. And that lack of a genuine love of life is a major lady boner killer.

  • Society’s Disposable Son

    Simply put this is why most of us menz are frustrated with teh wimminz. This one made me think about my past relationships and puts things into perspective. The whole needing to feel needed is big for me when it comes to dating.

    I know people have been championing online dating but I’ve had pretty fail results but wanted to toss Susan an idea. Make a fake male profile and just browse and read women’s profiles. I see a few decent ones but you might be surprised how many profiles pretty much as state “I don’t need a man for anything” (then why are you on a goddamn dating site!?) to having bullet point lists of requirements to bother sending them a message, It really ties in the whole needing to needed sentiment and giving up trying fulfill endless demands and outrageous expectations. If nothing else it’ll be a good way to help any HUS girls stand out big online….

    That Good Man Project article….My family life is a good example of this… My mom (bless her heart) wanted the stereotypical white picket fence American family. My dad was never a pushover but she was always telling him how selfish he was no matter how out of his way he went for her. To make her dream scenario fall further from her grasp, she gave birth to a introvert who nearly failed high school and decided not to bother with college. Things were not very smooth in my MS-HS years. Lots of family shouting matches and my mom harping on us because we never met her demands. She more or less forced church activities and volunteering on me and my dad, which was a big source of familial discourse. She always used to try and shame my dad by frantically exclaiming “what will people think!?” if he tried to ditch out on church to go fishing.

    It wasn’t until I turned 25 and moved back home after my failed LTR that she told for the first time she was proud of me. To put it in to context though, most of her friends children that did decent in school later became drug addicts and alcoholics. So I guess that put things into perspective for her… that college isn’t everything in the world.

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

      @Society’s Disposable Son

      I see a few decent ones but you might be surprised how many profiles pretty much as state “I don’t need a man for anything” (then why are you on a goddamn dating site!?) to having bullet point lists of requirements to bother sending them a message, It really ties in the whole needing to needed sentiment and giving up trying fulfill endless demands and outrageous expectations. If nothing else it’ll be a good way to help any HUS girls stand out big online….

      I hear you, and those women should get exactly what they deserve – guys as selfish and unempathic as they are. However, incentives drive behavior and those women are being rewarded for profiles like that!

      Check out this story, it’s hilarious:

      OK CUPID: AN EXPLORATION INTO JUST HOW LOW SOME GUYS WILL GO

  • Just1Z

    @Plain Jane

    Susan, I don’t get it. Why am I banned yet again? By the way you said you deleted the posts on the previous thread last night of me and Just1z having a pissing contest, but we didn’t, and you didn’t.

    You deleted my posts about precocious puberty in boys and its possible links to porn, which I was curious to get your opinion on . Then Just1z chimed in with his thoughts on the matter. There was no “pissing contest”.

    What gives Aunt Sue?

    You may not believe this PJ, but I agree with you!

    We had some cordial (bit rocky at the start, but we put that aside) conversation.

    The youtube links I put up were initially unrelated to our conversation, they were just fun.

    I think that Susan saw our names in a sequence of comments and for some reason (can’t imagine what reason *blatant smirk* okay maybe I can think of a couple) assumed we were at it again.

    we were playing quite nicely – oh the injustice!

    (maybe Susan just went into shock over that? :) )

  • Just1Z

    @Sai
    “I guess I need to be really grateful if somebody holds another door for me.”

    nah.

    1) look like you won’t rip the head off of any man doing something simply polite for you – i.e. not like a feminist. so, a slight smile?
    2) really grateful is overegging the pudding. a nod and small smile? say hello?

    hope things are going well, take care

  • Just1Z

    @PJ
    “Really, its not rocket science. Trust me on that.”
    lmao

    I think that the circumcision thing on boys (MGM) is an American sourced anti-masturbation thing, don’t have that anywhere else to the same degree. Kellogg was a proponent wasn’t he? he had plenty of wacky ideas.

    see the movie ‘the road to Wellville’, it’s pretty funny at times
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0111001/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
    “A madcap portrayal of William Lightbody’s stay at the health farm run by cereal king Dr. John Harvey Kellogg. William’s wife, Eleanor, has persuaded him to go to Kellogg to have his system cleaned of impurities. Kellogg is very unconventional, and almost barbaric in his treatments.”

    William Lightbody: Oh, no, no, I can’t eat fifteen gallons of yoghurt.
    Dr. John Harvey Kellogg: Oh, it’s not going in that end, Mr. Lightbody.

    Endymion Hart-Jones: The enemas take some getting used to, but, in time, you’ll learn to look forward to them like an old friend with a cold nose.

    Interviewer: Sir, how often should one evacuate one’s bowels?
    Dr. John Harvey Kellogg: One should never, ever, interrupt one’s desire to defecate. I have inquired at the Bronx and London Zoos as to the daily bowel evacuations of primates. It is not once, twice, or three times, sir, but four. At the end of an average day, their cages are filled with a veritable mountain of natural health.
    Interviewer: And, sex?
    Dr. John Harvey Kellogg: Sex is the sewer drain of a healthy body, sir! Any use of the sexual act other than procreation is a waste of vital energy! Wasted seeds are wasted lives!
    Interviewer: Uh, eating meat?
    Dr. John Harvey Kellogg: “He that killeth the ox is as if he slew a man.” Each juicy morsel of meat is alive, and swarming with the same filth as found in the carcass of a dead rat. Meat eaters, sir, are drowning in a tide of gore. What is a sausage? A sausage is an indigestible balloon of decayed beef, riddled with tuberculosis. Eat and die! For I have seen many a repentant meat glutton his body full of uric acid and remorse, his soul adrift on the raft in the ocean of poisonous slime, sloshin’ against the walls of the body’s kitchen.
    Interviewer: Smoking?
    Dr. John Harvey Kellogg: The liver is the only thing standing between the smoker and death! Also certain other things have to be avoided… like, uh, feather beds, and romantic novels… and the, uh, touching of one’s organs. Masturbation is the silent killer of the night! The vilest sin of self-pollution! It is the sin of Onan!

    Virginia Cranehill: The fresh air, the exercise, and the pleasure of a leather saddle between one’s thighs.
    Eleanor Lightbody: Why, Virginia, what do you mean?
    Virginia Cranehill: Bicycle smile, I believe they call it.

  • Just1Z

    Men need:
    ■trust
    ■acceptance
    ■appreciation
    ■admiration
    ■approval
    ■encouragement

    GirlWritesWhat has (another) cool video / transcript here
    http://owningyourshit.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/transcript-of-men-not-marrying-how-deep.html

    it’s generally a cool video (as per usual) but part of it addresses how men need to feel they are seen in society (or relationships) i.e. relevant to the post

    And one thing the apexuals at the top, like Bill Bennett and Obama, feminists like Kaye Hymowitz and Katie Roiphe, and traditionalists like Suzanne Venker, will never realize is that using shame to try to coerce men to do what is expected of them isn’t going to work this time, because while it’s possible to shame a man into giving his life for his country if there’s a promise of respect in it, it’s impossible to shame someone into working his ass off and risking his future just for the joy of looking in the mirror and seeing Homer Simpson or Ray Barone looking back at him.

    When the cost of society’s approval is the self-respect you derive from a positive identity, it ceases to be worth it to a lot of men.

    it’s the same thing within a marriage. if you treat your hubbie as not-yet-adult who needs to be managed as a child…well, he’ll either fold (blue pill) or walk away (red pill). Portrayal of men in the media is poisonous in most sitcoms etc.

    Clearly if you are looking for a relationship, you need to bear in mind what signals you send him regarding his worth. I can see that PLI reflects reality somewhat in starting out or STR but it’s not a great way to get to an LTR – why would he commit to someone who shows / feigns indifference?

  • Just1Z

    @Han
    “Not sure how to get my dad to realize it since he’s so bought into his identity as the sacrificing pleaser. The plus side is he is a very kind, good guy.”

    Athol Kaye (married man sex life) has written books, how about a secret early xmas present for Dad? (if it’s secret he can choose to ignore it with no harm done). Maybe Dad can take a MAP (Male Action Plan) out for a spin, see what happens?
    http://www.amazon.com/The-Married-Life-Primer-2011/dp/1460981731

  • Damien Vulaume

    “When men feel good about themselves, they are most motivated to please a woman.
    The more a man’s life is in order, the more he hungers for a woman to share it with.”

    Of course. I’m surprised this should even need to be explained at all.

    “A man automatically alternates between needing intimacy and autonomy.”

    Yes. Gold observation. This I find to be at the core of misunderstanding in younger couples. Some girls tend to be “attention seekers”, and view those moments of male autonomy as a decreasing sign of interest for them.

    “But: Too much intimacy, too quickly, can cause women to become needy and men to pull away.
    When women “overgive” it compromises their position, and it prevents the excitement of anticipation and romance from building.”

    That’s what many young girls should keep in mind when they step into the mating dance hall. And I haven’t met many men who, deep inside, keep the same level of respect for women they’ve slept with too early on or too easily with.
    On the other hand, that doesn’t make a promiscuous girl necessarily an easy lay or
    or “slutty” female. I wish some guys could understand that.

    #24 “Lokland: I do disagree on receptiveness.
    Being only receptive is the equivalent of doing nothing and expecting everything.
    Nurturing is feminine, it is an active state, not receptive.
    A balance of the two is better.”

    That’s exactly what went through my mind when I read the post. Passive receptiveness is pretty much just that, nothing. Female nurturing is best when actively given in a balanced way. No overbearing nannies, please, but a minimum of active nurturing.

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

      @Damien

      “A man automatically alternates between needing intimacy and autonomy.”

      Yes. Gold observation. This I find to be at the core of misunderstanding in younger couples. Some girls tend to be “attention seekers”, and view those moments of male autonomy as a decreasing sign of interest for them.

      The biggest challenge for women is knowing when to go silent. In this era of social media, constant texting, etc. it’s become much harder. When I was young if a guy didn’t call you, he didn’t call. We rarely got closure, and short of confronting him directly at a social event, we were forced to go about our daily lives. If he came back into your life at some future point, well then you’d have some control over your response.

      Today women usually make the mistake of reaching out when they shouldn’t. That is why there are phone apps that allow you to block all outgoing communication to a specific number while you’re still sober, preventing the always inadvisable drunk dialing fiasco.

      Silence not only gives the guy an opportunity to reflect and miss you if he’s ever going to, it is also dignified. I know I lose respect for people who act foolish or set themselves up for humiliation. As Gray says, self-assurance, including self-respect, is a key part of femininity. That means no chasing guys, ever.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Actually, the exact quote is: ” 2. Receptivity: The ability to receive what is given and not resent getting less; ability to benefit or find good in every situation.”
    Now I realize that’s this is not related to “nurturing”.
    In fact, “the ability to receive what is given and not resent getting less.”
    is one of the more “generous” side of women that men often tread upon or take for granted.
    If this can be considered as something more, in terms of generosity, then i’d say that women are often capable of something more in relationships. If a woman truly loves you, she will fight to her last breath with utmost courage, for you. A woman who behaves in a cruel bitchy way with a man is ALWAYS simply because she has no respect for him. She should move on to somebody else instead of toying with her pray. An overdominating man shouting down his wife or, the other way around, complaining about her bitchy behaviour should move on as well. But I’m opening doors already open here, don’t I?

  • INTJ

    @ doomwolf

    I have to do a minimum of 19 pushups (which isn’t even that many), a woman my age doing the same job only has to do 9.

    Dude that is freaking pathetic. But then again most women can’t even do a pull-up…

  • INTJ

    @ Ana

    Lo siento no hablo ingles ;)

    Google Translate. ;)

  • Richard Aubrey

    Ref women and combat:
    Let’s presume that, for this op, everybody is supposed to ruck up with two-thirds of body-weight. Figure that a man’s personal gear; weapon, armor, water, commo gear, etc is 40 lbs, and a woman’s is 35 lbs, smaller people getting smaller armor.
    A woman weighs, say, 130, a man 180. The man has eighty pounds of carrying capacity left over, a woman has about fifty. That remaining carrying capacity is expendables, mostly ammunition of various kinds.
    So for every woman we substitute for a man, we lose at least thirty pounds of ammo. And that presumes she can keep up with the guys in the first place.
    And if we don’t gender-norm physical requirements, we’ll break, orthopedically speaking, probably six women trying to get one to qualify. But we will gender-norm requirements to satisfy tne feminists. Hell, any additional casualties can be blamed on the generals. So it’s all good.

  • INTJ

    @ HanSolo

    Watching more Game of Thrones? I want the new season!

    I’ll get started on the second season now that my bandwidth has reset. I finished the first season day before yesterday. :)

    Some thoughts: That healer woman sure tricked the Khalisee. Sweet revenge. :) Now I really hope Arya can avenge the butcher’s boy, Lord Stark, and everyone else by killing that prince. And rescue her stupid sister while she’s at it. The scene where Catelyn brokered a marriage alliance between the Stark kids and the Frey kids was hilarious. Poor Arya. I hope her future husband is a beta pedestalizer who will let her do what she wants. Also, now that it looks like Tyrion is going to be going steady with Shay, I hope she actually likes him and they can be a couple.

    So, most attractive women in Game of Thrones season 1:
    1) Shay
    2) Catelyn
    3) The Khalisee’s Darthrakee handmaiden

  • INTJ

    @ Richard Aubrey

    A woman weighs, say, 130, a man 180.

    Unless he’s Asian. :P

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

    “Receptiveness” seems closely related to “responsiveness,” as the latter term is sometimes used in sales training classes. The responsive person is attuned to the emotions of others, and prefers conversations which have emotional content to a “just-the-fact-ma’am” approach.

    In addition to the “receptiveness” dimension, there is the “assertiveness” dimension…these are separate dimensions, not opposites; a person can be both highly assertive and highly responsive (such people are often quite charismatic)…or both low assertiveness and low responsiveness.

    Don’t know if anyone has formally studied this model from a gender communications and mate-selection standpoint, but it may have potential.

    One source on the model is here:

    http://changingminds.org/explanations/preferences/social_styles.htm

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Nine pushups?

    You have to be fucking kidding me. Who would put national security in the hands of people who can barely do 9 pushups? It’s mind boggling-ly stupid.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    The problem is that for people who are not looking for casual, the traditional model of male pursuit is far more effective. Many times a guy does appreciate being singled out for special treatment, and he may happily go along for the ride, but he is likely to invest less because he didn’t have to work for it.

    Oh come on. There’s a difference between dragging a guy into a bedroom and giving him your phone number. The former is not effective for people who are not looking for casual. The latter is. It’s as simple as that.

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

      There’s a difference between dragging a guy into a bedroom and giving him your phone number. The former is not effective for people who are not looking for casual. The latter is.

      I don’t know. I mean that literally – I really do not know. I’m going on what Gray says. Also, a blog I like a lot for women is Rules Revisited (which I link to in this post). Two great posts that are relevant here:

      How to Make Yourself More Approachable

      Bottom line:

      If you get disheartened because men are not approaching you, or if you have an initial interaction with a guy you like and then he leaves or doesn’t take your number – tough luck. This is part of female game, just like approaching, being rejected and humiliated is part of a man’s. When a guy gets rejected, he doesn’t blame the girl; he blames himself. When I get turned down, I know that if I had been more confident or smarter, or otherwise a man of higher value, she would have been attracted to me. I make it my goal to always improve, so that next time I will walk away with her number. The same should go for you: when a guy walks away without your contact information, suck it up, figure out other ways to make yourself more attractive or personable (the other posts in this blog should help), then get back out there.

      Also:

      Don’t Initiate Contact

      A man might make eye contact with you from across the bar, but unless he overcomes his fear or leaves his buddies in order to approach you, he isn’t into you enough. Don’t approach him. A man might say he wants to see you, but unless he calls to set up a date, he doesn’t care enough. Don’t call or text him. A man might tell you to come and visit him, but if he cares enough, he will come to you if you suggest it.

      I could give all kinds of examples, but you get the point. By making it easy for a man, you risk wasting your time and energy on someone who is only interested in having sex with you, or maybe worse, someone who will actually agree to a relationship or even marriage, only to change his mind months or years later when he realizes he wants someone he considers better. Taking the initiative is not a right that men have over women; it is (or should be) a hurdle that women place in front of men to make them prove their interest.

      …Later in a relationship a girl can start to initiate, but this should wait until she has a good gauge of his interest and commitment to her.

      Shy men are like women that don’t dress well or take care of themselves physically: they need to change. Confidence is the most important male attribute for attracting women. The situation you described will hopefully be a learning experience for the guy who had a crush on you. And while it is somewhat regrettable that the relationship never happened, think about how much better of a man he will be once he learns from his mistake. If you’d initiated, he wouldn’t have learned and you’d be stuck dating a guy with no balls.

      That sounds a bit harsh, I know, but if he’s right, then the woman initiating with a number close just isn’t going to work.

  • GudEnuf

    ” It’s very clear here at HUS that men and women communicate very differently. ”

    British and Australians communicate differently, but that doesn’t mean there’s a biological explanation.

    If anything, the past two decades have shown that women are *not* aliens. Iran and Sweden have shown that women can do STEM as well as men. The sex positive movement has shown that women can enjoy sex as long as they are in a safe environment. More and more women are dating men who make less money, so the “hypergamy” theory hold less water every day. I know we’ve had this conversation a million times but men and women have far more common than the manosphere presumes.

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

      @Gud Enuf

      If anything, the past two decades have shown that women are *not* aliens.

      The point of the title is not that women are aliens, it is that men and women do not speak the same language. Perhaps the best book on the differences in communication styles outside of mating is You Just Don’t Understand by Deborah Tannen. It was a NYXs bestseller for a full four years because it made so much sense and helped so many couples to improve their communication.

      that doesn’t mean there’s a biological explanation.

      Men’s and women’s brains do indeed look quite different – certain sections are larger in one sex or the other. However, you are correct that culture can play a large role. Is the typical nursery school scene of girls playing house and boys playing Ninja Turtles entirely cultural? No, I don’t think so. My son was eagerly pointing at fire trucks before he turned one, and my daughter was pretending to feed her stuffed animals before her first birthday.

      ran and Sweden have shown that women can do STEM as well as men.

      I’m not familiar with this – can you explain a bit more?

      The sex positive movement has shown that women can enjoy sex as long as they are in a safe environment

      It has proven that is true for 12% of women, max. And FTR, sex pozzies are not so concerned about safety. Recall Jaclyn Friedman’s trolling for partners on Craigslist and Tracy Clark-Flory’s taking a stranger (and porn star!) home to her apartment for sex.

      More and more women are dating men who make less money, so the “hypergamy” theory hold less water every day.

      Do you have some data to back up this claim? It wouldn’t surprise me if it were true, because more men are making less money. However, we don’t have a good sense of the quality of those relationships do we? It’s well understood that hypergamy declines when there is a shortage of men. That reflects an adjustment to market conditions, doesn’t it?

  • http://x OffTheCuff

    INT: “But then again most women can’t even do a pull-up…”

    I’d bet most adult men can’t either, unless they specifically train to do it. It took me a solid two months of daily effort to get that first one. Most guys I see are far too fat, or very obviously untrained.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Lol the thumb wrestling guy realized she was a troll and counter-trolled her.

    His thumb-wrestling comment was so obnoxious that I had to bail. He even grossed out a fake girl. Wow, good job.

  • Richard Aubrey

    INTJ
    True, about Asian men. However, a small man can be cut for not making requirements. A woman, not. It would be disparate impact, see.
    Anyway, a man is generally stronger or can condition to a stronger state than a woman of the same height and weight.
    There. I said it.
    But figure swapping a squad of ten men for ten women. Lose three hundred pounds of killing stuff. Only the feminists would think this is a good idea.

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

      But figure swapping a squad of ten men for ten women. Lose three hundred pounds of killing stuff. Only the feminists would think this is a good idea.

      Agreed. What I can’t figure out is why women would be so eager to step up to a more dangerous job. I don’t see the incentive for that increased risk.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    That link about OkCupid………..smh.

    There is a reason that I deleted my OkCupid account, and that article has reminded me why.

  • doomwolf

    @Richard Aubrey

    Exactly.

    Thought to be perfectly honest there aren’t *that* many women who volunteer for the combat arms compared to, say, RMS Clerk (http://www.forces.ca/en/job/resourcemanagementsupportclerk-78#video-0) which is what I am. I presume most women don’t jump at the chance to do a physically hard, dangerous job that involves carrying heavy loads, handling weapons, being bored a lot, in a culture that would resemble your high school boys’ locker room.

  • INTJ

    @ OTC

    I’d bet most adult men can’t either, unless they specifically train to do it. It took me a solid two months of daily effort to get that first one. Most guys I see are far too fat, or very obviously untrained.

    Yeah for some stupid reason I used to be insecure about being able to do *only* about 10 pull-ups in a row. Then I tried Googling to find out how many the average guy can do, and found people estimating that the vast majority of adult men can’t do pull-ups. :D

    I still need to learn to do a muscle-up though. I can do one-handed push-ups, and I can do a single handstand push-up, but not yet any muscle-ups.

  • GudEnuf

    “The biggest challenge for women is knowing when to go silent.”

    Au contraire, it’s the men who need to learn to shut and let women speak! Men are more likely to speak in a mixed group and when a woman does speak up, men are more likely to interrupt. It is dangerous to tell women that to be MORE quiet, especially in a relationship. If men can’t handle an articulate women, they’re just going to have to change.

    (And yes, I am aware of this comment’s irony.)

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

      @Gud Enuf

      It is dangerous to tell women that to be MORE quiet, especially in a relationship. If men can’t handle an articulate women, they’re just going to have to change.

      I’m not sure if you misunderstood my comment or this was deliberate. I was referring to silence as a strategy when two people are apart, not group conversational dynamics. When a woman is not hearing from a man, the smartest thing she can do is wait it out. Chasing him is no bueno.

      As for boys interrupting girls, we had that experiment in the schools, and we succeeded in shaming boys into silence in math class. See lopsided college ratio for real-life long-term effect.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Let me try to critique his post:

    A man might make eye contact with you from across the bar, but unless he overcomes his fear or leaves his buddies in order to approach you, he isn’t into you enough. Don’t approach him.

    Bullshit. Restricted guys are less likely to approach you than unrestricted guys. That doesn’t mean they aren’t into you enough.

    A man might say he wants to see you, but unless he calls to set up a date, he doesn’t care enough. Don’t call or text him. A man might tell you to come and visit him, but if he cares enough, he will come to you if you suggest it.

    This is definitely true. Once the approach has been made and he is no longer held back by shyness, he should be willing to actively put in effort. Otherwise he’s a cad.

    I could give all kinds of examples, but you get the point. By making it easy for a man, you risk wasting your time and energy on someone who is only interested in having sex with you, or maybe worse, someone who will actually agree to a relationship or even marriage, only to change his mind months or years later when he realizes he wants someone he considers better. Taking the initiative is not a right that men have over women; it is (or should be) a hurdle that women place in front of men to make them prove their interest.

    By creating the hurdle of requiring a man to take the initiative, you’re filtering for cads. Unless cads are your thing, that’s not a very good strategy.

    …Later in a relationship a girl can start to initiate, but this should wait until she has a good gauge of his interest and commitment to her.

    Yes, but he won’t get a chance to demonstrate his interest and commitment if they don’t approach each other.

    Shy men are like women that don’t dress well or take care of themselves physically: they need to change. Confidence is the most important male attribute for attracting women. The situation you described will hopefully be a learning experience for the guy who had a crush on you. And while it is somewhat regrettable that the relationship never happened, think about how much better of a man he will be once he learns from his mistake. If you’d initiated, he wouldn’t have learned and you’d be stuck dating a guy with no balls.

    This is good advice, but it should be conditional. If you’re attracted to confidence, you won’t be attracted to guys you have to approach. And it’s true that perhaps the majority of women are attracted to confidence. But there are people like Ashley who don’t require that confidence. For them, approaching men is a sound strategy.

    By giving a guy your phone number, you’re giving him a clear signal that you’re interested in him. However, you’re also putting the ball in his court, thus forcing him to take initiative and demonstrate that he is truly interested in you.

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

      @INTJ

      By giving a guy your phone number, you’re giving him a clear signal that you’re interested in him. However, you’re also putting the ball in his court, thus forcing him to take initiative and demonstrate that he is truly interested in you.

      OK, let me play devil’s advocate here. (FTR, for years I have been advising women to give out their phone number when they like a guy.)

      If you give a guy your phone number, he has not risked anything at all. He calls it knowing that he will not be rejected. For that reason, he will not attach as much value to it as a “win.” If he would not have pursued you on his own, but is amenable to having the date anyway, already the woman is starting out with a risk of “He’s just not that into you.”

      This is a costly strategy because a woman can spend months or even years with a guy who ultimately confesses he never totally fell for her. By ignoring the role of men “displaying” and women “selecting” you have set up a situation where male investment does not develop to the same degree.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Agreed. What I can’t figure out is why women would be so eager to step up to a more dangerous job. I don’t see the incentive for that increased risk.

    They don’t. They don’t want to step up to jobs in the hard sciences either. Instead, they all go into liberal arts fields like women’s studies and then complain about the gender gap in the hard sciences.

  • http://x OffTheCuff

    I haven’t looked at the data, INTJ. At my best, I could only manage a few sets of six in a row, so ten sounds exceptionally good. Heck, at my huge gym, there are tons of men in great shape, but there are only a tiny handful of ones that actually do them. I’ve seen zero, my friend who is there 2 hours a day has seen a total of one. (I actually am too bashful to work out there, I just take the kids to the pool. Prefer to use my own stuff at home.)

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    How does this post square with “men escalate physically, women escalate emotionally?” I have done mostly “pursuit” in terms of initiating increasingly more personal and emotional questions and conversations, which have worked to draw in men who are on the same wavelength. But according to this post, that is a no-no.

    I was the one who asked for my husband’s email and private im information first, because he was going to just leave it as is and not actively pursue me. Incidentally every one of his ex’s had also pursued him. Lots of good guys don’t approach strangers and are not very forward. Taking initiative emotionally seems to yield better outcomes than merely being receptive.

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

      @Hope

      How does this post square with “men escalate physically, women escalate emotionally?” I have done mostly “pursuit” in terms of initiating increasingly more personal and emotional questions and conversations, which have worked to draw in men who are on the same wavelength. But according to this post, that is a no-no.

      That is an awesome question, I had to give it some thought. From my post on emotional escalation:

      “The problem with this sense of entitlement is that it creates total passivity on the girl’s part. You don’t have very good control of your dating life if you are always waiting for a call or hoping the perfect guy is going to see you from across the room and say to his buddy, “See that girl in the red dress? I’m going to marry her.”

      Usually this dilemma is addressed by encouraging women to make the first move or ask a guy out. In other words, we encourage the female to usurp the male role in hopes of nudging the process along. It seems only fair in the post-feminism era. This can certainly work, and in surveys a large majority of guys say they would love to be asked out by a woman. On the other hand, there are limitations to this approach, which runs counter to the natural order of things.

      A much better approach is for the woman to do her job, which is to escalate emotionally. Women want emotional intimacy during sex, but they have sex before creating a foundation of emotional connection. Doing that work is your job, not his. If you hope for commitment, it makes no sense to leave it to chance, dreaming that a guy will fall for you based on your looks alone, or because you’re good in bed. A man will offer commitment when he is sufficiently emotionally invested to make the tradeoff to forfeit sexual variety. Women are the ones who have the power to create that investment.”

      So the question is how do women create that investment? Here are the steps I recommended in that post:

      1. Focus 100% of your sexual attraction on him to avoid making him jealous.
      2. Be consistently curious and interested to learn more about him.
      3. Ask for his advice, support or help.
      4. Be generous and appreciative.
      5. Share a lust for life.
      6. Let him know how much you like him, and how sexually attracted you are to him.

      “Each sex has a job to do in finding the balance between sex and commitment. Embrace your role and your responsibility from the start. Nurture the emotional connection from the moment you meet someone. ”

      I think this list is compatible with Gray’s recommendations. All 6 of them are more receptive or responsive than dominant or leading, IMO.

      What do you think?

  • Richard Aubrey

    Agreed. What I can’t figure out is why women would be so eager to step up to a more dangerous job. I don’t see the incentive for that increased risk.

    Susan. For the most part, it’s civilian feminists who want other women to do it. If there is an incentive, it’s for promotion. Combat arms service, and combat action, are considered good things to have, if you’re on the outside.
    But officers and senior noncoms are promoted within their branch. Infantry guys are promoted, or not, as against other Infantry guys. The Adjutant General branch (Star, star upon my shield. Keep me from the battlefield) for example promotes or not within AG. You’re not competing with combat arms guys until, maybe, general.

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

      @Richard Aubrey

      For the most part, it’s civilian feminists who want other women to do it.

      Why don’t the women serving stand up and say no way? Surely they know better than anyone that they can’t carry the same weight in adverse conditions? I would also think that to the extent the army can target anyone specific, they’ll go after females first.

      Is there no one who will stand up to this PC nonsense?

  • http://x OffTheCuff

    INTJ: “By creating the hurdle of requiring a man to take the initiative, you’re filtering for cads. Unless cads are your thing, that’s not a very good strategy.”

    I disagree. Non-cads can approach and take initiative just fine. It may increase the likelihood of cads, but it greatly decreases the likelihood of wimps – and women greatly prefer the former to the latter. Hope’s strategy is great for women, and it worked for her because she filtered like crazy and did it in a safe way (you can break any rule you want if you thoroughly understand why the rule exists) — but as a man you can’t wait around hoping for a Hope.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    As for the risk of “he’s just not that into you,” this is where the girl should assess how receptive he is to emotional probing. If a guy doesn’t care to reveal to you his innermost feelings and thoughts, then he’s not interested. That is how I filtered and sussed out the guys whose hearts were just not warmed up by me.

    I think emotional escalation is key. It doesn’t matter if she gives out her contact info and made it “easy” to communicate. It does matter whether or not he will communicate with her on an emotional level. Most guys are of course reluctant to “give it up” so to speak, protective of their inner feelings, similar to how most girls are (or should be) protective of their bodies.

    About “overgiving” — I think it really applies to the physical stuff. The guy should be pursuing increasing physical giving from the girl, while the girl “holds back” some to entice and reward him for giving up emotions to her. The girl has to assure him that she won’t hurt him emotionally (orbiting, LJBFing), while the guy has to assure her that he won’t hurt her physically (pump and dump, FWBing).

    In the end the “dance” is a mutual back-and-forth, not simply girl sitting back and choosing from male displays.

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

      In the end the “dance” is a mutual back-and-forth, not simply girl sitting back and choosing from male displays.

      I agree, and the woman who puts in the effort and signals both interest and loyalty is way ahead of the game. I don’t think that’s what Gray means be overgiving. I can think of one example of overgiving off the top of my head.

      A young woman and guy got involved very suddenly and things escalated fast. It was the falling off a cliff kind of infatuation, and it was mutual. However, they hadn’t known one another long at all – there was no real foundation of intimacy as knowledge of the other person. Within a week or so she was essentially living at his place, shopping for groceries, making him fabulous meals, etc. She was a self-appointed helpmeet and sexual bombshell. He enjoyed all of this immensely for a time, naturally. He was crazy about her. After a couple of months, though, she began to grate on his nerves. He couldn’t grab a beer with his friends without her fussing – she wanted to come too. She was always around. She didn’t make many demands, but she wanted to be a part of his life every waking moment, and when he pulled away for some autonomy, she followed close behind to reestablish intimacy as fast as possible. No one but she was surprised when he ended things soon after.

  • Richard Aubrey

    IIRC, from 1970, in Jump School, the minimum requirement was six dead-hang pullups, palms forward. Tough.
    Tougher was the Airborne situp. Knees up, feet flat, nobody holding your feet down. Twenty-two of those.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Airborne situps are less difficult for me since I’m small. I do those all the time, could do 30 or so before I got pregnant. Pull-ups are also easier when you weigh less than 115lbs and have enough arm strength.

    But I would never want to do active duty combat. Robert Heinlein had some great thoughts on this subject:

    “Whenever women have insisted on absolute equality with men, they have invariably wound up with the dirty end of the stick.”

  • Richard Aubrey

    Hope. We also had to do eighty squats, butt to boot, in two minutes. I think that’s out now, considering knee damage. Not sure.
    There’s a five-minute vid on youtube about how slick it is to go Airborne. Kind of overdone, but you get a look at the various exercises.
    The Airborne situp flustrated a lot of guys who were otherwise in good shape. I liked them so much I did sets of seventy or so for eight or ten years after I got out. Tried to stay in shape because I figured Brezhnev was going west at any time and somebody might call and ask if I still could hold a map right side up.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I can only do 3 pull-ups, and I feel pretty goddam pathetic.

    I’ve finally gotten back into actually doing some cardio almost everyday. Need to get back into weights. I hate gyms, so I have a home weight set and just do P90X.

    So sue me, I like pre-crafted exercise routines. At least I’m doing something ;)

    @ Susan, re: How Low Men Will Go
    Young men have extremely powerful sex drives and will do a lot to satiate them in any way they can.

    That being said.

    Holy shit, those guys are creeps. But I gotta respect the guy who was negotiating for the deluxe package!

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    1-507th Parachute Infantry Regiment

    “In order to enter the course, the prospective student MUST score a MINIMUM of 60% on the lowest age group scale. This equates to 42 push-ups, 53 sit-ups, and a 15:54 or faster on the 2-mile run for males and 19 push-ups, 53 sit-ups, and an 18:54 or faster on the 2-mile run for females.”

  • mr. wavevector

    Susan,

    I think this post is both valuable and misleading. Valuable because it contains real truths. Misleading because of what it omits.

    The valuable truth is this:

    The way a woman makes him feel good, (and more interested) is by creating opportunities for him to succeed in truly fulfilling her needs. Without her to please, he is a man out of work. He needs a job, needs the opportunity to succeed in a relationship with a woman. This is an enormous boost to his fulfillment in life.

    Men (at least those with strong pair bonding instincts, not the cads) do indeed want to be needed by a woman. They want to be able to do useful things like protect and provide. They want to take care of a woman. They get pleasure from making her happy.

    But this alone is inadequate to understand the motivation of these men. In fact, it is dangerously misleading. It looks like men just want to be the cheerful servants of women, to be subservient to them – that all men want is to please, get a pat on the head and a “good boy”. As such, this post runs the danger of incurring the wrath of the manosphere in the same way Susan Venker has for her “War on Men” and subsequent capitulation to pressure from feminists.

    The essential point that is missing is that men want something in return for all this that they give, and that thing is authority. They want a woman who will voluntarily grant him some authority over her in the relationship and accept him as her leader.

    I know you know this, Susan, as your comment #84 and many other comments and posts make clear. But someone reading this post in isolation might get the opinion that all men desire is to serve women from a subordinate position.

    The truth is just as women want a man they can look up to, men want a woman who looks up to him. This is hinted at by the 4th bullet point for what men need: admiration.

    Why do men have this need for authority, leadership, or to be looked up to and admired? Because of hypergamy!

    We know that many women want to “marry up” – to mate with a man of higher social status or prestige. Because men know this instinctively, they looks for signs that show that a woman considers them “up”: things like deference, accepting his authority, choosing him to be the leader.

    Male leadership is the correlate of female hypergamy.

    A woman who voluntarily chooses her man to lead her is signaling that she is attracted to him as a suitable mate – that her hypergamous desire is satisfied so she will be true to him. That is why men want to be “1 up” in the relationship. That is why so many women who are in love with a man will happily place him in the “1 up” position too. It is her sign of being invested in the relationship.

    As I said, a woman who accepts her man as the leader is doing so voluntarily and out of attraction to him. It isn’t forced on her. She can rescind his “1 up” status if she chooses. But to do so is to communicate that she is no longer attracted to him. Like denying sex, repealing the status she bestows on her man is a sign that she is leaving the relationship.

    Yes, I know, not all relationships are like that! I understand that the concept of 50-50 egalitarian relationship is the held up as the social ideal today. Certainly there are many couples who can make this work to varying degrees. I wish them all success.

    But I agree with Susan that respecting sex differences will yield the greatest benefit for most couples. And when it comes to men, we should remember the importance not only of their desire to serve and please women, but to be admired by and lead them too.

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

      @mr. wavevector

      The essential point that is missing is that men want something in return for all this that they give, and that thing is authority. They want a woman who will voluntarily grant him some authority over her in the relationship and accept him as her leader.

      I know you know this, Susan, as your comment #84 and many other comments and posts make clear. But someone reading this post in isolation might get the opinion that all men desire is to serve women from a subordinate position.

      Hmmm, we may be about to get into a bit of an argument, partly semantic, but not entirely. Obviously, to the extent that you have an argument it is with John Gray rather than myself. Let me start by clarifying my position on male leadership.

      1. I reject any notion that my husband has God-given or other formal authority over me, or that I am required to accept him as my leader. I view my marriage as egalitarian, but counter to the claims of Dalrockolytes, who claim that women always dominate in egalitarian marriages, the edge goes to my husband in ours.

      2. I have described that I believe this is a natural outgrowth of our relationship and choices over the years, including his being the sole breadwinner. If I earned half the household income, I imagine that I would not just sit back and let him rule, even about financial decisions.

      3. I do not believe that our dynamic is the only one that happy couples have, or that he is entitled to make decisions without my input or agreement. I have also said that there are some areas where Mr. HUS defers to me – most notably in the area of parenting.

      4. I consider myself a strong and independent person, and therefore that is reflected in my marriage as well. These qualities are ones that my husband appreciates, and they do not mean that I am entitled or difficult to live with.

      If I led you to imagine that I was a female of the Mrs. Dalrock variety, I am eager to disabuse you of that notion immediately. I do not accept that a woman should “know her place.”

      Re John Gray’s analysis of the differences between the sexes, I don’t think he is saying that men live to serve women or be subordinate to them in any way. I think he is saying that relating to women is essential to man’s nature – indeed his reason for existing (and the same can be said of women – we exist to reproduce).

      Gray says that men need:

      trust
      acceptance
      appreciation
      admiration
      approval
      encouragement

      – and that women are in a position to amply provide these to the men they love. He does not say that men need to control women or even to lead them.

      We know that many women want to “marry up” – to mate with a man of higher social status or prestige. Because men know this instinctively, they looks for signs that show that a woman considers them “up”: things like deference, accepting his authority, choosing him to be the leader.

      I think you overreach here. The way a man knows that a woman considers him “up” is that she is receptive to his interest and potential commitment. The components of social status are dominance and prestige, and women value the latter more than the former. A man with prestige is well aware of his MV, and presumably uses it to attract a woman of even higher SMV than he could get without it.

      Of course, the female desire for male dominance is very real, though on a spectrum. I would venture to say that among happily married couples, the percentage of women who are deferential and submissive is quite low. Again, I would not describe myself as such, nor would Mr. HUS, nor would he wish me to be.

      Like I said, perhaps this is a matter of semantics, or perhaps it’s about the relative weight of power within relationships. I think that most successful relationships today are in the 40-60 egalitarian range. Obviously, relationships in the long tails – abusive wives on one end and abusive husbands on the other, produce very dysfunctional ways of relating.

  • Damien Vulaume

    “About “overgiving” — I think it really applies to the physical stuff. The guy should be pursuing increasing physical giving from the girl, while the girl “holds back” some to entice and reward him for giving up emotions to her. The girl has to assure him that she won’t hurt him emotionally (orbiting, LJBFing), while the guy has to assure her that he won’t hurt her physically (pump and dump, FWBing).
    In the end the “dance” is a mutual back-and-forth, not simply girl sitting back and choosing from male displays.”

    Thank you for those wise words. It is all here.
    I can’t understand the confusion I read in some comments here, from both genders.

  • INTJ

    @ Richard Aubrey

    IIRC, from 1970, in Jump School, the minimum requirement was six dead-hang pullups, palms forward. Tough.
    Tougher was the Airborne situp. Knees up, feet flat, nobody holding your feet down. Twenty-two of those.

    Piece of cake for ectomorphs. :P

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    If you give a guy your phone number, he has not risked anything at all. He calls it knowing that he will not be rejected. For that reason, he will not attach as much value to it as a “win.” If he would not have pursued you on his own, but is amenable to having the date anyway, already the woman is starting out with a risk of “He’s just not that into you.”

    Take this idea to the logical extreme and women should be nuclearly rejecting every guy and making him stalk and chase her to make sure he’s into her. I.e. the Rules. Obviously, that doesn’t work out so well, which is why we need to find a balance somewhere. And in many cases the girl giving out her phone number is part of that balance.

    This is a costly strategy because a woman can spend months or even years with a guy who ultimately confesses he never totally fell for her. By ignoring the role of men “displaying” and women “selecting” you have set up a situation where male investment does not develop to the same degree.

    Let me make an analogy. As a student, I sometimes get contacted by employers or universities for job or grad school opportunities. But they still expect me to take the initiative, apply for the job or grad school, and sell myself to them. Thus, the men are still “displaying”, and the women still “selecting”, but the women are first communicating that they want to be “displayed” to.

    In addition, consider the equivalent risk to the guy. By expecting the guy to do the “displaying” and the woman to do the “selecting” without any initiative on the woman’s part, you’re creating a serious risk that the guy will be strung along by a woman who never fell for him. And the guys who’re averse to being strung along are the dads, not the cads. Which might help explain why guys are so reluctant to do the approaching.

  • JP

    @OTC:

    “I’d bet most adult men can’t either, unless they specifically train to do it. It took me a solid two months of daily effort to get that first one. Most guys I see are far too fat, or very obviously untrained.”

    I can’t do a pull up and I generally don’t have a significant amount of strength at all.

    The difference is that I have a significant endurance benefit, such that I’m a natural distance runner.

  • Escoffier

    Yeah, hmmmm, I can do eight pull ups and sit-ups, I have no idea what my limit is, but 22 is no sweat, 4x that at least … and I can assure you I ain’t qualified for the 82nd Airborne …

  • INTJ

    @ OTC

    I disagree. Non-cads can approach and take initiative just fine. It may increase the likelihood of cads, but it greatly decreases the likelihood of wimps – and women greatly prefer the former to the latter. Hope’s strategy is great for women, and it worked for her because she filtered like crazy and did it in a safe way (you can break any rule you want if you thoroughly understand why the rule exists) — but as a man you can’t wait around hoping for a Hope.

    What exactly do you disagree with?

  • JP

    “We live in a land of plenty, where 80% of our folks in poverty sport air conditioning, and even the 20% without still have cellphones and TVs. Wealth transfers through government coffers ensure a minimal degree of stigma and a great degree of privacy.”

    We live in an empire where there is significant risk that the wealth pumps will be turned off in the near future.

  • Susan!

    Just1z,
    “I think that the circumcision thing on boys (MGM) is an American sourced anti-masturbation thing, don’t have that anywhere else to the same degree. Kellogg was a proponent wasn’t he? he had plenty of wacky ideas.”

    Yes I mentioned that too a few weeks ago in my response to Mr. Nervous Toes comment on the matter of “hysteria”.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Mr wv: “A woman who voluntarily chooses her man to lead her is signaling that she is attracted to him as a suitable mate – that her hypergamous desire is satisfied so she will be true to him.”
    Or, in other words, that she’s truly in love with him.
    I think all this misleading gender equality talk is also too often equated to Mutual respect, which is a different thing (and of course step Number 1 in a relationship).

  • Just1Z

    @Susan!
    keep your head down!
    best of luck, I’m off out for the night

  • Susan!

    Just want to point out the chasm between the two mindsets;

    Athol Kay: Married Man Sex Life says:
    “You’re also assuming that a woman of high quality is going to want to marry someone with a huge notch count. Most marriageble women are going to be repulsed by it.”

    Mark says:
    ” Disagree strongly. You’re making a lot of unproven assumptions in those statements.”

    Jon says:
    “It also depends on your definition of “high quality” and the fact that you can use such a term as though it applies to all men equally tells me a lot about where your issues are.”

    António says:
    ” Exactly. In my book, a judgemental woman is not quite “high quality”.

    Zen says:
    “Wait, back up. What do you mean “high quality” or “marriageble”?
    Those are for each man to decide for himself. There is no class of women who are “better” than others, there is simply the question of what kind of girl do YOU want to marry? What makes YOU happy?”

    _____

    Game simply does not mix with an older, conservative, right wing mindset. Not saying Athol is right wing, but he is conservative, sheltered and a bit naive and his previous religious conditioning still influences him, he’s admitted as much. Add that to his participation on MRA blogs where the default setting is bitter, angry 50+ year old right wing conservative borderline WN (or sometimes blatantly so), and its obvious that MRAs have tried to hi-jack “game” for their own purposes which are incompatible with a young, free, liberal and happy go lucky crowd.

  • Society’s Disposable Son

    @ Susan 86

    That doesn’t really shock me… Some guys will always low ball…. and other guys… well when if you were starving you might end up begging for table scraps eventually….

  • Cooper

    “I can only do 3 pull-ups, and I feel pretty goddam pathetic.

    I’ve finally gotten back into actually doing some cardio almost everyday. Need to get back into weights. I hate gyms, so I have a home weight set and just do P90X.”

    Yeah, I don’t like gyms. It’s something about paying a membership fee, for something I should be able to do myself. I know girl who pay for “bootcamps” and I tease them on how it’s compensating for their lack of motivation. Cause you shouldn’t have to enroll yourself into something you say your striving for – IDK. It’s certainly not the actually monetary value, cause I’ve spent probably x5 a gym membership on in-home equipment.
    I have a tremendously small apt, but I can set up a benchpress.

    The best pieces of equipment: a (mounted! Not removable!) pull-up bar ($80), and a Body Fat % scale (which water % too – $60)

    Since injuring my right-index in August I haven’t been able to exercise nearly as effectively. Gripping with my right is still at 50%. (And my second surgery is schedule to be the new year – my tendon is stuck down, so I necessitate a Tenolysis.).
    Two months ago, I’d easily do 20+ pull-ups while talking. :) (sorry to brag)
    I’m probably not small fraction of that now, since I haven’t been doing much lately.

  • HanSolo

    @Just1Z

    Thanks for the book suggestion.

    On another subject, US birth rates have hit their lowest level since reliable records started in 1920:

    The overall birthrate decreased by 8 percent between 2007 and 2010, with a much bigger drop of 14 percent among foreign-born women. The overall birthrate is at its lowest since 1920, the earliest year with reliable records. The 2011 figures don’t have breakdowns for immigrants yet, but the preliminary findings indicate that they will follow the same trend.

    The decline could have far-reaching implications for U.S. economic and social policy. A continuing decrease could challenge long-held assumptions that births to immigrants will help maintain the U.S. population and create the taxpaying workforce needed to support the aging baby-boom generation.

    The U.S. birthrate — 63.2 births per 1,000 women of childbearing age — has fallen to a little more than half of its peak, which was in 1957. The rate among foreign-born women, who have tended to have bigger families, has also been declining in recent decades, although more slowly, according to the report.

  • HanSolo
  • Cooper

    @Hope 104, 107
    +1

    @INTJ 116
    Well said.

    @Susan
    I still think it is possible for a girl to give her number, or approach, without denying the male his pursuit. An approach simply gets the ball rolling, it doesn’t have to remove the entire possibility of rejection for the guy.

    Excellent post, btw!!

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

      I still think it is possible for a girl to give her number, or approach, without denying the male his pursuit. An approach simply gets the ball rolling, it doesn’t have to remove the entire possibility of rejection for the guy.

      Well, I know some happy couples that started out this way. One woman I know who just got engaged basically stared at her husband in a bar for 10 minutes without blinking until he came over. He may have approached, but she was reeling him in.

      The way it can work really well is if the guy is super attracted but intimidated. Then he’ll be overjoyed to get the number and they’re off to a great start. I think that women will have to judge this based on individual circumstances, and look for signs in the relationship that he is quite invested. In this SMP, I do think that more female initiative is a good thing.

  • JP

    @Han Solo:

    “On another subject, US birth rates have hit their lowest level since reliable records started in 1920:”

    That’s because of the severe recession/economic strain since 2008.

    It’s not that much of a surprise.

    Demographics is another one of my hobbies.

    This is pretty much a non-story at this point.

  • JP

    @Cooper:

    “Since injuring my right-index in August I haven’t been able to exercise nearly as effectively. Gripping with my right is still at 50%. (And my second surgery is schedule to be the new year – my tendon is stuck down, so I necessitate a Tenolysis.).”

    Sorry to hear that.

    Hand injuries like that are a real pain to deal with because they just get so annoying.

  • Richard Aubrey

    IMO, you can start a relationship by meeting somebody in a joint activity such as a club, service project, etc. No young guy is a hundred percent at talking to the eyes.
    Just a matter of taking one’s time and getting to know one another without pressure.
    But it’s unlikely the woman in question doesn’t know what’s going on. A negative response is likely a matter of not wanting a relationship with the guy in question and pretending it was an underhanded tactic just adds some vinegar

  • HanSolo

    @JP

    Disagree. It is a big story. And it’s unlikely going back up.

  • HanSolo

    Here’s a longer article on demographics and how the singles demographic is growing a lot and how the hispanic birthrate is dropping a lot faster than had been thought and Mexican illegal immigration is at a net zero right now so there will likely be less of the new-immigrant and higher-birthrates-of-immigrants effects to keep America at the replacement level of fertility.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/nation-singles_664275.html?page=3

    Related to men being needed, it mentions how w/o marriage men are less likely to work.

    Fagan and Potrykus were able to identify a clear statistical effect of marriage on men’s labor participation. What they found is that without the responsibility of families to provide for, unmarried American males have historically tended to drop out of the labor force, exacerbating recessionary tendencies in the economy.

  • HanSolo

    And from that weekly standard article some trends in the developed world and that it is thought that it will happen in the US too:

    In Europe, Asia, and most advanced countries, people are running away from marriage, children, and family life at an amazing rate. To pick just a smattering of data points from the highlight reel: Thirty percent of German women today say that they do not intend to have children. In Japan in 1960, 20 percent of women between 25 and 29 had never married. Today the number is more than 60 percent. Gavin Jones of the National University of Singapore estimates that “up to a quarter of all East Asian women will remain single by age 50, and up to a third will remain childless.”

    The question, then, is whether America will continue following its glidepath to the destination the rest of the First World is already nearing. Most experts believe that it will. As the Austrian demographer Wolfgang Lutz puts it, once a society begins veering away from marriage and childbearing, it becomes a “self-reinforcing mechanism” in which the cult of the individual holds greater and greater allure.

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

      As the Austrian demographer Wolfgang Lutz puts it, once a society begins veering away from marriage and childbearing, it becomes a “self-reinforcing mechanism” in which the cult of the individual holds greater and greater allure.

      This has to be the most individualistic time in history – does any other time come close?

  • Damien Vulaume

    @hs: “Once a society begins veering away from marriage and childbearing, it becomes a “self-reinforcing mechanism” in which the cult of the individual holds greater and greater allure.”

    Yes, more than hardcore feminism, the cult of the individual is the primary problem. Given the orientation taken by our neoliberal based societies (western) and its pop culture that invariably hammers the same message, I don’t see a reversal on the trend in the near future.

  • Susan!

    Damien Vulaume December 1, 2012 at 3:29 pm

    @hs: “Once a society begins veering away from marriage and childbearing, it becomes a “self-reinforcing mechanism” in which the cult of the individual holds greater and greater allure.”

    Yes, more than hardcore feminism, the cult of the individual is the primary problem. Given the orientation taken by our neoliberal based societies (western) and its pop culture that invariably hammers the same message, I don’t see a reversal on the trend in the near future.
    ___

    The Manosphere lays the blame for everything solely on Feminism. Ironically enough “rugged individualism” and “capitalism” are sacred cows to them.

  • Susan!

    Hansolo,
    Did you see Erika’s latest reply to you? Did you know she is “timeless”?

  • Susan!

    “Usually this dilemma is addressed by encouraging women to make the first move or ask a guy out. In other words, we encourage the female to usurp the male role in hopes of nudging the process along. It seems only fair in the post-feminism era. This can certainly work, and in surveys a large majority of guys say they would love to be asked out by a woman. On the other hand, there are limitations to this approach, which runs counter to the natural order of things.”

    * I don’t think it runs counter to the natural order of things at all. In the animal kingdom males display and females choose.

    “A much better approach is for the woman to do her job, which is to escalate emotionally. ”

    * There is no question of escalating emotionally unless someone initiates the first conversation and gets the ball rolling with the first date. First things first.

    “Women are the ones who have the power to create that investment.

