Dear Susan,
I have been hooking up with a guy consistently for four months. It started out that we both wanted a friends-with-benefits situation, and we would basically hang out, do homework, etc., and of course hook up, but that was it. He made it very clear to me that he wasn’t into me further than a physical relationship and that he was on a break with his gf, so he still had feelings for her. I didn’t really have them for him either, though. I just thought he was attractive and fun, so perfect hookup material.
Throughout these four months, I helped him deal with his gf calling things quits and I have been tutoring him in school, and we have become overall closer friends. He even told me that I am his best girl friend and that he trusts me more than any other girl he knows.
Recently he has started acting really sweet to me and like he wants something more:
- He gets really upset when I need to leave him and always finds excuses to spend more time with me.
- He also has started wanting to go out on what I would usually consider to be “dates”, and he pays for me.
- He has been calling me beautiful and gorgeous a lot and he gives me random unexpected compliments much more often.
- The other day I awoke from a nap we were taking and he was holding me in his arms and just watching me sleep.
- He even mentioned that his mom (yes, I met his parents, but in a “just-friends” situation) thinks I am really pretty and that I seem like quite a catch, and he regards his parent’s opinions very highly.
- He also always makes comments about how he could see us being married in the future, but he does it in a joking way of course.
- He even wants to do more couple-ish things together, like cook and learn more about each other’s lives.
Basically, I feel like these are all signs of him falling for me as more than a FWB, but am I just fooling myself? Could he just be doing this because he is single and bored/lonely? Even though he pays for me now, he has never said anything about it being a “date”, and he has never tried to hold my hand or kiss me in public.
I just don’t get why he is trying to be so much more involved with me if he knows he could still hook up with me without putting in the time and monetary investment. So I am pretty much just confused about whether he actually is developing feelings for me or if I am just getting my hopes up for no reason.
Thanks,
Hopeful But Confused
Dear Hopeful,
What jumps out at me immediately from your letter is the fact that you obviously have strong feelings for this guy and hope that the two of you can become a couple. I wonder why you ever thought that “attractive and fun” was perfect hookup material, rather than relationship material? You say that you just were looking for a FWB, but I don’t understand what the benefits of that arrangement were. If you really weren’t interested in a relationship, you wouldn’t have developed feelings for him, right? But it sounds like you fell for him anyway, which is what usually happens in FWB – someone catches feelings. Sometimes both people do, but it’s much more common for one person to get hurt.
I agree with your perception that his recent actions appear to signal increased interest in spending time together, and a more emotionally intimate relationship. It may well be that he does like you and wants to make something work. There are several things I think you need to be concerned about:
- Is he truly over his ex?
- I share your worry that he is lonely and adrift right now, enjoying your company. Is he just biding his time with his great FWB until he falls for someone new, or is he trying to make this something more?
- He has relied on you for support, both emotional and academic. Does he feel that he owes you in some way? Can it be that he has picked up on your feelings for him, and is responding in a way that pleases you?
One of the most common mistakes women make is that they read too much into the time they spend with a guy. A guy can spend a whole weekend with you, cook meals together, laugh together, be passionate – do all the things that feel like being in love to a woman – and have absolutely zero emotional investment. If he is in a “no relationship” mindset, or views you as FWB material only, he can enjoy your company and the sex without any worries that you might get hurt, because these are the terms you both agreed to.
It’s time to stop guessing and ask him directly. You don’t need to make a big confrontation out of it, you could just say something like, “You’ve really been acting different lately, what’s up?” to get the conversation going. Because you like him, you need to find out asap whether the feeling is mutual. If not, you need to get out right away.
There’s an article in The Atlantic today about a new study of FWB relationships, Romance Trumps Friends with Benefits. (H/T: Stuart Schneiderman). Researchers from Harvard, Syracuse and Purdue conducted an online survey of college females, half in FWB and half in traditional romantic relationships. Their findings:
| Friends with Benefits | Traditional Romantic | |
| Total # sexual partners | 6.4 | 1.9 |
| Frequency of sex | Lower | Higher |
| Non-sexual time spent | Less | More |
| Satisfaction with relationship | Lower | Higher |
| Comfort expressing needs and desires | Lower | Higher |
| Comfort setting relationship boundaries | Lower | Higher |
| Discussion of other sexual partners | Higher | Lower |
| Condom use | Higher | Lower |
I don’t find most of these findings surprising, but am particularly struck by the difference in sexual history between women in FWBs and women who are dating. This suggests, at least to me, that the casual, no-strings nature of a friends with benefits arrangement leads to faster dissolution of those relationships and increased likelihood of entering additional casual relationships, leading to partner counts for women more than triple the women in relationships.
If you were cut out for casual it wouldn’t matter, but you are not satisfied, you want a traditional, romantic relationship. So why don’t you get one? If not with this guy, with some other guy. As long as “attractive and fun” doesn’t mean “unavailable,” there are many other guys out there.
Like so many women who try to do the FWB thing, you’ve found that it doesn’t really work. We are not meant to relate to other human beings in a strictly sexual way. We want emotional intimacy. I recommend that you not settle for anything less in future.
Hope this helps,
Susan
{ 832 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 2 3 4 … 6 »
@Iggles
“If that’s the case then men who give off the “boyfriend vibe” need to say, “Hey, I’m going to do couple stuff with you because I enjoy them too, but I have no intentions of actually being your boyfriend. Alright, cool!” *pours bottle of wine*”
Two questions, because this whole “boyfriend/girlfriend vibe” concept is a really slippery slope that people of both genders use to excuse themselves of self-responsibility:
1) What constitutes a concrete definition of “couples stuff” to both parties early in dating?
2) When does “couples stuff” stop being metaphorical and become the act of doing things as an actual couple?
Not really, Zach, though I can understand your reaction. Internet, tone and all that…nonetheless, I had a point that you are ignoring.
You can believe me or not, but my point to you is that your behavior, intentional or not (and I did use that terminology in my OP), does not take into consideration its effect on others and that continued behavior of that sort is very harmful–to yourself and others. I attempted to show you how it leads people on. Again, you can believe or not, but what I said is going to be true for all but the most jaded of women. A continued pattern of that sort of action, once you’ve been made aware, IS indeed “honest assholery.” It’s your choice to make, your character development at stake. And the quality of women you attract? We’ve discussed your desire to attract “realtionship quality women” here. An intelligent, relationship quality woman will not want to be with someone who has a history of FWB/”she let me use her” relationships.
Take it as motherly advice or ignore it, but be honest with yourself that indulging in bonding behaviors with people is going to facilitate bonds that you may not want and then take some responsibility for that. If some girl falls for you because you fed and fucked her, take it as a fact of human existence, not her stupidity or inability to stay with an agreement. Don’t pretend you’re just an innocent bystander. You have agency here, what you do creates an impresion on other women in your environment and people will react to it in ways that influence your other relationships. That’s a fact.
Sorry, it that hurts you or if you resent it. It’s just honest feedback.
@J
“people also need to mindful or their effects on others. Someone else’s stupidity is NOT license to take advantage of them, nor can you morally absolve yourself because of it. You need to own your behaviour.”
No, people really don’t.
If the person receives no ill effect from their treatment of others there is no reason to alter their behaviour.
Doing so might be a bad idea for themselves because they might end up worse off than they were prior.
Again, there is no need for moral absolution when there is no consequence. Double that if the person does not fear burning in hell.
If there is absolutely NO REASON not to do something that will forward yourself other than the harm it does someone else, people are gonna do it.
Which is why you must learn to protect yourself.
Any other nonsense about how its the other persons fault for taking advantage of you is merely whining.
@Lokland:
“No, people really don’t.
If the person receives no ill effect from their treatment of others there is no reason to alter their behaviour.”
The funny thing is that life is ultimately fair as time approaches infinity.
Actions have consequnces.
When you pick up one end of the stick, you pick up the other end.
That’s just a feature of existence.
You can deny that feature, but it won’t make that feature go away.
See gravity for details.
It takes time to identify an asshole. I was friend with assholes once without realising that they were assholes – and I think I qualify as stronly anti-assholic
Well that is different I meant if a guy knows another man is an asshole and still seeks out his company a part of him must agree that assholessness is not that bad after all,so declaring himself a good guy is moot,he is just an asshole of lower expression,YMMV.
Condom jokes time!
You know you have a though crowd when no one follows this to share more jokes.
To the average man, this is NOT leading anyone on.
Isn’t this like the average girl not knowing that her male friends want to sex her up? I didn’t heard any male saying is not her fault that he wants to be more than friends when all she offered was friendship and he agreed, did you?
@Lokland:
Everybody, soon or late, sits down to a banquet of consequences.
- Robert Lewis Stevenson
It’s a feature, not a bug.
To the folks suggesting that Zach and the guy in the post are giving mixed messages to their FWBs,
Consider that a FWB arrangement is sort of an imitation relationship, without the label (friendship + sex, how is that not at least a pseudo-relationship?). The FWB is really about benefits for the guy, who can enjoy relationship-like bonding with a girl but stay open to other options as well. Any girl who gets into a FWB situation is basically an idiot (and I say that having been in one before) because she’s essentially giving sex without the expectation of exclusivity, and that is HER mistake.
I think someone upthread suggested that FWB arrangements are basically a way for lower SMV girls to create sort-of relationships with higher SMV guys, the sacrifice being the exclusivity. I would take that even further, and suggest that the girl makes the arrangement often hoping to “convince” or “convert” the guy to a relationship mindset, by showing him how good a relationship-like situation can be. I can tell you for a fact that when I arranged a FWB situation with my ex four years ago, deep down there was a part of me hoping he would finally take me back.
@Anacaona
“Isn’t this like the average girl not knowing that her male friends want to sex her up? I didn’t heard any male saying is not her fault that he wants to be more than friends when all she offered was friendship and he agreed, did you?”
Actually, read my last few posts. I said exactly that about “nice guys”.
Though women are more likely to catch feelings for their FWB men can also and get attached and then she moves on. That’s happened to me before. I think I’m more on the romantic side of things. I have also had the more typical thing happen where the woman really liked or fell in love with me but I didn’t.
@Lokland
No, JP and R.L. Stevenson are right. NOTHING you do is without consequence.
Don’t let it drive you crazy. But recognize it as a fact of life. You either touch others for good or you touch others for ill. You can’t get away without touching them.
Good on you for being so well-intentioned. I do think you are exceptionally reasonable based on reading you here.
Thank you. I appreciate being visible to you.
But you are just that: exceptional,
In the ‘sphere, I guess so. IRL, I’m not so sure.
and you are years into a loving marriage judging by what youve wrote here.
I see young couples, usually kids of friends heading in the same direction. It gives me hope for my own kids.
because I think most people in my generation would agree that not much is owed either party in an early dating situation
I think once people have sex, they open a can of worms and expectations. That’s not generational. What is generational is the expectation that no one is supposed to be hurt when in fact they are.
Well, if I throw a fluffy stuffed duck at somebody in anger and it hits them straight in the stomach with it’s fluffy soft duckness, causing their tummy to jiggle a wee bit, there really isn’t likely to be much in the way of bad consequences.
So, there’s a common sense component here, kind of like the golden rule fiasco earlier.
