Beautiful Women Must Try Harder

December 18, 2012

I rarely post two letters from readers back to back, but I received an email today that is both time-sensitive and potentially instructive to readers.

I’ll begin with a confession. The real name of the writer is very unusual, and after reading her letter I had a hunch I wanted to confirm. Sure enough, she is indexed in Google images thanks to social media profiles. It is as I suspected. She is a hard 9, at least, if your taste runs to Kate Upton on a good day. I don’t mean to objectify her, but I think she falls victim to a mentality that is common among beautiful women. It may sound counterintuitive, but beautiful women often have to make a special effort to land a good man, initiating intimacy, providing encouragement and offering reassurance along the way.

My advice would be the same in any case, but her looks are undoubtedly a factor in the dynamic between them.

Dear Susan,

Hi, your blog always gives such insightful advice on relationship issues, and I would love some right now because I’m in a difficult position with the first man I’ve liked in a long time.  I’m 22, he’s 25.

I’ve been dating him for around two months now. I ended things with a guy this summer and was deeply depressed for a while, which is why I didn’t want to get emotionally attached too soon. There was a bit of imbalance – he took me out to nice dinners, walked me home, didn’t even make a move. When we started sleeping together, things were great but I was still not completely accommodating – I didn’t offer him coffee/breakfast in the morning, which I kind of regret now. I’m an introverted person and I don’t express emotions very well. Raised that way I guess.  Nevertheless, we continued dating and he’d text and call very often.  

I haven’t seen him in person for around 3 weeks. It’s sometimes been difficult matching our schedules (he’s working, I’m a student), and I have been travelling the past week. He said he wanted to take me to a lovely dinner the night I came back from an overseas trip. I was jetlagged when back and had a heavy lunch so I suggested a drink instead, and he accepted. I dozed off, got back to him a couple of hours later and said we could meet 45 mins later at which point it would be 10.45. He said it would be “a little too late” because he had to get up early for work, but we could meet the next day. I was pissed – that drink would probably lead to him coming back with me, he hasn’t seen me in 3 weeks, what guy says no to that because he’d get six hours rather than eight? I was so annoyed I said I was busy the next few days. He told me to “let him know when I could see him”.

So when I was out Thursday night I texted him (very late, early hours) asking if he was out too. For a weekday, I figured he might have been in bed. I got a reply the next morning. Friendly, as usual, but he hasn’t initiated anything since.

Worst part – Saturday night was a party hosted by a friend of his – an all night dinner and drinks.  He asked me about a month ago and even convinced me to stay in town a far more days to attend. Come Saturday, I heard nothing.  I’m just assuming he went to the party without me. I suppose most girls would text and go “what’s going on with that party??”. But I always assume a defensive position towards men – I think until the point of exclusive, the initiatives should be theirs. Plus, I did make an “initiative” Thursday night by texting first.

I was angry and in my irrational rage, I figured this was “finished from my side”, deleted him off facebook and deleted our text message history. That was yesterday, I assume he’s seen it by now, but he hasn’t said anything. I am twisting in agony trying to figure what the reason for his silence might have been… Whether someone said something about me. I can’t figure why, I’m not known as promiscuous, and I don’t think there is anything awful that may surface.

So as you can see I’m going out of my mind. I like the guy, and I know I acted irrationally when deleting him. But his behaviour was really schizo – he was all over me and seemed so genuinely interested, and then shut down on Saturday. I feel like it would be stupid to contact him now, it will seem as if deleting him was a provocation and now I’m “giving in”? I feel like it would give me an instant lower hand. Should I just wait it out? 

Am I being completely crazy? Will this end right now if I don’t make a move? Or will I look pathetic? Or is it the case that if he likes me enough, I will hear from him? 

An ex boyfriend accused me of always causing unnecessary drama. If that seems the case, please let me know.

Anne

Dear Anne,

It sounds like  you’re a regular reader, in which case you’ve seen my posts about avoiding players, and also my posts about the need for a woman to escalate emotionally when a man does get through her filter and she wants to be in a committed relationship with him. 

I’m going to cut straight to the chase here.

You have been employing the Principle of Least Interest with such success that you convinced Stephen you are not interested in him. To be fair, you describe yourself as having been hurt fairly recently and feeling somewhat self-protective. It’s hard to escalate emotionally while deliberately delaying intimacy. Being introverted and not emotionally expressive makes this more challenging as well.

It sounds like Stephen was happy to go all out in pursuing you, putting in most of the effort. You already have a sense that you did not give him the reinforcement that would have helped to seal the deal early on, as you mention having regrets about remaining aloof, even after sex. However, I see some poor judgment calls here on your part within the last week or so that I don’t believe you fully recognize. At the risk of being very hard on you, I’m going to highlight them in hopes that you can learn from this experience, whether things work out with Stephen or not.

You did not act eager to reunite with him when you returned from Miami. 

I understand that you were jet lagged, and I’m sure he did too. You might have rescheduled, explaining that you were dying to see him but wanted to be at your best. You could also have mentioned that you simply could not function without a couple of hours sleep, would he be amenable to a late drink? 

Instead it sounds like you dismissed his plan because you were not particularly hungry (bad call) and then left him waiting and wondering until 10 p.m. That was not very considerate of his time, and it may have played a role in his declining at that point. Or he may have calculated that you would both have a much better time with less pressure by doing it the next day instead. Maybe he wanted to enjoy your company for an evening instead of racing home from the bar to have sex before an early alarm.

You felt rejected, so you punished him.

If a man is rejecting you, punishing him for doing so is not a good strategy for exciting his interest. Had you agreed to the next night, you would likely have had a passionate reunion. Instead, you told him you did not want to see him. His response that you should let him know indicates hurt feelings and hurt pride. 

You sought to increase your control over him.

After turning him down, and without letting him know when you were available to see him, and how much you wanted to see him, you texted him while out late on a work night. This served to remind him that you are a carefree student who can be out and about getting attention from other men while he is required to get his sleep before another grueling day at the office. I imagine he woke in the morning, felt peeved, and his resentment grew throughout the day. 

Note that you have still not texted to “let him know when you could see him.” You have only texted to convey your fabulousness and desirability on a night when he was unlikely to go out. 

You stubbornly waited for him to break. 

You entered into a pissing match over who would blink first. It should have been you! Why do you always assume a defensive posture with men? Why are they required to do all the work? You’re bound to intimidate the hell out of most men as it is – they’re going to need some positive reinforcement to keep going! And they’re very likely to assume that they’re unlikely to hold your interest.

Deleting him from facebook probably signalled to him that you have zero interest in him whatsoever, and want all reminders of your association gone. 

In short, I don’t think his behavior has been schizo or the least bit unreasonable. I think you’ve been acting like a bit of a spoiled brat. (I say this with a maternal affection.) I don’t know whether this is salvageable, but if you really look at Stephen and see a potential father for your children, here is what I suggest you do:

Go crawling to him on your hands and knees.

Stephen,

I regret the way things have been between us for the last week. I accept responsibility for doing a very poor job of letting you know how much I wanted to see you upon my return. I have enjoyed our time together very much and I’d like to set things right. Are you free tomorrow night? Would you like to come over for a drink and we can talk about it?

Missing you,

Anne

If he is kind but says no, you’ll have time for soul searching. If he is a jerk and really was playing you in some way, he’ll be rude and unresponsive, in which case you just got rid of a bad guy. If he says yes, you’re back in the game. Respond graciously no matter what.

No more silent treatment, it’s time to make a little drama here (the good kind – as in, a dramatic gesture to surprise and delight him).

One Pingback/Trackback

  • Andy

    This woman is nuts. I’m not surprised he ran off.

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

      This woman is nuts. I’m not surprised he ran off.

      Nuts? How so?

  • Underdog

    I like this guy. Sounds like he’s got it together.

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

      @Underdog

      I like this guy. Sounds like he’s got it together.

      Me too. He’s prepared to Next a 9 for rude behavior. Well done.

  • Joe

    Absolutely great advice, Susan. If you forced me to guess, I’d say that you read the situation perfectly.

  • Ramjet

    “I really like this guy so I’ll act like I’m not into him to make him attracted! Oh why oh why doesn’t he like me now? :(”

    Beautiful
    Sane

    Pick 1

  • Rico

    A common bit of wisdom – No matter how hot the woman is, some guy is done putting up with her shit.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Yeah, the guy seems to have his act together in terms of relationship mgt skills. He’s not being a dick; because of female intrasexual competition for a dwindling supply of “appropriate” men, even the not-conventionally-hot guys of means are going to be acting this way now, and the hot guys with $$ just won’t tolerate much at all.

    The hair-trigger cutaway behavior can actually be more pronounced among LTR-minded guys because they are reacting to feminism and hook-up culture by becoming more judgmental and less and less easy-going—they don’t want to invest resources in lost causes, so they filter for lost causes very aggressively.

  • JamesV

    I will tell you who turns down sex from a hot woman late I night. I do. I seriously value my sleep. A woman that thinks she is so attractive that a guy will put banging her ahead of a good night sleep before a hard days work is showing some narcissistic and entitlement tendencies. That, plus trying to punish him for it the next day, is a sign of a woman whose always been able to get a guy to jump on command.

    Personally, if you’d invited me over late at night when we both know sex is a sure sign but where busy the next few days and followed that up by unfriending me on facebook, I might assume you were a slut and were pretty much done using me. If I didn’t assume you were a slut I would be seriously confused and you would likely confirm the belief that the prettiest ones are always the most crazy.

    You tried to play some crappy game on him and he’s having none of it. Consider this a life lesson to stop treating guys like they exist to fulfill your whims.

  • Vicomte

    You are causing unnecessary drama.

  • Senior Beta

    Ya gotta admit Susan. Even though Rollo sometimes gets under your skin, sometimes he nails it. Like now. Hot girls have it so tough.

  • http://www.christianfreethought.com/ IrishFarmer

    Pretty girls do have to try harder….to overcome themselves.

    Another way to sum up her behavior is that she’s trying to get commitment by filtering the guy with her behavior into either chump or cad. He can either put up with her crap, in which case she’ll likely stop being attracted to him, or he can start to play her games better than her which will probably only be possible if he’s a cad.

    If she’d just relax, and try and diminish her “I’m good looking and I know it” behavior, she’d probably (from the sounds of it) be happy to find out that she’s dealing with a guy who’s just enough “cad” and just enough “dad” to have a great relationship with. Maybe.

    I think this is the inherent problem with “girl game”. A lot of women are attractive, and want a relationship, but if they learn girl game they’re gonna start doing what this woman did and apply the techniques consistently with their entitled attitude towards relationships and just make things worse.

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

      @Irish Farmer

      If she’d just relax, and try and diminish her “I’m good looking and I know it” behavior, she’d probably (from the sounds of it) be happy to find out that she’s dealing with a guy who’s just enough “cad” and just enough “dad” to have a great relationship with.

      What she needs to do is abandon all sense of pride and/or entitlement. The thing is, I don’t find it useful to blame beautiful women for exhibiting “I’m good looking and I know it” behavior. They are good looking, of course they know it! They feel entitled because it’s rare that they don’t elicit interest from men. They’ve actually reached a logical and correct conclusion.

      The real problem is her strategy – she has to let her guard down, something that is very difficult for beautiful women to do. She also needs to make herself vulnerable, something that feels scary after a bad relationship ending this summer.

      I think it’s hard for men to believe that hot women have feelings too – they are not invincible, and they attract a lot of cads. They must filter so aggressively that they can become very cynical about men. One very pretty woman I know is very good at filtering out cads, but she says she wishes just one guy would make it through the filter!

      Anne describes this guy as short and not handsome. I’m sure the only reason he had any confidence was his wealthy background (which probably feels a bit crappy) and the delight she took in his personality when they met. Of course men want the hottest woman they can get, but they also want to trust that the attraction is real and building toward love.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Susan, great post.

    However! I would say that just thinking he’d be good husband/father material isn’t enough. At 22 and a student, she will still feel the urge to keep looking. She seems to be playing the Principle of Least Interest game because she isn’t all that interested (not totally in love), but it’s likely that his backing away has made her want to chase him.

    If she actually is in love with him, then she should do as you suggested. But if she’s not, then she’s just playing cat-and-mouse games, and should really go back out and find a guy that she’s truly excited about, as opposed to merely “like a lot.”

    Also, we don’t know if this guy is dating other women or if they’ve had the exclusive talk. Not enough info there.

  • Society’s Disposable Son

    Position of least interest ruins another relationship.. I should feel something but I don’t anymore…. play games and this is what happens.

    Good luck not repeating the same crap with the next guy I think you’ll need it.

  • VD

    You’re bound to intimidate the hell out of most men as it is – they’re going to need some positive reinforcement to keep going! And they’re very likely to assume that they’re unlikely to hold your interest.

    This is the main one right here. Any man who is attractive enough to regularly land 8+ women has enough experience to realize that they have no shortage of options. Since he has options too, though not as many, he’s going to be one foot out the door unless/until she signals that she has particular interest in him over all of the others he knows are pursuing her. The more desirable the guy, the easier it is for him to stop the pursuit.

    Her actions weren’t intentional, for the most part, and this is more miscommunication than anything. The situation is salvageable, but only if she sends an unambiguous message of her interest in him. She may be introverted and afraid of putting herself at risk, but she’s unnecessarily put herself in a position where it is now required. The big problem was the Miami thing, as Susan correctly noted.

    Men know that a woman who is genuinely interested will run herself ragged to see the man she wants. If she’s not, well, she’s probably not all that interested. That’s why it is so important to send very positive signals if you are already run ragged and you simply can’t manage it.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    There’s also a big cognitive growth spurt between college and after college. The first three years after I graduated, I think I was gaining life wisdom at an exponential rate and losing drama at the same rate of decline. An introvert staying up until wee hours of the morning for fun? In college, totally normal. In the working world, ha!

    So there’s that gap to consider between 22 and still in college vs. 25 and working.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @JamesV

    You’re posturing

  • Lokland

    Initial impression just from her letter.

    Damn girl you friggin nuts.

    More later.

  • Lokland

    +1 to other guys

    This guy has his LTR game nailed down perfectly.

    @Anne

    Good luck.
    Advice for next time:
    Everything you did this time, next time do the opposite.
    Actually.

    I’m going to disagree with Susan however, the situation isn’t likely salvageable and if it were… would you really be happy with a guy that let a woman treat him like that?

  • Ramble

    Beautiful Women Must Try Harder Not Introduce Unnecessary Drama

  • Anne

    Thanks for a great response, Susan.

    The responses on this thread were so strong and opinionated that I had to read through my letter again to check whether the situation was portrayed correctly.
    There might be some differences – such as the fact that we are not American, but I get the general message.

    I asked a male friend and referenced this blog, he said the advice given was “too general” and not specific for my situation. He advised me to contact this guy in the morning, it’s 11.15pm in London and he might be in bed.

    I am worried that giving him a response now will “reward” the fact that he pulled away. Most of all (even if he’s lost interest), I want to know what caused him to pull away on Saturday. We had specific plans, and the “craziness” you observe on my part, happened after that.
    I suppose I have little to lose now, other than pride.
    I am always reading advice saying that a man will “work to remain in your life if he wants to be”. I feel like I am being pulled from side to side in terms of relationship advice.
    I was dating a guy who called me every day, invited me on long weekends, introduced me to friends and wanted to meet my family, and in the end just wanted to sleep with me while he was casually dating a woman in NY. If that is a possible scenario, what hope do I have with a man who quits on me on a Saturday night, not even giving an ridiculous excuse?

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

      @Anne

      I am worried that giving him a response now will “reward” the fact that he pulled away.

      You have every reason to reward his pulling away. You want him and he is now removed from your life. I maintain that the bad behavior was initiated by you. His last instruction to you was to let him know when you want to see him. Did you ever send that text? If not, I think he is justified in assuming Saturday was off.

      Look, I’m talking to you like I would talk to my own daughter. I think you acted bratty, and now you need to make nice. He was dominant and collected and refused to put up with your shit. That’s excellent, you should be glad he stood up to you! Now go get him, making it clear you are invested and will treat him in a way that reflects that.

      I am always reading advice saying that a man will “work to remain in your life if he wants to be”. I feel like I am being pulled from side to side in terms of relationship advice.

      I’ll be honest – that is the He’s Just Not That Into You school of advice, and I’m not a fan. Yes, a cad will remain in your life if he wants to be because he is impervious to fear, rejection, or feelings of attachment. A normal man, a good man with the emotional range you want, will not persevere in the face of constant rejection or lack of interest. You don’t think he noticed that you never offered him coffee or breakfast? A woman trying to lock that down would have been babying him with feminine moves. You’re hot shit, but if you want him, you’re going to have to take a one down position. If you cannot do that and humble yourself, it’s not going to work.

      I was dating a guy who called me every day, invited me on long weekends, introduced me to friends and wanted to meet my family, and in the end just wanted to sleep with me while he was casually dating a woman in NY.

      This is the Pretty Girl dilemma. You attract Dark Triad males (narcissistic, manipulative, devoid of empathy) because you represent a great conquest and they have nothing to lose. You might as well be dating the Terminator. Unfortunately, these men can mimic desirable personality traits for a short time, and women are often taken in. I’ve heard a lot of these stories, and my guess is that when you look back, there were some signs that he was low on empathy. There always are.

  • j

    Could you please post links about women escalating emotionally? I don’t know where to find those articles and I need them. thanks!

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Anne

    The answer is simple, and yet, quite difficult : How do you get him to chase you ?

    What does he do ?
    What is he passionate about ?

  • Joe

    Anne, I can’t help but notice that you’ve used phases like “I feel like it would give me an instant lower hand.” and “reward [his behavior].” Reading as dispassionately as I can, it really seems as if you’re attempting to control his actions.

    And sometimes, all it takes is the perception to make a guy reconsider his options. Let me suggest that it’s not about gaining the upper hand or about rewarding good behavior like you would a child (or a dog, for that matter). You may very well be surprised if you surrendered the upper hand to him. He may realize that you are golden after all. You may get exactly what you want.

    I can’t guarantee that, of course, because you are both strangers to me. But I’ve seen it happen.

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

    Why Rollo, I think that may be the first comment you’ve ever left here that did not include a link. :)

  • Deli

    I am rooting for Stephen. G’luck mate, you are going to need it either way.

  • http://natewinchester.wordpress.com/ Nate Winchester

    I was dating a guy who called me every day, invited me on long weekends, introduced me to friends and wanted to meet my family, and in the end just wanted to sleep with me while he was casually dating a woman in NY. If that is a possible scenario, what hope do I have with a man who quits on me on a Saturday night, not even giving an ridiculous excuse?

    Anne, was that previous guy working? Because if not, there’s your answer. A working dude just does not have the time and energy to put that much effort into anything not the job. Shit’s gotta get done, yo.

    “A man who quits on [you]?” Per your letter, you signaled first that you quit on him. Like Susan said, he saw your response and decided to stop bothering. Why would he give an excuse when you signaled “finished” first?

  • Senior Beta

    Anne fell for an alpha. Who has choices. Like more 9s. Who doesn’t need Anne. End of story.

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

      Anne fell for an alpha. Who has choices. Like more 9s. Who doesn’t need Anne. End of story.

      I see him as a Vox beta. After all, he appears to be a man of character. He took her out and walked her home without demanding that she suck his dick.

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

    “I feel like I am being pulled from side to side in terms of relationship advice”

    You will be pulled from side to side in terms of advice in all spheres of life…who to vote for, what stocks to buy or not buy, what career to follow, etc etc. You have to listen to the advice *and the rationale for the advice* and figure out for yourself what actually makes sense.

  • Thiefsie

    The hamster is strong in this one…

    I hope she can salvage the relationship but from what I’m reading, sadly the guy has done what I would do and walk away from the drama (implied or not) and cut ties as soon as Anne did the childish act of deleting him on facebook.

    She needs to level a bit more with why she is interested in him as well… Money? Social standing? Personality? Well she needs to understand that to keep money and social standing he needs to work, and probably damn hard… so yes at this early stage she will take second position.

    Also, perhaps Anne should follow a little bit of Athol’s Captain and First Officer advice.

    Let your guard down for the guy that has got through the filter… work a little harder to attract him. Give him a BJ he won’t forget next time you’re with him.

  • Anne

    @ Nate Winchester
    The previous guy was working too. He was co-founder of his brothers’ company (30% owner) and finishing his MBA at the same time. Either way, a 60 hour workweek. All the time he wasn’t working, we spent together. I don’t know where he found the energy to pretend to like me while doing all this – some men get energy that way I suppose?

    @ Marellus
    He was a manager in a company, but quit a while ago. I’m assuming he’s always doing some work for the family company. Otherwise he’s preparing for gmat tests. He doesn’t need to work, financially speaking.
    We’re pretty similar in interests and taste. I’m a very good cook, so I will cook for him sometime – IF we get back in the sweet spot.

    I am googling Vox beta to see what that’s about.

  • VD

    I am always reading advice saying that a man will “work to remain in your life if he wants to be.

    No, that’s female projection. Women will just about kill themselves to be in a man’s life if they want. High quality men want to know you are loyal before they bother. Don’t make the mistake of projecting your own thoughts and feelings onto him. Men and women are different. Even ALPHA and BETA men think and act differently

    I am worried that giving him a response now will “reward” the fact that he pulled away. Most of all (even if he’s lost interest), I want to know what caused him to pull away on Saturday. We had specific plans, and the “craziness” you observe on my part, happened after that.

    He’s not a woman. Stop trying to treat him the way you need to be treated. He pulled away on Saturday because of this: “I was so annoyed I said I was busy the next few days. He told me to “let him know when I could see him”.”

    He sounds sufficiently in control of himself that, unlike most men, he’s not going to respond to every tiny hint that you might deign to dangle before him. Stop playing games, stop worrying so much about protecting yourself, and indicate your interest in a reasonably straightforward manner. Call him up, tell him you’re really sorry you’ve been such a flake, and see what happens. Ironically, the more coy you attempt to play it, the more likely it is that you’ll get played.

    I see him as a Vox beta. After all, he appears to be a man of character. He took her out and walked her home without demanding that she suck his dick.

    He could just be a decent Alpha. Or a patient one. They do exist. I think he just senses flakiness and is steering clear until she gets her act together one way or the other. I’ve done that. It’s a positive sign that he’s responding to her and being friendly. If he’d Nexted her, she’d get silence.

  • VD

    I am googling Vox beta to see what that’s about.

    Try this. He does sound like a high Beta from the description. Family wealth gives him Alpha trappings without the predatory drive.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Anne

    Ask his opinion on something. Tell him you’ll send him a rose for his trouble. Should he respond, and no matter how he responds, send him a rose. I mean it. If he responds to this, apologise and say you’ll send him some more. If he responds again, tell him that the matter should be discussed further over coffee.

  • VD

    You attract Dark Triad males (narcissistic, manipulative, devoid of empathy) because you represent a great conquest and they have nothing to lose. You might as well be dating the Terminator.

    (laughs) But Susan, you say that like it’s a bad thing!

  • Derrick
  • http://natewinchester.wordpress.com/ Nate Winchester

    The previous guy was working too. He was co-founder of his brothers’ company (30% owner) and finishing his MBA at the same time. Either way, a 60 hour workweek. All the time he wasn’t working, we spent together. I don’t know where he found the energy to pretend to like me while doing all this – some men get energy that way I suppose?

    Oh, see, MBA isn’t even a real degree. lol ;)

    At the very least, Guy 2 sounds like he proved his dad-bonafides to you with the turn down offer. It means he has a good head on his shoulders and is going to be a good manager of family finances. I mean no offense to you, but there are things more important than sex (especially long term unless you’re producing offspring). If you’re that worried he’s playing you, find some of his family and get the low down.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Anne

    I have been in a similar situation as you are now. Susan is speaking the truth.

    If you want to salvage this, you will need to swallow your pride and give him some signals that you are truly interested in him.

    It is not uncommon for men to be unsure about whether or not women are interested in them/likes them. That uncertainty is often multiplied tenfold if a woman is very attractive.

    I tend to be very aloof around men as well, and it has landed me in situations like yours on more than one occasion. Sometimes, I was willing to stick my neck out and tell the men honestly how I felt about them. Other times, I maintained my aloof demeanor, and they eventually FIDOed.

    How much do you want to be with this guy? If you honestly want to date him, you will need to give him more than crumbs of affection to keep his interest.

