Girl Game Today, Same As It Ever Was

December 11, 2012

Louise Brooks

“The Technique of the Love Affair makes, I am bitterly afraid, considerable sense. If only it had been placed in my hands years ago, maybe I could have been successful instead of just successive.” 

Dorothy Parker

In 1928 Doris Langley Moore wrote The Technique of the Love Affair at the age of 23. Langley Moore was a Byron scholar, a costume designer, a novelist, a friend of George Bernard Shaw’s and a a newlywed when she penned the tongue-in-cheek guide to making men fall in love with you. Modeled after Plato’s Symposium, it was an immediate sensation and scandal in England.

Long out of print, the book was rereleased ten years ago, and received a positive reception from critics. Reviewing it for the New York Times, Liesl Schillinger wrote:

If enough women read it, there may yet be time for the Irresistible Woman to avoid going the way of the dodo.

The book…is a virtual cocktail shaker on paper, written by a young woman who styles herself ”A Gentlewoman,” and it could very possibly undo the years of damage that earnest flocks of pastel volumes have worked on formerly swashbuckling female psyches. 

Reading about the SMP of the 1920s, I was immediately struck by the similarities to our own era. From the book’s jacket:

Its readers were the so-called New Women who emerged during World War I. The subject of cartoons in The New Yorker and Punch, the typical modern woman lived in a bachelor flat in the city; she earned her own living and believed in “sexual freedom” (although she might not have known exactly what that meant). She smoked cigarettes, drank cocktails, and swore in public. She even looked different: Slim and uncorseted, she wore her skirts short and her hair bobbed. To all appearances, she was physically, legally, and emotionally emancipated. The generation gap between the woman of the 1920s and her Victorian mother was all but unbridgeable, and a girl could no longer look to her elders for advice.

Langley Moore understood the sexual economy of the time – a male shortage after WWI resulted in a sex ratio that increased female intrasexual competition. Her book was meant to give women an edge over their less prepared flapper sisters. Technique offers specific guidelines for the newfangled practice called “dating.”

In one generation the Byzantine rituals of Victorian courtship had undergone a revolution: single women no longer extended invitations to suitors to “call” or held “at homes.” Now even respectable women went unchaperoned to nightclubs, restaurants, and movies. The modern date was born, and the once neutral telephone became an instrument of both despair and bliss.

…It was a time when men and women had dalliances or affairs, not relationships…This was an age in which it was important not to be earnest; flippancy and cynicism were sane responses to an insane war.

Schilllinger:

Where the Rules girl seeks a clothesline of her own, the Technique woman wants frolic, Champagne, banter and devotion, although she knows that ”it is generally only in the course of a light affair that the serious one springs up.”

Sounds like hookup culture, no?

Still, she is a sensualist who courts experience to perfect her craft, as well as a realist who knows that ”it is useless to tell men we are independent, and then beg them to come and dance with us,” so one might as well admit the need to scheme all along.

This is the refreshingly honest dissimilarity – the acknowledgement of sex differences allows the open sharing of the secrets to tripping a man’s switches, which can not really have changed much in just 80 years. Keep in mind that this guide is about sexual attraction, not finding a husband. It assumes that men are in a position of strategic advantage – no assumption of apex fallacy here. 

Here is a summary of Langley Moore’s strategy – all written by her or paraphrased.

Ten General Principles

1. We dare not give reign to our generosity, because men soon tire of what is soon obtained. 

2. A woman has not made a conquest until she finds herself pursued. Her conquest and the pursuit are synonymous; there cannot be one without the other.

3. Your surest weapon and most powerful spell lie in his own hunger for possession of you. Until you fulfill your ambition, you must always remain unattainable.

4. A man does not often want what nobody else would have. He covets what others have already found desirable. The more proof he has that you are sought after, the more convinced he will be that you are worth seeking.

5. You must not let his love stagnate the moment he has obtained you, but subtly rouse him to fresh pursuit whenever he shows apathy.

6. The most certain way of losing prestige is to let a man see that he occupies a more important place in your mind than you in his, but a woman who is infatuated will find it difficult to conceal her feelings.

7. The knowledge that there is a soul desperate with devotion before them can only excite pity or amusement, not love. In her abjectness and anxiety she ceases even to be congenial company. Her unhappiness is tedious, and he begins to chafe under his responsibility.

8. Never remonstrate with a man whose desire is flagging. Cease to see him, cease to communicate with him, let him hear rumours of others’ interest in you. If he has any lingering residue of possessive passion for you, these measures will bring him back to your side, and if not, you are acquitted without indignity.

9. It is not just physical desire that he seeks. He also wants intimacy. When he cherishes and protects you, enjoy it. Draw him into slight intimacies that seem charming, he will want more.

10. Do not give a man an idea which may prove disadvantageous to you. E.g., that he finds a certain other woman more fascinating that yourself, that he will cheat on you, etc. If you show that you expect infidelity, you will get it.

The Fundamental Principle of Femininity

1. Contrast is the keynote. Be different from the man in female ways.

2. Avoid being nasty about other females or blabbing their secrets.

3. If a man is able, he enjoys the burden of providing for you, and enjoys the feeling that you are dependent, his dependent. Be dependent materially and independent spiritually.

4. To sustain admiration for an indefinite period, display good nature, a sense of honor and a capacity for friendship. But never show yourself to be completely unselfish in your devotion to him.

5. Refinement of taste is an important virtue. Avoid indelicate conversation and coarse language.

Men to Avoid

1. Men whose prestige is much greater than your own. You need to feel at ease, even a little superior, to enjoy yourself.

2. Men with whom you would always have to make the first move.

3. Men who must conceal you

4. Men who are dissolute

Tactics

1. Be interesting

  • Have poise of manner (free from self-consciousness or arrogance)
  • Don’t laugh with abandon, becoming ungainly
  • Don’t become vehement in discussion
  • Be lively without being obstreperous.
  • Be spirited but never carried away.

2. Display accomplishments and allurements without calling attention to them.

  • Be cheerful, free from hint of grief or dejection. Misery long sustained begets pity without sexual love. 

3. Dress well.

  • The less women’s clothing resembles their own, the more men like it.

“Whether is was the first cause or not, from the earliest times one impt. Function of clothing was to promote erotic activity: to attract men and women to one another, thus ensuring the survival of the species. One basic purpose of costume, therefore, is to distinguish men from women.

Alison Lurie, The Language of Clothes, 1981

  • Dress like the women around you, only more sumptuously. Originality and distinction makes men uncomfortable.
  • If a woman is not groomed to perfection from head to foot, she will lack the necessary self-confidence.

4. Display a talent for flattery.

  • Seem attentive to his conversation; conceal signs of boredom, but don’t look too eagerly engrossed.
  • Draw a man out to speak about himself, but never attempt to probe him for secrets. This will make him think of you as more of a friend.
  • Don’t tell him secrets of yours until you are sure he likes you.

5. Be more generous with words than actions.

  • Actions should seem more indifferent than infatuated. If you are always flattering a man, he will see that you want him badly, and stop pursuing.
  • If you are always cold and casual, he will think you don’t want him at all, and a passion cannot flourish when rebuffed at every turn.
  • Many women [are] rude in their speech but complacent in every act. Better to spare no kindness that the tongue can utter.
  • Express gladness to see him, but show no desire for his company in any of your actions, i.e. pursuit.
  • When he is with you, let him feel strong, courageous, generous. 
  • If you signal to him that you expect to be treated poorly, he will comply. Men will give you whatever you seem to ask of them, so ask much. 

Methods of Approach

1. Don’t approach a man who is engrossed in another woman.

2. Any appearance of haste is unseemly and may defeat the purpose.

3. Don’t single a man out for special glances or flattery, unless you know you will have no opportunity later. Be encouraging at the second or third meeting, giving a hint of sexual interest.

4. Being good at flirting lets him know that you are used to the attentions of men.

5. Do not respond as much as he would like; make a little show of surrender. Always give a little less of yourself than is wanted, a little less than satisfies.

6. If he is indifferent, give it up immediately. An unattached man who is indifferent to your flattery is indifferent to you.

7. In a group of men, be delightful and personal with each of them. Don’t single any one man out for particular attention unless you can do it without being observed. Be so kind to the women that your attention to the men does not stand out. If there is a woman likely to resent you, be extremely amiable to her, and distinguish her by all the courtesy you can show.

Errors Common to Love Affairs

1. Allowing yourself to be won without adequate preparation, or taken unaware. The occasion of your surrender should be prearranged and have the ideal background. Do not let him think his victory an easy one. What he wins, or thinks he wins, easily, he will not esteem.

2. Attempting to arouse a fatigued or worried man to demonstrations of emotion. By taking the role of supplicant you make him feel that the right order of things has been upset, and give him a mortifying memory of yourself. Before a man has declared himself, make no concessions of any importance, but once he has done so, it is very unwise to demand repetitions and confirmations, for it will indicate over-anxiety.

“It is proverbial that after a woman tells a man she loves him, he assumes she’ll continue to do so until she says otherwise. In contrast, women seem to require periodic updates on a man’s emotional temperature. Fear and anxiety, and the behavior they engender, are lethal to love and well-being.”

3. Calling attention to one’s own defects. Conceal flaws if possible and do not apologize for them. In a love affair, you should display your assurance and conceal your humility.

Langley Moore’s only nod to marriage:

“Even those who would reform or abolish matrimony are prone to forsake their principles when they are seized with a passion for one who cannot be otherwise obtained.”

There is much wisdom here, and little I would disagree with. I have used many of these suggestions to great effect myself. Unfortunately, feminine and masculine roles have largely been lost since DLM wrote her book. Women are not practiced at communicating interest and attraction, and men are not practiced at reading those cues. Much of what DLM recommends will be most effective with men displaying a high degree of self-confidence. Then again, self-confidence is a strong female attractor, and she provides an excellent roadmap for engaging those men. It is interesting to note that Langley Moore speaks of the benefits of preselection, playful teasing, and a bit of push pull as important tools.

Finally, as noted above, Langley Moore has written a how-to for passionate love affairs. I see no reason why one’s approach to relationships should not be the same, as exciting a man’s sexual interest is crucial for both. The key is to follow her 1920’s guidelines for when to have sex, not contemporary ones.

  • Even though I am first, I doubt I will be the last to realize that Miss Moore’s advice to the lassies sounds eerily similar to Roissy’s and Rooosh’s advice to the lads.

    See esp. the Ten Principles – all social proofing, DHV, and dread.

    • @Mule

      Even though I am first, I doubt I will be the last to realize that Miss Moore’s advice to the lassies sounds eerily similar to Roissy’s and Rooosh’s advice to the lads.

      See esp. the Ten Principles – all social proofing, DHV, and dread.

      Yes, hence the title of the post. I wondered whether Erik von Markovik might have cribbed some of her advice.

  • Lokland

    Quite a few things on this list are very good.

    ——————–

    Quite a few others could be considered the equivalent of Roissy’s Rule of Three which you expressly view as a dark game tactic.

    Though obviously effective the argument is typically that the women obtained using this strategy are of lower quality.

    Should we assume the same of men obtained in a similar way?

    • @Lokland

      Quite a few others could be considered the equivalent of Roissy’s Rule of Three which you expressly view as a dark game tactic.

      What is the rule of three? It’s not obvious to me from the Commandments of Poon. I would note that Roissy’s commandment refer to a relationship, not just seduction. He believes in going Dark from the get go and staying Dark throughout.

      Here, Langley Moore is strictly discussing seduction, not commitment.

      Which things on DLM’s list do you think are unethical?

  • @Lokland

    Strangely, I have the intuition that the men obtain in this manner would actually be of higher value, but don’t ask me why. Women have a strange valuation system for men.

    Nevertheless, I’m reminded of the saying – “what it took to hook ’em is what it’ll take to keep ’em”.

  • Lokland

    @mule

    I suspect your right.
    Your are 100% correct though, I thought I was reading a mixture of Roissy and Susan for a minute.

    Some of these points are really good. Others are dark.

  • maven

    holy shit, its like PUA manual… gender reversed

    it looks like guys are in the same situation like women were after 2WW

  • JP

    Meanwhile, back in the science labs…

    “Scientists may have finally solved the puzzle of what makes a person gay, and how it is passed from parents to their children.

    A group of scientists suggested Tuesday that homosexuals get that trait from their opposite-sex parents: A lesbian will almost always get the trait from her father, while a gay man will get the trait from his mother…

    …Evolutionarily speaking, if homosexuality was solely a genetic trait, scientists would expect the trait to eventually disappear because homosexuals wouldn’t be expected to reproduce. But because these epi-marks provide an evolutionary advantage for the parents of homosexuals: They protect fathers of homosexuals from underexposure to testosterone and mothers of homosexuals from overexposure to testosterone while they are in gestation.”

    http://www-origin.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/12/11/scientists-may-have-finally-unlocked-puzzle-of-why-people-are-gay

  • LJ

    I’m curious as to what tactics people find dark? To me I read this advice as, “Be cute, be friendly and pleasant, play a little coy/hard to get.”

    How is that like PUA tactics?

    The only thing I maybe find a little disagreeable is the “Rules” advice of acting like you’re not interested instead of being straightforward.

  • Cooper

    I’m really not liking this post… 🙁

    It’s all Principle of Least Interest – a concept that relies heavily on the idea that we don’t value what we don’t have to work for.

    It’s stupid, IMO. Unattainable=/=desirable.

    It seems to imply that men are barely aware of whom they want to pursue, rather more of what other men are chasing. Like we’d fight over a boar (literally) if enough other guys were, rather than notice a nice girl.

    “4. Being good at flirting lets him know that you are used to the attentions of men.”
    You really think a guy needs a girl to demonstrate she’s experienced in flirting to know she’s worth pursuing?
    If we’re already flirting, it’s cause I’m interested, and if she starts to try to ‘prove’ how flirty she can be, I’ll think she’s too much into games.

    “The more proof he has that you are sought after, the more convinced he will be that you are worth seeking.”

    Again, pass. I’m don’t interested in joining a line of suitors. Nor am I going to pursue a girl who holds one either.

    “subtly rouse him to fresh pursuit whenever he shows apathy.”

    If he becomes indifferent – do the same. (Indifference is about the opposite of interst)
    So, IOW, if he becomes “less intereted” rouse him to fresh pursuit by seeming less interested. (See #3)

    #6 is straight up the “2/3rds” rule – or PLI.

    A girl playing #3 would have me drop her.

    “If you are always flattering a man, he will see that you want him badly, and stop pursuing”

    Yeah…I don’t like this one either.

    Maybe I just don’t know the difference between a hopeless pursuit and one being layed out for me. When I start to have my interest stretched, and see a general waning in interest on her part, I don’t see that as an invitation to pursue.
    For example, if I’m meeting a girl halfway, in order for her to implement this “pursuit” is she’d had to withdraw to make me, essentially, “catch” her. Well, if I think we’re supposed to be meeting half way, 1. I wouldn’t feel comfortable extending past half way (for numerous reasons) and 2. I’d feel that she is undervaluing me in thinking she doesn’t have to do her half, or at she is truly uninterested.

    I’m dealing with this with Ms. Flakey still. To be honest, you’d sware she’s doing all this stuff – in that she’s making me work for her attention. My initially thoughts are it sucks, it’s stupid, and it’s a waste of time. But having said that, she hasn’t lost my interest (as she very well could have if she’d gone about it differently)

    So, is that the part of the success of instilling-pursuit? (Hehe)
    Driving men crazy?

    Cause it’s a thin line, I feel. It’s kinda like getting a man to be patient, it works on different guy (good and bad) differently.
    Many nince guys have been crippled by their patience, in their past. As well as, toyed-with with for freely giving out their validation. (Not to mention orbiting)
    So, a girl attempting to generate a pursuit (via PLI tactics) could very well come off as an uninterested, AW.

  • Just1Z

    I wonder if the gender war has gone too far for this?

    how much feminine mystique can exist if the other half of women are running around on slut walks and high fiving each other with ‘you go girl’? tattoos up the wazoo (literally sometimes) and facial piercings. and starring in amateur on-line porn of course.

    I’m also not sure that men enjoy the chase as much as women enjoy being chased.

    I can see this approach tying into the SAHM mommy path that Susan claimed was the new target for women. Is providing for a SAHM the new target for men? maybe, if they want kids as much as the women, I guess. but I’m not sure that I’d work 60+ hour weeks in a stressful job so that my little woman could stay home. by downsizing the (woman’s) lifestyle aspirations to match an acceptable (to the man) worklife…maybe. sounds a little like settling though, rather than living the dream…I guess we’ll see.

    interesting seeing a flashback to earlier attitudes though

  • INTJ

    @ Just1Z

    I’m also not sure that men enjoy the chase as much as women enjoy being chased.