“Tell that to the NYC police officer that simply suggested woman should stop dressing provocatively in an area with a known, active rapist on the loose. ”
If it’s the incident I’m thinking of last summer… There were tons of flyers posted, etc., because the guy targeted women in the “trendy” neighborhood known as Park Slope. This neighborhood has TONS of “progressive” yuppies, etc., so they shouldn’t be indicative of the entire population of women (even though they’re pretty safe normally).
I know women were reminded not to wear short skirts, as a perp can easily bend them over and rip off their underwear. So its “easy access” clothing, not just because the clothing is provocative. It is safer to wear exposed cleavage over a short skirt and no tights. I remember hearing “welllll its hot outside, I want to dress this way blah blah”. I believe one of the women assaulted was also ridiculously drunk outside at 2am.
Now, a cop saying that about East Flatbush, which is so unsafe that women can be assaulted on their way home from church or in their nurses uniform would be a completely different story…..
@Lokland
What JP said in #154, 156.
It’s just the way it is, really.
@JP–Dude, you are fcuking brilliant!
Don’t let it drive you crazy. But recognize it as a fact of life. You either touch others for good or you touch others for ill. You can’t get away without touching them./i>
Yes, exactly. Very well said!
I know women were reminded not to wear short skirts, as a perp can easily bend them over and rip off their underwear. So its “easy access” clothing, not just because the clothing is provocative. It is safer to wear exposed cleavage over a short skirt and no tights. I remember hearing “welllll its hot outside, I want to dress this way blah blah”. I believe one of the women assaulted was also ridiculously drunk outside at 2am.
She was stupid, but the guy who assaulted her is still guilty of assault. Neither should be surprised at what happened though.
@J
LMAO at your shower scenario. One lesson I have learned: If a woman is really not in the mood for sex, she can reduce her chances of having it by not stripping in front of her husband.
“I think someone upthread suggested that FWB arrangements are basically a way for lower SMV girls to create sort-of relationships with higher SMV guys, the sacrifice being the exclusivity.”
Or girls who live in a population where men refuse to commit because of a shortage…say…college campuses.
Anyone who hasn’t seen average betas bag FWB never went to an Arts school.
LMAO at your shower scenario. One lesson I have learned: If a woman is really not in the mood for sex, she can reduce her chances of having it by not stripping in front of her husband
LOL. Whoduh thought?
Just to emphasize this to anyone who isn’t reading the thread careful– this is a made up example, not something I did.
@J
“In the ‘sphere, I guess so. IRL, I’m not so sure.”
You need to keep this in mind. The ‘sphere’ seems to overstate some things from what limited corners of it I’ve read, but they’re not wrong or even far from the mark about everything (in fact they’re getting at the truth a good amount of the time based on my real world experience). They tend to overstate the unreasonable behavior we are talking a out because the type of guy who ends up there typically has been subjected to this side of women for a variety of reasons, the most important of which being that many women in my generation can’t respect a guy they couldn’t in some world be attracted to. The rest of us don’t find it shocking because we learned to deal with it before we ever saw it described in writing (or just got to a level where we rarely provoke any of the more questionable instincts women have). But make no mistake, I have seen the way women tend to treat certain types of men, but you know what? I don’t see any mass consequence waiting in the wings for young women who behave badly to guys in innocuous ways (shit testing), so why bitch about it? That is why I lean towards people controlling what they can control and not making some huge moral crusade out of the rest.
“She was stupid, but the guy who assaulted her is still guilty of assault. Neither should be surprised at what happened though.”
Absolutely J! Without question he is guilty.
But we don’t go to dark alley’s while drunk, flashing hundred dollar bills and listening to our iPods at 3am. That’s the same as walking around drunk at 2am with a miniskirt and high heels you can’t run away in. In both cases, the rapist/criminal is guilty, but there are things we can do to lessen our chances of assault.
Girls need to know how they can help lessen their chances of being assaulted too (without guilty feminists reminding them that they can “wear what they want”, and party as hard as they want), imho.
@Joe
“NOTHING you do is without consequence.”
Your gonna have to point out where I said otherwise.
I did say that if the consequences for someone else are bad whilst being good for myself, I see no reason to exploit another persons voluntary idiocy.
“Don’t let it drive you crazy. But recognize it as a fact of life. You either touch others for good or you touch others for ill. You can’t get away without touching them.”
Of course.
I have no problem with doing ill if it does good to me on the condition that the person wants me to do ill to them.
There is no need for moral absolution as I don’t feel bad and theres no god in my world.
Girls need to know how they can help lessen their chances of being assaulted too (without guilty feminists reminding them that they can “wear what they want”, and party as hard as they want), imho.
Absolutely, that’s why I said, “She was stupid…” She wasn’t mindful of her environment, and environment has a way of trumping any real or imagined rights a person thinks they have.
My younger son thinks he has the right to go out of town on a Greyhound bus that also serves a federal prison to play music with some friends. He wants to carry with him an expensive bass, an equally expensinve guitar and two amps. He will wear his expensive jacket and carry cash. I told him that when someone cracks his skull open so they can take his stuff, I will write on his tombstone, “He had the right.”
You can bitch about rights all you want; you just can’t make other people respect them.
They tend to overstate the unreasonable behavior we are talking a out because the type of guy who ends up there typically has been subjected to this side of women for a variety of reasons,
Yeah, I know a lot of guys feel this way. I would never suggest hat every girl out there is an angel. I just worry that the level of rhetoric overshadows the good that’s out there too.
the most important of which being that many women in my generation can’t respect a guy they couldn’t in some world be attracted to.
That will have huge consequences for the women as well. We live in a society where the basic respect that people should have for one another has eroded and that affects us all in ways we aren’t even conscious of most of the time.
@Intj
“Wow, just watched that girlwriteswhat link. I’ve always considered her to be a rational voice in the men’s rights movement. But until today, I hadn’t realized just how brilliant she is. First rate mind right there.”
Yes!
I keep mentioning her as she is most impressive.
I hope that she does write her book. (she has previously written *cough* adult *cough* fiction).
@Lokland
Okay. It’s implicit in your statement:
I’m point out that there is no such thing as “no consequence” when you’re talking about human beings.
As for this:
Lokland, my man, I have two masters degrees in the “hard sciences”, and I have no idea what you mean.
I suspect the problem we’re going to have communicating isn’t because there is no god is your world. Please don’t take me as trying to psychoanalyze you now, because I don’t know you. But my observations say that, in general, atheists replace god in their worlds with their own egos (ego in the Freudian sense). The term moral absolution can never have the same meaning for me as it does for them.
Sometimes reading these threads really reminds me to go home and tell my husband how much I appreciate him and what a great man he is.
J, that is why family and true friends are so valuable. They’re about the only people left in this individualistic, mercenary, man-eat-man world who will care for us.
I hope your sons realize what a great mother they have!
Ion,
Right. A guy in that environment will have an inflated SMV. You know, scarcity leads to increased demand/inflated price and all that…
So I am having sex with a girl, but I also go out to dinner with her, and I bake cupcakes with her, and read a book with her, and maybe I might go see her family a few times.
Sounds like a friend.
With “benefits.”
I do understand the confusion, but it doesn’t mean “boyfriend.” Much like you can have a girlfriend you don’t want to marry, you can be friends with a girl you don’t want to make a girlfriend.
I hope your sons realize what a great mother they have!
Oh, sweetie, thank you. That made my day.
@Iggles, re: doing “couple stuff” outside of being in a relationship
“But for most women, and on HUS, many of men agree this all behavior that fosters intimacy and bonding of couples.”
Without discussing whether these things *should* be, the fact is there *are* taking place outside of relationship.
That’s why I continue to highlight the vocalization. (DTR)
Whether we all agree or not, the reality is guys consider certain things “fun” and that they shouldn’t indicate a exclusive relationship – not all, but some do.
I think girls are overlooking this, whether they disagree or not.
Namely because what as initially agreed upon! If the guy says “I don’t want a relationship” then acts all “coupley” and seems like he must want a relationship – he probably hasn’t changed his mind on what he said.
Look at like this,
I think some girls are counting “couple stuff” as if they count!
1. He says “I don’t want a relationship” – Score: -2
2. We see each other more days a week than not – Score: +1
3. We do “coupley” things, like cookcookies together – Score: +1
4. He introduced me to his parents – Score: +1
5. He gets upset when we can’t spend more time together – Score: +1
6. So on and so on. +,+,+
When in reality the guy explicitly said 1. and in his mind the rest is harmless fun. And the real score goes as follows:
1. -1
2. 0
3. 0
4. nil
5. 0, 0, 0, 0, so on and so on.
Im not saying it its necessarily right or wrong, but certianly it is how some guys view it.
There is no need for moral absolution as I don’t feel bad and theres no god in my world.
Newton’s third law: every action has equal reaction in the opposite direction.
First Law of Thermodynamics: Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only altered in form.
Sometimes reading these threads really reminds me to go home and tell my husband how much I appreciate him and what a great man he is.
This threads showed me that my husband is not only the best man I have ever meet but he is the best man I will ever meet. My hope is that my son is the second best man I will ever meet after hubby.
@Anacanoa:
“Newton’s third law: every action has equal reaction in the opposite direction.
First Law of Thermodynamics: Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only altered in form.”"
Except that I’m pretty sure that ultimately the system is open and not closed.
This works for chemical engineering, though.
This is effing brilliant. I’m thinking a post with this in some sort of graphic form! Any ideas?
@J:
“That will have huge consequences for the women as well. We live in a society where the basic respect that people should have for one another has eroded and that affects us all in ways we aren’t even conscious of most of the time.”
It might, but those consequences won’t be evenly distributed, nor will all the bullies in this case be punished, in large part because a lot of people (even myself to a degree) will find their own way around the maze because it’s easier to do that than sit around complaining, and even more people (men, also including myself lol) don’t have the time or the inclination to try to deal with every isolated case.
People here have been making a moral case regarding the responsibilities of two parties in a FWB arrangement, but what I see is that they are injecting their own morality into interpreting a situation in which two separate moral perspectives are at play, and there is enough of a gray area that both have merit. There is so much subjectiveness as to make it almost moot. It could similarly be argued that female hypergamy and solipsism are both not explicitly “right” in a moral sense. Think about it- wanting only those that stand above your standing in life? Not really fair to those who are your actual peers. Instinctively viewing most everything through your own lens? I don’t even need to explain how that can go awry. Shit testing? We’ve been over that. All of the above have been the root of a lot of shitty behavior, but we accept them as right (and remember that our host does too after much heated debate), because in the end, in a situation with unclear moral boundaries, a lot depends on whose lens you are viewing it through.
@cooper
But his situation has changed since he said that, and his behavior changed right along with his situation changing. Also, you left out cuddling for hours, talking about marriage and taking long afternoon naps in eachother embrace.
If he isn’t interested in a relationship, he is compulsively engaging in behavior that will trigger those feelings in her, because it feels very good to share those feelings and bask in them. If he doesn’t want an exclusive relationship, what he really seems to mean by FWB is “we will develop deep and profound feelings for each other bordering on love, and I will bask in them and enjoy the warmth of your undying affection, but I will not be exclusive to you in my affections.” He’s obviously getting off on the fact that the emotional connection between them is way beyond what we would think of as FWB.
Again, I postulate that this compulsion for guys to behave in ways with women that cultivate this outcome is probably because nature gave us men instinctual bonding behaviors that help build harems (for guys who have the SMV to do it). Having her emotionally bonded to you is much more likely to keep her loyal to your dick.