    So the question is how do women create that investment? Here are the steps I recommended in that post:

    1. Focus 100% of your sexual attraction on him to avoid making him jealous.
    2. Be consistently curious and interested to learn more about him.
    3. Ask for his advice, support or help.
    4. Be generous and appreciative.
    5. Share a lust for life.
    6. Let him know how much you like him, and how sexually attracted you are to him.”

    These are things that people do AFTER a good while of dating or some sort of “understanding” has been reached, a type of commitment or exclusivity.

    100% of nothing, and certainly not sexual attraction, should be focused on someone you are just getting to know.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    “Why don’t the women serving stand up and say no way? Surely they know better than anyone that they can’t carry the same weight in adverse conditions? I would also think that to the extent the army can target anyone specific, they’ll go after females first.

    Is there no one who will stand up to this PC nonsense?”

    Not anyone who has the power to change anything.

    It funny in a “people are really stupid” sort of way.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “She was always around. She didn’t make many demands, but she wanted to be a part of his life every waking moment, and when he pulled away for some autonomy, she followed close behind to reestablish intimacy as fast as possible. No one but she was surprised when he ended things soon after.”

    OMFG this drives me crazy.
    When we were in an LDR we tried to talk every morning and night (thank you 14 hour time difference). Most of the time that was good, after 6 months of it though I needed time off.
    At first she didn’t get it but like FUCK I don’t want to see you all the damn time. Solution, don’t talk for two or three days (one time a week).
    Miss her again and come back, much better.

    @GudNuf, Susan

    On woman in science.

    I don’t think theres any partial barrier to women entering science.
    Much like theres no barriers for straight guys entering fashion.

    Purely on an interest level your going to have more men in STEM, analytical/methodical step by step analysis is a guy thing.

    I don’t particularly care who has the good idea, the state of their genitals is irrelevant.

    However its more likely to be a man, not so much because woman can’t have a great scientific idea but because they simply wouldn’t even think about it. (Much like I wouldn’t think to much about matching a purse and shoes. Or what the best pleats are on a dress.)

    The only way for 50-50 split in science is if we force women who don’t want to be scientists to become scientists. That ought to end well.

    Part of why feminism/manosphere are nuts. They work of the assumption that an even number of people want the same things.
    A better system would be to allow people to pursue what they want (including hypergamy) but NOT having everyone else be responsible for the bad outcomes.

  • SayWhaat

    The male intimacy cycle is like a rubber band. It involves getting close, pulling away, and then getting close again.

    I’d heard of this before, but didn’t really understand it until recently. When Hurricane Sandy hit, I took shelter with my boyfriend for about a week while the power was out at my place. Being cooped up for days during a storm made him a bit irritable, and my being underfoot seemed to make him more cranky. I got out and went back home as soon as I could!

    He seemed to spring back almost immediately. Spent every day with me before he had to leave for a 2-week long gig. When I visited him for a weekend, he was very happy to see me. I was just a bit flummoxed by the turnaround, lol. I think it’s important for girls to recognize when a guy is pulling away, and then take advantage of that to take time off *for themselves*. That way they both can realize a little more autonomy over themselves, and she can bask in his affection when he springs back. :)

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

      @SayWhaat

      I think it’s important for girls to recognize when a guy is pulling away, and then take advantage of that to take time off *for themselves*. That way they both can realize a little more autonomy over themselves, and she can bask in his affection when he springs back.

      That’s a great suggestion. Women need to be able to enjoy that time off too – or they’re going to be unhappy every time a guy does it. My husband doesn’t do a lot of traveling, but when he does he’s usually gone for 4 nights or so. I hate the thought of that, but then I line up things that are harder to do when he’s home. I have my focus groups over, go out to dinner with friends, have girl time with my daughter, etc. It makes the time go much faster. I also stay up a lot later and let the dog sleep in the bed, my favorite.

  • Lokland

    @Coops

    Lol, it seemed funny last night.
    I think ‘The’ Cooper would have been an improvement.
    Damn the lack of an edit function!!!!

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

      Damn the lack of an edit function!!!!

      I sympathize, but no one has cracked the code on this for WordPress! Blogs on Blogger offer a preview function, but every plugin I’ve tried to use slows down the site noticeably. To be fair, the comment load here is heavy, and that’s a factor.

  • HanSolo

    @Damien

    In some ways it was very much a masculine urge to achieve independence from nature (to the extent of inventing technology to dominate the earth by growing crops, domesticating animals, and build tools and machines), to extricate humanity from the womb of mother nature. Richard Tarnas expresses this idea in his book Passion of the Western Mind, though I’m sure many others have too. This is seen especially in the mindset of modernism of thinking that the subjects, people, as objective observers can coldly analyze and manipulate the disanimated object, earth and nature, for their benefit.

    The interesting thing is that in striving for equality, feminists wanted to be equal in masculine ways probably much more than they wanted to turn men into feminine women. So more of a shift in women to be masculine with a lesser shift in men to be feminine. A striving for greater independence from nature, especially from their reproductive “shackles” via birth control and abortion, and independence from men via technology that allowed them to contribute economically without needing physical strength.

    In the current age, we realize that there are environmental repurcussions to our dominating the earth and we need to move back to being in sustainable harmony with the earth while maintaining our more advanced technological advantages. Also, the idea of man as completely rational subject, completely separated from inanimate nature, has been weakened as people realized you can never fully extricate the observer from the observed, and humanity from nature.

    Where we head from here is the interesting question.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Susan:
    “1. Focus 100% of your sexual attraction on him to avoid making him jealous.
    2. Be consistently curious and interested to learn more about him.
    3. Ask for his advice, support or help.
    4. Be generous and appreciative.
    5. Share a lust for life.
    6. Let him know how much you like him, and how sexually attracted you are to him.

    Those look like excellent steps from my point of view. :-) . But the reality is less rational than those proposed premises.
    #1 comes naturally to a woman only if she’s truly emotionally involved.
    #2- Or his fields of interests and his take on it.
    #4-Yes, and it works both ways.
    5- Oh yes, both ways. But this happens when love kicks in for both.
    6- Well, that obviously comes spontaneously, or not. If it doesn’t….Au revoir.

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

      @Damien

      It’s true, those steps really apply when a woman wants to make a man “hers.” If she does, she needs to let him know. That feels very risky for women, because if the guy doesn’t feel the same way, they get the rejection. My argument has been that it’s only fair, since men must escalate sexually and also risk rejection. And of course, most of the time, men must risk rejection to even approach a woman.

      I have advised women that if they find a guy attractive and want him to approach, the go-to move is a minimum of 3 seconds of eye contact with a smile. Look away, then repeat. If he doesn’t approach after two-four cycles of this, he is not attracted (or available).

  • JP

    “Here’s a longer article on demographics and how the singles demographic is growing a lot and how the hispanic birthrate is dropping a lot faster than had been thought and Mexican illegal immigration is at a net zero right now so there will likely be less of the new-immigrant and higher-birthrates-of-immigrants effects to keep America at the replacement level of fertility.”

    You do realize that there are a lot of legal immigrants every year, right?

    Also, France seems to be doing just fine.

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

    The countries that aren’t doing fine demographically are Italy, Germany, and Japan, to name three big ones.

  • Susan!

    “Much like I wouldn’t think to much about matching a purse and shoes.”

    How about matching a tie and shoes?

    ;)

    SayWhaat December 1, 2012 at 4:09 pm

    The male intimacy cycle is like a rubber band. It involves getting close, pulling away, and then getting close again.

    I’d heard of this before, but didn’t really understand it until recently. When Hurricane Sandy hit, I took shelter with my boyfriend for about a week while the power was out at my place. Being cooped up for days during a storm made him a bit irritable, and my being underfoot seemed to make him more cranky. I got out and went back home as soon as I could!

    He seemed to spring back almost immediately. Spent every day with me before he had to leave for a 2-week long gig. When I visited him for a weekend, he was very happy to see me. I was just a bit flummoxed by the turnaround, lol. I think it’s important for girls to recognize when a guy is pulling away, and then take advantage of that to take time off *for themselves*. That way they both can realize a little more autonomy over themselves, and she can bask in his affection when he springs back.

    —–

    The only problem with this, and its a big one, is that one partner molds her availability and emotional needs around the other partner’s, exclusively on his terms.

  • HanSolo

    @SusanPJ

    Yes, I did see that. Her soul may be timeless but her body isn’t. But I wished her the best of luck.

  • Susan!

    “Here’s a longer article on demographics and how the singles demographic is growing a lot and how the hispanic birthrate is dropping a lot faster than had been thought and Mexican illegal immigration is at a net zero right now so there will likely be less of the new-immigrant and higher-birthrates-of-immigrants effects to keep America at the replacement level of fertility.”

    And this is a bad thing……………. how?

    Why would anyone be worried about low birth rates? The planets got too many people now as it is.

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

      Plain Jane, stop using my name, it’s confusing me in the replies.

  • JP

    “In the current age, we realize that there are environmental repurcussions to our dominating the earth and we need to move back to being in sustainable harmony with the earth while maintaining our more advanced technological advantages.”

    We aren’t going to maintain our more advanced technological advantages because they are dependent on certain conditions, one of which is really cheap, concentrated energy.

    Are we going to get all our power from nuclear reactors safely? Can that even be done?

    The U.S. doesn’t even seem to be able to sustain its infrastructure at the moment.

  • Damien Vulaume

    #137 “Susan!”
    “Ironically enough “rugged individualism” and “capitalism” are sacred cows to them.”

    I don’t know anything about the manosphere but can only guess based on some of the comments here. You are absolutely right.

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    The countries that aren’t doing fine demographically are Italy, Germany, and Japan, to name three big ones.

    Gee, wonder what they have in common. ;) Perhaps it’s karma that’s causing the low birth rates.

  • Susan!

    Susan: 1. Focus 100% of your sexual attraction on him to avoid making him jealous.

    Damien: #1 comes naturally to a woman only if she’s truly emotionally involved.

    >>>
    Yes, I addressed that in my comment # 142. Its not wise to invest 100% focus on someone who is not 100% focused on you simultaneously.

    Also wrt asking for his advice, support or help. There are many men who would not want to give any of that to a woman unless they are already at the exclusive relationship level. They feel burdened and bothered by it.

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Are we going to get all our power from nuclear reactors safely? Can that even be done?

    Now it’s mine turn to say: France is doing just fine.

  • Susan!

    Hans,
    “This is seen especially in the mindset of modernism of thinking that the subjects, people, as objective observers can coldly analyze and manipulate the disanimated object, earth and nature, for their benefit.”

    Nature is not disanimate.

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    Are we going to get all our power from nuclear reactors safely? Can that even be done?

    No we aren’t and yes it can.

  • http://x OffTheCuff

    Esc, I can do 22 situps without a problem, but can’t do a single one as RA described without my feet anchored… I just roll back. Likewise, I can do a bunch of pull ups, but only a few with proper form (full extension, dead hang, palms forward, wide-grip).

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

      Esc, I can do 22 situps without a problem, but can’t do a single one as RA described without my feet anchored… I just roll back.

      One word: Pilates.

  • Lokland

    @Olive

    “Now it’s mine turn to say: France is doing just fine.”

    +1

    @JP

    “The U.S. doesn’t even seem to be able to sustain its infrastructure at the moment.”

    After the fall of the US (and Western civilization), I know its hard to comprehend but the rest of the world will shoulder on.

    Loss of Western civ. will not send our species back to the dark ages. Even here it’ll just be shitty living.

  • Iggles

    Re: OKCupid article

    Holy heck! I feel like I lost several brain cells reading that fake profile and the ensuing pathetic responses…

    Reading that makes me question having any faith in humanity!

  • Feelist

    I tend to agree with the topic. There is one girl I am particularly attracted to because she’s from an under-developed Euro Country. When I first saw her I didn’t pay much attention to her. She’s cute and all, but my college has far moe attractive women. But she asked me a question, wasn’t familiar with English, and we had to speak in German(she’s not German).

    For the next two weeks to come she relied on me to get her school situation worked out. And when I see her she brightens up and lets me open the door for her etc. Yeah, it makes me feel good about myself and I do see her as more attractive than what she really is.

    My socio-economical power is higher than hers. That oddly makes me feel more masculine. Can’t really feel the same about the other girls. They’re from European and Asian Powerhouses. She’s going to return home for Christmas holidays. I think I’m gonna miss her more than I’ll miss the 10 perfect German girl I’ve been spending a lot of time with lately.

  • Susan!

    “Loss of Western civ. will not send our species back to the dark ages. Even here it’ll just be shitty living.”

    Doomsday.

    The future will be better. We’ll be physically and mentally healthier.

  • doomwolf

    @Lokland
    “Part of why feminism/manosphere are nuts. They work of the assumption that an even number of people want the same things.
    A better system would be to allow people to pursue what they want (including hypergamy) but NOT having everyone else be responsible for the bad outcomes.”

    +1

  • Lokland

    @PJ

    I don’t think its gonna be some kinda catastrophic fall, just the loss of economic superiority resulting in relatively poor living conditions and life quality (which in comparison to cave men, will still be golden).

  • Susan!

    Iggles,
    “Holy heck! I feel like I lost several brain cells reading that fake profile and the ensuing pathetic responses…”

    Link? I’m feeling particularly masochistic today.

    “Reading that makes me question having any faith in humanity!”

    I’ve been nurturing suicidal ideation ever since I saw this video;

    http://jezebel.com/5964440/what-do-you-do-when-a-childs-flirting-goes-from-cute-to-full+on-sexual-harassment?post=54731503

    ^^^One of the many reasons I’m totally ok with humans not replacing their populations over the next several decades.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Jp.
    Yes, from a demographic point of view, France is doing better than some other western European cultures or Japan (which doesn’t face the same level of immigration from other continents). That in turn however creates many other head scratching social problems. See the worrying level of the Ultra-right in the voting polls.
    @Olive: France is a bit like a drug addict with the way it relies on its nuclear energy. Three mile island and Tchernobyl (and now Fukushima) were big enough eye openers for the population, who regularly protests against “more of the all nuclear” but apparently not for some of our leaders (Sarkozy was the latest best well known example ).

  • Lokland

    @Damien

    “France is a bit like a drug addict with the way it relies on its nuclear energy. Three mile island and Tchernobyl (and now Fukushima)”

    Three incidents over a span of 70ish (not sure on the exact history) is hardly cause for concern.

    Assuming we can just make sure that the tech. is not used by idiots and isn’t built in dangerous places theres no real need for concern.
    Three mile and Fuk. were scary but so is Paranormal Activity. Maybe a tad more expensive.

    Beyond that, Fuk. has spurred on new guidelines for reactors which are actually safer than the previous versions. (Which were already pretty damn safe.)

  • Iggles

    @ SayWhaat:

    He seemed to spring back almost immediately. Spent every day with me before he had to leave for a 2-week long gig. When I visited him for a weekend, he was very happy to see me. I was just a bit flummoxed by the turnaround, lol. I think it’s important for girls to recognize when a guy is pulling away, and then take advantage of that to take time off *for themselves*. That way they both can realize a little more autonomy over themselves, and she can bask in his affection when he springs back. 

    +1

    I’ve noticed this dynamic with my boyfriend as well. When we spend *too* many days together (say a week or week and a half) continuously it throws us off.

    This article shed some light on this and helped me not to take him need time apart personally:

    http://www.thefemininewoman.com/2011/10/why-men-pull-away-and-how-to-deal-with-it/

  • HanSolo

    @JP

    Yes, I realize that there are legal immigrants, so you could try to have more young people immigrate legally. But these people are not going to have as high of fertility as previous immigrants did.

    That is interesting that France has a slight uptick in fertility rates, starting in the mid 90’s, likely due to higher-fertility-rate immigrants. The US also had an uptick in the mid 80s that lasted until the great Recession, partly helped by the influx of higher-fertilility-rate immigrants. http://www.prb.org/images12/us-fertility-figure1.gif

    It will be interesting to see if birth rates continue to fall in Asia and Africa as is expected. Already it has fallen to 2.27 in Latin America as of this article a year ago.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/fertility-rates-plunging-across-latin-america/2011/12/29/gIQAmRWQPP_graphic.html

  • HanSolo

    @JP

    We aren’t going to maintain our more advanced technological advantages because they are dependent on certain conditions, one of which is really cheap, concentrated energy.

    Are we going to get all our power from nuclear reactors safely? Can that even be done?

    I agree that cheap energy is required for modernity (and the economic equality for women that depends on machines/technology to remove the physical strength divide).

    I am optimistic that we will continue to have relatively cheap energy. The shale oil and gas revolution have and will provide enough fuel until we can invent cheaper solar and storage and also build much more nuclear.

    Thorium reactors are being slowly developed. There is 3x as much thorium as uranium and it doesn’t make much waste, is not really weaponizable, and is not subject too meltdowns:

    http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/12/ff_new_nukes/all/

    Overseas, the nuclear power establishment is getting the message. In France, which already generates more than 75 percent of its electricity from nuclear power, the Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie has been building models of variations of Weinberg’s design for molten salt reactors to see if they can be made to work efficiently. The real action, though, is in India and China, both of which need to satisfy an immense and growing demand for electricity. The world’s largest source of thorium, India, doesn’t have any commercial thorium reactors yet. But it has announced plans to increase its nuclear power capacity: Nuclear energy now accounts for 9 percent of India’s total energy; the government expects that by 2050 it will be 25 percent, with thorium generating a large part of that. China plans to build dozens of nuclear reactors in the coming decade, and it hosted a major thorium conference last October. The People’s Republic recently ordered mineral refiners to reserve the thorium they produce so it can be used to generate nuclear power.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Susan, I was thinking of your post on emotional escalation and how it somewhat contradicts this post, at least on the surface. Maybe you could link to that post at the end of this one so people don’t get the idea that you’re advocating total passivity.

    It’s also worth noting that both the man and the woman should have the maturity and healthy mental outlook to sustain a healthy, respectful and good relationship. If the woman does too much for a man who is not ready, he’s going to be overwhelmed. Thus his desire for autonomy.

    Also, in your story, moving in together after a week is a bit much! When I look back at the beginning with my husband, I was actually very reluctant to move in with him, and it took a lot of persuasion on his part. I am not advocating the “overly eager” tactic for the woman. She should negotiate her desires as well.

  • Joe

    Sigh. I’m going to be verbally accosted for this, but I must caution everyone who thinks that there are too many people that they should reconsider.

    Seriously.

    First of all, you have no idea what the carrying capacity of the earth is. No one does. Check the numbers – most of the planet – BY FAR – is sparsely populated. If you live anywhere on the east coast of the the US or in most of the west coast, you should think that most of the inhabitable part of the world has a population density much more like Arizona or New Mexico, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. It’s not like NYC, LA, or anywhere close to that.

    Second, most of our economic structures have as an unspoken assumption the necessity of a stable or increasing population. Think Social Security. What you don’t want to know is that so does much of culture and civilization. On every scale at every time in history, a decreasing population is a sign of death and decay, not a sign of life and prosperity.

    I can’t emphasize enough that the “Population Bomb” ideas of the ’60s were nothing more than Malthusian propaganda. It always was bogus and it always was propaganda at the service of the few who thought of themselves as the enlightened elite.

    There are far bigger things to worry about than over population.

  • JP

    “It will be interesting to see if birth rates continue to fall in Asia and Africa as is expected. Already it has fallen to 2.27 in Latin America as of this article a year ago.”

    What about India?

    “India is projected to overtake China as the world’s most populous nation by 2030. India’s population growth has raised concerns that it would lead to widespread unemployment and political instability.[57][58] Note that these projections make assumptions about future fertility and death rates which may not turn out to be correct in the event.
    Source:[59]
    2020: 1,326,093,000
    2030: 1,460,743,000
    2040: 1,571,715,000
    2050: 1,656,554,000″

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

  • JP

    The entire population issue is tied into agriculture which it tied into cheap energy/pollution.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Susan:
    “I view my marriage as egalitarian, but counter to the claims of Dalrockolytes, who claim that women always dominate in egalitarian marriages, the edge goes to my husband in ours. ”

    If I follow Mr wv train of thoughts correctly, then you essentially agree with him.

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

      If I follow Mr wv train of thoughts correctly, then you essentially agree with him.

      I don’t think we’re far apart, but his constant linking to Dalrock has me a bit worried…

  • HanSolo

    @Susan!PJ

    Perceived as inanimate.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    “This has to be the most individualistic time in history – does any other time come close?”

    Individualism is one of the primary cultural products of Western civilization.

    The point is that cultures/civilizations ossify, slowly decline, and are ultimately overrun by warbands/migrations.

    You can use the population of Rome, the city, as a proxy for the rise and fall of Classical Civilization.

    Note that the population peaks then falls during the imperial period.

    350 BC 30,000.
    270 BC 100,000.
    100 BC >500,000.
    44 BC 1,000,000.
    100 1,650,000.
    300 1,200,000.
    400 1,100,000.
    450 80,000.
    500 50,000.
    752 40,000.

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

      @JP

      Should we blame Ayn Rand?

  • Abbot

    “When a man does something to make a woman feel special, he becomes more attracted to her.”

    There has to be a starting feeling. That is, he needs to feel that she is special from the start or what is the point of using his efforts to build on that?

    “When women “overgive” it compromises their position, and it prevents the excitement of anticipation and romance from building.”

    When a woman “overgives” over and over to prior men that’s a near sure fire way for a man to torpedo his desire to make her feel “special.” What is there to salvage? Certainly, John Gray never mentioned that. Imagine if he did?

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

      @Abbot

      There has to be a starting feeling. That is, he needs to feel that she is special from the start or what is the point of using his efforts to build on that?

      Agreed, if he’s not attracted to begin with she’s just a PITA, lol.

      When a woman “overgives” over and over to prior men that’s a near sure fire way for a man to torpedo his desire to make her feel “special.”

      You have an amazing ability to turn every comment to the topic of female promiscuity!

  • JP

    @Susan:

    “Should we blame Ayn Rand?”

    For being a third-rate novelist pretending to be a first-rate philosopher?

    The most recent iteration of individualism (generally the stupid kind) is mostly a product of consumer capitalism (there’s no human problem that can’t be solved by buying lots of electronics and tanzanite jewelry from QVC) coupled with a massive financial bubble (a house is an asset, particularly when you only make $30,000 a year, but have a $700,000 liar loan).

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Susan:
    Forgive my ignorance, but who is Dalrock? Some kind of polished modern days male supremacist?

    “I have advised women that if they find a guy attractive and want him to approach, the go-to move is a minimum of 3 seconds of eye contact with a smile. Look away, then repeat. If he doesn’t approach after two-four cycles of this, he is not attracted.”

    You know it’s funny. I’ve talked to many women about that. And their answer varies as much as their personalities, but in essence most of them told me they were doing it that way. And that is what I more or less always experienced in public places with women who showed interest. Although 3 seconds already seems to be a long time, at least at the beginning. As for the smile……..Nobody can teach that. In the end, even with two complete strangers, it’s always about natural, sensuouslly instinctive reaction to one another without yet knowing each other. And of course, real women always know better than men on that one.

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

      @Damien

      Forgive my ignorance, but who is Dalrock? Some kind of polished modern days male supremacist?

      More like a disgruntled, disheveled holdover from the old days. :)

      You’re right, 3 seconds is a long time! But that’s why it’s effective – no confusion about intent with that long a gaze. I actually read somewhere that 3 seconds is the threshold for sexual attraction.

      I think you make a good point about the natural chemistry that happens between strangers. It isn’t common, but when it happens across a room it’s powerful.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Hhmmmmm. I’ve read Atlas Shrugged 3 times cover to cover, and saw both of the movies.

    Maybe Ayn Rand isn’t the problem ;)

  • Abbot

    “You have an amazing ability to turn every comment to the topic of female promiscuity!”

    Prior to 40 years ago, the dynamic between women and men as later described by Gray worked as he states. Where and how does the hook up culture fit in? The dynamic is contaminated. Its compromised. How can a man’s feeling’s in 2012 be like the much luckier man of say 1967?

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Damien,
    What Lokland said. Also, I’ve said this already, but I’ll say it again: I grew up within a 7 mile radius of Three Mile Island. I hadn’t been born when the scare happened, but my dad was living with my great grandparents, who literally lived in TMI’s backyard, and he’d decided to go for a run lol. The man is still living.

    I’m too lazy to find the stats, but I once learned that far more people die in coal plant accidents than they do in nuclear accidents. Just a thought.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Abbot’s railing about female promiscuity is great because all of these arguments can be so easily applied to promiscuity.

    It’s an important part of arguing, IMO, that people automatically try to dismiss because “they aren’t the same.” Without bothering to say why they aren’t the same.

    Related to this:

    One of my friends had to take a sexual harassment course for his college. The college made damn sure that VERBAL and SPECIFIC consent must be required before EVERY sex act, or else the guy is a rapist.
    And I mean the guy, because in every situation the aggressor was a guy.
    With hilarious consequences.
    In one example, Fred was pressuring Sue into sex. Sue didn’t want to have actual sex, so she just started blowing him instead. Fred then decided to take Sue and put her on the bed, take off her panties, and have sex with her. At no point did Sue say no, at all, or indicate in any other she didn’t want to have sex.

    Fred absolutely is a rapist, because agreeing to one sex act does not mean agreeing to another sex act. Fred should have asked Sue if she wanted to have sex first, because just because she was giving him a blowjob doesn’t mean she wanted to have sex with him.

    My thought is, just because Fred was asking Sue for sex, does not mean he consented to Sue giving him a blowjob. Agreeing to one sex act does not mean agreeing to another sex act, after all.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Lokland: “Assuming we can just make sure that the tech. is not used by idiots and isn’t built in dangerous places theres no real need for concern.”
    Assuming, yes, but the reality is otherwise. TEPCO are no fools, but irresponsible people. The problem is not “the span of time”. When one accident happens, its side effects lasts many more years than that “span of time”. There have been many nuclear incidents in France kept under the rug, guess why? But anyway, let’s not start into an ecological debate. The focus here is on men/women approaches, differences, etc.

  • JP

    @Olive:

    “I grew up within a 7 mile radius of Three Mile Island. I hadn’t been born when the scare happened, but my dad was living with my great grandparents, who literally lived in TMI’s backyard, and he’d decided to go for a run lol. The man is still living.”

    West Shore or East Shore?

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    JP,
    How do you mean?

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Olive: “I’m too lazy to find the stats, but I once learned that far more people die in coal plant accidents than they do in nuclear accidents. Just a thought.”
    Agreed, but you could also say that more people die from car crashes than from smoking. It goes round and round that way.
    Anyway, a thought on men/women?

  • JP

    @Olive:

    “I grew up within a 7 mile radius of Three Mile Island.”

    West Shore or East Shore (of the Susquehanna River).

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Damien,

    Agreed, but you could also say that more people die from car crashes than from smoking.

    Not a good comparison. We’re not discussing whether smoking is a suitable substitute for driving. This is a discussion about finding energy sources, and there are a lot of really great benefits to nuclear (uranium is plentiful–by the way, HanSolo, interesting stuff on thorium!–and nuclear plants don’t release greenhouse gases). Your argument is that nuclear is dangerous; I’m saying that, relatively speaking, it’s not as dangerous as it’s made out to be by the media (I once had to explain to some fairly ignorant environmentalists that the smoke stuff coming out of nuclear plants is, in fact, steam!).

    Anyway, a thought on men/women?

    ? Something specific you’d like to discuss?

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

    If France continues to avoid panic and use nuclear power on a large scale, they are going to have a real advantage over other European countries. Germany, in particular, is not going to find it very feasible to run an advanced industrial economy on wind and solar, nor are they going to be very happy being dependent on natural gas imports from Russia and other points East. I expect that they will be a major destination for U.S. exports of liquified natural gas; however, the liquification & transportation process adds **a lot** of cost to the U.S. price.

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    JP,
    Oh, sorry. East.

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

    One more point on energy: if today’s social/political climate had existed when electricity was introduced, we probably never would have had widespread electrification.

    Indeed, Thomas Edison used extremely sleazy tactics attempting to inspire public fear of alternating current to protect his direct-current investments, even going so far as to sponsor the electric chair as a replacement for hanging and suggesting that the process should be called “Westinghousing” in “honor” of his AC-based competitor, George Westinghouse.

    If today’s fearful climate had existed then, he probably would have gotten away with it.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Olive:
    “Something specific you’d like to discuss?”
    Something related to the original post, and sticking with the general disscussion on the issue. Not more.

  • JP

    I actually got to experience Three Mile Island, since I was alive and living in South Central PA at the time (West Shore). I think it was a little more than 10 miles away.

    I wasn’t allowed to go play outside for a few days.

    It wasn’t a particularly bad nuclear accident, all things considered. Mostly just scared a lot of people who thought they were all going to die.

  • BroHamlet

    @Clarence

    “Feminism has run its course…”

    Yeah, why don’t you tell our politicians that as the feminists are more plugged into the political process than ever, esp. when it comes to laws involving marriage/divorce and family formation. I see someone sticking their head into the sand and at the same time throwing a few million men and women whose lives or families or both have been ruined under the bus…

    Now, I thought I was very clear about what I said, which goes beyond the snippet you seem to be misinterpreting as a lack of awareness:

    Feminism has run it’s course, and largely isn’t about equality, or even about the interests of the average woman anymore, and that much has been explored in depth on this blog if you read back in the archives.

    If it wasn’t clear, the point is that feminism has ceased to be useful for wider society in many ways, and is now extremely counterproductive for both genders (yes, that’s a huge understatement, but do we really need to get into that?). One might even argue that what many feminists are pushing for in the political arenas isn’t feminism as it was originally intended at all, because it’s not about equality for women, it’s about privileges for women at the expense of everyone else. I didn’t see the need to get into detail about all of that because it’s been discussed by our host at really great length already.

  • Just1Z

    @pj
    teh manosphere isn’t so much about individualism, as saying that if the deal is crap walk away from it.

    also, if a man isn’t working for his own interests (wife’n’kidz) then why should he work beyond what he needs? to pay tax to support single moms?

    that is where the man-boys are coming from…why man up just to be taxed to pay for a society that has treated them as crap since starting kindergarten?

    for every action there is a reaction. for every change in the incentives there is a change in the efforts made. misandry isn’t unfortunate, it’s going to be catastrophic, start looking after da menz, or tgey won’t be there to look after you…

    happy days, we thrashed the kiwis at rugby and I saw it in the pub. in more ways than one, good night y’all

  • INTJ

    @ ADBG

    My thought is, just because Fred was asking Sue for sex, does not mean he consented to Sue giving him a blowjob. Agreeing to one sex act does not mean agreeing to another sex act, after all.

    Yup. They raped each other.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Susan
    “Why don’t the women serving stand up and say no way? Surely they know better than anyone that they can’t carry the same weight in adverse conditions? I would also think that to the extent the army can target anyone specific, they’ll go after females first.

    Is there no one who will stand up to this PC nonsense”

    The powers that be have decreed. It’s a career-killer to mention difficulties such as ten percent of women aboard ship get pregnant and have to be pulled out, to be replaced by some guy jerked out of his other assignment and shoved in without having a chance to meld with the team. You can’t say the reason the platoon didn’t make its objective in a manuver is because the women couldn’t keep up.

    You will recall that, after the Ft. Hood shooting, Gen. Casey said that he hoped this wouldn’t damage diversity “which is our strength”. Means if you see some guy with appalling professional performance and demonstrated Islamic nutcasery, the general doesn’t want to hear about it. Message received, general, sir.
    There was a report that nine officers were going to be investigated–certain career killer and possible judicial action–for failing to stop Hasan’s greased slide through the Army to Ft. Hood. Those claiming to be connected say the reason they didn’t downcheck the guy on efficiency reports or put letters in his file or reprimand him or whatever their position would suggest say that the officers were convinced they’d be accused of Islamophobia. It’s one thing to show the moral courage to get something done, but in this case, it would mean they get accused and Hasan is forever Tefloned because of having been persecuted due to his religion. IOW, sacrifice for nothing.

  • HanSolo
  • Damien Vulaume

    “Why don’t the women serving stand up and say no way? Surely they know better than anyone that they can’t carry the same weight in adverse conditions? I would also think that to the extent the army can target anyone specific, they’ll go after females first.”

    Why would any woman want to serve in the army in the first place? I don’t think this is “natural”. In my view, those who serve in there are quite confused or have a personally troubled psychological agenda. My own experience of the army was the most extreme real life example of what machism and or male bonding looks like at its worst when all put together: Schoolboys doing fart contests and calling women “pussies and whores”. Good luck for her if that’s the environement she wants to work in…

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    JP,
    Interesting! My great-grandparents lived on a farm in Dauphin County, probably less than half a mile away from TMI. I remember going to their house as a little kid and marveling at those lovely towers.

    Damien,

    Something related to the original post, and sticking with the general disscussion on the issue. Not more.

    *Shrugs* okay. I haven’t felt a burning desire to comment on the post but if I do I’ll let ya know.

  • Richard Aubrey

    I recall a Senate hearing about TMI. Turns out that, in the following forty years, in the fallout pattern, 40,000 cancers were expected. Adding in the TMI radiation, there was a fifty percent chance of one more.
    But there was plenty of room for panic and posturing.

  • Hari Christmas

    Joe, re: population

    Its not so much population that is the sole problem, but the ever increasing consumption needs of the population. Finite resources!

    Just1z,
    “also, if a man isn’t working for his own interests (wife’n’kidz) then why should he work beyond what he needs? to pay tax to support single moms?
    …that is where the man-boys are coming from…why man up just to be taxed to pay for a society that has treated them as crap since starting kindergarten?”

    We ALL pay taxes, unless we are part of the elite 1%.

    “a society that has treated them as crap since starting kindergarten”

    Bullshit. They don’t know how good they got it here. Spoiled brats.

    [Susan, I changed my moniker for you]

  • Hari Christmas

    Mr. Wavevector,
    “The essential point that is missing is that men want something in return for all this that they give, and that thing is authority. They want a woman who will voluntarily grant him some authority over her in the relationship and accept him as her leader.”

    It would be more accurate to say that this is what YOU want out of a woman in a relationship, not all men or men in general.

    Susan Walsh December 1, 2012 at 5:18 pm

    @SayWhaat

    I think it’s important for girls to recognize when a guy is pulling away, and then take advantage of that to take time off *for themselves*. That way they both can realize a little more autonomy over themselves, and she can bask in his affection when he springs back.

    That’s a great suggestion. Women need to be able to enjoy that time off too – or they’re going to be unhappy every time a guy does it.

    —–

    One has to be careful though that the availability isn’t exclusively on his terms just when its convenient for him and the relationship becomes all about him and his mood swings.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Susan: “A disgruntled, disheveled holdover from the old days.”
    Ha ha, Looks like it’s an international phenomenom then…

    “I actually read somewhere that 3 seconds is the threshold for sexual attraction.”

    Well I don’t know about numbers. All I know is that the “quality” and the “intensity” of the sparkling light that shines in a woman’s eye in a public place is all that matters. She can do it in the glimpse of an eye, pretending not to be looking at all or gazing for 5 seconds. A woman is always magical when her intent is coloured with natural infatuation. We all should instinctively sense this (men women).

  • Hari Christmas

    Damien,
    “Well I don’t know about numbers. All I know is that the “quality” and the “intensity” of the sparkling light that shines in a woman’s eye in a public place is all that matters. She can do it in the glimpse of an eye, pretending not to be looking at all or gazing for 5 seconds. A woman is always magical when her intent is coloured with natural infatuation. We all should instinctively sense this (men women).”

    An ATTRACTIVE woman is always magical……

    We all know that men don’t find women they are not attracted to as “magical” no matter how intentful her natural infatuation.

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

    Google Translate.

    My religion forbids me from googling :p

  • Damien Vulaume

    @PJ
    “An ATTRACTIVE woman is always magical……”
    Absolutely not. It’s all about charm. Beauty doesn’t necessarily comes along with charm. Period.

  • Lokland

    @PJ

    “An ATTRACTIVE woman is always magical……”

    I know a 60 year old woman. Her presence is enchanting.
    Would not bang.

    Femininity makes any woman’s presence far more enjoyable. Even if they’re not on the menu.

    Ie. Theres more to being magical than tits. Thats kinda the difference actually. a hot girl is tits without magic, a magical girl is feminine. A girl who strikes me as GF potential has both (and I think upwards of 80% of women are hot).

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

      I know a 60 year old woman. Her presence is enchanting.
      Would not bang.

      Haha, that’s a relief. One of the things I enjoy a lot about being in my 50s is that I am now free to be as outgoing and friendly as I please with men of all ages without worrying about sexual undercurrents.

  • Hari Christmas

    Damien Vulaume December 1, 2012 at 9:52 pm

    @PJ
    “An ATTRACTIVE woman is always magical……”
    Absolutely not. It’s all about charm. Beauty doesn’t necessarily comes along with charm. Period.
    ———————

    Damien, bless your sweet little heart. However that flies in the face of EVERYTHING men on this blog and others have tried to drill into our heads for, like, ever.

    Case in point…..

    “I know a 60 year old woman. Her presence is enchanting.
    Would not bang. ”

    Exactly.

    Now let’s get back to the regularly scheduled program of you guys telling us how important youth and physical fitness are.

  • J

    @Susan

    Post #169 is terrific!

  • http://x OffTheCuff

    Sue: “One word: Pilates.”

    Forget that, all I need is youtube videos on form. I thought my core was good, as I can do a 3 minute plank, but this is news to me. I didn’t even know they were possible! Well, I have a new project.

  • Hari Christmas

    Regarding comment #169

    “2. I have described that I believe this is a natural outgrowth of our relationship and choices over the years, including his being the sole breadwinner. If I earned half the household income, I imagine that I would not just sit back and let him rule, even about financial decisions.”

    Susan, whether s/he earns half, whole, or not a single cent, a spouse, either spouse, should not let the other “rule” in any area – particularly not the financial one when not only BOTH spouses are dependent on it, but their children as well.

    A partnership means just that – a partnership.

    “If I led you to imagine that I was a female of the Mrs. Dalrock variety, I am eager to disabuse you of that notion immediately. I do not accept that a woman should “know her place.” ”

    Mr. Wavevector thinks this is a “dominionist” type conservative Christian blog?! Entitled “Hooking Up Smart” – really?!?! LOL!

    “Re John Gray’s analysis of the differences between the sexes, I don’t think he is saying that men live to serve women or be subordinate to them in any way.”

    Service does not mean subordination. Of course partners are supposed to serve each other.

    There is one very happily married man with several children on youtube who gives out marriage and relationship advice and he says the purpose of “manhood” is in fact to serve “womanhood” because women bring forth humans and its mens’ duty to serve women in that function.

    I’m sure the Manosphere would call this (very handsome in fact) man a pussy whipped beta who is setting himself up for cuckholdry but he claims he and his wife have never had an argument in all of their 11 years of marriage.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @PJ:
    “Damien, bless your sweet little heart. However that flies in the face of EVERYTHING men on this blog and others have tried to drill into our heads for, like, ever.”
    And bless your “sweet little heart” as well.
    Although I don’t think mine is. I’m not in the naive sphere of love anymore, but into reality.
    Forget about the “men on this blog and others have tried to drill into our heads..”. Those same guys you’re talking about are reasoning like you…
    Why don’t you try another culture, as long as you don’t carry your own problems with yourself along the way?… I’m saying this gently.

  • Joe

    @Hari

    Joe, re: population

    Its not so much population that is the sole problem, but the ever increasing consumption needs of the population. Finite resources!

    Yes, but nothing on this planet is so finite that we’re in danger of running out.

    Nothing. Paul Erlich’s bet was no gamble for Julian Simon for one reason – Erlich never misunderstood that the amount of any resource is independent of availability. He did not account for the fact that availability of resources always grows, because of (ta – da!) people. We will leave this planet long before we run out of whatever it is you think you need.

    However, the only truly limited resource is human brains. We need more, not less. In a civilized universe, attempts to decrease the population would be considered a crime against humanity.

    AND (to bring this back to the topic at hand) we would be very alarmed at the idea that men and women are getting married later and having children later still, if only because of the associated lower fertility rates. That’s already wreaking havoc in Europe and Japan.

    I am NOT saying every teenage girl should go out there and have a kid ASAP. No one is. We don’t encourage having children too early primarily because it’s not good for the children and the family unit. Society considers the needs of the mother, but only secondarily.

    As a society we should still encourage having children and not encourage putting family creation off indefinitely.

  • mr. wavevector

    @Damien 122

    I think all this misleading gender equality talk is also too often equated to Mutual respect, which is a different thing (and of course step Number 1 in a relationship).

    I too believe that mutual respect and an equal commitment to the relationship is the type of equality required in a relationship. Everything else is negotiable.

  • Hari Christmas

    ” I’m not in the naive sphere of love anymore, but into reality.”

    The reality is that if a man is not attracted to a woman, her “intent coloured with natural infatuation” will not inspire him to pursue her.

    See Lokland’s comment at 224 regarding the “charming and feminine” 60 year old woman.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Mr wv:
    “I too believe that mutual respect and an equal commitment to the relationship is the type of equality required in a relationship. Everything else is negotiable.”

    I don’t know if ‘negotiable” is the right word, but I know what you mean.

  • Damien Vulaume

    #234. PJ or whatever you want to be called: “The reality is that if a man is not attracted to a woman, her “intent coloured with natural infatuation” will not inspire him to pursue her.”
    And the same the other way around. It’s in the end a chess game that never cheats…

  • Hari Christmas

    “The reality is that if a man is not attracted to a woman, her “intent coloured with natural infatuation” will not inspire him to pursue her.”

    Damien: ” And the same the other way around. ”

    Of course.
    I’m not the one arguing that an “intent coloured with natural infatuation” would make me feel any kind of way about a man that I’m not physically attracted to first.

  • mr. wavevector

    @ Susan #169

    I reject any notion that my husband has God-given or other formal authority over me, or that I am required to accept him as my leader.

    Of course. That is why I emphasized that any authority that a woman grants her husband is voluntary. It should not be coerced by social mores nor religious edict. It is not an entitlement that a man can demand. It is something that a woman can offer a man, if she chooses, because she loves him and trusts him. Whether you feel that way towards your husband is between you and him.

    I have described that I believe this is a natural outgrowth of our relationship and choices over the years, including his being the sole breadwinner. If I earned half the household income, I imagine that I would not just sit back and let him rule, even about financial decisions.

    I think the important factor is this: do you want to feel that he takes care of you? If you don’t, then there is no reason for you to grant him leadership. But if you do want to feel taken care of, then granting him leadership is a good way to secure that.

    There is a fundamental aspect of social interactions in many social animals that couples status with care. Those who wish for care from others grant them status. Those who are granted status assume the responsibility for care. If you are strong and independent and don’t need a man, then you have no need to grant him a leadership status. But if you want the man to care for you and provide for you, then granting him leadership status is a good way to secure the investment that you desire.

    I do not believe that our dynamic is the only one that happy couples have

    And you will notice my comment to the same effect – that many couples pursue an egalitarian relationship, some of them with success.

    I consider myself a strong and independent person, and therefore that is reflected in my marriage as well.

    A strong and independent person who is entirely financially dependent on her spouse? What type of hubris is that? You would be better off acknowledging that you are indeed dependent on your husband. As he is on you for other reasons, no doubt. The strength of a couple is in its mutual interdependence, not in the independence of its individual members. As it is, you belittle his contribution to the relationship, while claiming to be that which you are not.

    As for Dalrock, I was linking to him as an example of how your post may be interpreted, not as a model of how gender relations should be construed .

    The way a man knows that a woman considers him “up” is that she is receptive to his interest and potential commitment.

    So the way a woman acknowledges a man’s superior position is by things that benefit her personally, rather than anything that may benefit him? That she will do him the favor of letting him do her a favor? Are women really that exploitative?

    Susan, I have no idea from this dialog what benefits your husband receives from supporting you, nor do I have any idea what benefit any man would receive in a committed relationship. Please elaborate.

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

      @Mr. Wavevector

      There’s a lot to unpack here – I hope I can shed some light on where I’m coming from re a husband’s authority over his wife.

      First, as you know, hypergamy is rooted in a woman’s desire to secure the best possible package of resources for her future offspring. Material resources, but also a man’s network of connections and influence as a result of his being a leader among men. What he gets in exchange for that is a hotter wife. (David Buss) Many high status men voluntarily marry women who are anything but deferential or willing to submit to authority. A man may want that dynamic and seek it in a partner, but that is not what he gets as a result of status, per se. She gets good stuff for her children, e.g. leadership genes, material wealth, connections, and he gets good stuff for his children, e.g. youth, beauty, high fertility.

      Second, in terms of what my husband gets from commitment to me, I would say Gray explained it well: trust, acceptance, appreciation, admiration, approval, encouragement. I provide all of these on a daily basis. A natural outgrowth of having that kind of respect for my husband means that I will naturally defer to his judgment on many things. He has veto power on just about any issue. However, it’s only fair to say that with the exception of our finances, where I defer to him entirely, I have veto power as well.

      Together we made the decision that I would stay at home when my second child was born. This was a suggestion initiated by my husband, but one that I welcomed with relief. My job, which involved frequent air travel and long hours, had created great stress for our family after our son was born, even though I had cut back to three days per week. I recall worrying that living on one income would produce a great deal of stress for him, and said that I didn’t think it was fair – what would he get out of it? His reply was “the best care imaginable for my children.” Throughout all these years, he has remained firm that this deal was fair and beneficial to all parties, and is convinced that our children are the people they are in large part because they had the experience of my being home.

      Third, I want to clarify that in describing myself as “strong and independent” I was not referring to being financially independent, obviously. Rather, I mean that I am capable of thinking and acting for myself. In fact, one of the reasons my marriage has worked so well is that in exchange for the luxury and privilege of being at home, I have worked hard to make my husband’s home experience as comfortable and pleasurable as possible. Every conceivable physical need of his is attended to with enthusiasm and without complaint ;) . Our house is comfortable, clean, and well maintained. His clothes are cleaned and pressed at all times. I cook very high quality meals six nights a week. I maintain our cars and negotiate and arrange for all the services we need, from media and entertainment to vacation planning to gift giving and remembrances, for both his family and mine. I maintain the garden with only occasional help from my husband in lifting heavy things. The bottom line: he works his job and brings home the paycheck. He handles our finances. Literally every other thing is done for him. He has no errands to run on weekends.

      He would vehemently deny that he is being exploited in any way, and would say instead that he marvels at the benefits I provide in our marriage on a daily basis. I’m sorry to have tooted my own horn here, but I hope that I have provided one clear illustration of how an egalitarian marriage can work and thrive, with both parties deriving benefits and feeling very fortunate.

  • Hari Christmas

    Susan: The way a man knows that a woman considers him “up” is that she is receptive to his interest and potential commitment.

    Mr. Wavevector: So the way a woman acknowledges a man’s superior position

    Me: I believe what Susan meant by “up” is that the woman considers him the best of all her options, not that she considers him “superior” to her.

    Mr. Wavevector: …. is by things that benefit her personally, rather than anything that may benefit him?

    Me: He obviously sees a benefit in it too or he wouldn’t be pursuing her or offering up his commitment, would he?

    Mr. Wavevector: Are women really that exploitative?

    Me: Possibly. But in this context there is no exploitation. Its 2 individuals entering into a mutually agreed upon committed relationship.

    Mr. Wavevector: Susan, I have no idea from this dialog what benefits your husband receives from supporting you, nor do I have any idea what benefit any man would receive in a committed relationship. Please elaborate.

    Me: The benefits that humans receive by entering into voluntary, mutually agreed upon committed relationships with other humans are varied. Some of them are;

    1. Companionship
    2. Affection
    3. Intimacy
    4. Sexual activity and satisfaction
    5. Hearth
    6. Home
    7. Children and family (if they want that)
    8. The sharing of financial burdens
    9. The sharing of tough times in life like the death of a parent
    10. The sharing of life’s joys and someone to create those joys with
    11. Someone to “have your back”

  • mr. wavevector

    Me: I believe what Susan meant by “up” is that the woman considers him the best of all her options, not that she considers him “superior” to her.

    No, the general understanding of hypergamy is that the woman marries a man of superior social status – superior to her own status, specifically.

    He obviously sees a benefit in it too or he wouldn’t be pursuing her or offering up his commitment, would he?

    There are indeed foolish men who pursue relationships with women without clear benefit to themselves. But any man who wishes to find a good mate should choose one who is willing to make the benefits to him clear, rather one that indulges in the solipsistic female self-interest that Susan describes.

    The benefits of a committed relationship that you describe are ultimately dependent on having a wife that will have the man’s interest in mind, rather than defending her status as a “strong and independent woman”. It is this lack of awareness of the man’s interest that I am criticizing in Susan’s response.

  • Hari Christmas

    “rather one that indulges in the solipsistic female self-interest that Susan describes”

    You’re new here so you missed the comments some weeks back where I laid down the gauntlet on the Manosphere’s incorrect use of the word “solipsistic”.

    “No, the general understanding of hypergamy is that the woman marries a man of superior social status – superior to her own status, specifically.”

    Susan didn’t marry a man of higher social status than herself.

  • Sai

    @Just1Z
    Good article…
    “rather than expecting women to adjust themselves to the environment.”
    I’d like to see this. If you’re coming to somebody else’s place, you should respect how they do things.

    “If a woman truly loves you, she will fight to her last breath with utmost courage, for you.”
    http://youtu.be/K4ftQfqqt7k

    @INTJ
    “Dude that is freaking pathetic. But then again most women can’t even do a pull-up…”
    Guilty as charged.

    @Richard Aubrey
    I can’t cheer women in combat any more. (Disclaimer: That doesn’t mean I want them dead!)

    @mr. wavevector
    This post made perfect sense, as did the later ones. I’m saving it!

    @Damien Vulaume
    “See the worrying level of the Ultra-right in the voting polls.”
    I’m going to have to check this out further. I knew about the headscarf debate but I got lazy.
    “Why would any woman want to serve in the army in the first place? I don’t think this is “natural”. In my view, those who serve in there are quite confused or have a personally troubled psychological agenda.”
    When I was in middle school I wanted to be a drill sergeant so I could yell at people. But my mother told me I’d have to get up very early and I gave up. XD

    I have a slightly OT question about men and women relating: I was reading Robert Greene’s “Art of Seduction” (I was curious!) and found a section on The Dandy… Since a first-world problem is feminized men and women acting too much like men, would this tactic be very effective nowadays?
    All right, two OT questions. Does the mail Napoleon sent Josephine count as supplication? Because… do want. *flee*

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Sai:
    “When I was in middle school I wanted to be a drill sergeant so I could yell at people.”

    Sounds like you got off to a good start in being an attractive woman…

  • Just1Z

    @Sai
    I just wanted to be a (mostly) benign global ruler. the shit that I could sort out… *sigh*

    you could be a senior henchperson if you want?

    as everyone must clearly be happy under my glorious, patriarchal rule, you could be in charge of beating the unsmiling ones till they showed how happy they were…

    usual benefits package. apartments in moonbase and volcano HQ. as senior management you would not need to wear an opaque visor

    whaddayereckon?

  • Just1Z

    hmmm
    best make the visors one way transparent rather than flat out opaque. else the accident rate would be through the roof along with the resultant medical costs. this global domination stuff is trickier than one might suppose.

  • Iggles

    @ PJ:

    “I know a 60 year old woman. Her presence is enchanting.Would not bang. ”

    Exactly.

    Now let’s get back to the regularly scheduled program of you guys telling us how important youth and physical fitness are.

    :lol:

    I gotta say, I’m with Plain Jane on this one. On the whole men seem to project positive qualities onto women they find attractive – whether there’s any basis for it in reality or not!

    Case in point, the nerd in high school who’s infatuated in love with the most popular girl in school. She can be super bitchy and he won’t see it. Instead he’ll be fixated on how he would treat her better than her jerk, varsity boyfriend. (Of course not seeing that she’s turned on by the jock boyfriend’s dominance..) He will ignore his nerdy female friend who thinks he’s amazing because he views his SMV counterpart as “homely”.

    In college and elsewhere I’ve seen a lot of good-hearted dudes chasing, dating, and marrying bitchy women. This is not just high school phenomenon!

  • mr. wavevector

    You’re new here so you missed the comments some weeks back where I laid down the gauntlet on the Manosphere’s incorrect use of the word “solipsistic”.

    I am utterly indifferent to what you consider “solipsistic” to mean. I am using it in the sense of “The theory or view that the self is the only reality.” Specifically, Susan’s response reveals a view that a woman’s emotional reality is the only reality. This is reflected in this quote:

    The way a man knows that a woman considers him “up” is that she is receptive to his interest and potential commitment.