  • http://www.christianfreethought.com/ IrishFarmer

    @ Susan

    “What she needs to do is abandon all sense of pride and/or entitlement. The thing is, I don’t find it useful to blame beautiful women for exhibiting “I’m good looking and I know it” behavior. They are good looking, of course they know it! They feel entitled because it’s rare that they don’t elicit interest from men. They’ve actually reached a logical and correct conclusion.

    The real problem is her strategy – she has to let her guard down, something that is very difficult for beautiful women to do. She also needs to make herself vulnerable, something that feels scary after a bad relationship ending this summer. ”

    Of course it’s not useful, that’s why I added all of that other rabble to my comment.

  • Anne

    Susan, how can I see who’s ‘liked’ this on fb? I don’t want it floating about on social media.

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

      Susan, how can I see who’s ‘liked’ this on fb? I don’t want it floating about on social media.

      I have no idea! Only one person has liked it so far, that’s the good news. But I have no access to information on which reader clicked that button. You should be OK – the readership here is 80-90% American.

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

    Anne, I don’t suppose this guy’s name would be Nick Krauser?

    Nick Krauser could never pull Anne. She’s an educated Londoner dating independently wealthy men. His accent is, well, um, not posh, and he’s unlikely to ever be within 100 yards of her. Just saying. The Venn Diagram of Krauser and Anne’s social circles do not touch.

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

    Why would a woman want the conquest of a Dark Triad male? That’s like saying we want the great conquest of alcoholism or heroin addiction. Fun at the beginning perhaps, but soul and life destroying.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Oh my…
    just checked in today because I saw there was a new post and only 40 comments. I have a busy day today, so I gotta make this quick, and respond to this.

    I am always reading advice saying that a man will “work to remain in your life if he wants to be”. I feel like I am being pulled from side to side in terms of relationship advice.

    You are misapplying this advice. The problem is that girls can get all worked up over a guy and bend over backwards to see him, when he doesn’t show the SLIGHTEST interest. Did you see He’s Just Not That Into You? I’ll admit this is one of my favorite movies. Here’s what the women screw up in that movie:
    -Gigi goes to another part of the city to “return a pen” to a guy who won’t return a phone call
    -Scarlett (can’t remember character name) keeps on sleeping with a man who is married to another woman
    -Gigi hosts an ENTIRE PARTY for Justin Long’s character, when he is not showing any equivalent interest in Gigi.
    -Bradley Cooper’s wife is getting cheated on…and she is working her ASS off trying to save the marriage. What the hell is the goddam point?

    The problem is that a girl finds a guy, wants him, and then goes crazy trying to win him over! The flip-side is the guy doing all the work, but that doesn’t make sense EITHER. What Justin Long says in that movie is that he will make SOME effort to meet up with you. Not that he is going to slay a Dragon, solve WWII, build you a desk, and then call you 6 times just to get you to text him.

    Both sides have to show some interest, and like Susan said, you need to show some interest or he’s going to just drive on.

    Tonight, my GF actually reallly wants to skype me. I can’t because I had to go get gas, then pick up some pottery stuff we painted, check this website for some “recreation,” get my ass exercising for 45 minutes, shower after exercise, cook dinner, eat dinner, wash dishes, cook lunch for tomorrow, check pantry to see if I have the food necessary to make dinner tomorrow, oh fuck I don’t so I need to make a shopping list too, by the way my 401k information came into today so I need to check that, I really would like to look into buying a condo a little more, fuck the sweet table at work is tomorrow and I want to bake some muffins, I want to buy some Disney on Ice tickets for Mom/Dad/Niece to go together which also means I have to text Sister to see when Niece is actually in town, and subtly hint to Mom and Dad that they should keep a weekend free without ruining their Christmas Present, some laundry, blah blah blah my life is boring.

    And I don’t even even really have time to skype my girlfriend, who I REALLY care about. I don’t feel bad about it, because I just spent all weekend with her, so she’s being a bit demanding, IMHO.

    What in the world makes you think I am going to make massive amounts of effort to see a girl who I think probably isn’t even interested in me? This is my BORING day.

    Even if I had more free time, which I spent looking at HUS, I could play Xbox. Or watch a movie. Or look at porn. Or read the new Tom Wolfe.

    I don’t mean to rag on you or anything, but this whole “guy does everything” idea is not a good one to have. It doesn’t always work out that way in real life.

    Which leads me to this…

    The previous guy was working too. He was co-founder of his brothers’ company (30% owner) and finishing his MBA at the same time. Either way, a 60 hour workweek. All the time he wasn’t working, we spent together. I don’t know where he found the energy to pretend to like me while doing all this – some men get energy that way I suppose?

    Yeah, certain kinds of people have virtually boundless energy, at least for short time spurts. I once hung out drinking with my friends for 6-7 hours, slept for 3 hours, drove another 3 hours, and ran a half marathon.
    I am not Superman but for that period of time it was hard to slow me down.

  • JamesV

    Anne,
    What behavior of his do you see as wrong and that you are trying to avoid rewarding?

  • Damien Vulaume

    The classic self-made vicious circle ice queens find themselves trapped in, and great comments adressed to Anne:

    “You have only texted to convey your fabulousness and desirability on a night when he was unlikely to go out.”
    “Consider this a life lesson to stop treating guys like they exist to fulfill your whims.”
    “How much do you want to be with this guy? If you honestly want to date him, you will need to give him more than crumbs of affection to keep his interest.”

    Nothing more to add, really.

    “Ironically, the more coy you attempt to play it, the more likely it is that you’ll get played.”

    Voilà. +1

    @Marelus
    “Tell him you’ll send him a rose for his trouble. Should he respond, and no matter how he responds, send him a rose. I mean it. If he responds to this, apologise and say you’ll send him some more.”

    Looks like you’ve mistaken her for a tranny…

  • http://markymarksthoughts.blogspot.com/ MarkyMark

    Man, that chick is too much WORK! If I have to wonder if a gal likes me, then I assume she doesn’t and look elsewhere. If Anne’s man has any sense, then he’ll do likewise.

    That reminds me of a saying an old, female friend told me: I graduated from high school for one reason: to LOSE the games! How true it is. Anne would not qualify for my time or interest, given her behavior; given her behavior, Steve would be right in assuming she’s not interested, and would look elsewhere to find someone who IS…

  • Dinkney Pawson

    Anne:

    He has been wondering about you for some time. Your lack of affection indicates low emotional investment.

    I had such a relationship. She wasn’t as pretty as Susan says you are, but she was cuddly and had nice skin. It was on-again, off-again for longer than I should have let it be.

    Search your feelings. You didn’t really want him. Now you think you do. Is it merely the fact that he seems indifferent now?

  • pvw

    I think all the advice to Anne is great.

    I am realizing through reading Anne’s discussion of the situation, the significance of the halo effect, that women who are seen to be very beautiful can get away with flaky behavior, because men are tripping over themselves to please them.

    Perhaps Anne has been able to do this before with other men who didn’t call her out on it. So Mr. Highly Functioning Beta is forcing her to grow up and realize the world doesn’t revolve around her.

    This struck me: “When we started sleeping together, things were great but I was still not completely accommodating – I didn’t offer him coffee/breakfast in the morning, which I kind of regret now. I’m an introverted person and I don’t express emotions very well. Raised that way I guess. Nevertheless, we continued dating and he’d text and call very often.”

    Me: This isn’t about being introverted. This is about being a gracious host, which makes me wonder, what the hell is happening out there?

    I guess I’m just too old fashioned for words with respect to my upbringing. I remember as a little girl, being instructed and shown by my mom, the value in being gracious in offering hospitality.

    If anyone came to our house, the expectation was that they would be offered some refreshment, ie., juice and perhaps a snack. I was to help her in gathering the glasses, the drinks, the trays, etc. And if it was a matter of having time to plan beforehand, I was to do so by making sure I had something on hand to offer.

    When I was 22 and in college but living in a dormitory, I remember an instance of some family connections visiting me; we were going on our way to visit some of our mutual relatives. I remember talking to my mom and her asking me whether I remembered my duties as a hostess.

    “I didn’t forget, I said, yes mummy, I got a few bottles of juice and some cookies/crackers.” If I didn’t act appropriately, it would have been beyond embarrassing to her, and she would have called me on it.

    Heck, she would probably call me out on any rude behavior even today!

    Forget about a man visiting with you and not offering him some refreshment, but after sharing sexual intimacies, it just never occurred to you???

    Wow, just wow…

  • Anne

    @JamesV
    “What behavior of his do you see as wrong and that you are trying to avoid rewarding?”
    Mainly blowing me off Saturday. He told me to “let him know” on Tuesday, and I did in fact contact him Thursday (although late). I can understand that he feels he has given more than me, but I thought not taking me to the party was crossing the line. He invited me to this party a month ago and has been talking about how I MUST come.
    The main reason I wrote to Susan was that I thought something serious must have happened in the meantime, and I was trying to figure out what. It was so sudden.

    @Dinkney Pawson
    I was hugely attracted from the first time I met him. I had butterflies waiting for the first text and the first dinner we had together was amazing – I have never laughed so much during one dinner. My only reservation has been that I’ve still struggled with the idea of the last guy I dated and whether the fact that he was on my mind was a problem. But I’ve realized that’s just anger. And when I didn’t see Stephen for some time, I realized how much I missed him. Of course you realize these things more when things get rough. But I wanted him available too. I’m just so used to doing the withholding dance I don’t know any other way.

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

      I’m just so used to doing the withholding dance I don’t know any other way.

      This. I think it’s important to dispassionately view the SMP economics of this. Anne does not play hard to get. She is hard to get. From a male POV, it’s difficult to imagine a more fertile or alluring vessel to carry one’s offspring. Anne’s natural counterpart is the handsomest, smartest, wealthiest, kindest, top male in the tribe. It is her right, because of her own SMV, to reject all men who don’t measure up to that standard. She has no earthly incentive to be “easy to get.” Of course, men want the woman who is hard to get for every other guy and easy to get for himself. But Annes are not easy to get for anyone – they spend their lives deflecting unwanted attention, practicing rejection, and filtering through waves of cads in search of their rightful and natural partner.

      In this SMP, the Annes are at a disadvantage. Their natural partners are often players, uninterested in commitment and low in MMV due to their own promiscuity. Anne is to be commended for choosing a man who displays LTR traits. The reality is that any man who holds onto Anne is going to have to be quite dominant – a hero in her eyes. Stephen is off to a good start, as he passed all her shit tests with flying colors. If Anne can find a way to stop withholding and “give in” – to be easy to get for Stephen alone, well then I think they have a shot.

  • INTJ

    @ Anne

    Don’t be too hard on yourself. Introvertedness is difficult (I would know haha). But you need to open up a bit, and most importantly, not expect him to show you attention if you’re unable to do the same in return.

    @ Susan

    All I can say is, wow. You were brutally honest with Anne. Didn’t know you had it in you. :D

  • INTJ

    @ Ramjet

    Beautiful
    Sane

    I believe it’s beautiful, intelligent, sane, pick two. So yes, it’s possible to get a beautiful and sane girl as long as she has rocks for brains. :D Poor Zach…

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    What the hell is going on? Two articles in a row, and both times we have a decent consensus between men and women? Madness!

  • INTJ

    @ Bastiat Blogger

    Yeah, the guy seems to have his act together in terms of relationship mgt skills. He’s not being a dick; because of female intrasexual competition for a dwindling supply of “appropriate” men, even the not-conventionally-hot guys of means are going to be acting this way now, and the hot guys with $$ just won’t tolerate much at all.

    The way I see it, it doesn’t even have to do with whether there is female intrasexual competition or not. I don’t care if I have better options or not. It’s a matter of having basic self-respect. Any guy who has a backbone (though admittedly many lesser deltas don’t) is going to react the way he did.

  • pvw

    @INTJ: I believe it’s beautiful, intelligent, sane, pick two. So yes, it’s possible to get a beautiful and sane girl as long as she has rocks for brains.

    Me: Yes, which begs the question, will men go for intelligent and sane even though the woman is merely attractive, cute, pretty (ie., 6-8), or presentable (ie., a 5)….But the temptation for many men seems to make the choice in favor of beautiful and crazy. It is the halo effect. I wonder, if Anne were not as beautiful, ie., a 6-7, what might her behavior have been like? I would guess, far more accommodating (sane) in the hope of locking down a desirable higher beta. Unless there is a greater tendency to female narcissism and flakiness, a 6-7 would realize that she can’t afford to act as though men are always going to put up with garbage….

  • INTJ

    @ pvw

    Me: Yes, which begs the question, will men go for intelligent and sane even though the woman is merely attractive, cute, pretty (ie., 6-8), or presentable (ie., a 5)….But the temptation for many men seems to make the choice in favor of beautiful and crazy. It is the halo effect. I wonder, if Anne were not as beautiful, ie., a 6-7, what might her behavior have been like? I would guess, far more accommodating (sane) in the hope of locking down a desirable higher beta. Unless there is a greater tendency to female narcissism and flakiness, a 6-7 would realize that she can’t afford to act as though men are always going to put up with garbage….

    Yeah the tendency of men does seem to be to forgo sanity. For me, that’s the most important factor. I can balance off attractiveness and intelligence (though my minimum threshold for intelligence is probably higher, percentile-wise, than my minimum threshold for attractiveness).

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Anne:
    “I’m just so used to doing the withholding dance I don’t know any other way.”

    You’re just 22. Maybe you might want to consider learning other ways fast…
    You don’t want to end up being a trophy wife, do you? Or find yourself alone once your looks fade…

  • HanSolo

    @Anne

    Important questions:

    On the evening you returned, what time were you supposed to meet for dinner?

    Then when you said you wanted a drink instead, what time was arranged or was it left open? This appears to have been at 8 pm and then you went to sleep for 2 hours.

    Can you fill in some of the timeline and details before I give my advice?

    Not seeing him at an earlier time the night you came back plus telling him that night you were busy for the next few days are what got this whole thing rolling so understanding what must have been going through his head that night is key to everything.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @pvw:
    “which begs the question, will men go for intelligent and sane even though the woman is merely attractive, cute, pretty (ie., 6-8)”

    Yes, at least sane men.

  • HanSolo

    @Anne

    I guess my point is that it seems like he was probably expecting to meet for the drink soon after 8 (maybe around 8:45 since 45 min was the time lag you suggested when you texted him at 10) and not at 10:45. So if he was just left waiting for 2 hours then I can see why he might have thought you were uninterested. He may have really needed to get sleep and thought it would be better to just see you the next day when you could both spend more time and not be rushed.

  • pvw

    @INTJ: Yeah the tendency of men does seem to be to forgo sanity. For me, that’s the most important factor.

    Me: I can understand that. It seems to me a sane and balanced man is going to want sanity in his life.

    It is about knowing the value in having a girlfriend/wife who is in the words of my French-speaking mother-in-law, “une jeune fille tres bien elevee,” (I’m missing some accents here) a young woman raised with “good home training,” manners, etc.

    Thank God for my old school Caribbean immigrant mom!

  • pvw

    Damien Vulaume December 18, 2012 at 11:49 pm

    @pvw:
    “which begs the question, will men go for intelligent and sane even though the woman is merely attractive, cute, pretty (ie., 6-8)”

    Yes, at least sane men.

    Me: Which might imply then that the insane ones go for the insanity of the hot craziness! This was probably at the heart of Karen’s dilemma in the last post; she was merely presentable/cute/pretty and sane, no competition (in the eyes of her boyfriend) for the hot insanity of her sister…

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

      @pvw

      Which might imply then that the insane ones go for the insanity of the hot craziness! This was probably at the heart of Karen’s dilemma in the last post; she was merely presentable/cute/pretty and sane, no competition (in the eyes of her boyfriend) for the hot insanity of her sister…

      Good point! We should add a red flag – any man who says is ex (or heaven forbid, his exes) were crazy, psycho or insane should be summarily dismissed! I think a lot of these men get hooked on the dopamine rush of conflict and agitation followed by makeup sex. They learn to crave the unpredictability and find it genuinely arousing. Guys here have said the men put up with crazy behavior for the sex, but I would go further and say they seek women with crazy behavior for the sexual and emotional roller coaster. I’ve seen guys get sucked in by really unstable women, where the instability was part of the attraction.

  • jason773

    Anne,

    You messed up and you keep making excuses as to why you didnt and why he should continue chasing. Im a 25yo american male with a plenty of options, just like it sounds for your guy, and the simple fact is that all this crap isnt worth it. In my view this guy has been more than accomodating towards you and showed real interest while you have continually rebuffed him.

    From the talk of susan you sound really good looking, but this guy prob can get other good looking women so you need to do more. Maybe he ends up with an 8, rather than a 9 like yourself, but one who is very caring, sweet and doesnt play these games. The latter is definitely worth it when looking for a relationship.

    Swallow your pride, take a chance and follow susans advice here.

  • Senior Beta

    Susan @ 49

    Thanks for clearing that up. So a London model type 9 is working through wealthy young Brits to find the right match. And gets pissed when one does not supplicate. Now I have it. Thought you were trying to help a stressed out American like the last poor gal with the threat of a slut sister. You need a vacation.

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

      @Senior Beta

      So a London model type 9 is working through wealthy young Brits to find the right match. And gets pissed when one does not supplicate. Now I have it.

      ???I don’t see how my comment at 49 relates to your response. First, Anne is not working her way through anything. She is 22, and recently ended a serious relationship, and she is dating Stephen with the express intention of possibly marrying him.

      She has very high SMV and is surely on any short list of highly desirable and eligible women in London. Why on earth would she go for a broke PUA who accosts her with a webcam and a cocky funny routine at an intersection?

      Thought you were trying to help a stressed out American like the last poor gal with the threat of a slut sister. You need a vacation.

      Why did you think that? She’s neither American, nor stressed out, poor or coping with her man’s having eyes for her sister. She’s not a victim, nor did I treat her as one. I urged her to take responsibility for her feelings and change her behavior.

      Unless I’m missing something, your comment strikes me as oddly defensive. Are you white knighting for a PUA? Is that the career Anne should be seeking in a mate?

  • Damien Vulaume

    @pvw:
    “which might imply then that the insane ones go for the insanity of the hot craziness! This was probably at the heart of Karen’s dilemma in the last post”

    Insane or hoplessly imature, or suckers for beauty. Yes, that was probably at the heart of Karen’s dilemma. It would have been interesting to see pictures of both sisters. I’m making an assumption here but seeing the picture of the supposedly hot sister would have had me ROFL even more at that pathetic boyfriend. Just my instinct.

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

    Anne,

    I always say that with a women (and presumably men as well), you don’t truly know the strength of their character until you observe how they deal with adversity. I’ve had a couple girlfriends I thought had very strong personae fall to pieces when life threw them a curveball. This situation here and now is giving him a nice illustration of your character. By your own admission, he has invested far more effort into the relationship than you have. The particular details of what precipitated this minor crisis is totally irrelevant: it’s time for you to reciprocate his investment, or quit.

    Poop or get off the loo.

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

    ‘are totally irrelevant’, geesh…

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @DV

    Looks like you’ve mistaken her for a tranny…

    Looks like Anne’s mistral will respond to such mischief …

  • Emily

    If a girl is going to act this way in her relationships, then she’s going to end up having to be extremely hypogamous, even if she is beautiful. An attractive, confident man simply is not going to put up with this kind of behaviour. The remaining options are either: a) flings with cads who will P&D you b) a LTR with a snivelling gamma who will worship the ground you walk on because of your beauty, no matter how you treat him.

    …I can’t imagine either of these options being particularly appealing, so I’d say an attitude adjustment is probably in order.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Marelus
    I’m more worried about the real mistral than hers.
    Sorry if that remark offended you, but you seem to misread her behavior if you seriously think that she’d send roses to the guy….

  • Melissa

    First off….the patronising of Anne’s good looks is WAY TOO MUCH (So much that it sounds condescending)!…..I wonder if she finds it annoying when people constantly revert back to her good looks in any topic of discussion, especially of this kind.

    Besides the patronising, I think Susan’s advice is perfect.

  • pvw

    Re. DamienV at 72: your suggestion to add onto insane, “hoplessly immature, or suckers for beauty” (I would add, as per the halo effect), I can agree with that.

    And that is probably going on here, as I mentioned the “halo effect,” but the guy has pulled a fast one, which she never saw coming which is why she is in knots:

    “Still, I have often ended up dating guys who are not exactly George Clooney, and have had comments that I could do “a lot better”. Stephen is extroverted, funny, well educated and from a very wealthy background, but he’s not “handsome” and a bit on the shorter side (I’m 5”9). I don’t know if it’s relevant, but I’ve had the feeling all along that he feels very lucky to be with me.”

    Re Jason at 70: “From the talk of susan you sound really good looking, but this guy prob can get other good looking women so you need to do more. Maybe he ends up with an 8, rather than a 9 like yourself, but one who is very caring, sweet and doesnt play these games. The latter is definitely worth it when looking for a relationship.”

    Me: He might even be able to go lower and still be “safe,” in that she has admitted as per the quote she provided that he is not handsome, while (according to Susan) she is in the 9 category. He could be anywhere, but I would guess 5-8, as she said he is below her in looks.

    And this has been typical for her: with respect to the looks of the men she dates, she can do “a lot better”. Less handsome men with money are so grateful to get her attention (ie., they want a trophy?) that they will do anything for it. As with many wealthy men who are not “handsome,” their money makes them more appealing, so they can pull the 8+ women. So that is what is at stake.

    This makes for an interesting affirmation of game: very attractive women need serious game to get them in line. She took him for granted while he seemed very accomodating; it was what she expected, that the lowly serf (as all the other serfs before) would worship at her feet and be grateful for the bones she tossed his way. But now that the tables are turned and he doesn’t reward her rude behavior, she believes he is “playing games.”

    Perhaps there needs to be more assortive mating here…Highly Functioning Beta needs a woman like him, perhaps a 5-8 who can appreciate him.

    Let Gisele look for her Tom Brady.

  • pvw

    Re Melissa at 78: I wonder if she finds it annoying when people constantly revert back to her good looks in any topic of discussion, especially of this kind.

    Me: But she made it a central part of her analysis in explaining the pattern of interactions she has had with the man she is dating.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Damian Velum

    She must do the entire rose-thingy in a tongue-in-cheek manner. That way she doesn’t loose face, and the mistral is at once blindsided, piqued, and motivated to reframe.

  • LongLostFriend

    Anyone else notice that Anne’s not heeding any of the excellent counsel here, but rather merely defending herself and her bad choices?

    Another case of a vapid female seeking affirmation, not advice…

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

      Another case of a vapid female seeking affirmation, not advice…

      I feel compelled to say that I find the display of bitterness from some of the males downright embarrassing. Gee, I hope Anne can deal with the shock of your not wishing you could date her!

      Beautiful women have their own issues in the SMP – the top women and the lower males are the big losers post Sex Rev. Anne never claimed to be perfect, and I think she’s taking the feedback with grace. She has acknowledged her own mistakes and weaknesses in general – from her first letter to me. She is well aware that she has been emotionally aloof, and seeks to improve herself.

      I believe Anne welcomes constructive criticism, which is what I hope we can provide – a constructive approach, or strategy, for her to succeed in this relationship.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Marcellus
    Miscommunication probably. So the mistral here is the guy she’s treating like classic prima donnas do? I thought you meant to use the mistral (the wind in Provence) as a metaphor for her wrath.
    Even tongue in cheek, I doubt she’ll do it.

  • JamesV

    Anne,
    Look at it from his perspective. Given the way you treated him his reaction actually is very reasonable.

    After not seeing him for 3 weeks he was so important to you that you went to sleep. OK, so maybe he really is important to you and accidents happen. No problem. You invite him out later that night but it is already too late and he is ready for bed. This should be no problem because adults don’t act like college students. Maybe he could have gone but it is perfectly reasonable for an adult to not start his evening at 10:30pm. However, as you said, you decided to pretend you were busy for a while.

    So, you expected him to have no problem with you breaking plans to sleep yet you weren’t willing to allow him the option of not even making plans because he was getting sleep. You expected a sacrifice from him that you weren’t willing to make. And it is all downhill from here.

    From his perspective the girl he was interested in broke plans with him, tried to change them to fit her convince (at an inconvenient time for him btw), blew him off with an indefinite time frame of when she’d be available again, tried once more to squeeze him in at her convenience (when she should no from prior experience his is unlikely to be available).