I remember, back when I was single and mild hockey hair was still ok, cudling and all that all evening with a woman after having sex with her for the 3rd or fourth time in our relationship, enjoying how much she enjoyed it and feeling good about myself, then the next day I thought “What am I doing? I don’t want this to get too serious.” So I broke it off so as not to lead her on . She just couldn’t understand how I could be deeply affectionate like that but not want the relationship. I’m thinking “Well, we both seemed to like it.” In another society, I would have just kept her and sought others.
“This is effing brilliant. I’m thinking a post with this in some sort of graphic form! Any ideas?”
Take it a step further – splice “I don’t want a relationship” often with a bunch of intimate couple-type activities, and a girl might overlook the #1 repetitively. (If she can come up with enough +’s to outweighs that single – that matters.)
As for the visual graph, I give it some thought. (Perhaps a stock-market analogy, where “the stock” appears to be rising and rising (with each coupley act) but the true value is still where it sat when they started.)
Also, it’s important to mention the different ladders guys have. Guys generally are willing to do more with girls that are on a “not good enough” ladder than say vice versa. (Signs of being on (the bottom of) one ladder, is much likely to be indicative of being on another one all together)
@passer_by
“But his situation has changed since he said that”
Then, what he says should to. Otherwise Score: zip
@coop
“Then, what he says should to. Otherwise Score: zip”
Real life doesn’t work that way – people aren’t robots, and changes in feeling are gradual. Honestly, maybe I misunderstood your history, but my impression is that you’ve never been in this guy’s situation (FWB), so I’m not sure how you speak with such authority on it. And I’m not saying he does want a relationship. I’m saying his behaviors are calculated (consciously or not) to cultivate strong feelings and bondedness on her part. Him wanting a relationship is just one possibility.
@Joe
“I did say that if the consequences for someone else are bad whilst being good for myself, I see no reason to exploit another persons voluntary idiocy.
Lokland, my man, I have two masters degrees in the “hard sciences”, and I have no idea what you mean.”
Thats because there is a ‘not’ missing. Should read…
I see no reason not to exploit another persons voluntary idiocy.
As in, if someone offers me $100 at no cost to MYSELF (obviously they lose out on $100) I see no reason not to take the money. (subsequently is a woman offers me NSA sex, I see no reason not to take it).
“I suspect the problem we’re going to have communicating isn’t because there is no god is your world. But my observations say that, in general, atheists replace god in their worlds with their own egos (ego in the Freudian sense).”
You work of the assumption that there is something that needs replacing which may or may not be correct.
“The term moral absolution can never have the same meaning for me as it does for them.”
I agree.
Moral absolution for me involves being guilt free. For you it means squaring what you’ve done with God.
I’m far less forgiving yet have a far wider range of acceptable behaviours.
“Honestly, maybe I misunderstood your history, but my impression is that you’ve never been in this guy’s situation (FWB), so I’m not sure how you speak with such authority on it.”
“I remember, back when I was single and mild hockey hair was still ok”
Sorry, which was when?
“I’m saying his behaviors are calculated (consciously or not) to cultivate strong feelings and bondedness on her part.”
Then shouldn’t he be comfortable in defining the relationship?
Ouch! I’m squirming just thinking about it, that’s a great idea.
Uh oh I think you just took this to 3D
I have NO idea how I might represent that. I’ll sleep on it and look at it with fresh eyes tomorrow.
@Passer_by
+1 For better or worse been there done that.
@Cooper’s scoring system
This, this, this, this. If I’m not going to date a girl, period, and I’ve communicated that to her, then why not go to the movies with her? Why not bake cookies? If I’ve already said “no relationship”, I’m not leading her on.
@J
I could have very easily been MUCH worse in this current situation. I just the other day told this girl I wasn’t going to be entering into an LTR (I gave some reasons: business school in 6 months mostly, but it’s basically because I’m just not enough into her) and let her choose whether she still wanted to see me. I did this BEFORE I had sex with her. I could have very, very easily waited another few days, fucked her, and then just disappeared. She was completely ready to sleep with me. And let me tell you, that second choice would have been far easier for me (no awkward conversation with her, and I would have gotten laid no problem). It turns out she just broke up with her ex 6 weeks ago (didn’t really share that so much with me) and is on a “no relationship” page as well, and wants to just hang out and see where it goes. So you know what? That’s what I’m going to do, implications to her be damned. She’s going in eyes wide open, so it’s on her from here.
@ Zach
Is this with the shy “sloppy seconds” girl you went on 3-4 dates with, or a different girl?
@coop
“Sorry, which was when?”
Yeah, I bet male nature has changed completely from the late ’90s (I was kidding about the hockey hair).
I think this thread has now given me license to keep a rotation of “beta providers” who I will never sleep with, for lack of attraction, so that they can offer emotional support to me while paying for my things. I’ve been shooting myself in the foot this entire time, and I didn’t even know it.
I guess I should accept the friend request of that guy I met last week and get this ball rolling.
@zach
“If I’m not going to date a girl, period, and I’ve communicated that to her, then why not go to the movies with her? Why not bake cookies? ”
Well, putting aside whether you should be baking cookies at all, you seem to be focusing on the innocuous.
Why ask those questions? Why not ask “Why not bring her home to meet my mother and tell her what a great catch my mom thinks she is and how I really trust my mom’s judgement? Why not act hurt and upset when she isn’t available to see me? Why not take long naps while I hold her in my arms and gaze into her eyes when she wakes up? Why not talk about marriage (jokingly, of course, for plausible deniability)? Why not tell her I trust her more than any woman alive?”
Whether he consciously intends this or not, those things are calculated to trigger “relationshippy” feelings in her.
@Zach
So I guess the casual sex hiatus is over…
I’m a guy, and I was in a friends with benefits arrangement in college for 2 years. Honestly, in retrospect, in some ways I consider it the only meaningful romantic relationship I had (which was kind of sad, admittedly, but it wasn’t for lack of trying – I certainly dated other people, just nothing that clicked romantically enough to fall head over heels after a couple of months of dating them).
I certainly considered dating her several times. I was pretty sure that if I asked, she would have said yes. But…I could just never convince myself that I would be happy with her long term. She was just…to far below my class level. The problem wasn’t with her looks – while she wasn’t a “9″ or “10″, if I hadn’t been physically attracted to her enough I wouldn’t have been sleeping with her in the first place.
The problem was that she just didn’t quite attractive enough to me.
1. She was to lower of a social class…it reads weird when I write it, but she smoked, all her friends were smokers and guys I had absolutely no interest in hanging out with because they were to much of one kind of loser or another. Her best female friend was another college girl…that occasionally did hard drugs, and I had absolutely zero respect for. Her and I were better friends than her and her female friend, and had she been able to make better female friends I’m sure she would have dropped that girl in a second – but, she couldn’t.
2. I love girly passion and energy. Think sunshine and rainbows, a genuine hope and love for the future. She didn’t have that…at all, unfortunately. I mean I felt like she liked it, but she just couldn’t do it herself. Had she displayed any ability to do that, it would have made a big difference.
I considered dating her many times. But she just…wasn’t good enough.
I’m copying a couple of other people’s quotes here, but I would suggest -
1. Find a week that’s not super busy, like finals, and follow the post on emotional escalation -
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/06/08/relationshipstrategies/in-this-battle-of-the-sexes-women-need-to-blink-first/
Dress up sexy, act sexy, treat it mostly as dating. Like it’s someone that you just met, you don’t really know them, but you’re trying to impress them.
2. If he hasn’t said something within 3 times of this, follow the advice to “Just tell him that your arrangement has become too difficult for you and you’d like to go back to being just friends without benefits.”
If possible, mentioning that you’re thinking of it, then another mention the next time, then say it explicitly the 3rd (and last time). He may try to reframe it, dismiss it, change the subject – etc. Let him. But don’t let it change your mind.
If he has become attached to you romantically, this gives him plenty of time to think about it and decide what he wants to do. If he’s been feeling like he’s starting to want to date you, this will give him both the motivation to say something, and the opportunity to process his feelings on the matter.
3. If you’ve been upfront the 3rd time, then it’s time to pull back and stop doing your friends with benefits arrangement. Send him a facebook / email message saying that you’ve had fun, and you don’t regret it at all, but if it keeps going on you’re going to start developing real feelings for him and end up getting hurt when he doesn’t feel the same way, so you’d rather stop they physical stuff now.
If he tries to keep things going, you don’t need to be angry at all, but you do need to be blunt. Just straight up say “I still want to be friends, but I don’t want to cuddle at your place as we’re trying to move on from the friends with benefits arrangement”.
If he’s developing romantic feelings for you, imo as a guy, and a guy who had a friends with benefits situation, this will cause him to do say or do something about it.
The more he’s an ethical guy – or perhaps I should say “a guy you can actually continue to be friends with afterwards” – the less he’ll try to manipulate you into keeping it going. The more of a douchebag he is, the more he will.
If – after all this – he suddenly says he wants to date you – I’m not sure what advice to give. If he was *me*, he would actually mean it, as I would never have said that unless I was certain. On the other hand, I’ve heard a ton of stories from female friends about guys who do that to get “that one last lay”, then she falls for him and he stops returning her calls. So…not sure on that one. I would say if he backs off right away, then later say he wants to date, it’s a much better chance that he actually means it.
If he’s not actually romantically interested in you, this also ends the arrangement with an ego boost for him – it’s flattering that a girl found you attractive enough to sleep with you and start to fall for you. He’ll still be horny afterwards, but – that’s all you can do.
The drawback of my plan is that it requires a certain amount of emotional control on your part. You have to be able to flirt one week, then the next week if he doesn’t respond with dating, actually pull away. Not everyone can do that.
Paul Rivers, great post.
Sassy, brilliant analogy. Collect those $100…
“Cooper- I was glad to see all of the positive ideas, but now I am interested in what you are saying ( I am Hopeful, in case you are wondering). I didn’t realize guys were really that mean and deceptive!”
The best logical model I’ve found for this is to understand deception.
Deception is about appearing to do something acceptable or desirable, while actually doing something else.
Problem is – most of the time people being deceitful are actively copying people who are completely not, in any way, being deceitful. The most effective thing to copy is what genuinely well meaning people do. There are some exceptions – “This isn’t what it looks like?” – but that’s because there was no positive behavior for the deceiver to pretend he was doing.
It’s totally possible that a guy who didn’t have things work out with his ex, and started sleeping with a new girl, really is interested in the new girl now that it’s become clear that things are never going to work with his ex. Which is also exactly why it’s such a powerful frame for someone being deceitful to use – because it’s something regular people sometimes do.
I mean honestly, it’s not always that someone is being deliberately deceitful. Sometimes it’s that they just follow an emotional pattern, and growing closer to someone they follow that pattern, just lacking in that one feeling you’re hoping they have. Girls do this to guys **all** the time – the “tehehe I was flirting with this cute guy tonight and dancing dirty with him, even though I have a boyfriend and it would never ever go anywhere with this guy (and that last part is actually true)”. Girls will often say this without even a hint of remorse or guilt, in fact if anything they express excitement. That’s like what the equivalent to what the guy could, possibly be doing.
@Paul Rivers
Welcome and thank you for that awesome testimonial! There’s great advice there for women, I appreciate it.