    Here we see the status of the man being defined exclusively by the emotional state of the woman, rather than any characteristic of his or any thing she might do for him. It is this self centered worldview that I correctly describe as solipsistic.

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

      The way a man knows that a woman considers him “up” is that she is receptive to his interest and potential commitment.

      Here we see the status of the man being defined exclusively by the emotional state of the woman, rather than any characteristic of his or any thing she might do for him. It is this self centered worldview that I correctly describe as solipsistic.

      My statement refers to nothing more than the nature of the mating transaction. We figure out our SMV via trial and error. This is especially true for men, whose SMV is dependent on more than just looks. A man whose status gives him an SMV bump will figure out how much his status is worth according to which women are receptive to his attention. Ron Perelman’s status was obviously worth a great deal, as he got a sexy, albeit aging moviestar to marry him. Based on his looks alone, which I consider well below average, his mate should also be quite unattractive.

      The sexual economics of this is simple: His status for her looks. It has nothing to do with the emotional state of the woman.

  • Bully

    @Damien

    Totally agreed. In my (way blue pill, this-is-what-a-feminist looks like) earlier years, I dated unattractive, ‘nice’ girls. They had charm, but no beauty. I was utterly miserable despite their charm ,and I never really knew why at the time.

    Then I swallowed the red pill, picked up Game, started dating much more attractive women without any sort of feminine ‘je ne sais quoi’. And I didn’t really care for that much either, though at least I was then educated enough to know why not.

    I’m only truly happy when dating a woman that has both at this point. And I know every man has to make concessions and all that, and I do when appropriate, but if I’m with a woman and she really is not making any attempt at all in one of the two spheres I just mentioned, I really don’t bother continuing with her, no matter how good she is in the other.

  • Iggles

    Crap. I gotta remember not to PJ’s full name in a comment. Now my last one is in moderation…

    @ Joe:

    AND (to bring this back to the topic at hand) we would be very alarmed at the idea that men and women are getting married later and having children later still, if only because of the associated lower fertility rates. That’s already wreaking havoc in Europe and Japan.

    I didn’t want to throw my hat into this discussion earlier, but I second this. It’s very bad for the U.S. to have falling birth rates because of the trends seen in those countries!

    Depopulation – especially lopsided depopulation – comes with a whole host of associated problems!

  • mr. wavevector

    Susan didn’t marry a man of higher social status than herself.

    Then she is not hypergamous in her actions. Few women in the UMC are, as there are very few men of higher status available. Most UMC women have to settle for a peer at best, or remain single.

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

      Most UMC women have to settle for a peer at best, or remain single.

      I’ve wondered before whether there isn’t some law of diminishing returns for hypergamy. Certainly I and other women at Wharton who married men from the class felt that we had hit the jackpot – there wasn’t a sense that our dreamboats were out there somewhere with even higher status. My husband was 28 when we got together – and his youth and potential were a far more attractive package than a potentially wealthier but older man.

      If hypergamy is about securing resources for offspring, surely there is a point at which a woman feels that the critical level of status has been reached. In addition, if she is a potentially high earner herself, she can afford to go younger and hotter (similar to a man) in exchange for a bit of status.

      Most successful marriages in the U.S. today are assortative, between parties of similar education and status.

  • Bully

    I suppose why that’s been single for some time; I’m constantly striving to improve myself in a wide range of arenas – Game, social circle, career, physicality, and finances – and too many women I meet in my age group are coasting by on merely being women and don’t really apply that same all-out self-improvement assault in their own lives. At this point I’m outright relieved when I meet a decently attractive mid to late 20s woman that has at least moved out from their parents’ home (Chicago), and I get the feeling that said woman would not give me the time of day if /I/ was still living at home.

  • Feelist

    No, the general understanding of hypergamy is that the woman marries a man of superior social status – superior to her own status, specifically.”

    The general understanding of hypergamy in the mansphere(and aren’t we part of it?) is that hypergamy is the pursuit by women for better men than the men they have around them: taller guys, fitter guys, richer guys, more good-looking guys etc.

  • mr. wavevector

    The general understanding of hypergamy in the mansphere(and aren’t we part of it?) is that hypergamy is the pursuit by women for better men than the men they have around them: taller guys, fitter guys, richer guys, more good-looking guys etc.

    If that’s your definition, it’s fairly meaningless. It just means that a woman wants the best partner she can get. Men want that too.

    The “hyper” in hypergamy means “over”; it is implied that the reference for “over” is the woman’s own status. Wikipedia defines it as such:

    Hypergamy (colloquially referred to as “marrying up”) is the act or practice of seeking a spouse of higher looks, socioeconomic, caste or status than oneself.[1]

    All the sociological papers I’ve read use it in this manner. The tendency of women to choose mates of higher rank than themselves is the driving force for the social ramifications. If all women insist on marrying up, men at the bottom and women at the top have difficulty finding mates.

  • VD

    Are men actually threatened by women who are attractive, rich, powerful, and self sufficient because they feel they have nothing to offer (since you suggest that a man needs to feed needed). I wonder if this is why so many men are trying to keep women at home and married with kids by 25. I wonder if this is simply what the backlash against feminism is all about.

    No. No more than women are actually threatened by men who are stylish, pretty, look fabulous in skirts, and have zero sexual interest in women. You’re making the mistake of thinking that a man correctly realizing that what he brings to the table is not wanted, desired, or needed is somehow tantamount to being threatened. Think about it. What is the threat? What is the danger this woman poses to him? And if there is no danger, then what would he feel threatened about?

    The backlash against feminism is because more and more men are realizing that feminism is the primary means of demolishing Western civilization. The West is literally dying, economically and demographically, and feminism is one of the primary reasons. Those who value the West want women home and married by 25 because we would like our children, and our children’s children, to grow up in a functioning and stable civilization, not a decadent one collapsing into pagan barbarism.

    Now, many people firmly believe that Western civilization and its fruits will survive without its traditional religious and societal foundations. Those people are very, very wrong and it is becoming increasingly obvious that is the case.

  • VD

    You’re new here so you missed the comments some weeks back where I laid down the gauntlet on the Manosphere’s incorrect use of the word “solipsistic”.

    And he is quite properly ignoring you. As is pretty much everyone else. It is a nicely descriptive term describing an observed pattern of behavior. As Mr. Wavevector correctly pointed out, you don’t even understand what hypergamy is, or its etymological roots.

  • Just1Z

    @Sai
    “If a woman truly loves you, she will fight to her last breath with utmost courage, for you.”

    Could come in handy in the coming, any-day-now, zombie apocalypse.

    Won a fencing competition at Uni and it was only the second time that I ever did it(!)…they were somewhat disgruntled (true story). I gave up when I realised that I could beat them with their 2-3 years of training just because I was fast and coordinated – so, what’s the point? Luckily, I found a more fun alternative

  • Feelist

    ”If that’s your definition, it’s fairly meaningless. It just means that a woman wants the best partner she can get. Men want that too. ”

    A woman’s beauty and number of sexual partners is interconnected with her social status. Her academical degree, her social background don’t mean anything to most men. I don’t look at women when I’m in college and think, ”Damn, I gotta get me some of that – I heard her master thesis on Tolkien was the hot stuff!”

    I look at women, see if they fulfill my base requirement in looks and from there I figure if I’m sexually attracted to her, or if there’s more to it. Since I find most young women to be attractive(for they have the right weight for their height, are pleasant to look at etc) I don’t neccessarily chase after the perfect 10. Matter of fact I’m more attracted to this 5.5 than I am to the perfect german natural blonde I’ve been hanging out with.

    Truth be told, I was hanging around her to figure out if my attraction to her was hormonal only. And it was. I spent two hours with her and I realized I only listen to what she says because of her looks. Would I want to deal with this on a daily basis(marriage)?

    Not in this lifetime.

    So you see, when the average woman chases after the tall/fit/good-looking/rich/sparkling colgate teeth she’s practicing hypergamy, because she’s going for men who are of higher social status than her own, and that is the definition of hypergamy amongst the vast majority of the people who belong to the mansphere.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @VD:
    “the early 20th century anti-suffragettes were correct and feminism is the primary means of demolishing Western civilization. The West is literally dying, economically and demographically, and feminism is one of the primary reasons.”
    Are you serious here, or is this some kind of subtle humour that totally escapes me?
    If I follow your reasoning, then you should immediately remove women the right to vote. You could also blame feminism for the general decline of the literacy rate, or the fact that over 65% of the US population is overweight, among others.
    Next step, how about claiming that Sandy was launched by a vast feminist conspiracy?

  • Just1Z

    @DV
    don’t see how you get to Sandy…can you explain that one?

    as for the rest, I’ve got me wine and cheese, take it away…

  • Damien Vulaume

    @justiz
    That was poor sarcasm on my part. An attempt to show that you could blame feminism for just about anything.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Oh, DV, how funny.

    Why is patriarchy the dominant social arrangement? It’s because it’s the OPPOSITE of oppressive to women: it’s oppressive to MEN.

    Patriarchy is the ONLY social arrangement that is capable of generating massive male investment from 90% of men. That may not be thought of as quite so huge a deal, because so much of our economy is now Apple products and advertising and healthcare. It’s a huge deal when you have Hard Work to do, like building roads, or repairing oil wells, or colonizing North America, or beating the Germans.

    That Hard Work is the foundation of civilizations. The Soft Work that women do is also the foundation of civilizations, when the Soft Work is “raising children.” It is not useful in an economic context, except when the Hard Work of building civilization is already done. Or society is so damn decayed that families no longer raise their own children.

    What has now happened is the dissolution of the social mores and foundations that have supported patriarchal societies. You will find that most guys will say that this is a good thing: we think women should vote, have a say in how many children they should have, and should not be raped or viewed as property.

    We’ve gone with that, but our society has also removed a lot of the incentive for male investment. And males are responding like males should…not investing. Not all guys, of course, but more and more are dropping out, and that’s how avalanches start.

    Besides, you don’t need all guys to drop out to start causing huge, huge problems. Society can handle a small part of “ruin” in it. The parts that don’t work, so to speak. Some homeless we give scraps too, some kids that don’t realize their full potential, some places where we can’t stop crime no matter how many police we put there.

    We absolutely are not going to survive with 60% of families being broken. Not as a superpower anyways, but as a Third World hellhole with pockets of First World awesomeness, with all the social and political arrangements that implies.

    That’s not a good future.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @VD
    I also have a sugestion for you:
    You could also settle down in some remote village in Corsica or Sicily, and date a young woman there…You’d love her upbringing.
    Although, make sure you wear a bulletproof jacket when you meet her brothers.

  • Just1Z

    @DV
    sorry, I was kidding too. I got your intent.

    I’m in favour of restricting the right to vote, but it wouldn’t simply be based on innie vs outie genitalia (that debate could be amusing to witness from the sidelines though).

    Ol’ Mitt certainly did put a cat amongst the pigeons when he talked about the 47% (iirc from overseas). What happens when the majority has the automatic ability to vote themselves the money of the minority? ‘Your’ Founding Fathers had views on the subject that look prescient.

  • Just1Z

    @ADBG
    +1
    see you poolside

  • Sai

    @Damien Vulaume
    “Sounds like you got off to a good start in being an attractive woman…”
    That’s why I had parents to help me check myself before I wrecked myself. I can’t believe I just typed that.

    @Just1Z
    “usual benefits package. apartments in moonbase and volcano HQ. as senior management you would not need to wear an opaque visor.”
    …Okay! :mrgreen:

    “If a woman truly loves you, she will fight to her last breath with utmost courage, for you.”
    That wasn’t my quote, I just liked it and responded with a movie clip.

  • INTJ

    @ Iggles

    Case in point, the nerd in high school who’s infatuated in love with the most popular girl in school. She can be super bitchy and he won’t see it. Instead he’ll be fixated on how he would treat her better than her jerk, varsity boyfriend. (Of course not seeing that she’s turned on by the jock boyfriend’s dominance..)

    Ahh the hamster is strong with this one.

  • INTJ

    @ VD

    The backlash against feminism is because more and more men are realizing that the early 20th century anti-suffragettes were correct and feminism is the primary means of demolishing Western civilization. The West is literally dying, economically and demographically, and feminism is one of the primary reasons. Those who value the West want women home and married by 25 because we would like our children, and our children’s children, to grow up in a functioning and stable civilization, not a decadent one collapsing into pagan barbarism.

    No. That’s the viewpoint of your little corner of the manosphere. Most of the manosphere is more worried about fairness towards men than the fall of Western civilization.

  • Just1Z

    @Intj
    “Most of the manosphere is more worried about fairness towards men than the fall of Western civilization.”

    I think that the two are pretty strongly linked…but each has the right to disagree. I think that it’s pretty clear who built society and who do the crappy, dangerous jobs that keep it running. As I said, I think that the two issues are strongly linked.

  • Just1Z

    @Sai,
    it was a good quote. if that’s how you feel then you can have my back when Austin Powers / James Bond / teh zombeeeeez attack and the ‘sharks with frikin lasers attached to their heads’ fail us.

    Speaking of Austin Powers, I have some Alan Parsons Project albums from my distant past – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Duj2oZIC8U
    and Wang Chung and Bananarama

    oh the shame!

    BTW
    “That’s why I had parents to help me check myself before I wrecked myself.”
    and what an interesting person you are! *raises eyebrow* (just one, I’m British; we don’t do showy emotions)
    See you at Ted’s Beer ‘n’ BBQ Fest by the pool – we can swap tales.
    Cheers.

  • Iggles

    Ahh the hamster is strong with this one.

    You mean the male hamster ;) Yep, it is, lol!

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I think that it’s pretty clear who built society and who do the crappy, dangerous jobs that keep it running

    Question to men:

    Would you want your sisters, daughters, mothers, and wives working on a dangerous, messy oil rig, or in an office?

    Question to men:

    If you are told you are constantly oppressing women all the time, are probably a rapist, have lots of privilege, a creep, lazy, etc, would you want to work on a messy oil rig for a woman?

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Just1z, I don’t like to get into politics, but a lot of the 47% do pay taxes on the local level, such as taxes on goods, services, and payroll taxes, just not necessarily federal income taxes. They also often pay taxes then get a return back, so that money collects interest in the federal coffers.

    Also, the economy of today is such that disposal income of the bottom tend to go back into the economy, because the lower classes want to buy stuff, while the huge increase in wealth at the top tend to get swirled around at the top with the investment class. That money goes into overseas bank accounts and more global investments, as opposed to building the national economy.

    Recall that small businesses get taxed at the normal rate, while investments are taxed at the capital gains rate, which are also deferred until taken out, so the “potential” wealth could go quite low as in cases of bubbles bursting. The complicated mathy derivatives and stock packages are just glorified gambling.

    The economy at the top is like a giant expensive casino, while the economy at the bottom is the poor and lower middle class making minimum wage and squeaking by, waiting tables, doing cashier work, etc. There are very few who don’t work at all and collect benefits. Not sure how it is in the UK, but that is how it is in the US.

    Trickle down economics hasn’t worked. Mitt Romney lost because he was clearly a tool from the wealthy investment class, and the poor who voted for him were ignorant fools who thought their positions could be improved by more pyramid schemes. The elites are no longer national, but global. They care not about US faltering, because with their wealth, they can be anywhere. They’ve transcended.

    I’m grateful not to be one of those Chinese factory workers working long hours for dollars a month in awful conditions, but I am not under delusions of grandeur that if my taxes are cut and federal spending becomes miniscule, my life will become so much more amazing here as barely a member of the UMC. Finally, Utah is a nice state because the rich actually reinvest locally (the Mormon influence) and spend the wealth on the “little people.”

  • Lokland

    @ADBG

    No and No.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Haha, that’s a relief. One of the things I enjoy a lot about being in my 50s is that I am now free to be as outgoing and friendly as I please with men of all ages without worrying about sexual undercurrents.”

    That was kinda my point.
    Woman don’t become useless after the age of 35. Their useless in terms of marriage and kids but there are other ways to add value to the world.

    One of those is to be an all around nurturer (lady mentioned above).
    Women can have men wrapped around heir fingers even when sex is not on the table.

    Those who think they can’t aren’t feminine enough.

    Last, women can gain a far more powerful position in the world by being feminine than being a dominant bitch.

  • JP

    @VD:

    “The backlash against feminism is because more and more men are realizing that the early 20th century anti-suffragettes were correct and feminism is the primary means of demolishing Western civilization. The West is literally dying, economically and demographically, and feminism is one of the primary reasons.”

    The West is ending because cultures end when they become culturally exhausted/run into resource constraints.

    I’m pretty sure that the final cultural peak was circa WWI. We are still technologically developing, so there’s material progress. There’s just no longer cultural/spiritual progress.

    In any event, I’m pretty sure that the great migrations/pagan warbands are essentially baked into the cake at this point.

    It’s more of a problem of post-modernism/consumer capitalism/mass materialism than anything else.

    Oswald Spengler did a wonderful analysis on this, basically seeing the analogy between High Cultures and other living things. Meaning that they are life, in the sense that they are born and they die.

    You are unhappy that the West (Faustian civilization) is ending. Which is fine, but you can’t fix it because it’s not really fixable in the way that you want to fix it. You are going to need to find what’s in the future. You’re looking to the past.

    The pagan warbands are coming (in the future). What are you going to do about this as the civilization continues to ossify and decline?

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Lokland: “Last, women can gain a far more powerful position in the world by being feminine than being a dominant bitch.”

    Yes, and I see it everyday here. Although some can be the devil in disguise, you know the one, the corporate ladder climber.

    @Hope:
    Standing ovation for your last two paragraph!

  • doomwolf

    @Just1Z

    For further world-dominance ideas, check this link:
    http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html
    Point #100 is especially devious. Free advice is good for a “please don”t kill me card” right?

    “Question to men:

    Would you want your sisters, daughters, mothers, and wives working on a dangerous, messy oil rig, or in an office?”

    NO.

    @Lokland

    “Last, women can gain a far more powerful position in the world by being feminine than being a dominant bitch.”

    It’s amazing what you can get me to do if you follow up your request with a pretty smile. Assuming you’re female. If you’re male I’m going to back away slowly and look for a door. Just saying,

  • Ted D

    ““She was always around. She didn’t make many demands, but she wanted to be a part of his life every waking moment, and when he pulled away for some autonomy, she followed close behind to reestablish intimacy as fast as possible.”

    Ok. First of all, honestly this doesn’t sound so bad to me. I’ve had to learn to give my wife (past and current) space because I don’t mind the scenario described above at all. Seriously.

    Second, how the hell do you folks that can’t live with your partner for a week intend to survive marriage? I’m not being a smart ass, but the reality is if you marry , you will see that person almost every, single, day of your life. So, if after a week they are driving you nuts, perhaps the relationship isn’t meant for the long haul.

    Just my .02

  • Ted D

    ADBG – no and no

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Ted, sometimes you just need alone space for a little bit. My SO lives hours away and I don’t get to see her all the time, but even when she comes in, occasionally I need a small break. So I keep my iPOD handy and just check into the web-er-net on occasion.

    This realllllyy ground her nerves at first, but she does understand it now. It’s extremely intense to have someone ALWAYS THERE.

    I imagine if I were to live with her, I’d take a few hours in my Man-Cave and watch tv shows I like or something.

    @ Lok and Doom

    I am glad to see that the men here do not want their women working on oil rigs for the sake of “equality.” I think most men recognize that full equality is bullshit and a bad idea, and most men would be horrified to see it come to full fruition.

    I am pretty sure most men do not get off on the idea of excelling at female equalities. I’m good at working in groups, much better than my SO, but I don’t think of it as “I am an even better than a woman than a woman!”

  • VD

    The West is ending because cultures end when they become culturally exhausted/run into resource constraints.

    Sure. Feminism/equalitarianism is merely the form in this case.

    You are unhappy that the West (Faustian civilization) is ending. Which is fine, but you can’t fix it because it’s not really fixable in the way that you want to fix it. You are going to need to find what’s in the future. You’re looking to the past.

    I never said it was fixable. In fact, I publicly pointed out the precise opposite in columns written back in 2001 and 2004.

    The pagan warbands are coming (in the future). What are you going to do about this as the civilization continues to ossify and decline?

    I wouldn’t assume the warbands will all be pagan.

  • INTJ

    @ Iggles

    You mean the male hamster ;) Yep, it is, lol!

    Well I’ve always been annoyed by how the hamster is considered exclusively female. Yes, it’s true that men tend to be more logical than women and that current society encourages women to pursue their base instincts (and rationalize them if necessary). But while the hamster might be more common and more severe in the average woman than the average man, it certainly does occur in males.

  • INTJ

    @ Hope

    Just1z, I don’t like to get into politics, but a lot of the 47% do pay taxes on the local level, such as taxes on goods, services, and payroll taxes, just not necessarily federal income taxes. They also often pay taxes then get a return back, so that money collects interest in the federal coffers.

    Not to mention a lot of those 47% include students and retirees, who shouldn’t be paying taxes…

  • Just1Z

    This is quite a funny explanation of why feminism has an equality-seeking credibility-shortfall

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_profilepage&v=QKYPW0CTZwY

    I think you should be able to handle the sco’ish accent, d’ya ken hens? the peculiar words are comprehensible from the context, or ask PJ what bint means. it isn’t rude over here (or India I have been told).

    he’s a funny guy on the GirlWritesWhat channel – enjoy, he’s cool

  • Just1Z

    Sorry PJ but you’re approaching peejcon4, I’m leaving you to your beaulux.

    I tried being nice, but you just can’t manage an even keel, can you?

  • Just1Z

    @Hope
    thanks for the insight, I am a foreigner your ways are mysterious and strange…that and the fact that I hate politicians of all stripes in all countries – same shit, different gravy

    What many western countries do have in common is that the rich (1% if you wish) don’t pay much tax as a %age of their income, the big companies have overseas HQs for tax purposes, the poor don’t have the money, so every time it’s the middles that gets the bill. Guess where I am?

    I don’t want to pay for free housing for single-mummies-by-choice and their child benefits. or third generation never employed.

    hence men opting to minimise their earnings to minimise their taxes. see Captain Capitalism’s blog – it’s what he’s doing. to really score with benefits you need to give birth to a kid with no resident daddy.

  • JP

    @VD:

    “Pagan warbands” is shorthand.

    The successful warbands with respect to the Roman Empire were Arian Christians.

    @Hope:

    “The elites are no longer national, but global. They care not about US faltering, because with their wealth, they can be anywhere. They’ve transcended.”

    A lot of the “wealth” is fake.

    It doesn’t really exist.

    They haven’t transcended anything; they’re just delusional (in the sense that they don’t really understand the underlying reality).

  • JP

    @Hari:

    “In the US its unfortunately not “pagans” who are coming but more and more Catholics (sorry Susan but you know how I feel about intolerant monotheism).”

    I think that was 10 years ago, if you are talking about hispanics. The construction boom ended.

    Now, it’s people from Asia.:

    http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2012/11/09/what-about-asian-americans/

    And the immediate American problem is that the hegemonic delegitmation process has begun. Which is going to be bad news unless the U.S. comes up with an actual solution that actually mitigates the damage.

  • JP

    “If you are in the system you have to work unless you can prove “disability” which is very difficult to do.”

    Yes.

    As I tell my clients, you actually have to have medical evidence that proves you are disabled.

    Administrative Law Judges generally only care about the evidence.

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

    @Hope

    Trickle down economics hasn’t worked.

    I’ll agree that supply-side promises of windfall tax revenue didn’t materialize as promised. But I haven’t seen any evidence that demand-side economics works all that well, either. The only time it has (per my college economic history classes) was when the gov’t all but nationalized the economy during WW2. That wasn’t meant to be a long-term solution, and it was rolled back dramatically after the war was over.

    This little nugget was reported in July by Bloomberg News, well before the election. I never heard it mentioned at all during the debates, though I wouldn’t have expected the President to do so:
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-25/companies-say-3-million-unfilled-positions-in-skill-crisis-jobs.html

    No federal stimulus would have addressed this particular problem, which is probably why unemployment remains so high.

  • Just1Z

    Thanks to Doomwolf for his link, entertaining! and so informative.

    I have done more investigation into my plan for world domination bwahahahah etc

    unfortunately Sai, you’re out of a jub:

    First and foremost, do not hire the hot chick. You know what I mean; every Bond villain surrounds himself with one or two hulking henchmen, a dozen to a hundred hired killers and one lone female, invariably gorgeous and always the weak link in the chain.

    Hey, I’m as human as the next guy; I understand the appeal of a pretty face, especially when your other employees are a pack of broken-nosed thugs. But the cold, hard truth is that it’s just not worth jeopardizing your one shot at global domination to watch some cutie sashay around the fortress in a mini-skirt.

    You might tell yourself she has strategic value; she can seduce that womanizing 007 and lure him to his doom. Trust me, it never works. In From Russia With Love, SPECTRE recruits blonde bombshell Tatiana Romanova to seduce Bond and set him up for the kill; instead she falls for him and turns on her handlers. In You Only Live Twice, a helplessly bound Bond faces torture from SPECTRE’s ravishing redhead Helga Brandt and her nasty collection of surgical instruments. She uses them only to cut Bond loose for a bout of lovemaking. In Live and Let Die, Kananga’s inner circle consists of a fat killer, a hook-handed hoodlum, a possibly immortal zombie lord and, of course, Solitaire, a sexy female fortune-teller. (Which of these things does not belong?) Naturally she’s seduced by 007 and disaster follows. Most famously, Pussy Galore — a career criminal on the verge of pulling off the biggest heist of her career — is completely reformed by one roll in the hay with James Bond and sells out her partner-in-crime Goldfinger, literally on the doorstep of Fort Knox.

    To be fair, not every bad girl is swayed by a tryst with James Bond. Fiona in Thunderball and Elektra in The World Is Not Enough have their fun with the super-spy and remain happily on the side of evil. Until they’re shot to death, that is. Fatima Blush of Never Say Never Again emerges from her dalliance with 007 as gleefully rotten as ever . . . until she explodes.

    On the whole however, hiring a female agent tends to open you up to more risks than you’ll want to take on. And really, why bother if she’ll be the only woman in the entire organization, anyway? Or were you planning to outfit the volcano fortress with a “Ladies” room and separate shower facilities just for her? When you’re already guilty of nuclear blackmail, genocide and missile toppling, the last thing you should care about is complaints from the Equal Employment Opportunity crowd<. But if for some reason you feel you simply must hire a woman, then for pity’s sake at least don’t tempt fate with a name like “Pussy Galore.”

    http://www.hmss.com/films/villains/evilgenius/

  • Ted D

    ADBG – I guess “alone time” is different from person to person. I get most of my share of “alone time” sitting in bed with my wife while she watches TV and I do my thing on the laptop or iPad. Other than that, my daily drive to work and an occasional solo excursion are all I need.

    That being said, my wife and I have spent entire afternoons together without talking more than a few short paragraphs worth. So perhaps I get enough space from her even when I’m with her. I’ll have to think on this, because generally I DO need space from my friends and extended family.

  • JP

    “Construction has given way to Big Agro and Big Meat, which employs EVEN MORE illegal Catholic immigrants from south of the boarder.”

    My point was that the momentum has shifted from hispanic to asian immigration.

    This is really only relevant to the question of whether California is going to be primarily a hispanic culture or an asian-hispanic fusion culture and has little to do with anything else.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Hari: “Any examples of that? Thatcher? Clinton (Hillary)? Gandhi (Indira)?, Rice? Who?”

    Lol. I would pull out Indira Ghandi from the list, The others are not women, but creatures from the opposite sex, and career politicians…enough said. You could also include Madeleine Allbright and Segolene Royal in the pack.
    I was talking about the ambitious, feminine, young, well mannered, sweet talking and very attractive girls coming from a small village hitting the capital city with high career expectations in big corporations. I don’t know how that scene looks like in the US though.

  • JP

    @VD:

    “And yes, in any sane society that wishes to survive, women and 80 percent of men would not be permitted to vote. John Adams explained the former, Cicero the latter. I understand most people think I’m crazy. Most people also thought I was crazy when I told them to buy gold like crazy at $275 an ounce when Gordon Brown was dumping it. Most people are idiots… which is why nearly every coherent thinker since Ancient Greece has known that democracy is insane, unstable, and unsustainable.”

    Preventing 80 percent of men and all women from voting doesn’t really do anything in terms of the longevity of a High Culture.

    I understand your point, but I don’t think that taking away the right to vote from women is really going to fix anything.

    The current embodiment of the Savior/Welfare State is a function of the problems encountered during the Great Depression and relates directly to industrialization.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Ted:

    Second, how the hell do you folks that can’t live with your partner for a week intend to survive marriage? I’m not being a smart ass, but the reality is if you marry , you will see that person almost every, single, day of your life. So, if after a week they are driving you nuts, perhaps the relationship isn’t meant for the long haul.

    I questioned this as well, and tbh it was kind of at the root of my insecurity when I felt him pulling away. But as ADBG mentioned above, I’m fine with the idea of him having his own “man cave” for retreat, and I actually don’t mind having my own alone time as well. We’ve also been able to each do our own thing, not speaking to each other, simply sharing the same room for company. It’s a pretty nice arrangement, if I do say so myself! :)

  • JP

    ” but there has been no downward shift in the momentum of illegal Catholic immigration.”

    I think it’s net zero at the moment because there’s no longer a credit bubble.

    In any event, religious freedom is going to be the least of our worries going forward.

    Secular liberalism doesn’t have the slightest interest in it beyond being annoyed that religion is still here and that’s who is going to be running the show for some time.

  • JP

    This thread has gone completely off the rails. Break’s over. Back to briefing.

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

    Not to mention a lot of those 47% include students and retirees, who shouldn’t be paying taxes…

    If they earn income, as most students and retirees do, they should pay some % in taxes. That’s the only “fair” way to fund the gov’t IMO. Deductions and tax credits ad nauseam are primary reasons why the U.S. has a revenue problem. It isn’t because we don’t have a progressive tax code. Other way around…

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Say whaat: “We’ve also been able to each do our own thing, not speaking to each other, simply sharing the same room for company. It’s a pretty nice arrangement, if I do say so myself!”

    That looks like a real passionate and heart warming relationship………….. Well, I guess everyone finds his /her own way with relationships. Whatever works.

  • Sassy6519

    This thread……………………………

    I’m going to need another package of twizzlers for this.

  • Ted D

    SayWhaat – ” We’ve also been able to each do our own thing, not speaking to each other, simply sharing the same room for company. It’s a pretty nice arrangement, if I do say so myself!”

    This! This is exactly how “personal space” works in my marriage. I have all the space I need when she is with me, because when I’m quiet she can sit next to me and leave me alone while keeping me company.

  • Ted D

    The flip side is this is why people being around tends to annoy me in general. For some reason most people insist on talking to someone if they are near them regardless of whether or not they have anything of importance to say. I very much enjoy my wife’s company because much of it is spent in silence, or at least with no idle chit chat. We talk if we have something to say, and simply enjoy each others company in silence when we don’t.

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    This! This is exactly how “personal space” works in my marriage. I have all the space I need when she is with me, because when I’m quiet she can sit next to me and leave me alone while keeping me company.

    The flip side is this is why people being around tends to annoy me in general. For some reason most people insist on talking to someone if they are near them regardless of whether or not they have anything of importance to say. I very much enjoy my wife’s company because much of it is spent in silence, or at least with no idle chit chat. We talk if we have something to say, and simply enjoy each others company in silence when we don’t.

    Haha yup. My ideal version of “personal space” would be sitting next to or cuddling with my SO while I daydream or do work on the computer. :D

  • INTJ

    From an etymological perspective, it should be noted that hypergamy is not necessarily male or female. Hypergamy can be practiced by either sex. It just so happens that historically, female hypergamy, aka hyperandry, has been more common.

  • Ted D

    INTJ – ” Haha yup. My ideal version of “personal space” would be sitting next to or cuddling with my SO while I daydream or do work on the computer.”

    Yep! And it only took me 2 LTRs and 2 marriages to find it. :-p

  • Sai

    Re: personal space
    No awkward silences that way, right? :)

    “So here in the above exchange you admit you never thought yourself unattractive at all but had parents who had to “check” you before you got too big in attitude for your britches because of your looks?

    What gives?”
    My parents had to check me so I didn’t devote a lifetime of work to yelling at other people.

    @Just1Z
    It was worth a try, I guess. :mrgreen:

  • Ted D

    Of course those relationships span the time from 16 to 39 years old though. LOL

  • Ted D

    Hari Christmas – ” I’ll tell you how, they don’t intend to survive marriage. These people aren’t even engaged. Marriage isn’t anywhere near the table. Its just another “relationship” out of many to come.”

    Well then to my original point: why be with them at all? If they don’t intend to marry their current SO someday, why bother continuing the relationship?

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    This thread = completely overtaken by Plain Jane.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @hary christmas: “Ah Hah! You finally said it, “attractive”. The “intent coloured with natural infatuation” is not simply enough, now is it?”

    With all due respect, I’m slowly beginning to understand why so many people pick on you all the time here. I must be slow witted :-)
    You seem to have personal, defensive issues about your looks. My comment was meant to describe a category of young ambitious women in the Czech Republic. Wether I find them personally attractive or not is irrelevent.
    And yes, I don’t find myself guilty of being more physically attracted to women that suit my own taste. I very much doubt that when you enter a public place, a fat, swearing “Mike or Bill” with a baseball cap on and the face of Newt Gingrich would be the first that would catch the gaze of your flirty eyes.

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    Well then to my original point: why be with them at all? If they don’t intend to marry their current SO someday, why bother continuing the relationship?

    This is a common thing amongst young women (especially the ones that are interested in young guys), and I can’t really figure it out.

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

      Sheesh, Vox Day is trying to repeal the 19th Amendment on my blog and Plain Jane is off her meds again. Here goes the Delete button!

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    As Just1Z pointed out, Hairy Christmas seems to be clogging up the comment threads. Perhaps another PJ ban is in order?

  • Hari Christmas

    Damien Vulaume December 2, 2012 at 3:44 pm

    @hary christmas: “Ah Hah! You finally said it, “attractive”. The “intent coloured with natural infatuation” is not simply enough, now is it?”

    With all due respect, I’m slowly beginning to understand why so many people pick on you all the time here. I must be slow witted :-)
    You seem to have personal, defensive issues about your looks.

    —-

    You are new so you missed the endless threads with men saying “women say they want nice, sensitive guys who will treat them right but they don’t…..wah …. I had to take the red pill to find out the truth”

    They are surprised to learn that yes we want nice, sensitive guys who treat us right but whom we are also attracted to first. They seem to think that being nice is enough, and I don’t know where they got that idea from since we women never say that.

    Just like when men say they want x amount of qualities in a woman, its a given that they are talking about a woman they are attracted to first, same goes for us.

    That was kind of what I was getting at in a joking way.

  • Iggles

    @ PJ:

    Did she have a career? Hobbies? Family (that she loved, not common in the USA, heh)? Friends? A life of her own outside some random dude she shacked up with?

    Isn’t it usually people who don’t have a life who do stuff like that?

    :lol:

    There definitely a “type” that’s prone to do this.

    It’s the high intensity, drama folks who usually dive right in. Heads first. I have a friend like this. She loves the beginning stages – intense chemistry, falling fast, fantastic sex, practically moving in together within weeks – but the momentum never seems to last. She admits it’s a risky strategy and has had her heart crushed many times, but she loves the rush too much to try building a relationship at a slower pace.

    To each their own..

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Olive: “This thread = completely overtaken by Plain Jane.”
    It does look like that indeed! :-)

    Now, THIS is intersting:
    Ted D: “I very much enjoy my wife’s company because much of it is spent in silence, or at least with no idle chit chat.”
    INTJ: “Haha yup. My ideal version of “personal space” would be sitting next to or cuddling with my SO while I daydream or do work on the computer.”

    What I found, based on my experiences, is that girls (rather than women) tend to feel insecure or neglected in a relationship if they don’t get enough attention at home, attention in a verbal way. I’ve always found women more verbal and talkative than men in their social interactions, certainly between them, but with everybody in general. I think they’re more communicative or at least need to be much more so than men.
    Although what I gather from Ted D is different, he’s talking about his grown up mariage, and apparently a tacit agreement between him and his wife.

    On another note, I’m always a bit distressed when I see those couples in restaurants who can spend the whole dinner without utering a single word to each other, obviously bored and used to one another. This I witnessed everywhere. I never understood how why those couples were still together.

  • MLM

    “INTJ December 2, 2012 at 3:45 pm

    @ Ted D

    Well then to my original point: why be with them at all? If they don’t intend to marry their current SO someday, why bother continuing the relationship?

    This is a common thing amongst young women (especially the ones that are interested in young guys), and I can’t really figure it out.”

    Women are the only ones that do this?

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    I’m always a bit distressed when I see those couples in restaurants who can spend the whole dinner without utering a single word to each other, obviously bored and used to one another.

    Last Valentine’s Day my BF and I went to Olive Garden (I know, I know, so cliche) and there was a couple at a table right near us, both on their smartphones/texting The. Entire. Time. My BF and I spent several moments quietly poking fun at the awkwardness.

  • INTJ

    @ Damien Vulaume

    What I found, based on my experiences, is that girls (rather than women) tend to feel insecure or neglected in a relationship if they don’t get enough attention at home, attention in a verbal way. I’ve always found women more verbal and talkative than men in their social interactions, certainly between them, but with everybody in general. I think they’re more communicative or at least need to be much more so than men.

    Hah. Maybe I just need to let out my natural asshole game and say “Shut up bee-itch!”

  • Ted D

    Damien Vulaume – “I’m always a bit distressed when I see those couples in restaurants who can spend the whole dinner without utering a single word to each other, obviously bored and used to one another. This I witnessed everywhere. I never understood how why those couples were still together.”

    Well, we usually at least talk a little, but we are close enough to this that I feel confident answering.

    It’s simple: we do not need to talk to enjoy being with each other. Literally, I feel better just being in her presence, and she enjoys the calming influence I have on her. (Deep down she is a slightly extroverted social butterfly ENFJ). We can enjoy a meal alone, but just sharing it with each other makes it better, even if we have nothing at all to say to each other. And at the root of it, this is why I love having her with me as much as possible. She doesn’t waste my time with inane yapping about nothing, and her presence adds to my enjoyment of just about everything I like doing.

    Now, I’ve seen “silent couples” that we’re silent because the were miserable with each other, but that is in no way the same as what my wife and I share.

    But we get alone time occasionally. She is out with her mom and the girls shopping for a dress for her Xmas party, and the boys and I rearranged the living room furniture to make room for the tree. Oh, and I got the oil in the van changed. Pretty productive use of our time apart.

  • VD

    Vox Day is trying to repeal the 19th Amendment on my blog and Plain Jane is off her meds again.

    Hey now… I simply made an observation. I have repeatedly stated there is zero chance of any Western society restricting voting in any manner. I expect children and aliens to be given the franchise first. Just remember that I observed it before the collapse.

    It’s remarkable how obvious the financial crash of 2008 was to everyone after the fact. I expect the unsustainable demographics of Western societies will be equally ex post facto obvious.

  • Ted D

    Olive – “Last Valentine’s Day my BF and I went to Olive Garden (I know, I know, so cliche) and there was a couple at a table right near us, both on their smartphones/texting The. Entire. Time. My BF and I spent several moments quietly poking fun at the awkwardness.”

    And again, the wife and I resemble this enough to chime in and I’d like to give you an alternative view on this. Perhaps this couple was indeed so bored with each other that the were seemingly ignoring each other right at the table. But…

    My wife and I do this on occasion. It isn’t that we are bored with each other. It is that we are so comfortable with each other that we realize it is OK if we are not always 100% focused on each other as we spend time together. I don’t get offended if my wife picks up her phone at dinner to glance at a Facebook, and she doesn’t take it personally if I send a text or two during dinner. I’m not ignoring her at all. I’m thoroughly enjoying her company WHILE I’m writing that text. And she enjoys that I enjoy her company. She knows that while she is checking Facebook, I am sitting across the table appreciating her companionship even though she isn’t paying much attention to me at the moment. Her just being with me means a great deal to me, and since I enjoy her company often, I have to allow that she needs to focus on others sometimes as well. By allowing each other the opportunity to mentally “check out” while spending time together, we can spend more time together and still maintain relationships with others.

    This is how we use modern technology and communications to improve our lives. It allows us to spend more time together without neglecting our commitments to foster other relationships with friends and family.

  • Iggles

    It’s simple: we do not need to talk to enjoy being with each other. Literally, I feel better just being in her presence, and she enjoys the calming influence I have on her. (Deep down she is a slightly extroverted social butterfly ENFJ). We can enjoy a meal alone, but just sharing it with each other makes it better, even if we have nothing at all to say to each other. And at the root of it, this is why I love having her with me as much as possible. She doesn’t waste my time with inane yapping about nothing, and her presence adds to my enjoyment of just about everything I like doing.

    This is lovely, Ted! Aww :D

    And probably the most romantic thing I’ve ever read on HUS.

    I feel the same way about my boyfriend. We don’t need to talk to enjoy being together.

  • JP

    “It’s remarkable how obvious the financial crash of 2008 was to everyone after the fact.”

    2008 was my best year recently for investment and speculation. It was absolutely wonderful, in the sense that an amusement park is wonderful. When you see a major financial bubble, you short it.

    I can’t deal with Financial Repression. 2011 was my worse year ever. Fortunately, I’ve recovered and am now back to steady positive returns again.

    “I expect the unsustainable demographics of Western societies will be equally ex post facto obvious.”

    They are obvious now and have been obvious for some time. Although Japan and South Korea seem to be worse.

    @Susan:

    In fairness to Vox, he was also recommending that non-property owning men also be stripped of the right to vote.

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

      In fairness to Vox, he was also recommending that non-property owning men also be stripped of the right to vote.

      In that case, forget I objected. :)

  • Ted D

    Iggles – I said I had a VERY gooey emotional center. There are few people in this world that will ever see any of it at all, and the only people that have seen it in all it’s horror and glory are my LTR mates. So perhaps you can understand why I find it so damn hard to use “game” on my wife. She is literally the only person in my life that knows or sees the real me in its entirety every single day. No one, even my closets friends, sees it all.

  • Ted D

    Lol. Closet = closest above. Beer and iPad autocorrect for the lose!

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Ted,
    To each his own (recall that I refuse to get a smartphone precisely because I don’t want to be THAT person, but if it doesn’t bother you it’s no skin off my back). However, I want to point out something.

    There’s a difference between “spending time together” and being in a setting that sort of facilitates face-to-face interaction and communication. For example, at this very moment I’m spending a nice Sunday afternoon with my BF, but I’m sitting here writing this post, while he’s watching football (you Stillers fans!) and loudly expressing his disdain for his videogame. No talking required.

    However, if we were out to dinner somewhere and he had to check his facebook every 15 minutes, I’d become increasingly annoyed. Again, it’s a manners thing for me. But as always, YMMV.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @INTJ: “Hah. Maybe I just need to let out my natural asshole game and say “Shut up bee-itch!”

    Oh man…… showing your true colours, hé? Why being so prompt at lashing out insults at girls? Good luck in finding your soul mate.
    Looks like there are lots of things going on here that I don’t understand :-)

  • INTJ

    Bah. It isn’t voting that’s the problem. Everyone knows women can’t drive.

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

  • Ted D

    Olive – ” There’s a difference between “spending time together” and being in a setting that sort of facilitates face-to-face interaction and communication.”

    I actually agree with you on this, which is why we both make an effort not to be on the phone often when out. But, we spend so much time together that it hardly makes a difference if I choose dinner or TV time in bed to strike up a conversation. So, if we don’t have anything to say at dinner, why not use the tike for something more productive than talking about the weather?

  • INTJ

    @ Damien Vulaume

    Oh man…… showing your true colours, hé? Why being so prompt at lashing out insults at girls? Good luck in finding your soul mate.
    Looks like there are lots of things going on here that I don’t understand

    I was being facetious.

    Though admittedly there have been times when I’ve wanted to do this:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zTTZ54W2Ug

  • Iggles

    Iggles – I said I had a VERY gooey emotional center. There are few people in this world that will ever see any of it at all, and the only people that have seen it in all it’s horror and glory are my LTR mates

    Often the people with the toughest shells are soft on the inside! :)

    My boyfriend has a pessimistic view of most people. He readily admits he had his guard up with me until he could fully assess my character and what I am about. I figured out it because when he falls, he falls hard. He’s been burned in the past by lovers and friends so to make it into his inner circle takes time and building trust.

    Also speaking of tough shells, one of my best friends embodies this too. On first impression she comes off tough and/or intimidating to some, but once you get to know her she’s nothing like that! Lol. She’s a big goofball (she loves pulling pranks) and is a caring, genuine person :)

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Ted,
    I don’t feel that facebook is ever “productive,” but again, YMMV.

  • Ted D

    Olive – LOL on Facebook. I agree. But my wife puts it to great use staying in touch with her large circle while spending most of her time with me and our children. To me, that is productive and a rather great multitasking use of time.

  • Ted D

    Iggles – ” My boyfriend has a pessimistic view of most people. He readily admits he had his guard up with me until he could fully assess my character and what I am about. I figured out it because when he falls, he falls hard. He’s been burned in the past by lovers and friends so to make it into his inner circle takes time and building trust.”

    From this description I think you have a pretty damn good idea of how I work as well. Your description of your husband and his experiences with “the world” and getting burned very my mirror my own past. And indeed, when I fall, it leaves a huge crater. ;-)

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    My husband does his man cave thing by going to the shooting range (which he’s at now). I did go with him before I was pregnant/nursing, but only rarely.

    We often play video games or do stuff on our computers in the same room, just being comfortable, and every now and then talking about game stuff. He’s not into sports (which I totally appreciate).

    I do like to ask him silly female questions like “what are you thinking?” and “what are ya up to?” He hates those questions. I’m generally not very talkative though, being more introverted than him.

    But I like my personal space, too. When I first moved in with him, he asked me why I had closed the door when I used the bathroom. I was like, uh? Apparently he grew up with open bathroom doors, and when I close the door, he thinks I’m being distant.

    On a selfish note, I appreciate baby napping time, when I can be all alone, too.

  • JP

    @Iggles:

    “My boyfriend has a pessimistic view of most people. He readily admits he had his guard up with me until he could fully assess my character and what I am about. I figured out it because when he falls, he falls hard. He’s been burned in the past by lovers and friends so to make it into his inner circle takes time and building trust.”

    I have a rather pessimistic view of myself. I readily admit that I have burned myself in the past.

    I’ve noticed that the common denominator in many of my live problems have been that there was a significant contribution to the problem by me.

  • JP

    “I do like to ask him silly female questions like “what are you thinking?” ”

    I’ve found that my wife generally doesn’t like the answer to this question.

  • http://x OffTheCuff

    Ohhh… troll is gone, now we can talk like grownups. Hi, hope your Sunday is as awesome as mine. We brewed beer, made my Sicilian grandmother’s meat sauce, and played some games with the kids.

    Any real relationship cannot be filled with 24/7 activity, unless you’re both dopamine-addled extroverts. Even a dual-extrovert pair needs some down time — they just do it in private.

    Wifey and I are all over the map, sometimes when we are out, we chat up strangers, other times we only talk to each other, and once in a whole it might actually look like we’re being totally silent (but we are usually playing footsie).

    She actually never asks me what am I thinking — we are kinda opposite in many ways.

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

      We brewed beer, made my Sicilian grandmother’s meat sauce, and played some games with the kids.

      That sounds like a fabulous Sunday! We didn’t get to see much of our kids this weekend – I missed them! Next Sunday is tree trimming and I am planning to make “Sunday gravy” for guests – I can’t claim a family recipe, though.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Olive: “I don’t feel that facebook is ever “productive,”

    I don’t either. Besides the “big brother” side to it, it is often a time spent on it virtually communicating with close ones you could actually meet by just taking the subway and share a real human meeting. with them.

    @Ted D: “But my wife puts it to great use staying in touch with her large circle while spending most of her time with me and our children.”

    This I observed with many couple around me. I don’t know about the world statistics of facebook users, but I woud not be surprised if it showed that there are more female users than male users. Just a guess.

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

    To each his own (recall that I refuse to get a smartphone precisely because I don’t want to be THAT person, but if it doesn’t bother you it’s no skin off my back). However, I want to point out something.

    I share this idea I only want a smartphone for uses like directions (since I can’t read a map) but I wouldn’t want to use it when I’m around people and talking. I do like Facebook both for the keeping tabs on people and for the chances of learning new stuff really quickly I had found many interesting articles by people sharing with other people things I’m interested but they don’t know I’m into or they are not close enough to share. Is also a good way to publicize my blog posts.
    In spending time with hubby is good that we are past the stage of insecurity so sometimes we spent time talking all day,sometimes over coffee, he goes out with friends to play Car Wars I go out with friends to watch Twilight, sometimes we stay at home he is in his computer and I am in mine no need to say anything. And all this is normal.

  • Ted D

    “it is often a time spent on it virtually communicating with close ones you could actually meet by just taking the subway and share a real human meeting. with them.”

    Well sure. But, in order to do that, my wife would have to be gone from home often, as she really has a huge number of friends. And, many of them are still in New Hampshire, and she can hardly just jump in the car for a 12 hour drive to shoot the breeze.

    If she didn’t satisfy her social needs by using Facebook, she would either need to spend most of her free time visiting people, or she would go stir crazy for lack of socializing, because obviously I’m not going to be able to meet that demand. She is the reason I discovered any use for Facebook at all. But unlike her, I’m perfectly happy with a small handful of friends I only talk to on occasion.

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Re: facebook, I guess I should clarify because my post made it sound like I despise it lol. I do find facebook quite useful for keeping in touch with old friends and even making plans in some cases. I just think that it can become quite addicting, and can be used as a substitute for actual real life interaction. Now, if you’re Ted (who, for an introvert, is quite social here at HUS ;-) ), that’s not necessarily a bad thing, I guess. But to me, it’s the same thing as if I whipped out my phone and started texting in the middle of a college class or a business meeting. There’s a time and place, and Olive Garden with your SO on Valentine’s Day isn’t it, IMO.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Damien:

    @Say whaat: “We’ve also been able to each do our own thing, not speaking to each other, simply sharing the same room for company. It’s a pretty nice arrangement, if I do say so myself!”

    That looks like a real passionate and heart warming relationship………….. Well, I guess everyone finds his /her own way with relationships. Whatever works.

    I usually try to avoid the need to defend my relationship to anonymous Internet strangers. :) All I was trying to convey was how each of us could find our own “down time” while still enjoying the other’s company. I am very extroverted, and my boyfriend is very introverted, so it works for both of us.

    Sometimes it doesn’t, though…like yesterday, when we nixed half of the errands we needed to run, just because we enjoyed cuddling under the covers for longer than we should have! XD

  • Lokland

    @Olive

    I got to watch a relationship train wreck itself in slow motion via pictures from half way across the planet.

    All bow to the glory of The Facebook which made the hours of 11:30-2:30 incredibly entertaining, yet also sad (for the man in question)…

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Lokland,
    Lol, facebook is a gossip’s playground. “Omigod, did you hear…?” “Yeah, I saw it on facebook!”

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I deactivated my facebook for a long time because everyone seemed fake. Then I reactivated it because everyone just uploads their pictures to it, and I like keeping up with my friends that way.

    I think I might start going traditional and getting albums, though. There is just something more upscale about that.

    I’m glad the rest of you had great Sundays. Mine involved helping to host a Baby Shower. Ugh. Women-folk doing women things. I was appointed baby-sitter, which is cool, I like kids, but goddam.

  • Ted D

    Olive – “Now, if you’re Ted (who, for an introvert, is quite social here at HUS )”

    Dear, I’m not introverted because I don’t like to talk. I’m introverted because I don’t particularly like talking with people face to face. The Internet is my favorite means of communicating, followed by text and then email. I can keep up with my friends and actually only see them once every few months for an evening and be good. I get all the interaction I need for the most part virtually, and rely on my wife and family for the face to face stuff. And I love that I can do all this without actually having to go visit anyone.

  • Lokland

    @Olive

    ““Omigod, did you hear…?” “Yeah, I saw it on facebook!”

    I have to share.
    First, though it sucks, the result is good for the guy in question.
    (Who ended the relationship this afternoon.)

    LDR, one on the other side of ocean.
    Girl has lingerie/sluber party with friends. Kool.
    Girl uploads picks to Facebook, one at a time as night progresses. WTF!! (Even more WTF!!! as I could see these and I know her in a professional capacity, as well as her now ex.)