    Based on the behavior he saw you might want to consider that his decision not to take you to the party was reasonable. You gave him many signs that he was only important enough for you to squeeze into your life when you had time. It makes perfect sense that he would reciprocate and back off of his interest in you to the same level.

    Every single problem in this relationship since your trip is because of your unreasonable expectations, pique and caprices.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @LongLostFriend
    “Anyone else notice that Anne’s not heeding any of the excellent counsel here, but rather merely defending herself and her bad choices?”

    Absolutely. I found her subsquent comments very revealing of her frame of mind. The prima donna type.
    But it’s not so much seeking affirmation. My take is that she genuinely doesn’t see where she did go wrong. She is already (and at just 22, at that) way too used to expect to treat even a guy she likes and is with as if he’s at her disposal.
    That Stephen sounds like a perfect gentlemen. They already have an intimate relationship together (but obviously not a love one) and yet she can’t help but keep pulling those those tricks.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @DV

    What I find amazing is how the advice is given. And it’s given with the tact and circumspection of a Sandor Clegane … when what’s called for, is the mannerisms of a Tyrion Lannister.

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

      @Marellus

      What I find amazing is how the advice is given. And it’s given with the tact and circumspection of a Sandor Clegane … when what’s called for, is the mannerisms of a Tyrion Lannister.

      Did you just compare me to Sandor Clegane? How would you have advised Anne differently?

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Melissa: “The remaining options are either: a) flings with cads who will P&D you b) a LTR with a snivelling gamma who will worship the ground you walk on because of your beauty, no matter how you treat him.”

    Probably the best summation so far. Except, being part of an alpha rotation is far more likely than a pump and dump. That, and even a decent normal delta will probably fold like a card table in her presence… a gamma is taking it too far.

    She’s definitely locking herself out of the beta LTR market with her behavior. What’s amazing is this guy hasn’t bumped her to ladder two and accepted some booty calls. My take: he has other prospects, or, is one of the rare single-ladder types. If he’s the latter, go back and beg because he won’t be for long.

  • Maven3

    Nice
    That’s exactly what awakens my inner player…

    Now you have two choices:
    – go back to him and you have lost lots of power. Guy might use it or not – depending how genuine is he
    – wait for next attractive guy to come (might be year or never)

    Do you trust guy?

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Marelus.
    It’s hard to decipher what you mean through the fog of your references. I have no idea who those two characters could be. Some pop “culture” reference maybe?
    I suppose you mean that Susan’s or everybody else’s advices to the girl were too blunt? If so, I believe that frank and direct explanations will be more helpfull to her than sugar coated, serpentine ones.

  • Anne

    @ LongLostFriend
    I am simply replying to the questions which were asked directly. I thought filling them in on the information they wanted would be useful.
    I haven’t rejected any advice given (except maybe the “rose” thing…). In total, most of what people have said is some variation of the advice Susan gave – I emailed her when I read it for the first time and told her it was an eye-opener, especially this “carefree student” scenario.

    I do find this thread to be very focused around looks. I cannot rate this guy from 1-10 – there is a reason that scale is used mostly for women. A guy’s “rate” says little about his overall attractiveness, but it can be significant for how he sees himself. Men are visual, and many falsely assume women are too. My note on his appearance was a small paragraph at the end of my email. If Susan assumed he was very good-looking, she might have given different advice. Or he might have been labeled an alpha – maybe he is anyway, I don’t know, I don’t have sufficient ‘knowledge’ about these personality types. Either way, it was natural to give SOME mention of his looks. I find him very attractive, and I am sure other women do too.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Melissa

    First off….the patronising of Anne’s good looks is WAY TOO MUCH (So much that it sounds condescending)!…..I wonder if she finds it annoying when people constantly revert back to her good looks in any topic of discussion, especially of this kind.

    I hate to tell you this, but I have a feeling the unconscious thought process working in the minds of many men right now is wayyyyyy worse than what’s being communicated.

    Men-Folk, in particular the guys here, tend to really like women. That’s why we pedestalize them so much. It’s why the guys keep coming here again and again, we honestly love women.

    You have to figure this is biologically programmed to a great extent :P

    Anne is not getting that welcome here, which makes you wonder what else might be playing deep in the lizard-brain. It’s probably not pretty.

    No worries, Anne, you’ll be fine. You’re 22. You have to do some work, just like allllllll the rest of have to do, but I’m fairly confident that you are trying to learn and will be able to put Susan’s good advice into practice.

  • Cooper

    Anne,
    I think all this is stemming from you blowing him off when you got back from Miami. Read JamesV’s comment #84 – he wrote exactly what I was thinking while reading the post.

    I actually think this guy sounds like a really good guy.

    @Susan
    If I can remember correctly, sounds like Anne need to do, in your words, some “Coopering.”

  • pvw

    Some random thoughts re:

    Hope at 15: So there’s that gap to consider between 22 and still in college vs. 25 and working.

    Anne at 92: In total, most of what people have said is some variation of the advice Susan gave – I emailed her when I read it for the first time and told her it was an eye-opener, especially this “carefree student” scenario.

    ADBG at 93: No worries, Anne, you’ll be fine. You’re 22. You have to do some work, just like allllllll the rest of have to do, but I’m fairly confident that you are trying to learn and will be able to put Susan’s good advice into practice.

    Me: I know there have been occasional debates where I believe Susan have urged college aged women interested in long term relationships leading to marriage, to consider guys who are a bit older as the college market is impossible to navigate.

    Some guys have bought the argument, others have not, because they have seen or experienced some of what has been described here. Not all young college girls who have not made the transition from school to work are mature enough to negotiate a grown up relationship with a man who is an adult in the working world.

  • Escoffier

    Wow, Susan, this is the second post in like three weeks I find nothing to complain about!

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

      Wow, Susan, this is the second post in like three weeks I find nothing to complain about!

      I guess that means I have my afternoon free!

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Anne does not play hard to get. She is hard to get.”

    I disagree with your entire comment.

    Having a huge filter is perfectly fine in the rejection phase, but she’s playing these flakey games even when she likes him after sex. Being hot doesn’t mean you get a free pass out of being a decent person, and continuing these games too long is the very thing that will keep her from having a decent relationship with a self-respecting Vox Beta.

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

      @OTC

      Being hot doesn’t mean you get a free pass out of being a decent person, and continuing these games too long is the very thing that will keep her from having a decent relationship with a self-respecting Vox Beta.

      I don’t think it has anything to do with decency. Her problem is strategic – she is signaling a low level of emotional involvement, even though she feels quite emotionally invested.

      I suggest that her tendency to withhold and reject is partly born of necessity. She is guarded and wary of men. For every good guy who sacks up to ask her out, I can guarantee you she has to reject 9 cads. A woman like Anne can see her N skyrocket if she does not arduously filter for character. One way of filtering is waiting to see which men are truly in it for the long haul, as evidenced by the tenacity of their pursuit. There is some validity to this approach, as cads will rarely stick it out. The risk, of course, is that she wears down the good guy, as she has apparently done in this case.

  • Maven3

    “Nick Krauser could never pull Anne. She’s an educated Londoner dating independently wealthy men. His accent is, well, um, not posh, and he’s unlikely to ever be within 100 yards of her.”

    “Just saying. The Venn Diagram of Krauser and Anne’s social circles do not touch.”
    Ha – good point. Could be Krauser – he’s daygamer in London like me and this sounds like PUA tactics.
    I am less sociopath, but I have been pulling chicks like those before, so it’s not about social circles (street has everything – from strippers to models).

    Anna, if this guy of yours is bald guy around 35 – run fast and and don’t look back.

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

      Could be Krauser – he’s daygamer in London like me and this sounds like PUA tactics.

      Or maybe he has natural dominance and self-respect…

      The idea that any PUA would be in this situation is laughable.

      Anne: What do you do for a living?

      PUA: Chase pussy.

      Anne: Excuse me?

      PUA: I get my dick wet professionally.

      Anne: Is that lucrative?

      PUA: No, I’m broke.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    One thing that seems increasingly clear to me is that the quality, provisioning-capable LTR-minded men in the SMP are deeply concerned about malinvestment.

    -They know about the so-called “35 Wall” vs. the later age of marriage and the tension that this creates for women;

    -they know about female complaints regarding the scarcity of good men;

    -they know that many women want the SAHM option and that many/most men cannot provide it;

    -they know about the college ratio numbers;

    -they know about the family court system’s homicidal impulses towards males;

    -and they know about how their hot player friends have been behaving in this environment and about the popular “carousel” and “alpha fucks, beta bucks” memes.

    As a result, we see among the high-MMV male crowd an obsession with chastity and female N (as witnessed here many times) and a near zero-tolerance view towards behavioral problems. Basically the quality, in-demand guys in the SMP who are unrestricted are just taking on the player lifestyle, while the ones who are restricted are becoming extremely choosy and judgmental (I read the phrase “Taliban Jim” recently and have started using it because I think that it is an amusing, not-wholly-inaccurate way to describe this latter type).

    I wonder if it is safe to safe that the age of the pure Mr. Nice Guy may be nearly over, at least where high SMV or MMV men are concerned. Successful Girl Game strategists (such as Susan’s proteges) will of course adapt to these scarcity conditions, but I fear that many may seek refuge in completely counterproductive, pro-entitlement/narcissism tracts like The Rules.

  • Erwan

    Anne,

    I am short (5.3) and used to be a lowly omega who couldn’t have a date to save my life. Lost my virginity at the ripe age of 36. I am now a local political figure, light years away from your world, but I still get approached reasonably frequently (reject most of them, by the way).

    That to tell you I know both attitudes, and they are worlds apart. The perpetually dateless nerd will accept anything to get a bit of attention from anything remotely resembling a woman. The man who gets some attention from women will be far more picky, especially for what concerns character, not so much because they have options (that kind of thinking belongs to cad-land) but because they tell themselves : she is beautiful, but immature and that’s not what I want, so let’s move on.

    In your case, I’d suggest swallowing your pride and going back to him to apologize and tell him what you feel. The rules are not the same for quality men : they look for a partner, not some bratty arm-candy, and a partner is an adult.

    As for your previous boyfriend, he was a cad, nothing more. Genuine people have emotions, and that keeps them from being too smooth.

    And, Longlost, I wouldn’t be so severe. Changing one’s perspective on life is quite hard, but asking is the first step. Let the one who never deluded himself throw her the first stone. I certainly won’t.

    A final word of warning. One of my friends is (was) as beautiful as you are, intelligent with a prestigious diploma and more connected than I could dream of being. The same kind of girl as you (and yes I did a lot of orbiting around her and got friendzoned fair and square). She is now fourty, single and childless, not particularly successful professionally with more than twenty serious ex-boyfriends behind her. She has been dateless for nearly a year now and things are not getting better. Frankly I am bit worried since I value her as a friend.

    Don’t be her

  • Shiner

    This whole sitch is awash now. She might as well seek out someone new. She fouled up big time with the Miami thing and really screwed the pooch on that one. Even if they managed to work things out Anne might sabotage things in the future and I can’t blame Stephen one iota for his actions at this point. Realize too that you don’t come across too many men that will pique your interest and draw you in like Stephen especially since it sounds like he is very charismatic. He sounds very analytical too so much in fact that he knew when to exactly cut and run and not look back…for his sake, not being mean, just sounds like Anne will have to make drastic changes in a short time frame because as other posters above already stated he won’t be lacking in the interested females for long.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Anne

    I haven’t rejected any advice given (except maybe the “rose” thing…)

    Oh well, try a cactus then … I really liked the small cacti one of my female friends gave me (this after I mentioned to her, that I wanted a low maintenance garden one day, where I just have to piss on the plants and they’re happy) … and stay away from gifts like this. Now put on your combat mascara, watch some Black Adder comedies, eat a kebab … and start plotting Annie …

    … what ?! … you’re still reading this Anne ? … you must be from Stevenage … *sigh* … you leave me with no choice … cheerio …

  • Sai

    I usually don’t feel I have the right to weigh in on other people’s relationship issues, but:

    “So, you expected him to have no problem with you breaking plans to sleep yet you weren’t willing to allow him the option of not even making plans because he was getting sleep. You expected a sacrifice from him that you weren’t willing to make. And it is all downhill from here.”

    I agree, that’s where it all went wrong.
    But that goes for any woman, not just the really pretty ones, right?

    (What are all of the “girl game”/emotional escalation posts again? It’s almost Christmas but I’ve felt rather cold lately.)

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

    Aunt Giggles making HB# calls? Now that’s a post I’d like to read.

    If you must know, I ran her pic by a few guys…virtual jaws dropped. One asked if it was Kate Upton, hence the comparison. Of course, they just confirmed what I already knew.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Suzan

    Did you just compare me to Sandor Clegane? How would you have advised Anne differently?

    … Suzan-deary … I’ll come and mow your lawn … and I’ll wear tight fitting pants with a be-view-tiful g-string, so that you may have no trouble locating my poor sexy arse for spanking, if my workmanship is shoddy …

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Erwan:
    Great post. Very honest and sensitive. The last part of my comment at #64 also had to do with this:
    “A final word of warning. One of my friends is (was) as beautiful as you are, intelligent with a prestigious diploma and more connected than I could dream of being. The same kind of girl as you (and yes I did a lot of orbiting around her and got friendzoned fair and square). She is now fourty, single and childless, not particularly successful professionally with more than twenty serious ex-boyfriends behind her. She has been dateless for nearly a year now and things are not getting better. Frankly I am bit worried since I value her as a friend.”

    Wooof! The world is small. What you describe is 90% percent the current situation of one of my distant relatives: A 50 years old former model who orbited in the show biz area. Countless successful, high profile boyfriends… Now single and childless, modeling now LONG gone and no genuine men wanting to come near her. Last time I heard from her through my sister, she was on med for depression.

  • Zach

    @Anne

    I agree with Susan on this one, but let me try and frame it in perhaps a more relatable manner. Let’s take this situation and imagine that the roles are reversed (his actions ascribed to you and yours to his). You have some really good first dates, things move along, and you start sleeping together. You leave on a trip, and you really want to see the guy you’re dating when you get back. However, that guy completely flakes on you when you get back (I don’t think you realize how big a slap in the face to him this was). Given that he flaked on you, you tell him it’s up to him to reschedule (the right move). He doesn’t reschedule, and instead his next communication is a straight-up, full-on booty call. If that was the situation, most of your gfs, and guy friends, would tell you to run for the hills, because all the guy is interested in is sex. So imagine it from that point of view.

    Second, to go back to the flaking on him, it’s much worse than you made it out to be. He’s busy with work. He sets aside time to meet you for dinner. Dinner usually means reservations. You say you fell asleep. So there he is, with reservations for dinner, perhaps even at the restaurant (how would he know not to show up?), and you as a no show and incommunicado. He’s just been completely stood up and publicly embarrassed. You then barely apologize and say you’d be up for drinks much later. Even if he didn’t go to the restaurant, he may even have told his friends he was going to dinner with you, and then you just disappear. It’s a pretty humiliating situation. I would have acted exactly as he did. I would have put the burden completely on you to make it up to me, and if you didn’t, goodbye. You made no effort to make amends. Instead you booty called him. If you think that means anything to a guy who actually wants to date you, you’ve got to re-think your priorities. It may be that most guys are so blown away by the idea of having sex with you that they accept sex as an apology, but any guy with options will just be offended, as you would be were you in his shoes and a guy did that to you.

    In summary, I think this guy is into you and did want to date you, but he is a guy who has other options, and isn’t blinded by your beauty. He’s unwilling to put up with your disrespect just to be dating you. He acted almost exactly as I would have acted.

    PS Seems like you have a history of dating wealthy older men even though you’re in college. You’re doing two things there: you’re swimming with the sharks (the guys who use their money to get laid), or you’re putting a HUGE red flag on yourself, because those guys who are into you will think you’re just after their money.

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

      @Zach

      Seems like you have a history of dating wealthy older men even though you’re in college. You’re doing two things there: you’re swimming with the sharks (the guys who use their money to get laid), or you’re putting a HUGE red flag on yourself, because those guys who are into you will think you’re just after their money.

      I was nodding along to your comment until this P.S. First, I do not consider 22-25 a notable age difference that amounts to Anne dating “wealthy older men.” He’s a 25 yo rich guy. Second, you make assumptions about Anne’s own circumstances. I think it’s fair to say she runs in a crowd that is very high status, herself included. Anne and Stephen are well matched socially.

  • pvw

    Sai

    “So, you expected him to have no problem with you breaking plans to sleep yet you weren’t willing to allow him the option of not even making plans because he was getting sleep. You expected a sacrifice from him that you weren’t willing to make. And it is all downhill from here.”

    I agree, that’s where it all went wrong.

    But that goes for any woman, not just the really pretty ones, right?

    Me: I would agree, but I wonder whether the less pretty ones are forgiven as much???? It is the beautiful/sane/crazy matrix. When a woman is a lot more attractive, her craziness seems to be more expected or it is forgiven for whatever reason.

  • Lisa C

    @Anne

    Sorry if I missed this, but did you reply to his Friday morning text? Wouldn’t that have been the time to start setting up definite plans for the weekend?

  • Zach

    @Susan

    Any college girl dating a guy out of college is dating an older man. The difference in life experience, maturity and priorities is huge. And if I recall correctly, both her boyfriends had family money, which is very, very different than guys who are high-status because they went to great schools, got good jobs, etc.

  • Joe S.

    At 22, would anybody really fully understand what to look for in a potential life partner. Everybody I knew at 22 was more focused on how to secure a job (graduated ’09, deep on the recession) and keeping the good time going rather than what who would be a great partner.

    In the 3 and 1/2 years since I’ve graduated I’ve faught hard to secure a good job, seems relatives foreclosed on, seen my good friends form family, lost my apartment as most of what I owned and move on again. So have a lot of people I know who in my age range (26-30). I don’t know of someone still in school or fresh out would have the maturity to really match up well in a relationship with someone who’s been grinding it out the world for a few years. I think that’s what we’re mostly seeing here.

  • pvw

    @Susan regarding guardedness. I find it interesting that you see more in her behavior as indicating low emotional investment, while others see it is a matter of basic decency.

    It is possible to have low emotional investment and be guarded, at the same time one is polite and decent in behavior. It is not as though she needs to be running around declaring undying love and telling him how much she likes and appreciates him.

    Common courtesy and decency doesn’t require that, and that is what is so apparent in all her discussions of her interactions with him, a lack of consideration which seems to border on disrespect, not low emotional investment.

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

      @pvw

      Common courtesy and decency doesn’t require that, and that is what is so apparent in all her discussions of her interactions with him, a lack of consideration which seems to border on disrespect, not low emotional investment.

      You’re right, I agree that her actions have been disrespectful. If it was a guy doing those things I’d be saying “He’s a cad, run away!”

      I think where I’m finding some empathy is in her having genuine feeling for him, but expressing it poorly. Pretending you don’t care for someone when you do is less objectionable than pretending you do care for someone when you don’t, IMO.

      It sounds to me like a lot of her distancing behavior, i.e. no breakfast in the morning after sex, was meant to prevent a strong emotional attachment from forming on her end. Her motive was self-protection. That does not excuse discourteous behavior, but it does shed light on her intent, which was not to use this guy in any way. There is the rebound factor at work here, which suggests that she was not truly emotionally available when she met Stephen.

  • Maven3

    @Susan Walsh
    “The risk, of course, is that she wears down the good guy, as she has apparently done in this case”

    The “cad” might be normal guy, who just noticed how girls operate and adjusted. She started playing this game, he just followed.

    I am currently dating very nice asian girl – nevertheless, she shit tested me hard from start. Kiss close on d6 (no fclose yet) – without PUA experience, I will be over already. That’s reality.
    Given a chance, I will commit to her.

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

      @Maven3

      I am currently dating very nice asian girl – nevertheless, she shit tested me hard from start. Kiss close on d6 (no fclose yet) – without PUA experience, I will be over already. That’s reality.
      Given a chance, I will commit to her.

      Your intent is clearly honorable and I respect it. I hope it works out for the two of you!

  • pvw

    So it is a matter then of shit-testing for character through her indication of low investment and the principle of least interest, ie., does he really like me? As compared to her shit testing for character because she can seem self absorbed and inconsiderate of others, shit testing because she wants to see whether he will jump? In this case, it seems that is what the guy thought; she was shit testing his character in a way which proved something more about her that he didn’t like….

  • LJ

    “Anna, if this guy of yours is bald guy around 35 – run fast and and don’t look back.”

    Uh, she’s 22 and hot. Probability that her guy is bald OR 35 is 0.1%

  • http://www.theredpillroom.blogspot.com Ian Ironwood

    I do find this thread to be very focused around looks. I cannot rate this guy from 1-10 – there is a reason that scale is used mostly for women. A guy’s “rate” says little about his overall attractiveness, but it can be significant for how he sees himself. Men are visual, and many falsely assume women are too. My note on his appearance was a small paragraph at the end of my email. If Susan assumed he was very good-looking, she might have given different advice. Or he might have been labeled an alpha – maybe he is anyway, I don’t know, I don’t have sufficient ‘knowledge’ about these personality types. Either way, it was natural to give SOME mention of his looks. I find him very attractive, and I am sure other women do too.

    Anne: While you are correct about the differences in Sex Rank between men and women, I don’t think you understand them completely.

    For women, SR is about 60-70% appearance-based. Therefore you can look at a picture and probably figure out a woman’s SR within a couple of points, as Susan did with you. Now, that number could slide up or down dependent on the other 30-40% — for example, if you were drop-dead gorgeous and a hardcore IV drug user, or just batshit crazy, or kept 300 cats in your bathroom, that would drop you a couple. The good news (for women) is that they can use cosmetics and wardrobe and obfuscation to boost their SR temporarily.

    But with men, establishment of Sex Rank is far more contextual. He might be a 9 but not look like a nine. For men, only about 40-50% of their SR is physical. The other 50-60% is contextual. His social status, wealth, affability, popularity, and other factors add to his attractiveness. Don’t believe me? Google the study that showed women saw the same dude (“bloke”) as more handsome when he stood in front of an expensive Italian sportscar than when he stood in front of a mini.

    There is also an age component to SR. A woman might be an 8 when she’s 20, but when she’s a 30 year old 8 she’s still a 7 compared to a 20 year old. It’s as if women get “paid” the bulk of their attractiveness all at once, over a few years, while men get a steadily-increasing amount every year. This is just a fact of life, not a value judgement. You can either accept it and plan your mating strategy accordingly, or you can pout and have a wonderful time with a lot of cute bad boys until you get to 30 and the phone stops ringing.

    If this man is as good as he seems (and dude has consummate Game — have to hand it to him. I’m saying High Beta, with the possibility of developing into a strong Wolf Alpha) then do as Susan says and stop at nothing to get him interested again. I think Susan’s suggestion is probably the lowest-hanging fruit. A polite, thoughtful, and well-mannered approach to the subject demonstrates that you are mature enough to handle a real relationship. Any other response might land you back in his bed, but it’s unlikely to land you in his life with any permanence.

    This is your opportunity to grow up, step up, put on your big girl knickers and show him that you are really a woman, not a petulant child in a smokin-hot body. A man of quality will know the difference and act accordingly.

    Good luck . . . and I mean that sincerely. If you’re serious, then consider acquiring some helpful wifely skills you can show off. No, really. bake the dude a pie or something.

    Now, what you do with that pie, once you’ve made up, is entirely your business.

    You’ve gotten a lot of advice here, and I hope you can dodge the barbs enough to take Susan’s insightful advice to heart. It sounds like you’ve got a winner, or at least the possibility of one. You are probably at the “hottest” you will ever be.

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

      @Ian Ironwood

      +1 on the whole comment.

  • Society’s Disposable Son

    @Maven3
    You sir must have the patience of a saint. My last promising date was a few months ago, after date one the subsequent interactions were shit testy and gave an air of entitlement. I just fuckin ghosted…

  • pvw

    @Susan: I think where I’m finding some empathy is in her having genuine feeling for him, but expressing it poorly. Pretending you don’t care for someone when you do is less objectionable than pretending you do care for someone when you don’t, IMO. … There is the rebound factor at work here, which suggests that she was not truly emotionally available when she met Stephen.