@PR:
“1. She was to lower of a social class…it reads weird when I write it, but she smoked, all her friends were smokers and guys I had absolutely no interest in hanging out with because they were to much of one kind of loser or another. Her best female friend was another college girl…that occasionally did hard drugs, and I had absolutely zero respect for. Her and I were better friends than her and her female friend, and had she been able to make better female friends I’m sure she would have dropped that girl in a second – but, she couldn’t.
2. I love girly passion and energy. Think sunshine and rainbows, a genuine hope and love for the future. She didn’t have that…at all, unfortunately. I mean I felt like she liked it, but she just couldn’t do it herself. Had she displayed any ability to do that, it would have made a big difference.”
Out of curiosity, did you ever discuss #1/#2 with her?
@Susan
Eh, not quite. Still not having any one night stands. Thats really what I meant by casual sex. Sex with people I didnt know at all, and didnt spend any time with outside of the bedroom.
However, I may introduce some more “casual” sex back in. As I predicted, I had almost 3 months of self-imposed celibacy. Thats what happens when you only hook up with girls you take on dates, and kick to the curb very quickly those without relationship potential. When you’re ditching most girls after 1 date and not taking anyone home from bars to sleep with (took a girl back while visiting a friend in Vancouver but didnt sleep with her, had to cross off Canada), you’re not really going to get laid. And I have to say after 3 months (longest celibate streak since junior year of college by 6 weeks), I do miss sex quite a bit. No one night stands still, but maybe I’ll give girls I kind of like a few more dates and see what happens.
@Zach
Hi Zach,
I posted this on the “Date an Older Guy” thread for you, just in case you missed it:
=====
1419
Zach, you can correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve never “heard” you connect emotionally to any girl, with the exception of your ex-girlfriend. So much of your conversation reads (to me) like how you evaluate them and what you’re getting out of the deal.
I almost wonder… so much has come so easy for you. Where have you experienced delayed gratification in your life?
Have you ever really had to work at anything –I mean, in regards to developing a skill– where there has been no immediate payoff? Where there may never be a payoff?
Also– and I could be totally mistaken here, please correct me if I’m wrong– but you read to me as a very “bottom line” kind of person.
You go straight ahead, from one objective to the next, without a whole lot of contemplation or soul-searching. I almost feel like you avoid that kind of stuff. (Or are supremely annoyed by anything that is not concrete and tethered to earth).
I don’t know what the answer is, Zach, but if I was trying to avoid connection and letting myself actually care about another person (and be vulnerable in return), I would follow a path much like yours. Again, I could be completely missing the mark, but that is how it reads to me.
====
I could have very easily been MUCH worse in this current situation.
True, but you hav been better too.
I just the other day told this girl I wasn’t going to be entering into an LTR (I gave some reasons: business school in 6 months mostly, but it’s basically because I’m just not enough into her) and let her choose whether she still wanted to see me.
Or, you could have given her an even more informed choice and said, “I’m just not that into you.” That, of course, would have decreased your chances for sex and her chances for self-deception. But you know that already, don’t you?
“A guy can spend a whole weekend with you, cook meals together, laugh together, be passionate – do all the things that feel like being in love to a woman – and have absolutely zero emotional investment.
In other words, women tend to associate those feelings with the desire for an exclusive relationship. Men are fully capable of having those feelings for multiple women at once.”
I want to correct this, in my opinion.
I’ve seen this phrasing used a lot when I was in college (I’m 32 now), and it never seemed to help the woman out, because it was fundamentally inaccurate for most confusing situations.
When the guy actually has “zero emotional investment” – that usually isn’t hard for the girl to spot. Girls are pretty good at this, if she doesn’t catch on the first time she usually does the second.
The trouble I would see, is that the girl would try to figure out if he was getting emotionally involved/invested. And you know what? He was. So she couldn’t figure it out – he seemed like he was getting emotionally involved. It seemed like he was getting invested. And they could never break out of it because – he was.
The correct phrasing (imo) is -
“A guy can…do all the things that feel like being in love to a woman – and have absolutely zero **romantic** emotional investment.”
He can have emotional investment. Personal investment. But not be developing romantic feelings.
But this is a possibility, not a certainty – certainly these are also the signs or behavior that happen when he’s falling for the girl. Nowadays, it’s not true that “men” do this and women can’t – the “friend zone” term came about exactly because women are just as capable of this, they’re just not usually sleeping with you when they’re doing it..they’re still sharing feelings, meeting your parents, doing everything you would do in a relationship except actually getting physical with you. It’s the same with guys – except guys are capable of doing that stuff with the physical component, without developing romantic feelings.
(Honestly, more and more girls are capable of doing it to, it’s just usually not such as problem as guys usually view a girl who will sleep with him but doesn’t want to date him like they won $1,000 in the lottery but not the $10,000 grand prize – he doesn’t feel like the whole thing is a failure. Usually. Of course there are exceptions.)
@Jackie
I don’t know why exactly, but I was really missing you today. I am about to sign off for the evening, but I feel especially pleased to see that you commented.
Think about it- wanting only those that stand above your standing in life? Not really fair to those who are your actual peers.
While I think we all try to find the best mate we can, I really don’t believe in hypergamy as a major force. People really do mate assortatively, IME. And, FWIW, personally, DH and I are really pretty similar in looks, background, IQ, etc.
All of the above have been the root of a lot of shitty behavior, but we accept them as right (and remember that our host does too after much heated debate)
Not all of us do.
because in the end, in a situation with unclear moral boundaries, a lot depends on whose lens you are viewing it through.
Well, since I’m on my moral high horse today, I’m gonna come out in favor of clearer moral standards. People can screw whomever they want, let’s say, as long as they are completely honest.
“True, but you hav been better too.” should read, “True, but you could have been better too.”
And I have an italics fail in my response to Bro Hamlet.
First day with the new fingers.
@Susan
Check the “20 Years” thread before you sign off– People really appreciate all that you do here, Susan. I can’t even imagine the amount of time and effort you put into this communtiy. You rock!
I think this thread has now given me license to keep a rotation of “beta providers” who I will never sleep with, for lack of attraction, so that they can offer emotional support to me while paying for my things. I’ve been shooting myself in the foot this entire time, and I didn’t even know it.
Way to go, but never actually say, “Look, I feel no attraction for you.” Just say you’re not ready for a relationship.
@Sassy
“I think this thread has now given me license to keep a rotation of “beta providers” who I will never sleep with, for lack of attraction, so that they can offer emotional support to me while paying for my things. I’ve been shooting myself in the foot this entire time, and I didn’t even know it.
I guess I should accept the friend request of that guy I met last week and get this ball rolling.”
===
Ha ha ha!
This is ripe for satire! After I write my O. Henry-esque tale –instead of Dangerous Liasions, it’s going be along the lines of Digital Liasions– I am taking this trope and going crazy with it.
I’m thinking re-booting Jonathan Swift: “A Modest Proposal: Men As ATM Machines; Women as Leeches.” (This could actually be a hilarious satire as graphic novel.)
@sassy
As long as you tell him up front that you won’t be having sex, it’s ok to let him see your tits while he jerks off, masturbate in front of him and tell him how nice it is to be able to do that in front of someone to whom you feel so close and who makes you feel so comfortable when you’re naked, and maybe once in a while give him a fully clothed lap dance in yoga pants or a bikini. I mean, you told him you weren’t going to fuck him, right?
@J
This has been said before, especially here, and while I think your intentions are good, believing that hypergamy is not a major force is very shortsighted. The reason we are discussing at all, the reason “game”, and blogs like this even exist, is what happens before people decide when good enough is good enough and settle down because that space of time is much longer than in the past. How did it come to this? Maybe Susan will disagree, but hypergamy informs a lot more than just who a girl decides to marry. Point blank, men have stagnated in status relative to women, and that is the reason these discussions are going on at all.
@lokland
I see no reason not to exploit another persons voluntary idiocy.
Clearly, we have different sense of morality. I am atheist too, BTW.
@J
Agreed completely. If my son breaks something and then claims “It was not my intention, I didn’t know it works like that!”I may believe him and I would just sile and patiently explain what to do. But ifhe continues to accidentally break things, and his explanation would be always “It was not my intention!” then I may be jst a little bit angry.
And my son is six, while Zach, I presume, is a bit older.
@Sassy
Yes, and actually that’s exactly what the thread is about.
You accept his invitation and you give him overt and explicit statement that you are not planning to eff him, that you are absolutely sure, and there is nothing that could change that.
And if he continues being strung along and continues his advances as you regularly provide explicit affirmation to the said overt contract, well he’s on his own. Unfortunately being an idiot is still legal in most countries. *
*Unless you are an amazing conversationalist and have knowledge in topics he is interested in, so he will be staying in touch for the discussions.
Not my personal experience, sadly.
I am yet to find a woman (and have found only about 2-3 guys total) who knows anything about railroad freight operations, internal design of modern diesel locomotives and applied color theory from the perspective of human eye anatomy and color recognition processes in human brain.
(But I am certain: that foxxy cog. psych.-loving ferro-sexual wrench-wench is still out there waiting for me
)
@Deli
“But I am certain: that foxxy cog. psych.-loving ferro-sexual wrench-wench is still out there waiting for me ”
I note that misplaced optimism is also still legal in most countries…just saying
but best of luck with your search (you’re going to need it, I’m very sorry to say (we should all get our dream partners)
”There’s one difference between those though. A guy who is unhappy about being in the friend-zone is called a nice guy(tm) and considered a creep for wanting sex. A girl who is unhappy about being a FWB is not considered a creep for wanting emotional commitment”
A nice guy(average) has low value. Women have naturally high value just for the sake of having a vagina. Its up to him to raise his value. Of course when he does it he’s so used to being sexually starved, he’ll indulge his deepest sexual desires and the women in his -now- social status level complain that he won’t commit.
How a woman treats you also depends on your social status. The women from rich Countries regardless of how they look treat me as a nice guy. Attractive girls from underdeveloped Countries ”see” me as attractive as the 6’4” young Brad Pitt.
Of course its hypergamy at play and they’d only put out if I was to give them what they want(a relationship/marriage etc) but its rather funny to be the creepy dude to 50% of the college’s female population and a ”jock” to the rest of the 50%.
”Girls need to know how they can help lessen their chances of being assaulted too (without guilty feminists reminding them that they can “wear what they want”, and party as hard as they want), imho.”
So I guess girls need to know that going to college looking like they’re about to walk the street for a living is not going to get them the relationships they want, nor the respect they desire?
How are they going to get the male attention they crave, then?
Sassy: “I think this thread has now given me license to keep a rotation of “beta providers” who I will never sleep with, for lack of attraction, so that they can offer emotional support to me while paying for my things.”
Go right ahead! It’s a useful strategy, though it probably won’t do anything to *get* you the man you want — but maybe it will make hooking up with a pure alpha man more tolerable. Heck, if you’re up front about it like Zach is, that’s very unusally clear of you, and you don’t have to save any idiot’s soul.
@ Passer_By
I would be a bit more efficient that that. Since I have an extensive history in acting/theatre, this should be a cake walk.
1. I’ll tell him that I don’t want to have sex with him. I won’t tell him it is because I’m not attracted to him. I’ll tell him any other fluff reason (Ex: “I want to focus on myself right now”, “I don’t want to ruin the friendship”, “Sex complicates things”, etc).