    Girl gets comments and subsequently flirts with all her new admirer’s. Ohh hell no.

    Boyfriend becomes just another guy.

    Anyway, long story short, girl was bad news from the get go. Everyone told him so (not me, not my place, but you can be damn sure I was praying he’d listen. I like the kid.).
    Result unsurprising.

    @ADBG

    Pics are the only reason I still keep Facebook. Me and my wife use it as a virtual album.

  • JP

    I win the Worst Sunday Award. I’m briefing and will be for the forseeable future.

    Stupid 18 month lag time.

  • VD

    In that case, forget I objected.

    To understand my perspective on voting, it may help to understand that I have lived most of my adult life in countries where I was not allowed to vote. I simply don’t have the emotional the connection between voting and freedom that most people, particularly Americans, do.

    No doubt the fact that I am a libertarian and no one I have ever voted for has ever won an election at any level may also be a factor.

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

      @VD

      I’m relieved to hear you bear no personal responsibility for Italian election results over the past few years.

  • INTJ

    @ Hope

    But I like my personal space, too. When I first moved in with him, he asked me why I had closed the door when I used the bathroom. I was like, uh? Apparently he grew up with open bathroom doors, and when I close the door, he thinks I’m being distant.

    Hah. I’m actually curious now. Is it common amongst whites to leave the bathroom door open?

  • http://x OffTheCuff

    My kids are all under 12. A day home with them inside is basically ensuring they don’t destroy anything… or each other.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    I’m relieved to hear you bear no personal responsibility for Italian election results over the past few years.

    Akk. My stomach hurts. Please try not to make me laugh so hard! ;)

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Ted,
    I’m mostly just pulling your leg. :-P Though I have a hunch you’re less introverted than my BF, for example, who tends to get in the zone and doesn’t want to be bothered, even via technology. 5 minutes ago I asked him why he was smiling and he just said “because my bitch was leaving me alone.” Douchebag… :-P

  • Ted D

    Olive – “5 minutes ago I asked him why he was smiling and he just said “because my bitch was leaving me alone.” Douchebag… ”

    ROFL! I don’t ever want to hear you say your man doesn’t have game. That answer was brilliant!

  • INTJ

    @ Olive

    5 minutes ago I asked him why he was smiling and he just said “because my bitch was leaving me alone.” Douchebag…

    Hahaha. What a man.

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

    Nice Sunday here too:
    I placed the baby on the opposite side of the crib and his little mind was blown with the new angles (that was mommy’s advice to exercise his eyesight) I made a Tuna Casserole that I always wanted to try and the hubby approved and some Coconut Anise bread (this one is the bread my mother used to sell when we were growing up and has been passed from mother to daughter for at least 4 generations, is a family recipe no one in the country knows how to make it mwa ha ha ha) and I managed to come up with a very interesting theological tale that I think is quite good. Need to put in the folder of “to write” nice Sunday all allong.

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

      @Anacaona

      That sounds like a lovely day! Those small pleasures are the best. Coconut Anise bread sounds delicious – will google.

  • Mike C

    Recall that small businesses get taxed at the normal rate, while investments are taxed at the capital gains rate, which are also deferred until taken out, so the “potential” wealth could go quite low as in cases of bubbles bursting. The complicated mathy derivatives and stock packages are just glorified gambling.

    Hope,

    This isn’t an apples to apples comparison. Most large corporations are C-corps, while small business are either S-corps, LLCs, partnerships, or sole proprietorships.

    The latter do NOT pay any taxes at the “business” level. The businesses are 100% pass through entities, and the “owners” pay personal income tax on the business earnings.

    In contrast, C-corps are double taxed. The business itself pays corporate income tax BEFORE any of the money is distributed to the owners….the stockholders. The U.S. has one of the highest nominal corporate income tax rates in the world at I believe 35% off the top of my head although the effective rate is often much, much lower because the system can be gamed with various deductions. The actual shareholders who own stock then pay tax on any dividends the corporation pays out…..which is presently 15% off the top of my head because of the Bush tax cuts, and also pay capital gains tax on stock appreciation.

    The debate/argument about what is fair tax policy involving corporations, the double tax issue, and whether large corporations even pay real tax (pass through to customers) is beyond the scope of this discussion and I don’t have the time or inclination to get into that. But the way you framed the comparison in terms of the raw facts is misleading.

    The economy at the top is like a giant expensive casino, while the economy at the bottom is the poor and lower middle class making minimum wage and squeaking by, waiting tables, doing cashier work, etc. There are very few who don’t work at all and collect benefits. Not sure how it is in the UK, but that is how it is in the US.

    I agree that the U.S. economy has become too “financialized” with essentially anyone involved in finances, owning paper assets essentially getting too much of the total pie.

    On a different note, Mr. Wavevector….you are just absolutely killing it. Your comments since you have arrived here are exceptional. You absolutely are right on so many things, and I find myself nodding my head reading your comments. You are absolutely right in pointing out that many women still don’t get the value proposition of a man being in a committed, monogamous relationship. There has to be more than regular sex and having a “hot” wife due to the man’s status. There is a massive amount of cognitive dissonance amongst many women even those who ostensibly appear more empathetic to the male POV. At the end of the day, many women value their “strength and independence” and empowerment ABOVE EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING ELSE.

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

      @Mike C

      Uh oh, do I need to start quoting David Buss again at great length?

      There has to be more than regular sex and having a “hot” wife due to the man’s status.

      There has to be? We’re talking about biology. That is the trade – men may increase their SMV via status. It is as simple as that, and actually has nothing to do with commitment.

      many women still don’t get the value proposition of a man being in a committed, monogamous relationship.

      What is the value proposition? Since most men are not in a position to “take care” of a woman in the traditional sense that Mr. Wavevector describes, how do women benefit from male investment?

  • szopen

    @Ashley

    “Side thought: Are men actually threatened by women who are attractive, rich, powerful, and self sufficient because they feel they have nothing to offer (since you suggest that a man needs to feed needed).

    No, (and yes). It’s not “threatened”. It’s “not seeing where do I fit in her life”. When I started to live with my future wife, I was still studying. I felt not comfortable with her, until I finally get the job. I was really, really happy when I brought home my first REAL salary from REAL job and I knew it that I was bringing something to the relationship. I think that if I wouldn’t be able to get the job that time, I would break up with her, no matter how much I loved her.

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

      @szopen and the other guys too

      I felt not comfortable with her, until I finally get the job. I was really, really happy when I brought home my first REAL salary from REAL job and I knew it that I was bringing something to the relationship. I think that if I wouldn’t be able to get the job that time, I would break up with her, no matter how much I loved her.

      I heard from a young friend this weekend who has been seeing someone for about six months. They met via a random encounter and get along really well. The thing is, she is in a high status job. He used to have a similar job but was laid off almost two years ago, and has been unable to get anything even remotely similar. He has been mostly working odd menial jobs to cover his bills. Needless to say, he has become extremely discouraged.

      He recently ended the relationship. He told her that although she is the best thing to have happened to him in months, he “feels like a loser all the time.” He also said that he cannot possibly be responsible for another person’s happiness right now – all of his energy must be directed toward finding employment. He promised that if he gets a job, she will be the first person he calls. She is in love with him, and devastated.

      Does this surprise you? Is this a case of “he’s just not that into you?” or would you feel the same way? What should she do? I think she’s going to have a hard time letting go, because she perceives that the circumstances are entirely to blame, rather than a lack of feeling on his part. She feels that if he cared enough, he would stay in the relationship, and she also points out that he acknowledges his life is better with her in it. I think it’s more about his self-respect. What do you think?

  • szopen

    @susan

    My son was eagerly pointing at fire trucks before he turned one, and my daughter was pretending to feed her stuffed animals before her first birthday.

    I hate to play “girl’s plays” so when I was playing with my daughter, I always played as I would play with a boy. Once we created harpies from the paper and started to play in Jason journey. One moment, when Jason started to shot at the harpies my daughter suddenly declared “and now harpies realise they were wrong and they became good and they will have children“.

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

      One moment, when Jason started to shot at the harpies my daughter suddenly declared “and now harpies realise they were wrong and they became good and they will have children“.

      HAHAHA! I love that.

  • szopen

    @JP

    France seems to be doing just fine.

    But it’s not because native French woman are having children. One could estimate that 1/3 of children born in France are children of immigrants. It’s estimate, since I think there is no official statistics. However, sickle cell anemia is extremely rare among old European population (half of percent for southern european populations), and quite recenlty a data was relased which shown 1/3 of children born in France are now at risk.

    Meaning that fertility in France is driven mainly by immigrant woman, which may still not be integrated within western culture. Meaning France is a poor counter-example to “western culture drives fertility down”.

  • szopen

    @A Definite Beta Guy

    That Hard Work is the foundation of civilizations.

    Yes, but it was alse done by females.

    Every drop of water for laundry, cooking, and indoor chamber pots had to be hauled in by the housewife, and wastewater hauled out. The average North Carolina housewife in 1885 had to walk 148 miles per year while carrying 35 tons of water.5 Coal or wood for open-hearth fires had to be carried in and ashes had to be collected and carried out. There was no more important event that liberated women than the invention of running water and indoor plumbing, which happened in urban America between 1890 and 1930.

    This was REAL work, and that work HAD TO BE DONE by someone.

  • Iggles

    This was REAL work, and that work HAD TO BE DONE by someone.

    + 1

    It rubs me the wrong way to hear women’s contributions to society brushed aside. (i.e., “All they did was birth babies; men did everything else!) While I don’t doubt that men did most of heavy physically tasks, I don’t thing what women brought to the table was insignificant. (And as szopen points out, they also did physical tasks as well)

    I think where the disconnect lies is that throughout history women’s influence was greater felt in throughout personal sphere (impacting individuals, such as her husband, children, relatives, and neighbors) while men dominated the public sphere (work, politics, etc). In the 20th century as more women begin working outside the home, they now have a larger impact on the public sphere. However, many believe that only influencing the public sphere counts as important.

    Civilizations have risen and fallen many times on this rock. One of the common threads I’ve noticed is family is the glue that holds society together. Without those ties there’s little to tether citizens to looking out for one another and the common good. You can build a civilization, but it’s not likely to sustain itself as the personal sphere weakens..

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

    SZopen…”real work”

    Owen Young, who grew up on a farm, ran GE from 1922-1939. Ida Tarbell’s biography contains a word-portrait of what Monday–”wash day”–was like for a farm woman in that era: “he drew from his memory a vivid picture of its miseries: the milk coming into the house from the barn; the skimming to be done; the pans and buckets to be washed; the churn waiting attention; the wash boiler on the stove while the wash tub and its back-breaking device, the washboard, stood by; the kitchen full of steam; hungry men at the door anxious to get at the day’s work and one pale, tired, and discouraged woman in the midst of this confusion.”

  • JP

    “Does this surprise you? Is this a case of “he’s just not that into you?” or would you feel the same way? What should she do? I think she’s going to have a hard time letting go, because she perceives that the circumstances are entirely to blame, rather than a lack of feeling on his part. She feels that if he cared enough, he would stay in the relationship, and she also points out that he acknowledges his life is better with her in it. I think it’s more about his self-respect. What do you think?”

    I sounds like self respect.

    He sounds humiliated because of his employment status and the fact that she is successful while he has been thrown onto the industrial scrapheap, where he suspects, and not without reason, that he will stay forever.

    If I were in his position, I would simply scrap looking for a job and get a Ph.D. in biostatistics or a medical degree.

    Problem solved.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Does this surprise you?”

    No. Women don’t want to be in relationships with losers. Men don’t want to be in relationships with winners.
    “Is this a case of “he’s just not that into you?”
    No. He probably does like her. Fact is the situation won’t end well. Regardless of how they feel now.

    “or would you feel the same way?”

    Exactly the same.

    “What should she do?”

    Quit and work at Starbucks, pray he gets a job or find a new boyfriend.

  • szopen

    @susan

    Does this surprise you?

    No. I am not saying that all men, or even a majority of men would feel the same as him (or as me). But it seems that there is at least sizeable minority who feel really not comfortable if they do not feel they contribute enough. It may be culturally prescribed, as feminists tend to think, or it may be in genes, I don’t know. At one moment in my life my wife have been earning (I hate English tenses) more than me. It was eating me alive. She said she does not care and that it’s not problem for her, yet I felt like a loser. I started to get additional work hours and side jobs. It was like i was not really grown up, not really a male.

    And there could not be done much about that, at least I cannot imagine how could she do anything about it. It was about me, not about her. It was not about lack of love. In fact, the fact that I really care about her only make the case worse. If I wouldn’t care about her and about the relationship, I wouldn’t care about difference in our earnings too.

    But again, I don’t know whether I am simply an outlier – i am outlier in so many other areas, so this could be like that also here – and if this guy feels the same as I was feeling. Sure, this could be just pretext for him, it is possibly that he really “was not that much into relationship”. I am waiting for the other guys’ opinion.

    Well, if there is some tasks in which he feels really comfortable (fixing things etc, or just moving heavy furniture) she could ask him to do them for her. Or she could just claim she needs to go to some area at dark does not feel safe and maybe he could escort her for a moment. Whatever to make him feel she needs him. I don’t know. This could misfire if she would formulate this n a wrong way (e.g. if she would make it look as it would be something he is expected to do). Again, would love to hear from the other guys first.

  • Just1Z

    @Susan
    “I think it’s more about his self-respect. What do you think?”

    Yes, you are wise.

    He may not be (wise), if they can make it work between them he should kick his BS old style values to the kerb.

    I fully believe in people making their own deals. Everywhere from true equality through to patriarchy – whatever you want as long as you are both legal adults of sane mind.

    When the pack/herd is crazy, stop listening to it – Go Your Own Way.

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

      @Just1Z

      I fully believe in people making their own deals. Everywhere from true equality through to patriarchy – whatever you want as long as you are both legal adults of sane mind.

      I agree with this – I’ve been thinking about this re the question of egalitarian marriages vs. those dominated by males (or even by females). In 2012, we can go on about what the majority is doing, and how well, but it doesn’t matter. The only thing that matters is if it works for the individuals in question. If you’re a woman who wants to be Taken in Hand, there are plenty of guys who will dig that. If you’re a woman who wants egalitarian, there are many men happy to sign up for that. There are even manginas who will be in LTRs with people like Amanda Marcotte.

      I think it’s largely a waste of time to argue about what people should do, or more importantly, should want.

  • szopen

    After a thought, don’t go with my advices. That would be just temporary solutions. After all, how many many times she can ask him to help with heavy furnitures. She could also say “do you want me to quit my job? I care about you more than about the job” but frankly, if he would answer “yes”, I would advise her to dump the guy. At least he would be assured that she does not consider him a looser.

    But what do I know, after all.

  • JP

    “ut it seems that there is at least sizeable minority who feel really not comfortable if they do not feel they contribute enough. It may be culturally prescribed, as feminists tend to think, or it may be in genes, I don’t know. At one moment in my life my wife have been earning (I hate English tenses) more than me. It was eating me alive.”

    I have the same problem, but it’s completely driven by my competitiveness rather than my need to contribute.

    I don’t really have an inborn need to contribute. As my wife would admit, I basically have no skills with respect to interacting with the physical world, including lifting, carrying, repairing. That just wasn’t my thing, growing up. I did books and computers and academics.

    I put her in charge of the household repair stuff. She also notes that she knows of no other men quite like me.

    I do apparently have an inborn need to win.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “What is the value proposition? Since most men are not in a position to “take care” of a woman in the traditional sense that Mr. Wavevector describes, how do women benefit from male investment?”

    Do you have any suggestions? Because honestly I don’t. Unless we can get to a point where we CAN completely redefine society AND biology, what exactly SHOULD men be doing to “add value” to a relationship with a woman that isn’t already expected?

    By this I mean, women already expect love, devotion, care, attention, and a whole host of other “lovey dovey” stuff from the men in their lives. (I don’t know what else to call it, but the “emotional” stuff in a relationship.) Problem is, men in general DO NOT see any of that as “adding value” because traditionally men are taught that their “purpose in life” is to make money to support his family. If he isn’t able to be the bread winner, what exactly IS he supposed to excel at? Oh, I can hear the multitude of answers from homemaker to soccar dad, but here is the rub. IF men do this, will women lose attraction for them? Because you see, it is NOT just men who are socialized to expect to be a work horse for their family, but women are also told that men are the workhorse of the family. And, even if that wasn’t the case, if women need a man they can ‘look up to’ and they have high powered careers, what exactly is a man supposed to do to “impress” such a strong and independant woman? Connect with her on an emotional level? Be her domestic god?

    It isn’t just that men don’t feel like they have a place, women seem to believe the same in many cases. And in general, men figure if women don’t have a clue what they want from their men, how the hell are the supposed to provide it? And of course, as we’ve outlined already, men
    NEED to be needed.

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

      @Ted D

      It isn’t just that men don’t feel like they have a place, women seem to believe the same in many cases. And in general, men figure if women don’t have a clue what they want from their men, how the hell are the supposed to provide it? And of course, as we’ve outlined already, men
      NEED to be needed.

      I don’t have the answers either. My question was in good faith – obviously the dynamic between the sexes has changed dramatically – the old value proposition no longer applies. To say that men take care of women, so women should let them lead just doesn’t resonate, because that kind of provisioning is unusual today.

      For me personally, I would say that my husband and I take care of each other. We’ve figured this out as we’ve gone along, but we’re both happy with what we’re putting in and what we’re getting out. I mentioned that I tend to defer to my husband as a direct result of his being the sole provider for our family. When that is not the case, what is the justification for deference or submission?

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “What is the value proposition? Since most men are not in a position to “take care” of a woman in the traditional sense that Mr. Wavevector describes, how do women benefit from male investment?”

    Extending this argument implies that men with enough money should be able to support multiple families.

    *I’ll be taking applications. No one over 5′ 4″, 110 pounds and under.
    Pics required. No kids. No smokers. No drinkers, No partiers. No sluts.

    Jokes.

    ———–

    An analogous situation to the one you presented above is a 21-22 year old male shacking up with a 30 year old female.

    At the time they may have equal SMVs and it can all be dandy.
    A quick look at reality however reveals that the chance of that actually working long term is 0. (In this case because the male SMV increases.)

    In the case you presented, it might be fun for the first few months-years after which its gonna become a daily reminder of how inferior he is to her. Resentment ensues.
    The same occurs in the situation I mentioned above. One person becomes inferior, resentment ensues.

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    And, even if that wasn’t the case, if women need a man they can ‘look up to’ and they have high powered careers, what exactly is a man supposed to do to “impress” such a strong and independant woman? Connect with her on an emotional level? Be her domestic god?

    This explains the “chicks dig jerks” thing. The only way to impress such a strong and independent woman is to be an alpha douchebag.

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

      @INTJ

      And, even if that wasn’t the case, if women need a man they can ‘look up to’ and they have high powered careers, what exactly is a man supposed to do to “impress” such a strong and independant woman? Connect with her on an emotional level? Be her domestic god?

      “This explains the “chicks dig jerks” thing. The only way to impress such a strong and independent woman is to be an alpha douchebag.”

      INTJ, this makes no sense. Once again, let me suggest that data is your friend. The most stable marriages in society today are those between educated individuals who have married assortatively. High status women are clearly happy to mate with men whose status is the same as theirs rather than higher. That is the profile of the marriages in this country with an 83% success rate.

      I understand Megaman’s frustration with you, you really do shoot from the hip. :P

  • JP

    “I think it’s largely a waste of time to argue about what people should do, or more importantly, should want.”

    Unless that’s how you make life decisions.

    “What should I be doing here? What is the ideal to which I should be aspiring?”

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

      “What should I be doing here? What is the ideal to which I should be aspiring?”

      Ah, but the problem is that so many are asking “What should everyone else be doing? Why are they not doing it my way? I don’t like being in the minority, I don’t feel dominant or successful. I think society is broken and will destroy itself soon because there aren’t enough people who think like me.”

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Ah, but the problem is that so many are asking “What should everyone else be doing? Why are they not doing it my way? I don’t like being in the minority, I don’t feel dominant or successful. I think society is broken and will destroy itself soon because there aren’t enough people who think like me.””

    This isn’t necessarily true.
    If two people recieve the same end result via different means, one got a better deal than the other.

    The end result is far less important than the journey it took to get there.

    Example,
    2 men marry virgins.
    One has N of 1. One has N of 10.

    Who has better deal?
    One with N of 10.

    If you allow the unrestricted (and those restricted who take a dalliance or two) continue with their behaviour the value or everyones marriage with a lower N count is decreased.

    Not necessarily bad because guys with low N at marriage probably couldn’t do better anyway. Still, its a smack in the face to enjoy life less then have someone else get the same result.

    Hey you have an MD. Go work at Starbucks. Hey you have a Bs. in Basket Weaving. Go work at Starbucks.

    If society doesn’t segregate the rewards given to different paths then theres no point competing.

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

      @Lokland

      I don’t disagree with you about promiscuity – all of society pays the price for that. I was speaking about the idea that men should rule in relationships. I don’t have a problem with Athol’s Captain/First Officer model – it’s a very useful concept for men whose wives have been Captain for a while…

      Mostly I see the relationship dynamic as a personal choice, and I don’t see how one man whose marriage is egalitarian is either better off or worse off than one whose isn’t. Financially speaking, the egalitarian couple is probably better off.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    INTJ, this makes no sense. Once again, let me suggest that data is your friend. The most stable marriages in society today are those between educated individuals who have married assortatively. High status women are clearly happy to mate with men whose status is the same as theirs rather than higher. That is the profile of the marriages in this country with an 83% success rate.

    At what age do they get married? What happens until then? I’d venture that a sizable portion of these women forego relationships altogether, while many of the rest end up with high dominance assholes.

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

      @INTJ

      At what age do they get married? What happens until then? I’d venture that a sizable portion of these women forego relationships altogether, while many of the rest end up with high dominance assholes.

      The women we’re discussing are college graduates. They marry at 30, on average. I do not think it’s at all true that a sizable number forego relationships – what do you base that claim on? As for high dominance assholes, I don’t think any women wind up with them. They tend not to marry, and when they do, they tend to cheat and then divorce. So in the educated group, that’s got to be some portion of the 17%, at most.

  • Just1Z

    @Susan
    “If you’re a woman who wants to be Taken in Hand, there are plenty of guys who will dig that. If you’re a woman who wants egalitarian, there are many men happy to sign up for that..”

    I could do either, or anywhere between. as long as decisions are taken according to reason and competence I don’t much care who makes those decisions (equality), but if ‘you’ want to defer, okay no biggy, I see myself as horse sense equipped (mostly). I’d be happy to let a relationship wander round that map over time, but then I’m a nurturer, I would expect my wimminz to grow.

    Amanda and I? nahhh!
    well, I just can’t see a future with a pushy feckwit on the grounds of lack of both reason and competence (specifically recognising the real world as opposed to the bizarre, twisted feminist holodeck hell that she infests).

  • JP

    “If you allow the unrestricted (and those restricted who take a dalliance or two) continue with their behaviour the value or everyones marriage with a lower N count is decreased.

    Not necessarily bad because guys with low N at marriage probably couldn’t do better anyway. Still, its a smack in the face to enjoy life less then have someone else get the same result.”

    I wasn’t trying to get high N.

    In fact, I thought that winning involved keeping N at 1 and avoiding any pre-marital sex.

    I was going for winning, not pleasure. In fact, my goal in life wasn’t to “enjoy life”.

  • JP

    I’ll admit that I may have a problem with perfectionism.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “I don’t have the answers either. My question was in good faith – obviously the dynamic between the sexes has changed dramatically – the old value proposition no longer applies. To say that men take care of women, so women should let them lead just doesn’t resonate, because that kind of provisioning is unusual today. ”

    I wasn’t being snarky and assumed the question was in good faith. (if I came off as cranky, chalk it up to no coffee and Monday morning at client location. I had to wear business casual and drive an hour…)

    I think you are correct that each couple needs to suss this out for themselves. The problem is, as individualistic as our society is, we DO NOT in any way I can see teach people to approach relationships in this manner. By and large, there is still a push towards the more traditional roles, and they simply DO NOT apply in the modern West. And, how exactly should a man and woman even attempt this? I mean, should I walk up to an attractive womand say something like “hey, I really like those hot shoes you are wearing. Would you be open to a “taken in hand” relationship?” I exaggerate, but honestly Susan, in this PC world we live in, how is a guy that perhaps wants such a traditional relationship even supposed to figure out which women might be up for it? Other than religious institutions and maybe a few private organizations, I think most men assume ALL women are feminists to some extent, and fear pissing a woman off by asking for another/better deal.

    JP – “I was going for winning, not pleasure. In fact, my goal in life wasn’t to “enjoy life”.”

    Exactly. To me, happiness is a side benefit of living a good life, NOT the goal of life. The goal is to do what needs to be done, and to do it to the best of your ability. I guess I’ve always seen life as a test from God: to prove you can make it through in one piece. I suppose that means even God makes men jump through hoops. :P

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

      @Ted D

      in this PC world we live in, how is a guy that perhaps wants such a traditional relationship even supposed to figure out which women might be up for it? Other than religious institutions and maybe a few private organizations, I think most men assume ALL women are feminists to some extent, and fear pissing a woman off by asking for another/better deal.

      Yes, this is a problem if the number of men able and willing to provide in the traditional sense who want leadership in return is larger than the number of women willing to make that deal. Religious communities do seem like the best bet, but perhaps that works because it does seem like a high percentage of men complaining about this are religious, at least online.

      Whatever the case, it is what it is. There is no way in which you can boss women back into bare feet. Some of us may choose it, that’s the best men are going to get.

  • Just1Z

    I only have one fault JP, my modesty

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

    @SW

    Once again, let me suggest that data is your friend.

    It’s only his friend if it reinforces his predetermined and quite negative opinions of college women. Arguing that “the methodology is wrong” is just a silly pretense. This is an example of a conclusion in search of a factual basis. Ironically, following his own example, you’d be justified in flushing anything he presents down the toilet, for no good reason! :shock:

  • Lokland

    @JP

    “I was going for winning, not pleasure. In fact, my goal in life wasn’t to “enjoy life”.”

    Thats my point.
    If two people are able to win but one receives a disproportionately large amount of pleasure (or lack thereof) then theres something wrong with the society that is allowing one of those two to win.

    You can label as either high or low N people are the winners but to say they both deserve equal things is ridiculous. You could even switch it up by sex.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    We were considering totally different things.
    Didn’t realize the context.

    Your correct.

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

    @I??J

    At what age do they get married? What happens until then? I’d venture that a sizable portion of these women forego relationships altogether, while many of the rest end up with high dominance assholes.

    Without evidence, you’re just venturing into BS land, yet again. Why don’t you do some research of your own for a change?

    For an admitted atheist and Thomas Paine admirer, you have a real knee-jerk, quasi-religious attitude towards facts you don’t like. I don’t see much reason at work here…

  • Ted D

    “At what age do they get married? What happens until then? I’d venture that a sizable portion of these women forego relationships altogether, while many of the rest end up with high dominance assholes.”

    FWIW this is almost exactly what I figured INTJ was getting at with his comment. Sure, college educated women do tend to stay married once they tie the knot, but what are they doing with themselves in the years prior? We know that for many its going to be at least 5 years, and for many a decade or more? So, until they find “Mr. Beta Right” who are they sexing up? Jerks? Cads? Players? Asshats? Seems these guys do manage to get at least a few hits a year… Or, are they spending 4-6 years with a guy they have NO INTENTION to marry someday? Because I’m starting to get the picture that:
    1. A small percentage of women are truly sexxing up cads, either by choice or lack of experience with men.
    2. A decent sized portion do seem to get into relationships, but those relationships are not based on an intent to marry, and instead seem to be either “comfort” relationships or simply something to tide them over until they are “ready” to get married.
    3. some number (small to medium?) of women that just sit out because they either can’t generate any interest from men at all, or can’t generate interest from men THEY deem worthy.

    Seems that the bigger issue may be with the “average” young woman working the serial monogomy tract, since I’d wager they are a larger group than either the fully “unrestricted” bunch or the totally left on the sidelines group. I’ll admit that IF indeed it is only 20% of women sexxing up cads, then they can’t be the primary issue. So, who is left? The women sitting out? Yeah, in some cases if they are simply being too choosy, or more to the point overestimating their actual market value. But I still wager the largest “group” of women fall into catagory 2 above. And, that means that perhaps some of the ‘sphere is right, serial monogomy is just as bad if not MORE disruptive than straight out promiscuity.

    I’m not pointing fingers, I’m interested on everyone’s take.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “Whatever the case, it is what it is. There is no way in which you can boss women back into bare feet. Some of us may choose it, that’s the best men are going to get.”

    LOL. You crack me up with the “barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen” schtik. Tell me honestly, how many men do you know that feel this way? How many here at HUS do you think feel this way? I probably know a small handfull at best, and they are older “red neck” boys from the boonies of Western PA and Ohio. Guys don’t want their wives barefoot and pregnant by and large. They simply want a woman that looks up to him, respects him, loves him, lusts for him, and takes care of him. Most men I know have NO PROBLEM with women working, until it comes to him or them, and at that point I think men AND women tend to defend their needs over the needs of others.

    So, although I appriciate the immagery you paint, do you really think it is an honest attempt at dialogue to continue perpetuating the myth that most men want wives to lose the vote, lose the right to work, and lose all personal freedoms. I get that the ‘sphere is full of such guys, but I’d wager that if you could round up every man alive that has found the Red Pill, the men that want to take away sufferage would STILL be the minority. We don’t want to push women down, we’d simply like to know exactly how we can once again stand next to them, and in the interests of fostering good marriages, perhaps stand just a smidge above a few, so we have a shot at getting some admiration from them.

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

      They simply want a woman that looks up to him, respects him, loves him, lusts for him, and takes care of him.

      If that’s true, then I don’t think we have a problem, because I believe most women want to give that. Not at 21, it’s true, but eventually. I’m not questioning that, I’m questioning whether most women are willing to sign up for the Male Leads, Female Follows shtick.

  • jrd

    INTJ: Is it common amongst whites to leave the bathroom door open?

    No.

  • JP

    “I don’t disagree with you about promiscuity – all of society pays the price for that.”

    I think that one of the issues here is that for some people serial monogamy = promiscuity.

    So, there’s probably a promiscuity semantics issue here.

  • J

    I don’t think its gonna be some kinda catastrophic fall, just the loss of economic superiority resulting in relatively poor living conditions and life quality (which in comparison to cave men, will still be golden).

    It depends on how far the fall is. I’ve spent some time in both Israel and Italy. There was less material wealth, but in some ways the quality of life was higher. Oddly, even Israelis seemed less stressed tha Americans. There’s less anomie in those countries. People seem more connected.

  • Just1Z

    @Megaman
    “@I??J”

    hmmm, that’s a particularly nerdy joke that you are making there. so, what ‘sign’ are you? *lmao*

    can’t you two just grab a couple of beers and chill?

    Hell, I was getting on ‘okay’ with PJ the other day…anything is possible

  • Escoffier

    One possibility of a return to more traditional roles for women, and more traditional (and larger) family structures generally, is that if/when the welfare state collapses under its own weight (which seems likely), first we will have a period of significant pain in which it will be observable by everyone that the single & childless with little to no extended family are suffering the most. People will in effect return to their innate clannish instinct. With no state to protect/provide for them, it’s back to relatives banding together to protect their mutual interests. Those without a lot of relatives will be at a real disadvantage.

    What will then happen, probably, is that more and more people will get married earlier, stay together more steadfastly, and have more kids.

    In many ways this will be “progress” but in others “regress.”

    This observation is not original to me.

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

      @Escoffier

      if/when the welfare state collapses under its own weight (which seems likely), first we will have a period of significant pain in which it will be observable by everyone that the single & childless with little to no extended family are suffering the most. People will in effect return to their innate clannish instinct. With no state to protect/provide for them, it’s back to relatives banding together to protect their mutual interests.

      Yes, this scenario seems plausible. What timeline to you see for this?

  • Escoffier

    J, Italy definitely, but Israel??? That’s a crazy high-stress country if you ask me. People there are very tightly wound. Gee, I wonder why …

  • JP

    The end of the U.S. as Great Power hegemon (which is the decision that will hit in 15-20 years) is not the same thing as the end of the welfare state.

    The welfare state is with us as long as there is cheap energy and the current culture remains in place (which is an engineering question).

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    Just started looking back over things here- gotta say, that this whole concept of “men need to be NEEDED” that everyone keeps bringing up, is lost on me. Maybe it’s just the way I am, but to me, saying that men need a woman to do things for is a bit infantilizing, and I know that was not your intent. It seems to imply that men have no compass, and less drive or aspiration without the company of a woman. Personally, I don’t believe that at all, I believe the opposite. When not coupled up, not comfortably provided for (i.e. in the hunt), is often when men are at their best as far as their desire to achieve and overcome. Being on your own keeps you hungry and focused. In any case, if you are not complete in the most fundamental ways (think purpose, not food, sex or sleep), how is a woman supposed to fill that void? No person can. One thing I have found to be true, is that those who achieve will do so regardless of who or what is or is not in their life. This is especially true of men- because men draw less of their personal identity and drive from outside influences than women do (and too many men don’t realize this, using external prods and society’s rewards to push them forward, rather than letting their instincts guide them).

    The way I would characterize the relationship between a man and a woman with regards to need is something like this: I don’t NEED to be needed, the only thing I really need in this life is to fulfill my purpose in as many ways as possible- this may or may not involve a wife, or a child, or even a girlfriend for that matter. A woman is welcome to share my journey with me, but she will not become the focal point or the destination of that journey, and she needs to understand that. I will share what I have with her, and support her in setting her compass and fulfilling her own purpose, not because I need to do so, but because I believe that is the way life should be lived.

    I do appreciate what you are saying with your blog post, but I think it needs to be more realistic with regards to how men who are attuned to what they really want out of life live and relate to women. Presumably, the women who read your blog want a man who truly self-defines, for obvious reasons, and I’m telling you that such a man does not need a woman to do things for, in order for his life and pursuits to be satisfying. A woman can help him on his journey (and he can help her on hers), but like I said, the type of man your readers want will decide who and what he is, and will win regardless of who’s on his team.

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

      @BroHamlet

      Maybe it’s just the way I am, but to me, saying that men need a woman to do things for is a bit infantilizing, and I know that was not your intent.

      Just to be clear, I have no intent, I was sharing the insights of John Gray. However, this claim is not new to me. For example, I have read in many different places that when men do generous things for women, they like the women more. The mere act of giving makes men more emotionally invested. Several men here agree, but perhaps this varies by individual.

      A woman is welcome to share my journey with me, but she will not become the focal point or the destination of that journey, and she needs to understand that.

      I know there is much individual variation here. I know, for example, that my husband identified wife and family as a key part of his life’s purpose long before he met me. We discussed this on our third date. I do not believe that is unusual, and from a female POV, it’s a very positive green flag. It doesn’t mean that the woman is the objective of the journey, but many men are certain that they want female companionship on the journey.

  • Escoffier

    We already can’t pay for the welfare state and it’s far, far from a foregone conclusion that A) we will extract all the new energy we’ve found, since there are large and powerful forces that don’t want to and who, not incidentally, for now have the upper hand and B) even if we did, there’s no guarantee the resulting wealth/revenue could pay for anything like the current welfare state.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “I’m not questioning that, I’m questioning whether most women are willing to sign up for the Male Leads, Female Follows shtick.”

    Well here is the rub. IMO what I outlined IS a relationship with a male lead and a female follow. Here is my quote:
    “They simply want a woman that looks up to him, respects him, loves him, lusts for him, and takes care of him.”

    “looks up to him” – pretty much means she thinks HE is higher up the food chain.
    “Respects him” – IMO respect from a woman is deeply entwined with subordination, to some extent. That is, if my wife “respects” me, then I assume she will defer to me when push comes to shove. The level of defferment probably varies a great deal from man to man, but I think most have some element of this.
    And the rest? Well Love/Lust should hopefully be tied together, although we can all find personal examples in our lives of couples where one or the other is there, but not both.
    “takes care of” – that one is a wildcard I’ll admit. Every guy I know has some individual idea of what “care” constitutes in a relationship, and this is where negotiation between the couple is necessary.

    So the thing you are missing is, for many men, “respect” and “admiration” come partly from a woman’s submissive approach to his leadership. It is her defferance to his leadership that SHOWS she respects and admires him.

    How many women are up for that? Basically I’m more than willing to treat my wife pretty closely to being an “equal partner”, provided the underlying aggreement is we are equal in everything until I see an issue, and then I am the tie breaker by default. I’ll help with house chores, I’ll take care of the house and car maintenance, I’ll help cook. I’ll share every dime I make and allow her to choose how that money is spent WITH me. But, when it comes down to brass tacks, we both agree that if it ever comes down to it, its my way or the highway. If we both do our part, it should never, EVER come down to that, because we SHOULD be working together so that these situations don’t occur. But the underlying message is “our relationship appears to be egalitarian because I allow it to be so. I like making you happy, and it makes you happy to feel like you have an equal stake in our relationship. But you should always understand that this situation is my choosing, because I love you and want you to be happy. Take that incentive away from me, and expect to face a completely different situation.”

    And, I realize that at 21, a woman may not be ready to marry tomorrow. However, I’d say that IF she ever wants to marry, she should be steering her life in that direction far before she turns 21.

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

      @Ted D

      So the thing you are missing is, for many men, “respect” and “admiration” come partly from a woman’s submissive approach to his leadership. It is her defferance to his leadership that SHOWS she respects and admires him.

      But I know for a fact that my husbands respects and admires me. Yet that is not deference to leadership, it is appreciation for my efforts and the qualities that make me a good partner. I don’t see how either quality requires submissiveness.

  • Escoffier

    Bro, well, personally, if not coupled up, it’s very doubtful I would be where I am today. Not saying I would be unhappy but I probably would not have achieved what I have achieved.

  • Ted D

    BroHamlet – “Maybe it’s just the way I am, but to me, saying that men need a woman to do things for is a bit infantilizing, and I know that was not your intent. It seems to imply that men have no compass, and less drive or aspiration without the company of a woman. Personally, I don’t believe that at all, I believe the opposite. When not coupled up, not comfortably provided for (i.e. in the hunt), is often when men are at their best as far as their desire to achieve and overcome. Being on your own keeps you hungry and focused. ”

    I’d say that is how you are. Me? If I didn’t have a wife and kids to support, I would likely live WAY below the level I do now. I wouldn’t need a 5 bedroom house and two cars. I wouldn’t need multiple TVs, computers, and high speed internet. My electric costs would be nil as would my heating, because I could be content living in an efficiency apartment. In short, the reason I strive to “do better” is for them, not myself. Without a family to support, I may very well have spent my entire life as a starving musician. Perhaps I would have been happier, and rest assured I’ve spent many nights contemplating that. But, it would have been worse for society, because without a family to support, I would NOT have become a productive member of society. Because frankly, I don’t give a shit about “society” because they don’t give a shit about me.

  • J

    No, the general understanding of hypergamy is that the woman marries a man of superior social status – superior to her own status, specifically.

    I can get behind the idea that many women will try to get the highest status man they can get and that “marrying the prince” is a common fantasy. Nonetheless, the reality is that most people marry within their own social class. Cinderella stories are rare and tend not to work out. A rich man is far morre likely to pump and dump a poor girl than he is to marry her. Even where there is upward mobility, it tends to be two lower SES people making that climb together.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Szopen: “I would break up with her, no matter how much I loved her.”
    Please explain.

    @Susan: “He also said that he cannot possibly be responsible for another person’s happiness right now (…) He promised that if he gets a job, she will be the first person he calls.”

    Based on what we have here, it’s clear that she loves him for who he is as a person, and not for WHAT he is, since she met him when he was already down on his luck.
    In an era where money is put above everything else by many many people,
    I would consider it a precious gift, the most precious, to have a woman like that standing by my side if I were in this man’s situation. Also, I find it strange that he says he “cannot possibly be responsible for another person’s happiness right now”. Well, that’s already happening, isn’t it? Since he brings her happiness by just being the way he is with her. I don’t see how his current employment status is related to it. All this is more about his wounded pride.
    What should she do? I don’t think anyone could give her any useful advice right now. I also doubt she is going to let go of him easily.

    Having said all this, it would have been interseting to hear his side of the story. He might have told a different tale… Besides, 6 months is still a fairly short time in a relationship, so there might be lots of other untold factors involved.

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

      @Damien

      Based on what we have here, it’s clear that she loves him for who he is as a person, and not for WHAT he is, since she met him when he was already down on his luck.
      In an era where money is put above everything else by many many people,
      I would consider it a precious gift, the most precious, to have a woman like that standing by my side if I were in this man’s situation.

      Yes, I wondered about this too. Perhaps he feels that he is not worthy without employment, or that he has no hope of holding on to her long-term unless his career gets back on track. The truth is, this woman is not going to marry a guy who is down on his luck. The worst case is a sort of Blue Valentine future – very risky for her

      Having said all this, it would have been interseting to hear his side of the story. He might have told a different tale… Besides, 6 months is still a fairly short time in a relationship, so there might be lots of other untold factors involved.

      True! It’s always hard to know the truth when one only has one side of the story. It would be great to get two people in a relationship to each tell me their side and I could run that as a post.

  • JP

    @J:

    “It depends on how far the fall is. I’ve spent some time in both Israel and Italy. There was less material wealth, but in some ways the quality of life was higher. Oddly, even Israelis seemed less stressed tha Americans. There’s less anomie in those countries. People seem more connected.”

    The U.S. is excellent at producing anomie.

    I think I’ve been in a permanent state of anomie since high school.

  • INTJ

    @ Just1Z

    can’t you two just grab a couple of beers and chill?

    Believe me, I’ve tried. Unfortunately, there’s something in me that compels me to respond in kind to repeated ad homs.

  • Ted D

    J – “I can get behind the idea that many women will try to get the highest status man they can get and that “marrying the prince” is a common fantasy. Nonetheless, the reality is that most people marry within their own social class”

    Well the thing is, hypergamy probably doen’st cause too many problems for Cinderella. After all, her man is pretty high up the ladder compared to her. Now, how about Jane Doe and her husband John? They are both from the same SES, and both work. WHen they marry they are pretty close in SMV, but over time they begin to separate for any number of reasons. Lets just say John gets laid off and can’t find work. Two years later, Jane files for divorce and ends up with Tim Brown, who years ago when she married was possibly below her threshold, but now that he has a VP position at a small company, he looks stellar next to her loser husband without a job.

    IMO that situation is driven by hypergamy. She bailed on her husband because she saw him as beneath her, and found herself a man with a higher rank than her, based on what her rank is today. (not what it was when John and Jane married.) So tell me, how is a man supposed to ensure that he can keep up in this financial climate?

    Yes, this example is extreme and devoid a lot of useful details. but as an example, I think it works to present the concept.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    The women we’re discussing are college graduates. They marry at 30, on average. I do not think it’s at all true that a sizable number forego relationships – what do you base that claim on? As for high dominance assholes, I don’t think any women wind up with them. They tend not to marry, and when they do, they tend to cheat and then divorce. So in the educated group, that’s got to be some portion of the 17%, at most.

    I don’t think I’m communicating very clearly. See Ted D’s post to see what I was talking about.

  • J

    SW: The way a man knows that a woman considers him “up” is that she is receptive to his interest and potential commitment.

    Wave: Here we see the status of the man being defined exclusively by the emotional state of the woman, rather than any characteristic of his or any thing she might do for him. It is this self centered worldview that I correctly describe as solipsistic.

    Of course it’s “solipsistic.” By describing what any individual considers, one is by definition describing that person’s individual, internal world. What sdoes that have to say about Susan?

    I could say that John considers Mary’s tats hot. That has noting to do with her “objective hotness,” which may or may not even exist. The only real information in that statement is the John likes Mary’s tats.

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    LOL. You crack me up with the “barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen” schtik. Tell me honestly, how many men do you know that feel this way? How many here at HUS do you think feel this way? I probably know a small handfull at best, and they are older “red neck” boys from the boonies of Western PA and Ohio. Guys don’t want their wives barefoot and pregnant by and large. They simply want a woman that looks up to him, respects him, loves him, lusts for him, and takes care of him. Most men I know have NO PROBLEM with women working, until it comes to him or them, and at that point I think men AND women tend to defend their needs over the needs of others.

    So, although I appriciate the immagery you paint, do you really think it is an honest attempt at dialogue to continue perpetuating the myth that most men want wives to lose the vote, lose the right to work, and lose all personal freedoms. I get that the ‘sphere is full of such guys, but I’d wager that if you could round up every man alive that has found the Red Pill, the men that want to take away sufferage would STILL be the minority. We don’t want to push women down, we’d simply like to know exactly how we can once again stand next to them, and in the interests of fostering good marriages, perhaps stand just a smidge above a few, so we have a shot at getting some admiration from them.

    Yup. I’m getting tired of this whole “barefoot and pregnant” thing, because frankly, it’s a knee-jerk straw-man not unlike feminist rhetoric.

    I want some traditional things such as having relationships with the intent to settle down and marry, putting family ahead of career, and having kids before the risk of infertility and birth disorders goes up. But the thing is that I don’t expect anything from my wife that I’m not willing to do myself, aside from being a baby incubator which unfortunately I’m physically not equipped to do.

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    They simply want a woman that looks up to him, respects him, loves him, lusts for him, and takes care of him.

    Had to pull this out specifically. What guys want is someone who pedestalizes them. No double standard there, given that the whole problem with guys is that they tend to pedestalize women.

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

      What guys want is someone who pedestalizes them. No double standard there, given that the whole problem with guys is that they tend to pedestalize women.

      It is true that men want to be pedestalized and women don’t. I think there’s a huge spectrum between pedestalization and total submission.

  • JP

    “Whoops. Bold fail. I just meant to bold “a woman considers” and “what any individual considers.” Susan, can you fix that?”

    This is why I use little * thingies.

  • Just1Z

    @Intj
    “Believe me, I’ve tried. Unfortunately, there’s something in me that compels me to respond in kind to repeated ad homs.”

    well, I have had my hiccups too…so no moralising from me. I just thought that beer might help. in fact, since it’s pitch black here, I’m opening a Hobgoblin* as I write

    *Hobgoblin is a beer, not an ugly woman, nor is ‘opening a Hobgoblin’ a perverted sexual practice of any kind. promise

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

      I’m opening a Hobgoblin* as I write

      *Hobgoblin is a beer, not an ugly woman, nor is ‘opening a Hobgoblin’ a perverted sexual practice of any kind

      LMAO

  • Escoffier

    God, what drivel:

    http://www.mydailymoment.com/Mind-Body/the-pros-and-cons-of-one-night-stands/Print.html

    Note what’s not on the list of “cons”: as your N rises, men’s interest in anything more than a quick bang declines.

    I also like “don’t feel guity.” Yeah, because we all know that feelings are easily controlled!

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

      @Escoffier

      I just read that post on the pros and cons of ONSs. Note the difference of the scale of risks vs. rewards:

      Cons:

      disease
      depression
      rejection due to unrequited attachment

      Pros:

      Ego boost
      Liberation of “having sex like a man”
      Unusual sex positions
      Practice for LTRs

      Which of these is likely to have the longest lasting effects?

  • Ted D

    INTJ – I think you hit the nail on the head. I am not asking for much from a wife I am not willing to do myself, however the concessions I am willing to make are somewhat different than the concessions I need from a mate. I see it as an equitable trade. But as women become more self sufficient, they are less likely to like my concessions, or even make any at all. So the relationship is either off balance, or no one gives an inch and it fails regardless. To me the problem is if men and women are equal on too many levels, there is little room to compromise and less incentive to do so to foster a successful relationship.

  • Lisa C

    @Damian “Based on what we have here, it’s clear that she loves him for who he is as a person, and not for WHAT he is, since she met him when he was already down on his luck. In an era where money is put above everything else by many many people, I would consider it a precious gift, the most precious, to have a woman like that standing by my side if I were in this man’s situation.”

    +1

    @Susan “I think she’s going to have a hard time letting go, because she perceives that the circumstances are entirely to blame, rather than a lack of feeling on his part.”

    A successful marriage requires the desire and ability to stay together through “bad circumstances” such as unemployment, illness, or death of a parent or child. IMO, a man who ends a relationship under the circumstances described is not a good bet if he comes around later asking for round two. What happens if the next job doesn’t work out?

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

      @Lisa C

      I think it would be different if they started out on equal footing, and then he lost his job once they were committed. In this case, I think he started out not wanting anything serious because of his situation, but then he fell for her anyway. When they had a conversation about their relationship, he told her that he would keep doing his best to hold her at arm’s length as long as he was unemployed. She could see no way to proceed under such an artificial structure, and had no interest in dialing the relationship back to casual. Also, he now feels that he must move wherever a job offer occurs, so he doesn’t feel geographically stable either. It’s a bad situation. I know she is brokenhearted, I don’t know about him.

  • HanSolo

    @BroHamlet

    I think you describe men with a strong sense of purpose accurately, the achievers. However, I don’t think most men have a strong sense of internal ambition (most probably have some and a good deal have little) and do need to feel needed by women or, to a lesser extent by their larger family or society, in order to have the desire to strive more towards achieving goals.

    I’ll even give myself as an example. I think I’ve been a fairly high achiever. However, there came a time where I decided to take a couple years off to travel the world and learn Portuguese and read. This is achievement in a personal sense but not in a career sense really. If I were married I would definitely be much more ambitious career-wise.

  • Tasmin

    @Susan
    “Does this surprise you? Is this a case of “he’s just not that into you?” or would you feel the same way?”

    I have been in this situation and I know a handful of ‘transitioning’ men in this spot as well. The process can be long and frustrating and there are some significant impacts to confidence, identity, status and of course the lifestyle changes due to the new economic outlook – which has far reaching implications in terms of provisioning and both the present and future partnership dynamic.

    I have felt the same way. For me it came down to: self-respect/confidence, trust, and the ability to be generative.

    Trust & Self-respect – confidence. It can be extremely difficult to open up to someone fully when we don’t have our own foundation and our place in the world is ambiguous and/or we are not progressing. This is particularly troubling for men w/o naturally high (or recently shattered) confidence or a very clear sense of purpose and then drive toward that end, which is to say, a great many men these days. There are enough women who want, and always have, a fully baked man with status, earning potential, etc. to remind us of where we stand in the bigger sense.

    IOW, we don’t just consider our partner’s view of us, we need to feel like our value is not singularly in the eye of the beholder – particularly when we are struggling to find, hold onto our own sense of value. We need a broader sense of respect – from other men, from societal expectations, and most importantly from ourselves. We can eventually break from those external excitations and the more ego-centric things, but not until we have somehow solidified that sense of higher purpose or deep expertise or recognition from new sources – often inclusive of an economic model that we can accept.

    Trust. If a man does not feel powerful in his world in terms of control over his own life and progression in his field, and subsequently his identity, he will have a harder time trusting both his feelings toward her and the relationship in a long-term sense as well as trusting her feelings for him.

    We might feel like her feelings are conditional or have a time limit. This can create a lot of pressure – pressure that we are already piling on ourselves to be “something”. We might feel like there is potential for resentment from her due to our lacking status or progress or competitive success or the level of our drive, desire, aggression, etc. that we are able to generate. There is a real fear that she will “tire” of our process of our “moping” our depression and we will become less attractive in light of the continuing chasm between the men of higher (temporary or not) status at work and the society that she is anchored to but we are not.

    There is also the stewing concern that our progress may lead us in a direction that she will not be “ok” with – a more permanent shift in identity. To navigate all of that requires a higher-than-normal level of trust. Many marriages, where arguably trust has been defined and time-tested, do not survive the displaced-man situation.

    And finally, being generative. I think men must be productive in some way to be happy. The breadth of productivity is great, so there are many ways to achieve this – but still, we must feel that we are producing something. There is the practical sense in terms of our careers but there is also the (ideal) feeling that we have so much to give that we need to be with someone else in order to fully realize our ability to share these things. However if we feel that we are not producing excess energy to share, not filling up our own cup until it is spilling over, then we are net takers, we are not elevating ourselves to the leadership role, the giving, providing, supporting father-figure we all carry around. Until we re-enter this state, we are essentially on emotional welfare, lowering our head as we cash those checks.

    “What should she do? I think she’s going to have a hard time letting go, because she perceives that the circumstances are entirely to blame, rather than a lack of feeling on his part.”