    Me: Yes, I can understand you view; the other boyfriend pretended in a way which was so harmful thus she was on the rebound and not really available, which is what Stephen got caught up in. She saw herself as liking him but being guarded; he saw her as seeming to like him but being disrespectful at the same time, which meant in his view that she didn’t really like him at all.

  • LJ

    @ Maven3 – I can’t tell what’s going on in that post, but is that an online communication with a woman in Serbia?

    Given the differences in SES status between that situation and Anne’s, I don’t think we can really compare the 2, even if the age and attractiveness levels are the same. Meaning, the ability of a rich old guy in London to land beautiful young woman from Eastern Europe looking for money/citizenship doesn’t translate into his chances with woman in his own country.

  • Underdog

    @Susan

    “but I would go further and say they seek women with crazy behavior for the sexual and emotional roller coaster”

    I call female projection on this one. Guys will always pursue the path of least resistance when it comes to sex. Men don’t spend billions on porn and prostitutes for the emotional roller coaster.

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

      I call female projection on this one. Guys will always pursue the path of least resistance when it comes to sex.

      But they’re not impervious to getting played, falling for the wrong girl, etc. I have personally known various men who were clearly addicted to the drama. I’ve also known women who don’t do drama at all. There are undoubtedly more men on the “no drama” end of the spectrum and more women on the “constant drama” end, but there’s a whole lot of mixing in-between.

      In fact, I’d go so far as to say that men who can get sex relatively easily were much more likely to make a high maintenance woman their gf. They’re looking for someone who can engage them on an emotional level, and the most emo women are the most likely to do that. I do believe this is often related to immaturity and decreases as guys mature through their 20s. Though I can say that I know several long-married couples where the woman is still psycho at 50. Her beauty faded but her personality didn’t change.

  • Cooper

    I agree with Zach,

    ” I think this guy is into you and did want to date you, but he is a guy who has other options, and isn’t blinded by your beauty. He’s unwilling to put up with your disrespect just to be dating you. He acted almost exactly as I would have acted.”

  • Maven3

    @LJ
    In short:
    – Krauser dates some girl while in Serbia (probably from daygame approach). Girl is sexually inexperienced (one guy before)
    – he chats with her 3 months (Facebook), invites her to London, organizes tickets, visa, etc.
    – her fcloses her once and next day says he used her for sex (aka: I dont love you anymore)
    – he posts a video where he fucks her on his blog and rambles how great he is
    – she writes him this message, Krauser posts again with comment “I rejected seconds” (more ramblings)

    Sick, huh?
    PUA are not saints – we lure and manipulate girls for sex.
    I saw a lot, but this is ugly – this level of investment (3 months + tickets, etc) just to fuck once and have 5 minutes of ugly fame in niche blog?
    IMO, he’s psychopath.

  • Ian

    Beautiful women are human candy, the perfect object to be objectified. Higher-estrogen comes with a higher sex drive, higher emotionality, higher subjectivity. The prettiest girls in my town met the worst ends, and people still don’t pity them – because they’re the physical version of the 1%ers. Even now, at this low point, a part of me is tempted to address her directly with negs or false sympathy.

    I agree that she misplayed a few things. Like people said, a beautiful woman can get shepherded into the short-term pile because of her excessive options. In the short-term, maybe the sex is so good that the woman gets addicted. If not, once the deed is done, much of the male imperative is already satisfied. Positive Reinforcement, Alex – especially on a man with options, as all of the men in her rung will be.

    Other observations: One, Anna mentioned that she didn’t feel the relationship was yet “exclusive”, despite already having had sex. I’d tweak the timeline so that personal affection can develop before sex; she can afford to wait with her looks. Two, the high estrogen also makes women more susceptible to Game, and I wonder if she was as attracted before he pulled away.

  • yareallyhahaha

    SO much fucking lol at this lololol

    “Am I being completely crazy? Will this end right now if I don’t make a move? Or will I look pathetic? Or is it the case that if he likes me enough, I will hear from him? ”

    She will be thinking about him 24/7. He doesn’t even have to take her out to dinner at this point. This “9” will fuck his brains out the next time they hang out. He turned down a little pussy now (on her turf, “come over, upset your sleep schedule, do what I want so I know you’re chasing me”) for a massive reward later (he can just txt “come over” any time day or night and she’ll come over because she’s dying to have a conversation with him, she’ll shit-test him a bit pouting and all that and he can just laugh it off, escalate, and she’ll bang him like crazy).

    I don’t know if the guy ran Game on purpose, I doubt it, but this is hilarious to a PUA. This is exactly what we’re talking about when we tell guys to do shit like this guy did. She’s on an emotional rollercoaster right now that he’s the center of, and she loves every minute of it compared to some lame Nice Guy boyfriend who doesn’t push her through any emotions.

    IN FACT, Game and PUA tactics work *SO WELL* that Susan herself, a complete anti-PUA chick-advice blogger, is actively ENCOURAGING this HB9 to “go crawling on him on your hands and knees” lolololol

    Oh god, I love it.

    “She is a hard 9, at least, if your taste runs to Kate Upton on a good day.”

    I seem to recall mentioning that Game was made for the hottest girls. :)

    What a day lol thanks for the laugh Sue. You guys who still aren’t sure about Game reading this site, come on over to the dark side, we have pussy. lol

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

      What a day lol thanks for the laugh Sue. You guys who still aren’t sure about Game reading this site, come on over to the dark side, we have pussy. lol

      This from a fat old PUA. He ain’t got no Annes.

  • Maven3

    @yareallyhahaha
    “I don’t know if the guy ran Game on purpose, I doubt it, but this is hilarious to a PUA. This is exactly what we’re talking about when we tell guys to do shit like this guy did. She’s on an emotional rollercoaster right now that he’s the center of, and she loves every minute of it compared to some lame Nice Guy boyfriend who doesn’t push her through any emotions.”

    I will say on purpose :-D
    Not so many guys (alpha, beta or PUA) can walk away from 9hb.

  • Underdog

    @Susan

    “In fact, I’d go so far as to say that men who can get sex relatively easily were much more likely to make a high maintenance woman their gf”

    That’s because men who can get sex easily tend to know how to manage hot girls — and hot girls just happen to be emotional wrecks most of the time (coughAnnacough). Men are not attracted to drama in and of itself. If you line up a drama-queen hot girl with her drama-free equivalent, the guy will pick the drama-free version 100% of the time.

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

      If you line up a drama-queen hot girl with her drama-free equivalent, the guy will pick the drama-free version 100% of the time.

      Perhaps, but that’s not the choice on offer. I have observed that many men of high SMV are with seriously crazy women. I don’t believe that most beautiful women are crazy, but even if you were right, it’s clear that a man would rather date a crazy 9 than a sweet and nurturing 8. Not to mention the crazy 7s I’ve seen with decent bf’s.

  • Zach

    @yareally

    Apparently on the dark side, you also have the writing abilities of a 10 year old lolololololololol

    This guy’s “game” was literally having self-respect. There was no manipulation of any sort, no “negging”, none of that bullshit you idiots go on about. He just refused to be disrespected.

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

      @Zach

      There was no manipulation of any sort, no “negging”, none of that bullshit you idiots go on about. He just refused to be disrespected.

      Every blogger pimping PUA tactics is suffering from massive PTSD. Rollo and KrauserPUA have shared how devastated and broken they were by a woman earlier in life. Roosh has shared how thoroughly rejected he was by women until he went dark. Based on yareally’s description of his own appearance, I suspect his story is similar.

      These guys are in a bad way, mentally.

  • Höllenhund

    “Anne does not play hard to get. She is hard to get.”

    No. Any woman is hard to get for some men and easy to get for others. All women play hard to get, but the SMV rank of the men that get played varies.

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

      @Hollenhund

      The more beautiful the woman, the harder she is for any one man to win, due to mad competition. She has almost unlimited options. She does run the risk of being too selective, but that is not Anne’s problem.

  • Underdog

    @Zach

    Or he’s running some super tight dread game.

  • Erik L

    I don’t think she is nuts but she needs to imagine how this looks from a man’s point of view. This is exactly how it would appear if she had lost interest in the guy but didn’t want to tell him bluntly (and who ever does?). He looked at the evidence and drew a reasonable conclusion. At this point it might be difficult to convince him of the opposite. If she follows up weakly, it might come off as guilt (maybe not the right word). That is, a way that she can lessen the feelings of having rejected a perfectly nice man. I know that doesn’t seem to make much sense but I would expect it.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Susan#134

    I think there’s some serious variation there. I married a hard 8 with a brain, no drama and a number of other great stuff in her hatband, though before making that jump I had bed access to a number of nines and one 10 (who I walked away from b/c she was boring).

    I don’t know a whole lot about the game thing besides some reading lately over the past few months, but I think that men have some equivalent to the hypergamous thing in terms of a “beauty floor.” If I’m perfectly happy with an 8 or above, I don’t care about 8 vs 9 vs 10; once you’re in my radar, it’s other factors that’ll determine whether I’m willing to commit to you.

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

      @Russ

      I think there’s some serious variation there. I married a hard 8 with a brain, no drama and a number of other great stuff in her hatband, though before making that jump I had bed access to a number of nines and one 10 (who I walked away from b/c she was boring).

      Yes, I’m sure there is. Well done, btw.

  • HanSolo

    Can people please learn to read? As stated in the opening paragraph of her email to Susan, the guy is clearly 25!!!!!! He is NOT 35. Definitely not Krauser.

  • Escoffier

    “it’s clear that a man would rather date a crazy 9 than a sweet and nurturing 8″

    Not necessarily. For some men, perhaps, this is always true. For others, it is never true. And for some us, one experience with a crazy HB is enough to make us say “never again” and seek sanity even if it means trading in a couple of SMV points.

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

      Not necessarily. For some men, perhaps, this is always true. For others, it is never true. And for some us, one experience with a crazy HB is enough to make us say “never again” and seek sanity even if it means trading in a couple of SMV points.

      Good point, I shouldn’t have spoken so generally. This obviously varies quite a bit from man to man. It’s an interesting analogy to cads, perhaps – a lot of women who get burned by a cad as freshmen say “never again”

  • Underdog

    @Susan

    “it’s clear that a man would rather date a crazy 9 than a sweet and nurturing 8.”

    Sure, if by date you mean sex for a few months with no plans of further commitment. A man who can get sex easily (aka has game and thus can handle the craziness) would definitely “date” a crazy 9 over a nurturing 8.

    “Not to mention the crazy 7s I’ve seen with decent bf’s.”

    Decent as in high SMV and has plenty of options? Or decent as in nice/beta and lacks options? Because if there’s anything to learn from this post, it’s that high SMV men will almost never put up with dramas when it comes to LTRs.

  • Höllenhund

    “These guys are in a bad way, mentally.”

    It’s time you considered blogging for Jezebel.com.

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

      “These guys are in a bad way, mentally.”

      It’s time you considered blogging for Jezebel.com.

      LOL! Actually, HH, you might consider counseling yourself.

  • Ian

    Good point! We should add a red flag – any man who says is ex (or heaven forbid, his exes) were crazy, psycho or insane should be summarily dismissed! I think a lot of these men get hooked on the dopamine rush of conflict and agitation followed by makeup sex. They learn to crave the unpredictability and find it genuinely arousing. Guys here have said the men put up with crazy behavior for the sex, but I would go further and say they seek women with crazy behavior for the sexual and emotional roller coaster.

    I’m triply red-flagged then.

    Speaking in defense of Drama-lover-lovers: if we can picture testosterone poisoning as an over-aggressive, deep-voiced, low-vocabulary, handsome young man, then estrogen poisoning is a pretty, nurturing, high-voiced, periodically insane, young woman. Dealing with periodic insanity is often the cost of dating young and pretty.

    There’s definitely a sexual component, but, in sexual relationships, that’s a given. Makeup sex isn’t the main draw – there’s a carnality in the craziness itself. Craziness and lust are both low-brain storms of emotionality, there’s cross-over between the two. In my experience, everyday sex has been much better with the dramatic women.

    And now, for my attempt at rhetoric. Emotionality is insanity. Women tend to be emotional. Some women more emotional than others. Are they all so unworthy of affection? We, crazy-lovers, accept a woman’s inherent emotionality. We may correct, do not punish, a woman for it. If we must ourselves be punished and red-flagged by the less-emotional women of the world, that is a burden we must accept, in our noble pursuit, of love.

    – Dedicated to S., S., D., & S..

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

      @Ian

      There’s definitely a sexual component, but, in sexual relationships, that’s a given. Makeup sex isn’t the main draw – there’s a carnality in the craziness itself. Craziness and lust are both low-brain storms of emotionality, there’s cross-over between the two. In my experience, everyday sex has been much better with the dramatic women.

      Thanks for owning it, and for helping me to understand what I’ve witnessed with my own eyes.

      We, crazy-lovers, accept a woman’s inherent emotionality. We may correct, do not punish, a woman for it. If we must ourselves be punished and red-flagged by the less-emotional women of the world, that is a burden we must accept, in our noble pursuit, of love.

      Touche! Seriously, you raise an important point – it’s all about the match. I’ve mentioned that I know several long-standing marriages where the woman is crazy. My own mother was literally crazy, and despite all the ups and downs of my parents’ marriage, I know for a fact that their attraction to each other never wavered. Their marriage outlasted many more predictable and boring ones.

  • Höllenhund

    “The more beautiful the woman, the harder she is for any one man to win, due to mad competition.”

    It’s due to hypergamy. Women of varying SMV are competed for by men of varying SMV. A female 10 doesn’t have to “put up” with advances by men that are 8-9 or below because they generally don’t bother to try. It’s not like a mini-army is pursuing every hot woman. That’s nothing but a myth.

    “She has almost unlimited options.”

    …for casual sex. For commitment from the men she wants it from, not so much.

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

      “She has almost unlimited options.”

      …for casual sex. For commitment from the men she wants it from, not so much.

      Her position in this SMP is weaker than it used to be, it’s true. But a 9 is going to have more offers for every kind of male attention than a less attractive woman is, including commitment. Most of them have literally dozens of orbiters.

  • LJ

    “It’s not like a mini-army is pursuing every hot woman. That’s nothing but a myth. “

    Have you seen this?

    http://jonmillward.com/blog/attraction-dating/cupid-on-trial-a-4-month-online-dating-experiment/

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

      @LJ

      Thanks for that link to Jon Millward. Very interesting. Re the army of men pursuing beautiful women, I’ve discussed this with young women who are considered “the hottest” by guys. My sample is decidedly non-slutty. Here is what they report.

      1. Lots of unsolicited and unwelcome attention from afar. Cat calls, cars slowing down, uncomfortable staring in public.
      2. Lots of supplicating attention up close – free stuff, offers of favors, etc. in hopes of getting a number.
      3. Lots of approaches from extremely cocky men who have zero interest in anything but the hot bod.
      4. Frequent feedback that guys they liked didn’t feel like they had a real shot.
      5. Frequent conflict in relationships due to male insecurity. This is often fed by other males – they are the ones to say “you could do a lot better.” Women have reported that they get this a lot from strangers when they are with their boyfriends! Needless to say, this creates anxiety in the bf, never a good feeling.

      A beautiful woman has to filter out cads she finds attractive, while filtering in good guys she finds attractive, often without much information about which is which!

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

    @Rollo

    .,come on over to the dark side, we have pussy. lol

    Winner.

    Thread closed.

    Dude, your asshole game doesn’t work around here. You come off as a putz.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Every blogger pimping PUA tactics is suffering from massive PTSD. Rollo and KrauserPUA have shared how devastated and broken they were by a woman earlier in life. Roosh has shared how thoroughly rejected he was by women until he went dark. Based on yareally’s description of his own appearance, I suspect his story is similar.

    These guys are in a bad way, mentally.”

    OT, but can anyone blame them?
    If the system is built to inflict pain is the expected result not going to be some individuals breaking?

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

      OT, but can anyone blame them?
      If the system is built to inflict pain is the expected result not going to be some individuals breaking?

      I don’t blame them for being a mess, but I caution others not to take their advice. It is never free and clear, it is always tainted with their own pain and anger.

  • Lokland

    “Good point! We should add a red flag – any man who says is ex (or heaven forbid, his exes) were crazy, psycho or insane should be summarily dismissed! ”
    Always interesting to see the tables turn.

    You fucked one alpha, your no good for an LTR.
    Crazy rant (from women here) about how unrealistic the man is.

    You dated on crazy chick, your no good for an LTR.
    …..

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

      You fucked one alpha, your no good for an LTR.
      Crazy rant (from women here) about how unrealistic the man is.

      You dated on crazy chick, your no good for an LTR.

      Just keeping things fair. :)

  • Höllenhund

    “If the system is built to inflict pain is the expected result not going to be some individuals breaking?”

    It’s designed to inflict pain on men, but those who break are the ones who get cuckolded, divorce-raped, falsely charged with rape, bled through chilimony. As far as them are concerned, the system has served its purpose. If they also remain plugged in, its victory is complete. But if you refuse to become a victim and plug yourself out, you don’t break; you win.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Susan#161:

    The general run of pretty women won’t consider those orbiters dating/sexual material, however, simply because they orbit: they fail what I call the “daddy test.”* What beautiful women often *fail* to consider is that men they consider “in their league,” simply by that definition, are not impressed. A man who dates 5s and 6s gets starstruck by an 8 or 9. A man who dates 8-10 *might* orbit a 10 if the whole package were there. But a 9, even a hard/solid one? No way.

    I’ve caught a lot of flak for saying “beautiful women are a dime a dozen” from guys for whom that apparently sounds like crazy-talk. But for me and a lot of other men it is very much the case.

    (*my Daddy didn’t put up with my shit, so nobody *I* would marry will, either.)

  • HanSolo

    @Russ in Texas

    I think that men have some equivalent to the hypergamous thing in terms of a “beauty floor.” If I’m perfectly happy with an 8 or above, I don’t care about 8 vs 9 vs 10; once you’re in my radar, it’s other factors that’ll determine whether I’m willing to commit to you.

    I agree that once the woman is above the threshold or beauty floor that then the relative beauty beyond that level are less important than personality, character, etc.

    I will disagree with your use of hypergamy her somewhat.

    The key point about hypergamy is setting the minimum bar at a level higher than your own (and I fully admit that all these rating systems are somewhat vague and hard to define exactly but they still get the point across in a general way).

    So a woman (or a man) who is a 6 and will only accept 7+ men (women) is being hypergamous whereas just wanting someone better than yourself is not getting at the most important factor of hypergamy.

    In the present day, I think there are more men willing to accept someone at his level than women are. And that makes perfect sense. The provider/protector value than men used to be able to throw into their overall value no longer adds as much because women don’t need that as much from an individual man because technology made physical strength less important (machines do most of the heavy work now and guns remove much of the differential ability to kill, plus add in the relatively safe society we live in). Without needing a provider/protector as much then women are free to focus more on pursuing pushing their attraction buttons that in prehistoric times corresponded to better genes (though how closely they correlate today is dubious because some of them can be faked such as confidence and badboyedness because there is not a close examination of whether there is substance behind the bluster like there would have been in the tribal setting).

  • Höllenhund

    I suppose you’re schooled in world history, so I won’t have to explain that Soviet propagandists used a simple method to deal with opponents: they neutralized their subversive message by giving them a label that wasn’t open to interpretation i.e. “mentally ill”.

    Unlike in earlier times, the Soviet cangaroo courts didn’t even bother to sentence them without evidence or due process; it was no longer necessary. They simple rounded up their political opponents, “diagnosed” them with mental illness and locked them away for “psychiatric treatment”.

    (For those unfamiliar with the subject:

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_psychiatry_in_the_Soviet_Union)

    Jezebel, being the ideological bastard child of Marxism-Leninism, has copied these methods, of course, the main difference being that the federal government they’re allied with has not yet fully implemented it. But it’s only a matter of time. And now you’re resorting to the same method yourself. That’s pretty clear.

    Can you offer a counterargument or you’ll just keep dishing out snark?

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

      @Hollenhund

      I don’t need to argue the point about mental illness. We have Rollo on this thread championing Dark Triad males and the “dark side.” Those personality traits are listed as mentally disordered in the DSM for mental health professionals. In addition, scores of studies on narcissism, Machiavellianism and sociopathy highlight the way in which these “agentic” individuals operate, freely exploiting others without remorse. They score highly on disagreeableness, low on conscientiousness and extremely low on empathy. They can’t maintain LTRs, they rely on a quick in-and-out (or P&D) strategy. They don’t connect with other human beings in a meaningful way.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan Walsh

    “The more beautiful the woman, the harder she is for any one man to win, due to mad competition. She has almost unlimited options.”

    That’s why I have little sympathy for female 9’s and 10’s who are with assholes. They could pick almost any guy and yet she picked him? The asshole?

    I do, however, sympathize or empathize with female 9’s and 10’s who would like to have a commited, faithful relationship with a 9 or 10 value guy but half of those guys are players not looking for an LTR. This is the same dynamic that the male 4-6’s experience where probably 1/4 or 1/2 of the female 4-6’s are wanting the male 5-7’s (or higher) and both of these things totally throws off the assortive mating balance.

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

      @HanSolo

      That’s why I have little sympathy for female 9′s and 10′s who are with assholes. They could pick almost any guy and yet she picked him? The asshole?

      I do, however, sympathize or empathize with female 9′s and 10′s who would like to have a commited, faithful relationship with a 9 or 10 value guy but half of those guys are players not looking for an LTR.

      +1 My point exactly.

  • Höllenhund

    “But a 9 is going to have more offers for every kind of male attention than a less attractive woman is, including commitment. Most of them have literally dozens of orbiters.”

    She has desire for neither her orbiters nor for the majority of her approachers. In that she’s in the same shoes as a 6 or a 8. The only difference is that the orbiters of a female 8 are 6s and below whereas the orbiters of a female 10 are 8s and below.

  • pvw

    Ian at 133: Other observations: One, Anna mentioned that she didn’t feel the relationship was yet “exclusive”, despite already having had sex. I’d tweak the timeline so that personal affection can develop before sex; she can afford to wait with her looks. Two, the high estrogen also makes women more susceptible to Game, and I wonder if she was as attracted before he pulled away.

    Me: I was thinking about this. She was going into a sexual relationship from a position in which she felt conflicted; she was attracted and liked him but was distrustful. So she couldn’t respect him in the way he deserved. Not a good combination; it’s not exclusive, so she feels ready to bail at a moment’s notice, or isn’t in too deep in case he wants to. And the funny part, a more aware and self assured woman would not be having sex before knowing things were exclusive and wouldn’t be having sex without certainty about him. But it occurred to me that is the nature of today’s sexual marketplace. Too many women believe if they want to stay in the game and keep a guy’s attention, they have to put out and early. You’re right, but it takes a mature grown and self aware woman to say that the current traditional model isn’t working and that she needs to remove herself from it.

  • Russ in Texas

    @LJ#155.

    Saw that a bit ago.
    It probably makes things even worse than the investigator intended, given that his top slots are inhabited by low 7s. One assumes that had he put actually beautiful women into those positions, that they’d have received many, MANY more responses.

  • Höllenhund

    “Those personality traits are listed as mentally disordered in the DSM for mental health professionals.”

    And the colleagues of those professionals tell us that the same traits improve one’s chances in the sexual marketplace due to women’s preferences being what they are, which is the same thing the “mentally ill” “PUAs” are saying. So yes, you should indeed argue the point, because “he’s mentally ill” isn’t a counterargument, it’s a tactic in the Marxist culture war.

  • Russ in Texas

    @HanSolo#164.

    You’re right; I was hunting for an equivalent and misused the term in the process. Some “over the station” happens, though, thus my fumbling for terms. You could have some stinking hound who couldn’t actually pull a 6 if his life depended on it, but won’t look at anybody less than an 8. I was roomies once with a guy like that; it was fairly insane (classic omega behavior on rejection, too).

  • yareallyhahaha

    @Susan
    “They can’t maintain LTRs, they rely on a quick in-and-out (or P&D) strategy. They don’t connect with other human beings in a meaningful way.”

    shit, my LTR GF of 2 years and her family will be very puzzled to hear that.

    You can keep making stuff up and using clincial sounding terminology to try to make your made up accusations carry more weight, but in reality it just doesn’t stick. :)

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

      Had to delete yareally. If he would stick to debating the point at hand and not proselytize his wasted lifestyle, I’d let it stand. But no way is HUS going to be a springboard for that shit.