2. We’ll go out together and he’ll pay for my things. I know he’ll pay for my things because every man I’ve encountered has wanted to pay for my things unless I explicitly tell them not to. I won’t be putting a stop to his flow of money this time.
3. I’ll tell him things like “you are such a great guy” and “any woman would be lucky to have you”, knowing that I don’t mean myself when I say those things.
4. On nights that I am lonely/bored, I will call him over to cuddle with me. Sometimes, I may even let him spend the night with me as we spoon together in bed.
5. He will be my emotional tampon, and I will end every talk by telling him how he is such a “nice guy” or “sweet guy”.
6. Eventually, I will become a bit more physical with him. I will allow him to hold my hand. We may even go dancing together, during which I’m sure he’ll get a hard-on as I carelessly grind my ass against him for an hour.
7. On a rare occasion or two, I may let him kiss me. I’ll stop him, however, if he presses for more than that. If he asks me why I let him kiss me, I’ll simply say “because it’s fun”.
8. Rinse, lather, repeat for probably 3-4 more guys. I’ve spun 4 dating plates before. I’m almost positive that I could have 3-4 male orbiters at any given time. I’ve avoided putting men in the “friendzone” in the past, since I always tried to spare their feelings, but I don’t have to do that now.
9. If any of them complain about the lack of sex, or the lack of potential relationship (since I’m sure some of them will have bona fide crushes on me), I’ll simply hold to my original excuse.
I wonder how much money I could successfully get from those chumps per month? I may never need to go grocery shopping again, not to mention my entertainment costs will decrease significantly. This should be fun!
@ OffTheCuff
It’s not about getting the man I want. I wouldn’t want those men, since I don’t date betas and I would be sexing any man that I actually wanted. It’s about getting other things that I want, such as money and emotional support. I would definitely still be on the prowl for a man that I was actually attracted to, in the meantime.
@Sassy
Your list is very comprehensive – an excellent strategy. Just a few more things:
10. When he asks if you could ever “see him as something more,” be sure to encourage him by saying, “Maybe! I know I love spending time with you! When I’m ready for a relationship, you could be the one!”
11. If he gets wind of your sexing up alphas and pouts like a little bitch (the usual response), tell him that those guys mean nothing to you, they’re just ways for you to get sex without getting emotionally entangled.
12. He will try to delve into your psychological state to try and determine why you won’t “let yourself” have the perfect relationship with him. If he gets too curious, just say that there are some things from your childhood that you are very ashamed of and can’t discuss with any man. He’ll be too intimidated to ask for details.
Sassy, it’s getting hard to see the difference between your “plan” (theatrics and all) and the reality that’s out there for betas.
@Joe
And they need to step up and put an end to it just the way we’re advising Hopeful. If it feels like crap, stop doing it.
The point Sassy is making is that according to some rather fluid morality, neither women in FWBs or betas have any cause to blame the person enjoying all the benefits they provide.
@ Joe
That’s not my problem. If some men are eagerly willing to offer me those things, why should I stop them?
It’s nice to see that Susan and Sassy are seeing the Friend-Zone script as exploitation. I think I could negotiate with them as equals and wouldn’t put them in a FWB-scenario.
Most women don’t give guys anywhere near that level of respect, and I am unsure why guys should be bending over backwards for girls who think so little of them?
@ A Definite Beta Guy
How is it exploitation? If the man consents to such an agreement, it’s on him. The women who put men in the “friendzone” owe them nothing. Why shouldn’t some men be kept in the friendzone, since he goes along with it, if it benefits her? Why should a woman look out for a man in this way?
Sassy, looking forward to the field reports! Rain fire on the gammas and deltas, and show them the error of their ways.
@Susan
@Sassy
Ah! I get it. Two wrongs making a right. Right?
Not exactly. I realize you’re both mocking the “flexible morality” bit to make a point. But don’t you see that your strawman is mocking the strawman tossed into this pit earlier with the same mocking intention? Sadly, what you’ve described is much closer to reality, not the exaggerated turnabout you intended.
@ Joe
I’m not trying to make a right out of two wrongs. I’m trying to be strategic.
Also, there are no strawmans here.
Finally, the situation I described is a reality, but so are FWB situations.
My question is why should I not take what is offered to me by men of their own volition, even if they aren’t getting sexual “benefits”? It’s not my job to protect them. Why shouldn’t I take what is offered to me?
@Sassy
I’ll be perfectly honest when I say that I see nothing wrong with that.
Stupid if the guy allows it obviously but not morally wrong.
” It’s not my job to protect them. Why shouldn’t I take what is offered to me?”
You shouldn’t unless you want to be Robin Hood.
@ OffTheCuff
You know what? I may attempt this once or twice, just to see how effective I am at getting what I want. I’m kind of curious, actually.
Sassy’s vignette does reflect the reality of existence for many betas. They attempt to trade provisioning and “playing house” domesticity for sexual companionship and believe that the woman is only holding out because she’s chaste and wants an old-fashioned courtship.
I’ve heard women talk about these guys in some unpleasant ways that I won’t relate here because it would probably be too provocative.
It’s not that the beta strategy never works—sometimes they can get sexual access if a window of time presents itself (Christmas, b-days, etc.). It just has such serious potential costs in terms of self-concept and bitterness. If a guy is going to take this approach, I think he should exclusively target women way, way above his SMV.
FWB is often a good format for Fisherian “Explorers”, IMHO. The woman can concentrate on career and still maintain her man-harem of beta orbiters for endless Facebook validation and economic benefits, while the man can spend time on work, exercise, Viking drinking games with the Crew, and other important hobbies/interests. They can get together for the hot sex and weekend sleepovers and retain a sense of mystery and adventure around the relationship that can have its own dopamine kick.
I think you, of course, will succeed at getting an orbiter, but not necessarily a perfectly compliant orbiter to the chumpish degree you describe. If you could get one like that, it would flame out fast. I was as gamma as all get-out in high school, but wouldn’t stoop to even a fraction of THAT level.
Don’t undervalue your face time, though – a night of cuddling is enjoyable. Your best bet for maximal resource-extraction is to to keep all that to the minimum. Texting is your friend here.
My question is why should I not take what is offered to me by men of their own volition, even if they aren’t getting sexual “benefits”? It’s not my job to protect them. Why shouldn’t I take what is offered to me?
Sassy,
You should do whatever you want, and allows you to look at yourself in the mirror. It isn’t clear to me if you are being genuine or playing devil’s advocate here.
@Sassy
I agree, go right ahead. If you can find guys who are big enough chumps to do that, then go for it. Any guy who’s stupid enough to stay in that zone is asking for it. It’s like what I once said to a girl when she walked up to me and said “hey, want to buy me a drink?” “I know I don’t like look an ATM, but THAT guy down the bar definitely does. Go ask him.”
@Jackie
I’ve connected emotionally to a couple girls besides my ex. However, neither of those situations worked out at all (for different reasons), and so there’s nothing really to report. I don’t dwell on my past failures. One girl had me so much that I acted bought into every single line she said, no matter how outrageous it was (I was her little beta puppy dog, except we were having sex). The other girl was at the end of college, and she left me for another guy, her fat friend who she “realized she was in love with”, dated for a few months, got sick of and then dumped. I had a bad habit of going after girls who had red flags waving from every point of their bodies. I grew out of it. I learned from those experiences, and am more cautious when evaluating a girl. When you hear me “evaluating” a girl, it’s generally my parsing my feelings into concrete things. So it’s going from my feeling “I just am not hugely into her” to “I’m not hugely into her because she’s X”. I’m 25. I’m not trying to get married anytime soon, so part of what I’m using this time for is to find out what I like and don’t like in a girl. With my ex, we had an awesome sex life, great times partying together, and had fun doing activities together, but there just wasn’t enough to talk about in the quiet times. I really liked her, but it just wasn’t going to work for me long-term, and I knew it. It taught me something.
And I’ve had to work for plenty of things in my life. I worked really hard to get into the high school I got into, then really hard to get into an Ivy-league university. I’ve worked very hard at my job, and have been promoted twice in 3 years due to that. I taught myself financial modeling so I have a larger skill set when applying to future jobs.
Things without real payoff I don’t describe as work. They are hobbies. Reading about the social disintegration of America in Charles Murray’s “Coming Apart” has no payoff for me aside from my intrinsic curiosity. I have a pretty busy life, and I don’t really have the inclination to do things just to do them. Those are vacations.
And yes, I’m very objective driven, and I don’t spend a lot of time to wonder about things. I find religion to be a bit of a joke (sorry), and I think the wishy-washy “finding yourself” is new-age BS. I think if you talked to more men you’d find I’m not even close to alone in my objective-driven perspective. Men are problem-solvers. It’s what we do. So for me, problem might be “how do I get where I want to go in my career”? I then come up with a solution and enact it. I don’t spend time wondering what “career” means, or if the universe has a plan for me. I also don’t sit back and expect things to come to me. I identify the things I want, make a plan to get them, and go out there and execute.
Sassy wrote:
I wonder how much money I could successfully get from those chumps per month? I may never need to go grocery shopping again, not to mention my entertainment costs will decrease significantly. This should be fun!
Just remember that while violence is officially the tool of the state in a republic, historically it was how men enforced order with women. There are many betas out there seething with anger over their fate in the sexual marketplace, as you’ve seen for yourself here. So if an angry beta knocks your teeth out in revenge once the game is up, you only have yourself to blame.
You are right, Joe. It would actually be wrong of Sassy to actually undertake that plan, and I would not condone it. Deliberately profiting at someone else’s expense is just not OK.
I really was just joking around. Sassy’s beef is not with betas, it’s with the players.
@Sassy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgrD-8b53AM
Agreed. I think people need to realize what they’re made of, and not attempt to “try this at home” if they haven’t got the right equipment, i.e. wiring.
I had to run out. Dentist appointment. I’m back and I’m numb!
Oh, I know.
But Sassy’s about to become busy “raining fire on the gamma and deltas, showing them the error of their ways,” not actually kidding now and being cheered on by the Loklands and OTCs of the world. Sigh. First, they came for the gammas…
In actuality, this whole thing, joking included, is precisely what Roissy dreams of seeing. I guess we are all belong to the Chateau now.
@Joe
OTC is joking.
I am serious.
Should be noted I apply this standard to more than just mating.
No one watches your back in life. Fact of life is, if you aren’t trying to use others they will be using you.
Much better to be the user.
@ Mr. Nervous Toes
Uh…..no.
I wouldn’t be to blame for anything. I wouldn’t force men into such arrangements. They would agree to participate in them of their own volition. The consequences are on them, not me.
If a man decided to “knock my teeth out”, in retaliation, he would swiftly find himself in jail with a restraining order against him. If he doesn’t like the game, he shouldn’t play.
@Joe
Sassy’s hypothetical experiment would only backfire on her, ultimately. Not that she couldn’t get CASH N PRIZEZ out of the men– she could, obvi!
But what she is describing is tacit exploitation, pandering and manipulation. People seem to think that you can exploit others with no (surface) cost to yourself. This is not true.
Exploitation hurts the practitioner at a core level, maybe even more than her/his victims. There is no way you can have self-respect or integrity (or peace, for that matter) when you use other people for self-gratification.
The resulting contempt you have for them — let’s face it, that is the only possible result when someone falls for your manipulation tactics; you hate them for falling for it almost as much as you hate yourself for having to stoop to it– bleeds over into your own psyche.