    She should treat it as the split that it is. No contact going forward. She may very well hold on due to the circumstances but she should treat the relationship as if it were over for any other reason and maintain the distance. It will be a big problem – probably for both of them, if they try to maintain any kind of friendship or contact going forward. Move on. He made his decision, the reasons may never be known, but the action is definitive. Those circumstances may never change or may change but not actually influence his feelings on the relationship. And if he changes and them comes back around it is likely she will then feel resentment about him leaving and have her own reasons for distrust. You never know. But he broke off to progress in his way, she needs to continue to progress in hers.

    “She feels that if he cared enough, he would stay in the relationship, and she also points out that he acknowledges his life is better with her in it. I think it’s more about his self-respect. What do you think?”

    Yep. He probably does feel he is better with her. He probably extracts a great deal of happiness from the relationship. That is great but also part of the problem: too much of his happiness and identity are from the relationship. This makes it very difficult to maintain self-worth. It seems counter-intuitive, but the relationship can feed into a downward spiral of feeling poorly about himself. It really, really hurts to be in that spot and sometimes cut-and-run is the only way to find relief from the sense that he is continually letting her down and that he is taking without giving. It is sad and perhaps ironic that a man in this spot often exercises the only real power he feels he has in the world – to scuttle the relationship.

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

      @Tasmin

      Brilliant as always. The choicest nuggets, IMO:

      IOW, we don’t just consider our partner’s view of us, we need to feel like our value is not singularly in the eye of the beholder – particularly when we are struggling to find, hold onto our own sense of value. We need a broader sense of respect – from other men, from societal expectations, and most importantly from ourselves.

      This explains why her love is not “enough.” It gives him something, but not that broad sense of respect.

      There is a real fear that she will “tire” of our process of our “moping” our depression and we will become less attractive in light of the continuing chasm between the men of higher (temporary or not) status at work and the society that she is anchored to but we are not.

      I wondered about this too. He has not indicated any of this directly – I gather this man is not of the emo variety – but she has said that she feels extremely awkward that she is currently more successful than he is in the same industry. She wishes that her job were not so directly comparable to his old one.

      However if we feel that we are not producing excess energy to share, not filling up our own cup until it is spilling over, then we are net takers, we are not elevating ourselves to the leadership role, the giving, providing, supporting father-figure we all carry around. Until we re-enter this state, we are essentially on emotional welfare, lowering our head as we cash those checks.

      This breaks my heart! I know that when they broke up she said that she believed in him, and he said that he did not share that feeling, so he could not accept it from her. :(

      It is sad and perhaps ironic that a man in this spot often exercises the only real power he feels he has in the world – to scuttle the relationship.

      Sigh. I’m going to forward all of the good feedback from men here to her. I get why she is sad, it feels like a waste. Terrible timing.

  • INTJ

    @ Just1Z

    “@I??J”

    hmmm, that’s a particularly nerdy joke that you are making there. so, what ‘sign’ are you? *lmao*

    It doesn’t make any sense though. I’m clearly an iNtuitive, because Sensors are much more data-oriented and they value statistics a lot more than I do. So he could call me an INFJ, but that would make no sense either, since INFJs don’t make abstract generalizations like I do (which Megaman hates) – they make personal generalizations.

  • INTJ

    @ Just1Z

    well, I have had my hiccups too…so no moralising from me. I just thought that beer might help. in fact, since it’s pitch black here, I’m opening a Hobgoblin* as I write

    I don’t drink… And if I did, I’d probably become like PJ without her meds. :D

    *Hobgoblin is a beer, not an ugly woman, nor is ‘opening a Hobgoblin’ a perverted sexual practice of any kind. promise

    Sure it is. ;)

  • J

    You could also settle down in some remote village in Corsica or Sicily, and date a young woman there…You’d love her upbringing.

    LOL. Have you visited a Sicilian mountain village in the last 35 years? I have. Appolonia Corleone types haven’t existed there in decades, though a cautious man would still fear her brother or father.

    @Hope #272

    Brilliant analysis of the economic situation. IMO, Romney’s 47% comment is what lost him the election.

    @JP

    You are unhappy that the West (Faustian civilization) is ending. Which is fine, but you can’t fix it because it’s not really fixable in the way that you want to fix it. You are going to need to find what’s in the future. You’re looking to the past.

    That’s typical of the ‘sphere. There’s this sense that if women all go back to vacuuming in pearls like June Cleaver all the social, technological and economic forces that have spawned the social changes (including feminism, ironically) of the last 150 years will just go away. There’s no sense that new forms of relating will have to evolve, just the idea that if we could somehow go back to 1950–when the biggest and most anomalous economic boom in history was in full force– things would be fine.

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

      There’s no sense that new forms of relating will have to evolve, just the idea that if we could somehow go back to 1950–when the biggest and most anomalous economic boom in history was in full force– things would be fine.

      Yes, this is what I meant by the bare feet comment. I guess I should have said vacuuming in high heels instead. In any case, the future belongs to those looking forward – the innovators. There may be a period ahead like Escoffier describes – a sort of Dark Ages where we go back to survival mode. We’re throwing darts, we won’t be around to see it.

  • JP

    “Yes, this scenario seems plausible. What timeline to you see for this?”

    This really is tied into cheap energy.

    The status quo will try to maintain itself until it literally can’t anymore.

    I’ve been trying to generally timeline this thing for years, but I don’t really have the projections I need to do it.

    There may be some erosion in this direction starting now, but I can’t really tell.

    http://www.theburningplatform.com/?p=40366

  • J

    As Just1Z pointed out, Hairy Christmas seems to be clogging up the comment threads. Perhaps another PJ ban is in order?

    I’m not pro-banning.

    I used to feel that every post addressed to me or related to something that I’d said deserved a response from me. There are now 3 or 4 people whom I no longer read and to whom I no longer respond. If someone strikes you as crackerbox, ignore them. In fact, if we all did that, the trolls would eventaully tire and go away.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    Some men do have a strong sense of their identity tied into their job and ability to provide financially and so, like the man you cited breaking up with the woman he loved, some are left miserable by the simple fact of not achieving as much career success as they think they need to. It’s such a part of their personal measure of worth and success that they will feel like failures. Both he and the woman can try to make him feel worth in other areas and shift his self-worth metrics to other areas and it can be successful if he is capable of that and willing to try.

    Other men don’t feel such a strong sense of worth based on their provider ability. Other areas are being a protector, lover, source of wisdom, soulmate, friend, and having some other valuable ability like making her laugh or having talent in some area that usually doesn’t provide financial reward.

    I am an example of someone that could be happy with a higher earning woman as long as she isn’t being an arrogant bitch about that fact. I draw more of my personal sense of worth in a relationship in providing deep love, romance, great sex, wisdom, friendship, humor, and connection. Also, I will be a great father when the time comes for children. I will be a good provider but that’s not what my relationship identity is based on. Also, since I achieved success as a scientist, and, to a lesser extent, as a business consultant and in other areas in the past I have those things to look back on as well.

  • JP

    What’s this pedestalization thingy, in psychological words that I can understand?

    What’s involved here?

  • Just1Z

    I keep seeing this ‘age of the man, increased risk of genetic problems’ line being shot out, but what risk rate are we talking about?

    I mean you could multiply my risk of getting hit by a meteorite by two and I would not change my behaviour, even if you multiplied by a thousand. load two chambers in a revolver rather than one? (i.e. double the risk) I didn’t want to play in the first place, but I’m a lot less keen now.

    multiplying the risk matters, but so does the risk being multiplied – well, duh!

    In a meta-analysis published online in November 2010 Christina Hultman, an epidemiologist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, found that men between the ages of 40 and 49 were 1.4 times more likely to have children with a diagnosis of autism than 15- to 29-year-old men—the reference group for this study. And the risk of autism increased dramatically with the father’s age: Between the 50 and 54, men were 2.2 times more likely to have children with a diagnosis of autism compared with the reference group; for men aged 55 and above, comparative risk was 4.4 times greater than the control.
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=children-with-older-dads-at-greater-mental-illness-risk&page=2

    this smells of a feminist line of BS for use as a reply to menopause in women. there’s no like for like comparison between menopause and disability. stop believing what feminists say unthinkingly – they lie, like a flatfish.

    140% of the risk of Autism if the Dad is in his 40s. this is a skyrocketing change guaranteed to produced genetically damaged kids? ORLY?

    But…140% of what?

    Americas

    [edit] Canada

    The rate of autism diagnoses in Canada was 1 in 450 in 2003. However, preliminary results of an epidemiological study conducted at Montreal Children’s Hospital in the 2003-2004 school year found a prevalence rate of 0.68% (or 1 per 147).[36]

    A 2001 review of the medical research conducted by the Public Health Agency of Canada concluded that there was no link between MMR vaccine and either inflammatory bowel disease or autism.[37] The review noted, “An increase in cases of autism was noted by year of birth from 1979 to 1992; however, no incremental increase in cases was observed after the introduction of MMR vaccination.” [37] After the introduction of MMR, “A time trend analysis found no correlation between prevalence of MMR vaccination and the incidence of autism in each birth cohort from 1988 to 1993.”[37]

    [edit] United States

    The most recent estimate states that up to 1 out of every 88 children, or 11.3 per 1,000, have some form of ASD.[38] The number of diagnosed cases of autism grew dramatically in the U.S. in the 1990s and early 2000s. For the 2006 surveillance year, identified ASD cases were an estimated 9.0 per 1000 children aged 8 years (95% confidence interval [CI] = 8.6–9.3).[20] These numbers measure what is sometimes called “administrative prevalence”, that is, the number of known cases per unit of population, as opposed to the true number of cases.[28] This prevalence estimate rose 57% (95% CI 27%–95%) from 2002 to 2006.[20] A further study in 2006 concluded that the apparent rise in administrative prevalence was the result of diagnostic substitution, mostly for findings of mental retardation and learning disabilities.[28] “Many of the children now being counted in the autism category would probably have been counted in the mental retardation or learning disabilities categories if they were being labelled 10 years ago instead of today,” said researcher Paul Shattuck of the Waisman Center at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, in a statement.[39]

    so another good point is made – changes in rates of diagnosis vs increasing age of fathers. let’s not be assuming that increasing rates of diagnosis is explained by increasing age of parents, that would be dumb, wouldn’t it?

    A population-based study of one Minnesota county found that the cumulative incidence of autism grew eightfold from the 1980–83 period to the 1995–97 period. The increase occurred after the introduction of broader, more-precise diagnostic criteria, increased service availability, and increased awareness of autism.[40] During the same period, the reported number of autism cases grew 22-fold in the same location, suggesting that counts reported by clinics or schools provide misleading estimates of the true incidence of autism.[41]
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_autism#Incidence_and_prevalence

    if marriages have a 50% fail rate, or 10%(?) for UMC and above, surely we should be stopping men getting married, rather than fathering kids in their forties…shouldn’t we? I mean, that’s where the main risk is for their lives.
    1 in 2 marriages
    1 in 88 various degrees of abnormality
    you do the maths

    people’s inability to ask basic scientific questions depresses me…check the numbers, methodology, agenda. otherwise you are just sheep to be manipulated by big business / government / employers etc.

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

      @Just1Z

      In the dating an older man post I linked to research that shows how rapidly genetic mutations occur in men over 30. The links to autism and schizophrenia are real.

  • Just1Z

    @Susan
    I just thought that I should make clear about the beer, though I’m happy that I amused as well…

  • Ted D

    Susan – I respect and admire my wife a great deal, but not for her leadership abilities. She is caring, considerate, nurturing, and a whole host of other things. I admire those traits because I lack them, and her bringing them to the table helps me, her, and our family.

    I don’t want her to respect and admire me for the same traits. I want her to respect and admire my leadership, my ability to stay the course regardless of how I feel about it, my bull headed determination, and my intelligence.

    In short, I agree that respect and admiration MUST be a two away street in a relationship, but that respect will not likely be based on the same things from traits. And if my desire for it is based on traits I deem worthy, it does no good if she respects me for other traits. I need acknowledgement from my wife that she values what I’m offering, not some other list of traits. Its fine if she admires my piano skills, but it won’t make me feel content in the relationship it she does not also respect me for what I feel is most important.

  • Just1Z

    And of course, there are educational benefits to being diagnosed with a problem too. money to be made. budgets increased. time in exams. easier grading.

    not many people lose when the kid gets labelled.

    I remember AJ in the Sopranos getting diagnosed, it was like he’d hit the jackpot, instead of the books that he should have studied.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “I guess I should have said vacuuming in high heels instead. ”

    Same old same. Again, do you know any men in real life like this? How many at HUS do you think truly want a return to the 1950s? I’m one of the most sexually conservative men here (and most anywhere LOL) and I have no desire to go back to Leave it to Beaver. But, I also don’t like the other extreme, which is where everyone is the “bread winner” and no one is actually baking the bread.

  • JP

    The immediate problem is that the U.S. might lose access to it’s wealth pumps as it’s international leadership is delegitimized.

    That’s going to cause all sorts of problems stateside and is scheduled for about 2030 +/- 10 years.

    We’re getting a longs ways away from WWII, folks.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @J: “LOL. Have you visited a Sicilian mountain village in the last 35 years? I have. Appolonia Corleone types haven’t existed there in decades, though a cautious man would still fear her brother or father.”

    That’s true, as well as in Corsica. This was a nasty outdated stereotype from me. I used it because I thought the person I sent it to might have been more familiar about it than if I’d chosen other places in the world where ultra patriarchal societies are still sailing full wind.

  • Escoffier

    Re: timing, Susan, I don’t know. There are many variables but only one direction. Suppose that we can do more or less what Europe is doing now: keep papering over the problem, tinker here, temporize there, lurch from crisis to crisis, always coming up with some temporary “fix” that really fixes nothing long term … well, then, assuming we can keep that going absent any external or internal shock, the demography will screw us within 50 years and certainly well before 100.

    But our creditors may well act before that, or else something else will topple the house of cards. The only thing certain is that it IS a house of cards and we just ratified the whole system, indeed we voted to expand and perpetuate it.

  • Cooper

    “Does this surprise you?”
    No.
    “Is this a case of “he’s just not that into you?””
    It most certainly isn’t.

    “would you feel the same way?”
    Hard to say, I might.

    “What should she do?”
    Assure him that she still respects him – needs him. And that she’d be much happier to work through his unemployment *with him*

    “I think she’s going to have a hard time letting go, because she perceives that the circumstances are entirely to blame, rather than a lack of feeling on his part.”
    I think it’s important that this is something that HE is going through.

    “She feels that if he cared enough, he would stay in the relationship, and she also points out that he acknowledges his life is better with her in it.”
    I think this relates to the part in the post that mentions that a man seeks a woman’s love, the most, when his life is in order. Obviously this guys considers his life out of order, ATM.

    “I think it’s more about his self-respect. What do you think?”
    Mmhmm – pretty much.

    Basically, for whatever reason, this guy is distancing himself from the relationship, while his life isn’t in order, in attempt to not let the “out of order” spread into the relationship. He is being slightly self in not letting her be involved with his troubles, but he is doing so with, what I assume, it the best intensions. If she really does want the distance, she’ll have to reassure him that A. She isn’t loosing respect for him, and won’t allow his (temporary) unemployment degrade their relationship, and B. that she’d be much happier with him, than (however temporary) without him.

  • JP

    Here’s what Spengler says about the final end of the West:

    “3. Maturing of the final form. Private and family policies of individual leaders. The world as spoil. Egypticism, Mandarinism, Byzantinism. Historyless stiffening and enfeeblement even of the imperial machinery, against young peoples eager for spoil, or alien conquerors. Primitive human conditions slowly thrust up into the highly-civilized mode of living””

    “After 2200 A.D.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spengler%27s_civilization_model

  • Cooper

    @Tasmin, Susan 457

    Tasmin has excellent insight.

    “Until we re-enter this state, we are essentially on emotional welfare, lowering our head as we cash those checks.”

  • Just1Z

    @Susan
    I know that they are real, no denial at all

    but they need to be put in context

    I hear that taking the pill increases the risk of thrombosis and other medical issues, but clearly a lot of women look at the overall rate and take the pill for its convenience (or whatever reason that they chose).

    basically
    doubling a risk of sfa* means nothing
    doubling the risk in Russian Roulette is a whole different ballgame

    Surely you get that?

    *Sweet Fanny Adams / Sweet F*ck All

  • Ted D

    ““Until we re-enter this state, we are essentially on emotional welfare, lowering our head as we cash those checks.””

    with absolutely NO pride or self respect in sight. Yep, that pretty much sums it all up.

  • JP

    Here’s some from the Archdruid (I am so not a druid).

    “Central to Toynbee’s project, and to the sprawling 12-volume work A Study of History that came out of it, was the idea of putting corresponding stages in the rise and fall of civilizations side by side, and seeing what common factors could be drawn from the comparison. Simple in theory, that proved to be a gargantuan undertaking in practice, which is why nearly all of Toynbee’s career as a writer of history was devoted to that one project. The result is a core resource for the kind of work I’m trying to do in this blog: the attempt to gauge the shape of our future by paying attention to the ways similar patterns have worked out in the historic past.

    The final stages of the process depend on the broader pattern of decline. In Toynbee’s analysis, a civilization in decline always divides into a dominant minority, which maintains its power by increasingly coercive means, and an internal proletariat—that is, the bulk of the population, who are formally part of the civilization but receive an ever smaller share of its benefits and become ever more alienated from its values and institutions. This condition applies to the imperial state and its inner circle of allies; outside that core lies the world of the external proletariat—in the terms used in earlier posts here, these are the peoples subjected to the business end of the imperial wealth pump, whose wealth flows inward to support the imperial core but who receive few benefits in exchange.

    The rise of warband culture drives the collapse of that arrangement. As warbands rise, coalesce, and begin probing across the border, the machinery that concentrates wealth in the hands of the dominant minority begins to break apart; tax revenues plunge as wealth turns into warband plunder, and the imperial state’s capacity to enforce its will dwindles. The end comes when the internal proletariat, pushed to the breaking point by increasingly frantic demands from the dominant minority, throws its support to the external proletariat—or, more to the point, to the successful leadership of one or more of the external proletariat’s biggest warbands—and the empire begins its final collapse into a congeries of protofeudal statelets. Much more often than not, that’s how the final crisis of a civilization unfolds; it’s also one standard way that common or garden variety empires fall, even when they don’t take a civilization down with them.”

    http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2012/11/on-border.html

    And thus completes today’s less in metahistory.

    Which is not particularly relevant to the lives of today’s 20-something woman who reads HUS.

  • Escoffier

    So, I have been thinking about what sort of marriage I have and I don’t know. It’s not clear to me that either one of us is the clear leader. She’s definitely not but am I? Really, the whole issue almost never comes up because there is nothing significant involving the marriage (or anything else) that we disagree on, apart from occasional irritating little arguments about where to spend this or that holiday. (If it were up to me, I would go to California at every opportunity and never see my in-laws at all. There’s no conflict there, I just really like going home and going to see them is meh at best.)

    My career since I met her has totally been under my control and she has supported every decision I have made, moving four times for me, including once across the country. I have deferred to her on most decisions regarding the children but that’s because she’s with them all day and I’m not and also because I don’t think she’s ever been wrong. I should qualify that by saying, not including day-t0-day parenting and discipline, which we both do. But when it comes to which pre-school or which althetic program and what have you, she does all the research and comes to a conclusion and I ratify.

    The last big decision we had to make, apart from simply having the kids in the first place, was when we moved back to NY, and I wanted to be in Manhattan and she wanted to be in a ‘burb. I knew in my heart that she was right because the size of the place we could afford would have been so small we all would have been on top of each other and it would have been awful. So she didn’t really even need to persuade me, I realized that she was right.

    She also took the lead in researching and purchasing our last car, which was five years ago.

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

      Escoffier, your marriage dynamic sounds about the same as mine. Division of labor, consult one another on the big decisions, little conflict, etc. I call that egalitarian.

  • JP

    Less = lesson.

  • J

    The U.S. is excellent at producing anomie.

    Yes, indeed.

    J, Italy definitely, but Israel??? That’s a crazy high-stress country if you ask me. People there are very tightly wound. Gee, I wonder why …

    Yep, Israel. Despite the situation, Israelis seem a lot more open, friendly and relaxed–at least amongst each other and with Americans–than Americans are with each other.

    About four years ago, when I was employed, I did a bit of work travel. One year, I was in LA and Israel within a few months of each other. I was staying in Beverly Hills and in my off times I would take a bus around town. One late afternoon, I went to the La Brea tar pits and then to Rodeo Drive. After the shops closed, the streets were deserted. There were plenty of cars whizzing by, of course, but no foot traffic. The buses were full of surly looking teens. It was 9 o’clock in the evening, and I was definitely uneasy.

    Contrast this to Jerusalem at midnight. Loads of foot traffic. People say hi to strangers. Teen and pre-teen girls are allowed out at night; no one fears stranger rape. During the day, strange little kids ask you to help them cross the street. Their mothers, who are watching them out the windows, yell down to say it’s OK for you to help. Strangers offer you bits of food–“Are you American? Here, have a fry. Americans like fries, no?”

    Sure, people are nervous about Arab attacks. Nonetheless, the day-to-day seems pretty relaxed there, in an albeit weird way. The source of danger is clearly identitfied and understood; there’s no fear of random violence from other Israelis. OTOH, my female counterparts told me that NYC and Chicago are terrifying places to visit because they are “full of muggers and rapists.”

  • Just1Z

    @JP
    “against young peoples eager for spoil”
    also
    Boomers with their medicaid (no savings were made for this (tax cuts at the time), so actually the young are paying for the old. demographics make this a poor idea for the kids – A Ponzi scheme give it a google if necessary)
    Single women demanding parenthood (‘independence’ via state benefits)
    Young demanding subsidies to study worthless degrees

  • Cooper

    Gawd my phone edits are unreal.

    Anyone that reads my posts have to be “edit open-minded.”

    Self=selfish, it=is, “if she does want”=doesn’t, loosing=losing.

    Ugh. Smh.

  • Cooper

    @JP 467

    Hahahah.

  • Ted D

    Escoffier – “So, I have been thinking about what sort of marriage I have and I don’t know. It’s not clear to me that either one of us is the clear leader. She’s definitely not but am I?”

    To be honest I’m pretty much in the same type of marriage. We don’t fight because we work together to accomplish things. We both do indeed defer to the other depending on what the situation calls for. But, there is a sense of leadership in the relationship based on our roles and how we fill them.

    I’m 100% sure that if my wife was asked a question like “who is the boss in your house?” she would reply that there is no boss because we work together. If I was asked the same question, my reply would be that IF it every came down to someone having to be “the boss”, it would be me. I do my best to work WITH her so that “pulling rank” is never an issue, because the last thing I want is for her to feel inferior. What I find sad is that she feels SO strongly about “being equal” that it would bother her to admit what she and I both know: that if it came down to it, I am the leader of our household. And why does she feel so strongly about trying to “pull her weight” and “be equal”? You guessed it, because soceity TOLD her she should be “strong and independant”, and admitting that she depends on me would somehow lesson her value as a woman.

    It’s odd, because deep down inside she is a rather old fashioned woman with a foundation of conservative values. Over that is a lifetime of living with a mother that pushed “independence” because she went through 4 husbands in her lifetime and still manged to end up alone. If she didn’t hold those conservative values, we simply wouldn’t work out. But, despite her desire to BE my wife, she also still feels like she has to be something else to have meaning in her life. Me? I’m completely happy being her husband and my children’s father. If we didn’t need money to survive, and I didn’t need to have some form of “prestige” to feel comfortable with my place in the world and my relationship, I woudn’t need anything more to feel accomplished with my life.

  • J

    @Ted

    Well the thing is, hypergamy probably doen’st cause too many problems for Cinderella.

    Presumably because it’s a fairy tale. IRL, the fantasy just doesn’t happen.

    Two years later, Jane files for divorce and ends up with Tim Brown, who years ago when she married was possibly below her threshold, but now that he has a VP position at a small company, he looks stellar next to her loser husband without a job.

    Except that it doesn’t happen that often as Tim will more than likely seek out women who better befit his new status. As an example, DH and I both came from the working class–him a not lower than me, BTW, since my parents did eventually reunite after divorce and became a two income couple. If I were to die, do you think he’d go fishing in working class waters again? I rather doubt it. He’d some divorcee or widow in our current environment.

  • J

    It is her defferance to his leadership that SHOWS she respects and admires him.

    Not necessarily, Ted. I have a helluva a lot of respect and admiration for my husband, and I’m not particularly deferential (unless we are discussing an area, like investments, where he has professional expertise). I couldn’t be with him if he were not an admirable person, but I don’t hand over my autonomy to him. Nor does he seem to want it. OTOH, I’ve seen a lot of “deferential” users.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    I think it would be different if they started out on equal footing, and then he lost his job once they were committed. In this case, I think he started out not wanting anything serious because of his situation, but then he fell for her anyway. When they had a conversation about their relationship, he told her that he would keep doing his best to hold her at arm’s length as long as he was unemployed. She could see no way to proceed under such an artificial structure, and had no interest in dialing the relationship back to casual. Also, he now feels that he must move wherever a job offer occurs, so he doesn’t feel geographically stable either. It’s a bad situation. I know she is brokenhearted, I don’t know about him.

    He seems like the kind of guy that is the cause of male suicides being 4 times as likely as female suicides.

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

      @INTJ

      He seems like the kind of guy that is the cause of male suicides being 4 times as likely as female suicides.

      Not sure what you mean here?

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Yes, this is what I meant by the bare feet comment. I guess I should have said vacuuming in high heels instead. In any case, the future belongs to those looking forward – the innovators. There may be a period ahead like Escoffier describes – a sort of Dark Ages where we go back to survival mode. We’re throwing darts, we won’t be around to see it.

    I think the problem is which part of the manosphere you choose to associate with. VD might not mind women being barefoot and pregnant, but I’m sure Chateau Heartiste doesn’t want that.

  • J

    That’s true, as well as in Corsica. This was a nasty outdated stereotype from me. I used it because I thought the person I sent it to might have been more familiar about it than if I’d chosen other places in the world where ultra patriarchal societies are still sailing full wind.

    Oh, I wasn’t at all offended. I knew exactly what you were talking about. I was just pointing out how even ultra patriarchal societies have changed since, I’d say, the end of WW II. And if WW III breaks out in the Middle East, the Arabs can kiss it good-bye too.

  • Ted D

    J – “Except that it doesn’t happen that often as Tim will more than likely seek out women who better befit his new status. ”

    You missed that I said Jane chose Tim based on her NEW value, presumably made by her increase of status from when she married to John. Tim may be a co-worker, or perhaps a manager/supervisor in her office? I’ve seen this scenario play out about 5 or 6 times with couples I know. Maybe it’s just the ‘Burgh, but other men seem to report similar issues, so I’d wager it isn’t a geographically isolated phenominon.

    “I have a helluva a lot of respect and admiration for my husband, and I’m not particularly deferential (unless we are discussing an area, like investments, where he has professional expertise). ”

    And perhaps for your husband this is plenty of “deferance”. Remember I said that the amout of deference required by a man probably varies a great deal, just as the desire for dominance vairies from woman to woman. The issue is, there seems to be more women looking for a man like your husband than a man like me, but more men like me than you husband, so to speak. Meaning, of the men I know, most want some level of actual, seeable deference from their mate. It may be as little as “allowing” him to buy a convertible when he wants one, all the way up to “barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen.” The issue is, woman are wanting to break out of that role faster than men are willing to give up on it.

    I personally do NOT want my wife to be some cowering housewife afraid of my ever word, waiting at the door with a drink and my slippers. I very much like that if push came to shove, I know beyond all doubt she is capable of handling herself AND our kids. That being said, as long as I’m around, I fully expect her to NOT grab the reigns and instead expect her to allow herself to depend on me knowing full well that I have her best interests at heart, because what’s good for her is good for me, and my family.

    There is NOTHING wrong with women being capable. However, being capable DOES NOT mean you should just do something. Sometimes, even when you can do it yourself, it’s a good idea to let someone else do it for you. Because, it’s good for them, and in turn good for you, and your children as well. It isn’t that my wife CAN or CAN’T do something that matters to me, it is that she knows when she SHOULD or SHOULDN’T do something, and I expect her to come to me if she has doubts about that.

  • Escoffier

    Well, there are cities like that in the US, LA is not one of them lol. The idea that NYC (manhattan) is scary is laughable IMO. Chicago Gold Coast/Lincoln Park is also not the least scary but it does get scary when you stray too far.

    Anyway, I wasn’t so much talking about the crime rate but the Israeli national character, which is not, IME, “laid back.” Israel, HK and NYC share that same super-personality overdrive, I have observed.

  • INTJ

    @ Escoffier

    Anyway, I wasn’t so much talking about the crime rate but the Israeli national character, which is not, IME, “laid back.” Israel, HK and NYC share that same super-personality overdrive, I have observed.

    Yeah it’s that Type A personality.

  • J

    VD might not mind women being barefoot and pregnant, but I’m sure Chateau Heartiste doesn’t want that.

    The entity that calls itself CH, which may or may not include Jim Weideman at his point, is essentially crypto-conservative. In fact, I’d say the overall tone of the ‘sphere is ‘If I can’t find a June Cleaver and have to “settle for a carousel rider,” then I wanna see the whole thing crash and burn will I “sit poolside” and/or enjoy a hedonistic lifestyle.’ I suspect that the biggest tragedy of many a ‘sphere bloggers life is inability to attract a gal like mom. Several Roissy regulars BTW have told me that they envied my family life, used to want something like it, no longer believed it possible, etc.

  • Just1Z

    @Intj
    “I think the problem is which part of the manosphere you choose to associate with. VD might not mind women being barefoot and pregnant, but I’m sure Chateau Heartiste doesn’t want that.”

    you’re on fire tonight! l’d mao

    respect

  • Lokland

    @J

    “In fact, I’d say the overall tone of the ‘sphere is ‘If I can’t find a June Cleaver and have to “settle for a carousel rider,” then I wanna see the whole thing crash and burn will I “sit poolside” and/or enjoy a hedonistic lifestyle.’”

    This pissed me off.

    No man should have to settle for a carousel rider. Refusing to do so is neither wrong nor unacceptable.

    It is the lowest possible form of mate in existence.

    Given the choice between that and watching it crash and burn. Crash and burn because the new system that arises in its place might be better at providing “a gal like mom.”

    The reaction to watch the crash and burn of society is not a knee jerk resentment reaction. If the current system does not work for you, build a new system.
    Thats happened many times throughout history.

  • Lokland

    @INTJ

    +1 btw.

    There’s a difference between being barefoot and pregnant and being a follower.

    Also, following doesn’t typically entail much.
    Unless your relationship is over the top drama filled, following entails letting him choose the restaurant and where to go for vacation. Ohh nooooo, scary….please not Cuba again…anything but Cuba.

  • J

    Anyway, I wasn’t so much talking about the crime rate but the Israeli national character, which is not, IME, “laid back.”

    Well, Italians aren’t either for that matter. I’ve never been to the North, but south of Rome, people are just as likely as Israelis to be frenetic, excitable, loud and emotional. Both groups of people also have a warmth that you don’t find in LA. I was in NYC this summer for the first time in several years. New Yorkers seem more friendly than they used to.

  • BroHamlet

    @Escoffier

    “Bro, well, personally, if not coupled up, it’s very doubtful I would be where I am today. Not saying I would be unhappy but I probably would not have achieved what I have achieved.”

    And that’s what I mean by her making your journey easier (and you hers). I think you’d still have achieved the same IF you really wanted it- there are definite benefits to being coupled up, but some people also get complacent in a relationship, or give up their dreams to fit the mold. I’m saying you should make the mold and then allow your life and the people in it to fit into it.

    @Ted D
    “But, it would have been worse for society, because without a family to support, I would NOT have become a productive member of society. Because frankly, I don’t give a shit about “society” because they don’t give a shit about me.”

    You and I may differ here. I was raised to be realistic about what I wanted and to recognize that I wouldn’t always be able to do exactly what I wanted to get those things. You definitely know that you often have to pay the piper to get the material things you want- sometimes there’s no passion in provision, even if its just providing for yourself. Right now my contributions to society allow me to be free to do what I like to do in other arenas. Oddly enough, I still want to do well enough at the rat race to live nicely, and that’s probably because I’m a competitor, and I just plain like winning. For me, being productive does have benefits, whether I give a shit about society or not- I contribute for me and what I get in return, not really for the benefit of society, and I would be considered “productive”. There are other arenas where I contribute for the good of the whole because my heart is in it.

  • Ted D

    “The reaction to watch the crash and burn of society is not a knee jerk resentment reaction.”

    I get the impression that most women actually believe men ARE simply pissed off and acting like children: if I can’t play my way I’ll take my toys and leave!

    They fail to realize that most men would prefer to be happy. They would much rather be able to spend time doing something enjoyable rather than sit around and be grump that life sucks. But, as Lokland pointed out, men also tend to see something that is broken and want to fix it. This current political climate is not allowing men a chance to fix it, or at least not in the way many/most would like it to be fixed, so instead they decide to do nothing and let it burn. Because honestly, why should I bust my ass to keep a system afloat that I:
    Do not like or agree with
    Doesn’t even acknowledge let alone admire the sacrifice I make TO keep it afloat
    Doesn’t really provide me with any reward FOR putting in the effort.

    It used to be that “putting in the effort” got you a wife, a family, a house, a car, and a comfortable standard of living. Many men can’t find gainful employement, can’t manage to find a woman to marry let alone keep that marriage together for life, lost their homes and cars, and yet still works hard for losing returns. IF they get married, they often find themselves competing WITH their wives instead of working with them to get ahead, and many times feel very unappriciated for any effort they put in.

    Is this the fault of women alone? No way. It took a whole host of variables to get us here, but if men are currently backed into a corner, the only way they can get ahead is if women give them a way out.

  • J

    This pissed me off.

    It’s not in quotes because I advocate that you find some slut to marry. It’s in quotes because I think it’s a meme. Ever hear this old song?

    Would you like to swing on a star
    carry moonbeams home in a jar
    and be better off than you are
    or would you rather be a mule?

    Makes it sound as though there are only two options, but, in point of fact, few people get to swing on stars or be mules. Same with the ‘spheres view of options:

    Would you like to marry a slut
    get divorce raped up the butt
    and be worse off than you are
    or would you rather be just sit poolside and watch it all burn?

    There’s a lot of middle ground that gets ignored.

    And with that, gentleman, I am going to load the dishwasher and defrost some meat.

  • Ted D

    BroHamlet – “You definitely know that you often have to pay the piper to get the material things you want- sometimes there’s no passion in provision, even if its just providing for yourself. ”

    The difference between you and I is simply a matter of what we want for ourselves.

    When I was a kid, I had a mind to go two different routes in my life, musician or family man. Over time, I realized that my desire to be a musician, although genuine and personally driven, was also likely to end in a less than stellar fashion. By itself I was OK with that, expect I also wanted a family. I chose to do something with my life I really didn’t want or desire, to get my family. Or, in other words, I paid the piper with my entire life in trade for a happy family and a life long marriage.

    I did get my family, but the marriage didn’t last. So, at that point in my life, the price I paid to the piper was far more than what I got, because the ONLY reason I paid the price was to have what I lost: a wife and family. I still have my children, and I managed to find a woman that values what I can offer based on the price I already paid, so for me it was a chance to salvage the sacrifices I made early in my life to get what I wanted: an intact family. But what if I hadn’t found her? I would have sacrificed the first 38 years of my life for something I didn’t actually get in the end.

    Perhaps I was completely foolish to make the choice I did at 21 years old when I first started a degree in Computer Science, and to be honest I’ve questioned it many times myself. Because the ONLY thing I have to offer a woman IMO that is worth a damn in terms of relationship equity, is the money I make and the comfort I can provide. I gave up the rest to GET that equity, and today it is becomming more worthless by the day. Am I a good person? Most days. Do I have “redeeming” qualities a woman would find attractive? Certainly. But MY opinion of what I have to offer a woman is money and security. The rest is extra fluff to me.

    I am driven to do more because I want more for my family, NOT because I want more for me. I truly could have been happy as a clam spending my days playing music and getting by, but I determined that a family and a legacy was more important. IF I’d been told at 18 years old that I couldn’t have a family, or that I would have to struggle every day to keep it intact? I might just have decided living on the road was a better deal.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    “Which of these is likely to have the longest lasting effects?”

    Uh, liberation and ego boost?

    After all, liberation lasts a lifetime.

    And if your ego was tiny, maybe stretching it out will make it bigger and, uh, more awesome and more ready to handle liberation?

    I’m not sure that the smaller egos handle liberation as well.

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Would you like to swing on a star
    carry moonbeams home in a jar
    and be better off than you are
    or would you rather be a mule?

    Fond memories of my mom singing this song to me. :-) Heck, sometimes she still does (“moooommmmm, you can stop singing now, I’m not five years old…”).

  • Escoffier

    I don’t get the sense that Roissy is saying “Since I can’t have a kinky June Cleaver, I will burn down the system.” Rather he is saying, “The system is burning from causes beyond my control, but which I among very few understand. Since there is nothing I can do about it, I may as well use my knowledge to screw hot women.”

  • Ted D

    Susan – “Division of labor, consult one another on the big decisions, little conflict, etc. I call that egalitarian.”

    right up until some situatoin comes along that you and your hubby dont agree on. Then what?

    On the outside I’m damn sure my marriage looks exactly like what you and Escoffier described. Why would I go out of my way to make my household some evil dicatorship when a peaceful existance is much better for everyone and less stress for me? The thing is, someone still has to be the “bad guy” sometimes, and generally that person is the “leader” of the family. Because when the truly hard decisions come, it is that person that shoulders the responsibility and the outcome of the decision.

    If I am going to take that responsibility (and I insist that I DO take it in my relationships) then I expect a certain level of respect and deference for doing so. And I insist on having that role because without it, there is always a possibility that my “rank” may sink too low, and I’d find myself single again. If that is a constant possibility, then I’m damned sure going to do my best to make sure I’m in control until I’m not, if that makes any sense.

    I hope you all don’t think that I go home and swing my dick around like some caveman. It isn’t like I look for some sure sign that my wife worships the ground I walk on every day. All I want is her assurance that if/when shit hits the fan, she’ll stand by me and support my decisions, even if she doesn’t necessarily like them. In return, I give her my assurance that I will never use that “power” to take advantage of her, because like I said, what’s good for her is good for me, and good for our children. And, it also relieves her of the burden of being the “bad guy” if/when that shit arrives.

    I get that this is a VERY tough sell for most people, and certainly for the “strong and independant” woman of today. But its what I’m offering, and I certainly won’t accept anything less now that I know what I do. I tried the whole “egalitarian” thing in my first marriage, and it failed. Yeah, I was using a flawed model so no surprise. But, if I’m going to fail (or succeed) again, this time it will be on my terms.

  • Just1Z

    @TedD

    This current political climate is not allowing men a chance to fix it, or at least not in the way many/most would like it to be fixed, so instead they decide to do nothing and let it burn. Because honestly, why should I bust my ass to keep a system afloat that I:
    Do not like or agree with
    Doesn’t even acknowledge let alone admire the sacrifice I make TO keep it afloat
    Doesn’t really provide me with any reward FOR putting in the effort.

    happy to sign up to all that you say there, and would add that not only is there no reward for any effort, but you actually get called some kind of prophet of doom for even mentioning any issues.

    Ignorance is bliss wasn’t supposed to be a way of life, but billions do it and they vote…

  • Escoffier

    Well, my wife was not keen to move the last time. She liked where we lived. It was clear that at some point we were going to need a bigger place but that could have been delayed a little and there was no necessity to leave the area.

    I wouldn’t call that a “disagreement” but moving for the new job was something I wanted to do that she was not exactly eager for, but she put up no resistance, she let me lead in that instance (and in fact in every other career decision that required a move). So I guess I do lead but I can’t recall ever having to really “rule” on some decision that she disagreed with, because anything she really doesn’t want to do is something I don’t want to do either.

  • Just1Z

    “or would you rather be just sit poolside and watch it all burn?”

    the bonfire is already lit and it’s frigging enormous, just wait till it gets going.

    http://alfin2100.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/when-exploding-debt-meets-collapsing.html

    http://alfin2100.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/business-in-russia-etc-worrisome-future.html

    nobody is laughing because it’s funny; it’s called “Gallows Humour”
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallows_humorhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallows_humor

    Author and playwright Oscar Wilde was destitute and living in a cheap boarding house when he found himself on his deathbed. There are variations on what the sentence exactly was, but his reputed last words were, “Either that wallpaper goes or I do.”

    Murderer James French has been attributed with famous last words before his death by electric chair: “How’s this for a headline? ‘French Fries’.” Likewise, when a Jewish mob boss George Appel was electrocuted, his last words were: “Well, gentlemen, you are about to see a baked Appel.”

    In the conclusion to Monty Python’s Life of Brian, a group of crucified criminals joyfully sing “Always Look on the Bright Side of Life”.

    In Stephen King’s book The Tommyknockers, the main character reflects on a joke he “heard once”. As a man is about to be executed, the firing squad leader offers the man about to be executed a cigarette. He replies, “No thanks, I’m trying to quit.”

    Men want to fix stuff, when we can’t, or aren’t allowed to, it can be stressful – so, relax poolside and enjoy the decline

  • Ted D

    Escoffier – “So I guess I do lead but I can’t recall ever having to really “rule” on some decision that she disagreed with, because anything she really doesn’t want to do is something I don’t want to do either.”

    There ya go! FWIW I think this is probably the exact model I shoot for in my marriage. I have NO desire to be an asshole, but I do desire the ability to choose the path of our family, with her input, but ultimately in the way I feel is best. I’m asking for a lot here, I know this. But, I wouldn’t want to be with a woman that didn’t trust me with this responsibility. Because to me, it is my primary purpose in the family to DO so.

    I would say any couple that fights a lot has bigger issues than “who’s the boss around here” to deal with. Things should run smoothly enough that there are very few times when things come to a major blowout. Part of that is having two people that are 100% committed to working things out. But, another part of that is having a relationship framework that bypasses an impasse if one occurs, and in my marriage I’m the tie breaker. Can it be the woman and not the husband? I’m sure it can and does work for some people. But how many? Are these couples a minority? 50% of all? More? I suspect that female led households in this sense are the minority, although that may change as time goes on. What I find troubling is: knowing what I do about a woman’s tendency to want a man somehow “better” than her, how would such a female led family survive long term? Would she truly stay happy with her “lesser” husband for life?

    I may be totally wrong about all of this, but my suspicion is I’m not. I don’t know many men that would be truly satisfied playing second fiddle to a successful wife, and very few women that would be happy with a kitchen bitch for a husband. There is lots of room in there for degrees of variance, but I truly believe that for the vast majority of folks, the “better” man model is the necessary one. Just how “better” he has to be probably varies a great deal woman to woman.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Not sure what you mean here?

    Sorry. I was being overly cryptic there. I’m just that whereas she has to deal with the sadness of the relationship ending due to circumstances, he has much bigger problems than just the relationship.

    Unable to get back a job like the one he had, he must feel very worthless right now. I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes for a second. This is a large problem with young males today though. So many of them are lost and unable to make things work with their careers.

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

      @INTJ

      Thanks for clarifying, I agree with you. I actually asked her if he is depressed, and she said she thinks so. He has said a lot of very self-deprecating things.

  • Tasmin

    @Susan
    “This breaks my heart! I know that when they broke up she said that she believed in him, and he said that he did not share that feeling, so he could not accept it from her. ”

    Uhg. Mine too. I have been through this and it still pains me a great deal. She said those exact words to me: “I believe in you.” There are only a handful of phrases that are as powerful and intimate. In many ways that struck me even more than “I love you” because it spoke more directly to that space in myself that I could not fill up. I knew that her faith and love for me in a time where I was stripped naked, unanchored and exposed is precisely the kind of respect, faith and commitment that I desired yet I could not accept it.

    That kind of raw and deep attachment becomes a heady responsibility and I ultimately didn’t believe I was up to the task of becoming the man worthy of her commitment, in time – or in full. I could not reconcile her image of me with what I held up as the image of what I needed to become. The irony is that I was ALREADY the man that she desired, but I didn’t trust her given that I didn’t have the experience of being loved as a man without title, without definable status, direction, purpose, and power. Or so I believed. The truth was that she found in me things that I had yet to discover, accept, or value on my own. A tragedy indeed.

    I think his response is telling. He does not love himself, he is full of fear, and he does not feel worthy of this kind of faith in him. He probably knows – as I did, that her valuing his character decoupled from most of the contextual markers of society is something we strive and hope for in a relationship, yet in these situations it becomes further affirmation of how we are taking and not giving.

    He is writing the script and she is not following it. He has little faith in himself, she has every faith in him. If she follows his script, she begins to believe the message: he is not strong, not worthy of further investment. And his self-fulfilling prophecy is completed.

    Or she breaks script and rails against his views of himself, she is assuming the more dominant role of provider (of emotional and ego support) as well as adversary in terms of having to constantly challenge his view and justify her beliefs in him; all while her life away from him is a constant reminder of the world in which he struggles to reclaim his place.

    The fact that she is a participant and beneficiary of a world that has seemingly rejected him or a world that he is distancing himself from makes the alignment of his view of self and her view of him much more difficult; he must either devalue that world in order to preserve his sense of self or devalue himself in order to reconcile his place (or lack of) in that world.

    Not being able to accept her blind admiration, essentially rejecting something so valuable feels really horrible and often the only way to relieve some of the guilt and shame is to default to the belief that she is better off w/o you. You still my still see yourself as the captain of your ship, but you would rather go down with the ship alone, rather than have her either come to see you as you see yourself or indeed grow weary of taking the dominant role and eventually take the only remaining power you have from you in your weakest moment. It is some kind of self-destruction for the sake of self-preservation.

    It is a selfish act but whether or not it is necessary or “right” is still lost on me. It goes to that question of being “ready” for a relationship for life. And something of the chicken-egg: does it mean she wasn’t the “right” woman for him because he could not trust-accept her investment in him at his lowest – is it the “right” person who can inspire us to overcome these situations OR is it the situation that inspires us to find the right person, does he have to find that love and respect for himself before he is open to find the “right” woman. Like all things, I suspect a continuum, but in the midst of these times it can be really difficult to accurately self-assess where we are on it.

    In some ways it is understandable why he (and men in general) took this action because the character qualities she obviously admires in him are buried beneath all of the external validation we are accustomed to. We have internalized the fact that image has supplanted integrity in our culture. You can tell a man all kinds of things and he may even believe a few of them them to be true, but it is hard to overcome a lifetime of experience in how the rest of our culture acknowledges and rewards those visible markers, the proxies, the facade in favor of those character qualities. So until he can reclaim some measure of himself in those other mirrors, he will feel pacified, coddled, and turn those deep compliments into further indications of his weakness, his needs, his taking – not his strength, his provisioning, his giving.

    My heart goes out to both of them.

  • INTJ

    @ J

    There’s a lot of middle ground that gets ignored.

    But Heartiste has tried to find that middle ground. He has made several posts about applying Game to LTRs.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Thanks for clarifying, I agree with you. I actually asked her if he is depressed, and she said she thinks so. He has said a lot of very self-deprecating things.

    Yeah unless he’s a total lazy bum, any guy in his situation would be depressed. :(

  • Ted D

    Tasmin – I’ve been in that place myself, and you did a stellar job of explaining it. Kudos!

  • HanSolo

    @Tasmin 502

    This makes me think of Javert committing suicide after having his life spared by Jean Valjean. His view of the world being ruled by justice was shaken and that there were other forces at work, just as the man in Susan’s story believes that his worth is primarily derived by his career status and provider capability, ignoring the other things that make life worth living and him attractive to the woman in question.

    To quote wikipedia’s take on it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Javert:

    “He would rather ‘escape now from the world … of Jean Valjean,’ where forgiveness trumps judgment.”

  • Just1Z

    Cappy Cap:
    “I know I say “enjoy the decline,” but it takes a mighty strong person to embed that into their psychologies”
    http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/the-one-thing-i-mourn-most-with-death.html

  • Ted D

    ““He would rather ‘escape now from the world … of Jean Valjean,’ where forgiveness trumps judgment.””

    Or put another way: he wanted to leave a world where he saw no place for himself. I get it.

    Fact is, many men are “checking out” of society for the same reason. But instead of committing suicide, they are playing Xbox and passing the time.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    My husband leads in every decision, but he consults me before doing it. I don’t usually use my “veto power” because I know he’s reasonable and won’t deliberately do something harmful to us.

    For a few years I made several times more money than him, and now I make a little bit less than him. It isn’t really about the money, more about the all-important respect. He knows he “wears the pants” in our marriage, but he doesn’t abuse it.

    On the other hand, we talk about things and discuss them in a manner that would probably be seen as egalitarian by most people. And as Escoffier describes, anything I really don’t want, my husband wouldn’t want either.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    He recently ended the relationship. He told her that although she is the best thing to have happened to him in months, he “feels like a loser all the time.” He also said that he cannot possibly be responsible for another person’s happiness right now – all of his energy must be directed toward finding employment. He promised that if he gets a job, she will be the first person he calls. She is in love with him, and devastated.

    Does this surprise you? Is this a case of “he’s just not that into you?” or would you feel the same way? What should she do? I think she’s going to have a hard time letting go, because she perceives that the circumstances are entirely to blame, rather than a lack of feeling on his part. She feels that if he cared enough, he would stay in the relationship, and she also points out that he acknowledges his life is better with her in it. I think it’s more about his self-respect. What do you think?

    I believe he really does love/like her but he doesn’t feel the same way about himself. (Though without really getting inside his head this is just speculation. It is possible but not likely that he doesn’t love her. In this case I think it really is him, and not her, unless she’s actively making him feel inferior in ways that aren’t clear…she seems to be very supportive of him and loving him for who he is inside and not just his job/status.)

    He gets a bit of my empathy but the more I think about it not much. He seems like more of a quitter and a coward. I usually give men the benefit of the doubt these days so it’s not lightly that I come down hard on him.

    Yeah, he can’t find a job he wants. So what? Industries change, the economy changes, we have to adapt and move on. That is what has allowed humanity to survive. We’re resilient, adaptive and keep on fighting. Granted, he’s still looking for work but maybe it’s in an oversupplied field or maybe he wasn’t that good at what he did. I don’t know.

    Passing up on a good woman in order to avoid the painful looking in the mirror that being around her requires makes me think of the powerful movie, The Mission, where the Robert De Niro character, Rodrigo Mendoza, is sulking in the prison, feeling guilty and worthless for having killed his brother in a duel. Father Gabriel tells him, “I see a coward, a man running from the world.”

    This man needs to look inward fast and see that there is more to him than just a job. He needs to love himself for who he is, independent of the job. He also needs to realize that his industry may be in the dumps forever and change to another field.

  • HanSolo

    @Ted D

    I agree that there are many forces stacked against men and they don’t feel needed, appreciated or that there’s much opportunity. I’ve spoken often to that and that men respond to being needed.

    OTOH, the checked-out men need to stop being such pussies and find some inner drive that is meaningful to them and do it. If they go there own way because they consciously choose it, great, but if they choose to just be helpless victims in the face of real difficulties and neglect then I really don’t have much sympathy. Yes, there are many forces against many men and so society in general and women should work on those but for these men themselves, they have the ability within them to fight and strive and find their own purpose, and if they’re not doing it and succeeding as best they can within a difficult environment then I have less sympathy for them.

    I have overall sympathy and concern about the environment they’re in but if they just choose to be quitters then I don’t.

  • Escoffier

    The only think I want to do that my wife does (or did) not want to do is return to Santa Cruz “some day.” (Not that she is from there but she’s been going for years now.) Recently she has softened on that, partly because of the weather here, I think.

    Anyway, what I used to tell is her is that I sure as hell AM going to go home one day, she can come or not, I hope she does, but I ain’t going back on that promise to myself for no one or nothing. That would annoy her, I think because she wasn’t quite sure if it’s a joke or not (it’s not).

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Tasmin, wow that is very tragic. :(

    “The irony is that I was ALREADY the man that she desired, but I didn’t trust her given that I didn’t have the experience of being loved as a man without title, without definable status, direction, purpose, and power. Or so I believed.”

    I also fell in love with him when he was not externally high in status. He was always high in status to me though. I did remember him feeling depressed and like he wasn’t going to make it, and telling him that I believe in him and that he’s awesome and amazing, even when he didn’t think or feel that way.