      It’s actually moronic that this post about Anne’s relationship is even generating discussion about PUAs. Thanks to Rollo for highjacking the thread by mentioning Kreepy Krauser.

      Rollo, Yareallypua and Hollenhund in one thread. How many brain cells have been sacrificed? How many readers have fled the bizarro comments of these middle aged prurient men?

  • LJ

    @ Russ – Interesting you would classify them as 7’s. I’m just a straight woman, but I’d wager the 2 “most attractive” of the women profiles are more attractive than ~90% of okcupid users their age., or women in real life their age. Although it’s not easy to tell given the small thumbnail pics.

    But they probably wanted to show the experience for the “typical” beautiful woman that might actually use OkC, rather than just put up a pic of Mila Kunis that would be generalizable to no one.

  • HanSolo

    @Russ in Texas

    I agree that some guys are hypergamous. I just think more women are and it makes sense in terms of evolutionary psych.

    @Yareally

    I wasn’t doubting that some assholes push her attraction buttons and don’t pedalize her and she likes that.

    Rather, I was looking at it from her point of view. I don’t think the world is as dichotomous or bimodal as you may be suggesting. Many of the male 9 and 10’s are neither assholes nor weak supplicators so why doesn’t she go for one of them? Well, because she excessively loves the feeling of “a guy must be better than me if he doesn’t treat me well” (obviously she’s never going to give the 5 the time of day to begin with so he can act disinterested all he wants and it won’t matter).

    Also, I’m not doubting the effectiveness of game with many/most women, at least done in the right way.

    I’m simply asking, why doesn’t she go for someone that is better for her? Reason? She wants to feel infatuated and more often than not the asshole makes her feel that (especially with younger, less mature girls, though some older women never change too).

  • Russ in Texas

    “Then an asshole comes along and says “No, fuck you, you’re being retarded right now.” and she goes “holy shit, someone who I can trust to say what they REALLY think around me!!” ”

    aka, passes her Daddy Test.
    Yup. While I think some of the folks in game-land have a weirdly jaundiced view of popular sociology, resulting in a worldview that seems to abhor the feminine entirely, YaReally is dead on the money here.

  • Russ in Texas

    @LJ#180,

    We could run a quick poll, and that might actually be very interesting.
    But it’s equally likely that I’m simply picky. I found the three women who received the top # of responses to be reasonably close to each other at high-5/7/7, and wouldn’t have been attracted to the others in the slightest.

    (I *did* once date a 4, a classic “homely” butterface you couldn’t have made pretty with all the photoshop in the world – primarily because she actually fulfilled the ancient stereotype of ‘what a personality.’ Irony is, while all these folks say the pretty girls have the highest SMV…..me and Mrs. Butterface had a LOT of sex and if she hadn’t had some very specific damage/issues to which I’m allergic, there’s a decent chance she could have landed me for real. Me and the wifey are still in touch with her two decades later.)

  • LJ

    Interesting, but I would say you seem to be in the minority in seeing the girl w/ glasses as close to the attractiveness levels of the 2 women to the right of them, given the ~10: 1 ratio of messages they received.

  • Sai

    @HanSolo
    “That’s why I have little sympathy for female 9’s and 10’s who are with assholes. They could pick almost any guy and yet she picked him? The asshole?”
    INORITE

    “the hero meets the villain and they have a massive life or death struggle and you’re falling off the edge of your seat pulling your hair out with anticipation and excitement and BOOM!!! The hero wins!! The day is saved!! Everyone celebrates”
    Hang on, this sounds more like action than drama. Now it’s true, I will watch Die Hard and Conan the Barbarian over and over, but if there’s no action I’ll do like Samuel L. Jackson says and go the &%$# to sleep, because I just don’t care.

  • Jason773

    Susan,

    5. Frequent conflict in relationships due to male insecurity. This is often fed by other males – they are the ones to say “you could do a lot better.” Women have reported that they get this a lot from strangers when they are with their boyfriends! Needless to say, this creates anxiety in the bf, never a good feeling.

    This right here is absolutely brutal unless the guy has rock solid inner game or is undoubtedly an SMV match to the 8-10. Multiple times over the years I’ve been out with an attractive girl and when I’m getting drinks for us or something a guy will take a shot at the girl I am with who looks to be alone. I’ve even overheard conversations as they go something like this…

    Guy: Hey, why are you over here by yourself?

    Girl: I’m not. I’m with someone.

    Guy: Oh yea? Who?

    Girl: Him (points to me)

    Guy: Oh, he’s pretty good. Lucky guy though, have a good night.

    This has only worked in my favor purely because of looks and musculature, but without that I can only imagine the damage that would occur to the psyche. If a guy is an overall 8-10, but not an 8-10 physically, this situation happens a ton and other guys will try to blow him out. I see it all the time and the worst women are the ones that feed into it. These beautiful girls need to reassure the guys every now and then if they want to maintain the peace.

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

      @Jason

      If a guy is an overall 8-10, but not an 8-10 physically, this situation happens a ton and other guys will try to blow him out. I see it all the time and the worst women are the ones that feed into it. These beautiful girls need to reassure the guys every now and then if they want to maintain the peace.

      I know of one relationship where this was such a problem it eventually failed. The girl is a 8-9, the guy is a 6 at best. She fell hard for him, though, and was careful not to flirt or even acknowledge other guys. It didn’t matter, everywhere they went, guys remarked on it. Sometimes they’d ask him, “Who is that?” When he said, “My girlfriend” they said, “Yeah, right.” Another time she and her bf were having a disagreement about something outside on the sidewalk, and a guy walked up to her and said, “You are so hot, it is ridiculous that you put up with any shit from this loser.” It was truly doomed, and no amount of reassurance helped. Her bf would wind up yelling, “I don’t give a fuck!” In the end, he told her that he wished it didn’t bother him, but it did, and he couldn’t do it anymore. He actually broke her heart.

  • Ian

    @Rollo

    Sue, for the record it wouldn’t be all that difficult to build the case that HUS is little more than your own catharsis for reliving the life you wished you’d lived for the past 28 years vicariously through attractive 22 year old women.

    Glass houses and all that,..

    This is passive aggressive and faux-intellectual, I’ve lost the tingle you hoped to gain through your earlier wise-ass asides. Build the case directly that Susan is living her preferred life vicariously through her coaching of 22-year olds, without the “would be”.

    I don’t know you, but I sense vaguly that you’re in the pickup scene. There’s a recurring with PUA’s that they try to become what they learn women find attractive. Problem, what works in a bar with women doesn’t work with the men who are unlike women.

    In many places, humility is learned through pain. Men don’t speak sharply because even weak punches hurt, and teach humility and respect. In the military, in manlier countries, in Susan’s hometown and mine, men have to do more to earn respect than affect a sexy persona.

    @yarighthaha

    lol “That guy won the lottery and fell ass-backwards into money? That’s okay, what an awesome guy! That other guy started up a business and strategically built up and earned his money methodically and on purpose?? WHAT AN ASSHOLE!!!!! Everyone should just cross their fingers and hope money falls from the sky!!”

    If this was my site, I would ban you permanently for the crime of using “lol” nine times in one post. Add the emoticon, capitalizations, multiple exclamation points, and that post was mental graffiti. Please leave, or at least leave the teenage-girl prose some place where I won’t read it.

  • Russ in Texas

    @LJ.

    Author: LJ
    Comment:
    Interesting, but I would say you seem to be in the minority in seeing the girl w/ glasses as close to the attractiveness levels of the 2 women to the right of them, given the ~10: 1 ratio of messages they received.

    Yup. That’s the advantage of experience. #3 is backlit with a crappy camera — it’s a photo tailor-made to make her look like crap. Dollar to a donut in real life she’s prettier. The other two are shot with good lighting and decent camaras, and are making them look BETTER than they do IRL.

    The hard-8 I married looked no better than the #2 or #3 recipient here until she got out from under a pair of birth-control-glasses and me and her Dad got her to stop dressing frumpy.

  • Underdog

    If there’s anything that game deniers should learn from this post, it’s that dread game — much like every other PUA technique, including negging — is simply something that high SMV men naturally do.

    You can ridicule the nerds who broke those actions down and applied PUA terminologies to them, but what you can’t deny is that those actions work. Shaming PUA tactics as “manipulation” is simply feminine talk since women want “natural alphas” instead of “learned alphas”.

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

      @Underdog

      There was no dread Game here, as it was not Stephen’s intent to provoke anxiety, as far as I know. I believe, as I said in the post, that he simply concluded she didn’t like him much and moved on. Dread Game involves all kinds of fakery – calling your gf while getting other women to laugh loudly in the background, that sort of thing. And it usually aims to get the woman jealous of your other options, which are generally manufactured for the purpose. Stephen didn’t engage in manipulative tactics at all.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Yeah, I know rollo and yareally are basically Dark Triad Males and are getting a lot of well-deserved hate, but they basically got it nailed.

    Let’s look at this from the guy’s POV, IF HE WERE A PLAYER.

    Dating a 9, she puts out in less than a month. Doesn’t even need commitment, so he’s free to hook up with other girls, which I’m 100% sure he’s able to do. Girl leaves on vacation (hell, that just made picking up other girls easier!), comes back and offers a booty call.
    He says no, girl responds crazily, but is so twisted up and thinking about him all the time that she is asking the internet for assistance. Willing to bet dollars to donuts that if he called asking for another late night drink (read: Booty Call), Anne would jump at the offer.

    This isn’t a horrible situation for the guy at all, and if he is a player, this is going right into his hands.

    Anne’s problem, IMO, is not one of strategy, it’s one insecurity and immaturity. That’s why she can sleep with a man she barely knows but not make him a cup of coffee. Sorry, Anne, I don’t mean to offend you, I wasn’t really mature enough for a relationship at 22 either. Neither was Hope, from what she is saying.

    It might work out with this guy, it might not, but you’re not quite ready for another relationship yet. You’re obviously still hurt from the last one, you’re not fully matured yet, and you are very vulnerable because of that. That will, more times than not, result in you getting hurt.

    And the more you get hurt, well….

    I would actually take a break from the whole dating scene period. Recharge your batteries, come back in a year, and see what lemonade you can make of the lemons that life gives you :)

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

      Let’s look at this from the guy’s POV, IF HE WERE A PLAYER.

      But he’s not a player and he doesn’t run Game. He’s just a man behaving intelligently as he honestly weighs his options. Anne gave him little to go on, flaked and acted bitchy, so he moved on. No tactics.

  • Just1Z

    @YaReallyHaHa…
    “Which movie that I just described would YOU want to publish if you were a movie studio?”

    reminds me of the Henry Rollins ‘Funny Guy’ track where he compares the two movies:
    “Happy Guy” – empty movie theatre
    “Psycho Manic Depressive Motherfucker” – lines around the block

    as you said, “People want to experience a full range of emotions. It makes us feel alive.”. Rollins agrees, but he’s funnier than you (sorry about that).

    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000S5BU6K
    track 6
    starts about 4 minutes in.

    (I prefer ‘Think Tank’ as an album though)

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Rollo

    But seriously, here you have a textbook example of (by your scale) an exceptionally attractive 22 year old woman who WAS attracted to a guy displaying Alpha dominance via his indifference to her –something she’s unaccustomed to as a high SMV girl.

    And, as Game would predict, she’s locked into qualifying for his intimate acceptance. In fact you yourself want to characterize the guy as a hopeful LTR potential. How do you not see the irony in that?

    Ever heard of a theorem, its converse and contrapositive ? It’s the done thing in mathematics. Here is how it works :

    A theorem is in the form of : If (something) then (something else).

    So what is the converse then ? Well, you switch those two brackets around. And then it looks like this :

    If (something else) then (something).

    And here is the funny thing Rollo; the converse of a theorem is not always true. I’ll explain later. Just keep this in mind.

    So what is the contrapositive then ? Well, you take the converse and you add a “not” to each bracket. So the contrapositive looks like this:

    If “not” (something else) then “not” (something).

    Easy isn’t it ? And here’s the rub: The converse of any theorem is ALWAYS true. In fact, some theorems can only be proven by making use of the contrapositive.

    So what is a real life example then ?

    Theorem : If someone is a lawyer then he is a bastard.

    Converse : If someone is a bastard then he is a lawyer.

    Do you see how they were switched around Rollo ? And like I said, the converse of a theorem is not always true. So why is that ?

    It’s because some bastards are politicians …

    Contrapositive : If someone is “not”a bastard then he is “not”a lawyer.

    Always true, don’t you think Rollo ?

    So let’s apply this to what you’re needling Suzan about :

    Theorem : If someone is a PUA then he has Game. (True)

    Converse : If someone has Game then he is a PUA.

    Eh ? I’m not buying this. I think ole Steven could be an exception. There will be others … after all, Rollo, I need only one counterexample to disprove the converse.

    So this is not an “irony” Rollo … it’s a failed converse … hence, it’s a case of railing against the player … and not the Game.

    But at least you, and Suzan, will agree on the contrapositive :

    If someone does not have Game, then that someone is not a PUA.

    Heh.

    Another thing that struck me about you and Suzan, is by analogy of boxing :

    Styles make fights.

    And your style of writing (and debating) Rollo, will not have any effect on her. If you’re a Foreman ( with such powerful punches : Foreman destroyed Frazier, where Ali had his work cut out for him), then by heavens, Suzan is your Ali.

    She’s rope-a-doping you.

    It’s also why deti is having trouble with Suzan, but to give him credit, he’s more like Joe Frazier. He has heart.

    And now you’re thinking what kind of a woman can bring me to my knees Rollo ?

    Here she is.

    Coulda Woulda Shoulda.

    I mean it.

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

      @Marellus

      Bah, not sure why you were caught in mod. Links, I think. Sorry.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Is this Krauser chap the Brit I-banker who went PUA? Intellectually sophisticated, favors MMA training, sort of down on Mystery Method-type “cookbook” approaches? Or do I have the wrong guy here?

  • Just1Z

    @Sai

    action movie? just watched ‘Lockout’, pretty cool
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1592525/

    just about to restart ‘Killer Joe’, first ten minutes were cool. the beaver was strangely hirsuite.
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1726669/

    (Top Henry Rollins – Think Tank – Airport Hell)

  • Just1Z

    BB – sounds like Krauser to me.

  • Zach

    @yareally

    What Ian said. You sound like a teenage girl.

    Great, you can get laid. Big deal. That’s what I find so pathetic about guys like you, Rollo, etc. Once you’ve had enough sex, it’s not really all that important anymore. You think that because you’ve built your life around getting laid all the time, that that’s what everyone else wants. It’s probably because you never merited a look from a girl for so long that you’re massively overcompensating for the insecure little boy (lol) inside of you. I’ve turned down sex plenty of times before. It’s not the be-all and end-all of life. Although since you do sound like you’re in high school, so maybe you do think that. Guys learning how to get better at talking to women? Fine, all for it. Guys who determine their entire self-worth on the ability to get women into bed? Pathetic. Grow up. I have to run to something that doesn’t involve chasing pussy, or else I’d continue.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Han: “I do, however, sympathize or empathize with female 9′s and 10′s who would like to have a commited, faithful relationship with a 9 or 10 value guy but half of those guys are players not looking for an LTR.”

    Why? I won’t feel sympathy for women who won’t extend the same sympathy to men. Not specifically, and definitely not generically.

    If there’s no quarter for deltas and gammas other than laugh at him at wordt, and say “man up” a best – then it’s the same for women. I make exceptions for those who go out and seem kind to those less fortunate (like Jackie).

    Sympathy for people way above me, be it by wealth or looks, is in near-zero supply.

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

      Sympathy for people way above me, be it by wealth or looks, is in near-zero supply.

      Really? I have no problem sympathizing with people both better looking and better off than myself. Neither of those things guarantees happiness or contentment. I feel very sorry for some of the best looking, wealthiest people I know.

  • Senior Beta

    Yo,Susan @96. Didn’t mean to ruffle feathers. We agree Krauser not the guy. The guy stills sounds like he absorbed some Roissy lessons – if the gal is being coy and flighly, move on. We take your word for it she is a 9 and can get the top 1%. But, just like you said, we all know the guys in the top 1% have lots of action. And she probably missed her chance to nail the guy down. She will undoubtedly snare some rich guy. Why fret over a 9’s problems when you have many more 6-7 fishes to fry?

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

      @Senior Beta

      Why fret over a 9′s problems when you have many more 6-7 fishes to fry?

      As I said earlier, I found her email interesting. It’s not every day I get an email from Sandro Botticelli’s Venus. I’ve written before about the plight of female 9s and 10s in this SMP. Beautiful people need love too!

      There a lot of envy, a lot of schadenfreude, a lot of smallness as people celebrate the misery of someone more fortunate than themselves. I don’t relate to that.

      I find Anne’s case interesting based on the male-female dynamics alone, and I saw the potential to provide Anne with a reality check, which she badly needed.

  • Underdog

    @Zach

    You know you’re on a site called Hooking Up Smart, right?

    Why are you so obsessed with sex, bro?

  • Russ in Texas

    Long-term relationship potential?

    Easy test for women: how do you feel about washing his socks?

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

      @Russ

      Easy test for women: how do you feel about washing his socks?

      Oof, you’re a week too late on that one.

  • Society’s Disposable Son

    “A guy who spends his life obsessing over mastering guitar and playing in a rock band to get more attention from women is a loser.”

    But this is precisely the reason we have shitty ass bands like nickelback and buck cherry… how about learning for the sake of creating good music and pushing yourself to be the best despite what anyone else thinks?

    I don’t see many jazz, classical or extreme metal musicians neck deep in trim but these types all have incredible musical abilities.

    Starting a nickelback cover band to bang chicks IS pretty lame.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Russ in Texas “Easy test for women: how do you feel about washing his socks?”

    Did it just today, sorted, folded and put away, as always.

    But we went over this in a different conversation. Men don’t fall in love with women who clean for them because of the cleaning. They fall in love with the fun and sexy aspects first and then evaluate long-term potential.

  • pjay

    I sense Teh Crazy….run, Man, RUN!!!!!!

  • Emily

    I’m so confused by this sudden PUA takeover. …surely there’s a happy medium between sycophant and pickup artist? My impression is that Anna’s guy is just a decent dude who has self-respect. This isn’t “dread game”, it’s basic dignity.

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

      I’m so confused by this sudden PUA takeover. …surely there’s a happy medium between sycophant and pickup artist? My impression is that Anna’s guy is just a decent dude who has self-respect. This isn’t “dread game”, it’s basic dignity.

      It’s a hostile takeover. They’re about as welcome as ebola virus.

  • Russ in Texas

    A willingness to wash socks is, however, an unambiguous statement regarding long-term potential.

    The flip side of that, though, and why I posted it, is Anne or another gal in her shoes responses with a vocal-fried “OMG, No,” then she’s just answered the LTR question for herself unambiguously.

  • Russ in Texas

    Emily, I agree on the happy medium. Some of those guys have a very “out there” sense of how society works.

    What the PUA guys did, and doing so was actually a service to the rest of us at large, was observe and describe the things that successful men did, and analyze for why. In that sense “Game” can loosely be translated to “understands intersex relations,” and anybody can benefit.

  • Senior Beta

    Actually, Rollo is being modest. Several of us who like his writing and ideas refer to him as the Plato of Pussy.

  • Ian

    @Rollo

    8. False Premises Hate … Hater: Yeah, sure, game works well for picking up low self-esteem bar skanks.

    Previously, it would have been an insult to call you someone who would argue under false premises, in a post about false-premises. Knowing that, find the exact words “low self-esteem bar skanks”. If you can’t, take a moment to observe the human nature of what that implies.

    As a fellow observer of human nature, and a smarter one, let me share an anecdote with you. Susan’s hometown has a bit of a Martial tradition. I have observed quiet, medium-height, slender men from that town, with fighting experience, wall up shoulder-to-shoulder, four-across, and knock the false confidence off of a group of 20 men, from a more effete, pleasure-loving culture.

    Though the four men were neither cocky, nor funny, nor had they received internet-based training in remedial manliness, they managed to date and sleep with the most highly-attractive women in their combined social circles, drawing mainly from the effete men’s neighborhoods. Because they carried themselves with respect, I respected them.

    Having that knowledge, were you to meet Susan, among her cousins on the street, would you dare to derisively call her Aunt Sue? If you would not, for fear, I do not respect you. If you would, I still would not respect you. Even if you win the fight, you’d deserve to lose.

    If you cannot gain my respect, you are not an alpha. You are acting the part of an alpha, for sex, and a woman who falls under your spell, for sex with an alpha, is being lied to. No one with confidence studies to achieve the appearance of it. In your language, affected cockiness is a DLV, however many insecure and immature young women, many of whom frequent bars, it dupes.

  • pvw

    @A Definite Beta Guy #194: “Anne’s problem, IMO, is not one of strategy, it’s one insecurity and immaturity…”

    Me: We are seeing the world of combat dating at work. Women are at a distinct disadvantage: see BB’s post #103.

  • Emily

    Re: The sock test

    How hard is it to wash socks? Any rogue socks that end up on my floor get thrown in the laundry with the rest of my clothes and then eventually make their way back to my boyfriend’s house. My bf does the same thing with any of my clothes that are left at his place.

  • Ian

    Actually, Rollo is being modest. Several of us who like his writing and ideas refer to him as the Plato of Pussy.

    I hear that this type of joyous fraternal affection was more common during Plato’s time.

    Really, I haven’t browsed in a few weeks. What’s bringing in all the bronies, and how long have they been here?

  • yareallyhahaha

    @Emily
    “This isn’t “dread game”, it’s basic dignity.”

    What you’re saying is “I know that car is moving but it has nothing to do with physics, it’s just driving a car.”

    All we’re doing is labelling very obvious consistent human psychology that naturally exists. You move your body up off the ground and back down again, and I label that a “jump” and help other people learn how to purposely use their leg muscles to create a “jump”.

    @Russ in Texas
    “A willingness to wash socks is, however, an unambiguous statement regarding long-term potential. ”

    I don’t like to wash my OWN socks. I’m terrified to learn what that means lol

    “In that sense “Game” can loosely be translated to “understands intersex relations,” and anybody can benefit.”

    The question there then, is why are we demonized for being extremely competent at understanding something and using that understanding to achieve a goal? Nobody cries out when someone studies to be good at Chess, or at being a Doctor. And in fact, when done properly and used in the recommended manner (“leave them better than you found them”), the end result is two satisfied people who have fond memories of fun orgasms together. The girls I’ve been with have nothing but good things to say about me and our time together because part of PUA is understanding the psychology of how to make sure a woman feels good about hooking up instead of feeling shameful/slutty. The only sad emotions some of them feel is that I won’t be their boyfriend, but I was honest and up-front with them about not being able to provide that from the very start.

    @Ian
    “I have observed quiet, medium-height, slender men from that town, with fighting experience”

    Oh is this going to be one of those things where you threaten someone over the Internet, not directly, but by heavily implying that “Bad Things”(TM) will happen to anyone who does something you disapprove of? I liked when Clint Eastwood did the whole “You ever meet someone you shouldn’t have messed with?” bit in that “GET OFF MY LAWN” movie too lol

    For what it’s worth, I’ve picked up girls in biker bars and cowboy bars and angry little small towns with”good ol’ small town values” and shit. Those guys aren’t real difficult to befriend, and you just game their girls a little more subtly than in the big city type places.

    “If you cannot gain my respect, you are not an alpha.”

    Bit narcissistic to assume that everyone wants your respect, wouldn’t you say? Careful, that’s a Dark Triad trait. ;)

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

      The question there then, is why are we demonized for being extremely competent at understanding something and using that understanding to achieve a goal? Nobody cries out when someone studies to be good at Chess, or at being a Doctor.

      I cannot believe you just compared being a PUA to being a doctor. lololololoolololzzzzz

      Being a productive member of society and living a life of purpose can take many forms. Here are some pastimes that do not make the grade:

      PUA
      Opium den regular
      Prostitute
      Drug dealer
      Alcoholic
      Sugar Daddy
      Stoner
      Bridezilla
      Shopaholic

      Self-indulgent parasites, all.

  • Russ in Texas

    Emily,

    Not hard — unless you have raging entitlement issues…..

  • yareallyhahaha

    @Ian
    “What’s bringing in all the bronies, and how long have they been here?”

    Righteous vindication in this article where Sue instructs an HB9 to throw herself begging at a guy running Dread Game.