In short: No such thing as a free lunch.
@Lokland
” Fact of life is, if you aren’t trying to use others they will be using you.
Much better to be the user.”
It’s not the only paradigm, LL. There’s a better way.
===
I’ve seen this mindset before in people who have been abused.
I know you’re serious too, Lokland, and yes, it doesn’t just apply to the mating dance either. I see the same dynamic being played out on Capitol Hill right now, too, between the political parties. Ayn Rand described it as the stage after “going Galt” in the larger society.
Needless to say, I’m not sanguine about the outcome.
I doubt that Hitler, Stalin or Mao lost much sleep over killing people by the multiple millions. People without morals can have free lunches. Society isn’t really teaching morals these days. It appears that laws by the multitude are supposed to restrict our actions, rather than old-fashioned self discipline.
@Jackie
I agree. Lokland and others believe that there are such things as opportunities that occasionally come your way without consequences. They would not agree, I imagine.
@Zach
Hey Tolstoy! Thanks for your reply!
I appreciate the response — that’s so sweet that you were once devoted puppy! I’m sorry to hear it didn’t work out.
(Though: Why the scare quotes about her realizing she had fallen in love with her friend? Do you not think that’s possible? And why did you point out that he was fat? Do fat people not deserve love?
Or are you incredulous that a girl could prefer a chunky dude to you and thus want to take him down a peg?)
I’m with Voltaire, regarding your disagreement with my beliefs. And I have no beef with atheists– I think it’s an orientation, for the most part. Born this way, so to speak. ;-P
That said, Why do you think religion is a joke? Do you think people who practice religion are “jokes” as well? Is searching for meaning a joke? Or is the concept of a God (or gods) a joke?
Finally: What I meant about working towards something with no immediate tangible reward– I should have used the concept of “integrity.”
Do you believe in integrity, Zach (i.e. thoughts, speech, actions in alignment)? If not, why not?
PS: I know you are busy and these are quite personal, so I totally understand if you would prefer not to respond. Peace, Zach
@Joe
absent a belief in an all powerful god that administers absolute justice in the afterlife, there clearly can be actions without consequences for the perpetrator. it doesn’t make them right, but that doesn’t mean that justice is ever going to forthcoming.
I was surprised to learn when I was researching NPD that narcissists are actually miserable and often depressed for this precise reason. They are not blessed with lack of self-awareness – deep down they know how manipulative they are, and that their behavior is wrong.
This thread has just gotten too depressing for me. Time to read video game forums.
This is like Plato’s Gorgias, where Socrates makes the argument that it is far better to endure rather than commit injustice and that the most miserable person in the world is the perfectly unjust man who is never caught or punished. Naturally, all his interlocutors get really angry at him.
Fond memories, that wasn’t the first dialogue I read but it was the first one that really woke me up. Bernard Williams, RIP.
This has been said before, especially here, and while I think your intentions are good, believing that hypergamy is not a major force is very shortsighted…
Yes, I understand that I’m the outlier here in not believing much in hypergamy, and I acknowledge that it does play a role in fantasy (Cinderella stories, etc.). I just don’t see it play out much IRL. The women who read romance novels in which the shop girl marries a millionaire are generally married to plumbers themselves.
Hell, I’ll even confess to dreaming of marrying the prince when my mom read me fairy tales, but I “settled” for a smart guy from a somewhat lower SES than me who had a helluva lot of drive. Then we worked together to get what we have, and now we appreciate it. Smart people figure this out early. If not, life has a way of showing them. I feel sorry for women from the Boston slums who think they can marry a Kennedy (as opposed to just getting raped by one) as much as I feel sorry for men who think that game is going to get them a woman 5 HB points above their own SMV. People need to be realistic about themselves, understand what they can have and then go after it.
@Lokland & Sassy
I’m going to cosign this, Lokland. I just don’t really see the evil. She might discover that a pretty face is still worth a monthly stipend to some guys. For some men, it always has been.
Maybe the moralist sentiment should be aimed at the system that teaches people that their own concept of morality or honesty is the only valid one? Because I see a lot of people here arguing over what constitutes full disclosure by degrees. They will probably never come to an agreement because what is “enough” detail for one person, isn’t enough for the next. Let’s also remember that the social context (this blog and it’s missions) in which the discussion is being had, affects the discussion itself.
And I can’t remember who, but someone quoted Newton’s third law. IF the world was a perfectly efficient closed system, this would work as an analogy to “Karma”. But it’s not and the world is not that simple.
Just1z, I’m in Jackie’s camp with this. Even absent a belief in an all powerful god, a person’s actions always have consequences both for others and on the actor. Only some (even few!) of the consequences may become visible to others. More of them, but perhaps not even all can be felt by that person himself.
I can’t help but think that the example on the table is something like a situation where a masochist is telling a sadist “Beat me! Beat me!”. (Punchline to an old joke – the sadist replies “No!”) The sadist may think he’s got permission and there are no consequences. But there most certain are, especially on the sadist. He is changed.
Part of the human condition is that ya can’t run away from yourself.
Of course, with a belief in an all powerful god, and in the face of an actual all powerful God, the moral absolution is still in question, whether the victim gives absolution or not.
If the guy says “I don’t want a relationship” then acts all “coupley” and seems like he must want a relationship – he probably hasn’t changed his mind on what he said.
Except that most women are going to view the coupley behavior as an indication that the guy is changing his mind, just as, in my striptrease scenario, most men are going to view the treasing as an indication that the girl is changing her mind. And that’s normal. It doesn’t make one an idiot if one sees a change in behavior as a change of mind. Actions, as they say, speak louder than words. That’s why is disingenuous to act in one way and then expect that people will take you at your word.
@Joe
“Part of the human condition is that ya can’t run away from yourself.”
yeabut, I think that there are people without any real ‘self’ to run away from. even short of having a full on ‘pathy there are many people that can rationalise anything…
I saw an interview on (UK) national tv of a bunch of kids that lived off of benefits. One young ‘lady’ was asked if she felt guilty for living off of other people. Princess replied that, “nah, cos like, I get me benefits right? but like I pay tax when I buy me fags. so like it’s fair innit”.
Just what inner dialogue do you think is going on within her ‘brain’? I don’t believe that you could find a self within to be troubled by anything…
(liked your joke BTW)
Go right ahead! It’s a useful strategy, though it probably won’t do anything to *get* you the man you want — but maybe it will make hooking up with a pure alpha man more tolerable. Heck, if you’re up front about it like Zach is, that’s very unusally clear of you, and you don’t have to save any idiot’s soul.
I suspect that our Sassy is a brilliant satirist and is “taking the piss,” as the British say, out of Zach. However, if a woman is looking to use a guy, Sassy (and later Susan) is providing an excellent blueprint. Notice that it’s pretty equivalent to to the male role in a FWB scenario. The hope that things will become more intimate is never really squashed by the “playa” in either case because we all know that if one person tells the other straight up “I’m not attracted to you” or “I just want sex,” then that person will walk and the “playa” will no longer be able to take advantage.
Sassy,
I am making a point, although perhaps I am being too obtuse, so let me elaborate excessively. For the record, Mr. Nervous Toes does not partake in nor approach of FWB situations. He has had romantic flings, that generally either failed to make the transition from lust to love or ran into geographical constraints, but these were hardly without emotional intimacy.
Now, if violence is the masculine tool to enforce social order, shame is the female tool to enforce social order. Violence is illegal in our society (except for the state), shaming is not. Violence is the tool of last resort due to the legal consequences, but precious few women see man-shaming as a weapon of last resort. For shame to be effective, it has to be balanced with reward. Shaming has been losing its effectiveness in our society because women by-in-large are not rewarding men for good behaviour (and also because our social circles are getting so large and volatile). Thus more and more men go, “Fuckit!” because they can either:
A.) Be shamed by women for being a nice guy, and get no sex.
OR
B.) Be shamed by women for having a FWB, and get sex.
You, on the other hand, run the risk of the same fate as Rihanna. The law can retroactively take vengeance, but it cannot realistically stop a man from hurting you in the first place. Your talk of a restraining order, is like the ‘internet tough guy’ caricature but as a woman. Remember, sexual dichotomy exists. That was the entire purpose of Susan’s last post, was it not?
From an evolutionary biology perspective, there’s three basic forms of relationships: symbiotic, parasitic, and altruistic. For social animals, the ideal situation is often where animals are slightly altruistic towards members of their own species, as strengthening the tribe tends to help the reproductive success of the individual. For humans in modern society, it’s probably a better idea to aim for symbiotic relationships. A little bit of parasitic or altruistic behaviour at the start of a relationship is ok but the intention should be to return to a state of equilibrium exchange of favours. For example, if you lose your job, going on welfare and becoming parasitic to the state is fine if it helps you not make life-wrenching changes and get a new position relatively quickly. Staying on welfare forever, is not so sustainable and corrosive for the recipient.
If a man and women get into a budding relationship and she fails to engage her vulnerability game and escalate emotionally, a FWB situation results and she’s at fault. If he intentionally deceives her, then he’s at fault, but how to judge? Similarly if a women engages in your proposed strategy and ‘plays games’ to encourage him to spend money on her, then she’s behaving badly and should be prepared to face the consequences if her game is discovered and he’s angry and drunk. But if he simply fails to physically escalate then that’s his problem — but this is _not_ the situation you have described. Thus the difference between what’s ok and what’s not is the same bugaboo that criminal justice deals with: intent. What’s the difference between murder and manslaughter? A person is still dead, either way.
That should read, “approve of FWB situations,” above.
@J
Go to any bar on a friday night and you will see it play out. The many chasing the few LOL. Or any college campus. You don’t even have to do that. Just read Susan’s post about the SMV scales for women and men (can’t look up the link, but it basically explains how and why so many women direct their efforts to men at the top of the pyramid). Or just note the existence of blogs about married men keeping their wives interested. One would think that just earning a little more and not getting fat would be enough. Not so. All an outgrowth of hypergamy. Even the system as it exists is built to separate the wheat from the chaff when it comes to men- it’s comical because it really and truly is one big test. If it’s not already painfully obvious, many of the men who listen to mainstream messages about them are at a real disadvantage when it comes to even attracting someone of their same stature, especially (and most importantly) when those women are at their most attractive.
@Bro Hamlet
“Maybe the moralist sentiment should be aimed at the system that teaches people that their own concept of morality or honesty is the only valid one? Because I see a lot of people here arguing over what constitutes full disclosure by degrees”
====
BH, can you elaborate on this? Most of the morality discussed around here is the Golden Rule, which is central to multiple religions and (theoretically) practiced by billions. Is there another competing concept of morality that we should be aware of?
And, specifically, can you address how morality is conflated with disclosure?
Just1z, yeah, I see people without conscience too. Your example is a good one.
But isn’t that the point? It’s clear that they see no consequences, so their conscience is clear! But there’s a lot of people, me and you, I suspect, who see plenty. Their lack of vision doesn’t change that.
To bring this back to HUS, that’s exactly the idea that’s plaguing many here. Everybody wants to be loved, but nobody wants to be taken. Why not be a taker then? It’s because that way, you lose. Guaranteed.
@Joe
so…’neither a taker nor a taken be’?