    We were both young though, mid-20s, and he had some sense of direction and purpose. He also had a lot of spiritual wisdom, was open to love, and did not place an extreme amount of importance on externalities. Before he took this job which is well-paying, he promised himself he would not fall prey to the love of money and would try to help the less fortunate whenever the occasion rises.

    I can understand the deep desire for a man to “feel like a man.” But I think that a woman who falls in love with a man when he’s not well-off is a woman who truly loves him for him, and has already fulfilled the “for richer or for poorer” part.

  • JP

    “OTOH, the checked-out men need to stop being such pussies and find some inner drive that is meaningful to them and do it. ”

    Or they can go to law school.

    That works for some people.

  • HanSolo

    This is the trailer of the Mission, one of my favorite movies of all time, totally recommend everyone watch it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VG3VHlEIxV0

    Here’s the great dialog between Father Gabriel and Rodrigo Mendoza after Mendoza kills his brother and is sulking in the monestary:

    Gabriel: I see a man running away, a man hiding from the world. I see a coward.

    So is that it? Is this how you mean to go on? (sulking in the monestary)

    Rodrigo: There is nothing else.

    Father Gabriel: There is life.

    Rodrigo: There is no life.

    Gabriel: There is a way out, Mendoza.

    Rodrigo: For me, there is no redemption.

    Gabriel: God gave us the burden of freedom. You chose your crime. Do you have the courage to choose your penance? Do you dare do that?

    Rodrigo: There is no penance hard enough for me.

    Gabriel: But do you dare try it?

  • HanSolo

    @JP

    Or they can go to law school.

    You do have a dark sense of humor! LMAO

  • Mike C

    Re: timing, Susan, I don’t know. There are many variables but only one direction. Suppose that we can do more or less what Europe is doing now: keep papering over the problem, tinker here, temporize there, lurch from crisis to crisis, always coming up with some temporary “fix” that really fixes nothing long term … well, then, assuming we can keep that going absent any external or internal shock, the demography will screw us within 50 years and certainly well before 100.

    But our creditors may well act before that, or else something else will topple the house of cards. The only thing certain is that it IS a house of cards and we just ratified the whole system, indeed we voted to expand and perpetuate it.

    Escoffier,

    It is critically important to point out the U.S. is NOT Europe in one very important way….we control the currency our debt is denominated in unlike Spain, Italy, or Greece with the euro.

    Regarding our “creditors” it is important to realize that a good chunk of the U.S. Treasury debt is held on the balance sheet of the Federal Reserve, and the Fed has done much of the debt purchasing the last few years. Now this comes with its own set of financial issues ….most likely down the road, but “going broke” isn’t one of them. The ability of the U.S. to theoretically issue dollars is not constrained just like a a scorekeeper can’t run out of points to put on the scoreboard. It isn’t clear to me why those in power who know better insist on this fiction of going broke. I suspect if it was commonly understood there was no limitation on the creation of dollars to pay government obligations the fear is the populace would in fact demand it.

    In any case, I would suggest reading this:

    http://pragcap.com/understanding-the-modern-monetary-system-part-1

    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1905625

  • Tasmin

    @Hope
    “I can understand the deep desire for a man to “feel like a man.” But I think that a woman who falls in love with a man when he’s not well-off is a woman who truly loves him for him, and has already fulfilled the “for richer or for poorer” part.”

    Agree. and that is why it is so tragic. While one woman can go a long way to help a man “feel like a man”, the extent to which he deviates from those “traditional” and more universal markers in society will put an increasing emphasis/importance on that one woman’s view, which can be problematic. Sometimes it is just too much – too far.

    Getting together young can avoid some of this as there is less of a delta between how he sees himself and those external expectations – and the plenty of time ahead in which to carve it out. But the issue isn’t so much about a man needing and searching for those external things as it is about the man’s ability to generate his own inner strength, which is something that is very hard to do for a generation of men who have been sent counterproductive and mixed messages about what it means to be a “man” and particularly difficult when that man finds himself displaced.

    Some men manage to navigate better than others. Some men do better in this alone, some with a partner like you. Some will never “get it” and for some it will take a long time and relationships will inevitably get caught in the gears. Some men never get displaced or face a reckoning and some don’t care or don’t have the raw material to manufacture their own worth. There are all kinds, but the fact remains those external things matter. How much, under what circumstances, and to whom is always debatable, but it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t matter and each man has to do his own work to find his place in light of this truth.

    Certainly your husband had to do his own work to feel grounded and confident and full (enough) of purpose that had nothing to do with you. In fact, it was this: “He also had a lot of spiritual wisdom, was open to love, and did not place an extreme amount of importance on externalities.” that evidenced his very power and frame of confidence that you found to be so attractive to begin with. While young, you still met a man with purpose. Sure it was subject to lulls in confidence and other challenges, which you have met together, but still that is quite different from a man displaced and faced with course-correction, fighting back in, and the distinct possibility of accepting a new position within the same game at a lower level.

    In any case, I think you two sound truly grateful to have found each other. Sometimes it is just a matter of timing. And that’s a bitch because we want to feel like we have more control than that :-)

  • Bully

    I think that if women never abused gender roles by taking the Chinese menu approach, then I think there would be much fewer men feeling crushed about not being able to find jobs.

    Men are practical. We know what what’s being said, but we’re also quite good at reading between the lines.

    Like it or not, if the woman in the example previously mentioned wants her man to believe her that she still wants him, she’s going to have to go beyond mere lip service if she wants him to stick around. It sucks that she’s paying for the sins for others, but that’s really how it is

    http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/2753-dating-unemployed-men-women.html

  • Mike C

    I know that they are real, no denial at all

    but they need to be put in context

    I hear that taking the pill increases the risk of thrombosis and other medical issues, but clearly a lot of women look at the overall rate and take the pill for its convenience (or whatever reason that they chose).

    basically
    doubling a risk of sfa* means nothing
    doubling the risk in Russian Roulette is a whole different ballgame

    Surely you get that?

    Just1Z, absolutely right. There are two things, severity of outcome, and probability of outcome.

    Whether “doubling” is consequential or not depends on the starting base rate you are doubling off of.

    Doubling from 20% to 40% incidence would be very, very, very, very material.

    Doubling from .01% to .02% is utterly inconsequential.

    As a side point, I’ve noticed an uptick in wanting to equate the male and female timelines which I think is part of the feminine imperative related to “age appropriateness”. I’ll admit I haven’t studied it in detail, but I throw a low wager bet off the top of my head that a 35-year old woman has a much higher risk of stuff she can pass to offspring than a 35-year old man.

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

      @Mike C

      As a side point, I’ve noticed an uptick in wanting to equate the male and female timelines which I think is part of the feminine imperative related to “age appropriateness”. I’ll admit I haven’t studied it in detail, but I throw a low wager bet off the top of my head that a 35-year old woman has a much higher risk of stuff she can pass to offspring than a 35-year old man.

      Experts said that the finding was hardly reason to forgo fatherhood later in life, though it may have some influence on reproductive decisions. The overall risk to a man in his 40s or older is in the range of 2 percent, at most, and there are other contributing biological factors that are entirely unknown.

      But the study, published online in the journal Nature, provides support for the argument that the surging rate of autism diagnoses over recent decades is attributable in part to the increasing average age of fathers, which could account for as many as 20 to 30 percent of cases.

      The findings also counter the longstanding assumption that the age of the mother is the most important factor in determining the odds of a child having developmental problems. The risk of chromosomal abnormalities, like Down syndrome, increases for older mothers, but when it comes to some complex developmental and psychiatric problems, the lion’s share of the genetic risk originates in the sperm, not the egg, the study found.

      Previous studies had strongly suggested as much, including an analysis published in April that found that this risk was higher at age 35 than 25 and crept up with age. The new report quantifies that risk for the first time, calculating how much it accumulates each year.

      The research team found that the average child born to a 20-year-old father had 25 random mutations that could be traced to paternal genetic material. The number increased steadily by two mutations a year, reaching 65 mutations for offspring of 40-year-old men.

      The average number of mutations coming from the mother’s side was 15, no matter her age, the study found.

      …Some difference between the paternal and maternal side is to be expected. Sperm cells divide every 15 days or so, whereas egg cells are relatively stable, and continual copying inevitably leads to errors, in DNA as in life.

      Still, when the researchers removed the effect of paternal age, they found no difference in genetic risk between those who had a diagnosis of autism or schizophrenia and a control group of Icelanders who did not. “It is absolutely stunning that the father’s age accounted for all this added risk, given the possibility of environmental factors and the diversity of the population,” said Dr. Kari Stefansson, the chief executive of Decode and the study’s senior author. “And it’s stunning that so little is contributed by the age of the mother.”

      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/23/health/fathers-age-is-linked-to-risk-of-autism-and-schizophrenia.html?_r=2&hp&

      If you don’t care for these findings, you will be happy to know it’s just a study, and Badger says you can disregard it. :)

  • Lokland

    @Mike C

    “I suspect if it was commonly understood there was no limitation on the creation of dollars to pay government obligations the fear is the populace would in fact demand it.”

    I have zero training in economics and even I know that printing of bills without allowing for value increases in the dollar results in cash that is utterly worthless.

    Not a huge deal if you just buy-sell within your own borders but an economy that imports nearly all of its needs cannot have a worthless currency.

  • Lokland

    @Mike C

    “I’ll admit I haven’t studied it in detail, but I throw a low wager bet off the top of my head that a 35-year old woman has a much higher risk of stuff she can pass to offspring than a 35-year old man.”

    Its a no contest really.
    To even equate the two as equal in some way is an insult to thinking creatures. (Which has not been done here, yet.)

    However, there is a decrease (duh, shit stops working with age). I have never heard of anyone speak of declining male fertility and male age related defects in progeny before the age of 40 however.

  • Escoffier

    “Europe”–which really means France, Germany and the Brussells elite–most assuredly does control its currency even if other individual countries do not.

    Sure we can try to inflate the debt away the but the overall effect will be the same, just from a different cause, our creditors will howl (then bail) and the dollar will become worthless.

    Leaving aside all the money details, the fundmental point is that we have made promises to people re: their standards of living and of benificent government that the laws of economics will not allow us to keep.

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    Fact is, many men are “checking out” of society for the same reason. But instead of committing suicide, they are playing Xbox and passing the time.

    This goes back to how lazy bums are able to deal with the current situation better than driven men.

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

    @Just1Z

    Can’t you two just grab a couple of beers and chill?

    Heh, maybe when the boy matures into a man!
    If he keeps providing the ammo, I might as well use it… :wink:
    What Mr. Wizard calls straw men = quoting him with his foot in his mouth. Ad hominems = pointing out willful ignorance, PC-style.

    PS: I think I’m a moderate ISFJ or something like that…

  • Mike C

    “Europe”–which really means France, Germany and the Brussells elite–most assuredly does control its currency even if other individual countries do not.

    It is a fascinating topic who really has the power here. Many of the French and German banks carry the sovereign debt of the PIGS nations on their balance sheet. There is the old joke that if I owe $10,000 to the bank, I am at risk, but if I owe $10,000,000 the bank is at risk. The idea of a monetary union without a fiscal union from Day 1 was insanity. One potential outcome is Germany and France bail, go back to their original currencies, and leave the PIGS to inflate their debt away with trillions upon trillions of newly created Euros.

    Sure we can try to inflate the debt away the but the overall effect will be the same, just from a different cause, our creditors will howl (then bail) and the dollar will become worthless.

    Leaving aside all the money details, the fundmental point is that we have made promises to people re: their standards of living and of benificent government that the laws of economics will not allow us to keep.

    Agreed. The one saving grace might be some sort of quantum leap forward in overall productivity. Thought experiment. If you had limitless cheap energy, and could provide healthcare at a fraction of the current cost, then theoretically you might be able to support a very large elder retired population with a high standard of living with a much smaller amount of younger workers. I don’t think that is impossible. Who knows what technological progress could happen in the next 2-3 decades?

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

    @INTJ

    I don’t think I’m communicating very clearly. See Ted D’s post to see what I was talking about.

    Ted communicated very clearly. Someone just doesn’t like responding to direct questions. Susan’s been over this stuff before, multiple times. College-educated women report the lowest N of any other educational level (lifetime median = 3).

    93% of them were either virgins, or had 0-1 partners over a 1-year period. Don’t like gov’t statistics? Too bad. Make up your own if you want. Time to move on, quit worrying so much, and find a GF!

  • Tasmin

    @HanSolo
    “OTOH, the checked-out men need to stop being such pussies and find some inner drive that is meaningful to them and do it. ”

    One could argue that many of those “checked-out” men are by definition acknowledging that inner drive and its incongruence with the accepted, expected, and judging-labeling conditions of the society from which they are checking out. While I’m big on personal responsibility and have little time for whining and entitlement, I stop at the point of calling someone a pussy because they have done their math or otherwise calculated the cost-benefit of what they believe to be of value to themselves and to society and consider the corresponding risks and costs to them in their conclusion of: “fuck it”.

    Sure some guys are lazy piles, but were not really talking about them in this case, are we? We are talking about men who desire a productive and rewarding place in this world, about men who wish to share the rewards of their work but have found themselves in a position that greatly challenges how they view their ability to achieve those very things and thus how they see – and value themselves in light of those challenges and how that impacts their relationships. Tangents onto the extremes of suicidal and/or lazy or apathetic men is not particularly relevant or helpful IMO.

    In fact, I give those “checking out” guys the same benefit of doubt that I give all of the men who occupy the expected societal roles with fervor even though I know full well that a great many of them are complete shadows, empty-suits, and dark players who give little to others, extract all that they can from the world, and leverage every opportunity to serve their needs and wants. Yet those men are somehow able to maintain a defined role and place in society – often a place of high status, almost entirely by the nature of their career and all that it affords them in terms of economic and social benefit. Of them, there are many. But somehow no one ever tells them to “man up”, which is essentially what your comment seems to distill down to.

    As a side note, with few rare exceptions I equate suicide with depression, with illness, and illness is not a choice and therefore not a true reflection of one’s worth or “bravery”. Growing up with a mentally-ill mother taught me more than I ever wanted to know about that. And instilled in me a great deal of empathy for those who are – be it temporarily or perpetually lacking the fundamental ability to create and sustain their own positive and/or rational thoughts. A brother returning from two wars pretty much set that in stone for me as well. You seem good hearted enough, but you are missing *something*.

  • Escoffier

    Mike, we seem to have been technologically stagnating for about 40 years. I know that sounds crazy in the so-called “information age” but really all the great advances of my lifetime were either medical or else IT and those boil down to three: the PC, the cell/smart phone, and the Internet. In every other way we have done close to nothing, or else regressed.

    The next great frontier might be genome/biotech but that is scary stuff. I certainly don’t foresee any great techno leaps that will enable us to pay for this Leviathan state, and anyway, a big proble (THE big problem) with the Leviathan state is not that it’s expensive, it’s that it saps the virtue of the people which is the foundation for such innovation in the first place. Vicious cycle.

    This was all predicted by Tocqueville, Nietszche and others, to say nothing of Plato, Xenophon and Aristotle.

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

    Yes, but it was alse done by females.

    Yeah people ofter forget how hard housework was before the advent of modern technology the expression “I spent all day in the kitchen cooking” was not a metaphor.

    One moment, when Jason started to shot at the harpies my daughter suddenly declared “and now harpies realise they were wrong and they became good and they will have children“.

    Heh that is so cute.

    That sounds like a lovely day! Those small pleasures are the best. Coconut Anise bread sounds delicious – will google.

    There are variations but not the one we have in the family. I would pass it on to you but my mom told me that the recipe is cursed for non blood relatives, I don’t believe in witchcraft but it exist nevertheless ;)

    I’m opening a Hobgoblin* as I write

    GOOD! He deserves it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobgoblin_%28comics%29

  • JP

    “You seem good hearted enough, but you are missing *something*.”

    Professional experience with the mentally ill.

  • JP

    Regarding Fun with Economics:

    Recent Jeremy Grantham Report:

    “On the Road to Zero Growth”

    http://www.gmo.com/websitecontent/JG_LetterALL_11-12.pdf

    Recent John Hussman Report, talking about the Jeremy Grantham Report:

    “Grantham argued that “The U.S. GDP growth rate that we have become accustomed to for over a hundred years – in excess of 3% a year – is not just hiding behind temporary setbacks. It is gone forever. Yet most business people (and the Fed) assume that economic growth will recover to its old rates… Going forward, GDP growth (conventionally measured) for the U.S. is likely to be about only 1.4% a year, and adjusted growth about 0.9%…The bottom line for U.S. real growth, according to our forecast, is 0.9% a year through 2030, decreasing to 0.4% from 2030 to 2050. This is all done presuming no unexpected disasters, but also no heroics, just normal “muddling through.” (h/t Business Insider).”

    http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc121126.htm

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Tasmin, ironically, when my husband and I met each other, we had both basically given up on love, and resolved that we would be okay being single.

    You may think yourself this that or the other, but there will always be time and opportunity. I hope you find the right one for you. :)

  • INTJ

    Ted communicated very clearly. Someone just doesn’t like responding to direct questions. Susan’s been over this stuff before, multiple times. College-educated women report the lowest N of any other educational level (lifetime median = 3).

    93% of them were either virgins, or had 0-1 partners over a 1-year period.

    Well this proves part of what I said: that a significant portion of the women are foregoing relationships during this time. Now the question is, of those that don’t forgo relationships, who’re they having relationships with? I betcha many of these boyfriends score high on the asshole spectrum.

    Time to move on, quit worrying so much, and find a GF!

    I don’t want a GF…

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

      @INTJ

      I don’t want a GF…

      What??? Are you saying you want to go straight to engaged?

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    One moment, when Jason started to shot at the harpies my daughter suddenly declared “and now harpies realise they were wrong and they became good and they will have children“.

    Just re-noticed this. Barefoot and pregnant harpies?

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

      @INTJ

      Just re-noticed this. Barefoot and pregnant harpies?

      That was szopen’s comment.

  • JP

    With respect to innovations and economy, I recommend thinking about the innovation waves on S curves as pointed out by Harry Dent.

    Here’s one of Mike Alexander’s old articles:

    “By looking at the timing of important basic innovations we can obtain an idea of when each economic cycle began. Figure 4 shows the composite innovations from Figure 2 along with more invention data for earlier periods. Four periods of enhanced innovation can be identified, which are coincident with four major innovations. The first cluster is centered in the 1770’s and is associated with the early textile manufacturing innovations that comprise the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. A second cluster, centered in the 1830’s, is associated with the development of the railroad. The third cluster centered in the 1900’s is associated with the development of the automobile and other mass-market consumer products. A fourth cluster of innovations in the 1970’s and 1980’s is associated with the internet and personal computer revolution. Like Dent’s spending wave, the periods of heightened entrepreneurial activity designated by these clusters of innovations can be thought of as an innovation wave that periodically surges through the economy, beginning a new economic cycle. Table 1 lists the four economic cycles initiated by the four innovation waves…”

    http://www.safehaven.com/article/71/the-innovation-wave-and-secular-market-trends

    The next wave is the biotechnology wave, I think. We’re in the innovation bust phase of the process at this point because of the current flatlining of the IT wave and the lack of power being supplied by the biotech wave.

    Both of which should go into expansion phases in the future.

  • HanSolo

    @Tasmin

    I do have empathy for men, both the corporate drones who live in gilded or at least bronze cages and the checked-out video gamers. I think my posts usually are slightly biased in mens’ favor because I see the difficulty that the changing world and S/MMP has brought them.

    However, in the case of Susan’s friend’s ex, I see a man who threw away a seemingly great woman in order to salve his pride, in an era when many men are finding it difficult to find such an empathetic and loving woman (assuming she really is as described and perceived by him as the best thing he’s had happen to him in months).

    Instead of taking the easy path out he should be a man and fight through it with her at her side.

  • Lokland

    @Tas

    Question what would be worse?
    To question your own value enough to end the relationship with the person who believes in your potential value?
    Or
    To question your own value without having anyone offer any affirmation of your value, you subsequently increase your value and suddenly everybody is standing there, bleating their affirmations on how awesome you are and how they knew you could do it?

  • INTJ

    I think you Susan and the commenters might enjoy reading this old newspaper article from 1958. The rhetoric sounds eerily familiar.

    http://news.google.co.uk/newspapers?id=c3QzAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ruIDAAAAIBAJ&dq=barefoot-and-pregnant&pg=6821%2C3738371

  • Mike C

    However, in the case of Susan’s friend’s ex, I see a man who threw away a seemingly great woman in order to salve his pride, in an era when many men are finding it difficult to find such an empathetic and loving woman (assuming she really is as described and perceived by him as the best thing he’s had happen to him in months).

    Instead of taking the easy path out he should be a man and fight through it with her at her side.

    Han,

    I’m not sure we know enough to definitively conclude he threw away a relationship with a great women. I think it was Susan who had a comment referencing that Blue movie and the risk to her. Perhaps he senses quite correctly that she really isn’t in it for the long haul and *truly* committed and he’d rather pull the plug now given his circumstances rather then her pull the plug down the road when she wakes up one day and realizes she cannot be with a man of his status/career.

    When I met my now fiancee, I was NOT full-time professionally employed. I was bouncing, doing some other stuff that didn’t produce enough income, and living with my parents. That unemployment actually lasted a considerable length of time. It never dawned on me for a second to drop my relationship. One, I brought a lot of value in many other ways besides income/career status, and more importantly I truly believed she was WITH ME THE PERSON, not me the potential “success/status object”.

    I’m speculating but perhaps he is picking up the slightest whiffs of that in the air. She may be supportive but hinting that he needs to get the career/income stuff on track ASAP.

  • HanSolo

    @Tasmin

    What I’m really saying is that people need to come to a deeper understanding of what is meaningful to them, both men and women. Corporate-drone or even high achieving men need to realize that they have value outside of their jobs. The checked-out men need to realize that they can likely find something more meaningful to them and pursue it. Women need to realize that they don’t need to follow the herd, they don’t need to follow the feminist/academic alpha mares that promote the career-over-love-and-family and the pop-culture alpha mares that sell images and songs of promiscuous pleasure and slutty empowerment.

    The use of the word ‘pussy’ may have been excessive but it was used in the moment of feeling the emotion that, yes, there are forces arrayed against men but that we are not just helpless victims and need to arise and find our inner purpose and follow it (note, not man up for women’s sake but for our own, though women will like many of us better for having done so).

    So both the corporate drone who is selling his soul and his time to follow the script that he doesn’t believe in or the video-game underachiever who is rebelling against that meaningless script but hasn’t come up with any script of his own and just defaults into video-game escapism both need to realize that life is short and that it can be meaningful when you realize what your purpose and goals are and follow it.

    This is not to say that men can’t have a good reason to stay in their drone job if it’s for some purpose that is meaningful to them or they actually like that job. It’s not to say that someone couldn’t be following their purpose in enjoying life and their way of enjoying it is video games.

  • HanSolo

    @Tasmin 529

    I basically agree with your points and explained more of what I was getting at in my previous two comments to you just now.

    Cheers, and I enjoy reading what you have to say.

  • Mike C

    What I’m really saying is that people need to come to a deeper understanding of what is meaningful to them, both men and women. Corporate-drone or even high achieving men need to realize that they have value outside of their jobs. The checked-out men need to realize that they can likely find something more meaningful to them and pursue it. Women need to realize that they don’t need to follow the herd, they don’t need to follow the feminist/academic alpha mares that promote the career-over-love-and-family and the pop-culture alpha mares that sell images and songs of promiscuous pleasure and slutty empowerment.

    Amen. Han, perfectly said. Unfortunately, I’m not sure how many people are capable of the introspection necessary to really understand what is meaningful to them. It can be a scary process as well. In a strange way, it can be easier to live life according to the various expectations foisted upon you. When you toss them into the trash, you have to figure out what to put in the vacuum/void that now exists.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Re: debt bombs. I share the concern of many here and as a result have a series of long-term “convexity” trades either currently active or planned.

    An interesting aspect of these things is how sensitive the system becomes to interest rate shifts; Italy went from “muddling through” to full-blown crisis with an increase of only 100 basis points in its government 10-year rate. The final stage can happen very quickly.

    It’s a bit like an insidious form of spring-loaded trap that has three central components :

    1) The Bomb: A period of heavy debt/GDP build-up, usually due to a combination of demands for heavy Keynesian stimulus and a cooperative central bank.

    2) The Arming: disappointing headline GDP growth numbers make the “hey, we’ll just grow our way out” plan seem rather unlikely. Oh NO!

    3) The Trigger: a year-on-year fiscal deficit that is “suddenly” recognized as being so horrendous—within the context of 1 and 2— that interest rates finally start accurately reflecting sovereign risk of default (either through restructuring or through a print-off attempt—rates and the press now enter a sort of drag race).

    Ka-boom.

    So the multi-decade sovereign debt bacchanalia is the Rigger and a combination of weak growth and a grotesque deficit is the Trigger. The thing is that, at extreme values, these are not independent variables that have to line up like some rare celestial event—debt, weak growth, and rates become linked by feedback processes and can become fated to, eventually, come together in a crisp, KO-thunderous jab-cross-hook to the face.

    *(there is a simple equation in macroecon that is used to calculate how large/small a permanent surplus—not just a balanced budget in many modern cases, but an actual fiscal surplus—a country needs to run to try to keep its debt/GDP stable as it enters the endgame state. It’s basically a kind of Austerity/Pain Index that tracks the fiscal discipline that you would need to endure if you actually wanted to slowly pull away from the jaws of the trap).

    A lot of guys in my industry see Japan going down hard and first. Few are ready for default in a G7, but I personally have trouble feeling much more than schadenfreude at this point.

  • INTJ

    @ Escoffier

    Mike, we seem to have been technologically stagnating for about 40 years. I know that sounds crazy in the so-called “information age” but really all the great advances of my lifetime were either medical or else IT and those boil down to three: the PC, the cell/smart phone, and the Internet. In every other way we have done close to nothing, or else regressed.

    I do think humanity as a whole has passed the zenith of technological advancement. All the easy stuff has already been invented, so the pace of technological innovation is going to drop off.

    Nevertheless, I’d argue that the Internet alone has been a revolutionary invention that has caused a massive transformation in society.

    The next great frontier might be genome/biotech but that is scary stuff. I certainly don’t foresee any great techno leaps that will enable us to pay for this Leviathan state, and anyway, a big proble (THE big problem) with the Leviathan state is not that it’s expensive, it’s that it saps the virtue of the people which is the foundation for such innovation in the first place. Vicious cycle.

    I’m hoping advanced manufacturing can pull us out of this mess. I’m certainly putting my money on it as the one remaining hope. http://www.economist.com/node/21552901

  • HanSolo

    @Mike C

    Agree we don’t know enough and it is possible she was making him feel shitty about not getting the job or that it was expected. My assumption was more that she was standing by him whether he ever returned to the top 5% or whatever of earners.

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

      Agree we don’t know enough and it is possible she was making him feel shitty about not getting the job or that it was expected. My assumption was more that she was standing by him whether he ever returned to the top 5% or whatever of earners.

      Not only did she not make him feel shitty or pressure him in some way, she was his rock. When they broke up he said he didn’t know what he was going to do without her to lean on.

      One thing that was hard for her was that his only free time in the entire week were Monday and Tuesday nights. She generally suggested staying in and cooking together, and she often brought provisions or made dinner at her place. Her aim was to make their time together as stress free as possible, and she found ways to be a cheap date and contribute financially where she could. (She knew he was working very hard to keep his condo.) These weeknight dates were not ideal by any means, especially since she gets to work at 6. She did this without complaint, knowing it was beyond his control.

      She fell head over heels for this guy, AS IS. She feels certain he will overcome this setback based on his past track record – she is totally in his corner. She feels that Tasmin captured the relationship dynamic and failure very accurately, and she is grateful for the feedback.

  • Mike C

    I’m 100% sure that if my wife was asked a question like “who is the boss in your house?” she would reply that there is no boss because we work together. If I was asked the same question, my reply would be that IF it every came down to someone having to be “the boss”, it would be me.

    IMO, if you are doing it right as the guy, this is exactly how it should *seem*. The “boss” should be unstated. IMO, there is a way to lead and be “in charge” without it coming across negatively. I think this will be problematic though if a guy is with a woman who feels the need to “assert her independence”.

    Much of this discussion about who is in charge and dominance, etc. is just abstract BSing unless you actually narrow it down to actual examples. I defer to my fiancee on things where I know she is more competent or the issue is of minor importance to me. But if it is a major issue, ultimately I am the “decider” to use a Bushism. Recently, we faced an issue as a couple where I wanted her to increase her monthly 401(k) contribution. Going into this, it really was a given in my mind. There was no alternative outcome without me doing serious questioning about the relationship. It was probably one of the most contentious things we’ve addressed. Ultimately, the dollar increase was equal to what I had wanted.

  • BroHamlet

    @Escoffier & Mike C

    “Mike, we seem to have been technologically stagnating for about 40 years. I know that sounds crazy in the so-called “information age” but really all the great advances of my lifetime were either medical or else IT and those boil down to three: the PC, the cell/smart phone, and the Internet. In every other way we have done close to nothing, or else regressed.”

    You guys have an interesting line of discussion here. I’ll agree, but qualify this further: Innovation does happen within the constraints of existing paradigms in consumer technology. BUT, the information economy and the products it generates is/are now largely commoditized. We have not created new technology so disruptive as to redefine the basic scope of possibilities for everyday life, and in the process create an entirely new string of opportunities for wealth creation.

  • Mike C

    Re: debt bombs. I share the concern of many here and as a result have a series of long-term “convexity” trades either currently active or planned.

    Bastiat, you care to share any?

    I know some really smart HF managers are jumping on the short yen trade.

  • HanSolo

    @Mike C

    It can be a scary process as well. In a strange way, it can be easier to live life according to the various expectations foisted upon you. When you toss them into the trash, you have to figure out what to put in the vacuum/void that now exists.

    Very scary. I have experienced this myself in the last 5 or 6 years, but not in a way related to career. Prior to leaving the Mormon church my main purpose in life was wanting to follow the vision of God and Christ that I had found by my intense involvement there. It was the center of my life. Goodness, God and Church and my life’s purpose were all molded together. After certain life experiences and realizations, this beautiful and deeply meaningful world view was shattered. Some of the pieces remain, like having a loving family some day, the conviction that love (both romantic and charity) are the most meaningful ways to live life, and wanting to help the world be better. However, that underlying spiritual reason for why and my certainty about that spiritual realm have been replaced by dim assertion that there probably is a divine being out there in some fashion or other, hoping rather than knowing that providence reveals its hand at times.

  • Mike C

    You guys have an interesting line of discussion here. I’ll agree, but qualify this further: Innovation does happen within the constraints of existing paradigms in consumer technology. BUT, the information economy and the products it generates is/are now largely commoditized. We have not created new technology so disruptive as to redefine the basic scope of possibilities for everyday life, and in the process create an entirely new string of opportunities for wealth creation.

    The thing is IMO both with regards to innovation and the “unsustainable promises” is that it mostly lies in health care. I don’t know the exact numbers, but I’d guess that a very large amount of the economic value provided from younger workers to the older retired is in the form of health care services. I am living this right now, as I have a parent who has been hospitalized for nearly 2 months. The potential costs are literally mind boggling. A rough estimate so far is probably around $2 million in costs for the last 60 days.

    There simply has to be a better way to deliver the same quality of healthcare at much lower cost. I have no idea what that is, but hopefully greater minds will figure something out over the next 10-20 years.

  • JP

    “However, that underlying spiritual reason for why and my certainty about that spiritual realm have been replaced by dim assertion that there probably is a divine being out there in some fashion or other, hoping rather than knowing that providence reveals its hand at times.”

    Whereas I kind of have the opposite problem, spiritually speaking. A certain class of experiences will lead to a certain class of knowing.

    In any event, Mormonism has some issues as they relate to the fact that they want things to be true that simply aren’t true. Nothing worse than an an inflexible TBM in your family if you are on the outs with the church, though.

    I generally don’t have a problem with their general moral structure. I just don’t like groups that are too insular.

  • HanSolo

    @JP

    I still remember all my spiritual experiences. It is simply the interpretation that I am now uncertain about. Back then I thought it meant that God lives, the Church is true, therefore I must and want to follow it. Now, I don’t know whether or not they really were from God, made up psychologically (though perceived as very real) or some mix.

    My family is pretty open-minded though and I have other siblings who have left and some who have stayed. We got along well.

    And stating certain things as true that eventually came to my awareness of not (likely) being true was one of the key factors in my leaving, in spite of liking many of the other things.

  • JP

    “And stating certain things as true that eventually came to my awareness of not (likely) being true was one of the key factors in my leaving, in spite of liking many of the other things.”

    Yeah, they really need to stop doing this. It’s kind of annoying. If you want to call something mythic or transcendent, fine, you just don’t get to make up your own facts.

    However, since the religion was born of a Great Awakening in Protestant America, that’s probably going to be hard for them to do.

    However, it strikes me as a perfectly serviceable religion as far as that goes. I have a much more favorable view of it now than I did when I had a Mormon girlfriend.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    Can you follow up with your friend to find more of the details if he really loved her or was just not into her? And whether she was making it explicitly or implicitly known that he had to achieve a high-status job again to be good enough for her?

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

      @HanSolo

      Can you follow up with your friend to find more of the details if he really loved her or was just not into her? And whether she was making it explicitly or implicitly known that he had to achieve a high-status job again to be good enough for her?

      I’ve pretty much addressed the latter. I’ll add that when they broke up he told her that while he couldn’t stand the thought of her with another guy, he believed she deserved someone better. He also said, “You need to trust me on this. I am doing this for you.” I know they both cried.

      OTOH, they never got to the point of saying I love you. The interest was mutual and strong from the outset, and they saw each other every single week for the duration. But it was obvious the circumstances were difficult and both acknowledged the timing was terrible, but they wanted to date anyway. It was when she forced the issue of where they were headed that it blew up, which was inevitable.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “The average number of mutations coming from the mother’s side was 15, no matter her age, the study found.”

    AHHHHHH fucking my head of things.

    Thats because an older mother has problems with chromosomal sorting which leads to ploidy numbers resulting in miscarriage/Down syndrome.

    You can’t have mutation when your sitting their not dividing. AHHHHHH.

    Ploidy is significantly worse than single point mutations occurring within an individual sperm of which their are millions. (65/3.2 billion) as the result is effective of only a few sperm which if the mutation is negative enough will prevent them from reaching the egg in the first place.

    Moms problem tend to prevent a baby ever being born, mens tend to produce minor physiological/psychiatric changes which may or may not be negative.

    Which is worse?

    AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

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

      Moms problem tend to prevent a baby ever being born, mens tend to produce minor physiological/psychiatric changes which may or may not be negative.

      How could an unborn child be a greater problem than a child with birth defects? Furthermore, schizophrenia, epilepsy and autism are hardly minor changes.

  • Mike C

    If you don’t care for these findings, you will be happy to know it’s just a study, and Badger says you can disregard it.

    Haha….no I am not going to disregard it unless I spent alot more time reviewing it.

    Here’s the thing. There are all sorts of studies that demonstrate all sorts of contradictory things. You have scientists producing studies on both sides of the global warming issue. You have studies that contradict regarding things like Paleo/low-carb diet versus high carb/low fat diet.

    Escoffier has pointed this out before but sometimes you have to use your basic smell test when a study suggests something that on the surface appears unlikely such as this:

    “It is absolutely stunning that the father’s age accounted for all this added risk, given the possibility of environmental factors and the diversity of the population,” said Dr. Kari Stefansson, the chief executive of Decode and the study’s senior author. “And it’s stunning that so little is contributed by the age of the mother.”

    Now maybe this is correct in that autism is only on the Y chromosome. I don’t know. I am not a geneticist. I believe I recall reading something that Down’s sydrome is highly correlated with mother’s age.

    More broadly speaking, this is an example of what I find difficult in discussing with you. I make a general point equating overall risk between a 35 year old man and 35-year old woman, and you answer back with a very narrow example about autism, and dodge the more general point which I’d note Lokland answered that only a non-thinking person would disagree with this and he has the background in this area:

    Its a no contest really.
    To even equate the two as equal in some way is an insult to thinking creatures. (Which has not been done here, yet.)

    So again, your response gives the impression that you simply want to try to find some microscopic hole to take the opposite side of whatever I say.

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

      @Mike C

      More broadly speaking, this is an example of what I find difficult in discussing with you. I make a general point equating overall risk between a 35 year old man and 35-year old woman, and you answer back with a very narrow example about autism, and dodge the more general point which I’d note Lokland answered that only a non-thinking person would disagree with this and he has the background in this area

      You seem to have a great deal of difficulty dealing in anything but literal statements of fact. Nuance and subtlety is completely lost on you. I feel like I’m trying to talk to Siri or something.

      You are misinformed.

      Your general comment followed recent specific comments and links here about fathers and autism. It appears to be in response to that – as I know of no other research that suggests males contribute to birth defects. IOW, you were referencing research without even being aware of that, apparently. My response alluding to that research was sensible.

      I did not dodge the more general point – in fact I bolded the part about the risk being 2%, a rather minor amount.

      As for Lokland’s background, who’s trotting out the credentials now?

      Lokland trumping the New York Times? I don’t think so. The fact that he has background is irrelevant, as I have no specific knowledge of his credentials or experience with male genetic mutations.

      Normally you make narrow points and get discombobulated by the general. Here you’ve addressed the general and been thrown by the specific. I do not think in these sorts of narrow straits, I’m afraid. I don’t speak in binary. If you’re going to leave pissy comments on the blog, e.g. *feminine imperative*, expect pushback Susan Style. If you don’t like it, well…

  • Mike C

    Susan,

    OK, question for you…..putting aside the specific incidence of just autism and schizophrenia, is it your position that a 35-year old man and 35-year old woman are of equal risk in terms of fertility and the genetics they are passing along, the man is of greater risk, or the woman is of greater risk?

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

      @Mike C

      is it your position that a 35-year old man and 35-year old woman are of equal risk in terms of fertility and the genetics they are passing along, the man is of greater risk, or the woman is of greater risk?

      While advanced maternal age is a major cause behind rare chromosomal problems such as Down syndrome in babies, the latest findings add to growing evidence suggesting that at conception it is the father’s age— rather than the mother’s—that is the main factor behind the passing of new hereditary mutations to children.

      …The latest paper focuses on spontaneous changes in genetic coding known as de novo—or new—mutations.

      These errors aren’t inherited from the parental lineage. Instead, these mistakes occur only in eggs or sperm cells, or just after fertilization. In such cases, children will carry a genetic mutation in every cell without there being any family history of that particular alteration.

      Sperm pick up more of these genetic spelling errors because, unlike eggs, they are constantly produced and go through many more cell divisions. Sperm from older men carry more errors.

      …A deleterious de novo error can especially affect brain functioning in children. That may be because more genes are expressed in the brain than in any other organ.

      Several years ago, scientists reported that a man over 40 is almost six times as likely as a man under 30 to father an autistic child. Research has also shown that kids of older fathers are at higher risk of schizophrenia, bipolarity and epilepsy. One 2009 study suggested a link between late fatherhood and weaker performance by children in intelligence tests.

      Wall St. Journal, Older Dads Pass on More Genetic Mutations

      This article suggests that the variable of male age has much greater effect than female age in producing harmful genetic mutations. I have no personal knowledge of the subject.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    That was szopen’s comment.

    Oh I substituted Susan for szopen. Freudian slip I guess. :D

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    What??? Are you saying you want to go straight to engaged?

    Nope. But I need to make the distinction. I’m only interested in a relationship that is intended to become permanent. Most girls my age, especially the ones that don’t go for older men, are only interested in serial monogamy. I don’t want a serial monogamist GF.

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

      @INTJ

      Most girls my age, especially the ones that don’t go for older men, are only interested in serial monogamy. I don’t want a serial monogamist GF.

      OK, that’s your right, but that’s a very tall order. Is arranged marriage an option?

  • JP

    So, you want an Engaged-Friend?

    Or a Marriage-Friend?

    This is a job for a good lexicographer.

    Our society is demanding a word for girls who are willing to get engaged and not just dating for serial monogamy so that people like INTJ can use proper terminology.

    “Girlfriend with Benefits”?

    No. Doesn’t sound right.

    “Courtship Girlfriend”?

    Hmmm.

    “Pre-Nuptial Girlfriend”?

  • JP

    Well, Pre-Nuptual Girlfriend sounds the least stupid of what I’ve been able to come up with in the last 5 minutes.

    So, it’s settled.

    INFJ wants a Pre-Nuptial Girlfriend, a “PNG”.

  • JP

    INTJ. Sorry.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @JP: “Our society is demanding a word for girls who are willing to get engaged and not just dating for serial monogamy so that people like INTJ can use proper terminology.”
    Ha-ha-ha-ha! Good one!
    After the DTR and the FWB, now, ladies and gentlemen, you will love the NSMGFWB, aka the non serial monogamy girlfriend with benefits… Er, no, it’s too long.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Warning…Long Post…

    What’s wrong with being barefoot and pregnant? People seem to think we want a return to the 1950s. This is absolutely not what anyone here wants. We want a restructuring of social institutions and social mores to something family-friendly and more conservative.

    Instead we get a socially destructive UMC-Script.

    Here’s how I would picture a more “ideal” life occurring.

    2008: ADBG is in his second year of work at Fortune 50 company as Accountant. He started out as an intern after finishing his 2 year Associate Degree in Accounting/Finance/Business, and his manager likes him a lot, so she is giving him management training classes. In the evening he takes E-MBA classes at Northwestern, half paid by Fortune 50 Company, half paid by ADBG.

    Pretty UMC Girl has also recently graduated, with a 4 year degree, and a moderate amount of debt. She has recently started teaching mathematics to high schoolers, which is her dream job, and has a busy, yet not entirely fulfilling, life of tutoring and cooking classes and speech classes during her evenings.

    Pretty UMC Girl and ADBG meet through ADBG’s neighbor, who happens to be UMC Girl’s Best Friend. They hit it off, they start dating in a traditional matter and a few months later become official.

    2010: Marriage after a suitable courtship and ADBG and Mrs. ADBG move to an affordable house. Combing gross income by this time is well over $100,000 a year, and Mrs. ADBG’s debt is paid for. Both have been saving up for years, so they can have a nice wedding and are comfortable.

    2010-2012: Mrs. ADBG is working part-time, 30 hours a week, and using her extra time to do chores while ADBG works some extra hours and takes a few extra classes. Mrs. ADBG makes some real impressive dinners most nights: turns out she is quite the chef, although she hates cleaning dishes, so ADBG cleans those (he really likes that).

    ADBG isn’t a bad cook himself, and always cooks breakfast. Also likes to vacuum. Hates doing laundry, so he won’t touch that.

    In the evenings they like to take acting and improv comedy classes. ADBG also likes to entertain and makes drinks for everyone. Mrs. ADBG doesn’t like this, he spends too much money and it’s taxing for Mrs. ADBG to be sociable, so ADBG makes it up by spending lots of time with her family.

    They go on 3 different vacations, and have one new and one used car!

    2012: Mrs. ADBG is barefoot and pregnant and as she reaches her 6th or 7th month she starts taking a lighter schedule. When she gives birth, there are two sets of living grandparents within an hour drive, each more than willing to watch a little tyke if the ADBGs want a night out or another vacation by themselves. Oh, and ADBG’s brother is stable in a nice union job after his 2 years of technical school, with a child on the way, and ADBG’s sister now has a 2 year old…the dad is Stay At Home, which is unusual, but fine, because the mother is making lots of money as a pharmacist.

    What about this is so terrible?

    Instead we get brow-beat into a UMC script for no discernible reason with broken economic functions for no damn reason. My SO WANTED to be a math teacher: this was deemed “not enough,” because she was a Top 20 student from an elite high school with near-perfect GPA. So instead she decided to become a pharmacist, which I guess is more “succesful” because she gets to call herself “Doctor.”

    She also went out of state to do it, because that’s also in the Elite UMC script. She mentioned numerous times, oh my, my sister was a Valedictorian, and oh my she is going to CORNELL, and she’s going to go into GREEN ENGINEERING. How cool that is! How successful!

    And you are just going to be a lousy math teacher…that’s…cute!

    Pharmacy laws were changed in a lot of states, from being a 2 year post-grad to a 4 year post grad. My sister was one of the last in a 2 year program, so she got away with a LOT less debt. My SO went to school for 7 years. Out of state.

    Pharmacy is also horribly bloated, so, after taxes and loans, she is actually making LESS money than she would have if she were a teacher. Now instead of a Top 20 student educating your children in a highly critical field, you have a Top 20 student providing useless healthcare to geriatrics. Oh, and instead of going to school for a reasonable 3 years and then pursuing additional education after getting a job as needed, she spent 7 years of her life learning a lot of stuff she didn’t need, when we all know we could have gotten away with less time spent in stupid classes than that.

    This is not a wise investment of society’s scarce resources.

    It also does not bode well for family formation, since she had to move out of state for a job and has huge amounts of debt.

    All because UMC-Script says “you have to be a doctor/lawyer/business VP.”

    Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid.

    You seem to think, though, that the conservative guys here are railing for a return to women not going to school and chaperoned dates. I guess it’s wonderful to paint our position as a caricature, but really we are attacking your UMC-script, in its entirety, including some of its relationship advice, for the following reason:

    It sucks.

    Policy and norms should be overhauled to prioritize family formation.

    I’m probably over-generalizing substantially, but that’s my current thought, and it has nothing to do at all with putting women back into the kitchen. It has nothing to do with wife-y doing all the chores.

    I am pretty sure most of the other guys would agree.

    I just have a giant axe to grind with the UMC nonsense. They pretend to be open-minded and, in my experience, require their children to follow a strict script.

  • Tasmin

    @Han 542
    Thanks for the follow-up, I agree with your thoughts. The challenge is that we develop our sense of self and purpose based on certain images and internalized values that are provided to us, images and reinforcement that is often well out of alignment with our own sense of value, i.e. many of the socio and biological contradictions we discuss here.

    There are a lot of men and women who – for many reasons, have not developed a healthy sense of self in terms of confidence, purpose, drive, etc. Almost all of them will bring this into relationships. Relationships often end because of this; it is just not as visible, the cause is often attributed to something else.

    When and how our sense of self develops varies widely and unfortunately relationships can feed into – or be fed into this process along the way. This is no different than any of the other things that make us “ready” for a relationship. The skill of self-awareness, the ability to have insulated or independent self-worth, and to create and follow through on our sense of purpose or direction are developed over time and tested through challenges.

    Ideally we find partners that recognize those things in us, vice-versa, and we find ways in which we deploy those things into the world in exchange for all kinds of utility. When we find this we hang on but we also can’t discount the significance of a man’s career in terms of his sense of self and value solely in light of a woman who sees value of him outside of that career. He needs to find his value on his own.

    This is a difficult task when we consider that we continue to SHOW a man what counts but TELL him what REALLY counts is something else. He is free to discover what counts on his own and then chose how to engage going forward, but that process of discovery will often take a toll. A toll that many people just won’t pay. This isn’t a whole lot different than the blue pill red pill.

  • INTJ

    @ ADBG

    Holy crap that post was brilliant.

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    I think I prefer courtship girlfriend (CGF). Pre-nuptial girlfriend (PNG) sounds like we’re writing a prenup agreement, and the acronym reminds me of a popular image compression format.

  • Tasmin

    And concerning the man and woman in question, there is also the chance she is sending him messages that we are not privy to. That she is indicating timelines or expectations or is holding something up of value that he feels he must reclaim or else face a similar fate (breakup, loss of attraction, respect, resentment) down the road or is in the process of realizing that he does not value that/those things in the same way as her anymore and is realizing a newfound divergence in core values. And is basically preempting what he sees as the inevitable.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    INTJ, I wish I could say it was epic too, but it was just a rant at the nonsense I see.

    The UMC has a lot of positive aspects, I like it, it just needs to be tweaked. I don’t like my position being characterized as 50s Trad-Con, ESPECIALLY since so many of my friends are minorities or immigrants. And would have not fared well in that environment.

  • JP

    @INTJ:

    “I think I prefer courtship girlfriend (CGF). Pre-nuptial girlfriend (PNG) sounds like we’re writing a prenup agreement, and the acronym reminds me of a popular image compression format.”

    The problem is that Courtship Girlfriend sounds Victorian.

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

      The problem is that Courtship Girlfriend sounds Victorian.

      That’s because it is. What INTJ wants/expects has not been the norm since the 1920s.

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

    ADBG…”Pharmacy laws were changed in a lot of states, from being a 2 year post-grad to a 4 year post grad.”

    The endless (and often pointless) increase of educational requirements is of course happening in a lot of other fields, too.

    But look at the bright side.

    Her 7 years of college (probably resulting in significant student loans, I would guess) not only provided employment to professors, it also provided quite lucrative employment to a whole raft of college administrators, who otherwise would have had to endure the emotional pain of looking for productive work.

  • JP

    @ADBG:

    “All because UMC-Script says “you have to be a doctor/lawyer/business VP.”””

    Ok.

    Once again.

    “Lawyer” is *not* a UMC profession at this point.

    It’s UMC for BigLaw and some others, but it’s not UMC for most lawyers.

    Lawyers aren’t wealthy as a general rule.

    Susan knows about the law school grad being a babysitter or whatnot. This is happening everywhere in lawland.

    Yes, I was immune to this because I graduated during the dot-com boom. But that was 12 years ago. It’s different now.

    Law is most likely a financial/career death-trap for the poor 1L’s in today’s world.

    Medicine is still UMC. It’s cool for the UMCers.

    One of the Dual-Docs we’re friends with already has 4 kids.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Oh believe me JP, I know. Our mutual friend that introduced is a lawyer, too, which seems to have the primary benefit of not having to go to jury duty.

    Most 18 year olds and I imagine most college students do not know this. SO’s sister wants to go to law school, too.

  • JP

    @David Foster:

    “Her 7 years of college (probably resulting in significant student loans, I would guess) not only provided employment to professors, it also provided quite lucrative employment to a whole raft of college administrators, who otherwise would have had to endure the emotional pain of looking for productive work.”

    Here’s a recent commentary from Paul Campos’s blog regarding law school. Specifically the future tuition given the new PAYE repayment system:

    The defenders of PAYE underestimate, in my view, the following factors:

    (1) The effect of PAYE on the cost of law school. If PAYE is employed widely by law graduates, this will encourage law schools to keep raising tuition, since the debt incurred by law students will come to be viewed by both them and law schools as essentially a form of monopoly money. (The tuition paid by these students will, however, remain delightfully real). This will destroy any possibility of law schools reforming their cost structures in such a way as to bring the value of a law degree in line with its social cost. Of course to the sufficiently cynical and shameless within legal academia this is a feature not a bug.

    (2) The effect of (1) on graduate debt. If PAYE remains in place average educational debt for law graduates will within five years top $200,000, while at private schools it will be more along the lines of $250,000.

    (3) The psychological effect of (2) on the very large percentage of law graduates who will find themselves carrying fantastic debt loads while being unable to earn a reasonable middle class living as lawyers, or who indeed will never be lawyers at all. Keep in mind that PAYE doesn’t create a single new legal job, or add a dollar to anyone’s salary. The graduate toiling away in a $50,000 per year cut and paste office will be paying an 7% or so surcharge on top of an effective tax rate of around 25%. As DJM points out this is both a significant individual and social cost. Does the “prestige” of calling yourself a lawyer compensate adequately for a take home pay of $2,800 a month, while watching your $200,000 debt balloon ever-higher, and hoping that the political process doesn’t ever decide that you actually have to start paying it back?”

    http://insidethelawschoolscam.blogspot.com/2012/12/will-ibrpaye-be-good-for-future-law.html

  • JP

    I don’t know how these poor law students even function these days.

    I had $120,000 in debt back in 2000, and that was with Duke giving me basically a year of tuition.

    I’m doing fine, financially speaking, but it still took me four years of living as a student after law school to pay it back. I benefited from graduating into the dot-com boom.

    These days, there are less legal jobs, less job security, and more debt. Half the law students will be fine. The other half will do horribly.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Lokland trumping the New York Times? I don’t think so.”

    Well not to be a prick but…

    Jokes.

    Susan, if you want I’ll draw up a somewhat comprehensive review of papers over the next month or so to prove I’m right and submit it to you…and I expect an A.

    I’m always right.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    Thanks for the extra info. Then I think he was foolish to break up with her as I originally stated.