    This is the big glaring disagreement I had with her advice.

  • INTJ

    @ Cooper

    Cosign your entire post (#8).

    It seems to imply that men are barely aware of whom they want to pursue, rather more of what other men are chasing. Like we’d fight over a boar (literally) if enough other guys were, rather than notice a nice girl.

    This is very important. Men don’t view heuristics such as preselection and least interest to determine a girl’s value.

    • @INTJ

      Men don’t view heuristics such as preselection and least interest to determine a girl’s value.

      They do, though. Men want the highest SMV female they can get, and the way they feel confident in her SMV is the response of other males to her.

      I have often heard men say that they were proud to be with the girl “that all the guys want.” I’ve also heard reports from many women who have been told that is a key part of their attractiveness.

      WRT PLI, all human beings are susceptible to that.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    First of all, shaking my head the at the ten principles because they are guy game. Women trying this stuff will probably fail to snag any guy of substance that they would want to keep (read: man just higher than her on the totem pole) using these tactics. These are pretty much a fail for a girl unless you want to look like a game player, or attract a player who will do the dance right back at you.

    The rest is good, with a few caveats:

    “1. Men whose prestige is much greater than your own. You need to feel at ease, even a little superior, to enjoy yourself.”

    NO. Hypergamy anyone? LOL. The minute a woman starts feeling superior to her man is the minute she starts feeling dissatisfied. The whole “feeling superior” thing is the entire problem. You know more about women than to say this.

    “2. Men with whom you would always have to make the first move.”

    This needs more nuance. Game is roughly equivalent to walking a line, that line being too interested, and not enough. A girl should not pursue a guy who is continuously disinterested, but a lot of times to get the attention man worth having, she WILL have to make the first move. By first move, I mean she will have to be in his space or somehow make it possible for them to talk. Susan, you are fond of saying something to the effect of “men display, women select”. This doesn’t mean what you think it does. Women select, but that doesn’t mean a man worth having should leave his sphere just for her. These types of men have plenty of female attention that is the side effect of their lifestyle, not the focus of it. So no, you can’t sit back and dangle your hand out to be kissed. You’ll have to select and then go after him in a somewhat indirect, feminine way.

    • @Bro Hamlet

      NO. Hypergamy anyone? LOL. The minute a woman starts feeling superior to her man is the minute she starts feeling dissatisfied. The whole “feeling superior” thing is the entire problem. You know more about women than to say this.

      Whoops, that’s not me talking, that’s Langley Moore. I guess I’d better go back and make that clear. All of the principles and suggestions are hers.

      I agree with you about hypergamy, but I think she’s correct in saying that women should avoid men with higher SMV than their own. Research clearly shows that the most successful couples are ones where the woman is more attractive than the man. Also, a woman with lower SMV than a man cannot keep him – as we see with the unleashed hypergamy evident in casual sex.

      Langley Moores advice to avoid men with considerably higher SMV is sound.

      You’ll have to select and then go after him in a somewhat indirect, feminine way.

      That is Langley Moore’s point. Women need to be indirect and maneuver to get the guy to make the first move. He must initiate and pursue or he will not value the “catch,” according to her.

  • JP

    “I can see this approach tying into the SAHM mommy path that Susan claimed was the new target for women. Is providing for a SAHM the new target for men? maybe, if they want kids as much as the women, I guess. but I’m not sure that I’d work 60+ hour weeks in a stressful job so that my little woman could stay home.”

    Again, I though that the point was to have a SAHM because that’s best for the children.

    Somebody has to work unless you have a trust fund.

    • Again, I though that the point was to have a SAHM because that’s best for the children.

      Agreed. Women who think SAHM is a day at the beach have a rude awakening coming. For me the hours were longer, much more physically taxing and less intellectually stimulating than working 80 hour weeks in consulting. Hardest job I’ve ever done by a mile.

      Men who think they’re doing women a favor by funding SAHM are also deluded. I’ve shared that my husband is the one who proposed it. He viewed it as something with a high ROI, and he was correct, at least in our case.

      The fact that women are willing or eager to stay at home with their children does not mean that they are entitled. It means they have realized they can’t have a family and a career, and they choose family.

  • Cooper

    I thought #8 was real good.

    “8. Never remonstrate with a man whose desire is flagging. Cease to see him, cease to communicate with him, let him hear rumours of others’ interest in you. If he has any lingering residue of possessive passion for you, these measures will bring him back to your side, and if not, you are acquitted without indignity.”

  • deti

    Susan, I think this misses the broad side of the barn by a country mile. This is play hard to get, Principle of Least Interest, and “The Rules”.

    If a girl does any of this stuff in this SMP, most men will just walk away because it — and she — is not worth the effort.

  • Pixie

    @INTJ

    For clarification, lets just say there are two girls in a class of yours. One of them, you think is hot, and all your guy friends agree. The second girl, you also think is hot, but all your guy friends think she’s gross. Your guy friends opinions wouldn’t make the unanimously hot girl slightly more appealing to you, or the hot/not hot girl maybe slightly less appealing now?

  • JP

    ““8. Never remonstrate with a man whose desire is flagging. Cease to see him, cease to communicate with him, let him hear rumours of others’ interest in you. If he has any lingering residue of possessive passion for you, these measures will bring him back to your side, and if not, you are acquitted without indignity.””

    Yes.

    In my case, when the women did this, since I didn’t have any lingering residue, I could simply never talk to them again.

    Problem solved for everybody.

  • deti

    Pixie 16:

    Not really. It might influence my view of the two girls a little, but in no way are my friends’ opinions going to influence a decision on which to pursue, or when.

  • INTJ

    @ Pixie

    For clarification, lets just say there are two girls in a class of yours. One of them, you think is hot, and all your guy friends agree. The second girl, you also think is hot, but all your guy friends think she’s gross. Your guy friends opinions wouldn’t make the unanimously hot girl slightly more appealing to you, or the hot/not hot girl maybe slightly less appealing now?

    I think the average guy would be swayed a little bit by his friends’ opinions, but the difference won’t be much compared to the typical variation in hotness.

    I personally would actually find the second girl more appealing. But I wouldn’t generalize from myself to other men.

  • Pixie

    @INTJ, deti:

    From my personal experience, it doesn’t seem like either situation as a stand alone would influence the average guy too much, but if it was an either-or situation, then guys would typically go for the girl their friends agree with, ymmv.

  • BroHamlet

    @Cooper

    “I thought #8 was real good.”

    It’s fine to leave a guy who’s not interested enough, and I highly recommend that, but this part is lame and shows a weak position:

    ” …let him hear rumours of others’ interest in you.”

    Really? Or you could go about your life and be a person of ACTUAL value. This sounds like a jealousy ploy, and anyone who would use it on you isn’t really that high on the pyramid. A good product sells itself without the need for rumor.

    Susan, maybe instead of teaching girls to game from the outside in, you could teach them to do so from the inside out. Then there’s no need for checklists. Essentially a lot of these things are elementary pick up tactics, the type that are naturally embodied by desirable people. You can fake it till you make it, or you can change your mind and let the outer stuff follow as a result.

    • @Bro Hamlet

      Susan, maybe instead of teaching girls to game from the outside in, you could teach them to do so from the inside out.

      I think that there are many women of high value who do not know how to inspire sexual interest in males. It’s a skill set we removed from the culture long ago. Langley Moore’s advice is exactly what grandmothers used to tell their granddaughters. Women counseling women on how to be attractive to men. Today women rely on showing cleavage or most of their legs. We no longer know how to intrigue men – we’re too much like them.

      The fact is, men respond to female traits, including coyness. They enjoy feminine wiles, which are a key component of femininity. Langley Moore is right – the woman who is nurturing and compliant with no commitment is supplicating, and will not appear high value to a man, or not for long.

  • Ted D

    Pixie – I’d actually tend to go for the hot/not girl myself. If less of my friends are “interested” in her, my chances of having to fight off other guys is smaller, so easier overall situation.

    I could give a rats ass what my friends think of how “hot” or not my GF/Wife is. I’m the one that sleeps with her, so the only opinion that matters is mine.

  • deti

    @ Pixie:

    It’s not just the appeal the girls have; it’s also the work of the pursuit and the relative degree of difficulty involved as well.

    The first girl might be more appealing to the eye but the task of pursuing her will be less appealing. If other men think she is hot, she is pursued frequently and she will be more of a challenge.

    The second girl is hot to me and less so to others. She’ll probably be easier to pursue and thus less of a challenge. Second girl isn’t the hottest, but she is hot enough, and that is sufficient.

  • Pixie

    @deti

    In your scenario in 23, assuming everything is going well, would you (either you you, or as a generalization) say most guys would be content with that outcome, or to a certain degree would they think they settled?

  • INTJ

    @ Pixie

    I also don’t find most celebrities particularly attractive. Except Zooey Deschanel.

  • I prefer the cute girl who doesn’t realize how hot she is. It’s even better when other men don’t realize how hot she is. Because once you start dating her and she becomes more confident in herself, all the other guys will realize she exists and be jealous. Win-win.

  • Just1Z

    @Intj
    I’m not surprised that you agree with me, you’re clearly a smart guy!

    At the end of the day though, women are free to pursue whatever strategy they like, but whether men fall for it may be another thing.

    Also this attempt to raise the price of a woman’s interest (lack of haste in being caught, getting him to provide etc) has the usual reality gap issue for women; what the rest of the women are doing.

    Women always used to have to worry about the actions of the village bike lowering the cost of sex, now it’s how much the other half of the female population is selling sex for.

    Very few men enjoy the chase, this is why women read Mills and Boon / twilight / emo-porn as emo-porn. If true-romance really happened like that, this ‘literature’ would be seen as fact not fiction.

    Some of the steps might improve things for some of the women, but we are not going back to prolonged, chaste romance. which used to be the only game in town for men not wanting to marry the town bike. nowadays there’s a market cap price set by porn, x-box and unrestricted women. it isn’t very high.

    • @Just1Z

      Also this attempt to raise the price of a woman’s interest (lack of haste in being caught, getting him to provide etc) has the usual reality gap issue for women; what the rest of the women are doing.

      One of the reasons I found Langley Moore’s book so interesting is that hers is a guide for promiscuous women. This is most certainly not about commitment, it’s about attracting a high value male for a passionate love affair. (Though DLM notes that these may lead to more.)

      In her world, the woman is willing to have sex, at a timing of her choosing, in a premeditated way that gives her the best outcome.

      DLM’s strategy is economics, which you rightly point out is affected by the “supply.” I suppose the comparison might be between a fat old hooker and a pricey escort. DLM is advocating a luxury pricing strategy. Obviously, you need to have the SMV for it. Or at least the SMV that will entice your target market.

  • Pixie

    @INTJ

    Are they legitimately not your type physically, or do you think the presumed characteristics of being a celebrity impacts your perception of them?

  • Ted D

    Cooper – +1 on your comments. I see a lot of female “dark game” in this, and as others have pointed out I’m not sure much of it is even useful.

    Seems like any woman that plays “hard to get” is going to only catch guys that “like the challenge”. I don’t know exactly what type of man goes for such a woman, but most guys I know (my age and younger) would see a woman like that as “high maintenance” or something similar. Not exactly the vibe I’d be throwing out there myself.

    • @Ted

      Seems like any woman that plays “hard to get” is going to only catch guys that “like the challenge”.

      Men with options do like a challenge, in my experience. It’s one of the reasons cads invest weeks in trying to bed freshmen. 🙁 And the highest SMV guys who are committed inevitably go for a very high SMV woman who brings a lot of sex appeal.

      How many times have we heard guys admit that they will date “psycho bitches” because they’re hot? Guys will do all kinds of jumping through hoops for hot, sexy girls. Every girl here knows that is true, we’ve all seen it a hundred times.

  • Just1Z

    @Mules
    “what it took to hook ‘em is what it’ll take to keep ‘em”.

    yeah, but there’s also, “familiarity breeds contempt”. and this one is supported by the divorce stats. 🙂

  • LJ

    I wonder if ya’ll are reading a different thing from “play hard to get” than I am. I didn’t read it like she’s telling women to be like,

    “Hmm.. let’s see Saturday won’t wont because I’m going to the movies with Tom and Sunday I’m getting my nails done and then meeting up with Sam… and next weeks is pretty booked… are you free 2 weeks from Tuesday?”

    But to just NOT be like (after a first date), “I had a great time! When can I see you again? I’m free all week!”

    Believe it or not, I think there are girls who can swing too far to the latter end of the spectrum and this advice is aimed for them.

    • @LJ

      But to just NOT be like (after a first date), “I had a great time! When can I see you again? I’m free all week!”

      Believe it or not, I think there are girls who can swing too far to the latter end of the spectrum and this advice is aimed for them.

      Correct. She is telling women not to be supplicating, which lowers their value.

      Interestingly, reviewers specifically mentioned that the book is 1,000 times better than the crappy Rules. Not at all the same thing.

  • deti

    Pixie 24:

    I’ve been in exactly this situation. I learned the hard way, more than once, that Second Hot Girl Who Friends Think Is Gross isn’t “settling”.

    Every time I went for First Hot Girl, I regretted it or it didn’t work out so well.

    Every time I went for Second Hot Girl. it worked out OK.

    I’ve also been in the situation where you ditch Second Hot Girl to pursue a First Hot Girl. Bad, bad idea. If you’ve got a good thing going with a girl who’s hot enough, you don’t torpedo it in hopes of getting something better.

  • HanSolo

    @LJ

    I don’t know who these totally available girls are. Most I meet are on the play hard to get side of things. In fact someone on the other side, telling me they had a great time and want to see me again (assuming I like her) will be a fresh relief and bump up her attractiveness in my mind because I don’t want a girl who plays all kinds of games.

    • @HanSolo

      I don’t want a girl who plays all kinds of games.

      Which of Langley Moore’s suggestions do you believe are manipulative or dishonest, i.e. playing games?

  • INTJ

    @ Pixie

    Are they legitimately not your type physically, or do you think the presumed characteristics of being a celebrity impacts your perception of them?

    I’d say there are two categories.

    The first is where celebrities slap on a bunch of makeup and stuff to try to look good looking, but speaking in terms of natural looks, they’re either really old, or young but average looking. In this case, most men seem to see through the makeup and have the same perception of looks as me, but women seem to have the misconception that they’re pretty. Jennifer Aniston is an example of this.

    The second is one of “not my type”. I think there’s a divide between guys who prefer the “hot” look, and guys who prefer the “cute” look. For example, I can agree that, objectively, Megan Fox was hot (prior to her plastic surgery). But she’s not really my type.

  • LJ

    @ HanSolo… Hmm, another example maybe that’s maybe more common is responding to a 10pm booty call/text after a few weeks of dating.

  • Pixie

    @deti

    Do you think these are scenarios/lessons that need to be learned? I’m in college, and everything you described on the “do not do” list seems to very often be exactly what I see friends and peers do. For guys and girls alike.

    • @Pixie

      I’m in college, and everything you described on the “do not do” list seems to very often be exactly what I see friends and peers do. For guys and girls alike.

      Full disclosure: Deti is a 40+ dad of two. Different generation entirely.

  • Ramble

    Reading about the SMP of the 1920s, I was immediately struck by the similarities to our own era.

    Susan, there is a reason why I often reference the early (i.e. pre-War) 1900s when I say that this is what we will ultimately return to.

    While Modernism had started in many areas before the 1920s, it was the 1920s where is exploded. My guess is that this had as much to do with the aftermath of The Great War as it did with the economic policies (The Federal Reserve had been created not long before the 20s and had started to have a major impact on our economy by the early to mid 20s) and increasing amount of industrial “luxuries” (wealthy people could now more easily afford to live outside of urban areas with the proliferation of the automobile) that were available to the upper class.

    And Modernism, in general, meant subverting all that was traditional. Stark architecture with lots of smooth lines, flat roofs, lots of glass…and the same deal with female fashion.

    Shorter hair, the “Bob” (it literally has a masculine name), flat breasts and straight hips were now in vogue, and “bawdy” behaviour, speech and humor.

    Now, it should be said that this was really only happening in the largest and wealthiest areas. Very little of this was happening in Kansas.