I’d agree with that.
it was the ‘this will hurt me as much as you’ hippy stuff that I thought was misguided; there are people that will take regardless of whatever consequences that others can see. caveat emptor
@Joe
I’m with you and Jackie. Only by offering love can you really hope to receive it. We need a lot more risk taking, IMO. Just listen to how afraid the young people here are about having their hearts broken. It’s understandable, but also inevitable, I think. At least for most people. My heart got stomped on a few times. You pick yourself up, reflect and learn whatever the experience can teach you, and get back out there.
We’re not porcelain teacups, we need to be willing to risk injury for the biggest prize, which is love.
P.S. This does not mean being weak or supplicating. We can give with dignity and self-respect, and not lower our value in the process.
@Susan
“P.S. This does not mean being weak or supplicating. We can give with dignity and self-respect, and not lower our value in the process.”
Yes it does.
Your either a ‘go get em’ independent tough grl who can take care of yourself or your barefoot and pregnant dependent on others for everything in life.
Your generation wanted a society of extremes. Good to know in hindsight very few of you realize it was a bad idea.
“At least for most people. My heart got stomped on a few times. You pick yourself up, reflect and learn whatever the experience can teach you, and get back out there.”
Difference between now and then.
Its not a few times.
I got walked on everyday for 15 years. It was not a few times thing.
Success (or hell, even indifference from others) was a once in a blue moon type event.
PS Talking about general life, not just dating, which for me has never involved heartbreak.
“Only by offering love can you really hope to receive it. ”
Face palm.
As a kid I offered kindness and understanding, I got walked on, robbed, had the shit beat outta me.
As a teenager I tried to be kind, I got walked on, robbed, no one could beat the shit out of me any longer.
I didn’t start getting anything GOOD until all I started putting out was bad.
FWB is often a good format for Fisherian “Explorers”, IMHO. ….
Agreed. I think people need to realize what they’re made of, and not attempt to “try this at home” if they haven’t got the right equipment, i.e. wiring.
Yep. This is why people need to know themselves. There was a time that I really envied the women like Sassy is pretending to be and felt that they were taking guys who were rightfuly “mine.” Then I realized that I didn’t have the stomach to pull that shit anyway.
I had to run out. Dentist appointment. I’m back and I’m numb!
Numb may be the best way to enjoy this thread.
But Sassy’s about to become busy “raining fire on the gamma and deltas, showing them the error of their ways,” not actually kidding now and being cheered on by the Loklands and OTCs of the world. Sigh. First, they came for the gammas…In actuality, this whole thing, joking included, is precisely what Roissy dreams of seeing. I guess we are all belong to the Chateau now.
Yep, let’s just burn it all down, while we all sit poolside.
Actually, I try to take heart in the words of Walter Sobchak, “No, Donny, these men are nihilists, there’s nothing to be afraid of. “
@Jackie
Yes, that is exactly why I mentioned he was fat, because I was incredulous that I could “lose” to him. I actually had several friends not believe me when I told them what happened, that’s how physically unappealing this guy was, and how out of his league she was. And this is not a girl who’s generally about the “inner beauty”. Her dating history is mostly one of frat stars and athletes.
I absolutely believe in integrity. I follow through on what I commit to. And in a FWB situation, I commit to not committing. I’m not in control of others’ perceptions of my actions. All I can do is commit to something (not dating the girl). She can warp my actions to fit any narrative she chooses, but that’s not in my hands.
Re: religion. I have quite a few religious friends. I don’t think people who adhere to religions are jokes. I just tend to think a bit less of their reasoning capacity. Religion is rife with arbitrary rules, dietary codes being just one example (no real reasoning why food x and not food y; it’s just because that’s how it is), all justified by belief in made up fairytales. Honestly, take away the history and tradition behind it, try releasing the bible today as non-fiction and you’d get laughed out of every publishing house. Water turned into wine? Raising a man from the dead? An omnipotent creator who no one has ever seen and defies any proof of existence? The likelihood of there being a judeo-christian god is just as strong as there being an omnipotent flying spaghetti monster. Even more, this god as described is a raging a**hole. He’s insanely jealous, completely inflexible, and downright cruel (oh hey Job, I know I f**ked you over completely, but I was just pulling your chain, or “you, go kill your son to prove I’m the best”). I could go on, but I think that just about summarizes my view.
The jackass who came up with “flying spaghetti monster” has done arguably more damage to the American education system than anyone in the last century. Way to take 2,500 years of extremely deep thought re: “Athens v. Jerusalem,” reduce it to a cartoon, and convince every freshman philosopher that he’s figured it all out.
Much better to be the user.
Best to neither.
“Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.”
For the Christians, that’s Matthew 10:16. If you’re Jewish, consider it wise Jewish advice from a bright guy some mistakenly think was the Messiah. If you’re an atheist, think of it as common sense. And if you have trouble with King Jamesian English, it means, “Don’t mess with others, just be smart enough tosee it coming when others mess with you.”
Exploitation hurts the practitioner at a core level, maybe even more than her/his victims. There is no way you can have self-respect or integrity (or peace, for that matter) when you use other people for self-gratification.
The resulting contempt you have for them — let’s face it, that is the only possible result when someone falls for your manipulation tactics; you hate them for falling for it almost as much as you hate yourself for having to stoop to it– bleeds over into your own psyche.
You are such a smart kid, Jackie. I’m so glad that this is your take-away from your own horrid situation.
The jackass who came up with “flying spaghetti monster” has done arguably more damage to the American education system than anyone in the last century. Way to take 2,500 years of extremely deep thought re: “Athens v. Jerusalem,” reduce it to a cartoon, and convince every freshman philosopher that he’s figured it all out.
Bravo, Esco.
As someone who had a rather long spiritual journey, complicated by a long period of atheism and cynicism, I tire of the sophmoric juvenalia spouted by people who haven’t been in a church or synagogue since their confirmation or Bar Mitzvah. It’s one thing to reject a child’s view of God, it’s another to assume that other people’s views haven’t evolved since 13 or 16. If most of these folks were to have a REAL discussion with their clergy, they’d find that their clergy don’t believe many of the same things they don’t believe.
@J
8-) 
Thanks, J! You made my day.
@Esco, J
Well, I can’t blame people who have a hate-on for religious folks entirely. Think of the most ostentatiously religious people in our culture– they make me crazy in their intolerance and unkindness.
Last night I was at the gym and I am too stupid to know how to work the tv remotes, so I got stuck watching televangelism for an hour on the treadmill.
At first I thought it was SNL or something, because it was so craven, gross and money-hungry– pimping of imitation leather Bibles. Ugh!
I think there is a lot of cheap sophistry involved in the current modern atheist movement as well; how I hate the terms “Sky Fairy” and “Jeebus”! And the reading of sacred texts at a cursory, 21st century level is of course going to result in an epic fail of understanding.
It’s too easy to get entrenched on your side of the turf in the so-called “culture war.” I think to ask the question, Why are we here, with an open heart, and then to listen quietly for the answer is much harder, but necessary.
Seriously, I realize that in our time it’s rare to come across a truly first-rate pious mind on the order of, say, Cardinal Newman, because religion is so atrophied and the educated classes have run away from it the fastest.
But pick up a book … Augustine, Aquinas, Pascal, Maimonidies, Farabi, and so on, if you want to see what real theological-philosophical depth is like.
The early modern philosophers from Machiavelli through the Englightenment took faith with the utmost seriousness even though–or precisely because–they were all non-believers. Learn something from them, too.
Go to any bar on a friday night and you will see it play out. The many chasing the few LOL. Or any college campus. . ..
You say this to me as though you think there was no bar scene when I was single, as though I don’t speak to anyone under 50 IRL, and as though I’ve never seen the various blogs you mention. In point of fact, things are fundamentally the same as they always were. I’ve had my share of disappointments as have most of the people here. I fully understand what’s going on. I’m trying to show you guys how to side-step it.
“things are fundamentally the same as they always were”
I don’t think this is true at all. Certain fundamental forces may be the same as ever, but they are now acting in a different environment, with fewer restraints, so the observed behaviors are mighty different.
I doubt that Hitler, Stalin or Mao lost much sleep over killing people by the multiple millions.
Ah, role models………
@Zach
Thank you for your response!
Regarding Chunky Dude: Don’t you believe you could be loved for your heart and character, Zach? Maybe you need to be looking for girls of better character, who will love you for yourself.
I mean, it sounds like you believe the way you evaluate girls (ie MUST BE HAWT N SKINNEH) is the same way they evaluate you. Which obviously isn’t true. As hard as it is for you to believe, in that girl’s eyes, CD was extremely attractive.
I know you have this awesome life that is full of sex and money, but have you ever been loved for who you are? It just seems to me that what you are continually finding is what you are putting out there. And you don’t seem to like the results very much.
===
“I absolutely believe in integrity. I follow through on what I commit to. And in a FWB situation, I commit to not committing.”
This reads as super-Orwellian to me, somehow. How can you commit to not committing? I mean, how does it work? (It actually seems more like you are determined not to let other people’s feelings affect you. When this does happen, like your ex-GF, you write of profound guilt.)
It reminds me of when you said you were pursuing casual loveless sex and a girlfriend simultaneously. I disagreed that it was possible: Look at how interconnected our systems are (the mind-body connections alone are pretty staggering to contemplate!). Compartmentalization is not possible; the parts will bleed over into one another.
===
I realize we do not have anything in common, apart from being carbon-base forms of life and a love of Russian literature, but I must address your last point regarding religion:
What is your personal experience with religion? Growing up what kind of background did you receive? Anything?
Because it appears you have a very cursory, simplistic and South Parkian understanding of the Abrahamic faiths.
Have you ever discussed sacred texts with someone who has studied them in-depth? I mean, look at ALL the commentary various rabbis will have on just the few parts of the OT you mentioned. Obviously there is something beneath the surface that has merited thousands of years of discussion and scholarship.
Have you ever met a Jesuit? Talked to a Red-Letter Christian? Studied the Sojourners?
I have no intention of conversion, Zach, don’t worry
If you’re born an atheist, that is your orientation. I will only refer you to the passage of Talmud that says,
We do not see the things the way they are; we see things the way we are.
(Peace)
@Lokland
What? This makes no sense to me. As I look around I see a lot of women somewhere in between.
I’ll confess I have absolutely no idea how to respond to this. Perhaps Jackie will do a better job. I can’t even begin to wrap my mind around the idea of getting walked on every day for 15 years, short of being a prisoner, hostage, or something like that.
Perhaps I overstated my case, Esco. Human nature is fundamentally unchanging though. People chasing the wrong people is nothing new.
Have you ever met a Jesuit? Talked to a Red-Letter Christian? Studied the Sojourners?
I believe Zach once said he was raised Jewish (though my post-menopausal memory does play tricks on me). If so, I suggest a sharp, campus Hillel or Chabad rabbi as opposed to whatever suburban Bar Mitzvah mill rabbi made him sit through a few hours a week of Hebrew school per week and taught him just enough religion to give him a sense of contempt for it.
No, that’s Jason. Zach is a WASP.
@J
No, you didn’t J. You know how it goes. plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose and “History may not repeat, but it rhymes.”
Don’t know about you, but my problem is a tendency to jump to the end because I have seen it before. Mostly, I’m not surprised by what transpires.
But history only rhymes. The subtle differences are the changes that us grouchy old codgers rail about. They accumulate until the world seems very strange.