  • JP

    ” Furthermore, schizophrenia, epilepsy and autism are hardly minor changes.”

    Three of my more popular types of cases.

    Just talked to an autism case several hours ago.

    Schizophrenia is later this week, I think.

  • Mike C

    You seem to have a great deal of difficulty dealing in anything but literal statements of fact. Nuance and subtlety is completely lost on you. I feel like I’m trying to talk to Siri or something.

    No, I understand subtlety just find…actually very well…which is why I immediately recognize your subtle rhetorical sleight of hand you tend to engage in. You are very good at the non-answer answer where you appear to respond to the point or question but really it is just a distraction. If you answer like a politician I am going to point it out.

    As for Lokland’s background, who’s trotting out the credentials now?

    Well…it is interesting…no fascinating that he basically pointed out that I am stating the obvious while you felt the need to challenge my general point in some way.

    Normally you make narrow points and get discombobulated by the general. Here you’ve addressed the general and been thrown by the specific.

    If you’re going to leave pissy comments on the blog, e.g. *feminine imperative*, expect pushback Susan Style. If you don’t like it, well..

    Nothing pissy about feminine imperative. It is simply a description of a particular view. Here is perhaps the best definition of feminine imperative I’ve seen:

    I would describe the Feminine Imperative as the tendency for women to define social rules and morality to meet strictly female needs.

    So for example, the entire concept of age appropriate dating….i.e. that a 35 year old man should be more inclined to date a 35 year old woman instead of a 25 year old woman is an example of the feminine imperative. I could give many more examples. The idea that a man should display provisioning capacity during courtship is another. Mind you, I’m not saying anything about what is right or wrong, simply describing things that serve female interests.

    To your last sentence in that paragraph….well..that goes both ways. It would be nice if any discussion, would be less confrontational, but the ball is in your court to stop trying to play verbal chess with me.

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

      @Mike C

      So for example, the entire concept of age appropriate dating….i.e. that a 35 year old man should be more inclined to date a 35 year old woman instead of a 25 year old woman is an example of the feminine imperative.

      I consider that a ludicrous statement, as evidenced by my post Why You Should Date Older Men. Therefore, I fail to understand why you lecture about the feminine imperative here. Come to think of it, I have never seen that statement anywhere, not even on feminist blogs. Can you provide some evidence of this prevalent imperative?

      The idea that a man should display provisioning capacity during courtship is another. Mind you, I’m not saying anything about what is right or wrong, simply describing things that serve female interests.

      Another silly statement. Men are under no obligation whatsoever to display provisioning capacity. And women are under no obligation to display fertility/beauty. It just so happens that people who choose to do so are more successful in mating.

      I can’t recall your ever stating that women working out, or having their hair and makeup done (ahem) is evidence of the male imperative…

      It would be nice if any discussion, would be less confrontational, but the ball is in your court to stop trying to play verbal chess with me.

      You threw the first punch by showing up to “high 5″ Mr. Wavevector on his challenges to the feminine imperative. Dude! This is the problem! You know exactly where you can go to dish all you want about us selfish and entitled girls. Mr. WV and I were having a perfectly civil exchange – why do you feel the need to cheer him from the sidelines? It’s exactly this kind of fist pumping that I have always objected to, and I have asked you not to do it many times! Your MO is gender wars, Team Man vs. Team Woman. I don’t do that here, and I don’t want it. I honestly have no idea how I can make this clearer to you. The last few discussions here have been a huge improvement, specifically because the adversarial mentality has been missing. More women are commenting and listening, real understanding and respect is occurring between the sexes. Please don’t start pissing matches.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “This article suggests that the variable of male age has much greater effect than female age in producing harmful genetic mutations. I have no personal knowledge of the subject.”

    No it doesn’t.

    “rare chromosomal problems such as Down syndrome in babies,” OR more often Dead as the baby miscarries and never sees the light of day (or one of the other two birth able trisomies which are probably some of the worst things to parents to endure)

    “autism”

    Downs and Dead > Autism/schizophrenia

    Least in my simpleton mind.

    —————

    those de novo point mutations involve the change in 1 base pair out of 3.2 billion.

    Large chromosomal abnormalities effect 100’s of thousands to millions of base pairs.

    Not even in the same ballpark in terms of effect.

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

      those de novo point mutations involve the change in 1 base pair out of 3.2 billion.

      How does this relate to the 2% risk to older fathers cited in the article? If the odds are 1 in 3.2 billion, why have autism rates risen so sharply as a result of increasing paternal age?

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

    Regarding “scripts”…of course, parents have long influenced or attempted to influence the career choices of their children. Indeed, in Ye Olden Days, if dad was a peasant or a blacksmith or a merchant, that was likely what his sons were going to be, too. And even when society changed to open more career choices to the kids (whatever their parents had done career-wise) there were often still a lot of pressures. (“My son, the doctor”)…but I think these pressures gradually receded and parents were generally more open to letting the kids make their own decision. But now I’m afraid this openness has too often been replaced by micromanaging the kid onto the “right” conveyor belt.

    And a lot of the parents that are doing this probably don’t really have the knowledge/understanding to really grasp what they’re doing when the push the kid into becoming an X. One can’t assume that because pharmacy, for example, has been a good career over the last 20 years that it will be a good career over the next 20. Did these parents consider the impact of supply/demand balance among pharmacists, the effects of automation and of cost-control programs, etc etc? Driving with eyes firmly focused on the rear-view mirror is rarely a good idea.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “How could an unborn child be a greater problem than a child with birth defects? Furthermore, schizophrenia, epilepsy and autism are hardly minor changes.”

    You look at this through the lens of the parents.
    I see it through the lens of the kid. Not being born is infinitely worse in my mind than having autism.

    Having Downs is also worse than any of those three.

    Beyond that the link to mental disorders from genetics though definitely existent is shaky at best. To try and draw it down to a few genes and then say its Dads fault is ridiculous.

    As you quoted, disorders of the brain are polygenic (okay you didn’t actually quote it but it can be inferred) which means that the problems can arise through multiple different subsets (leading to disease gradient).

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

      @Lokland

      Take it up with the NYXs via a Letter to the Editor. Seriously, I am in no way inclined or informed enough to debate birth defects. The research made big news and was carried in reputable newspapers.

      I really don’t see what difference it makes – this is a silly argument. I have no investment in the outcome of who is responsible for birth defects. It appears that aging reproductive systems may produce less perfect embryos. Sounds like common sense to me.

      Why is this a finger pointing exercise?

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Furthermore, schizophrenia, epilepsy and autism are hardly minor changes.”

    Yes. Its also a minor problem to get hit by a car or be in an airplane crash.
    You seem to be making some kind of strange link between old dude = kid with mental disorder which is not correct.

    Must also consider the frequency with which these diseases occur.

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

      You seem to be making some kind of strange link between old dude = kid with mental disorder which is not correct.

      Must also consider the frequency with which these diseases occur.

      If you would, read the NYXs and WSJ articles and let me know if I have misunderstood them. They seem pretty clear. Perhaps your quarrel is with the researchers or the journalists who wrote them up.

  • Jackie

    @Susan (374 & Replies)
    Argh, that story is *tragic*. :( I mean, this is going to be one of those things he looks back on at the end of his life. And feel like he turned down what could have been the greatest thing that ever happened to him. :cry:

    Especially as it sounds like she gave it 110%. At least she can have no regrets on that score. She needs to accept his No and move forward with her life. Even if she tried to go back, the trust is broken.

    The thing is– and this will sound pretty mean– if he dumped her over his lack of a job, maybe he did the right thing. I mean– there are other options besides a high-paying job in that exact field.

    What about starting his own business– heck, I’d clean houses, if I needed to. Walk dogs. Someone offered me $400 to train their cat how to use a bathroom (instead of litterbox) just last week. Strange, but true! 8-) He is conflating self-worth with his current employment, or lack thereof.

    I knew an awesome guy (used to be a buyer at Neiman Marcus, got cancer), who used his retail knowledge to scour estate sales and re-sell on eBay and paid off his chemo that way. I was reading a memoir about a boy who was turned loose from his family at 6 years old and learned to make his own way in the world– in the Depression. :(

    I remember being SO low on money during school that I sold plasma. Yes, it was an unhappy time, but I kept asking myself, What can I do so I will never have to return to this ever again? I kept asking and asking until I had all kinds of answers. I didn’t like a lot of them, but I’d rather have tough answers than give up on life and happiness.

    The point is, there are SO MANY more difficult things than this job situation. I’m not saying it doesn’t stink — *it does*. But if this guy is going to give up on a girl who was ready to believe in him, support him and give him 110% at his lowest…

    A corporation can replace you in the blink of an eye. Even less than that. Whereas it can take a lifetime to find someone to believe in you, which is irreplaceable.

    Some people never even get half a chance at what he has and he’s throwing it away with both hands. It’s a damn shame.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    “That’s because it is. What INTJ wants/expects has not been the norm since the 1920s.”

    It doesn’t seem that unreasonable to me because I got what he wants a mere 12 years ago. So, it just feels wrong to really discourage him on his quest. Although I really don’t think I cared about his issue that much.

    And amazingly enough, there was no religious community involvement.

    Granted, I was a law student, so I got bonus points.

    I also think that I wasn’t particularly concerned about the entire serial monogamy issue because it wasn’t on my list of things to worry about.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    OK, that’s your right, but that’s a very tall order. Is arranged marriage an option?

    I better get on my mother’s case.

  • Jackie

    @Lokland

    “You look at this through the lens of the parents.
    I see it through the lens of the kid. Not being born is infinitely worse in my mind than having autism.”
    ===
    Yet you said you would terminate your own child if it had any defects. Am I missing something? Thanks, Lokland.

  • Jackie

    @INTJ

    INTJ, you are Indian, correct? I know at least two couples from India that had arranged marriages and really were devoted to their families. Would you be okay with something like this?

  • HanSolo

    @INTJ

    You should find a way to sincerely become a Mormon. Lots of Mormon girls wanting to get married at 20-22 y/o, though they’re gradually following the broader culture, only 20-30 years behind in terms of delaying marriage.

  • Lokland

    @Jackie

    “Yet you said you would terminate your own child if it had any defects. Am I missing something? Thanks, Lokland.”

    She’s looking at the effect on people.
    I’m looking at the biological effect.

    She is extrapolating the effect on people and returning it to the biological effect. Though the effect on those living with the person might be large, the biological changes in play are minuscule in comparison to those occurring within a mother of the same age.

    This is not correct.

    I also disagree with her assumption that a baby never born is better off for the parents.

    Ask a mother who has had a couple miscarriages how she feels.

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

      @Lokland

      I also disagree with her assumption that a baby never born is better off for the parents.

      Ask a mother who has had a couple miscarriages how she feels.

      I have known several, and do you know what their obstetricians told them? That miscarriage is nature’s way of terminating a pregnancy when the fetus will not be viable. I don’t have any knowledge re whether this is accurate, but that is the prevailing medical wisdom.

      I also know two women whose children were born extremely prematurely, extraordinary measures were taken, they spent months in the hospital and are now 3 and 6, respectively. It is not for me to judge any part of the process or care, but neither child can speak or hold its head up. Both are fed via trachea tubes. Cognitive function is seriously impaired. Both have had several surgeries, with many more to come. Of course their parents love them very much. I don’t know if that kind of intervention is a good thing.

  • HanSolo

    @Jackie 596

    +1

    It reminds me of the Little House on the Prairie episode where Jonathan Garvey has a huge harvest but then his barn burns down and so then he goes and sells his team and stuff so that he can buy a bunch of presents for his wife and son.

    She says she’ll work at the post office but he gets pissed because it’s an affront on his ability to provide. Enraged, he moves out of the house and goes to another city and they nearly divorce.

    And just to add some fuel to the fire, he finds out that she was married for a brief time and never told him…bad move there on her part.

  • JP

    I think that the last thing that INTJ should do is become Mormon.

    What he needs to do is find a 20-22 year old female ex-mormon who has left the church very recently due to questions of faith.

    That way he gets the benefits of Mormonism without the 10% annual tithe.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “How does this relate to the 2% risk to older fathers cited in the article? If the odds are 1 in 3.2 billion, why have autism rates risen so sharply as a result of increasing paternal age?”

    Mental disorders are polygenic.
    If theres 50 genes involved loss of function/change of function etc. in any one of those can lead to diseases state.
    Most of the bodies biochemical network is interconnected.

    Another example is Cancer, which is probably 200-400 separate types of genetic disorder displaying similar characteristics which we label cancer. mental disorders will likely become labelled in much the same.

    Also, the mutations themselves are probably not entirely random. Certain areas/epigenetic tags/base frequencies in regions are more prone to mutations.

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

      Oh shoot Lokland, I am not smart enough to follow you. I will take your word for it. As my babymaking days are over, and the odds of birth defects are very low for everyone, with your permission I’m not going to lose sleep over this.

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

    #374….very sad story. Seems to me he is making too many assumptions and declaring failure prematurely. There are lots of different paths to success, as Jackie said above; I get the feeling that he is engaging in conveyor-belt thinking about his career. And also, it sounds like she has been very supportive of him, rather than losing attraction on account of failure-derived betaness…Does he really think he’ll be LESS demoralized not having her around?

    I slychologize that he’s subonsciously–maybe even consciously–expecting that she will ditch him on account of his job situation at some point in the future, even if she’s given absolutely no sign of such behavior, and he’s trying to make it less painful by preempting it.

  • http://x OffTheCuff

    JP: “INFJ wants a Pre-Nuptial Girlfriend, a “PNG”.”

    I hear JPGs and MPEGs make pretty good ones, too.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    And thats off the top of my head.
    Give me an hour and I’ll come up with another half dozen.

    Example, certain mental diseases are caused by the proteins aggregating and gunking up the nerves which is due to a slippage resulting in repeat extensions (Huntingtons) its possible for point mutations to cause something similar (aggregation) via unfolding the protein or something.

    Essentially, theres a lot of shit that can go wrong in making a baby. Even stranger is when one thing goes wrong it all tends to go wrong.

    To lay the blame at the feet solely of the father is ridiculous.

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

      To lay the blame at the feet solely of the father is ridiculous.

      I don’t think anyone was doing that, even at the New York Times. :)

      As obvious as all of this seems to you, apparently it was considered something of a real discovery to learn that male genes mutate with age. I do recall reading in the past about the relative fragility of the Y chromosome. No doubt that is totally irrelevant, though.

  • INTJ

    @ Jackie

    INTJ, you are Indian, correct? I know at least two couples from India that had arranged marriages and really were devoted to their families. Would you be okay with something like this?

    I’d be perfectly happy with it. However, unlike most desis, my parents are rather out of the loop with the Indian community back home.

    Though recently, one of the great aunts was trying to set my older brother up with some some of her acquaintances’ daughters/granddaughters.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Why is this a finger pointing exercise?”

    Its not.
    I enjoy the topic.

  • Lisa C

    @Susan

    I’m still thinking about your friend. In response to me, you said:

    “When they had a conversation about their relationship, he told her that he would keep doing his best to hold her at arm’s length as long as he was unemployed. She could see no way to proceed under such an artificial structure, and had no interest in dialing the relationship back to casual.”

    If I loved him (or at least thought there was a very likely chance that I would love him and he would love me back), I think I would seriously consider agreeing to dial the relationship back to where he is comfortable — at least for the near future. It doesn’t sound like he wants her out of his life, and she sure doesn’t sound ready to go. Yes, there are risks (time is always ticking of course), but if I loved him, I would probably take the gamble.

    I originally was under the impression that he wanted a complete break from her while he sorted out his issues.

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

      @Lisa C

      If I loved him (or at least thought there was a very likely chance that I would love him and he would love me back), I think I would seriously consider agreeing to dial the relationship back to where he is comfortable — at least for the near future. It doesn’t sound like he wants her out of his life, and she sure doesn’t sound ready to go. Yes, there are risks (time is always ticking of course), but if I loved him, I would probably take the gamble.

      She did try this. The break actually occurred over a few weeks and several long talks. Both were reluctant to end it. Ultimately this is what he said, “We have strong feelings for one another. If we keep seeing each other, yours will increase, as they should. I will not let myself become any more emotionally invested. That is not fair to you, I won’t do it.” She couldn’t believe he was essentially turning down no-strings sex at that point, but he did.

  • INTJ

    @ HanSolo

    You should find a way to sincerely become a Mormon. Lots of Mormon girls wanting to get married at 20-22 y/o, though they’re gradually following the broader culture, only 20-30 years behind in terms of delaying marriage.

    The sincere part is easier said than done. ;)

  • JP

    I learned a new word today!

    Desis.

    Thanks INTJ!

    How in the world did that word originate?

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “If you would, read the NYXs and WSJ articles and let me know if I have misunderstood them. They seem pretty clear. Perhaps your quarrel is with the researchers or the journalists who wrote them up.”

    What leads you to conclude I haven’t already?
    (Note: Didn’t read any papers. As always media sensationalized. Need to sell those papers.)

  • Jackie

    @HanSolo

    Ha ha! You can count on Capt. Solo finding a way to relate LHOTP to the discussion in an intelligent and informative way! ;) Speaking of, that sounds like it could make an *excellent* book proposal:

    Everything I Needed To Know I Learned from Half-Pint :-P

    or
    Little Advice Column On The Prairie (HS, this should be your blog! You solve people’s problems, one LH episode at a time. Seriously!) :D

  • HanSolo

    @JP and INTJ

    Yeah, the ex-mormon who still holds family values would be a better bet.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    I realize you don’t want to discuss this.

    I’m not saying birth defects don’t increase with age in males.
    I am saying it does not occur with as large an increase as it does in females.

    In the end, theres no point going any farther because regardless of what people read here 35yo women, 40 yo men are still gonna shack up and have kids. Most of those will pop out okay.

    Most people will have kids before then anyway so, who cares.

    What is annoying is your tone, wording which almost makes it seem to come as a “ha, ha. girls are better than boys” mentality.

    I have literally no interest in you and Mikes pissing contest. Ban him, make up and kiss it all better, force him to dress like a chicken and run ’round the forums. I don’t care who wins your argument or how its concluded.

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

      What is annoying is your tone, wording which almost makes it seem to come as a “ha, ha. girls are better than boys” mentality.

      That is antithetical to everything I am trying to do here. Very discouraging.

      It started as a minor “con” in the risk/benefit analysis of dating an older guy, which I endorsed. I apologize for allowing this to get blown out of proportion.

      There was no feminine imperative intended.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “That miscarriage is nature’s way of terminating a pregnancy when the fetus will not be viable. I don’t have any knowledge re whether this is accurate, but that is the prevailing medical wisdom.”

    100%

    For the previously mentioned reasons.
    Consider that a new tid bit for your ever expanding body of scientific knowledge.

  • Mike C

    I consider that a ludicrous statement, as evidenced by my post Why You Should Date Older Men.

    I wasn’t accusing you of saying it is inappropriate. Why you took that personally I have no idea. I was using that as a single example. I could find many women who would find a 10-year difference of 35 to 25 problematic especially if they are in their 30s and single.

    Another silly statement. Men are under no obligation whatsoever to display provisioning capacity.

    Of course they are not *obligated*. But it is still part of the prevailing social expectations.

    You threw the first punch by showing up to “high 5″ Mr. Wavevector on his challenges to the feminine imperative.

    This is ridiculous. This isn’t throwing a punch. If I threw a punch, you’d know it, because it would be painful. I was simply acknowledging someone who I thought has had some brilliantly incisive and spot on comments.

    Mr. WV and I were having a perfectly civil exchange – why do you feel the need to cheer him from the sidelines?

    If your exchange is civil, it is absurd to suggest there is something uncivil about me appreciating and acknowledging his arguments. For f*cks sake, people + 1 other comments ALL THE TIME. I simply was being more verbal about it. I feel the need because I like to appreciate when someone has impressed me in whatever capacity whether it is a guy making a verbal argument or a guy bench pressing 315 for the first time. Maybe that is a guy thing.

    The last few discussions here have been a huge improvement, specifically because the adversarial mentality has been missing.

    I have intentionally steered clear from trying to address any of your comments. If you want to challenge me though, I will come back. That is up to you.

    More women are commenting and listening, real understanding and respect is occurring between the sexes. Please don’t start pissing matches.

    I’m not starting any pissing matches with anyone else. The only one going on is between you and I in this thread. That one can easily end if you stop trying to one up me.

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

      That one can easily end if you stop trying to one up me.

      I’m giving up responding to you for Advent.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “I also know two women whose children were born extremely prematurely, extraordinary measures were taken, they spent months in the hospital and are now 3 and 6, respectively.”

    I would have taken a more Spartan approach.

    You look at this from the effect on others.
    I look at this on the level of biological effect.

    We are never going to agree.

  • Jackie

    @david foster

    “There are lots of different paths to success, as Jackie said above; I get the feeling that he is engaging in conveyor-belt thinking about his career.”
    ===
    Agreed!

    I also wonder if his metric for success has been formatted to fit some incredibly high (and artificial) standard. To me, that puts so much unnecessary pressure on a person.

    I was talking to my dad about what it was like when I was about to be born. My dad said, We just wanted you to be healthy and have fingers and toes. That was it! I can’t imagine that I am somehow uncommon. There was a point in time where our parents were just thrilled that we were here!

    It’s a shame that we make such unfair rules about what needs to happen in order for us to feel happy or successful. So arbitrary and unjust. :(

  • Jackie

    “I have literally no interest in you and Mikes pissing contest. Ban him, make up and kiss it all better, force him to dress like a chicken and run ’round the forums. ”
    ====
    Yesssss!
    CHICKEN! CHICKEN! CHICKEN!
    8-)

  • Mike C

    Seriously, I am in no way inclined or informed enough to debate birth defects. The research made big news and was carried in reputable newspapers.

    ****I really don’t see what difference it makes – this is a silly argument.***** I have no investment in the outcome of who is responsible for birth defects. It appears that aging reproductive systems may produce less perfect embryos.

    Then it was pointless in the first place to respond to my comment initially with that giant excerpt.

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

      Then it was pointless in the first place to respond to my comment

      Agreed. My bad.

  • Jackie

    @INTJ

    “Though recently, one of the great aunts was trying to set my older brother up with some some of her acquaintances’ daughters/granddaughters.”
    ===
    Dude, you’ve got a golden opportunity here. Plus, if she is the “matchmaker type” she will not rest until you are set up with the right girl. ;)

    (Plus, we can all cheer you on when you’re going on dates instead of posting about not meeting girls.)

    Why don’t you call your great aunt and see what happens? There’s not even a downside here, INTJ. Carpe diem 8-)

  • Jackie

    @HanSolo

    Little Blog On The Prairie has been taken, darn it! But Little Blogspot On The Prairie is still available!

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    ” I do recall reading in the past about the relative fragility of the Y chromosome. No doubt that is totally irrelevant, though.”

    Its really cool but being a guy is do to one gene that is located on the Y chromosome. If you lack that your a girl (or maybe I got that backwards).

    If you recombine that gene across to the X chromosome you can have an XX individual with a penis!

    And yes Y chrome. is fragile but that would be more of an issue in GENERAL than just spermatogenesis.

    “As obvious as all of this seems to you, apparently it was considered something of a real discovery to learn that male genes mutate with age. ”

    Thats because I suspected it for a long time beforehand. (SOO intuitively obvious.) We don’t disagree on whether it occurs, frequency is the issue.

    “with your permission I’m not going to lose sleep over this.”

    Lol. Its all good.
    I just like talking about genes.

  • Lokland

    @Jackie

    “Yesssss!
    CHICKEN! CHICKEN! CHICKEN!”

    Tar and feathers comin’ up.

  • Lokland

    @Sue

    “I don’t think anyone was doing that, even at the New York Times. ”

    Why in the world would I read an American newspaper?

  • Lisa C

    I can believe that he turned down the no-strings sex, but it’s cutting off his support network (or possibly a major component of his support network) that seems crazy. In any event, it doesn’t sound like there is anything she can do (sadly).

  • Jackie

    @Susan

    “She couldn’t believe he was essentially turning down no-strings sex at that point, but he did.”
    ====
    Susan, wasn’t she setting herself up lose-lose on this?

    Not only the loss of her self-respect –letting this guy use her for sex, just to hang on to him seems guaranteed to do that. But if he took her up on it, what good could possibly result from it?

    If he accepts, she is bending over backwards to a guy who is okay with using her NSA– yuck. If he rejects her, she is not only rejected but knows that even at her “SMP lowest price” he doesn’t want her, even if he is retaining his principles.

    To me it looks like she is trying to bring herself lower, to make the guy feel better. That kind of relationship never works out in the long run.

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

      @Jackie

      Not only the loss of her self-respect –letting this guy use her for sex, just to hang on to him seems guaranteed to do that. But if he took her up on it, what good could possibly result from it?

      To be fair, she wasn’t really suggesting they be f*ckbuddies, she was just saying, “Can’t we keep seeing each other and see how things go?” That was backpedaling from her initial demand that without the potential for real commitment, she was not interested in continuing to see him. They were very close, and she was shocked when he balked at the talk of commitment. Once the conversation had been had, there was no going back. She realizes that now, and she is also glad that her offer was rejected. She knows she would have been miserable if he had succeeded at “keeping her at arm’s length.” I think she’s glad she didn’t have to watch or experience that. She’s just finding it very hard to be separated from someone she cares so much about.

  • JP

    Where are you Lokland?

    Meaning what newspapers do you read?

  • Jackie

    “I’m giving up responding to you for Advent.”
    ===
    Aw, you should both get chocolate Advent calendars featuring the dove of peace, instead. ;)

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Lisa c: “It doesn’t sound like he wants her out of his life.”
    No, but he’s decided to be out of hers.
    Susan posted some more detailed informations about that woman which showed that she really couldn’t have gone more out of her way to accomodate the situation than she did. The fact that he chooses to pursue his job hunting by himself rather than doing it with her shows a real difference of “love level” for each. In other words, she loves him MUCH more than he does.
    What he is also saying is essentially this: My darling, you’re the one but I must do my job hunting alone. When I’m done with it (if ever), and my pride is restored, I’ll give you a ring. How charming…
    To me he’s an ungratful fool blinded by his personal problems.

  • Ted D

    Wine makes everything better. Well at least sex and sleep. And other than eating (which wine can certainly assist on) what else is there of importance?

    Good grief peeps, why so serious? (And how does that sound coming from me?)

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ David Foster

    And a lot of the parents that are doing this probably don’t really have the knowledge/understanding to really grasp what they’re doing when the push the kid into becoming an X. One can’t assume that because pharmacy, for example, has been a good career over the last 20 years that it will be a good career over the next 20. Did these parents consider the impact of supply/demand balance among pharmacists, the effects of automation and of cost-control programs, etc etc? Driving with eyes firmly focused on the rear-view mirror is rarely a good idea.

    That’s an awful lot of work and understanding for parents. They are nice parents, and just doing the best they can by their kids. And their lives aren’t totally messed up or anything…for the most part, the kids turn out okay. For now.

    I am concerned about the future generations, though.

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

    I can believe that he turned down the no-strings sex, but it’s cutting off his support network (or possibly a major component of his support network) that seems crazy. In any event, it doesn’t sound like there is anything she can do (sadly).

    I think he is seriously depressed to a point that he has no idea what he is giving up, he just wants to punish himself. He will regret this choice as soon as he gets out of this dark moment on his life…too late for him sadly. :(

  • Jackie

    @Susan

    I’m sorry– my assessment was really blunt. I think these situations are so much easier to be cut-and-dried about when you don’t know any of the people. You do, obviously, and you care about them very much. I shouldn’t have been so blunt. :(

    I still think that this is going to be the biggest mistake of this guy’s life, though. The kind he will look back on at the end. If only we could get a Ghost of Christmas Future to show him that girls like this don’t grow on trees!

    I’m sure he can find another girl, but not one who will be so devoted at his lowest ebb of his existence. Remember what the Dowager Countess said to Lady Mary– If you support a man when he has nothing, he will love you all of his days.

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

      @Jackie

      I’m sorry– my assessment was really blunt. I think these situations are so much easier to be cut-and-dried about when you don’t know any of the people.

      No worries, I do it all the time! Like many others here, I feel empathy for them both, but I also feel disgusted by what I see as a waste. Your point was valid.

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Lokland,
    Since we’re discussing genes, I have a rather OT question. I have a de novo SALL1 mutation, which causes Townes-Brocks Syndrome, and I had a relatively old father (40, when I was born). I’m probably a bad example, as TBS is apparently extremely rare (the wikipedia article about it claims only 250 people worldwide have it, but I don’t think that’s true, I think people just go undiagnosed). But is it possible that this is one of those examples of an old father having a kid with a genetic disease?

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

    @INTJ

    Well this proves part of what I said… I betcha many of these boyfriends score high on the asshole spectrum.

    Susan’s asked for it. I’ve asked for it, but won’t again, as you appear to suffer from data deafness. I betcha that you can’t provide any reliable information to back that up.

    It’s weird, though: taking data you don’t actually believe in, then saying it supports what you do believe when it doesn’t… kinda delusional.

    I don’t want a GF…

    Hey, that’s your preference, which is fine. It also means you’re at a decided disadvantage WRT finding a marriage partner in America (where most people date, then mate, then marry, in that order). And you can’t blame women for that…

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    I learned a new word today!

    Desis.

    Thanks INTJ!

    How in the world did that word originate?

    Hehe. I think it is derived from “des” which means country/homeland. So a desi is someone who originates from the des.

  • INTJ

    @ Jackie

    Dude, you’ve got a golden opportunity here. Plus, if she is the “matchmaker type” she will not rest until you are set up with the right girl.

    (Plus, we can all cheer you on when you’re going on dates instead of posting about not meeting girls.)

    Why don’t you call your great aunt and see what happens? There’s not even a downside here, INTJ. Carpe diem

    Yeah I’ll try. Though she seems to be putting all her attention on my older brother right now – which makes sense given that he’s 8 years older…

  • INTJ

    Hey, that’s your preference, which is fine. It also means you’re at a decided disadvantage WRT finding a marriage partner in America (where most people date, then mate, then marry, in that order). And you can’t blame women for that…

    Hah, that would be great. Well that or date, then date, then date, … then mate, then marry. Unfortunately, it tends to be more like date, then date, then mate, then date, then mate, then date, then date, … then finally marry.

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Megaman,
    I find it amazing that, after all the fairly sniveling remarks you’ve addressed to INTJ, he continues to answer your posts in a considerably level-headed way, in a generous tone (654 is a case in point). He may not provide the data you want (then again, the vast majority of people who comment here do not speak in numbers, just a thought), but don’t you think it’d be appropriate to lower your weapon, in the spirit of Christmas? Looks like Susan and Mike C have called off the war for the time being. ;-)

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

    @INTJ

    Unfortunately, it tends to be more like date, then date, then mate, then date, then mate, then date, then date… then finally marry.

    I see absolutely nothing wrong with that sequence of events. You’ve got a pretty superficial view of what serial monogamy really entails. Most people don’t enter a relationship with the intent to jump out of it. They try their best to make a go of it, but it usually takes several tries before they’re successful (on average). Though not for 19% of married men and 32% of married women.

    I get the sense that you’ve got a LONG list of types of women already DQ’d before even meeting them. Good luck trying to find that attractive, celibate girl who’s just been sitting at home waiting for you to come along, because that’s what you’ve drained the pool to…

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

      Most people don’t enter a relationship with the intent to jump out of it. They try their best to make a go of it, but it usually takes several tries before they’re successful (on average).

      Not just that, most people will benefit enormously from dating a number of people before they find their life partner. From an economics standpoint, this is rational, as it is very unlikely that your first boyfriend or girlfriend is the best you can do. Dating is shopping, you rarely want to buy the first thing you see. If you do, you’ll likely never know if you paid too much or what was available at other locations.

  • szopen

    @Damien Vulaume

    I would break up with her, no matter how much I loved her.”
    Please explain.

    There is nothing to explain. It was when I studied and had no job while she had a job already. We lived together, we paid the rent together – I got money from uhm… what would be the english for stipendium? I started to feel worthless, nevertheless. It was like she was adult (my wife is older than me, btw), and I was still a kid. That I really do not look for my age and she sometimes teased me by calling me her “cute little boy” made only things worse.

    It’s not point to argue whether it was logical or not, since there is nothing logical about feelings. Yes, maybe it was my upbringing which made me feel that way. Maybe it was because of a culture. Even knowing that for sure wouldn’t change a thing – you cannot undone your upbringing and culture, or at least it is very hard.

    Second similar time, as i wrote earlier, was much later, when i finished the university. I earned less than her, but I have not really noticed it for a year or so. First six months or so she was on maternity leave. But then when we worked on tax forms I’ve suddenly noticed that her salary was larger. It was not pleasant, and since we already were married and had child, i simply had no other option than to go work more, harder and earn more.

    Once i’ve read a comment – I don’t know whether it was in Polish or English blogosphere – that our culture expects adult women to take care of themselves, but it expects adult men to take care of themselves and of the others.

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

      @szopen

      Once i’ve read a comment – I don’t know whether it was in Polish or English blogosphere – that our culture expects adult women to take care of themselves, but it expects adult men to take care of themselves and of the others.

      I think this is true, but I also think that many men are hard-wired to do this. They enjoy it. You can see this in the area of dating – there is no real reason why men alone should pay for dates. Some don’t. But some have a strong preference to pay. They identify strongly with the provider role. This makes sense, as displaying that trait would have been very advantageous for mating throughout our history.

      Today, I sympathize that men are sort of stuck with the desire to provide at the same time women need provisioning less. In my view, this is a large part of the male identity crisis in America, aka “the end of men.”

  • szopen

    @tasmin

    “Until we re-enter this state, we are essentially on emotional welfare, lowering our head as we cash those checks.

    That’s sooo true.

    It’s like if you are not considering yourself worthy, you take the love of the other with a grain of suspicion. Am I really worthy your love, or you are just taking pity of me?

  • szopen

    @INTJ

    Oh I substituted Susan for szopen. Freudian slip I guess. :D

    I don’t know what have you in mind when you made that freudian slip, but remember I am married and straight.

    :D

  • Just1Z

    @Ana #531
    not a comic…
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobgoblin_beer
    mmmmmm dark and tasty beer. not exactly bud-lite

  • Just1Z

    @BB
    “A lot of guys in my industry see Japan going down hard and first. Few are ready for default in a G7, but I personally have trouble feeling much more than schadenfreude at this point.”

    I notice that Iceland has disappeared off the media lately. Maybe the message that you can tell bankers to go **** themselves, sack the politicians, and life continues…maybe that message isn’t welcomed by the banking elite.

    Given the choice of a lifetime of paying off debt that I neither created nor voted for, or rolling the dice with a massive default of nations around the world…roll the die baby / go ahead punk, make my millenium.

    I just hope that the Chinese don’t start WW III when you guys default, or just attempt to inflate the debt away via QE.

    to be clear.
    UK & EU have nothing to shout about, I’m not bashing the US.
    when those economies crash, the BRICs have no one to export to…oops

    to be poolside is to be sane because stressing over stuff that you have no control over is very dangerous for your health.

  • Just1Z

    Watched a great mini-series off TV last night; ‘Secret State’

    It starts with the aftermath of a Bhopal (Union Carbide) type disaster in the UK but through the 3 hours of of the political thriller is touches on bankers / big business / politicians / military behaviour in the modern world.

    I think that it gets a little weaker towards the end, and it ended too early for my tastes, but a cool series. Based on the concept of a political leader with integrity…weird concept

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1960029/

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Just1Z, the Chinese don’t really start wars on foreign countries. They haven’t gone to active war since the Japanese invaded in WWII. Before that, there were rebellions and internal strife with the nationalists who went to Taiwan. Long before that, the Mongols kept invading. They killed their own people during the Cultural Revolution.

    So I doubt the Chinese would really try to invade a war-happy country which has a lot more modern military experience over the issue of debt. But this fear is trotted out a lot. IMO, if WWIII starts, it’s going to start in the Middle East or Europe. China, at the top, is not run by risk-taking warmongers, but risk-averse bureaucrats who want personal wealth and glory, and get plenty. The outgoing leader became a secret billionaire.

  • Just1Z

    @Susan
    “Experts said that the finding was hardly reason to forgo fatherhood later in life, though it may have some influence on reproductive decisions”

    yeah, so it’s more about feminists having a reply to men talking about female fertility declining with age.

    the fact that the two are not comparable except to the-hard-of-thinking doesn’t really matter, because their audience is the-hard-of-thinking. it’s about emotion not reason.

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

      @Just1Z

      yeah, so it’s more about feminists having a reply to men talking about female fertility declining with age.

      I don’t see the link to feminists. These were male Icelandic researchers, and I see no evidence that their motives are political. Here’s a thought – maybe scientists actually want to figure out how genes work.

  • JP

    @Anaconda: “I think he is seriously depressed to a point that he has no idea what he is giving up, he just wants to punish himself.”

    This is a possibility.

    He could be committing social suicide, so to speak.

    Meaning that he’s saying “stay away from me, I’m going to destroy everything I touch”.

  • Iggles

    yeah, so it’s more about feminists having a reply to men talking about female fertility declining with age.

    the fact that the two are not comparable except to the-hard-of-thinking doesn’t really matter, because their audience is the-hard-of-thinking. it’s about emotion not reason.

    I really don’t see the problem with Susan citing that study!

    It’s common knowledge that the age of the mother impacts fertility. The other she is, the harder it is for her to conceive and the higher number of damaged eggs she has – which can lead to miscarriage. However, for ages it was though men stay perfectly fertile no matter what their age because they continually make new sperm. This study shows it’s not as simple as that. While older men can still make babies, the quality of their sperm decreases over time. Much like the aging process, the root cause is mistakes happen as cells divide.

    She wasn’t saying older males have the same fertility issues as older women, or the same rate of problems. The point of the study is to dispel the myth that there are NO downsides for having other fathers.

    Again, I don’t get the problem here! No need to take the study personal or argue that older women have it worse — we know the latter already! *sigh*

  • Iggles

    Ugh, typos!

    Other mothers = older mothers

    Other fathers = older fathers!

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

    ADBG..re parents understanding the pharmacist biz in depth…”That’s an awful lot of work and understanding for parents. ”

    Which is really my point…there’s a lot of work and understanding for learning about the prospects of any industry/career field…therefore they need to take it easy about pressuring the kid to go into some field the kid doesn’t feel right about going into.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “From an economics standpoint, this is rational, as it is very unlikely that your first boyfriend or girlfriend is the best you can do. ”

    Why is the “best” the goal, rather than “good enough to be content”? There’s *always* going to be someone better out there.

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

      Why is the “best” the goal, rather than “good enough to be content”? There’s *always* going to be someone better out there.

      True, the key is knowing when to stop the search. I am speaking strictly in economics, or game theory terms here. I wrote about it here:

      Loveonomics

      I’d say if you’re in love and feel very fortunate to have those feelings requited, by all means lock it down. In my case, I had strong feelings for a couple of people back in the day who I am very, very glad I did not marry.

  • JP

    “Why is the “best” the goal, rather than “good enough to be content”? There’s *always* going to be someone better out there.”

    This is my point.

    And Susan’s response is that you “stop shopping”.

    You could do this on #1 and you would be in the same position as you were before because you can always improve, from an economics perspective.

    I think she’s trying to say that you find someone with whom you are compatible.

    But again, how in the world do you know this?

    We’re in a loop here.

  • Just1Z

    @Susan
    “I don’t see the link to feminists”

    I didn’t mean that the research was done by feminists. I don’t doubt the research, it’s just that most non-math types appear to have problems understanding what it actually means in practice – i.e. that kids with fathers over 40 are NOT doomed to automatic genetic disaster, just that the risks have gone up from a low number to a slightly less low number.

    But I have seen the femininits throw all the science stuff out and just use the ‘well men shouldn’t have kids late either because they have defects’ line that they take from the research. you haven’t? I’m sure that I’ve seen it on this blog in the past.

    it’s the feminits favourite counter to declining female fertility – ‘oooh oooh but older men have genetic issues!!!! so it’s the “same”‘

    there’s some kind of ‘fairness issue’ involved, I think.
    women have the menopause, so men have to have a problem too

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

      @Just1Z

      But I have seen the femininits throw all the science stuff out and just use the ‘well men shouldn’t have kids late either because they have defects’ line that they take from the research. you haven’t? I’m sure that I’ve seen it on this blog in the past.

      I can’t say I’ve ever seen that no, though it wouldn’t surprise me. The point is, I have seen zero articles trumping up this research in the way you suggest. It’s been reported in a dispassionate way as scientific discovery. As I pointed out in my comment yesterday, the press release was clear to specify that only 2% of men might even be affected.

      Frankly, I can’t recall feminists even addressing fertility issues, as most of them are against having children.

      IDK why people see the feminism bogeyman here. Sometimes there really is no hidden agenda, and I certainly don’t have one. I’d like to be able to report something objectively without starting a gender war.

  • INTJ

    @ Megaman

    I see absolutely nothing wrong with that sequence of events. You’ve got a pretty superficial view of what serial monogamy really entails. Most people don’t enter a relationship with the intent to jump out of it.

    Nope. They don’t usually rule out making the relationship permanent. But they often don’t plan on making it permanent either.

    They try their best to make a go of it, but it usually takes several tries before they’re successful (on average). Though not for 19% of married men and 32% of married women.

    That’s pretty nice to hear. I wouldn’t be surprised if the reason the male statistic is lower is that the women are marrying older guys. Still, it’s good, and now I just need to find those ex-mormons.

  • INTJ

    @ Just1Z

    I don’t think Susan was doing the whole “right back at you” feminist thing about age. I think she was just throwing me and Cooper a bone. ;)

  • INTJ

    @ Olive

    I find it amazing that, after all the fairly sniveling remarks you’ve addressed to INTJ, he continues to answer your posts in a considerably level-headed way, in a generous tone (654 is a case in point). He may not provide the data you want (then again, the vast majority of people who comment here do not speak in numbers, just a thought), but don’t you think it’d be appropriate to lower your weapon, in the spirit of Christmas? Looks like Susan and Mike C have called off the war for the time being.

    Thanks. I’m really not interested in arguing with Megaman or anyone. I just want to have constructive dialogue. Additionally, I’m not inclined to search up data for every statement I make, especially given that a) data can be misleading b) it takes a lot of time to find such studies c) much of this stuff has not been studied, because the evo-psych guys have only recently started doing their stuff and before them the feminists wouldn’t have allowed any of this to get studied.

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

      @INTJ

      Additionally, I’m not inclined to search up data for every statement I make

      That’s fine, but know that your opinion will then carry minimal weight. You have had a tendency to dismiss reams of highly reliable data without justification and then state that you can’t be bothered to come up with something better. That just makes you Mr. No, a not very appealing blog persona.

      This only applies to your arguments about data – I enjoy your general commentary.

  • Lokland

    @OTC

    “Why is the “best” the goal, rather than “good enough to be content”? There’s *always* going to be someone better out there.”

    +1.

    I see no reason to stop shopping after getting married if the goal is better.
    Contentment is a much more realistic goal, why that is not possible with only one partner (25% men, 45% women, N of 2 or less when married) strikes me as an attempt at cake eating.

    People who extend upwards in terms of relationship count must have problems with:
    a) incapable of creating a lasting relationship
    b) incapable of choosing a partner to form a lasting relationship with
    c) higher partner counts leading to decreased satisfaction

    Lets not try and make the failures feel better. If you have a continuous string of relationships that last less than a year theres something wrong with you. Your not shopping, you suck at being in relationships.

  • Lokland

    @INTJ

    “I don’t think Susan was doing the whole “right back at you” feminist thing about age.”

    I disagree. I wouldn’t have gone at it so fervently if that had not been the implied message.

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

      @Lokland

      I disagree. I wouldn’t have gone at it so fervently if that had not been the implied message.

      That was certainly not my intent. Someone else showed up to stir the pot and set up the question of who is more genetically compromised at age 35, and that began the competitive nastiness.

      As I pointed out earlier, I linked to that study last week with no editorializing whatsoever in my post about why women should date older men. I then went on to suggest that the risk was minimal and far outweighed by the benefits.

      My mistake was in taking the bait. Won’t happen again.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Not just that, most people will benefit enormously from dating a number of people before they find their life partner. From an economics standpoint, this is rational, as it is very unlikely that your first boyfriend or girlfriend is the best you can do. Dating is shopping, you rarely want to buy the first thing you see. If you do, you’ll likely never know if you paid too much or what was available at other locations.

    I’m perfectly fine with dating plenty of people. I actually put that in my post with the serial dating. It’s the mating and emotional pair-bonding that I’d rather keep to a minimum.

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

      It’s the mating and emotional pair-bonding that I’d rather keep to a minimum.

      Fair enough.

  • Lokland

    @Olive

    “Since we’re discussing genes, I have a rather OT question. I have a de novo SALL1 mutation, which causes Townes-Brocks Syndrome, and I had a relatively old father (40, when I was born). I’m probably a bad example, as TBS is apparently extremely rare (the wikipedia article about it claims only 250 people worldwide have it, but I don’t think that’s true, I think people just go undiagnosed). But is it possible that this is one of those examples of an old father having a kid with a genetic disease?”

    Must be rare. I’ve never heard of it.

    Based on my quick google read, the mutation occurred either before you were conceived or very early after your conception.

    Its entirely possible that it happened in your father.
    It also could have been within the first few rounds of cell division after egg and sperm met and effects most (but not all) cells in your body.

    Its possible but honestly I probably couldn’t figure it out if you were standing in front of me and I had a team sticking needles in you.

    What might be interesting is to test your eggs, see if the germ line is affected. (Also expensive as all hell.)
    However, its kind of irrelevant unless you plan on not having kids unless they can be TBS free.

    If you want kids, nothing you can do about it. Enjoy the ride.

    Conclusion, possible, but there are other ways it could have occurred as well. Fact is, it occurred. Determining why is irrelevant at this point.

    PS You have a hearing problem if I remember, correct?

  • Ted D

    OTC – “Why is the “best” the goal, rather than “good enough to be content”? There’s *always* going to be someone better out there.”

    My sentiments exactly! I hate, hate, hate that we talk about all this like we are indeed shopping for a brand new car. (despite the fact that I use car analogies a lot here…) For goodness sakes, you are supposed to be finding a life-long partner. You can NEVER know if the person you marry today will be the same person you are with in 20 years, because we all change!
    So, why wander for a decade or more “window shopping” when you should be finding someone you can work with, and building a life together?

    INTJ – “I’m not inclined to search up data for every statement I make, especially given that a) data can be misleading b) it takes a lot of time to find such studies c) much of this stuff has not been studied, because the evo-psych guys have only recently started doing their stuff and before them the feminists wouldn’t have allowed any of this to get studied.”

    Yep. I don’t go looking for data either, because IMO there isn’t much, and what we have is questionable at best. If I were actually working on a complete redesign of the SMP where I was in charge of destruction and construction, I’d order a TON of studies done today that would have useful info. But honestly, what we have now is often guesswork and theory wrapped around small data sets (meaning a few thousand people in the study at BEST)

    Plus, no amount of data is going to change what I see right down the street from me. I’ll concede that what I see everyday might be a regional thing, which is partly why I enjoy chatting here. Everyone is from somewhere else! And what I’ve learned is: for the most part, what I see is what everyone else sees IF they don’t live in some UMC area. I’ve seen very similar environments to my local one from many other men here and elsewhere on the web, so I’m at least convinced that although the troubles here in Pittsburgh might not apply to the entire nation, they DO apply to a very large subset of the nations poorer communities, and unlike Susan, I’m not very concerned about the plight of the UMC young with finding a mate. Don’t get me wrong, I think it sucks they have it tough, but their version of “tough” and what I see kids around here going through are barely even related. Take the troubles of your average Ivy League college girl with finding a mate, and add drugs, crime, and piss poor earnings (often with single motherhood) and you might get an idea of what I’m talking about.

    Hell, I was just visiting my daughter’s friend that got pregnant (Just had her baby a few weeks ago) in her new public assistance housing, and I was nervous having my children there. We didn’t stay long, because the place was scary. I wouldn’t drive through it at night! Is she having problems finding a good guy to marry? Well sure! The difference is: if an ivy league graduate has trouble finding a mate, they can still live a pretty damn good life alone. This girl is behind the 8-ball and even IF she can find a decent guy, they will probably be behind it together. And, considering her current environment, I don’t have much hope she’ll find any ‘decent’ men around at all…

  • Ted D

    “I’m perfectly fine with dating plenty of people. I actually put that in my post with the serial dating. It’s the mating and emotional pair-bonding that I’d rather keep to a minimum.”

    THIS!!! I have NO issue at all with young people “dating” a lot, and often, with LOTS of different people. But, “dating” does not equal “sexxing”, and there is the problem. Date all you want! How else will you learn what personality traits you want in a mate? But, you don’t have to have sex to learn about someone’s personality. And you don’t need to “test drive” every car you look at as a purchase. You ONLY test drive the car you are pretty sure you are gonna buy. That is, unless your actual goal is to simply drive a lot of cars that belong to someone else… Kinda sounds to me like the attitude of the most promiscuous among us. You know, just screw everyone that then, when you decide you actually want to OWN a car, pick from the ones no one else put lots of miles on…

  • Lokland

    @JP

    I’m Canadian.

    I read the Globe and Mail, National Post and then one other depending on how I’m feeling.

    I read international news, business and ‘life’ sections. Nothing else.
    I also do the Sudoku, sometimes one of the crosswords.

  • Lokland

    @Olive

    Your smart. You probably know this but;

    I’m not there in front of you.
    I’m a stranger in the internet.
    Work of the assumption I’m a 90 year old woman and don’t trust anything I say and use it as advice.

    Talk to a genetic councillor who can see you face-to-face if you need to make decisions.

  • Iggles

    JP,

    I think the issue is usually the first person isn’t the right one. Sometimes you have to have relationship experience – go through at least one or a few to really know what you works for you.

    Case in point, my Ex was my first bf. We started dating when I was 20. At 28, I know myself much better and it would have been a disaster to get married! I was carrying both of us – financially, socially, and emotionally was his biggest support. I hated it. I prefer the Captain/First Officer model for relationships – I don’t want to be the one leading it. I loss respect and attraction for him due to him leaning so heavily on me. I now know that for the relationship to work I need a partner who is proactive towards his career (IMO, working at mcdonalds is more admirable than whining about being unemployed while declared certain jobs are “beneath” you :roll: ), and who has a vision of the life he wants for himself (ambition and goals!), and can stand on his own two feet.

    I don’t think that a tall order. Fortunately, I screened for this when I began dating again. All of the guys I went out had an independent thought streak. I appreciate and respect thisis quality very much in my current boyfriend :)

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Offthecuff: “Why is the “best” the goal, rather than “good enough to be content”? There’s *always* going to be someone better out there.”
    I guess Susan didn’t mean it that way, but nevertehless you make an excellent point, which should be obvious to everyone. Individuals in the west tend to be more and more individualistic, and therefore selfish. They are, especially women since the past few decades, given more and more opportunities to “look elsewhere”. Once we get settled into the habit of a stable relationship, many of us will start to want more than that, i/e looking elsewhere.

    @JP: “I think she’s trying to say that you find someone with whom you are compatible. But again, how in the world do you know this?”

    Not too hard, if you first take the cautious walk. but it can take long: First you settle down in a relationship, by that I mean living 24h a day with her. You’ll find out soon enough if that woman is compatible. It can take weeks, it can take months, sometimes longer, but you always find out. That’s why you should never marry too quickly, and of course even less quickly to start having kids.

    @Szopen.
    Ok, I got the picture. I asked because if I had been in a situation with a woman I loved and vice versa, who earned more money than me or worse, had I been unemployed, my “male pride” would have made me leave her ONLY if she started to nag me about not finding a better job or something to that extent, or worse. Anyway, all this was related to Susan’s story about her young female friend and the fool who dropped her.

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    My sentiments exactly! I hate, hate, hate that we talk about all this like we are indeed shopping for a brand new car. (despite the fact that I use car analogies a lot here…) For goodness sakes, you are supposed to be finding a life-long partner. You can NEVER know if the person you marry today will be the same person you are with in 20 years, because we all change!
    So, why wander for a decade or more “window shopping” when you should be finding someone you can work with, and building a life together?

    Let me stretch the car analogy here though. I notice most people tend to switch to a newer, sexier car model every several years. Personally, I’m still in love with the old minivan my family bought almost almost 20 years ago. Also, there’s a reason used-cars are so much cheaper.