    And, once that economic bubble popped in the late 20’s and early 30s, so much of Modernism went away and would not make a real comeback until well after WWII and, more specifically, after the economy started humming again.

    • @Ramble

      I do find the history of courtship fascinating, as it reflects the economy, world politics, local politics (Prohibition), immigration, etc. Once the era of the gentleman caller ended, and girls managed their own lives via telephone, parents lost most of their influence. They tried to be strict, but they couldn’t keep their Italian son from meeting and falling for an Irish girl, and they couldn’t keep that Irish girl at home and virginal.

      As you may recall, premarital sex rates have always been high – even the Pilgrims are estimated to have had it at a rate of 50%, based on marriage and birth records.

  • Pixie

    @Ramble

    So do you think the current economic down turn will help to encourage more traditional life styles again?

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    Seems like any woman that plays “hard to get” is going to only catch guys that “like the challenge”. I don’t know exactly what type of man goes for such a woman, but most guys I know (my age and younger) would see a woman like that as “high maintenance” or something similar. Not exactly the vibe I’d be throwing out there myself.

    Extreme pedestalizing lesser Deltas.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    I am HanSolo and I cannot endorse most of the “girl game” in this post (unless a woman is just looking to get laid but then they don’t need much game for that really unless they’re shooting way above their own SMV).

    However, I heartily endorse your post on “25 Politically Incorrect But Effective Ways to Make Him Your Boyfriend”:

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/08/09/relationshipstrategies/25-politically-incorrect-but-effective-ways-to-make-him-your-boyfriend/

    When I saw the current post I was so excited to read it but quickly became disappointed as so many of the points were to implement the principle of least interest. You do say “keep in mind that this guide is about sexual attraction, not finding a husband” and you are pointing out the similarities in the SMP between the 1920’s and today, not necessarily endorsing these tactics. However, this seems to be using the term “girl game” in a different way than previously–with quite different goals in mind.

    Many of the points seem like “girl game” to get players who love a challenge. Basically tease and be hard to get so that he wants to fuck you. But then, women have never had a very hard time in finding hotter men than themselves to fuck them. Basically, be as hot as you can, flirt, and be a cock tease and you’ll get many men excited and pursuing for a romp in the hay. But I think most women know that.

    I really would love another post on girl game for acquiring and maintaining long term relationships (aka, femininity and being nice and removing entitled, bitch anti-game).

    Cheers.

    • @Han Solo

      Many of the points seem like “girl game” to get players who love a challenge. Basically tease and be hard to get so that he wants to fuck you.

      I think that Langley Moore aims to instruct women how to be irresistible – essentially have to inspire obsession, a key element of limerence, and precursor to falling in love. History is rife with examples of precisely this dynamic between the sexes.

      Langley Moore recommends strong and stark contrast between the sexes.

      I really would love another post on girl game for acquiring and maintaining long term relationships (aka, femininity and being nice and removing entitled, bitch anti-game).

      Which of her ideas do you feel amount to entitlement? It seems to me that she is advising women to be the opposite of bitchy – why do you disagree?

      Aside from that question, do you feel that any are effective in sparking male interest?

  • deti

    Pixie 36:

    I don’t understand your questions.

    Do I think WHAT are scenarios/lessons that need to be learned?

    What did I describe on the “do not do” list? Not sure what you mean.

  • JP

    @Ramble:

    “Susan, there is a reason why I often reference the early (i.e. pre-War) 1900s when I say that this is what we will ultimately return to.

    While Modernism had started in many areas before the 1920s, it was the 1920s where is exploded. My guess is that this had as much to do with the aftermath of The Great War as it did with the economic policies (The Federal Reserve had been created not long before the 20s and had started to have a major impact on our economy by the early to mid 20s) and increasing amount of industrial “luxuries” (wealthy people could now more easily afford to live outside of urban areas with the proliferation of the automobile) that were available to the upper class.”

    The problem is that we’re not going back there.

    We’re going somewhere else.

    I don’t know where, but it’s not to the early 1900’s…or 1800’s….etc.

  • Just1Z

    @Intj
    “Extreme pedestalizing lesser Deltas.”

    and how do things work out for these guys, generally speaking? 😉

    I can’t see a self-preceived prize of a woman being happy when that gang came a-sniffing…the horror!

  • HanSolo

    @LJ

    I agree that the responding to the 10pm booty call and hoping that will turn into a relationship is not a wise strategy. But that’s trying to get a guy to fall in love with you through sex.

    The other example, of saying that you enjoyed being with him and want to see him again speaks to more emotional investment and doing some activities beyond only sex (though maybe they did have sex as well).

    Showing interest in seeing a man again who has gone out with her on one or more dates and shown interest (beyond just sex) in her is a good idea for a woman.

  • Pixie

    @deti

    Sorry, I’m typing on a phone so I was trying to keep my questions short. In your answer you said that typically going for Girl 2 worked out fine and didn’t feel like settling, whereas dropping Girl 2 for Girl 1, or only going for Girl 1, typically didn’t pan out so well. Since you had been through the various permutations of the either/or scenario, you say you’d probably go straight for Girl 2 because itd be less of a hassle. My question is, do you think people need to learn that Girl 1 is probably a more stressful situation, before they’d begin choosing Girl 2 in the first place?

  • Abbot

    “He covets what others have already found desirable.”

    So long as it was limited to desire, for the most part

  • Just1Z

    “My question is, do you think people need to learn that Girl 1 is probably a more stressful situation, before they’d begin choosing Girl 2 in the first place?”

    Yes, but the result of chasing girl#2 instead, because you believe her to be equally attractive, regardless of your friends’ opinions, is an easier lesson for men to learn than for women. We do not put as high a value on other people’s opinions as women do.

    It should not be a hard lesson to learn that you can join the queue of men competing to prove their betadom in a fight to the bottom for girl#1 – OR – get girl#2 without competition (and you find her equally attractive anyway).

    That’s not a tough lesson…

  • Abbot

    “how much feminine mystique can exist if the other half of women are running around on slut walks and high fiving each other with ‘you go girl’? tattoos up the wazoo (literally sometimes) and facial piercings. and starring in amateur on-line porn ”

    Wife worthiness has been completely purged form the system. Thus the willing-man shortage

  • This was what I did/do:

    – Work out. Eat well. Have healthy habits. Don’t be overweight or obese.

    – Keep hair long. No perfume, jewelry or makeup. Clothing that is girly but modest enough for work.

    – Smile. Be sweet, friendly, kind, and feminine. Don’t be loud, obnoxious, attention-seeking or profane.

    – Have an interest in typically masculine pursuits like video games, guns, or martial arts, where the gender ratio is very favorable.

    – Be generally helpful and easygoing, not overly flirtatious but friendly. Get to know a few guys and talk to them on a regular basis, but not in a dating context.

    – Eventually one of those guys would get more interested in me…

    And this is how I sidestepped the whole dating scene altogether. Every one of the guys who fell in love with me was my friend first. I have the opposite of the LJBF thing, whatever that would be called. IOLF, I only love friends?

  • deti

    “My question is, do you think people need to learn that Girl 1 is probably a more stressful situation, before they’d begin choosing Girl 2 in the first place?”

    Girl 1 is hot, she knows she’s hot, and other men besides me know she’s hot. Men in general already know chasing, getting and keeping Girl 1 is going to be stressful and a challenge. That’s probably good info for women in general to have also. Generally, men will take the path of least resistance when pursuing.

    Men should probably also know that being with a 5 or a 6 who is into him is probably going to be better in the long run than an 8 or a 9 who is not into him.

    It’s probably a good idea for women to internalize that they will NOT always lose out because they are not as hot as other girls they know. All she has to be is hot enough and available for approaching.

    • Girl 1 is hot, she knows she’s hot, and other men besides me know she’s hot. Men in general already know chasing, getting and keeping Girl 1 is going to be stressful and a challenge.

      …Men should probably also know that being with a 5 or a 6 who is into him is probably going to be better in the long run than an 8 or a 9 who is not into him.

      Most of this is taken care of via realistic self-assessment re SMV.

  • Ramble

    A man does not often want what nobody else would have. He covets what others have already found desirable. The more proof he has that you are sought after, the more convinced he will be that you are worth seeking.

    IOW, be physically attractive, be charming, and don’t be a bitch.

    Refinement of taste is an important virtue. Avoid indelicate conversation and coarse language.

    To me, this is hugely lacking today, and, as far as I can tell, it has been missing for a while.

    Girls, IME, tend to have awful taste in music, movies and TV (and the guys are not doing that much better). (With clothing, I find that most girls do not have horrible taste, but what they tend to where on a daily basis is not particularly good.) And, I think, one major example of how different we are today then how it was from yesteryear is how few girls can play a music instrument.

    There is a great scene from Mad Men where the tall, buxom secretary pulls out her accordion to play for guests at a dinner party. I am confident that Matt Wiener was sending a message with that scene that basically went like this, “Could you imagine a girl, today, learning to play the accordion and then playing it, for guests, in such a feminine manner?!”

  • Ramble

    …No perfume…

    Hope, no perfume. Do you use shampoo with a really nice aroma?

    There are few things as intoxicating as getting close to a girl who is wearing just the slightest amount of perfume that you can only detect when you get really close to her.

    She, almost literally, draws you in.

  • Ramble

    So do you think the current economic down turn will help to encourage more traditional life styles again?

    Actually, no. The Upper Class and much of the Upper Middle Class were not that affected by these things.

  • SayWhaat

    Don’t become vehement in discussion.

    …. o__o

  • Joe

    @Cooper, et. al.
    I can see your point about this resembling guy-game and about the down-side (for men) of this “chase me until I catch you” idea. For 20 somethings, it does seem a bit ridiculous.

    But in your 30s? Not so much. It becomes more subtle. When I read this, the mental image I had was very much Merna Loy in “The Thin Man” series of movies, circa mid-’30s to early ’40s. The Nora Charles character demonstrated pretty clearly that it works, rather nicely, in fact.

  • Pixie

    @Hope

    LOL at your use of “IOLF”

  • Abbot

    “one major example of how different we are today then how it was from yesteryear is how few girls can play a music instrument.”

    Because they used to spend less time drinking and falling on multi penises thus leaving more time to learn such things

  • Just1Z

    @Abbot
    “Wife worthiness has been completely purged form the system. Thus the willing-man shortage”

    Oh, I do believe that there are marriage worthy women out there, but there are issues for both sides:
    *marriage is a terrible risk for the man – divorce / FDV / incarceration for inability to pay child support whatever (I wouldn’t do it except in very exceptional circumstances)
    *how does a woman price herself appropriately? too high and the men won’t pay. too low and the men won’t see the value of marriage. The pool of men being chased is smaller than the herd hunting it, and they may not even care to be caught at all.

    I’d say that the pool of women worth risking marriage for as shrinking (risks vs rewards – I don’t require that women are changing) and the pool of men wanting to marry is shrinking too. I know what Susan’s numbers say about wanting,/i> to marry, BUT the national stats show that the age of first marriage is increasing and that first marriage for women over 35 has stopped (statistically speaking)*. So, if we’re noting what people do, rather than say then it doesn’t look good. whether the upcoming generation will deliver a change to that? I’m not betting on it, but YMMV.

    *The place to see the numbers is ‘the other place’ nudge-nudge wink-wink. But they are national stats from the US updated for 2012.

  • Pixie

    @deti

    Your last point in 50 is good advice. I think a lot of women forget that at times.

  • Ramble

    lets just say there are two girls in a class of yours. One of them, you think is hot, and all your guy friends agree. The second girl, you also think is hot, but all your guy friends think she’s gross.

    Pixie, in my experience, this is really rare. While there are many different types of female attractiveness, it is rare for some guy to think that an unattractive girl is attractive.

    It’s also telling that you used the word, “gross”. That comes from a female perspective.

  • Ramble

    BTW, my comments are getting stuck in moderation on multiple threads. I may be posting too much in too short a time period.

  • Call me a jerk but I haven’t heard about Dorothy Parker before, but now I totally feel assured about that book… I cannot wait to have a lok at it as soon as possible!

  • HanSolo

    @Hope 49

    Good advice.

    (A minor difference would be I don’t see any problem with a bit of perfume, makeup and jewelry but I realize that is what you did and a girl can customize this to her own personality and style.)

  • Mireille

    Ramble and Abbott make quite the pair.

  • J

    Even though I am first, I doubt I will be the last to realize that Miss Moore’s advice to the lassies sounds eerily similar to Roissy’s and Rooosh’s advice to the lads.

    LOL. I believe I still have a 3 year old comment in mod at CH that is similar to the above.

    Game is pretty girly.

  • Ramble

    Ramble and Abbott make quite the pair.

    Wow!

  • Just1Z

    Can’t remember the cat vs dog thread but

    cat-friend vs dog-friend
    http://shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/i-know-these-people.html

  • Cooper

    “What is the rule of three?”

    Rule of three = two third rule? (Maybe)

  • Suzan

    Consider this :

    What is the destiny of women? What is their role on earth? It is to please. Now, a charming figure, personal graces, in a word, all the
    amiable and brilliant qualities are the only means of succeeding in
    that role. Women possess them to a superlative degree, and it is in
    these qualities that they wish men to resemble them.

    It will be vain for you to accuse them of frivolity, for they are playing the beauty role, since they are destined to make you happy. Is it not, indeed,
    due to the charm of our companionship, to the gentleness of our
    manners, that you owe your most satisfying pleasures, your social
    virtues, in fact, your whole happiness?

    Have some good faith in this matter. Is it possible for the sciences of themselves, the love of glory, valor, nay, even that friendship of which you boast so much, to make you perfectly happy?

    The pleasure you draw from any of them, can it be keen enough to make you feel happy? Certainly not. None of them have the power to relieve you from a wearisome monotony which crushes you and makes you an object of pity.

    It is women who have taken upon themselves to dissipate these mortal
    languors by the vivacious gayety they inject into their society; by
    the charms they know so well how to lavish where they will prove
    effectual.

    A reckless joy, an agreeable delirium, a delicious
    intoxication, are alone capable of awakening your attention, and
    making you understand that you are really happy, for, Marquis, there
    is a vast difference between merely enjoying happiness and relishing
    the sensation of enjoying it.

    The possession of necessary things does not make a man comfortable, it is the superfluous which makes him rich, and which makes him feel that he is rich.

    – Ninon de L’ Enclos

    She’s right Suzan. By heaven she’s right.

  • Just1Z

    @Marellus

    I hope that she’s dead, she wouldn’t be very happy in the modern feminist world…

  • J

    Strangely, I have the intuition that the men obtain in this manner would actually be of higher value, but don’t ask me why. Women have a strange valuation system for men

    To me , both Game and it’s older girly equivalent include a large measure of manipulation and attract the more or less easily manipulated. I personally tend not to respect men or women who chronically fall for either version.

  • Hope, no perfume. Do you use shampoo with a really nice aroma?

    There are few things as intoxicating as getting close to a girl who is wearing just the slightest amount of perfume that you can only detect when you get really close to her.

    She, almost literally, draws you in.

    Is better if she draws you in with the smell of her own skin…I cosign the no perfume advice for both genders actually. Genetic compatibility FTW! 🙂

  • For the readers, much of this is practised by the women of France. Cultures, they be different.

  • INTJ

    @ Hope

    And this is how I sidestepped the whole dating scene altogether. Every one of the guys who fell in love with me was my friend first. I have the opposite of the LJBF thing, whatever that would be called. IOLF, I only love friends?

    You’re a nice girl ™.

  • @Just1Z

    She died in 1805

  • JP

    “They do, though. Men want the highest SMV female they can get, and the way they feel confident in her SMV is the response of other males to her.

    I have often heard men say that they were proud to be with the girl “that all the guys want.” I’ve also heard reports from many women who have been told that is a key part of their attractiveness.”

    Isn’t this missing the entire “are we compatible” issue?

    This seems to be the road to getting a very high SMV person who’s quite incompatible.

  • HanSolo

    @Just1Z

    That cat-friend vs dog-friend video is hilarious!

    Finding more doglike people for relationships is a good idea. Or for Jackie, beta cats work too! 😉

  • Ana and Ramble, my husband likes my shampoo and lotion, which is the consistently cheap stuff I get for under $2 at the grocery store, and has become my “scent” I guess since I don’t really change brands.