    Well played on the Bronies thing. Sorry if we disrupted the love fest by pointing out reality. :)

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

      Righteous vindication in this article where Sue instructs an HB9 to throw herself begging at a guy running Dread Game.

      The interpretation of Stephen’s behavior as running Dread Game is silly. Go read Roissy’s post on Dread Game. Stephen is batting zero on his list of tactics. Dread Game is about manipulating someone into believing – falsely – that you have other women who want you. This misapplication of a Game principle leaves me no choice but to conclude that yareally pua and Rollo are stupid. No surprise in the first case, I’m a bit surprised in the second.

  • pvw

    @ Senior Beta # 201

    Yo,Susan @96. Didn’t mean to ruffle feathers. We agree Krauser not the guy. The guy stills sounds like he absorbed some Roissy lessons – if the gal is being coy and flighly, move on. We take your word for it she is a 9 and can get the top 1%. But, just like you said, we all know the guys in the top 1% have lots of action. And she probably missed her chance to nail the guy down. She will undoubtedly snare some rich guy.

    ….Why fret over a 9′s problems when you have many more 6-7 fishes to fry?

    Me: Now this sounds interesting, how do you think this sort of thing would work?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ PVW

    Me: We are seeing the world of combat dating at work. Women are at a distinct disadvantage: see BB’s post #103.

    There’s strategy, and there’s mindset. It’s like playing poker and trying to tell an extremely angry, tempermental guy that his strategy doesn’t work, except that’s silly, he can’t implement a good strategy because his mindset is screwed up. He gets angry too easily, he can’t think, he can’t…etc.

    He needs to fix his mindset before he can even think about fixing his strategy.

    Same thing with good ol’ Anne, here, IMO. It’s one thing that you don’t wash a guy’s socks because you realize he is just going to take advantage of you, it’s another not to do his socks because you experience sheer terror at the thought.

    In the first, you can switch to washing the guy’s socks, if that’s what the strategy calls for.

    For Anne? Even if it WERE good strategy, she would be gripped by total terror and wouldn’t be able to wash those socks.

    That’s my fear with Anne. Needs to work on Inner Game.

  • Zach

    @Underdog

    No obsession with sex. I’m deriding an obsession…read my comment again.

    @Rollo

    Yeah, I do think guys who do any of those things solely to get women into bed is pretty weak. Take no. 1 for example, “climbing the corporate ladder” (which is synonymous with no 3 in a lot of ways). The vast majority of my friends work in very high-paying (banker, lawyer, consulting, medical) jobs, and are extremely good at them. Most of them are also pretty good at picking up women. I cannot recall one instance of a friend of mine using their employment status or income to try and get a woman into bed. They do it because THEY want to, not because it will help them get laid. In fact, the only time I remember it is when my friend who’s a trader at Goldman used it when he was miserable at hipster bar in Brooklyn. He used it to get the girls to STOP talking to him (hipsters don’t think too highly of finance).

    And @what Ian said, +1. Affected confidence and swagger is exactly that. It’s fake. Two of the biggest players I know curl into the fetal position if they are ever confronted in a strong way by another guy. One of them is so insecure that he won’t go get money from the ATM without someone going with him (and man, the meltdowns he has when people make fun of him for hooking up with the occasional fatty…). I also have friends who are naturally confident, dominant, and not pussies in every situation. I draw a distinction, you seem not to.

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

      In fact, the only time I remember it is when my friend who’s a trader at Goldman used it when he was miserable at hipster bar in Brooklyn. He used it to get the girls to STOP talking to him (hipsters don’t think too highly of finance).

      LMAO, that’s hilarious. That needs to be a scene in Girls.

  • pvw

    @ADBG: He needs to fix his mindset before he can even think about fixing his strategy.

    Me: This is what I was thinking as well as per post 174….and Susan, as well, of course, in her original response….

  • Ian

    Well played on the Bronies thing. Sorry if we disrupted the love fest by pointing out reality. :)

    I see how you survived the bars, without AMOG braggadocio. The cowboys may respond to compliments, side-steps, and pats on the back, but I do not. You’re not disarming anger, you’re the subject of accurate, low opinion. Objectively, mathematically, whatever misfortune befalls you makes the world a better place, I will root for it, with clear conscience, until you display a valuable trait.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    It’s great to see the Zach post above mine contrast with the PVW post.

    These player guys that crumble into bawling wrecks have learned the ways to seduce women without actually fixing their mindsets and are walking time-bombs.

    Anne is also a walking time-bomb, as far as I can tell, which is why she can have sex with a man she barely knows yet not be able to make him coffee. Based on what I am reading, Susan thinks that Anne just has a strategy problem.

    IMO, Anne has an inner game problem. Which isn’t surprising, she’s 22 and that one guy tore her to pieces.

    Teaching her strategies and Girl Game is going to render her very vulnerable while giving the illusion of success.

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

      Based on what I am reading, Susan thinks that Anne just has a strategy problem.

      IMO, Anne has an inner game problem. Which isn’t surprising, she’s 22 and that one guy tore her to pieces.

      I acknowledge in the post that Anne needs to be more communicative about her own emotional state. Obviously, she is a bit wary and with good reason. It may be that the timing just isn’t right – she’s clearly still deeply affected by her experience with the cad.

      She also needs to wise up to SMP dynamics. High value guys are not going to jump through hoops. She is very young, still in school, figuring it out as she goes. This will have been a learning experience for her, whatever happens.

  • pvw

    @ADBG 226–what are the numbers of the posts?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Which ones? Zach was 223, yours was 224

  • pvw

    @ADBG, thanks!

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    ADBG “Teaching her strategies and Girl Game is going to render her very vulnerable while giving the illusion of success.”

    I don’t quite understand this. If she gave up being aloof when she actually likes a guy, tells the truth about how she feels and gives more emotional escalation, then she would actually have “success” insofar as she would be with the guy she likes. How is that an illusion? Or do you mean that she might get used by a player, who doesn’t actually want her for more than a notch? Isn’t she hot enough that if she were also feminine and has “girl game,” she would be seen as girlfriend material by even top guys?

  • Emily

    Definite Beta,

    Your analysis makes sense. I also get the impression that Anne was “punishing” the new guy for the way that the previous guy had treated her. She should probably recover from the last breakup before getting involved with a new guy.

  • Underdog

    @Zach

    No obsession with sex, and yet you’re on a site called Hooking Up Smart deriding guys who have learned how to hook up smart. Hmm….

    And your trader friend, just like the rockstar or the pro athlete, is doing what he does in order to raise status and accumulate wealth/security — something that will ultimately gain him access to higher value members of the opposite sex. To think of any other reason for it is to be in denial.

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

      @Underdog

      No obsession with sex, and yet you’re on a site called Hooking Up Smart deriding guys who have learned how to hook up smart. Hmm….

      Are you laboring under the misimpression that HUS is a blog for men to figure out how to get laid? In a nutshell, here’s what Hooking Up Smart means:

      NSBM: No sex before monogamy

  • yareallyhahaha

    @Ian
    “The cowboys may respond to compliments, side-steps, and pats on the back, but I do not.”

    http://i3.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/007/508/watch-out-we-got-a-badass-over-here-meme.png

    “You’re not disarming anger”

    Are you really angry? At someone you think is a piece of shit? On the INTERNET? lol

    “I will root for it, with clear conscience, until you display a valuable trait.”

    What if I wash your socks for you? :)

    @A Definite Beta Guy
    “These player guys that crumble into bawling wrecks”

    lol are these also the same player guys who cry themselves to sleep at night when they kick out their one-night stand bar slut, because their lives are so empty and meaningless and they know they have a hole in their soul? I enjoy these cartoon character versions of us you guys come up with.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Hope, she may succeed in getting into a relationship with a guy, but that’s not the same as being happy with herself, or being mentally stable.

    That’s what I mean.

    Also, if your inner core isn’t working, I doubt you can fully implement all of the strategies that need to be implemented in the first place. A girl who isn’t comfortable with emotional escalation, who then tries to emotionally escalate, might succeed in getting the guy, but it might burn her out, or it might come across as fake to a guy, or she might think to herself “blah, what kind of guy would actually fall for this.”

  • Just1Z

    “Killer Joe” – WOW

    a twisted version of Cinderella / Snow White, they say?

    hmmm

    lots of twisted, that’s for sure. great film for da menz. not sure the ‘fair sex’, though.

  • Mikey

    Hmmm…..definitely some anti-PUA hate here. Even when you disagree with what they do, it doesn’t mean you have to disagree with what the tactics or knowledge is (evo psy).

    I’m more disturbed by the notion Susan implies that the PUA’s are mentally damaged because they learned how to attract women after a bad experience with women. (such as being friendzoned). Why would they be mentally damaged but a girl damaged by a cad (Anne) is cheerlead into doing better?

    In other words, personal transformations come about through hardship, to imply that hardship means PUA’s are mentally unbalanced is false.

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

      I’m more disturbed by the notion Susan implies that the PUA’s are mentally damaged because they learned how to attract women after a bad experience with women. (such as being friendzoned). Why would they be mentally damaged but a girl damaged by a cad (Anne) is cheerlead into doing better?

      If Anne dedicated her life to getting commitment from low quality guys just for sport, I’d say the same thing to her.

      As for PUAs being mentally damaged, I can’t speak for all of them, but the ones on this thread show clear signs of sociopathy, narcissism and Machiavellianism.

      By anyone’s standards (except these Dark Triad guys, of course) that equals personality disorder.

      In the land of the blind…the trash dick is king.

  • BroHamlet

    @ADBG & Susan

    “IMO, Anne has an inner game problem. Which isn’t surprising, she’s 22 and that one guy tore her to pieces.

    Teaching her strategies and Girl Game is going to render her very vulnerable while giving the illusion of success.”

    I agree. Susan, remember in a previous thread where I suggested that people of both genders learn to game from the inside out? This is what I was talking about. Anne looks to have rolled along doing what she does until she ran into someone who appears unwilling to play the game she was asking him to play. More strategy is the typical answer, but like ADBG, I don’t think that will be the answer in the long run. A look inward will make anything she learns from this point more effective because it will come from the right place- it’ll be authentic, and she won’t encounter a shock when she runs into someone who, from the looks of it, has himself handled, because she’ll have herself handled.

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

      @BroHamlet

      A look inward will make anything she learns from this point more effective because it will come from the right place- it’ll be authentic, and she won’t encounter a shock when she runs into someone who, from the looks of it, has himself handled, because she’ll have herself handled.

      Honestly, I think it’s a bit over the top to start diagnosing Anne with not having her shit together. She wrote for strategic advice, I gave it. I’m not her therapist. I included some reality checks around what’s fair, what this might look like from his POV, and how she might effect a meeting.

  • yareallyhahaha

    @Mikey

    “In other words, personal transformations come about through hardship, to imply that hardship means PUA’s are mentally unbalanced is false.”

    We sure are getting shit on around here just for having a different view. And not even a WRONG view, as a number of posters including yourself have mentioned, we’re just pointing out what’s right there for anyone to see…it’s just something that makes everyone feel “squicky” lol

    Shoot the messenger much?

    @Underdog
    “shmeminine shmimperative.”

    lol’ed.

    Still waiting on that logical fact-filled rebuttal to the observation that you’ve just proved Game works on hot high-quality girls by telling an HB9 to go “crawling on her hands and knees” to a guy (knowingly or unknowingly) running Dread Game, Sue. :)

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    I like how the guys are equating “self-respect” with “Dread Game.”

    Meh, it’s almost Christmas. Need to write more envelopes.

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

    But seriously, here you have a textbook example of (by your scale) an exceptionally attractive 22 year old woman who WAS attracted to a guy displaying Alpha dominance via his indifference to her –something she’s unaccustomed to as a high SMV girl.

    And, as Game would predict, she’s locked into qualifying for his intimate acceptance. In fact you yourself want to characterize the guy as a hopeful LTR potential. How do you not see the irony in that?

    Your reading comprehension skills are lacking.

    First, Stephen took her out to dinner and walked her home without escalating at all on several occasions. It was precisely this behavior, along with his personality, that had her thinking of him as a potential husband and father. Had he acted alpha from the get go, she would have nexted him. While she was away, he texted and checked in regularly. He has also texted and called frequently, and has openly told her on many occasions how much he likes her and how lucky he feels.

    Second, I am pro-Game. Stephen sounds like a natural, someone with self-respect who has no plans to be a doormat. I give him credit and of course am not surprised that the threat of his removing his affection has Anne alarmed. To the extent that he is demonstrating self-respect, it is not with the intention of provoking anxiety, but rather of removing himself from a relationship where her interest seems to have waned. It’s perfectly reasonable behavior on his part – not the manipulative nonsense of spinning plates, two in the kitty, etc.

    Game emulates real, natural dominance by providing codified behavioral correlates. As far as we know, as a beta with self-respect, Stephen has no need for Game.

  • Mikey

    Seriously, it’s like people only respond here if game principles sounds nice and acceptable. Hope, Dead Game simply is reminding the person who acted up that you have other options, when Anne acted like a brat she needed to be reminded he wouldn’t take it and went silent. But since it’s called Dread Game and you don’t like that name, you’re opposed.

    I’ll leave it to the PUA’s to rename everything to acceptable terms “Sunshine Happy Tulip Game” then maybe the principles themselves can finally be discussed.

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

      @Mikey

      Hope, Dead Game simply is reminding the person who acted up that you have other options, when Anne acted like a brat she needed to be reminded he wouldn’t take it and went silent.

      First of all, Dread Game is preventative – it is not solely used when women have “acted up” or “acted like a brat.” Rollo uses Dread Game on his faithful wife by flirting with other women in front of her to make her jealous and anxious. No doubt she sleeps with one eye open.

      Second, Stephen did nothing to imply he has options. My guess is he went to the party on Saturday alone. He may have options, probably does. For that reason, he had no need to explicitly say so.

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

      @Mikey

      Seriously, it’s like people only respond here if game principles sounds nice and acceptable.

      Make no mistake. I support Game as it serves to help guys who want relationships get them. Game increases the number of attractive men, and I’m all for that. I do not support the use of Game for P&D’ing. You are at the wrong blog for that.

  • pvw

    @Brohamlet:

    A look inward will make anything she learns from this point more effective because it will come from the right place- it’ll be authentic, and she won’t encounter a shock when she runs into someone who, from the looks of it, has himself handled, because she’ll have herself handled.

    Me: As part of that look inward, some of the basics, that being in a serious adult relationship is not for the immature and childish.

    Or…those who seem to have problems realizing that their partner might have needs and interests which have to be worked through and negotiated, ie., empathy and consideration just might be necessary, as well as a dose of humility to remove any entitlement mentalities. In other words, it isn’t always about you and only you. It is about a give and take, not one side always taking, taking, taking with no sense of appreciation, gratitude and willingness to sacrifice for the greater good, and that can include for the benefit of one’s partner. All of this ony happens through the development of true intimacy and trust; these are to be worked at and develop over time; it won’t come in the midst of serious attitude problems and through the illusion of superficial intimacy.

    I can probably go on, but that is a beginning, as I think about my marriage and the marriages of those around me.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    pvw #240, I agree completely. But it’s never too early to start learning those things! Age is not a barrier to empathy and respect.

    Susan, lol.

  • pvw

    @Hope: Age is not a barrier to empathy and respect

    Me: Thanks; I forgot to add the word respect, but all that I wrote implies it….

  • Russ in Texas

    Sales 101: you talk in the language of your customer.

    An effective communicator translates his ideas into the idiom of the person listening. It actually makes PERFECT sense that communication meant to open the eyeballs of men who for one reason or another have poor social skills and can’t get it together with women ….wouldn’t translate well when put directly to people who are not the intended audience (women). The difference in rhetorical style says *nothing* about the quality of the idea itself.

    So yes, “dread game” and “I’ve got too much self-respect to put up with puerile manipulative shit” can in fact be synonymous without diminishing parties simply because they prefer one phrase to the other.

    Sadly, based on follow-up questions, I’d be surprised if Anne were able to learn *anything* from what she’s read. She’s simply not a keeper at this point.

  • Anne

    I read yareally’s first post but ignored the rest.

    Susan, your post #238 is spot on.
    I texted him this afternoon (from your advice), saying sorry for flaky behaviour, telling him I was going home. I got a reply, saying he was back home too, in order to attend a funeral, that he’d love to see me, and asking how I was and asking about an infection I had a while ago. He’s back for Christmas too and he told me his plans the next three days so we can get together back here (we’re from the same city).

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

      @Anne

      Hallelujah! I am so happy for you! It sounds like he welcomed your reaching out, and has no interest in punishing you or playing any games. Well done. So, the takeaway is…emote. Open yourself up, take the risk. There are no guarantees you won’t be hurt again as you were last summer, but he sounds like a good man – you are not likely to be treated with carelessness or duplicity. Shake off your misgivings about the cad and focus on the dad right in front of you.

      Think of ways to express that you care. Do those feminine, nurturing things that feel a bit unnatural right now. In other words, your job is to escalate emotionally with Stephen. You’ve been given another chance, don’t blow it!

      I hope you’ll circle back and let us know how it goes! In the meantime, have a lovely Christmas!

  • Höllenhund

    “Rollo, Yareallypua and Hollenhund in one thread. How many brain cells have been sacrificed? How many readers have fled the bizarro comments of these middle aged prurient men?”

    That’s their problem. I know your female readers simply cannot handle much, so I specifically avoided using swear words, derogatory phrases, ad hominem arguments and whatnot. If some woman is still offended, what the hell is she doing reading the comments section of a blog? She should turn off the computer and read some women’s mag, lest she become offended by anything around her.

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

      @HH

      I know your female readers simply cannot handle much, so I specifically avoided using swear words, derogatory phrases, ad hominem arguments and whatnot

      That’s actually really sweet. I don’t know, HH, I think there’s a softie somewhere in there.

      For the record, the sensitivity of my readers has been greatly exaggerated. I don’t think it’s a question of what they can handle, I think it’s a question of why spend your time with a bunch of bitchy men online.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    “Rollo, Yareallypua and Hollenhund in one thread. How many brain cells have been sacrificed? How many readers have fled the bizarro comments of these middle aged prurient men?”

    I take it that this is the normal response of your Dear HUS letters.

    It’s like anti-advertising.

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

      @JP

      I take it that this is the normal response of your Dear HUS letters.

      It’s not! I have no idea why these guys descended on this post. None of them is a regular here, and it’s not like I’ve said anything controversial. Weird.

  • Underdog

    Back to Anne, I don’t think this guy is purposely running game to get her back. Most likely, he’s simply nexting her. If he’s a player type, then he’s already got the ass. If he’s a dad type, then he’s most likely realized by now that Anne’s too emotionally unstable to be a mom.

    I’d advise Anne to move on and take some time off for introspection.

  • Höllenhund

    Sandro Botticelli’s Venus wouldn’t count as a 9 today. Standards have changed, especially those of the top men.

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

      Sandro Botticelli’s Venus wouldn’t count as a 9 today.

      WHAT?????

      sb

      No doubt you prefer the “updated” version on the right:

      sbo

  • Underdog

    Nvm, just read Anne’s latest comment. Ignore my previous post then. And congrats.

  • Höllenhund

    “It’s a hostile takeover. They’re about as welcome as ebola virus.”

    This attitude’d be warranted if your blog were about cooking, gardening, knitting or sharing baby pictures or whatever. But it’s not. It’s about the current SMP, and one group among many that can provide insight, no matter how amoral or unethical you think it is, are PUAs. It’s just a way it is. If I start a blog about cars and a bunch of mechanics show up and comment, is it “hostile takeover”? Lulz.

    Besides, there’s no “takeover”. Nobody is trying to take over your blog or destroy it. You’re becoming way too paranoid. You’re not a martyr for some heroic cause.

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

      @Hollenhund

      How can PUAs provide insight to my readers?

  • Höllenhund

    “Being a productive member of society and living a life of purpose can take many forms.”

    That’s beside the point. One can be a PUA who’s “extremely competent at understanding something and using that understanding to achieve a goal”. Doesn’t matter if he’s society’s pack mule or not. What’s this talk of “parasites” anyway? Are inner city single moms and their future criminal thugspawn included on that list?

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

      What’s this talk of “parasites” anyway? Are inner city single moms and their future criminal thugspawn included on that list?

      Sure, if they’re not contributing anything to society. It’s not that lofty a goal – one can work hard digging ditches and make the world a better place. It’s the indulgence of base appetites that I detest. An inner city single mom who works hard to provide for her children and tries to get them into a decent school is OK in my book.

      What will yareallypua leave behind when his wet dick has been eaten by worms?

  • JP

    “Being a productive member of society and living a life of purpose can take many forms. Here are some pastimes that do not make the grade:

    PUA
    Opium den regular
    Prostitute
    Drug dealer
    Alcoholic
    Sugar Daddy
    Stoner
    Bridezilla
    Shopaholic

    Self-indulgent parasites, all.”

    This made me think of Bioshock, everybody’s favorite Ayn Randish dyspotian computer game.

    “Transcript: What is the difference between a man and a parasite? A man builds. A parasite asks “Where is my share?” A man creates. A parasite says, “What will the neighbors think?” A man invents. A parasite says, “Watch out, or you might tread on the toes of God…”

    http://bioshock.wikia.com/wiki/A_Man_or_a_Parasite

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

      A man builds. A parasite asks “Where is my share?”

      These ten words explain my POV perfectly.

  • Anne

    @ Underdog, as you can see I wrote a response. He wants to see me again, I suppose I will find out more later.

  • JP

    Some fictional background for the fictional author of that parasite quote:

    “Andrew Ryan was born Andrei Rianofski[1] in a village near Minsk in Russia (modern Belarus), during the time when the Tsar still held autocratic rule over the country. In 1917 he witnessed the Russian Revolution which catapulted the Bolshevik Party into power.[2] Ryan’s experiences under Soviet rule led him to his personal philosophy: the modern world was created by great men who strove to make their own way. Anytime “parasites” gained control of such a world, they destroyed it (as the Soviets did “trading one lie for another,” the autocratic rule of the Tsar for the repressions of Bolshevism). In 1919 he anglicized his name to Andrew Ryan and fled Russia to go to America, believing it to be a place where a great man could prosper.[3]

    For a time, he was devoted to his adopted country, grateful for the wealth and fame it awarded his intellect and determination. However, the state social programs adopted in the 30s increasingly tested that devotion. His experiences in the “worker’s paradise” made Ryan despise the ideals of Socialism, believing that those who benefited from others were “parasites” (e.g. he considered Roosevelt and his “New Dealers” to be the ones “spoon-feeding” Americans on the “Bolshevik Poison”). In his mind, one could only own what one earned. For instance, he once owned a large forest as a personal retreat, one that many groups envied (one group told him that it “belonged to God,” demanding that he establish a public park there). When the government attempted to nationalize it as parkland, Ryan’s response was to burn it to the ground so no one could have it.[4]

    The final straw for Ryan was the destruction of Hiroshima with the atomic bomb.[5] In his eyes, the bomb was the ultimate corruption of his ideals — science and determination harnessed for destruction, creating a weapon that gave the “parasites” the ability to destroy anything that they could not seize. ”

    http://bioshock.wikia.com/wiki/Andrew_Ryan

  • Russ in Texas

    @Anna,

    Congratulations. Honestly. Based on what I’d read from your follow-ups, I didn’t think you had it in you. Very happy to be Random Stranger Proven Wrong.

    @Susan,

    As an old fart I once knew said, “never do a man a small wrong.”

    Not a PUA (yuck), but I cop to a *serious* case of the Macchiavelli’s… in the absence of positive pressure I am an ice-hearted son of a bitch who will eventually show up on CNN: it runs in my family and has to be kept on a tight leash at all times. Difference is that SOME of us know this isn’t something to be proud of. I’m lucky: not everybody in my shoes has somebody like my wife in her life.

    1. If that’s Roissy’s definition of “dread game,” then I stand corrected. I’d understood it as instilling fear that a given bad behavior means end-of-relationship (which is pretty common sense).
    2. Can you sell me a vowel on this one?

    “@Russ
    Easy test for women: how do you feel about washing his socks?
    Oof, you’re a week too late on that one.”

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

      @Russ

      . If that’s Roissy’s definition of “dread game,” then I stand corrected. I’d understood it as instilling fear that a given bad behavior means end-of-relationship (which is pretty common sense).