    Additionally, I’d like to relate how I bought my recent laptop, after my old one died (yup I’m a laptop widower). I did plenty of research online into all the laptops, looked at specs and reviews, and chose a laptop I thought I’d want. I chose a high-end Thinkpad, because Thinkpads are very rugged, and with the top quality specs, the hardware should still be competitive several years from now. I then walked into my local notebook store and briefly tried out the laptop keyboard before purchasing it. I didn’t do any hands-on trying out of dozens of laptops or anything.

    It’s interesting how closely my computer-shopping style corresponds to my relationship-shopping style.

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

    @Ms. Olive
    I’ll admit to being dogged, but not sniveling. What you call level-headed and generous, is evasive. I think I can count on one hand the number of times he’s answered a simple, direct question.

    I honestly don’t expect anyone to come armed with facts and figures. That isn’t the issue. Had Mr. INTJ not dismissed ALL information presented here @ HUS by Susan as “crap”, I wouldn’t have hounded him. But that’s what he did. No mea cupla either, just denial. That’s a big pet peeve of mine. Perhaps you missed that enjoyable discussion. :shock:

    He’s also got a very low opinion of young women. I could quote some his nasty generalizations, particularly about girls who go to community colleges. Never about guys, though. Anything I’ve said about him pales in comparison. Just thought you might like to know…

    PS: I’m not at war with anybody. My offer to drop the subject still stands, on one condition. Though I doubt he’ll cease recycling the same BS. Besides, I don’t think he even celebrates Christmas. A ceasefire during the festival of lights would make more sense. :wink:

  • http://7thseriesgongshow.blogspot.com Mr. Nervous Toes

    Susan,

    There is not strong evidence that autism has its roots in genetics. For example, in identical twins, if one develops autism there’s only about a 60 % chance the other twin will too. There’s never been a particularly strong inheritance correlation. There have been a number of genetic surveys that generally haven’t identified a solid candidate — only about 25 % of autism cases can be linked to a gene loci. The rest are all, who knows?

    E.g.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17764594

    Most of the research thrust is generally pushing towards a gene expression (i.e. epigenetics) as the potential culprit, which means the health of the womb and the environment that the fetus/infant is raised in. It would also make the health of the womb of the grandmother of the child as important (!!!). For example, women with weak thyroid function are way more likely to pop out autistic kids, especially if their T3/T4 bottoms out at any point in the pregnancy, as that can compromise immune function and breakdown the womb-mother-blood-barrier.

  • Escoffier

    The problem with Susan’s oft-repeated shopping analogy, IMO, is that she can be somewhat unclear and self-contradictory about what it entails.

    One the one hand, shopping is literally dating, that is, going on dates or doing things with a variety of people in the search for one who really is a good fit. The danger of not shopping is that a person will “settle” too early and not realize their full MMV potential, or worse, end up with someone less compatible than they might otherwise have found. Presumably, this kind of dating will involve little or no sex. Certainly not sex with everyone dated, or even close.

    But she also often seems to mean dating as a series of LTRs, sex included. She will defend this sometimes by saying that people need practice in LTRs, that the one that ends in marriage shouldn’t be the first one. This can lead to the rather absurd notion that if someone really does find the right person early and wants to stay with her, he should dump her because he needs more “practice.” And in fact we know that this is a cultural meme, affecting both men and women, but it seems to men women more.

    So, notion one of dating as shopping strikes me as perfectly reasonable provided it’s not an excuse to be a player/ride the carousel. Notion 2 has all kinds of problems that we’ve explored here and elsewhere.

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

      @Escoffier

      One the one hand, shopping is literally dating, that is, going on dates or doing things with a variety of people in the search for one who really is a good fit…Presumably, this kind of dating will involve little or no sex.

      But she also often seems to mean dating as a series of LTRs, sex included. She will defend this sometimes by saying that people need practice in LTRs, that the one that ends in marriage shouldn’t be the first one.

      I’m happy to clarify. It is rather complicated, and perhaps unclear, but I do not believe I have been inconsistent or self-contradictory.

      The first thing we need to do is establish the definition of dating circa 2012, within the context of hookup culture. Dating is being in an exclusive relationship with another person, embracing the terms “boyfriend” and “girlfriend” and presenting as a couple socially. It does not necessarily imply sex, though for the majority of young people the relationship is sexual, and may have begun that way.

      After college, when 20-somethings try online dating, meet people at work and through friends of friends, etc. the hookup script does not work as well, and there is at least a partial return to traditional dating, meaning the activity of two people going out alone together to become better acquainted, and continuing to see one another on dates as the relationship progresses. This type of dating rarely starts with sexual contact.

      Dating in College:

      There are many reasons why college aged kids choose to become exclusive and date a boyfriend or girlfriend in college, all of which have been covered here in various posts. Romance, sex, companionship, social support, strong feelings of affection and attraction, and also frequently a desire to avoid the hookup scene entirely or take a break from it. Sexual health/STDs are another reason young people choose relationships, or LTRs, in college.

      College students understand that very few people their age marry their college sweethearts today. The 10-12 year period between matriculation and marriage, as well as presumed geographic movement and uncertainty conspire to adjust expectations in this regard. Many students do attempt to stay together after school in long-distance relationships, but most of these do not survive.

      I believe that of the three options available to college students: casual sex, relationships, or abstaining from cross-sex interaction altogether, the best of these is relationships. Many more students would like to be in relationships than are. This is true of both sexes.

      The process typically looks like this, and generally takes a couple of months:

      Hook up —> Round 2 —> Regular hookup —> Together/exclusive —> DTR —> Relationship

      Dating After College:

      Traditional dating is certainly a form of shopping, and generally continues until two people decide to enter a committed relationship, or LTR. The shopping is for the LTR, not marriage. Very few people in their 20s accept dates, online or otherwise, with the notion of marrying the person if all goes well. Rather, the desire is to become acquainted and test compatibility for a more serious relationship. If all goes well at that point, then taking the relationship to the next level is considered.

      The typical process, which might take 3-7 years:

      First Date —> Continued dating —> Sex (generally 1-2 months in) —> DTR (generally 4-6 months in) —> Meet family —> Live together —> Marry

      I do not believe that an unlimited number of either kind of dating relationships is beneficial. Nor do I believe it is healthy to abstain from either of these processes while waiting for a marital partner, given the typical 10 year timeline.

      Both college and post-college dating scenarios give young people the opportunity to develop relationship skills, including compromise, demonstration of love and affection, responsibility for the happiness of another, etc.

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

    @INTJ

    I’m really not interested in arguing with Megaman or anyone. I just want to have constructive dialogue.

    Fair enough. You were certainly interested in launching a screed against knowledge and how this site was run back in late September. How was that constructive?

  • Ted D

    INTJ – “Let me stretch the car analogy here though. I notice most people tend to switch to a newer, sexier car model every several years. Personally, I’m still in love with the old minivan my family bought almost almost 20 years ago. Also, there’s a reason used-cars are so much cheaper.”

    I tend to buy a new car when my current one starts breaking down to the point that it is:
    No longer reliable
    Costs as much per month to fix as a car payment would.

    So, although I use cars as an analogy, I don’t expect people to be replaced when they start to wear out and break. The only reason for someone to “trade up” to a better “model” in a marriage is if they viewed their spouse based on their utility, and not on them as a person. In that case, I can see why a woman might dump a husband that got laid off, because she only saw him as a financial resource. I can see why a man might leave his wife of 20 years for some young thing, because he only saw her as a hot piece of ass.

    Where are the people that are with each other because they love and admire the other person? If it was possible, I’d still have my very first car (1975 Dodge Charger) because I loved it. But, as a car, I had to see it for its utility FIRST, and then how I felt about it second. It got old, utility lost, so I replaced it. I don’t expect to replace my wife because she loses “utility”.

  • Iggles

    @ Lokland:

    Lets not try and make the failures feel better. If you have a continuous string of relationships that last less than a year theres something wrong with you. Your not shopping, you suck at being in relationships.

    :lol:

    I couldn’t agree with you more!

    My N and relationship count is the same = 2. My first was 4 years. My current one is coming up on 1 year. I remember recently reading the statistic that most relationships last 3-5 months and being shocked. My perspective is a bit skewed.

    That said, it is easy to fall into relationship inertia when you’ve been together for a long time. Both of you are unhappy but you’re so used to being together that you don’t know how to end it. Despite our (many) problems, I would get tears in my eyes at the thought of ending things with my Ex. I literally couldn’t imagine my life without. Today, I can’t imagine my life if I stayed with him! Funny how life can be that way..

  • INTJ

    @ Hope

    Just1Z, the Chinese don’t really start wars on foreign countries. They haven’t gone to active war since the Japanese invaded in WWII. Before that, there were rebellions and internal strife with the nationalists who went to Taiwan. Long before that, the Mongols kept invading. They killed their own people during the Cultural Revolution.

    So I doubt the Chinese would really try to invade a war-happy country which has a lot more modern military experience over the issue of debt. But this fear is trotted out a lot. IMO, if WWIII starts, it’s going to start in the Middle East or Europe. China, at the top, is not run by risk-taking warmongers, but risk-averse bureaucrats who want personal wealth and glory, and get plenty. The outgoing leader became a secret billionaire.

    China is pragmatic and would not be stupid enough to start a war with America over debt. That doesn’t mean China doesn’t start wars with foreign countries though. While the border disputes with the USSR and India are debatable, China’s attack on Vietnam was a clear cut act of aggression.

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

    @SW

    True, the key is knowing when to stop the search. I am speaking strictly in economics, or game theory terms here.

    Didn’t Lori Gottlieb advise young women to seek out Mr. Pretty Good for marriage instead of staying single and vainly waiting for Mr. Perfect? I recall she was reamed for it, mostly by other women!

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Ted D: “Where are the people that are with each other because they love and admire the other person?”
    There are a few, but there are. I know quite a bit about that myself. I guess the real way to put it is rather like this: Where are the people that are with each other because they love and admire the other person, and that are still together.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    What INTJ said, China has disputes with many nations and is NOT shy about resorting to military force to resolve the question.

    That whole portion of the world isn’t super-stable. In the past century, China has had a shooting match with basically all of its neighbors. Japan, SKorea, Vietnam, India, USSR.

  • Ted D

    Iggles – “My N and relationship count is the same = 2.”

    Well that makes us of like mind. My N and relationship count is the same =4. So far, the shortest of those relationships is my current marriage. My last marriage lasted almost 13 years (including time together pre-marriage), and the other two LTRs where 4 and 4.5 years respectively.

    “That said, it is easy to fall into relationship inertia when you’ve been together for a long time. Both of you are unhappy but you’re so used to being together that you don’t know how to end it. Despite our (many) problems, I would get tears in my eyes at the thought of ending things with my Ex. I literally couldn’t imagine my life without. Today, I can’t imagine my life if I stayed with him! Funny how life can be that way..”

    I did the same in my first two LTRs. The thing is, I needed to learn earlier that IF a relationship gets to that point, it’s dead in all but name. Seeing as my first marriage failed, perhaps that was my greatest fault. Not that I didn’t choose well, or put in the effort. But, I never learned when to realize it wasn’t going to work, and instead just put my head down, dug in my heels, and pushed forward harder. *shrug*

    Truth is those first few LTRs were probably destined to fail based on my age and the age of my mates. But, had I not found myself in my early 20’s with little to no prospects for gainful employment, that second one might have ran the term. I pretty much tanked that relationship for similar reasons to the description of Susan’s friend. We were together for awhile and things went south for me with money. I got in the dumps, and it eventually forced the relationship into a downward spiral. I was young and inexperienced, she was four years younger and no better off. :P

    At any rate, while in those relationships, I treated them all as a progression to marriage. I wouldn’t have stayed with those young women so long if I didn’t think marriage was in the cards at some point.

  • Escoffier

    Re: Gottlieb, on the surface her advice sounds good, or at least it cuts two ways. You could interpret her to be saying that women need to learn to rein in their hypergamy and also to learn to maximize their MMV by locking down the highest value male in their 20s rather than waiting until 40 when the pickins are slimmer. She addressed this perfectly when she said that a 28y/o 8 would not commit to a male 8, only to discover at 38 that she no longer has any shot at an 8. So, women need to A) stop insisting on 10s and B) stop viewing their 20s as “play time” and get serious.

    If that’s what she meant by “settling,” then it’s good advice. Unfortunately, that’s not really what she meant. I did not read the whole book but I read some of it and I read the Atlantic piece on which it was based. It’s quite clear that she means, get a man for a help-mate whether you love him or not. In other words, she is explicitly advocating what manosphere types identify as the deliberate exploitation of betas.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Someone else showed up to stir the pot and set up the question of who is more genetically compromised at age 35, and that began the competitive nastiness.”

    I know.
    Its all good.

    Be as competitive as you want. Its cool.
    Start sensationalizing and I’ll be looming with a raised eyebrow.

    Also, Mr. NT seems to know more about the genetic link to mental disorders then I do.
    I’ll defer to anything he says unless it involves unicorns prancing around on the chromosome.

    @Iggles

    “I couldn’t agree with you more!”

    Obviously.
    Whats funny is I defend this method while not having practiced it myself.
    I still obviously see it as better.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    “I’d say if you’re in love and feel very fortunate to have those feelings requited, by all means lock it down. In my case, I had strong feelings for a couple of people back in the day who I am very, very glad I did not marry.”

    OK, I think I see a communications issue here.

    I’m going to use INTJ and myself as an example here, you scan correct me if I’m wrong about your dating history. INTJ will certainly correct me if I’m wrong.

    In my situation, all of my relationships prior to marriage ended because I broke them off (I’m omitting the one that was never going to go anywhere on mutual agreement at the beginning – A DTR where we were distinctly not in love with each other).

    INTJ doesn’t want his heart to get broken. This is understandable, and I don’t understand how getting your heart broken is helpful. You pointed out that *you* had your heart broken before. This is somewhat incomprehensible to me given my experiences.

    Usually, my feelings were not strong enough for the other person. So, there was no way I was getting my heart broken here, because I wasn’t emotionally entangled. The one time my feelings were stronger, I got annoyed because she was cold, so to speak, so there was never any danger in me getting my heart broken because it was obvious that she wasn’t into me. I have no idea why *she* decided to date me, but that’s another story. That was easy. I realized the “relationship” was inane, so I cut it off.

    Anyhow, the first and only time the feelings ever lined up, I immediately got married because it had failed every single time before due to complete imbalance as to romantic interest.

    However, in your case, it sounds like you did have feelings lined up, where you were each actually into each other, and you didn’t get married. This thoroughly confuses me.

    This seems to be exactly what INTJ is worried about. Mutual intense feelings not leading to marriage.

    I never got my heart broken. How in the world is getting your heart broken beneficial in any way, shape, or form? How could this possibly help INTJ with his life? He’s just going to end up scarred (like my married once, never again cousin)

  • JP

    scan = can

  • JP

    We’re back to N again.

    What on God’s Green Earth is “N” within the context of this comments section?

    I can’t comment on N because I can’t tell what my own N is!

    I know how many people I’ve dated, but I’ve got no clue whether they count as N!

  • JP

    @Lolkand:

    “I did not read the whole book but I read some of it and I read the Atlantic piece on which it was based. It’s quite clear that she means, get a man for a help-mate whether you love him or not. In other words, she is explicitly advocating what manosphere types identify as the deliberate exploitation of betas.”

    I’m going to agree with Lokland here.

    Settling = Not madly in love; marrying to marry.

  • Ted D

    JP – here we use N to represent the Number of sexual partners in your past.

    So in my case, N = 4 means I’ve had P in V sex with four women in my lifetime.

  • Ted D

    “Settling = Not madly in love; marrying to marry.”

    Add me to the list here. I agree that settling on a guy you don’t really love “just to marry” is BAD mojo.

    But, if by “settling” she meant women should get realistic about exactly what kind of man they want to marry? Yeah, I’m 100% behind that.

  • Iggles

    @ Ted D:

    I did the same in my first two LTRs. The thing is, I needed to learn earlier that IF a relationship gets to that point, it’s dead in all but name. Seeing as my first marriage failed, perhaps that was my greatest fault. Not that I didn’t choose well, or put in the effort. But, I never learned when to realize it wasn’t going to work, and instead just put my head down, dug in my heels, and pushed forward harder. *shrug*

    Right. This is an important lesson to learn!

    Not sure how else to learn it, without actually being in a relationship. I pick up a lot of what *not* to do from seeing other peoples mistakes, but this doesn’t seem detectable that way. It’s a different view when you’re going through it. Experience brings wisdom in this case. (FTR, I think 95% of relationship mistakes can be avoided by not repeating what you’ve seen others do!)

    At any rate, while in those relationships, I treated them all as a progression to marriage. I wouldn’t have stayed with those young women so long if I didn’t think marriage was in the cards at some point.

    Same here ;-)

    I don’t get the point of entering a LTR with someone you can’t see yourself marrying and/or having kids (if you want them, that is!). I feel that it’s a dealbreaker if they don’t inspire you to envision building a life together.

  • Cooper

    @JP Re: N
    Rofl.
    *smack* Catch up!

  • JP

    In that case, my N is 1.

    I’ve had plenty of relationships, by my philosophy always was that if you had sex, you were essentially morally obligated to marry the person. You only get one chance to get it right. I used the same philosophy with my career, although I was willing to change jobs once. That was hard, given that my perfectionism ideal was one employer for one career (once you choose a career, of course).

    This avoided STD’s and any potential children.

    This has more to do with my perfectionism/idealism/stubbornness than anything else.

    I wasn’t particularly religious growing up, but I was very perfectionistic/high academic achievement/A “B” in any class meas that you have failed type of person.

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    Yup that’s exactly the thing. I don’t want to get my heart broken. I’ve seen to many guys who have, and it aint pretty.

  • Lokland

    @INTJ

    “It’s the mating and emotional pair-bonding that I’d rather keep to a minimum.”

    Why not include the mating and skip the emotional pair bonding?

    They are not interconnected (yet when you do pair bond, sex is the best way to show your love, funny how that works).

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

      @Lokland

      Why not include the mating and skip the emotional pair bonding?

      They are not interconnected (yet when you do pair bond, sex is the best way to show your love, funny how that works).

      Helen Fisher says that men can and do fall in love as a result of having sex:

      “Fisher maintains that humans have evolved three core brain systems for mating and reproduction:

      Lust—the sex drive or libido
      Romantic attraction—romantic love
      Attachment—deep feelings of union with a long term partner.

      “Love can start off with any of these three feelings,” Fisher maintains. “Some people have sex first and then fall in love. Some fall head over heels in love, then climb into bed. Some feel deeply attached to someone they have known for months or years; then circumstances change, they fall madly in love and have sex.” But the sex drive evolved to encourage you to seek a range of partners; romantic love evolved to enable you to focus your mating energy on just one at a time; and attachment evolved to enable you to feel deep union to this person long enough to rear your infants as a team.”
      But these brain systems can be tricky. Having sex, Fisher says, can drive up dopamine in the brain and push you over the threshold toward falling in love. And with orgasm, you experience a flood of oxytocin and vasopressin–giving you feelings of attachment. “Casual sex isn’t always casual” Fisher reports, “it can trigger a host of powerful feelings.” In fact, Fisher believes that men and women often engage in “hooking up” to unconsciously trigger these feelings of romance and attachment.”

  • Damien Vulaume

    @INTJ: “I don’t want to get my heart broken. I’ve seen to many guys who have, and it aint pretty.”

    I sympathize with that. I was there after a heartbreak. But you can’t say you don’t want to dive in the swimming pool because you fear cold water before trying to test the actual temperature of the water.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Lokland: “yet when you do pair bond, sex is the best way to show your love, funny how that works.”

    I would agree with you on that one. That’s why I don’t understand this “FWB” concept.

  • Lokland

    @Damien

    “That’s why I don’t understand this “FWB” concept.”

    Its kind of like taking advantage of a stupid person for their money,
    except the person is a women and the money is sex.

    Except, in a FWB situation, the stupid person is giving you money for absolutely no reason whatsoever (we must assume is gives them so benefit or they wouldn’t do it, or the wires are not crossed right or they assume they can flip it into a relationship).

    “Hi want a $100?”
    “Hi want to have NSA sex?”

  • JP

    And in defense of INTJ, here’s another psychology article telling us why he wants to avoid it.

    “Battered by Biology

    Because our brains are wired from the beginning for bonding, breakups batter us biologically. Initially, says Rutgers University anthropologist Helen Fisher, everyone reacts to rejection like a drug user going through withdrawal. In the early days and weeks after a breakup, she has found, just thinking about the lover who dumped us activates several key areas of the brain—the ventral tegmental area of the midbrain, which controls motivation and reward and is known to be involved in romantic love; the nucleus accumbens and the orbitofrontal/prefrontal cortex, part of the dopamine reward system and associated with craving and addiction; and the insular cortex and anterior cingulate, associated with physical pain and distress.

    As reported in a recent issue of the Journal of Neurophysiology, Fisher rounded up 15 people who had just experienced romantic rejection, put them in an fMRI machine, and had them look at two large photographs: an image of the person who had just dumped them and an image of a neutral person to whom they had no attachment. When the participants looked at the images of their rejecters, their brains shimmered like those of addicts deprived of their substance of choice.

    “We found activity in regions of the brain associated with cocaine and nicotine addiction,” Fisher says. “We also found activity in a region associated with feelings of deep attachment, and activity in a region that’s associated with pain.”

    Fisher’s work corroborates the findings of UCLA psychologist Naomi Eisenberger, who discovered that social rejection activates the same brain area—the anterior cingulate—that generates an adverse reaction to physical pain. Breakups likely stimulate pain to notify us how important social ties are to human survival and to warn us not to sever them lightly.

    Although Eisenberger didn’t study romantic rejection, she expects that it actually feels much worse than the social rejection she did document. “If you’re getting pain-related activity from someone you don’t care about, it would presumably be a lot more painful from someone you share memories with,” she points out.”

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/collections/201211/the-indecisive-lover/the-thoroughly-modern-guide-breakups?page=2

  • Ted D

    L0kland – “Why not include the mating and skip the emotional pair bonding?

    They are not interconnected (yet when you do pair bond, sex is the best way to show your love, funny how that works).”

    that is an easy one. Because people like myself value the emotional pair bonding part of “sex” more than the act itself. Sex without emotion to me is wasting time and energy for very little, while increasing risks of STDs.

    In short, I don’t and have never had sex just for the orgasm. In fact, there are plenty of times when I enjoy other parts of sex with my wife FAR MORE than the orgasm I get at the end. Some nights its all about me and what I want. Other nights I put 100% of my effort into rocking my wife’s world in bed, and don’t care at all about the “quality” of my experience at the time. I get mine when I want it, but sometimes I want her to “get hers” more than I want my own. I get off on getting her off, and that actually doesn’t even require that I get mine, although she always makes sure I do regardless.

  • Sassy6519

    I’ve had around 4 relationships so far, so that’s not too bad. I tend to end things during the dating phase, so I’ve dated a lot of people.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Lokland: “Its kind of like taking advantage of a stupid person for their money, except the person is a women and the money is sex.”
    Yes, I got that part. And I’ve done it in my early 20’s, nothing I feel proud about. For in the end it didn’t make me fullfied, there was always something missing. Long story….but I hope you guess it.
    I don’t want to sound like I hold a higher moral ground here, but it is to me obvious that taking advantage of people for your own selfish interest, whether you’re talking about corruption in the business world or getting sex from gullible targets is not something you want to indefinetly pursue in life…

  • Mike C

    Its kind of like taking advantage of a stupid person for their money, except the person is a women and the money is sex.

    Except, in a FWB situation, the stupid person is giving you money for absolutely no reason whatsoever (we must assume is gives them so benefit or they wouldn’t do it, or the wires are not crossed right or they assume they can flip it into a relationship).

    Lokland,

    Very often in FWB situations you have a substantial SMV differential. The simple reality is many men have a different bar for the woman they will make a girlfriend, introduce to parents and friends and generally be happy to be seen with everywhere by everyone. The bar is lower for the 1 AM girl or the FWB. Speaking honestly, I’ve had one FWB arrangement. She was easily the lowest SMV girl I’ve been with. To be clear, she pretty much put it out there for the taking….eventually I wasn’t going to pass on the easy offer on the table. So it may not be just an issue of being stupid, but miscalibrating one’s SMV. If a woman has found herself in multiple FWB arrangements, odds are pretty good she is going for men whose SMV is significantly above her ownnj

  • Escoffier

    Sounds to me like FWB is both the stupidest aspect of today’s screwed up SMP and also just about the stupidist mistake a girl can make.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    INTJ, fair point, although short border disputes are not on the same level as going halfway across the globe to invade a country, so that’s why the idea of China invading the US seems far-fetched to me.

    Olive, I am sorry to hear about your health troubles and the genetic issues. I work with some genetic counselors, and my husband and I met with one after we had the stillbirth and miscarriage (chromosomal abnormalities; we were both 27). I second the suggestion to talk to them.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Escoffier: “Sounds to me like FWB is both the stupidest aspect of today’s screwed up SMP and also just about the stupidist mistake a girl can make.”

    Right on! And for a girl, it surely is the stupidest mistake she can make, even if she’s is not stupid as an individual. And there are many other aspects of the over-coded mating dance hall comedy in American colleges that are to me absurd, starting with what you call DTR.

  • JP

    @Hope:

    Here’s the Archduid on a potential future US-China conflict.

    He’s using history as a way to show what could happen in the future in his “Fall of American Empire” story.

    Enjoy.

    http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2012/10/how-it-could-happen-part-one-hubris.html

    Note: I’m not endorsing this theory because I can’t see how the Great Power dance is going to evolve.

  • JP

    @Hope:

    Here’s an article from Xenakis. If you ignore his theories, he’s a good source for interesting International Relations issues.

    This is the Nine-Dash Map dispute.

    “China’s neighbors are expressing alarm over China’s belligerent new actions in claiming sovereignty over the entire South China Sea, including regions that historically belonged to other countries, including Brunei, the Philippines, Malaysia, Taiwan, and Vietnam. China’s new passports contain the “nine-dash map,” a map that China uses to designate its claims with nine dashes circling the entire South China Sea. As I reported reported two days ago, China is now sending warships to the South China Sea and is preparing to board and take control of any ship in what china considers to be its sovereign “territorial waters.” The Philippines, which refuses to recognize the new Chinese passport, is saying that China’s new military policy is a violation of international laws. One senior Philippine naval officer has a different explanation:

    “Those warnings [by China] are not directed at us. They might be trying to find out how far the United States would react because this could affect freedom of navigation in one of the busiest sea lanes in the world. If this is an official policy announced by Beijing, this is very serious and a cause of concern.”

    This may be just wishful thinking on the part of the Philippine official. It was just eight months ago that the Philippines were forced to back down in a naval confrontation with China over the Scarborough Shoal, some islands that are clearly the Philippines’ sovereign territory. (See “8-Jul-12 World View — China escalates military buildup in South China Sea”)”

    http://www.generationaldynamics.com/cgi-bin/D.PL?d=ww2010.weblog&i=e121204#e121204

  • JP

    Hooking Up Smart:

    “The People’s Choice for Up-To-The-Minute International Conflict News.”

  • Sassy6519

    I’d say that a FWB situation is only viable for a woman if she is truly capable of separating feelings from sex. I do believe there are women out there who want and thrive in FWB situations. I think they are the minority, however. I won’t say that all women should not engage in FWB situations because there are a small portion of women who like them, for whatever reasons they may be.

  • Escoffier

    What is DTR?

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Lokland and Hope,
    Thanks for the info (really it was just a curiosity thing) and thanks for the suggestion. I do need to see a genetic counselor about it; the people who diagnosed me are in another state, and it’s one of those situations where they’re supposed to be following me in their clinic (because TBS is so rare), but I haven’t heard from them and meanwhile I’ve gotten really curious.

    Lokland,
    Yes, I do have a sensorineural bilateral hearing loss. It’s not one of the three main features of TBS, but it’s fairly common (I think in 65% of cases).

  • Cooper

    @Escoffier

    Define the relationship

  • JP

    @Escoffier:

    “What is DTR?”

    Apparently, it means “Define the Relationship”.

    I was excited to find out that I had DTRed previously without even realizing I *had* DTRed. I was quite impressed with myself.

    In any event, your confusion just shows the problem with being an effictite commenteer here at HUS. It’s confusing.

    Of course, some commenteers get confused by the concept of “Cooper”.

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    I’ll admit to being dogged, but not sniveling.

    How interesting, since you’ve basically called into question INTJ’s character and intelligence, based on the fact that he has chosen not to answer your repeated cries for data. Maybe he has not participated in the discussion here in a manner you think he should, but come now. Last week (or two weeks ago?) I promised to write a long post about global climate change in the forum and I still haven’t done it. Does that automatically make me lazy and evasive?

    Here’s the thing: there are two people asking for an explanation from INTJ: you and Susan. The rest of us probably wouldn’t read the miles-long essay he’d need to write to satisfy you, so it’s probably just not worth his time. The goal is to have a good discussion, not to constantly one-up each other. Part of the reason I haven’t written that global climate change post is that I recognize the discussion moved on awhile ago. The same can be said about whatever statement INTJ made about “crap” data, however much it grated on your nerves.

    I honestly don’t expect anyone to come armed with facts and figures. That isn’t the issue. Had Mr. INTJ not dismissed ALL information presented here @ HUS by Susan as “crap”, I wouldn’t have hounded him. But that’s what he did. No mea cupla either, just denial. That’s a big pet peeve of mine. Perhaps you missed that enjoyable discussion.

    If I saw it, I quickly forgot. That’s what’s weird about your strange need to take INTJ to the cleaners for that one time when…. yadda yadda. Hardly anyone else cares, including him. If you ask him 20 times to justify this or that statement with data, and he still doesn’t, do you think he’ll do it when you ask him the 21st time? Or is your goal to constantly make him out to be a fool?

    He’s also got a very low opinion of young women.

    *Shrugs* I’ve seen some pretty low opinions of women in my time around these parts, and he doesn’t even come close.

    I’m not at war with anybody.

    Huh, could’ve fooled me.

  • JP

    effictite = effective.

  • Ted D

    “Sounds to me like FWB is both the stupidest aspect of today’s screwed up SMP and also just about the stupidist mistake a girl can make.”

    Exactly. I’d say from worst to least in terms of bad ideas:
    1. FWB
    2. ONS (believe it or not, I’d say that in terms of potential damage to pair bonding ability, a single ONS is probably less destructive than a FWB. One can hope there was some type of feeling with the “friend”, and that probably means a broken heart was the result)
    3. Serial monogamy

    Now, I’m talking single instance here. If we are talking about a string of ONS spanning months or years? Then ONS moves up to the top of the list. But, to be completely honest, I can see how a woman might get a single ONS in her past based on inexperience with men. But, she should “learn her lesson” that first time, so repeatedly shooting for the random hookup becomes a real issue.

    The problem with woman staying in a FWB situation is, it kinda implies that she is completely OK with being used for sex without anything in return, other than using someone for sex. A ONS *could* have been her way of trying to lock down a commitment that failed (no duh!), but you can’t deny what a FWB relationship is.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Olive

    To be fair, this is how things typically break down with INTJ.

    Susan: Here is a post I have written, and here is the provided data/research.

    INTJ: I think the claims/your claims are bogus, and the data/research is bogus as well.

    Susan: Okay, INTJ. Explain what is bogus, why it is bogus, and provide some of your own data/research to back up your claims.

    INTJ: I don’t feel the need to provide data for my claims. Your data is still bogus though.

    Susan: *bangs head against desk*

    INTJ has been asked repeatedly to provide some data/research of his own to back up his claims. I think he has provided data/research once or twice, which pales in comparison to the number of times that he has complained about Susan’s data/research. I’m with Megaman and Susan on this. Either he puts up or he shuts the hell up. Otherwise, things will remain tedious and annoying with him. I’m not surprised by or opposed to the flack he has been getting.

  • http://www.femaleframechanges.blogspot.com Olive

    Sassy,
    Yeah, I guess I get annoyed by tone more than anything else (that sort of goes along with my whole history here, it was ultimately Doug1’s tone I couldn’t stand). Also, Megaman once struck me as one of the most productive, generous male commenters here, and now that half his comments are spent getting on INTJ’s case about data, in a very unproductive manner, my high opinion has deteriorated. I mean, sometimes INTJ says exactly the same thing as Ted, or whoever, and the response is immediately “where do you get that idea? Do you have data?”

    INTJ,
    I guess the lesson here is: just don’t talk about “questionable” data, if you aren’t at least willing to spend a lot of time debunking a study’s design.

  • INTJ

    @ Sassy6519

    Susan: Okay, INTJ. Explain what is bogus, why it is bogus, and provide some of your own data/research to back up your claims.

    INTJ: I don’t feel the need to provide data for my claims. Your data is still bogus though.

    That’s a strawman though. Whether or not there is any better alternative data should not have any bearing on whether we should accept and use the existing data.

    To use a physics analogy, there might not be any good alternatives to String Theory, but that doesn’t mean String Theory should be accepted.

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

      @INTJ

      Whether or not there is any better alternative data should not have any bearing on whether we should accept and use the existing data.

      The problem, quite frankly, is that you are not qualified to call research bogus without investigating it. Otherwise it’s just willful ignorance and ill-informed opinion.

      I reject most studies and data for posts. I only write about those I feel have merit, after reading them thoroughly and considering the data very specifically. I am not a professional statistician, and I’m sure I have published some iffy studies, but by and large I am willing to stand by what I discuss here, unless I say otherwise.

      I don’t expect you to put in the same kind of time or work, obviously, but a snarky claim of bogosity is very frustrating after I’ve spent anywhere from 4-10 hours on a single post.

  • JP

    @INTJ:

    “To use a physics analogy, there might not be any good alternatives to String Theory, but that doesn’t mean String Theory should be accepted.”

    Where did you get the idea that there aren’t good alternatives to String Theory?

    Do you have any data to back up this “idea” of yours?

  • Ted D

    “I mean, sometimes INTJ says exactly the same thing as Ted, ”

    That is because great minds think alike!

    and also, I tend to phrase it more as “I don’t care what the data says, I see XYZ every day of my life…” I don’t necessarily dispute that the study got the results reported, I question if the study is valid at all. And, before we go into it, the issue is the data he and I would need isn’t available, because no one has the guts to ask the right questions.

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

      @Ted D

      I tend to phrase it more as “I don’t care what the data says, I see XYZ every day of my life…”

      Anecdotes is not the plural of data.

      I am not interested in sharing broad conclusions about the mating behaviors of pregnant teens in Pittsburgh. I am interested in understanding the SMP at a macro level, and providing the kind of information most useful to my target market: educated young men and women aged 18+.

      I guess this is a way of saying that I don’t care if you don’t care. I will continue to write what I care about.

  • INTJ

    @ Olive

    I guess the lesson here is: just don’t talk about “questionable” data, if you aren’t at least willing to spend a lot of time debunking a study’s design.

    I have made specific complaints about studies in the past. I gave up for two reasons, though. First, Susan holds that the studies she used, however faulty, and the best source of information, and I need to provide alternative studies rather than simply debunk them. While I disagree with this position, (I think direct observations and anecdotes provide valuable alternative information compared to studies that often say very little), I accept that this is the position Susan takes, and have provided alternative studies if and when I find any. Second, Megaman dumped a list of a few dozen studies and wanted me to go through every one of them and accept or debunk all of them individually. I had neither the time nor the inclination to do this.

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

      @INTJ

      (I think direct observations and anecdotes provide valuable alternative information compared to studies that often say very little)

      No social scientist will agree with you. Anecdote is a logical fallacy, and in the sphere it is downright dangerous, because confirmation bias is so extreme.

      There are studies that consist of in-depth interviews, and it is key that subjects are randomly selected. For example, PUAs telling stories about women in bars digging jerks are bound to be highly unreliable. If reliability cannot be insured or even addressed, the source is bad.

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    Where did you get the idea that there aren’t good alternatives to String Theory?

    Do you have any data to back up this “idea” of yours?

    I knew someone would bring this up. As of now, there is no theory that has been rigorously proven to reproduce the limits of both quantum mechanics and general relativity. Loop Quantum Gravity is a good candidate, but it’s as yet a work in progress.

    I think the analogy is fine, because rightly or wrongly, String Theorists claim that their theory is the best theory amongst the alternatives. That is a straw-man, since just because it is better than the alternatives doesn’t mean we should accept String Theory. It has some real problems that prevent us from accepting it.

  • Ted D

    “Megaman dumped a list of a few dozen studies and wanted me to go through every one of them and accept or debunk all of them individually. I had neither the time nor the inclination to do this.”

    Nor does anyone here at HUS have any claim on how we individually spend our time. If this was a blog about physics, I’d be behind Megaman 100% here, because there is plenty of hard data to use for such a discussion.

    The stuff we discuss here is not easy to define even WITH accurate data, and the issue to me (and INTJ I believe) is that the little data we have could very well be faulty, based simply on looking at the studies and how they were conducted. I don’t see any issue with discounting a study based on a faulty premise or on how it was conducted, without having another study on hand to prove my point. Why do I need counter data to call foul on someones research?

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

      @Ted D

      I don’t see any issue with discounting a study based on a faulty premise or on how it was conducted, without having another study on hand to prove my point. Why do I need counter data to call foul on someones research?

      That’s fair. Can you think of one single instance where you discounted a study only after evaluating its premise and methodology? I can’t.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Sassy: “I’d say that a FWB situation is only viable for a woman if she is truly capable of separating feelings from sex.”

    Yes, that’s what I saw. And if suits them that way, that’s fine with me, there’s no need to call them name, as long as they don’t keep a boyfriend they lie to on the side.

    “I do believe there are women out there who want and thrive in FWB situations. I think they are the minority, however.”

    Yes, I totally agree. In the end, I think that most women that indulge in multi partnerships are more testing the water than looking for sex thrills. Well, if they can do both, there’s nothing wrong with it either, as long as they come out of it emotionally unscathed.

  • JP

    @INTJ:

    I was joking…but now that we are discussing string theory (yet another now-popular HUS topic)…

    What are the real problems with string theory?

    I’m a fan of mirror Calabi-Yau manifolds myself.

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

    @Susan:

    I once talked about Calabi-Yau manifolds at a party because I had a bit too much to drink. My wife still reminds me about my adventures that evening.

    I vowed to myself “never again”.

  • INTJ

    @ Lokland

    Why not include the mating and skip the emotional pair bonding?

    They are not interconnected (yet when you do pair bond, sex is the best way to show your love, funny how that works).

    I think I might do that. I could always avoid emotional investment to avoid getting hurt, and then escalate emotionally if and when the likelihood of a permanent relationship goes up.

    This goes back to why the Golden Rule should be ditched. I’ve always avoided mating without emotional pair-bonding because I would not be interested in a woman who has mated without emotional pair-bonding. But of course, women care very little (if at all), about a male’s sexual history, so there is no reason for me to follow the Golden Rule here.

  • Sassy6519

    @ INTJ

    That’s a strawman though. Whether or not there is any better alternative data should not have any bearing on whether we should accept and use the existing data.

    To use a physics analogy, there might not be any good alternatives to String Theory, but that doesn’t mean String Theory should be accepted.

    I forgot to mention that you also say this.

    INTJ: Susan, I think your data/research is bogus. Here is how I think the SMP really works. *Insert INTJ’s opinions on how the SMP works*

    Susan: Okay, provide some data/research to back up how you you view the SMP.

    INTJ: I don’t feel like looking up data.

    You say Susan’s data/research is bogus, offer your own ideas about the SMP, then don’t provide any data/research to back up your assertions. You basically take massive dumps on Susan’s work, claim it’s wrong, offer your own opinions, then you don’t offer any research.

    At this point, what Susan has provided is the best that we can go off of. If you believe that what she offers isn’t good, fine. If you suggest other ways, and want people to seriously jump on board with them, back up your assertions with data. Since you can’t seem to do that, why should we listen to you? Susan’s data may not be “the best”, in your opinion, but it’s better than nothing and more than you have provided us.

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    What are the real problems with string theory?

    They seem to be creating extra dimensions for the purposes of unification, when there is no experimental reason to do so. Basically, they’re creating a model for how they think the universe should work, and then running with it.

    Keep in mind of course that theoretical physics is outside my scope of knowledge. I’m an applied physicist, and while I have studied quantum mechanics and special relativity in depth, I have not studied general relativity and don’t know the actual mathematical formulations of String Theory, Quantum Loop Gravity, etc. (though I think these mathematical behemoths are difficult to grasp for even the best theoreticians).

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

      I’m an applied physicist

      Really? My brother had to get a doctorate to call himself that. Do you mean that you are a physics major?

  • Tasmin

    @Esc
    “Sounds to me like FWB is both the stupidest aspect of today’s screwed up SMP and also just about the stupidist mistake a girl can make.”
    +1
    The FWB relationship seems to be the hybrid state of hookup culture and dating. Unlike a random hookup or ONS, the FWB is a relationship, a dynamic agreement with highly subjective and variant levels of investment. With the price of sex bottoming out it and the sentiment that real dating is difficult, time consuming, and too often disappointing, it makes sense that the FWB would actually *appear* to be a pretty good deal.

    There is just enough potential for *more* than just sex to entice those with a relationship mindset and for the non-relationship minded person with a no-strings preference, once established the barrier-to-entry is actually lower than that of pursuing a ONS, all while emotional investment is essentially a violation of the agreement.

    While I’ve never been in one, I’ve seen plenty, and while the SMV delta as Mike C suggests is probably quite common, I think the situation entraps people with bait that has a much further reach than just the ability to play over your head.

    Ever hear guys say “women have needs too”, “she’s a mature woman with her own needs” or women say “I’ve got needs” and the like? Somewhere along the line, the “Equality” and “Empowerment” indoctrination has elevated this notion of “needs” (sex) as merely an itch to be scratched. Rationalizing the act as a “need” or serving someone else’s “need” helps keep it compartmentalized and appear rather egalitarian. The reality of course is that its a classic arrangement of favoring the short-term over the long-term with incredibly high opportunity costs. It is very rarely a win-win, particularly when those hidden costs begin to surface over time.

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    The stuff we discuss here is not easy to define even WITH accurate data, and the issue to me (and INTJ I believe) is that the little data we have could very well be faulty, based simply on looking at the studies and how they were conducted. I don’t see any issue with discounting a study based on a faulty premise or on how it was conducted, without having another study on hand to prove my point. Why do I need counter data to call foul on someones research?

    Exactly. My original point (the one which started Megaman’s crusade) was that there is too little data from which meaningful conclusions can be drawn for the relationship stuff we’re discussing here, and that we shouldn’t have an over-reliance on studies.

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

      My original point (the one which started Megaman’s crusade) was that there is too little data from which meaningful conclusions can be drawn for the relationship stuff we’re discussing here, and that we shouldn’t have an over-reliance on studies.

      False. The science of relationships is a burgeoning field, and many experts are highly respected and well-established. There are debates even within the various disciplines, and I have highlighted some of them.

      As my Definitive Survey post this summer demonstrated, there is now a large number of studies examining the sexual and relationship behavior of college students. They are remarkably consistent – findings have been replicated many times over. We really do know who is having sex and how often on campus. Continued denial really does look like cowering in fear of having one’s biases exposed.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Slight tangent, but I find the title of “Archdruid” giggle-worthy, as I have a level 90 druid in WoW. :P

    Re: FWB being The Dumbest Mistake… what about becoming a single mother?

  • JP

    @INTJ:

    ” I’m an applied physicist, and while I have studied quantum mechanics and special relativity in depth, I have not studied general relativity and don’t know the actual mathematical formulations of String Theory, Quantum Loop Gravity, etc. (though I think these mathematical behemoths are difficult to grasp for even the best theoreticians).”

    Any thoughts on quantum entanglement?

    It seems like you need the extra dimensions to explain the fact that these effects are not affected by distance.

    Meaning that if you push on one end of the box, the other end moves even if it’s 20 light years away.

    http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/140739-stanfords-quantum-entanglement-device-brings-us-one-step-closer-to-quantum-cryptography

    This is why I don’t necessarily answer the question “what are you thinking about” when my wife asks me.

    She really doesn’t want to hear the phrase “Quantum Cryptography” even though that is one of my current periodic trains of thought.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Hope: “The Dumbest Mistake… what about becoming a single mother?”
    What about another way to look at the same question: Are single mothers really happy?

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    that is an easy one. Because people like myself value the emotional pair bonding part of “sex” more than the act itself. Sex without emotion to me is wasting time and energy for very little, while increasing risks of STDs.

    Yup. I can’t say for sure, not having actually done it, but I doubt I’d get too much enjoyment out of no emotions sex. At the same time though, if it’s a requirement to move from the “dating” to “marriage is in our future” stage, I’ll do it, and accept whatever carnal enjoyment I can manage.

  • Ted D

    Sassy – “If you suggest other ways, and want people to seriously jump on board with them, back up your assertions with data. Since you can’t seem to do that, why should we listen to you? ”

    No one said you had to listen to INTJ at all. You can tl;dr him all you want, and I bet he won’t be offended.

    Just throwing that out there…

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

      No one said you had to listen to INTJ at all. You can tl;dr him all you want, and I bet he won’t be offended.

      I’m offended, and that is what counts. :)

  • Ted D

    INTJ – “At the same time though, if it’s a requirement to move from the “dating” to “marriage is in our future” stage, I’ll do it, and accept whatever carnal enjoyment I can manage.”

    But keep this in mind. IF you decide to go this route, and a relationship doesn’t develop from it, who lost? I mean, if you indeed get nothing from casual sex, maybe no harm or foul. But, what if you HATE it? What if it makes you feel like total and utter shit?

    Here is the thing, I get where you and guys like Cooper are coming from. If most relationships seem to start from hookups, then why not? Well, ask yourself: will you truly be good with yourself in 10 years when your N is 10? 20? 30?! Because if at the end of the line you find the love of your life but sold your soul to find her, did you really get what you wanted?

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    Any thoughts on quantum entanglement?

    It seems like you need the extra dimensions to explain the fact that these effects are not affected by distance.

    There’s a loophole there. The Everett relative-state-theory (which is often referred to as the Many-Worlds-Interpretation) actually solves the whole thing.

    You’ll have to trust me it solves it for now. The theory is somewhat mindbending, but bug me in a few days if you’re curious. With the grad school applications I’m doing right now, I don’t have the time to apply the brainpower required.

  • Cooper

    What exactly is INTJ arguing, that doesn’t have data?

  • JP

    @Cooper:

    “What exactly is INTJ arguing, that doesn’t have data?”

    See #762.

    Specifically, the Everett relative-state-theory.

    I like mirror Calabi-Yau manifolds because they are pretty and I like mirror symmetry, so I’m on Team String Theory.

    Are you with me or INTJ here?

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    Here is the thing, I get where you and guys like Cooper are coming from. If most relationships seem to start from hookups, then why not? Well, ask yourself: will you truly be good with yourself in 10 years when your N is 10? 20? 30?! Because if at the end of the line you find the love of your life but sold your soul to find her, did you really get what you wanted?

    Honestly, I’m really torn on this. My inclination has always been to stick to my guns, and that’s what I’ve done so far. Because every time I consider giving in, I wonder “What if things are going to work out without the need for me to compromise? I’ll have compromised for nothing.” But then I worry I’m like the woman who can’t settle down because she’s always worried she can do better.

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    Specifically, the Everett relative-state-theory.

    I like mirror Calabi-Yau manifolds because they are pretty and I like mirror symmetry, so I’m on Team String Theory.

    Are you with me or INTJ here?

    ROFL!

  • INTJ

    @ Cooper

    What exactly is INTJ arguing, that doesn’t have data?

    Well the last incident involved me saying that prior to getting married in their late 20s, college women who don’t opt out of relationships tend to get relationships with guys who’re high on the asshole spectrum.

    Of course, no one has done a direct study into whether this is or isn’t the case.

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

      @INTJ

      Well the last incident involved me saying that prior to getting married in their late 20s, college women who don’t opt out of relationships tend to get relationships with guys who’re high on the asshole spectrum.

      Of course, no one has done a direct study into whether this is or isn’t the case.

      We have lots of good information, all cited here before, that demonstrates clearly this isn’t the case:

      1. In Paula England’s survey of more than 20,000 college students, 74 percent of women and about an equal number of men say they’ve had a relationship in college that lasted at least six months.

      2. Also England: About 66 percent of women say they wanted their most recent hookup to turn into something more, but 58 percent of men say the same—not a vast difference.

      Therefore…74% of women have demonstrably not opted out of relationships, and more than half of those hooking up want one.

      3. After college, both women and men date with the express purpose of entering relationships. With a mean age of 28 at first marriage, it seems reasonable to assume that women are dating with the specific intent to marry by the age of 25 or 26, and probably date for an LTR before that.

      Therefore…most women don’t opt out of relationships in their 20s.

      4. Guys who are high on the asshole spectrum are generally short-term maters, they don’t seek LTRs, nor are they any good at maintaining them.

      Therefore…it is highly unlikely that many college women are in relationships with assholes.

      A direct study is not needed if we can piece together the facts sitting right in front of us.

  • Cooper

    “Are you with me or INTJ here?”

    Haha, no clue.

    Though I thought the scientific theories were just an example of straw-man argument.
    I’m wondering what it is that Sassy and Olive were referring to, when they say INTJ says Susan’s data is bogus.

    What is the claim?

  • Escoffier

    You win, Hope, that is indeed dumber.

  • Lokland

    @Damien

    “whether you’re talking about corruption in the business world or getting sex from gullible targets is not something you want to indefinetly pursue in life…”

    Theres a huge difference between taking advantage of an opportunity offered and going about creating opportunities at the expense of others.

    Hi want a $100. Sure

    Is different than

    Give me $100 or I’ma steal your kitten.

    If someone opens themselves up to attack, it might be unethical to take a shot but meh…I’ll take it anyway.

    @Mike C

    “Very often in FWB situations you have a substantial SMV differential. ”

    I disagree here.
    I had two during undergrad that spanned 1 semester-ish.
    SMVs were pretty equal.

    But I was also offering intimacy because I needed that myself. They probably saw it as a boyfriend gesture no matter how vehemently I said otherwise.

  • Lokland

    @Olive

    I thought so,
    You also have elf ears right?

    Pardon, I promise I’m not creeping you, just have a good memory.

    Also, Hope is correct. Genetic councillor few, not sure what that entails in the States but good luck.

  • INTJ

    @ Cooper

    Haha, no clue.

    Though I thought the scientific theories were just an example of straw-man argument.
    I’m wondering what it is that Sassy and Olive were referring to, when they say INTJ says Susan’s data is bogus.

    What is the claim?

    Well for one thing I disagree that the 80/20 claim has necessarily been debunked by survey data. Susan’s hypothesis, which is consistent with the data, is that unrestricteds are pairing up with unrestricteds while restricteds pair up with restricteds. I have an alternative hypothesis – that the 80/20 rule holds for both genders – with what little sexual experience the average male manages being with sluts, and whatever relationships the average female manages being with alpha asshats.

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

      @INTJ

      I have an alternative hypothesis – that the 80/20 rule holds for both genders – with what little sexual experience the average male manages being with sluts, and whatever relationships the average female manages being with alpha asshats.

      This is interesting, let’s explore this!

      I recall that you have shared anecdotes that your STEM friends have had sex with sluts.

      We know that around 15% or less of college students, both male and female, are promiscuous. Therefore, they can either:

      1. Be having sex with each other, in keeping with their unrestricted orientation.

      2. Be having sex with people of opposite orientation. That is, alpha asshats are avoiding sluts at events like frat parties, and seeking out average females in class, the cafeteria, gym, etc. Can you explain why the P&D’er would be willing to invest time and energy is seducing a restricted female when he socializes with unrestricted females?

      At the same time, according to your hypothesis, sluts are avoiding alpha asshats and finding Comp Sci majors and the like for sex. Can you explain the role of female hypergamy here? What are the incentives for an unrestricted female to invest time and energy is seducing virgin males?

      I’m also curious how you explain the existing relationships on college campuses. Are the boyfriends alpha asshats? If so, what makes them so? If they’re monogamous and emotionally intimate, what makes them asshats? And if they’re asshats or players, why would they consent to a LTR?

  • Lokland

    @INTJ

    “I’ve always avoided mating without emotional pair-bonding because I would not be interested in a woman who has mated without emotional pair-bonding.”

    You haven’t avoided mating without emotional pair bonding.
    Until you’ve started mating you can’t really be avoiding or searching for emotional pair bonding.

  • INTJ