    By the way, about the clothes on that modest Pinterest, Mikarose makes a few of the designs on there, and they’re a Provo, Utah company (Mormon women want dresses that are below the knee, cover the upper arms and no cleavage). I had a dress from them, too, bought on a whim from the local Costco. They’re usually more expensive than what I get, since I prefer clothing under $35 or so, but they do have nice stuff.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    That is Langley Moore’s point. Women need to be indirect and maneuver to get the guy to make the first move. He must initiate and pursue or he will not value the “catch,” according to her.

    That is simply not true today, though it may have been true in the 20s. This advice is the reason that girls always see guys going for the sluts instead of the good girls. A lot of guys will choose the slut who shows clear interest over the good girl who doesn’t.

    Personally, I think the female initiates, male pursues paradigm is a much more effective script, which gets both parties invested in the relationship.

  • Emily

    Re: Pixie’s two girls,

    IME, the younger the guy is, the more likely he is to be swayed by what his friends think. And this is just as true for girls. Teenagers especially are VERY concerned with what their peers think and seeming “cool”. As people get older, they’re more willing to stand apart from the crowd.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    They do, though. Men want the highest SMV female they can get, and the way they feel confident in her SMV is the response of other males to her.

    I have often heard men say that they were proud to be with the girl “that all the guys want.” I’ve also heard reports from many women who have been told that is a key part of their attractiveness.

    Well here’s the thing. I want a girl that I find attractive. It would also be a nice ego-stroke if all the other guys find her attractive and I know I’ve beaten all the competition. That’s the sigma-male fantasy. But it’s a fantasy. Sure, guys who pull that off are going to boast about it. But it doesn’t mean guys are actively seeking girls that others find attractive.

    For example, if I found Megan Fox really attractive (which I don’t), and I landed her, I’d be proud about beating out all the other guys who were after her. That doesn’t mean I pursued her because other guys found her attractive. I pursued her because I found her attractive.

    WRT PLI, all human beings are susceptible to that.

    Demonstrably false. NAHBALT. Most INTJs are clear-cut counterexamples.

  • INTJ

    @ Just1Z, HanSolo

    I’ve always believed it’s quite meaningful that women tend to be cat people while men tend to be dog people. Guy game quite closely resembles acting like a cat. Similarly, girl game should closely resemble acting like a dog.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Men want the highest SMV female they can get, and the way they feel confident in her SMV is the response of other males to her.”

    You have cause and effect backwards and your mixing in affirmation, which everyone wants.

    A woman is beautiful because she is physically beautiful. Not because other men find her beautiful.

    The reason men enjoy getting the high-five for landing the HB is that it feels good to receive praise for a job well done.

    We also high five a guy who picks up a woman on a night out because the task is hard to accomplish.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    They do, though. Men want the highest SMV female they can get, and the way they feel confident in her SMV is the response of other males to her.

    I have often heard men say that they were proud to be with the girl “that all the guys want.” I’ve also heard reports from many women who have been told that is a key part of their attractiveness.

    This is mistaking cause and effect. The guys want the girl mostly because they each individually find her attractive, whether or not anyone else does. Granted, there is a secondary effect of wanting the ego boost of having the men’s approval. For example, if all of a sudden every other guy wanted a looks=4 girl I would shout hallelujah because they’d be distracted from the hotter girls that I want to pursue. I would never start pursuing that 4 even if Brad Pitt were kneeling at her feet with his tongue out.

    For two looks=8 girls, I might find a bit of vain satisfaction in getting the 8 that everyone wants but only if it weren’t too much of an effort. If it were then I would rather have the less-effort-to-get 8.

    So, I do believe the guys saying they’re proud to be with such a woman but the other guys wouldn’t want her if she wasn’t “objectively” reasonably or highly attractive to them and if she suddenly became ugly in his eyes but not in the others–reverse Shallow Hal effect–then he would not be feeling very happy and no amount of outside wanting her would make up for that.

  • Susan wrote:

    They do, though. Men want the highest SMV female they can get, and the way they feel confident in her SMV is the response of other males to her.

    I have often heard men say that they were proud to be with the girl “that all the guys want.” I’ve also heard reports from many women who have been told that is a key part of their attractiveness.

    Men want the woman who was easy for them to get but too hard to get for other men. And yes, this implies that the woman chose the man through the fog of the song and dance of the chase and conquest. In the end, the woman has to pick the winner.

    Unlike a lot of the male commentators here, I don’t have a problem with most of this advice. There’s a lot of nuance here that people are missing. There may be some weaknesses in this advice thanks to social media and other new-school methods of information gathering.

    • Men want the woman who was easy for them to get but too hard to get for other men. And yes, this implies that the woman chose the man through the fog of the song and dance of the chase and conquest. In the end, the woman has to pick the winner.

      Exactly, and he can’t be the winner if there are no other competitors. Men thrive on competition, right?

  • JP

    I’m a 40- dad of two.

    I did hang out with some undergrads 12 years ago in law school, though.

    My 40th b-day’s going to be sad. 🙁

  • J

    Is better if she draws you in with the smell of her own skin…I cosign the no perfume advice for both genders actually. Genetic compatibility FTW!

    This is probably very true.

    I love perfume; it’s my one really girly indulgence. I’ll do hair and make-up if I’m in a nice dress, but I’ll wear purfume with jeans. The funny thing is no matter what perfume I wear DH hates it. Based on your post, I’d guess that he wants me to smell more like me and less like lilies of the valley.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Men with options do like a challenge, in my experience. It’s one of the reasons cads invest weeks in trying to bed freshmen. And the highest SMV guys who are committed inevitably go for a very high SMV woman who brings a lot of sex appeal.

    Maybe that’s because they like deflowering freshmen? As for going for very high SMV women, it’s not because they’re hard to get, but high value. The hard-to-get part tends to be an unfortunate side-effect of being high value.

    How many times have we heard guys admit that they will date “psycho bitches” because they’re hot? Guys will do all kinds of jumping through hoops for hot, sexy girls. Every girl here knows that is true, we’ve all seen it a hundred times.

    First, psycho bitches are not hard to get. Quite the opposite They tend show a lot of interest and be clingy. That’s easy to get. Second, you’re proving the point. The guys go for hot, sexy girls because they’re, well, hot.

    The order of preference for guys is like this: easy to get 10 > hard to get 10 > easy to get 4 > hard to get 4. Of course, the easy to get 10s are usually already “gotten”. Nearly all the single 10s are hard to get. Thus, it would seem that hard to get girls are at the top of the hierarchy, but that is a false observation.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    1. and 6. of the Ten General Principles are clear cut game playing. All of the Ten General Principles are a manifestation of the Principle of Least Interest and are pretty bad advice. The rest of her advice is good.

  • SayWhaat

    I’ve always believed it’s quite meaningful that women tend to be cat people while men tend to be dog people.

    Ehh, that’s BS. You could just as easily say introverts tend to be cat people, while extroverts prefer dogs.

  • SayWhaat

    Aside from that question, do you feel that any are effective in sparking male interest?

    I think they probably all do, the guys are just loathe to admit it. Cooper basically denounced the whole post, but then admitted that Ms. Flake is using these “ploys” and still has him hooked!

    • I think they probably all do, the guys are just loathe to admit it.

      It’s funny, they resent Girl Game because it gives women more control. Everyone wants control, which is natural enough. I say we’re all better off when everyone brings their best game.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    The fact is, men respond to female traits, including coyness. They enjoy feminine wiles, which are a key component of femininity. Langley Moore is right – the woman who is nurturing and compliant with no commitment is supplicating, and will not appear high value to a man, or not for long.

    I agree with this. Basically a gradual sensual tease, followed by a partial sexual/sensual reward, followed by further tease or withholding, followed by further reward (allowing the longing to build but not just causing pure frustration) seems like a great way for a woman to seduce me and get me worked up about her.

    Giving neither pure reward nor pure withdrawal is effective.

    One foreign guy wrote into David DeAngelo saying, “Why me feel like hating girl after sex?” That exemplifies the giving up sex too easily.

    Blue balls is the other end of the spectrum.

    A dance of tease and reward is probably best for seducing men into having longer-term sexual interest.

    Then combine that with emotional escalation, a la your 25 steps post, and he will really be loving things (assuming he’s into you).

  • deti

    Deti is a 40+ dad of two. Different generation entirely.

    The more things change, the more they stay the same.

    The SMP changes. Human nature does not.

    • The more things change, the more they stay the same.

      The SMP changes. Human nature does not.

      It is malleable, though. Sorry, but here’s Buss again:

      “It’s not just about DNA – environment matters. Every strand of DNA unfolds within a particular environmental and cultural context. All behavioral patterns can in principle be altered by environmental intervention.”

      One example is assortative mating 50 years ago. The 5 females and 5 males who married were genuinely attracted to each other. Average looking women did not demand hotties or feel that they were settling for men who had similar SMV. Restraining hypergamy isn’t just telling women they have to settle, they can’t have what they want. It’s a whole cultural context where people are pleased with a mate of equal value.

  • Susan…”they couldn’t keep their Italian son from meeting and falling for an Irish girl, and they couldn’t keep that Irish girl at home and virginal”

    …which gives me another opportunity to promote the awesomeness of Tom Russell and Delores Keane

    When Irish Girls Grow Up

  • HanSolo

    @INTJ

    “Guy game quite closely resembles acting like a cat. Similarly, girl game should closely resemble acting like a dog.”

    I agree with that, at the 80/20 level and all the obvious caveats about choosing wisely and making sure they’re making an effort.

  • HanSolo

    @INTJ

    And that guys need to have more cat qualities at first and gradually show the dog side so that she can be tantalized into wanting to discover more about him, not feel smothered, and thus feel subconsciously that he is good enough for her and not too needy.

  • XXIII

    Two Irreconcilable Passions in Women

    Will you pardon me, Marquis, for laughing at your afflictions? You
    take things too much to heart. Some imprudences, you say, have drawn
    upon you the anger of the Countess, and your anxiety is extreme. You
    kissed her hand with an ecstasy that attracted the attention of
    everybody present. She publicly reprimanded you for your indiscretion,
    and your marked preference for her, always offensive to other women,
    has exposed you to the railleries of the Marquise, her sister-in-law.
    Dear me, these are without contradiction terrible calamities! What,
    are you simple enough to believe that you are lost beyond salvation
    because of an outward manifestation of anger, and you do not even
    suspect that inwardly you are justified? You impose upon me the burden
    of convincing you of the fact, and in doing so I am forced to reveal
    some strange mysteries concerning women. But, I do not intend, in
    writing you, to be always apologizing for my sex. I owe you frankness,
    however, and having promised it I acquit myself of the promise.

    A woman is always balancing between two irreconcilable passions which
    continually agitate her mind: the desire to please, and the fear of
    dishonor. You can judge of our embarrassment. On the one hand, we are
    consumed with the desire to have an audience to notice the effect of
    our charms. Ever engaged in schemes to bring us into notoriety;
    ravished whenever we are fortunate enough to humiliate other women, we
    would make the whole world witness of the preferences we encounter,
    and the homage bestowed upon us. Do you know the measure of our
    satisfaction in such cases? The despair of our rivals, the
    indiscretions that betray the sentiments we inspire, this enchants us
    proportionately to the misery they suffer. Similar imprudences
    persuade us much more that we are loved, than that our charms are
    incapable of giving us a reputation.

    But what bitterness poisons such sweet pleasures! Beside so many
    advantages marches the malignity of rival competitors, and sometimes
    your disdain. A fatality which is mournful. The world makes no
    distinction between women who permit you to love them, and those whom
    you compensate for so doing. Uninfluenced, and sober-minded, a
    reasonable woman always prefers a good reputation to celebrity. Put
    her beside her rivals who contest with her the prize for beauty, and
    though she may lose that reputation of which she appears so jealous,
    though she compromise herself a thousand times, nothing is equal in
    her opinion to see herself preferred to others. By and by, she will
    recompense you by preferences; she will at first fancy that she grants
    them out of gratitude, but they will be proofs of her attachment. In
    her fear of appearing ungrateful, she becomes tender.

    Can you not draw from this that it is not your indiscretions which vex
    us? If they wound us, we must pay tribute to appearances, and you
    would be the first to censure an excessive indulgence.

    See that you do not misunderstand us. Not to vex us on such occasions
    would be really to offend. We recommend you to practice discretion and
    prudence, that is the role we enact, is it not? Is it necessary for me
    to tell you the part you are to play? I am often reminded that
    accepting the letter of the law, is to fail to understand it. You may
    be sure that you will be in accord with our intentions as soon as you
    are able to interpret them properly.

    – Ninon de L’ Enclos

    • @Marellus

      You are the most romantic guy. You would be awesome material for a passionate love affair!

  • deti

    “he can’t be the winner if there are no other competitors. Men thrive on competition, right?”

    Sure, on the battlefield, in the office, and in the athletic arena.

    In love and sex, not so much.

    • Sure, on the battlefield, in the office, and in the athletic arena.

      In love and sex, not so much.

      I don’t understand. If men are wired with a competitive instinct, why would that not apply to mating? Why would every guy not want to get the highest SMV woman? In his chapter What Men Want in The Evolution of Desire, David Buss attempts to explain why men marry:

      “One possibility is that men who refused to commit would have had trouble attracting the most desirable mating partners. Women did not consent to sex without the commitment. Women desire a lasting commitment, and the most desirable women are in the best position to get what they want.”

      Clearly the drive to beat out other men for the most desirable women is key, to the point where men who have options will offer commitment in order to do so.

      Buss continues on the status granted to men with the most attractive partners:

      “Beauty is not just important for reproductive value. It also affects a man’s social status. An attractive woman is a signal of status to same-sex competitors and to other potential mates.”

      Additionally, occupational status, gained via competition, is a strong predictor of mate attractiveness:

      Marriage patterns in America confirm that men with the most resources can most easily actualize their preferences. Men with high occupational status marry more attractive women than those who are low in occupational status. Occupational status is the BEST predictor of the attractiveness a man can get.

      So there are three strong areas of competition as men attempt to win the most desirable mates.

  • Well, Marquis, in love as in war, the
    pleasure of obtaining a victory is measured according to the obstacles
    in the way of it. Shall I say it? I am tempted to push the parallel
    farther. See what it is to take a first step. The true glory of a
    woman consists less, perhaps, in yielding, than in putting in a good
    defense, so that she will merit the honors of war.

    I shall go still farther. Let a woman become feeble enough to be at
    the point of yielding, what is left her to retain a satisfactory
    lover, if her intelligence and talents do not come to her aid? I am
    well aware that they do not give themselves these advantages, but if
    we investigate the matter, we shall find that there are very few women
    who may not acquire a few accomplishments if they really set about it;
    the difference would only be the more, at least. But women are
    generally born too indolent to be able to make such an effort. They
    have discovered that there is nothing so convenient as being pretty.
    This manner of pleasing does not require any labor; they would be glad
    not to have any other. Blind that they are, they do not see that
    beauty and talents equally attract the attention of men, but, beauty
    merely exposes her who possesses it, whereas talents furnish her with
    the means of defending it.

    In a word, to appreciate it at its full value, beauty stores up
    regrets and a mortal weariness for the day when it shall cease to
    exist. Would you know the reason? It is because it drowns out all
    other resources. As long as beauty lasts, a woman is regarded as
    something, she is celebrated, a crowd sighs at her feet. She flatters
    herself that this will go on forever. What a desolate solitude when
    age comes to ravish her of the only merit she possesses? I would like,
    therefore (my expression is not elevated, but it interprets my
    thought), I would like that in a woman, beauty could be a sign of
    other advantages.

    – Ninon de L’ Enclos

  • SayWhaat said something like:

    I think they probably all do, the guys are just loathe to admit it. Cooper basically denounced the whole post, but then admitted that Ms. Flake is using these “ploys” and still has him hooked!

    It’s the same as male game, as long as you don’t take it to excess, it works just fine. The danger of male game is that if you push it too hard you come across as an arrogant asshole. The degree of cockiness that women find attractive varies but generally the more confident the woman the more cockiness she appreciates. It’s a delicate act, however, balancing on that knife-edge while you try to discover just what she appreciates, and I recall cases where I pushed too hard and came away with nothing. The same is true of this advice for women here, you just can’t take it literally. It’s also an ephemeral draw, in that it has to be practised daily or the illusion is shattered.

    Oh yes, and this cat and dog show thing is ridiculous. Please stop.

  • Abbot

    “A dance of tease and reward is probably best for seducing men into having longer-term sexual interest.”

    Then how does a multi-penis-empowered woman coming off of say a 10 year bender shift down into that TnR groove, assuming the man finds her worthy enough to be given a chance?