      From Roissy’s Dread Post:

      Managing your relationship in such a way that she is left with a constant, gnawing feeling of impending doom will do more for your cause than all the Valentine’s Day cards and expertly performed tongue love in the world. Like it or not, the threat of a looming breakup, whether the facts justify it or not, will spin her into a paranoid estrogen-fueled tizzy, and she’ll spend every waking second thinking about you, thinking about the relationship, thinking about how to fix it. Her love for you will blossom under these conditions. Result: she works harder to please you.

      Examples of effective doom inducement:

      Turn off your cell phone twice a week. Alternate days.

      Make a blatant but plausibly deniable move on one of her friends when she’s not around.

      Call her from a very busy place so that she can hear women’s voices laughing and shrieking in the background.

      Mention how skilled your Russian ex was at giving head. Bring it up again a few days later, pretending not to remember the first time you mentioned it.

      Be seen by your girlfriend flirting with other women in a social venue.

      Cook her a romantic candlelight dinner at home. Make it a memorable experience, complete with jazz, chocolate, and rose petals. Then, do not talk with her for four days afterwards.

      Ignore her calls for a week.

      Gaze longingly into her eyes, say how hot she looks, then immediately glance sidelong at the bosom of any strange woman in the vicinity.

      Say things like “I really value my independence and freedom” relevant to nothing in particular. I

      Have an affair and make sure she finds out about it… Then without waiting for her response calmly walk out the door and break off all contact for two weeks.

      http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2008/03/27/dread/

      I truly pity the poor bastards who take this stuff to heart.

  • JP

    “@ Underdog, as you can see I wrote a response. He wants to see me again, I suppose I will find out more later.”

    And another relationship crisis solved by the crack team of HUS commenteers!

    Maybe.

    I suppose this a follow-up is required.

    Since this is the holiday season, why don’t we say three weeks?

    Does that work for everyone?

    How about checking back in, say,

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

      Since this is the holiday season, why don’t we say three weeks?

      Does that work for everyone?

      How about checking back in, say,

      LOL, I promise to report back if I get a follow up.

  • Russ in Texas

    “Rollo uses Dread Game on his faithful wife by flirting with other women in front of her to make her jealous and anxious. No doubt she sleeps with one eye open.”

    In the words of the Great Turqsidian Muse, “that is fucked up.”

  • Underdog

    @Susan

    ” it was not Stephen’s intent to provoke anxiety… Dread Game involves all kinds of fakery… Stephen didn’t engage in manipulative tactics at all.”

    Courtship ALWAYS involve fakery and manipulation — unless Anne is the type of girl who doesn’t wear make up, high heels, or fix her hair.

    What if Stephen wanted Anne to be his gf but knew that pursuing her would make her lose attraction but freezing her out / giving her anxiety would spike her attraction level? Would you call that fakery and manipulation? I think your problem with dread game lies more with intent than tactics.

    And yes, freezing a girl out is dread game, much like shutting your phone off for a day is dread game, much like calling a girl while you’re in a bar is dread game. All of them give the effect of you having options, which causes her to feel jealous and anxious.

    “NSBM: No sex before monogamy”

    So this blog is for men who want to toil in the friend zone? :)

  • JP

    “As for PUAs being mentally damaged, I can’t speak for all of them, but the ones on this thread show clear signs of sociopathy, narcissism and Machiavellianism.”

    That’s not “mentally damaged”, unless you are talking about a clear-cut kill the puppies for fun kind of person. (Which is what happened to one guy I knew in college who snapped. I think he was smashing kittens into walls or something. One of the most bizarre stories I ever heard.)

    That’s spiritually damaged, which is a horse of a different color. Like I said, it’s a cesspool radiating despair and discord.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    I thought you said that you discotinued the Letters because of the incoming artillery fire like you got today.

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

      @JP

      I thought you said that you discotinued the Letters because of the incoming artillery fire like you got today.

      Yeah, it was a problem. Not everyone was hard on Anne, but in general, these letters bring guys out of the woodwork to complain about women. There was one poor woman named Casey – I’ll never forget it. Her letter so inflamed the guys that one blogger ran off and wrote a post denouncing her.

      I really like to keep things positive, you know? I was pretty hard on Anne. I spoke to her like I would speak to a young woman I know well (which is why I told her that). I told her she’d been acting like a spoiled brat, in fact. I give her a lot of credit for absorbing that feedback and turning it around.

      I don’t know if my advice was good or not, but hey, she’s got another date lined up. Now it’s up to her.

  • Adam

    Roissy’s definition of dread game:

    “Instilling the dread of an impending breakup or loss of interest to promote a healthy relationship.”

    Fits what this Stephen guy did to a T.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “I think it’s a question of why spend your time with a bunch of bitchy men online?”

    Because we have milk and cookies?

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

      Because we have milk and cookies?

      I didn’t mean you Sweet Ted. I’m referring to the Dark Lords of the sphere. Boo.

  • Höllenhund

    “How can PUAs provide insight to my readers?”

    Who else is going to do so? Other women, who only confirm each other’s emotions for each other? Tradcons? Feminists? The Man Up Brigade?

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

      Who else is going to do so? Other women, who only confirm each other’s emotions for each other? Tradcons? Feminists? The Man Up Brigade?

      There are about 60 male “regulars” here, and none of them fits that description. I feel confident that my female readers are getting good and useful information from them. They’re better than I am – I do what I can in the posts, but am happy to pass the baton to both men and women in the comment threads. Increasingly, I see myself as a conduit between the readers and the commenters.

  • Russ in Texas

    @HH: That’s not an answer. That’s not even a thesis.

    @Susan#282,

    Holy shit. Yeah, stand corrected. I don’t have enough palms for the facepalms that requires.

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

      @Russ

      No problem. A belated welcome to HUS, you’ve left some good comments. I’m always happy to have new commenters, and those who admit they’re still learning (aren’t we all?) are particularly welcome!

  • Lokland

    @Hope

    ” I like how the guys are equating “self-respect” with “Dread Game.””

    This should speak volumes to the women about how men were raised.
    What the ladies are defining as self-respect men are defining as evil/dread inducing.

  • HanSolo

    @yareally

    Yes, many women (and some men) love drama.

    @OffTheCuff

    Why? I won’t feel sympathy for women who won’t extend the same sympathy to men. Not specifically, and definitely not generically.

    If there’s no quarter for deltas and gammas other than laugh at him at wordt, and say “man up” a best – then it’s the same for women. I make exceptions for those who go out and seem kind to those less fortunate

    Because I am a sympathetic and empathetic kind of guy at heart. Now if they are mean bitches then they lose my concern real fast.

    Now, I don’t have THAT much sympathy for 9’s and 10’s because they still do have so many options. The 10 can probably find a male 9 who will be faithful if she screens for character. The 9 can go for the male 8.

    I also care about the delta (average) guys and the schlubs, like Sam on Game of Thrones.

  • JP

    “Now, I don’t have THAT much sympathy for 9′s and 10′s because they still do have so many options. The 10 can probably find a male 9 who will be faithful if she screens for character. The 9 can go for the male 8.”

    I wonder how many of the 9’s and 10’s go horribly wrong, life wise.

    It’s kind of like having a massive “please hit on me” target on their back for a large portion of their lives.

  • Sai

    @HH
    “Sandro Botticelli’s Venus wouldn’t count as a 9 today. Standards have changed, especially those of the top men.”
    Ehhhhh?
    I guess you aren’t yanking our chains. What would she count as today?

    And that “have an affair and make sure she finds out” is actually a tactic. Trotsky’s balls, I’d rather be alone. SMH

  • J

    It’s actually moronic that this post about Anne’s relationship is even generating discussion about PUAs.

    It’s actually entirely predictible that this post about Anne’s relationship is even generating discussion about PUAs.

    A pretty girl got a comeuppance; let the fapping begin.

  • J

    HH: “Sandro Botticelli’s Venus wouldn’t count as a 9 today. Standards have changed, especially those of the top men.”

    Sai: “Ehhhhh? I guess you aren’t yanking our chains. What would she count as today?”

    HH and the some of the other denizens of the ‘sphere have rather exacting standards for women. I’m certain that even the goddess of love would need to work hard to match their values in the SMP. ;-)

  • Russ in Texas

    @Adam#280.

    Unlike HanSolo, I’m NOT a sympathetic and empathetic guy at heart: I have busted my ASS to develop those traits, and even I can see the distinction between:

    Instilling dread of relationship loss as a *reaction* to shitty behavior
    Instilling dread of relationship loss as a proactive emotional manipulation

    #1 is called “I’m not putting up with puerile shit.”
    #2 is called “treating your woman like shit.”

  • J

    But then again, you already know it’s men who define what’s sexy for women already,..

    You know, I truly question this. Certainly women can not dictate what men find attractive, but our ability to attract a man rests on our ability to understand what men find attractive. Any women who has attracted a good guy, locked him down and held on to him for an extended period of time has a pretty good idea of what like.

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

      Certainly women can not dictate what men find attractive, but our ability to attract a man rests on our ability to understand what men find attractive.

      The idea that women don’t understand what men want assumes that women are 1) blind: We don’t notice which women get a lot of male attention, and 2) Can’t read: have no access to the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition or Maxim’s Top 100.

      Rollo assumes that because some women wear their hair short or dress modestly they have no idea what men like, and it makes him angry that women might choose to present themselves without regard for the male gaze.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Han: “Because I am a sympathetic and empathetic kind of guy at heart.”

    Why? What do they do for you? Or maybe are you high value enough, that women treat you well, when there’s nothing to gain from it? So strange.

    Han: “I also care about the delta (average) guys and the schlubs, like Sam on Game of Thrones.”

    I don’t question that, that’s different.

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

      @OTC

      Why? What do they do for you? Or maybe are you high value enough, that women treat you well, when there’s nothing to gain from it? So strange.

      Do you have any idea how agentic/narcissistic this sounds? It’s all about you and what you can “get” from other people.

  • Russ in Texas

    @J#303: given the occasionally wildly different standards of beauty (I want to hurl when I pass a Victoria’s Secret, for instance), I’m not sure the dichotomy is really meaningful.

    Karinthy Frigyes comes to mind…. “How could woman and man understand each other? They want different things: the woman wants the man, and the man wants the woman.”

    :)

  • HanSolo

    @OffTheCuff

    Why am I empathetic and sympathetic? That’s like asking why the sky is blue*. I just am.

    Going into it a bit more, I just have a giving and caring personality beneath my sometimes very logical and fact-oriented manner. Unfortunately, in the past that led me to being too giving with women and they took that as me being needy and lower value (and there was a bit of actual neediness there too). So, developing more self-value and inner game has made me less giving up front and helped with attracting women.

    I’m not religious anymore but part of me still believes in selfless love and that it can help bring out similar feelings in the goodhearted. But, I have learned to be more careful with whom I share that, especially in a romantic way. But as to someone who really needs help I’m still there for them.

    I just don’t evaluate everything in terms of what is in it for me. In a sense, just being my best self is reward enough, and having love, empathy and sympathy is part of that best self.

    I guess I just have a lot of love in my core and believe it can transform part of the world, if only for moments at a time and with select people. But I’m not an idealist. The world would be better off without some people. I wish Joffrey would have been killed by Aria at the beginning of Game of Thrones. But then again, like Gandolf says to Frodo, I don’t feel wise enough in most cases to know who should and shouldn’t, but some people seem like obvious cases, like Hitler.

    *That was meant rhetorically. As a physicist I do understand the reason why it is blue. lol

  • Jesse

    My interest in these pictures of Anne has certainly been piqued. (Not expecting anything – I understand the confidentiality involved and all that.) I don’t consider Kate Upton to be extremely attractive. She’s not ugly, but rather plain in my view.

    PS: Ms. Walsh, I just wanted to send my best wishes. I’m not really the target demographic for this site (20 year-old male), but I find these sociological things mildly stimulating so I enjoy checking your site from time to time. This is my first post here. To be honest my eyes glaze over a lot of the time — X has a crush on Y who may or may not still have feelings for Z who used to be friends with A who is competing with X for… omigawd, what ever are they going to do??? — sorry, just not much for gossip, and I really don’t care what other people are doing. Especially when girls start talking about their love lives.

    Primarily what I do is read the interesting articles and sift through the comments for your writings, because what you’ve got to say is interesting, and you seem sweet. I like you. Cheers. Happy holidays too.

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

      @Jesse

      Thanks so much for checking in, I appreciate that! I’m glad you enjoy HUS on occasion, and would love for you to comment again if the mood strikes! I’ll give you a holiday treat, since you are not a Kate Upton fan. Did you notice that in the post I referred to Kate Upton on a good day? That’s because she’s the most photoshopped model in the world. Here she is on a bad day:

      ku

      ku1

      kut

      The letter writer looks a lot like this:

      kuy

  • HanSolo

    @Jesse

    Well there’s Kate Upton: http://cdn1.gossipcenter.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/story_header/photos/kate-upton-111912sp.jpg

    And then there’s Kate Upton:
    http://faystyle.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Kate-Upton-GQ-Scans.jpg

    In the first picture she’s not that great while in the 2nd she’s very hot IMO. But I wonder if they photoshopped her face to be narrower in the 2nd or if she just was chubbier in the first pic.

    I personally am somewhat skeptical of other people’s ratings of women because most of the time, especially when it’s another woman giving the rating, I build up these expectations only to have them disappointed.

    I’m kind of dating a girl right now and she went on about how her friend is soooo gorgeous. Then I met her friend and she was a 7.5.

    I had a roommate once who was swooning over and in love with this girl that I was dating (and thought she was very pretty) while I was debating if she was cute enough. Actually, happened with him and two girls so I soon learned to discount his ratings. Now he thought the 9’s in my eyes were gorgeous too but probably would have said they were more like 10’s.

    And yes, pvw, you can rag on me some more for being an insensitive bastard who is ruining things for all women. ;)

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

      I personally am somewhat skeptical of other people’s ratings of women because most of the time, especially when it’s another woman giving the rating, I build up these expectations only to have them disappointed.

      That’s funny, I have found you to be a very easy grader. :P

  • pvw

    At Hans Solo, huh?

  • HanSolo

    @pvw

    Maybe I’m confusing you with someone else. If so, my apologies. Actually, I am confusing you, so forgive me. Hmmm, now I feel like a jerk.

  • http://dannyfrom504.wordpress.com dannyfrom504

    am, am i still allowed to post Tia?

    i see and deal with this attitude all the time. usually from 7-9’s in their early 20’s. and in most case i blame guys for constantly kissing said girls asses and fawning over how “hot” she is. but they can’t help but respond to a guy that treats them like shit. you become the “i can fix him” guy.

    trust me, there’s no rational reason for me to close the girls that i do. i have the sex appeal of stomach cancer.

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

      @danny

      am, am i still allowed to post Tia?

      Of course! Why wouldn’t you be?

      but they can’t help but respond to a guy that treats them like shit. you become the “i can fix him” guy.

      But Stephen did not treat her like shit. He just treated himself with respect. He never fawned over her or was supplicating. There is no push pull here. When she texted yesterday he said he really wants to see her. He accepted her apology with grace, and they made a plan.

      Stephen’s behavior should be the norm. He is a dad, not a cad.

      Anne has no interest in a man she has to “fix.” The first thing she said is that he has the qualities of a great husband and father, something she doesn’t often see.

      Overall, no Game, just common sense. Nothing to see here.

  • Emily

    @ Anna,

    Congrats!!!! (Also: wow, you MUST be hot to be able to pull that off!!!!) I know we were all a bit hard on you, but hopefully the tough love paid off. Good luck! :)

    >> “Instilling dread of relationship loss as a *reaction* to shitty behavior
    Instilling dread of relationship loss as a proactive emotional manipulation
    #1 is called “I’m not putting up with puerile shit.”
    #2 is called “treating your woman like shit.””

    +1. #1 is perfectly reasonable, but I’d rather buy cats than deal with #2 (and I hate cats!)

    HanSolo (308),
    There’s a study somewhere (I’m too lazy to find it) that said that older women are better at guessing which women men will find attractive. Maybe with the younger women, it’s a subconscious intrasexual competition thing? ie. They don’t want to “build up” the girls who are already hotter than them? …just a thought. Either way, it’s interesting stuff.

  • HanSolo

    @Emily

    Nooooo! Not another study. I refuse to analyze any more studies. ;)

    But, that does sound interesting.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    “Honestly, I think it’s a bit over the top to start diagnosing Anne with not having her shit together. She wrote for strategic advice, I gave it. I’m not her therapist. I included some reality checks around what’s fair, what this might look like from his POV, and how she might effect a meeting.”

    Sounds like she got past this point without any issue, which is good. My comments weren’t written with the assumption that she was off kilter in any serious way, just that she needed to do some thinking about how she tends to react to these situations. By her own admission she ended up temporarily “going out of her mind” about something that anyone who has enough self-control to sit down and get their emotions in check can see clearly. She reacted the way her world conditioned her to (external influences), and luckily this time, she didn’t have to learn the hard way, as say a situation where she was deeply invested in a long term relationship, and tried to pull the same “withhold” game, bruised something really valuable to her and had to figure out how to repair it. The thing that I think both ADBG and I were getting at, is that someone who has the inner piece down won’t get thrown by something like this, because they won’t be reacting out of fear of loss (or a need to reassure themselves that they are worthy), and they will have the confidence to own when they’re wrong and realize that it doesn’t make you weak to admit it. That is what I meant all along by it “coming from the right place” and not just doing what works because it gets you results. We don’t know Anne, or what she’s like, but this situation points to a classic case of someone getting their expectations and self-beliefs checked. Notice that this was a case of “Beautiful Women Must Try Harder”, but not in the way the title suggests- sounds a lot like she had to try harder to manage the way she handled things. For someone whose experience is mostly one of people validating them, like most attractive women, it’s even more important to focus on what’s inside. Maybe you’ve posted on this, if not, it’d be something to think about.

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

      @BroHamlet

      The thing that I think both ADBG and I were getting at, is that someone who has the inner piece down won’t get thrown by something like this, because they won’t be reacting out of fear of loss (or a need to reassure themselves that they are worthy), and they will have the confidence to own when they’re wrong and realize that it doesn’t make you weak to admit it. That is what I meant all along by it “coming from the right place” and not just doing what works because it gets you results. We don’t know Anne, or what she’s like, but this situation points to a classic case of someone getting their expectations and self-beliefs checked.

      Yes, I cosign this. I hope Anne will reflect and learn something from this experience. If not, this will go south again soon.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Suzan #294

    I’m gonna reinforce my pants, and then I’m gonna mow your flowerbeds as well.

    Bahahaha .

  • Just1Z

    @J
    “A pretty girl got a comeuppance; let the fapping begin”
    now that was pretty good, but how about

    begin -> commence

    so,
    “A pretty girl got a comeuppance; let the fapping commence”
    I just think that it flows better (YMMV)

    If I had the skills I’d consider re-jigging this classic’s words
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-84jOEmCf4
    SFW (in this version)

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

      “A pretty girl got a comeuppance; let the fapping commence”

      Yes, this does have a nice ring to it.

      Yesterday I was baffled by the appearance of PUA types, but it must be this. They were aroused by Anne’s agony. It’s also noteworthy how anxious they were to chalk this up as a Game success story. When it’s the opposite – the rare story of a high value male who has good character to go with his high self-esteem. No need for manipulation on his part whatsoever – just reinforcing the behavior he liked, and withholding reinforcement for the behavior he didn’t.

  • szopen

    @underdog

    I call female projection on this one. Guys will always pursue the path of least resistance when it comes to sex. Men don’t spend billions on porn and prostitutes for the emotional roller coaster.

    You are wrong. I saw too many crazy girls with no looks, who were constantly besieged by swarms of males. I’ve already described one such girl, who was ugly. It may not work for you, but many males fell (though for most of them this is only temporary) into that.

  • Underdog

    @szopen

    I’ve never seen such thing. But these swarms of males you speak of, are they alphas with options or betas without options?

    @Russ in Texas

    Just like Susan, your problem with dread game is not tactic, but intent.

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

      Just like Susan, your problem with dread game is not tactic, but intent.

      You cannot separate the two. The intent to manipulate by providing false information is a prerequisite to dread game. Dread game is deceit, a deliberate injury to another person in the interest of personal gain.

  • ThanksForTheLaughs

    ” A man builds. A parasite asks “Where is my share?”

    These ten words explain my POV perfectly.”

    So you’re saying that the only parasites you want living in this society is that charming parasite called ”woman”? Last I heard the vast majority of women do not produce anything. They do not create. They do not motivate men to do great things(Alexander The Great, Bonaparte etc; Helen of Troy only inspired senseless bloodshed).

    They steal male attention in exchange of nothing. They steal alimony and mommy support(child-support). They take away the man’s house. They take away the man’s youth and health.

    Susan Walsh, you’re gonna delete this post, but why would what a 50-something think of me bother me in the slightest? I’m a man. I am not a pussy-chaser like these 30-50 year old low self-esteem boys that are still seeking their mommies approval, and I’m not one of these white knights that think women are spice and everything nice.

    I’m probably the only honest guy you’ll ever ”meet” on this feminist blog of yours. I am always amazed at how you claim one thing, to be on men’s side, but you can never control your true nature. You always let it come to the surface. Anne is a 9. She deserves the best of the best. But the guy she ”wants” is short and not handsome. Therefore he is a 3-4. But he’s rich. That makes him a 9-10?

    Wouldn’t it be easier for you to inform your male readership that what women want is money, and all of the banging they do with the Alpha(not the PUA’s, those don’t get any at all) is just to.. huh, learn what they want in a husband an a father for their kids?!

    Hilarious. PUA’S, ”conservative women(cough, cough”,) MGTOWS and MRAS. The vast majority of you would be spending some good years in an asylium if you were to come out and tell the doctors 1% of your crazy beliefs.

    ”I guess you aren’t yanking our chains. What would she count as today?”

    Probably a 5. Don’t you know that these armchair casanovas spend their entire days banging hot babes level 100 on world of warcraft?

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

      @Thanks for the laughs

      Anne is a 9. She deserves the best of the best. But the guy she ”wants” is short and not handsome. Therefore he is a 3-4. But he’s rich. That makes him a 9-10?

      You lack understanding.

      Anne’s looks do not entitle her to anything. It is not a question of what she deserves. Her looks are an asset she may deploy in the SMP to get a man of high value. Alone they are unlikely to get her more than a STR. For commitment, other qualities are required, as she now knows.

      But the guy she ”wants” is short and not handsome. Therefore he is a 3-4.

      Not to her. She’s crazy about him. She said she had butterflies the night they met, and that she’s never laughed so much on a first date. He is confident, funny, and smart. She is obviously very physically attracted to him – and she stated that she believes other women are also.

      But he’s rich. That makes him a 9-10?

      They’re from the same social class. This is assortative mating. But even if it wasn’t, the truth is that occupational status is the strongest female attraction cue – it trumps looks. Sorry not sorry.

  • Emily

    >> “You are wrong. I saw too many crazy girls with no looks, who were constantly besieged by swarms of males. I’ve already described one such girl, who was ugly. It may not work for you, but many males fell (though for most of them this is only temporary) into that.”

    Yeah, I think it’s really a “niche market” thing. Most guys will stay faaaaaaaaar away from the really crazy girls, but there’s a minority of guys who love them. I’ve seen many crazy girls punch well above their weight in SMV. That being said, I don’t think this is a “Girl Game” technique that can be faked. I think the crazies and the crazy-lovers are best left alone to do their own thing. :P

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

      That being said, I don’t think this is a “Girl Game” technique that can be faked. I think the crazies and the crazy-lovers are best left alone to do their own thing.

      This cracked me up. I guess I won’t be writing a post on How to Get the Guy By Acting Insane.

  • szopen

    @underdog
    I have no idea. I just report what i have seen with my own eyes. My friend was going crazy about one girl, but when he has showed me her photo I was unable to say why she even laid his eyes on her. Then, when one day i visited the city when she lived and I met her, I understood immedietely. She was damn ugly, has no body to speak of, yet, when she entered the room, no other girls existed. At one moment she started to pretend to be a dog (no kidding), yes, she really was that crazy. You could never tell whether she was interested in someone, or not, she sent mixed signals to everyone around her. I was in love with some other girl at that time, which may explain I was not under her spell, some other guys were making fun of her (but still, while she was in the room, also those were only talking to her and about her), but there were always few guys who couldn’t take their eyes of her. She was really, really crazy.