Hum. My grandfather died thinking that a colored TV was ridiculous and unnecessary. Black and White was good enough for him. My granddaughter is going to wonder why I put up with my bulky CD and DVD collections.
We’ll always need to allow for a bit of evolution and personal differences if we’re going to grow old gracefully.
LL: Your either a ‘go get em’ independent tough grl who can take care of yourself or your barefoot and pregnant dependent on others for everything in life.
SW: What? This makes no sense to me. As I look around I see a lot of women somewhere in between.
Me: Let me help you, SW. In the binary thinking of the ‘sphere, your choices are “swing on a star” or “be a mule.” There are no other options.
No, that’s Jason. Zach is a WASP.
Fcuking menopause.
Has this happened to you yet? And would you happen to know where I left my car?
@Jackie
“BH, can you elaborate on this? Most of the morality discussed around here is the Golden Rule, which is central to multiple religions and (theoretically) practiced by billions. Is there another competing concept of morality that we should be aware of?”
Let me relate this directly to the FWB/disclosure situation we are discussing. Two parties enter into an FWB. Party A tells B that he/she likes what they have but verbally states that no relationship will happen, ever. Party B says it’s cool and they continue. They continue to spend time together, going to dinner, cooking over wine, movies, etc. Party A reinforces that said activities don’t mean a relationship. One day, B is feeling hurt and used and blames A for not being clear. Who is in the wrong?
From A’s perspective, eating out, etc. do not make a relationship. And A has been verbally clear about what was to go down. To A, all the requirements of full disclosure have been met, and A does not feel at fault or that any moral obligations were skipped over- A’s threshold for what constitutes a moral handling of the situation has been satisfied at the point of verbal disclosure.
From B’s perspective, A’s words were understood for a time, but the activities they shared triggered unanticipated feelings. B feels that the actions are what was important. For B, the verbal disclosure meant less than the actions that followed.
Where the problem came in, is that B assumed that A’s picture of the way things should be handled was the same as his/her own. The difference in perspective could have come from any number of factors that neither of them control- social norms, personal history, etc.
So what I am saying is that you shouldn’t implicitly assume that another person’s understanding of the nuances of what is the correct moral stance in a situation. The person you are dealing with may have a slightly different take on the golden rule as applied to a given situation that still squares with the spirit of the rule, but may be different in degrees than your own. They may be acting “moral enough” to satisfy their own compass. And you can’t control any of that. In that way, there is a subjective aspect to this that makes calls to some objective morality largely a waste of time when there’s a situation where there is a significant gray area in interpretation between two people.
LOL. I hear ya, Joe, I hear ya.
Party A reinforces that said activities don’t mean a relationship.
It should be noted that this is a new wrinkle in the discussion. My guess is that few women, if faced with daily reminders that the relationship has no real meaning, affection or future, would not bail early on.
The popularity of films like No Strings Attached with Ashton Kutcher and Natalie Portman and Friends with Benefits with Mila Kunis and Justin Timberlake says something about the culture, no?
@Lokland, Susan
“I didn’t start getting anything GOOD until all I started putting out was bad.
I’ll confess I have absolutely no idea how to respond to this. Perhaps Jackie will do a better job. I can’t even begin to wrap my mind around the idea of getting walked on every day for 15 years, short of being a prisoner, hostage, or something like that.”
====
Lokland, I think I see where you are coming from. If you are being abused, especially severely, you are doing what you have to do to survive. There is no middle ground: You are either the abuser or the abused; the jailer or the prisoner. For me it was like this:
Go along to get along, endure (and hate myself) for a long, LONG time.
Then one day, something rises up within you, and you are *angry* and ready to say eff you, switch roles, or die trying. Now you are the jailer, and you attempt to treat the world your prisoner.
That is the paradigm: Do to others before to it’s done to you.
But there is a better way.
For me it involved a crap ton of CBT and learning how to re-interpret the world and a lot of reading and internal work. Also, the Humane Society helped me view this in action. Having to help animals heal taught me very much. Interestingly enough, this article set me on the right road:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/02/sports/football/02vickdogs.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
It’s about the rehabilitation of Michael Vick’s dogs that were abused in dogfighting. The same stuff you have to do to heal an abused animal is really similar to the work that humans have to do to recover. Creating an environment of trust and safety. It sounds like the family you are creating with your wife is really great. The more love you let in to your heart, the better things will get. You will be in my thoughts, Lokland.
(This is another good one, regarding animals.)
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/02/giving/at-the-gentle-barn-animals-and-people-find-healing-together.html
Peace
@Esco
“Flying spaghetti monster” is not a philosophical argument. Whether god (or gods) exist or not is not a philosophical question. It is a scientific question. He either exists or he does not. And the FSM is a helpful analogy. As in there is as much scientific evidence of a FSM ruling the universe as there is of the judeo-christian god (or any god for that matter).
@Susan
“What? This makes no sense to me. As I look around I see a lot of women somewhere in between.”
I agree.
However, your debate with some of the guys recently was exactly what I just gave you. Why did that occur if it is not a realistic interpretation of reality?
J is inaccurate on a few things:
i) I am in no way involved with the sphere, don’t read it, don’t think about it
ii) our entire society is based upon binary thought processes, not just the sphere, not just here, its everything we are
Examples,
Men are either players or total losers (which of course corresponds to only evil-nice).
Women are either hard ass workers or barefoot and pregnant.
You either got to university and live a good life or don’t go to post-sec and become a degenerate loser.
If your not for X, you must be against X (god forbid you every say you don’t really care about racism. Its the equivalent of being a racist apparently.)
I think this binary thought process is an idea(l) that the boomers thought of as it would make everyone a winner or loser, all that needs be done is alter the definitions of winning….
Beyond that, I actually did lead a binary life which went from good to bad in the span of approx. 6 months.
Its very easy to say how wrong it is to be robbed if you flash cash at 8 mile until your actually robbed at 8 mile while flashing cash.
Then you realize that blaming the predators for preying on you is a rather fruitless endeavour.
Rabbit: How dare you try and eat me lynx, you are morally corrupt.
Lynx: Yes but your dead and I’m full.
Therefore, the responsibility of not being eaten is on the rabbit, not the predator. Bitch about it all you want but it is what it is.
@Susan
“I can’t even begin to wrap my mind around the idea of getting walked on every day for 15 years, short of being a prisoner, hostage, or something like that.”
Thats because you were never an Omega who had such an idealized view of humanity that self defence was not a necessity as others would never take advantage of you.
Which in reality was a cover for weakness and an inability to defend oneself.
Its quite simple, being at the absolute bottom entails being walked on by everyone. People are not kind, good or moral.
They will use, abuse and extort everything they can as long as they do not face consequence.
The only option is to become stronger.
@J
First of all, it shouldn’t be one adult’s responsibility to tell another adult the same thing that was said day after day. I threw that in there so that nobody would get hung up on what would or would not happen, and focus on the differences in perspective as a philosophical matter.
For what it’s worth, I have had FWB’s too. One asked me to tell her if and when I felt we’d never work out. I did just that in the bluntest terms possible. She kept sleeping with me. So I really think people need to ditch this notion that women are always gunning for commitment and are incapable of looking out for themselves while at the same time having fun. The world is rarely so simple IME.
@Susan:
” Just listen to how afraid the young people here are about having their hearts broken. It’s understandable, but also inevitable, I think. At least for most people. My heart got stomped on a few times. You pick yourself up, reflect and learn whatever the experience can teach you, and get back out there.”
I think the problem is that you continue accumulating pain. So each time you get stomped on, you just get more total pain.
It also depends on how deep the emotional wound is. Some heal. Some don’t.
Plus, being in a puddle on the floor crying for several weeks, so to speak, doesn’t sound like fun to people.
I am yet to find a woman (and have found only about 2-3 guys total) who knows anything about railroad freight operations, internal design of modern diesel locomotives and applied color theory from the perspective of human eye anatomy and color recognition processes in human brain.
Maybe you should go for a woman willing to learn this things? I know next to nothing about Orcs and Miniature painting and even though far from an expert I can talk with my hubby about it and cheer him up when he finish a piece he is proud of. You just need to do your homework and filter for the ones that won’t get into to that, just FYI.
I wonder how much money I could successfully get from those chumps per month? I may never need to go grocery shopping again, not to mention my entertainment costs will decrease significantly. This should be fun!
This sounds like a good script for a thriller. Forget boiling bunnies and femme fatales and Black Widows marrying for money and getting other men to kill you. Beware the Cockteaser!
I doubt that Hitler, Stalin or Mao lost much sleep over killing people by the multiple millions. People without morals can have free lunches.
Hitler defeated killed his wife and himself, Mao agonized about dying asking his doctors his condition, Stalin was found on a pool of his own piss who he had been lying for hours before dying 4 days later. It might look like a small punishment for their deeds but time is relative and their last hours I’m sure were like centuries in hell for them.
I have talked to many older people at the edge of dying and in their golden years all they can remember is all the people they wronged, even if you don’t believe in the afterlife me thinks that leaving this world with the memories of all the shitty things you did seems like a terrible way to go. And trust me your brain won’t remember just the sex, but the little voice in the back of your mind that knew very well what you were doing exactly and how. I never seen anyone not paying in one way or another for their bad deeds, YMMV.
Hell, I’ll even confess to dreaming of marrying the prince when my mom read me fairy tales, but I “settled” for a smart guy from a somewhat lower SES than me who had a helluva lot of drive.
But you did married your prince is just a smaller kingdom
And I can’t remember who, but someone quoted Newton’s third law. IF the world was a perfectly efficient closed system, this would work as an analogy to “Karma”. But it’s not and the world is not that simple.
I did what make you think this planet/world/universe is not a closed system?
But isn’t that the point? It’s clear that they see no consequences, so their conscience is clear! But there’s a lot of people, me and you, I suspect, who see plenty. Their lack of vision doesn’t change that.
Still the consequences of her lifestyle will catch up to her in due time. Living as a parasite doesn’t work forever.
Last night I was at the gym and I am too stupid to know how to work the tv remotes, so I got stuck watching televangelism for an hour on the treadmill. At first I thought it was SNL or something, because it was so craven, gross and money-hungry– pimping of imitation leather Bibles. Ugh!
And He said to them, “It is written, ‘MY HOUSE SHALL BE CALLED A HOUSE OF PRAYER’; but you are making it a ROBBERS’ DEN.”
Where do I fall on the morality spectrum? I believe that in a selfish world such as this, people should look out for themselves like Lokland does. I also tend to do the right thing and be rather altruistic, even though my moral system suggests I should look out for myself.
I really feel for the betas sometimes. They are the noble beasts of burden of the SMP, they harbor a sense of loyal duty that perhaps only canines can really fathom/deserve, they are the factory workers who were promised lifetime employment and then had the rug pulled out, they are the workhorses who ultimately make the Great Female Call Option—Mommy Track or Career Track—possible.
The alphas either want to become players with soft harems or they want to become “toxic maximizers”, to use Lori Gottlieb’s phrase, who demand drama-free, nymphomaniacal Stepford Wife/Barbie Dreamhouse perfection with attendant daily BJs, perfect ribeyes, and end of day celebrations featuring flattery, Thai massage, and Macallan 25.
The betas carry the load for all of us, really. Their hours are long and, in this SMP, their “pay” kind of sucks.
« 1 2 3 4 … 6 »