  • Mike C

    It’s not just the appeal the girls have; it’s also the work of the pursuit and the relative degree of difficulty involved as well.

    I think one of the biggest myths/misconceptions that exist are that men enjoy the chase, the challenge, the work of the pursuit. It really is just projection. The reality is most men really don’t. The more a man enjoys that part, the more likely you are dealing with someone who is viewing you as a conquest/notch and not a person to have a relationship with. It is the more caddish types that actually thrive on the chase, challenge, and ultimate conquest.

    Some good things on these lists above, some is massive projection, and some is at odds with the notion of emotional escalation.

  • Dawin

    ”Exactly, and he can’t be the winner if there are no other competitors. Men thrive on competition, right?”

    Only when the reward is worth it. Think of it this way. Super Mario spends the entirety of the Super Mario gaming series fighting bad guys to save the Princess.

    The Princess. Not the ordinary woman that might be higher than most women in terms of beauty, but is still rather prone to hypergamy, alpha-penis endeavours in her youth and so forth.

    Besides, life is already pretty competitive. Why would I want to compete with other men for a woman? She’s either interested in the guy or she’s not. Reminds me of one girl who had her eyes on me when I was in college, first year. She was 6 feet tall. Cute, but very conservative. She’d blush from just mentioning she had had found her father’s condoms while she was looking in her parent’s room for her wallet.

    She tried to use those neat little ”game” tricks on me. I shrugged it off and went for the girl with the pierced nose, huge tattoo on her back, and she was also far more feminine and far better-looking than conservative girl.

    Do I compete to become a better man? Do I compete to become better in what I do? Do I compete to win at marbles? You betcha. Do I compete for women? Not in this lifetime.

  • J

    I’ve always believed it’s quite meaningful that women tend to be cat people while men tend to be dog people….Ehh, that’s BS. You could just as easily say introverts tend to be cat people, while extroverts prefer dogs.

    Me–female, INTP, dog lover

    DH–male, INTJ, cat lover

  • Susan wrote:

    Exactly, and he can’t be the winner if there are no other competitors. Men thrive on competition, right?

    Hmm… no, that’s not quite what I meant. The man wants to see other suitors spurned while she carefully lays him a trail of bread crumbs to follow. She’s impeccably chaste, except for him. Competition can be implied, but it cannot be overt, as that would ruin the fantasy.

    Consider the modest Pinterest site, but with just a dash of sex appeal thrown in. It’s like dark chocolate with a dash of chili pepper.

    • Mr. Nervous Toes

      The man wants to see other suitors spurned while she carefully lays him a trail of bread crumbs to follow. She’s impeccably chaste, except for him. Competition can be implied, but it cannot be overt, as that would ruin the fantasy.

      OK, I think I understand – so the man has competed with other men prior to the seduction, which is what gives him the confidence to aim high? He doesn’t want to cross swords over the female once he has reached that point?

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Exactly, and he can’t be the winner if there are no other competitors. Men thrive on competition, right?”

    When I win I want to do it as a blowout, not a skin of your teeth marginal victory.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan
    “I agree with you about hypergamy, but I think she’s correct in saying that women should avoid men with higher SMV than their own. Research clearly shows that the most successful couples are ones where the woman is more attractive than the man. Also, a woman with lower SMV than a man cannot keep him – as we see with the unleashed hypergamy evident in casual sex.”

    You mean the best arrangement is where the woman is more physically attractive, and the man is more valuable in other areas. That would suggest that they go for men that are close to their own cumulative SMV, which makes sense. They should consider the whole package though if their goal is to find a match like that. Obviously, part of the problem here is that since many women view themselves as independent, the long term part of the SMV inventory has far less value than the short term up front.

  • deti

    “I think one of the biggest myths/misconceptions that exist are that men enjoy the chase, the challenge, the work of the pursuit.”

    Indeed. One can be 40+ or even 50+ and know this.

    The SMP changes. Human nature does not.

  • Mike C

    I’ve always believed it’s quite meaningful that women tend to be cat people while men tend to be dog people….Ehh, that’s BS. You could just as easily say introverts tend to be cat people, while extroverts prefer dogs.

    Me–female, INTP, dog lover

    DH–male, INTJ, cat lover

    http://www.fanciers.com/npa/sdresults.html

    Gender distribution of pets

    The dog population was found to be 51.4% female and 48.6% male. The cat population, however, changed dramatically over the age of the animals. The gender ratio starts out equally, but by the time the cats are in the five-year-old age group, 60% are female. By the age of ten years, 70% of the owned cats are female.

    God forbid anyone post accurate generalizations.

  • Cooper

    @Saywhaat

    Yeah, I have utmost mixed feelings about tactics like “hard to get” or “dark game.”
    While there’s a part of me that wants to take stand against acting so self serving in SMP, there’s also a very strong INTJ-side that simply can not refute results.

    “Cooper basically denounced the whole post, but then admitted that Ms. Flake is using these “ploys” and still has him hooked!”

    I denounce dark game, while admitting it works.

    What I don’t like about PLI tactics is it shows the person is still wresling for upper-hand. Which indicates the person is still “shopping” for their best deal, and IOW hasn’t ‘chose’ you yet.
    Using PLI, or hard to get tactics while might work to convince some guys that your ‘worth chasing,’ (aka ‘better than him) to me it signals a level of discontent. And ime, (kinda like “beauty being in the eye of the beholder”) someones’ discontent in their SMP/SMV isn’t something that you can change. (Cause it usually stems from a inflated self worth or entitlement – so best stay clear)

    • @Cooper

      You are equating “hard to get,” Dark Game and refraining from supplication. These are not the same things.

  • Dawin

    @BroHamlet,

    So you’re saying that men should modify the purchase of temporary beauty(escorts) to relatively permanent consumption of the higher SMP value of the woman by providing his assets and financial support via marriage?

    Didn’t we ban prostitution for a reason?

  • Mike C

    Obviously, part of the problem here is that since many women view themselves as independent, the long term part of the SMV inventory has far less value than the short term up front.

    Excellent point. I believe Bastiat has made this same point previously in different words.

  • Sai

    …I would have to take acting classes to get all this right. But it was still very interesting to read.
    “Dress like the women around you, only more sumptuously. Originality and distinction makes men uncomfortable.”
    🙁
    It’s good to know guys don’t like the chase as much as I was told they do. Some of it always seemed like trolling to me.

  • INTJ

    Also, Cooper, you should move on from that flaky girl.

  • Ramble

    I have often heard men say that they were proud to be with the girl “that all the guys want.” I’ve also heard reports from many women who have been told that is a key part of their attractiveness.

    While I think that this is true, I also think it is very different than the kind of status seeking and pre-selection that girls use and employ.

  • Dawin

    ”Obviously, part of the problem here is that since many women view themselves as independent, the long term part of the SMV inventory has far less value than the short term up front.”

    I don’t see where the problem is. The woman sees herself as having more value than the man, which will result in her seeking men who are higher than her in how the man’s SMP value is, leaving the average man free from the financial ruin that will come from marrying a woman who is higher in SMP points than him(of course he’s still going to get crushed by marrying an average woman, but you know what I mean).

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan & Lokland

    “Exactly, and he can’t be the winner if there are no other competitors. Men thrive on competition, right?”

    “When I win I want to do it as a blowout, not a skin of your teeth marginal victory.”

    Lokland gets at the truth, which is that guys who are good with women don’t chase, or respond to jealousy ploys or attempts to get them to “square off” against other guys. Interestingly enough, there’s an easy solution to a woman who tries to “harness” male psychology in this way. It’s called “spinning plates”. Where have we seen that before?

    • @BroHamlet

      Interestingly enough, there’s an easy solution to a woman who tries to “harness” male psychology in this way. It’s called “spinning plates”. Where have we seen that before?

      Spinning plates isn’t mind games. It’s having sex with multiple people concurrently. In no way does Langley Moore propose that.

  • Ramble

    IME, the younger the guy is, the more likely he is to be swayed by what his friends think.

    Emily, I think this has a lot more to do with looks (and non-bitchyness) than status. For instance, if some guy is getting with some girl that does not “party”, and does not hang with the popular girls, but all of his friends think that she is f*cking smoking hot, then, he is unlikely to be swayed by the fact that they do not think she is “cool” (doesn’t drink much, doesn’t smoke weed, prefers to read, etc.)

    However, if they think some girl is funny and fun but, you know, she is not easy to look at, and they voice this to him (via ribbing) in the locker room and dorm room, then, yeah, he could definitely be swayed by it.

  • Mike C

    That is simply not true today, though it may have been true in the 20s. This advice is the reason that girls always see guys going for the sluts instead of the good girls. A lot of guys will choose the slut who shows clear interest over the good girl who doesn’t.

    Yup. The answer to the question that women ask…”Why is he with that….crazy….bitchy….fill in the blank girl” is because she didn’t make it an arduous task to get with her. She wasn’t a challenge and made things easy.

    • she didn’t make it an arduous task to get with her. She wasn’t a challenge and made things easy.

      Right, but she makes it really, really hard to stay with her. She’s super high maintenance, demanding, making constant drama. And the high SMV guys eat it up. I’ve seen it firsthand. Why? Because they haven’t “tamed” her. And her psycho-ness generally means highly unrestricted sex. They live for the challenge of the psycho girl.

  • Ramble

    Men who think they’re doing women a favor by funding SAHM are also deluded.

    Susan, this sounds incongruent with what you had been saying about how many girls see the possibility of being a SAHM as the ultimate goal, even if it is not that realistic for many in the middle class (and lower).

    • Susan, this sounds incongruent with what you had been saying about how many girls see the possibility of being a SAHM as the ultimate goal, even if it is not that realistic for many in the middle class (and lower).

      I believe women want to be SAHMs to be with their kids, not to read Russian novels and eat bonbons all day. It is a luxury, because it cuts household income in half. But it is also very hard work, presumably done with a level of attention and care no outsider can give.

      What I’m hearing from some of the men is that a woman’s desire to be a SAHM is selfish, or presumptuous, in that they expect a male to provide. My answer to that is that no male is forced to agree to such an arrangement. In cases where I have seen it work, parents have decided together that the benefits outweigh the costs. That calculation will be different for different families.

      In short, men should not do it if they view it as a sacrifice. They should only agree to finance this if they feel it is in the best interest of their children, and that the benefits trump the costs. It’s a net positive to every member of the family. My husband feels strongly about this – I sometimes apologize for having looked like a rainmaker in the early days, only to become a SAHM. He won’t hear it – and FWIW he would never, ever have wanted to be at home full time. In fact, he’s 58 and says he wants to work until he’s at least 70, maybe 75.

  • Mike C

    Lokland gets at the truth, which is that guys who are good with women don’t chase, or respond to jealousy ploys or attempts to get them to “square off” against other guys.

    Right. They NEXT them.

  • Mike C

    I think that there are many women of high value who do not know how to inspire sexual interest in males.

    Really? I’m perplexed by this statement. Inspiring “sexual interest” aka triggering the “I’d like to fuck you instinct” isn’t that hard since sexual interest pretty much overlaps 90-95% with simply being physically attractive.

    If inspiring sexual interest is the goal, then going to the gym and doing squats and building an ass that looks great in jeans will inspire 10x the sexual interest than any behavioral gimmicks.

    I don’t think many women have a problem inspiring sexual interest, at least not the ones decently attractive. Where they are deficient is in the behaviors to inspire commitment and emotional devotion.

    • Inspiring “sexual interest” aka triggering the “I’d like to fuck you instinct” isn’t that hard since sexual interest pretty much overlaps 90-95% with simply being physically attractive.

      Sorry, I meant sexual interest in the way Langley Moore uses it – the passionate love affair characterized by obsessive preoccupation with the desired object and a perception that she is highly desirable over a period of time. I suppose “inspire passion” is a better phrase. It’s really limerence.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    Which of Langley Moore’s suggestions do you believe are manipulative or dishonest, i.e. playing games?

    The following of the Ten General Principles seem like playing games to me (though perhaps in moderation they are fine, until the man shows more interest too):

    1. Not being generous.

    3. Until you fulfill your ambition, you must always remain unattainable.

    6. The most certain way of losing prestige is to let a man see that he occupies a more important place in your mind than you in his

    And from the Methods of Approach

    3. Don’t single a man out for special glances

  • Mike C

    A woman is beautiful because she is physically beautiful. Not because other men find her beautiful.

    The reason men enjoy getting the high-five for landing the HB is that it feels good to receive praise for a job well done.

    We also high five a guy who picks up a woman on a night out because the task is hard to accomplish.

    Lokland, you are absolutely correct.

  • SayWhaat

    Lokland gets at the truth, which is that guys who are good with women don’t chase, or respond to jealousy ploys or attempts to get them to “square off” against other guys.

    Right. They NEXT them.

    That’s probably a good thing, since most women don’t want a guy who is *too* good with women. 😉

  • Mike C

    Correct. She is telling women not to be supplicating, which lowers their value.

    And I’ll say this is projection. It is possible to go overboard….sure, and even men are going to respond negatively to someone who presents themselves as a doormat to walk over….BUT…men are generally going to appreciate a woman who does nice things for them/tries to please them.

    • BUT…men are generally going to appreciate a woman who does nice things for them/tries to please them.

      Men are so quick to play the Stage 5 Clinger card it’s incredible. One text asking what he’s up to can trigger it. Sure, men will happily let women clean their apartments, but do they keep them around? Apparently not.

  • INTJ

    @ HanSolo

    I finished Game of Thrones Season 2.

    Thoughts:

    I have to disagree with Olive’s boyfriend about Catlin Stark being the best looking woman in GoT. That wildling girl that John Snow was supposed to kill is the best looking.

    Rob Stark is such a selfish prick. His mother dealt a severe blow to their tactical position by releasing Jamie Lannister. But she can be forgiven for that given the circumstances of her children being captured. On the other hand, Rob Stark marrying that nurse was unforgivable. He was engaged to be married, and yet he deliberately put himself in a position where he would fall in love with someone else. Apparently he’s never watched When Harry Met Sally and doesn’t know that cross-sex friendships never work. Also, it took me a while to realize that Winterfell was burnt down by their own people. I confirmed my interpretation by Googling “who burnt down Winterfell”, and interestingly enough, Google autocompleted the search at “who burnt down”. 😀 The North really needed a good strategic position considering that they don’t have any supernatural powers on their side (dire wolves don’t count). They’re going to have to be very resourceful to survive the coming wars.

    Also, it was obvious from the start that the Khalisee had a very bad temper and was quite megalomaniacal. Unfortunately, it turns out that as the Mother of Dragons, she has the power to back up her megalomania. Hopefully Westeros can play her off against the white walkers. Let the fire and ice clash with each other. I’m worried that the people of Westoros are not going to take her seriously as a threat, with disastrous consequences. She’s basically the Genghiz Khan of GoT.

    I’m also pretty worried about that red chick. It’s unclear what all powers she has, and how to fight her magic. That makes her very dangerous.

    Finally, I wonder why Tyrion’s grandfather took him out of the loop of governing Westoros. He seemed like an intelligent person who would be able to recognize how competent Tyrion had been. I suppose he realized that Tyrion is too good a person. Tyrion cares about the people of Westoros and King’s Landing, which could put him at odds with the goals of the Lannisters.

  • INTJ

    @ HanSolo

    Also, the whole Wall at the North seems to be very reminiscent of the Israel-Palestine conflict, except they aren’t building any settlements in Wildling lands.

  • INTJ

    @ Mike C

    And I’ll say this is projection. It is possible to go overboard….sure, and even men are going to respond negatively to someone who presents themselves as a doormat to walk over….BUT…men are generally going to appreciate a woman who does nice things for them/tries to please them.

    I’d also say that even with the extreme doormat behavior, it depends on SMV. If a 4 acted like a total doormat, I’d be somewhat put off because she would come off as desperate. If an 8 acted like a total doormat, I’d be rather confused, but counting my blessings that I was able to lock her down before someone else did. 😀

  • SayWhaat

    And I’ll say this is projection. It is possible to go overboard….sure, and even men are going to respond negatively to someone who presents themselves as a doormat to walk over….BUT…men are generally going to appreciate a woman who does nice things for them/tries to please them.

    You’re mincing words, putting them back together, and calling them your own.

    Supplicating = doormat. And as you said (lol), “men are going to respond negatively to someone who presents themselves as a doormat to walk over”.

  • INTJ

    @ SayWhaat

    That’s probably a good thing, since most women don’t want a guy who is *too* good with women.

    And she’ll also be nexted by all the gamma males who aren’t *too* good with women.

  • Lokland

    @INTJ

    “I have to disagree with Olive’s boyfriend about Catlin Stark being the best looking woman in GoT. That wildling girl that John Snow was supposed to kill is the best looking.”

    Tyrions whore or Rob Starks nurse.
    Flaming fire chick.

    Whats wrong with you? :p

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    I think that Langley Moore aims to instruct women how to be irresistible – essentially have to inspire obsession, a key element of limerence, and precursor to falling in love. History is rife with examples of precisely this dynamic between the sexes.

    Langley Moore recommends strong and stark contrast between the sexes.

    “I really would love another post on girl game for acquiring and maintaining long term relationships (aka, femininity and being nice and removing entitled, bitch anti-game).”

    Which of her ideas do you feel amount to entitlement? It seems to me that she is advising women to be the opposite of bitchy – why do you disagree?

    Aside from that question, do you feel that any are effective in sparking male interest?

    My response to the 10 general principles and whether it makes her seem irrestible or entitled:

    1. Not being generous is a way to make a good man feel unappreciated. Think of Jason’s roommate on the other thread.
    Generosity to a good man is like water in the desert. At first, the woman can do a very small act of kindness or show some interest as a way to test the waters. Then if he pursues and shows interest and good character she should up the generosity.

    2. Agree that the man needs to be pursuing but she should be reciprocating things that are of value to him along the way. Women can initiate the introduction to overcome the bias towards men approaching and being called creepers, however, and then let him pursue.

    3. Depends on how unattainable you’re remaining. Rather, the dance of seduction (tease and reward) that I described in 106 is probably better where you remain unattainable in a small way and for a brief moment or time to entice him and long for you and then give him a taste, and sometimes a healthy taste. Otherwise you just starve him and he’ll eventually move on.

    4. This is just wrong. Men feel physically attracted to a woman primarily on how she looks and how sensual and seductive she acts around him. He’s not going to find an ugly women attractive no matter how many other men say she’s hot. As a secondary factor he may like that other men find her attractive.

    5. As long as this isn’t full of unreasonable demands or aloofness then keeping the pursuit alive (his part of the ongoing dance of seduction) is good.

    6. This can work to get the player to want to conquer you but will not work for a goodhearted man. Seems like good advice for men up front, but not women who want a non-player.

    7. If he’s not that into her then yes a desperate woman will be a turn off but for a man who loves her then this intense love and devotion on her part will be awesome. I want someone like that, that I love.

    8. Agree

    9. Agree and recommend.

    10. Agree but don’t think that makes a woman irresistible.

    • @HanSolo

      Thanks very much for responding to my question about the principles. Let’s take them one by one.

      Not being generous is a way to make a good man feel unappreciated.

      Agreed, but that is not what Langley says. She says “do not give reign to your generosity.” IOW, do not let it rule you. Do not give that which is in fact not appreciated. Do not give so much that your giving becomes devalued by virtue of its constant delivery. Do not give, give, give, because in doing so you allow no opportunity to receive. And of course, those who give constantly without reciprocation are martyrs, and are quickly taken for granted.

      Agree that the man needs to be pursuing but she should be reciprocating things that are of value to him along the way.

      Nowhere does Langley Moore rule this out. She simply states that if a man has never pursued you, you have not won him. I believe this is true. Men value the win, and they cannot experience that if they make no effort. None of us can appreciate what is won without effort.

      Rather, the dance of seduction (tease and reward) that I described in 106 is probably better where you remain unattainable in a small way and for a brief moment or time to entice him and long for you and then give him a taste, and sometimes a healthy taste.

      Agreed, and I believe this is what she is saying. Robbing any budding interest of anticipation kills passion. Anticipation is one of the best reasons for the slow dance to sex. Sex is always, always better when two people have spent time craving it.

      He’s not going to find an ugly women attractive no matter how many other men say she’s hot.

      How often do many men say an ugly woman is hot? My sense is that there is generally solid consensus around who is hot. Sure, men may have their own types, but society deems certain women great beauties. There are women who turn many heads, and other women who turn the occasional head. It seems reasonable that most men would prefer a woman who turns many heads over a woman who turns few heads, based on what I quoted from Buss above. Of course, if his head is one of the few, he is in the fortunate position of being a buyer of something with low demand.

      As long as this isn’t full of unreasonable demands or aloofness then keeping the pursuit alive (his part of the ongoing dance of seduction) is good.

      We agree. Keep in mind that a woman’s job is to rouse a man to passion, which is enjoyable for the man. The last thing he wants is to suddenly find that the woman he thought was incredibly sexy is now meh. If his interest wanes, and she can rekindle it, that’s a win win.

      This can work to get the player to want to conquer you but will not work for a goodhearted man. Seems like good advice for men up front, but not women who want a non-player.

      Agreed. This is the Principle of Least Interest in action. It’s a short-term gambit, and has no place in a love relationship.

      for a man who loves her then this intense love and devotion on her part will be awesome. I want someone like that, that I love.

      Look at Langley’s descriptors again: desperate, abject, anxiety, unhappy, uncongenial. Is this really the kind of devotion you want from a woman?

      In summary, I think we’re pretty close on most of this.

  • Mike C

    Supplicating = doormat. And as you said (lol), “men are going to respond negatively to someone who presents themselves as a doormat to walk over”.

    This is probably semantics, but I don’t consider them equivalent. If a woman asked a guy on a date to hold her purse while she does X and he says “sure thing” that is supplicating behavior, but NOT doormat behavior. If a guys does that with many women, it is a DLV. The proper male response is some cocky/funny response, not doing the nice thing and holding the purse. In contrast, most men don’t penalize or see a woman as lower value just because she does something nice. In many cases, it will be endearing.

    The difference between supplicating and doormat is the difference between a light drizzle and Hurricane Sandy.

  • SayWhaat

    And she’ll also be nexted by all the gamma males who aren’t *too* good with women.

    I doubt gamma males have that sort of capability.

  • HanSolo

    My take on the 5 Fundamental Principles of Femininity:

    1. Contrast is the keynote. Be different from the man in female ways.

    2. Avoid being nasty about other females or blabbing their secrets.

    3. If a man is able, he enjoys the burden of providing for you, and enjoys the feeling that you are dependent, his dependent. Be dependent materially and independent spiritually.

    4. To sustain admiration for an indefinite period, display good nature, a sense of honor and a capacity for friendship. But never show yourself to be completely unselfish in your devotion to him.

    5. Refinement of taste is an important virtue. Avoid indelicate conversation and coarse language.

    1. Agree, be feminine.

    2. Agree, though an occasional rip on some deserving girl is enjoyable.

    3. I think the bigger point is that men need to feel needed in some way and in today’s society they just aren’t needed as much as providers and protectors. In today’s age, if you are going to be a SAHM then really let him know you appreciate him “busting his ass” to support the family. (He should also appreciate what you do to take care of the kids and home.) So, find other ways in which you really need him and let him know you need him and appreciate him. Also, if he does provide or protect then appreciate that too.

    4. Agree that a woman should display good nature, honor and friendship but not be a doormat.

    5. Refinement of taste can be good as long as that taste is not too fine and expensive and demanding, unless you’re paying for it. 😉 Too much coarse language and indelicate conversation is bad but an occasional swear word out of a delicate mouth is very endearing and hilarious.

  • Sassy6519

    “Exactly, and he can’t be the winner if there are no other competitors. Men thrive on competition, right?”

    This definitely depends on the man.

    I’ve been in situations where a few guys have competed, in obvious and subtle ways, to win my affections. Some men like that sort of situation.

  • SayWhaat

    In contrast, most men don’t penalize or see a woman as lower value just because she does something nice. In many cases, it will be endearing.

    Right, but it doesn’t gain her points, either. It’s value-neutral.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    Agree on the Men to Avoid

    Now, my take on Tactics:

    I generally agree with 1-4 but disagree on 5. I think you should be generous with words and actions–but not too much until he has shown himself worthy (meaning, do something(s) nice but if he never does anything don’t stay with a taker). But maybe to just have a fling with a higher SMV male you shouldn’t be generous with actions.

    My take on Methods of Approach:

    1-2) Agree

    3) Disagree…do give glances and sincere compliments to get him to approach or ask you out.

    4-6) Agree

    7) This is good to get to know him but at some point you may need to give him some extra attention so he will approach you or realize you have some level of interest.

  • INTJ

    @ Lokland

    Tyrions whore or Rob Starks nurse.
    Flaming fire chick.

    Whats wrong with you? :p

    Okay yeah Shae is probably better looking than Catelyn, but can’t compete with the wildling girl. Rob Stark’s nurse was rather good looking too, but somewhat child-like (kinda like Shoshanna in Girls). Flaming red chick didn’t seem particularly good looking.

    I’m probably very biased towards Catelyn because of her character and personality.

  • Mike C

    This definitely depends on the man.

    I’ve been in situations where a few guys have competed, in obvious and subtle ways, to win my affections. ***Some men like that sort of situation.***

    Again, not many. Sassy, I might be misremembering but wasn’t it one of your ex-boyfriends or a guy you were dating who got quite upset when he learned he was choice #2 to get your phone number versus his buddy, and this was months after you had already been dating and had an established relationship? Would you say he handled the notion of competing with equanimity?

  • Abbot

    “Where they are deficient is in the behaviors to inspire commitment and emotional devotion.”

    To varying degrees, by virtue of being a woman, she has that ability. That gloss gets dulled as she goes from penis to penis while taking in the fumes of feminism and sucking down spoon after spoon of that unrealistic expectations elixir.

  • INTJ

    Now watching the movie, “Your Highness”. Natlie Portman and Zooey Deschanel. Talk about eye candy. 🙂

  • Ramble

    Women counseling women on how to be attractive to men. Today women rely on showing cleavage or most of their legs.

    And constantly telling each other how beautiful they look.

  • Ted D

    On competition: no go. The fastest way to sour my opinion of you as a mate prospect is to play this card in any way.

    This is partly why I have always only dated one girl at a time. (No spinning plates). I expect her undivided attention if we are dating, and that means no current “competition” allowed. I make this clear on date 2 or 3, because if we’ve made it that far I’m already starting to qualify you as keeper material. If exclusive dating (not necessarily an official LTR) isn’t an option she is willing to offer, then date 2 or 3 will be the last.

    I didn’t date much, but of those dates four women agreed and became LTR mates/wives. I probably dated 10 – 12 women in total, so statistically not too shabby.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    So I guess for the most part my disagreement was with the Ten General Principles.

    As far as being irresistible, being as physically beautiful as you reasonably can be, being in touch with and radiating sensuality, being charmingly feminine and positive, engaging in playful and or interesting conversation that stimulates his mind, finding his humor funny, and showing a certain amount of non-needy interest in a man but not needing him at the initial stages will do the trick. (This will do the trick for either short-term irresistibility or opening the door for long-term irresistibility.)

    Once he starts to show interest then you can gradually emotionally escalate (25 steps) and you will be even more irrestible (in a long-term kind of way).

    • Once he starts to show interest then you can gradually emotionally escalate (25 steps) and you will be even more irrestible (in a long-term kind of way).

      Yes, this is the ideal strategy, IMO. FWIW, I do not think the Technique is appropriate for LTRs, nor was it intended to be. I do think Langley Moore does women a service in explaining some things that men do and do not respond favorably to. It’s a set of instructions for capturing a man’s attention and interest, and getting him to single you out. It is definitely strategic – some might say manipulative. But then, so is Game.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Mike C

    Again, not many. Sassy, I might be misremembering but wasn’t it one of your ex-boyfriends or a guy you were dating who got quite upset when he learned he was choice #2 to get your phone number versus his buddy, and this was months after you had already been dating and had an established relationship? Would you say he handled the notion of competing with equanimity?

    You remembered correctly. It was my ex of one year, and he didn’t take it well. I was not referring to him when I made my previous statement.

    A few of the men I dated in the past knew that I was seeing other people, meaning going on dates with others. I found that once they knew that they were not the only people I was seeing, they tried even harder to catch me.

    I definitely believe that a minority of men operate this way though.

  • SayWhaat

    Again, not many. Sassy, I might be misremembering but wasn’t it one of your ex-boyfriends or a guy you were dating who got quite upset when he learned he was choice #2 to get your phone number versus his buddy, and this was months after you had already been dating and had an established relationship? Would you say he handled the notion of competing with equanimity?

    Obviously not, because he was #2. I bet he would have felt differently were he #1.

  • Society’s Disposable Son

    So now we have two sets of rules in which people are supposed to artificially inflate their own value… it goes around and around until some people get sick of the spinning circles and choose to drop out. When you put in double the effort for a prize that wasn’t exactly what you thought it was then what?

    Apparently expressing any honesty re feelings displays that you are low value with no options, so where does not playing games or honesty fit into this anywhere ever!?

    /rant

    • So now we have two sets of rules in which people are supposed to artificially inflate their own value

      Hmmm, maybe not artificially inflate, but just play your hand well?

  • Ramble

    even the Pilgrims are estimated to have had it at a rate of 50%, based on marriage and birth records.

    Susan, I would be careful in quoting that statistic too often. it may very well NOT illustrate what you think it does.

    Understanding sex and marriage in early and Colonial America can be difficult because of how disperse many things were.

    For instance, there are many stories of “married couples” walking down the street, running into a minister who asks them if they are married (that is, really, really married in the eyes of the Church) to which they say, “No” and he marries them right then and there.

    Because of things like this, which would have been extreme in the days of the pilgrims (which so many things were), it is difficult to extrapolate from early “stats”.

  • HanSolo

    @Mike C

    I don’t think many women have a problem inspiring sexual interest, at least not the ones decently attractive. Where they are deficient is in the behaviors to inspire commitment and emotional devotion.

    Agree.

    Now, a woman should try to get in shape and look as good as she can (with reasonable effort) plus add the feminine and other good personality traits to move from some guy’s casual ladder (if he is into casual) to the marriage ladder.

  • SayWhaat

    Now, a woman should try to get in shape and look as good as she can (with reasonable effort) plus add the feminine and other good personality traits to move from some guy’s casual ladder (if he is into casual) to the marriage ladder.

    It’s not as simple as that. A girl can do all of what you just stated, but still lack that spark, that je ne sais quoi that generates that frisson of chemistry.

    Previously that sort of thing could be chalked up to mere compatibility, but I suspect it’s more complicated than that.

  • SayWhaat

    Ugh, italics fail.

  • BroHamlet

    @SayWhaat

    “That’s probably a good thing, since most women don’t want a guy who is *too* good with women. ”

    Yeah, they have it so hard…In fact, they’re so good that they must all be fighting over the slim minority of women that doesn’t fall in your “most” category 😛 Now, back to reality. A quality guy will be good with women by default, because he has what they want. He won’t chase or play reindeer games either, which doesn’t make him *too* good with women.

    @Sassy
    “I’ve been in situations where a few guys have competed, in obvious and subtle ways, to win my affections. Some men like that sort of situation.”

    True. Some men chase women, in the same way some men run races for medals. You already know to watch out for the ones for whom the medal is only an object, and the race is just for sport.

  • Sassy6519

    I’m also reminded about a situation I was in about 3 years ago.

    I used to work with a guy. Let’s call him *Sam*. I considered Sam and I friends, and I wasn’t interested in him romantically. I wasn’t sexually attracted to him, and he also had a girlfriend at the time. I thought that he wouldn’t press for more than friendship.

    One day, he introduced me to his roommate. Let’s call his roommate *Tom*. I was instantly attracted to Tom, and focused my attention on him. We all hung out that night, and eventually went our separate ways. Tom ended up getting my contact info, and we met up with each other again a few days later. He and I got to know each other over a few drinks, and eventually decided it would be fun to invite Sam and his girlfriend to join us.

    Sam showed up with his girlfriend, saw me with Tom, and was visibly upset. He hid it well, for the most part, but I could tell that he was upset. Eventually he pulled me aside and asked me why I was out with Tom. I told him that he seemed like a great guy, and I wanted to get to know him better. He blew that statement off, and pretended to be okay with everything.

    Later on in the night, after he had a few drinks, Sam’s demeanor changed. He became super competitive with Tom. I watched with embarrassment as he challenged Tom repeatedly at darts. At one point, Sam’s girlfriend went to the bathroom, and Sam grabbed me around the waist and tried to pull me onto his lap. I protested, and Tom intervened. They exchanged a few harsh words, and Sam left soon after with his girlfriend.

    Tom and I did date for awhile, but things eventually ended. After things ended between Tom and I, Sam asked me whether or not I would be interested in having a threesome with he and his girlfriend. I naturally declined the offer, and made myself scare around Sam after that.

    That’s just one example that I have personally experienced.

  • Society’s Disposable Son

    @ Sassy 172

    That sounds less like friendly competition and more like compensating for insecurities… that sort of competition shouldn’t really strike anyone that isn’t damaged as fun or something to look forward too during any type of courtship….

    If this is normal and I’m wrong let me know so I can dip out.

  • SayWhaat

    “Yeah, they have it so hard…In fact, they’re so good that they must all be fighting over the slim minority of women that doesn’t fall in your “most” category.”

    Maybe that’s your scene, bro, but I’ve known plenty of girls who have DQ’d a guy for just that.

  • Mike C

    Tom and I did date for awhile, but things eventually ended. After things ended between Tom and I, Sam asked me whether or not I would be interested in having a threesome with he and his girlfriend.

    Was Sam’s girlfriend aware that he had propositioned you?

    I’m probably stating the obvious, but I’d bet Sam was sexually attracted to you from the get go.

  • Lokland

    Personal opinion.

    A lot of things on this list are very good and will spark chemistry if done correctly. They will also put it out instantly if overdone. Too much will verge of dark style game, too little will end a woman in the boring, sex is gonna suck zone.

    A balance of coyness and virtue is far superior to pure coyness or pure virtue.

    I like for the competition to exist yet I also like to realize I’m the favourite. (note: competition does not equal spinning plates)

    I’m quite happy my wife has a coy smile, touch of feistiness etc. Keeps me interested and I enjoy the mock chase in which I already know I’m going to win.

    At the same time, spinning plates/ rumours about other guys or faking interest in others would never fly.

    I broke up with my 3rd girlfriend because in the span of a few days I found out she was
    a) not most interested in me on first site, though after opening my mouth a few times that changed
    b) she called one of my friends hot (NEVER cool)

    Admittedly this made me want to earn her sexual affection more.
    It made me devalue her commitment completely.

    One has to maintain the balance of both.

    • @Lokland

      A lot of things on this list are very good and will spark chemistry if done correctly. They will also put it out instantly if overdone. Too much will verge of dark style game, too little will end a woman in the boring, sex is gonna suck zone.

      A balance of coyness and virtue is far superior to pure coyness or pure virtue.

      I like for the competition to exist yet I also like to realize I’m the favourite. (note: competition does not equal spinning plates)

      +1

  • HanSolo

    @INTJ

    Maybe you need to find a redheaded wildling girl! lol

    I have no idea how anyone could think Catelyn Stark (the mother) is the best looking?

    Khalisee is entitled but not as bad as her brother. She does have a certain compassion for the regular people like when she (unwisely) made the raping horsemen stop, which led to her husband’s death.

    I read a different take on why and who Winterfell was burned.

    http://www.quora.com/Game-of-Thrones-TV-series/Why-was-Winterfell-burned-in-the-second-season-finale

    The Boltons did it, according to this, so that they could weaken the Starks and maybe take control of the north.

    I was pissed at Catelyn. She never should have captured Tyrion and never released Jamie. Pure fuck-ups and that contributed to Ned’s death. Ned was an idiot too though I really liked him and was pissed he was killed. He selfishly put his honor above the good of the kingdom and by not allying with Renly Barratheon to take over the kingdom, the broader war was unleashed. Sometimes a little dark triad Machiavellianism is needed to fight even darker types.

  • Mike C

    I’m quite happy my wife has a coy smile, touch of feistiness etc. Keeps me interested and I enjoy the mock chase in which I already know I’m going to win.

    Lokland, I agree with you here. I’m going to add something on the touch of feistiness because I get the distinct sense some women are inclined to overdo it. Feistiness is like spice or salt in a meal. Just the right amount, a pinch here, and a pinch there really improves the taste of the meal. However, too much and the meal is ruined and you just want to throw it in the trash.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Mike C

    Was Sam’s girlfriend aware that he had propositioned you?

    I’m probably stating the obvious, but I’d bet Sam was sexually attracted to you from the get go.

    I think he was sexually attracted to me from the start, but I didn’t think he would attempt to act on it while he was in a relationship.

    I’m not sure whether or not the girlfriend knew about the proposition. My guess is that she didn’t, considering that he often tried to make passes at me when she wasn’t nearby. When she was in his presence, he appeared to focus his attentions on her.

  • Jackie

    Game of Thrones! Game of Thrones! :mrgreen:

    I, too, was all *facepalm* at Catelynn. But imagine how desperate she is to get Sansa and Arya back. Her husband has been set-up and decapitated, attempted murder on her son left him crippled, their ward Theon has turned on them and she never liked Jon Snow to begin with (aww! 🙁 Quit being mean to him! ) They had to give Robb to one of scary Walder Frey’s daughters to cross the bridge…

    I mean, there has been so much hardship and difficulty. She probably just wants to get back the children she has left.

    I love the incongruous pairings:
    Arya & Tywin (I would watch a spinoff with just them!), Jaime & Brienne of Tarth, Arya & Jaqen H’hagar.

    If there are any girls GoT fans: Who do you think is the cutest: Robb Stark or Jon Snow?

    Question: Do the guys here think Danaerys is pretty? Also I don’t see why people are hating on her. 🙁 I have a “In Defense of the Khaleesi” — much like my passionate defense of and unquenchable admiration for Colonel Brandon. (Plus, I like just saying, WHERE ARE MY DRAGONS? from time to time.)

    • Who do you think is the cutest: Robb Stark or Jon Snow?

      Jon Snow by a mile. He has the outsider thing going for him that makes a woman want to comfort him and sex him up, lol. Robb Stark is just a rich pretty boy.

  • Jackie

    PS to Han Solo:

    Sam + Gilly 4-evah!

    I *love* that guy– especially when they were trekking through the icy wilderness and he was all, I wonder if Gilly would like it here. (And all the other Crows were rolling their eyes and like, PLEASE shut up!)

    My hope is that he rescues Gilly (and all the other daughter/wives) and she has kept the thimble the whole time, feeds Abusey McCreeperson to the White Walkers, burns down that horrible place and they all escape and live happily ever after. 🙂

  • SayWhaat

    “If there are any girls GoT fans: Who do you think is the cutest: Robb Stark or Jon Snow?”

    Not yet a GoT fan, but about to be! Internet is being slow and the Season One disc that’s been sitting here for months is starting to look tempting…

  • Sassy6519

    “If there are any girls GoT fans: Who do you think is the cutest: Robb Stark or Jon Snow?”

    Robb Stark all the way!

  • Jackie

    @SayWhaat
    Yay! I am almost done with Season 2. Let me know what you think! 😀

  • Jackie

    Last GoT post

    Game of Thrones re-cut as romantic comedy:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-w98pNAi9A

    (Look away, SW, look away! Here be spoilers. 🙂 )

  • Jackie

    @Sassy

    I would have thought you’d like Jon Snow– he’s like the most emo dude in Westeros. 😉
    ===
    Other incongruous pairings:

    Tyrion & Bronn (we need to find him a GF)
    Sansa & The Hound (platonic on her side, obvs)
    ===
    DEATH TO JOFFREY
    (Sorry to be negative, but I really hate him!)

  • INTJ

    @ HanSolo

    Maybe you need to find a redheaded wildling girl! lol

    Haha yup. I almost jumped outta my seat when Jon Snow pulled back her hood.

    I have no idea how anyone could think Catelyn Stark (the mother) is the best looking?

    I did just realize that there’s a strong correlation between whether i’ve seen the character naked and whether I think she’s good looking. The whole modesty thing does seem to work on me.

    Khalisee is entitled but not as bad as her brother. She does have a certain compassion for the regular people like when she (unwisely) made the raping horsemen stop, which led to her husband’s death.

    She isn’t pure evil like her brother. I still hate her though.

    I read a different take on why and who Winterfell was burned.

    http://www.quora.com/Game-of-Thrones-TV-series/Why-was-Winterfell-burned-in-the-second-season-finale

    The Boltons did it, according to this, so that they could weaken the Starks and maybe take control of the north.

    Oh that was the conclusion I came to when I saw the episode. At first I was confused, since it seemed like the greyjoy soldiers were about to capitulate, so it was unlikely they would burn the city down, and even if they did burn it down, it was odd that there weren’t any friendly soldiers in the city afterwards. Then I realize that it was the friendly soldiers that burnt it down. I couldn’t for the life of me figure out why, so I googled, and found out what that link says, which was that it was a power grab.

    I was pissed at Catelyn. She never should have captured Tyrion and never released Jamie. Pure fuck-ups and that contributed to Ned’s death. Ned was an idiot too though I really liked him and was pissed he was killed. He selfishly put his honor above the good of the kingdom and by not allying with Renly Barratheon to take over the kingdom, the broader war was unleashed. Sometimes a little dark triad Machiavellianism is needed to fight even darker types.

    I can understand Catelyn’s actions given that she was just trying to protect her children, and mothers tend to be irrational when protecting their children. But yeah, Ned was way too honorable. That’s why I love Tyrion.

  • J

    the whole Wall at the North seems to be very reminiscent of the Israel-Palestine conflict

    Not Hadrian’s wall?

  • INTJ

    @ Jackie

    Sam + Gilly 4-evah!

    I *love* that guy– especially when they were trekking through the icy wilderness and he was all, I wonder if Gilly would like it here. (And all the other Crows were rolling their eyes and like, PLEASE shut up!)

    My hope is that he rescues Gilly (and all the other daughter/wives) and she has kept the thimble the whole time, feeds Abusey McCreeperson to the White Walkers, burns down that horrible place and they all escape and live happily ever after.

    Haha yeah Sam is adorable. It would be nice if Gilly and Sam ended up together. I doubt it’ll happen in the highly cynical world of GoT though.

  • INTJ

    @ Jackie

    They had to give Robb to one of scary Walder Frey’s daughters to cross the bridge…

    See that was the thing. I considered it a good deed to marry one of Frey’s daughters and rescue her from that awful place. Instead Robb Stark decided to go romance that nurse… Grrr.

    Question: Do the guys here think Danaerys is pretty? Also I don’t see why people are hating on her. I have a “In Defense of the Khaleesi” — much like my passionate defense of and unquenchable admiration for Colonel Brandon. (Plus, I like just saying, WHERE ARE MY DRAGONS? from time to time.)

    She ain’t bad looking. I don’t know to what extent it’s the immature character that is causing me to be biased, but she looks somewhat child-like. Rather off-putting.

    As for hating on her? Of course I hate her. She has an almost sociopathic temper, she loved the barbarian Khal Drogo, and had him destroy a city so they could obtain a fleet for her. Then she stopped the rapes and expected everyone to be grateful to her? I was so happy to see that witch play her for a fool.

  • Sparrow

    Daenerys is a perfect example of too much inbreeding.

  • SayWhaat

    lmao, looks like GoT is an instant thread-derailer! 😛

  • Pixie

    @ Jackie

    In response to 180: Jon Snow, without a doubt.

  • Jackie

    @INTJ

    “Haha yeah Sam is adorable. It would be nice if Gilly and Sam ended up together. I doubt it’ll happen in the highly cynical world of GoT though.”

    Hope springs eternal. 🙂

  • Lokland

    I like Danaerys the character.
    (Not attracted.)

    I can’t wait for her and Mormont to reign fire on the seven kingdoms.

  • HanSolo

    @Jackie

    Yes, she was distraught but she just fucked everything up by her actions.

    I love Sam. He’s such a good-hearted, clumsy and romantic nerd, and former coward. I hope Sam does rescue Gilly and the other daughters. That made me think of your involvement in rescuing abused pets.

    Danaerys is very pretty, probably a 9 but not a 10 (and I know you hate numbers but whatever, it’s a rough world 😉 ) If I were being hard on her I would give her an 8.5 but 9 is probably more accurate.

    And noooo! You cannot equate Danaerys and Colonel Brandon! Never. lol

  • Jackie

    @INTJ
    “As for hating on her? Of course I hate her. She has an almost sociopathic temper, she loved the barbarian Khal Drogo, and had him destroy a city so they could obtain a fleet for her. Then she stopped the rapes and expected everyone to be grateful to her? I was so happy to see that witch play her for a fool.”
    ====
    INTJ! 🙁

    I see Danearys as making the best of her situation: Her brother said he would let the ENTIRE Dothraki horde of 40,000 rape her if it would get him the throne. How is that not evil of him?

    And it looked like her life with Khal Drogo was scary and sucked at first. She could have given up, but instead she learned to speak Dothraki and made the Khal fall in love with her, instead of just seeing her as a sex toy. 🙂

    She won the hearts of the Dothraki when she ate the horse heart (GROSS) and was about to have the baby. When she lost all those things– can you imagine?

    She is the Mother of Dragons because “those are the only children I’ll ever have.” Her entire family is dead, and the last living Targaryen was her sociopathic brother who sold her to a scary warlord for an army.

    She’s got Ser Jorah in the friend zone, plus that Ducksauce guy proposing marriage. But I think she is still missing the Khal and is searching something to make life worth living for, in seeking the Iron Throne.

  • Jackie

    @Pixie

    Pixie, come on over and fangirl by me! 😀

  • HanSolo

    @Joffrey

    I think that Arya should have killed Joffrey right at the start. Would have solved some problems. There really is only one word that describes him and it starts with a C.

  • Jackie

    @HanSolo

    “I hope Sam does rescue Gilly and the other daughters. That made me think of your involvement in rescuing abused pets.”
    ===
    Aww! 😳 Thanks, Captain S! A kind word from you means quite a bit.

    Re: Danaerys vs Col. Brandon 😉

    I just like people who make the best of their situation. I think the Mother of Dragons is probably crazed with grief right now. I bet our esteemed Colonel probably was beside himself, as well, after losing his first true love.

  • JP

    “Additionally, occupational status, gained via competition, is a strong predictor of mate attractiveness:”

    True.

    Law = high status.

    Law school will take anyone and lawyers are a dime a dozen. You also marry six figures of debt.

    So, the status is misplaced.

    Which is really, really funny.

    Note: I went to Duke because I underachieved.

  • Lokland

    GoT

    I want the good guys to win (Rob Stark), I hold nothing against him for breaking a marriage vow to a women he cared nothing about.

    I want Jon Snow to go all 007 and kill Mance Rayder, take over and set up his own kingdom (allied with his bro). Where they go on to end the threat of the zombie army thingy.

    I think Tywin Lannister is bad ass, still think he will lose.

    Tyrion is by far the most interesting character on the show. I’m just starting into the third book, I’m very curious as to what he will do now that he is no longer the hand.
    (Also, huge fan of his SO. Hot accent.)

    The Hound. I feel a strange amount of connection with this character though I have no clue why.

    Catelyn is an idiot who got her husband killed.

    Arya is an interesting character. Her connection to the faceless men is interesting. I wonder where it will lead.

    Sansa, meh.

    Brann/Ricon. Meh.

    Tankasaurous (Diana or Diane). Not sure yet.

    Cersei/Joffrey- OMG please someone end the madness. Kids a nut case little twerp.

  • Jackie

    @Han

    AGREED. He must be stopped! I think even Cersei knows he is out of control.
    🙁

    Did you notice that Sansa contemplated pushing him from off the high wall when he made her look at her dad’s head (on a pike 🙁 ).

    Usually I dream of characters’ redemption. (I watched the Grinch Who Stole Xmas after seeing you guys talk about it here! I loved the heart growing three sizes and bringing back all the presents– and even carving THE ROAST BEEST!)

    But, man… wow…. can’t muster even a flicker of hope for Jerkfrey’s soul.

  • Jackie

    @Han
    Re: GoT & Animals

    You will like this, I hope: At the Humane Society, the vet techs who prepare the animals to go on the Adoption Floor name all the animals. There must be a George RR Martin fan in there, because they names a bunch of animals after all these GoT characters.

    Example: Enormous 22lb big black kitty = Khal Drogo, tiny little thing with ‘tude was named Tyrion. The yappiest, most annoyingest Siamese was named Joffrey– ha ha!

    (This Joffrey I don’t wish ill upon, obviously! Just a loving home and without the constant yowling!)

  • Lokland

    GoT

    Sam,

    +1 to what everyone else has said.
    If he succeeds the innocent kid I was 10 years ago can be happy that it does work sometimes.

  • HanSolo

    @Lokland

    The Hound is interesting.

    I think Brienne is basically a very loyal but dumb jock.

    @Jackie

    The de facto ruler is Tywin Lannister since he commands the army with Robb Stark and Stannis Baratheon still possible threats to taking over the 7 kingdoms. Most people know that Joffrey is not a Baratheon anymore. It will be interesting to see if Joffrey tries to supplant Tywin and what would happen.

    North of the Wall the white walkers are coming. Not sure if Mance Rayder’s group will move south or if they know how to defend themselves against the white walkers.

    Longer term the dragons are lurking to the east.

  • Pixie

    @Jackie,

    Is Jon Snow your favorite solely based on looks, or do you have a soft spot for the brooding emo boys? 😉

  • HanSolo

    @Jackie

    That’s funny about the 22lb Khal Drogo.

  • Jackie

    @Pixie

    I just think he’s super cute! But Robb Stark is cute, too. They will simply have to duel for me. 😉

    (Actually, there are some GoT crushes that I am not proud of: Jaime is super-cute! Evil, incestuous kingslayer Jaime. 🙁 Brienne, reform him and make him good, please!)

  • Jackie

    @Han

    I keep hoping they will go through a Star Wars phase soon. (There’s already been a “Star Trek” and STNG phase– the cat named Worf was super-cute! The dog named Data was awesome!)

    If there is another “Han Solo” I will definitely find the deets and keep you posted. 😉 It would have to be a pretty spectacular cat (or dog)!

  • INTJ

    @ Jackie

    I see Danearys as making the best of her situation: Her brother said he would let the ENTIRE Dothraki horde of 40,000 rape her if it would get him the throne. How is that not evil of him?

    Oh I certainly hated his brother. Almost as much as I hate Joffrey.

    And it looked like her life with Khal Drogo was scary and sucked at first. She could have given up, but instead she learned to speak Dothraki and made the Khal fall in love with her, instead of just seeing her as a sex toy.

    That was perfectly fine. But she also went all Stockholm in the process and fell in love with the same guy who would have used her as a sex toy.

    She won the hearts of the Dothraki when she ate the horse heart (GROSS) and was about to have the baby. When she lost all those things– can you imagine?

    She did that because she wanted to win the iron throne. I’m not particularly sympathetic.

    She is the Mother of Dragons because “those are the only children I’ll ever have.” Her entire family is dead, and the last living Targaryen was her sociopathic brother who sold her to a scary warlord for an army.

    She’s got Ser Jorah in the friend zone, plus that Ducksauce guy proposing marriage. But I think she is still missing the Khal and is searching something to make life worth living for, in seeking the Iron Throne.

    And this is what makes her so dangerous. Her biography is nearly identical to that of Genghis Khan. He lost everything, and came back with purpose. He also had the anger and attitude for vengeance that we’ve witnessed with Daenerys.

  • Lokland

    @HS

    I suspect The Hound is going to have a major role later on in the series.
    Brienne (with did I think Diane?), loyalty is actually quite endearing.

    Also, there is no de facto ruler atm.
    Joffrey has 0 power with each individual army holding its own scrap of land.

    I expect further fracturing of the kingdoms leading to more war.

    I also expect the white walkers are gonna pretty much sweep straight down to the neck (or somehow be magically held at the wall). Leading to a united front of armies (or not).

    At this point Mance Rayder’s army will pursue (with the help of the elves- Children of the Forest, from Old Naans story (book 1)). Its the only way they could still be alive up there.

  • HanSolo

    @Jackie

    Jaime is evil and arrogant, but I think he did a good thing by slaying the king.

  • HanSolo

    @Jackie

    It better be a dog for Han Solo because you well know that cats are pure eeeeeeeeeeeevil! 😉 lol

  • INTJ

    @ Lokland, HanSolo

    Catelyn is an idiot who got her husband killed.

    No, he did that himself by not backing Renly’s bid for the throne.

    Tankasaurous (Diana or Diane). Not sure yet.

    I think Brienne is basically a very loyal but dumb jock.

    Haha love the nickname. She’s a relatively flat character. It’s interesting just how silly knights and their chivalry, honor, loyalty, etc. seem when it’s done by a woman.

  • Lokland

    @INTJ

    Your probably right.
    In the books however, he actually did try and back Stannis for the throne.
    Something happened because Stannis was out at Dragonstone.

  • HanSolo

    @Lokland

    Within the 7 Kingdoms, I would say Tiwin+Joffrey’s army is the strongest right now while Stannis is back in his castle after his defeat and Robb Stark now has disension within his kingdom.

  • Sparrow

    I think, with the guy, it’s kind of like slaying dragons in order to win your lady fair.
    Who wants to fight dragons and the lady fair too?
    Shrek?
    How many women are dreaming of a strapping young ogre as their knight?

  • INTJ

    @ Jackie

    (Actually, there are some GoT crushes that I am not proud of: Jaime is super-cute! Evil, incestuous kingslayer Jaime. Brienne, reform him and make him good, please!)

    I don’t want him to get reformed. I want his head on a spike. The callous manner in which he tried to kill Bran causes me to have no sympathy for him whatsoever.

  • Lokland

    @HS

    Yeah but that had to retreat to hold Kings Landing.
    With Rob having to move North again it leaves a massive bit of land open for the taking.

    Which is right in between Casterly Rock and River Run (and presumably The Vale allied).

    Its up for grabs and whoever comes out on top will be the one holding the most power.

  • grace

    How would you reconcile the following from this post:

    “4. To sustain admiration for an indefinite period, display good nature, a sense of honor and a capacity for friendship. But never show yourself to be completely unselfish in your devotion to him.”

    And…

    the following point from the post titled “25 Politically Incorrect But Effective Ways to Make Him Your Boyfriend”

    “5. Have eyes for no one but him.
    Actively discourage attention from other men. Avoid eye contact with other men. Ignore other men who stare at you or seek to engage you in conversation. Never, ever try to increase a guy’s interest by trying to make him jealous. Any success will be temporary, guaranteed.”

    thanks,

  • Jackie

    @INTJ, Capt Solo

    I have just started reading the books, so by only seeing the series I have missed substantial backstory. I will catch up on the reading and maybe change my opinions of the characters.

    You have definitely given me a lot to think about. Hopefully we can be united in appreciating Tyrion’s quick wit and general awesomeness in the meanwhile? 🙂

  • Jackie

    @INTJ

    “(Actually, there are some GoT crushes that I am not proud of: Jaime is super-cute! Evil, incestuous kingslayer Jaime. Brienne, reform him and make him good, please!)

    I don’t want him to get reformed. I want his head on a spike. The callous manner in which he tried to kill Bran causes me to have no sympathy for him whatsoever.”
    ===
    Dang, T-Paine, you are hard core! No mercy for anyone, then?

  • Mike C

    Right, but she makes it really, really hard to stay with her. She’s super high maintenance, demanding, making constant drama. And the high SMV guys eat it up. I’ve seen it firsthand. Why? Because they haven’t “tamed” her. And her psycho-ness generally means highly unrestricted sex. They live for the challenge of the psycho girl.

    I don’t think this is quite right. Being honest, I’m speaking from personal experience here. I don’t think a high SMV guy, at least not one who is fully self-aware of his SMV stays in these situations for the “challenge”. It’s more of a choice of do I stick with the bird in hand, or go for the ones out in the bush that may or may not be obtainable.

    One of the things I think you tend to overestimate is the number of guys who have both the actual value and self-awareness of their value such as a Jason or Zach to essentially know they can walk away from any sub-par relationship situation. Take Jason’s roommate. He describes him as tall, a good job, etc. probably overall a guy with decent SMV value….but I’d bet that guy contemplates if I walk away from this girl who doesn’t do shit compared to what girls do for Jason can I easily and quickly replace her?

    It is less about “eating up any challenge” and more about weighing the cost/benefit of staying in the relationship with the drama and maintenance versus returning to a very uncertain market where you may or may not be empty handed. Consider the job market. If you are stuck in a crappy job, but the job market has a dearth of opportunities are you going to quit? What if the job market is full of opportunities? Most guys are acutely aware that in the SMP they essentially face an ongoing dearth of opportunities. I hate to drag Cooper into this but he serves as a good example sometimes. I know he has mentioned essentially being rejected by girls equally in looks and having to go 2-3 points below to be “considered for the job”.

    Bottom line, you are mistaking and misunderstanding the primary reasons why guys stay with certain women. It isn’t about eating up/thriving on the drama, but being very uncertain and not confident about viable alternatives.

  • Jackie

    @Susan

    “I believe women want to be SAHMs to be with their kids, not to read Russian novels and eat bonbons all day. It is a luxury, because it cuts household income in half. But it is also very hard work, presumably done with a level of attention and care no outsider can give.”
    ===
    My mom was SAHM, too, and I now see that it wasn’t for her benefit but for mine. (And many of the other neighbor kids as well.)

    It was really, really wonderful to always have someone to call if I got sick, or needed a ride, or just to have someone there. I never felt like I was competing with an outside agency (work, boss, clients, $$) for her attention.

    I will remember it the rest of my life. And, still, I know that she had a LOT of talents that must have been frustrating to set aside in order to SAHM. I think, too, that she might have been happier if she had some more adults in her life (since we kids took up all her time).

    You’ve definitely given me something to appreciate and reflect upon, Susan. Thanks 🙂

  • INTJ

    @ Jackie

    Dang, T-Paine, you are hard core! No mercy for anyone, then?

    I have mercy for Sansa. I think she has paid the price for her sins.

  • Lokland

    @Mike C

    “I’m going to add something on the touch of feistiness because I get the distinct sense some women are inclined to overdo it. Feistiness is like spice or salt in a meal. Just the right amount, a pinch here, and a pinch there really improves the taste of the meal. However, too much and the meal is ruined and you just want to throw it in the trash.”

    +1

    Theres also a certain level of feistiness in each women from which they can reduce or increase comfortably.

    The goal would be to reach a level of feistiness that is attractive to the highest number of men whilst remaining within the woman’s comfort zone.
    Thats going to involve stepping on some guys toes however.

  • Lokland

    @Mike C

    Forgot this, as written.

    Some of this advice sounds very dark.
    A more moderate form of some items would probably increase the number of men interested in the product while retaining the limerance like effects.

    @Susan

    I realize the creation of limerance is important but by encourage an affair?

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Men are so quick to play the Stage 5 Clinger card it’s incredible. One text asking what he’s up to can trigger it. Sure, men will happily let women clean their apartments, but do they keep them around? Apparently not.

    Unrestricted men who only want to be fuckbuddies are going to react like that. Restricted men don’t go nuclear about clinginess like that.

  • Joe

    Susan, those are some interesting comments about male competition. If I could put in my own two cents…

    You used “crossing swords” in a metaphorically sense (comment #211). If you are asking if men actually enjoy or relish competing like that, you have to understand that for men, the idea of “crossing swords” becomes a little more real than a metaphor. When sex is involved, men know instinctively that there’s always a potential for violence. It’s in the genes even if we don’t sharpen swords anymore.

    Most men I know are not violent by nature and tend to avoid confrontation when it’s not beneficial to them. And when they compete they don’t necessarily like it, even if they are good at it. For many, competition, even for females, is like driving a fast car. It starts out as a rush. But after years of putting up with rush hour traffic and breakdowns, not so much.

  • Iggles

    @ Sassy:

    Robb Stark all the way!

    Haha. I’ll second that 😀

    Full disclosure: The actor who plays Jon is beautiful, but the character annoyed me in thd books. Can’t get past that, lol.

    INTJ – You hate the Khaleesi?! Those are fighting words 😉

  • Mike C

    Susan, those are some interesting comments about male competition. If I could put in my own two cents…

    Regarding competition, there is a big difference between competing on the basketball court, or Madden football, or in the gym on bench press, and competing over a woman. With the latter, competition triggers jealousy which is very unpleasant. I think most men when they really like a girl tend to have some feelings of possessiveness whether justified or not (very often not as the guy tends to get more invested then he should). Guys who don’t mind competing essentially have mastered subduing their jealousy instinct. Usually, that also means they are not very invested. You get invested in someone you think is special not fungible….and you don’t want to compete over someone you think is special

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    Men are so quick to play the Stage 5 Clinger card it’s incredible. One text asking what he’s up to can trigger it. Sure, men will happily let women clean their apartments, but do they keep them around? Apparently not.

    No they aren’t, at least not with women they like. Maybe with women that they’re not interested in. Women need to avoid the guys that aren’t into them and go for the guys that are. But then that would ruin that whole falling in love feeling for the guy that just reveals his interest at the perfect moment, not too soon and not too late.

    And men do not want apartment cleaners–is that some great revelation? They want women that love them that they are attracted to, can respect, trust and love. They want women who will do thoughtful things for them and show they’re not entitled by helping out in ways that are not obligations but show she is willing to pull her fair share.

    • @HanSolo

      And men do not want apartment cleaners–is that some great revelation? They want women that love them that they are attracted to, can respect, trust and love. They want women who will do thoughtful things for them and show they’re not entitled by helping out in ways that are not obligations but show she is willing to pull her fair share.

      But Jason did not want her. He could not respect, trust or love her. But he did like the fact that she cleaned his apartment.

      Why is it “fair” that she clean his apartment while he is at work, or do his laundry? What is the fair exchange? What was she getting in return for those chores? Clearly she was investing in a future with Jason, but he dumped her, clean bathroom notwithstanding. From a strategic perspective, she bought high and sold low.

  • SayWhaat

    You get invested in someone you think is special not fungible….and you don’t want to compete over someone you think is special

    I am having difficulty squaring this with the situations I have witnessed of men chasing a woman who is already in a relationship. IIRC, this was how Athol managed to get with Jennifer, his now-wife.

  • SayWhaat

    Er, that should read, “then someone else’s gf, now his wife”.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    @Susan

    Exactly, and he can’t be the winner if there are no other competitors. Men thrive on competition, right?

    I think this is one of the biggest myths out there. It really speaks more to players & guys looking for notches rather than average guys.

    I’ve noticed a lot of beta friends through the years get extremely attached to the first girl to show any significant interest in them, even if everyone else questions if they could do better.

    @Mike C

    I don’t think many women have a problem inspiring sexual interest, at least not the ones decently attractive. Where they are deficient is in the behaviors to inspire commitment and emotional devotion.

    Couldn’t agree more. I know that’s definitely true for me.

  • HanSolo

    @INTJ

    Even unrestricted men (like myself) don’t necessarily go labelling girls stage 5 clingers. But I am a romantic unrestricted man who is capable of being faithful and wants a wife and family.

  • Mike C

    I’ve noticed a lot of beta friends through the years get extremely attached to the first girl to show any significant interest in them, even if everyone else questions if they could do better.

    Jimmy,

    You just said much more efficiently and concisely what I was trying to get at in comment 231

  • Joe

    @SayWhaat

    I am having difficulty squaring this with the situations I have witnessed of men chasing a woman who is already in a relationship.

    I would guess that you’ve seen much more of that behavior on tv then in real life.

    But insofar as it does happen IRL, it seems to be stereotypical Alpha behavior. What they don’t tell you, is that this is exactly the kind of Alpha behavior that causes men to think twice about the whole idea.

    Whether it’s an unfair characterization or not, men don’t like that kind of poaching. Men viscerally dislike men who do that, or even try.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    How often do many men say an ugly woman is hot? My sense is that there is generally solid consensus around who is hot. Sure, men may have their own types, but society deems certain women great beauties. There are women who turn many heads, and other women who turn the occasional head. It seems reasonable that most men would prefer a woman who turns many heads over a woman who turns few heads, based on what I quoted from Buss above. Of course, if his head is one of the few, he is in the fortunate position of being a buyer of something with low demand.

    You’re missing the point again. My original point was that preselection does not significantly help women. If you’re hot, men will find you attractive, because you’re hot. Not because other men find you attractive.

    • If you’re hot, men will find you attractive, because you’re hot. Not because other men find you attractive.

      The Power of Social Proof in Dating

      “In truth, however, there’s no evidence to suggest that social proof can’t work for women too. In fact, a recent study at Indiana University has demonstrated that men are affected by social proof too. It’s understandable that the approval of friends and family is important and influential when selecting a potential mate. However, this study shows that strangers play an important role as well.

      “The men’s interest in the women was generally positive after watching the videos but it increased significantly if the male peer in the video appeared to be interested in that woman and if the online men were considered as attractive or more so than the study participant. When the men in the video seemed uninterested, however, the male participants’ interest didn’t change much.

      An intriguing finding involved the sway men had on each other. Place