    I am catching up with the comments here. I find interesting that one commenter said that male alphas and betas thinking differently, while still seeming to insist to all females think alike :)

  • Iggles

    @ HanSolo:

    I personally am somewhat skeptical of other people’s ratings of women…

    I had a roommate once who was swooning over and in love with this girl that I was dating (and thought she was very pretty) while I was debating if she was cute enough. Actually, happened with him and two girls so I soon learned to discount his ratings. Now he thought the 9′s in my eyes were gorgeous too but probably would have said they were more like 10′s.

    Online I found ratings for SMV to be pretty subjective. (I’ve never heard anyone give a 1-10 rating of attractiveness IRL..) Some of the women I’ve seen rated highly by guys are rather plain.

    Likewise, IRL my friends and I have different tastes in guys. Someone they think is hot I may find “meh”, and a guy I think is hot they may not. It’s always makes me laugh, but I think it’s great we don’t go for the same guys.

    Overall aside from the handful of people who are considered universally attractive, there’s a lot of variation as to who ranks as a 7, 8, or 9. Personal tastes has quite an influence. YMMV..

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Re: parasitic women. I think we have gone over this before. Women create life. Men create conditions conducive to life. Those are the roles that enabled humans to survive until now, when various modern advances that men have created are making it easier to stay alive.

    But it is very fragile. All it takes is for a critical mass of people to stop vaccinating their kids or for a new mutation to come along on an infectious disease that is deadly but has a longer incubation period, to potentially wipe out a big portion of the population.

    Anyway, men who care more about physical, outer beauty over character, empathy and wife/mother qualities are going to find more “parasitic women” who will leech more life than give it. That’s a tough break. There are men who go for a balance and don’t have such complaints, just like women who don’t go after super-alphas then complain about all men.

  • Kathy

    J “Certainly women can not dictate what men find attractive, but our ability to attract a man rests on our ability to understand what men find attractive.”

    Susan” The idea that women don’t understand what men want assumes that women are 1) blind: We don’t notice which women get a lot of male attention, and 2) Can’t read: have no access to the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition or Maxim’s Top 100. ”

    Yep! We women ain’t stoopid.

    I have always been genuinely interested in people, anyway. I am a good listener.

    Men like a good listener.

    Never had any trouble getting male attention. ;)

  • Höllenhund

    Botticelli’s Venus would probably be rated a 7 today, especially by men that are 9s and 10s. Her tits are too small, thighs too thick, hips too wide for her to be a 9 or 10. The standards of both men and women have changed in 500 years, is that really surprising?

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

      Her tits are too small, thighs too thick, hips too wide for her to be a 9 or 10. The standards of both men and women have changed in 500 years, is that really surprising?

      Like I said, you prefer the rexy version on the right.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @ThanksForTheLaughs

    … spending some good years in an asylium …

    You contagium. You must go to the hospitium, for you hafnium breathium helium … or else you get a eulogium …

  • Kathy

    Well, now we know why you don’t have a woman, HH.

    Too picky ;)

    Her tits too small etc..?

    Not all men care about big tits ya know. :D

  • szopen

    @Kathy
    Exactly :) I prefer large ass over big tits :)

  • Höllenhund

    The word ‘parasite’ had meaning when everybody was expected to sacrifice for the common good through marriage, work etc. That no longer happens. Western civilization has been eating the seed corn for 40 years, eating up the wealth created by the bygone patriarchy. Now pretty much everyone is a parasite: the government, NAMs, big corporations, unions, single women, oligarchs etc., sacrificing their future and piling up debt to live beyond their means, here and now. Many PUAs aren’t contributing much to the tax base, but that pretty much applies to everyone else. They aren’t outliners.

  • Höllenhund

    Kathy apparently cannot be bothered to read the comments she’s responding to. What I said was that Botticelli’s Venus would have problems getting into an LTR with a 9 or a 10, because she wouldn’t be considered a 9 or 10. The top men would use her for casual sex, inside or outside soft harems; they wouldn’t wife her up.

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

      What I said was that Botticelli’s Venus would have problems getting into an LTR with a 9 or a 10, because she wouldn’t be considered a 9 or 10. The top men would use her for casual sex, inside or outside soft harems; they wouldn’t wife her up.

      This is perhaps the most bizarre comment ever left on this blog. How is it possible we are dissing Venus as a mere 7? Or even discussing Venus’ SMV?

      What’s next, a comment on the low SMV of the Madonna of Bruges?

  • Höllenhund

    ” The idea that women don’t understand what men want assumes that women are 1) blind: We don’t notice which women get a lot of male attention, and 2) Can’t read: have no access to the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition or Maxim’s Top 100.”

    Most Western women have absolutely no idea how to elicit commitment from the men they’re attracted to. And they won’t learn about this in Maxim or Sports Illustrated.

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

      Most Western women have absolutely no idea how to elicit commitment from the men they’re attracted to.

      That’s a different issue. We were talking about SMV, not MMV.

  • Kathy

    “The top men would use her for casual sex, inside or outside soft harems; they wouldn’t wife her up.”

    Still not getting it, eh, HH?

  • Höllenhund

    “There are about 60 male “regulars” here, and none of them fits that description. I feel confident that my female readers are getting good and useful information from them.”

    I’m sure you’ve noticed that you’re attracting four types of male commenters:

    1. Anti-feminist beta chumps like deti and Ted who keep trying to logically, analytically explain stuff in a non-offensive way, getting exactly nowhere.
    2. The manosphere bloggers and readers who keep returning because you keep picking fights with them.
    3. Men like me and Obsidian who cannot be bothered to court your or your readers’ approval; we aren’t here to portray ourselves as good, polite betas; we’re here to preach the truth, telling it like it is.
    4. The beta enemies of the manosphere who come here to tell women what they want to hear.

    There’s pretty much only one group of males completely absent: the top men that your readers WANT to show up and talk to them in a style that women like. You know, the male unicorns: perfect mix of alpha and beta and all that, “sexy and dependable” (as if something like that actually existed) etc. These are one group that your readers want to interact with online. But they’re nowhere to be seen. What’s your explanation? Your male commenters have one thing in common: they aren’t inducing the tingles. That’s why your readers find them annoying.

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

      @HH

      Hmmm, I think you plagiarized this list. Didn’t I see that somewhere as written by deti?

      1. Anti-feminist beta chumps like deti and Ted who keep trying to logically, analytically explain stuff in a non-offensive way, getting exactly nowhere.

      Deti knows the problem. Women at the peak of their SMV do not want to hear cautionary tales from middle aged men who have been unlucky in love. Why would they? They may be non-offensive, but they’re also irrelevant.

      2. The manosphere bloggers and readers who keep returning because you keep picking fights with them.

      Like on this thread? You, Rollo and yareallypua are here because I picked a fight in this post about Anne and Stephen? I literally do everything in my power to prevent catching the attention of you guys. That was the original intent of not mentioning certain people here – I hoped that if no one ever said their names they would go away. But you guys just can’t quit me. It would be flattering if you all weren’t such a pain in the ass.

      3. Men like me and Obsidian who cannot be bothered to court your or your readers’ approval; we aren’t here to portray ourselves as good, polite betas; we’re here to preach the truth, telling it like it is.

      No one is listening. Your communication style is so abrasive that everyone tunes out. You announced yourself as an enemy to women years ago.

      4. The beta enemies of the manosphere who come here to tell women what they want to hear.

      I don’t know what this means. I am not aware of any guys here who are enemies of the manosphere. Some may consider it irrelevant, unhelpful, or even weird.

      These are one group that your readers want to interact with online. But they’re nowhere to be seen. What’s your explanation? Your male commenters have one thing in common: they aren’t inducing the tingles.

      That is not true. The male readership here runs the gamut from players to virgins. There is actually a fair amount of flirtation that goes on, haha. Quite a few of the guys are very attractive.

      However, you’re wrong about who the women want to interact with. Women don’t come to HUS to become aroused by males. They come to solve problems. It’s a place where they can get the unvarnished truth from men, some of whom have credibility. You’ll notice that Anne dismissed you three PUA stooges immediately – none of you has credibility because none of you is remotely attractive in your persona. She paid much closer attention to the feedback from the younger guys and the women.

  • Kathy

    “3. Men like me and Obsidian who cannot be bothered to court your or your readers’ approval; we aren’t here to portray ourselves as good, polite betas; we’re here to preach the truth, telling it like it is.”

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha!.

    And here I was thinking that the Hellhound was a boring old fart with no sense of humour. ;)

  • Underdog

    @ Susan:

    “You cannot separate the two. The intent to manipulate by providing false information is a prerequisite to dread game. Dread game is deceit, a deliberate injury to another person in the interest of personal gain.”

    One of my earlier posts:

    What if Stephen wanted Anne to be his gf but knew that pursuing her would make her lose attraction but freezing her out / giving her anxiety would spike her attraction level? Would you call that fakery and manipulation?

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

      What if Stephen wanted Anne to be his gf but knew that pursuing her would make her lose attraction but freezing her out / giving her anxiety would spike her attraction level? Would you call that fakery and manipulation?

      Yes I would, and I would also call it bad strategy. Once he has given her anxiety, his LTR value has plummeted. The solution is not to freeze someone out or induce anxiety or jealousy. That reflects an attitude of scarcity. You can’t make it so you’ll fake it. Far more effective is what Stephen actually did, which was nothing more than declining to supplicate.

  • Höllenhund

    The rexy version on the right is too skinny. Good proportions, but still skinny without ass or breasts. A 6 or a 7, definitely not a 10.

  • Just1Z

    @Susan

    I wish to complain in the strongest manner. I am, in fact, considering writing to my M.P. (Member of Paliament) to register my utter outrage over your duping of me and the other guys here.

    Why did nobody tell me that this was a feminist blog?

    I worked out long ago that it wasn’t in the manosphere, the clue being that it never claimed to be in the manosphere.

    Why didn’t you tell me? Your feminine wiles and intelligence far beyond the feminist standard (pretty low bar, I’ll admit – that’s why I said ‘far beyond’) fooled me.

    damn…

  • Kathy

    Boy, I’d love to see a pic of HH, Susan.

    I kinda have this pic in mind, as to how he looks. :)

    http://wallpaperswide.com/rumpelstiltskin_shrek_forever_after-wallpapers.html

  • Just1Z

    @ThanksForTheLaughs

    thanks for
    “I’m probably the only honest guy you’ll ever ”meet” on this feminist blog of yours.”

    I never knew that this was a fime-nest of iniquity, or that I was a lying twat.

    thank the lord that you were here to set me straight on both

  • Kathy

    Heh heh heh.
    Just1Z?
    You are way to smart to be fooled my friend. ;)

  • Höllenhund

    “How is it possible we are dissing Venus as a mere 7? Or even discussing Venus’ SMV?”

    Because you brought up the issue.
    Look at any piece of entertainment that is specifically directed at men and features attractive women. Do they look like the medieval Venus? Not 100%. They have bigger tits and more slender bodies. Venus wouldn’t be on the top of the female sexual hierarchy today. In the upper crust, but not the top.

    “We were talking about SMV, not MMV.”

    Do Anne and your other female readers care about their MMV or their SMV more? You know the answer.

  • Just1Z

    @Kathy
    I married my now ex-wife… ’nuff said?

  • Kathy

    Nobody is perfect, mate. Least of all me.
    I married my ( first ) now ex- husband, too. ;)

  • Sai

    “I want to hurl when I pass a Victoria’s Secret, for instance”
    I still can’t bring myself to go in one. It also seems to me that Bath and Body Works is trying to become more like them, which makes me sad.

    I would like to join the other posters asking for more information on developing one’s insides. I have the mental image of smiling too long without meaning it, then quitting because it feels like a lie and glaring the rest of the day to compensate.

    @HH
    “Now pretty much everyone is a parasite: the government, NAMs, big corporations, unions, single women, oligarchs”
    ALL of groups are really parasites? I guess I understand the government part, but… Don’t you contribute if you avoid debt and pay taxes, married or not?

    “Your male commenters have one thing in common: they aren’t inducing the tingles. That’s why your readers find them annoying.”
    I know I should know this at this point, but what are these tingles and how do we get them online? (Is Ted D that unpopular? I like him…)

    So even Venus is just a 7 now… Thanks for your honesty. I mean it. But I’m going to crawl away and eat cake.

    (I miss Dr. F., can you tell?)

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

      I know I should know this at this point, but what are these tingles and how do we get them online?

      Good question. The idea that women read at HUS to tingle alone at their laptops while the males comment is laughable.

  • Just1Z

    @Kathy
    actually, I think that that was a little unfair – she wasn’t trying to fool me. she just changed a year or so after marriage.

    I shouldn’t have married her either way, but she wasn’t dishonest at the time of marriage.

    So, a piccy of your son in the sunshine? (it is a small picture – if I’m wrong, please forgive me!)
    we’re on flood alert here (again) luckily I:
    a) have plenty of scuba equipment
    b) live on a hill

  • yareallypua

    “Yesterday I was baffled by the appearance of PUA types, but it must be this”

    lol brilliant hamster spinning. It must be exhausted.

    Congratulations, Anne will be taking it up the pooper by a guy who used Game tactics on her. Couldn’t have asked for a better advertisement.

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

      Anne will be taking it up the pooper by a guy who used Game tactics on her.

      Classy.

  • Kathy

    Yes I do remember you mentioning that before Just.:-(
    Yep that’s my great little 12 year old bloke.
    He was out in our back yard helping the fig tree shed it’s renaining few leaves back in June.:-D

  • Höllenhund

    “Hmmm, I think you plagiarized this list. Didn’t I see that somewhere as written by deti?”

    I posted the same thing here before but you deleted it.

    “Women at the peak of their SMV do not want to hear cautionary tales from middle aged men who have been unlucky in love. Why would they?”

    That just proves my point. He isn’t generating attraction, thus women write him off as irrelevant. His one cautionary tale about his lying wife is directed at young men. But all his other arguments are directed at young women, to help them avoid the mistakes that turn women into feminist spinsters.

    And they need to hear those arguments.Yeah, they should be packaged into female-speak to get their attention, but they need them nevertheless. From whom will they accept them anyway? Other women at the peak of their SMV? Older women unlucky in love? Or they don’t count either?

    Do you have more information about the current SMP than deti or any other similar man of his age? You don’t. You’re not a bit more credible than him. You base your opinion on studies, statistics and anecdotal evidence. Do you think you’re alone with that?

    “I literally do everything in my power to prevent catching the attention of you guys.”

    You mean like posting criticisms of manosphere arguments? Bringing up topics that you know will get attention from the manosphere first and foremost? Bringing up the manosphere in the comments? Your female commenters do that all the time. Do you ever tell them to stop it? No, you approve of their attitude.

    “Your communication style is so abrasive that everyone tunes out.”

    Most women do. They would tune out anyway. I could sugarcoat my arguments, fart pink baby unicorns and they’d still recoil. Because the arguments contradict their worldview. But again, I’m not talking to them, I’m talking to you and some men.

    “I am not aware of any guys here who are enemies of the manosphere. Some may consider it irrelevant, unhelpful, or even weird.”

    What an important distinction. They aren’t its enemies, they merely show up to attack it and your female readers like it. Yeah, it’s really a big difference.

    “Women don’t come to HUS to become aroused by males. They come to solve problems. It’s a place where they can get the unvarnished truth from men, some of whom have credibility.”

    Which is what I said, in different wording.

    That’s your dilemma. There are men out there whom your female readers’d find credible, due to their social status and skills, ample experience in the SMP, attuned to female communication style etc. But they cannot be bothered to come here and tell the unvarnished truth. (As if women wanted to hear that from anyone!) And the only men who tell unvarnished truths are the ones your readers don’t find credible. So the end result is that your readers aren’t getting an inch closer to the truth. They just keep confirming each other’s emotions in circles.

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

      @HH

      He isn’t generating attraction, thus women write him off as irrelevant.

      No, he’s irrelevant because he knows nothing of the SMP.

      But all his other arguments are directed at young women, to help them avoid the mistakes that turn women into feminist spinsters.

      He’s so wrong so much of the time that his advice is not useful. He has no knowledge of female mistakes or how to avoid them.

      Do you have more information about the current SMP than deti or any other similar man of his age? You don’t. You’re not a bit more credible than him.

      Google Analytics says otherwise. The proof is in my results.

      Bringing up topics that you know will get attention from the manosphere first and foremost? Bringing up the manosphere in the comments? Your female commenters do that all the time.

      My blog is centered on a topic that gets attention from the sphere. I’m not going to tailor my content to appease them. It’s true that people often bring up the sphere in comments, and it’s not just females. Most of the men do as well. I don’t instigate it, but I generally let comment threads go where they will if people are being civil.

      There are men out there whom your female readers’d find credible, due to their social status and skills, ample experience in the SMP, attuned to female communication style etc. But they cannot be bothered to come here and tell the unvarnished truth.

      There are men like that on this thread right now. You don’t recognize them because they don’t share your version of the truth.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Underdog#317:

    That’s risible, and is predicated upon valuing tool over purpose.

    Intent COUNTS.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “This is perhaps the most bizarre comment ever left on this blog. How is it possible we are dissing Venus as a mere 7? Or even discussing Venus’ SMV?”

    I prefer the one on the right.
    Neither are what I would consider much above a 7.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “I didn’t mean you Sweet Ted. I’m referring to the Dark Lords of the sphere. “

    I’ve been rubber necking on this thread since it seems like you already have enough to deal with. But I figured a good chuckle might help. But Sweet Ted?! I’m going to cut and paste that for the next time we get into a tiff. :P

    “The idea that women don’t understand what men want assumes that women are 1) blind: We don’t notice which women get a lot of male attention”

    Not at all. However I’d wager that other than pure sex appeal (physical beauty) and “sluttiness” (her willingness to sex up guys quickly) most woman wouldn’t know why any particular woman does well with the guys. Do they realize that perhaps she is a very sweet person? Very sensual? Sends lots of easy to see IOI’s?

    “2) Can’t read: have no access to the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition or Maxim’s Top 100.”

    Susan really? Are you even suggesting that popular magazines give good relationship advice? I have yet to see any mainstream publication print something other than “50 ways to rock his world in bed!” Of course, perhaps you meant women can SEE what men want? If so, then you’d still be mistaken for many of us out here. I don’t prefer the build of a typical model, even the ones in SI swimsuit addition. I will admit that Maxim does a better job of finding curvy women, but most of them are still far too scrawny. (not to mention scrawny with fake boobs, which to me looks totally ridiculous.)

    “You cannot separate the two. The intent to manipulate by providing false information is a prerequisite to dread game. Dread game is deceit, a deliberate injury to another person in the interest of personal gain.”

    Why does it have to be false information? I mean, I can “run dread game” simply by hitting on another woman when my wife is around. (not saying I would ever intentionally do that!) And FWIW, I still see pulling away emotionally in a relationship as a form of “dread game”, because the idea is to induce dread in her that you might be checking out. (again, not something I would do as a preemptive measure, but something I would DAMN SURE do if my wife started treating me poorly)

    DREAD GAME is instilling a sense of fear of loss in your mate. That can be done for good or bad purposes, and it can be done by deceit or legitimate measures. It is a tool. How you USE that tool is what makes it good/evil. This guy may not have intended to run dread game, but the truth is he did it to an extent, by causing Anna to “dread” losing him. I don’t think it WAS intentional on his part, but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t have worked if it was…

    Re: Kate Upton – yuck. She may be pretty, but that pic of her in a bathing suit was a turn off for me. She just isn’t curvy enough. (in fact, my first thought was that she was about as curvy as a 15yo boy. LOL)

    Lokland – “This should speak volumes to the women about how men were raised.
    What the ladies are defining as self-respect men are defining as evil/dread inducing.”

    +1

    Russ in Texas – “Unlike HanSolo, I’m NOT a sympathetic and empathetic guy at heart: I have busted my ASS to develop those traits, and even I can see the distinction between:
    Instilling dread of relationship loss as a *reaction* to shitty behavior
    Instilling dread of relationship loss as a proactive emotional manipulation
    #1 is called “I’m not putting up with puerile shit.”
    #2 is called “treating your woman like shit.”

    Exactly. I, like you, seem to be pretty lacking in the empathy department and have had to learn it, which I still believe is NOT as good as the real thing. (naturally occurring) However, it does make it easier for me to look at a situation without a ton of emotional baggage, and I think your two points are pretty straight forward. If you are using ‘dread’ as a preemptive means of “keeping your woman in line”, you are a douche. If however, you are using ‘dread’ because a woman is treating you like crap, then to me it is totally justified. IF this guy was using dread (and I’m not sure he was intentionally using anything…) Anne’s behavior prompted it, and it was justified.

    J – “You know, I truly question this. Certainly women can not dictate what men find attractive, but our ability to attract a man rests on our ability to understand what men find attractive. Any women who has attracted a good guy, locked him down and held on to him for an extended period of time has a pretty good idea of what like”

    Eh, I don’t know. If we stripped away all of our learned behaviors and beliefs and went back to living on instinct, we’d still be pairing up and having sex. I think many women (and men) CAN attract a mate, but do they actually know HOW they did so? I can tell you I had no clue of what attracted my ex-wife to me, or I’d NEVER have stopped being that person. I think more often than not, love is a matter of luck simply because most of us have NO IDEA past some very basic principles of what the other sex wants.

    HH – “1. Anti-feminist beta chumps like deti and Ted who keep trying to logically, analytically explain stuff in a non-offensive way, getting exactly nowhere.”

    I wouldn’t say I’m getting nowhere. I realize I’m often banging my head against a brick wall, but deep down I must enjoy it, because I keep coming back for more. Truth is, I learned a lot about myself and my beliefs by doing so. And I learned a bit about what I can/should expect from the women in my life should I ever decide to go “public” with this stuff. By that I mean, I’ve learned that very few woman will even accept the Red Pill and will remain plugged in to the Matrix. Of those that can be unplugged, most won’t accept the alternative view men tend to get from being unplugged. Much of it is just too harsh for their delicate sensibilities. Put another way, women DO NOT want to know what’s behind the curtain, as long as the show is good.

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

      @Ted

      But Sweet Ted?! I’m going to cut and paste that for the next time we get into a tiff.

      Haha, I planted that just for you.

      Of course, perhaps you meant women can SEE what men want? If so, then you’d still be mistaken for many of us out here. I don’t prefer the build of a typical model, even the ones in SI swimsuit addition.

      Yes, that is what I meant. Obviously, there will be some variation in taste, but the popularity, i.e. profitability of those issues makes it clear that most men share their taste.

      Why does it have to be false information? I mean, I can “run dread game” simply by hitting on another woman when my wife is around.

      You’re missing the point about dread game. It’s not your hitting on other women that creates dread (though I’m sure she wouldn’t appreciate it), it’s other women coming after you. That’s the main reason I think this tactic is low value. A woman whose husband has options, or who women find attractive in general, is well aware of it. Acting creepy and inappropriate with other people’s wives just humiliates your wife, it doesn’t make her want to give you a blow job.

  • Underdog

    @Susan

    “Yes I would, and I would also call it bad strategy. Once he has given her anxiety, his LTR value has plummeted. The solution is not to freeze someone out or induce anxiety or jealousy. That reflects an attitude of scarcity. You can’t make it so you’ll fake it. Far more effective is what Stephen actually did, which was nothing more than declining to supplicate.”

    It seems that you are now denying the necessity and effectiveness of game in general. Had Stephen pursued Anne further after she’s been so rude to him, he would’ve been labeled as a desperate, creepy stalker with low SMV chasing after a girl who deleted him off Facebook; and Anne would’ve no doubt viewed him in a lesser light. Instead, he declined to supplicate by freezing her out.

    And if memory serves me, a great deal of comments made by you and others here alluded to the perception that Stephen had high SMV, had options, was LTR material, etc. simply because he cut off contacts and gave Anne a great deal of anxiety.

    There is only one difference between Stephen using dread and a PUA using dread: Stephen used dread as a response to bad behavior while a PUA would use dread to keep attraction constant — even if the girl didn’t deserve it.

    I’ll admit that Stephen’s intent (if is was his intention) was more “fair” than a PUA’s. But their tactics were the same — giving a girl anxiety causes her to think more highly of you and spikes her attraction level.

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

      @Underdog

      Stephen did not “freeze her out.” He responded to all of her texts. All he did was not supplicate to a woman who appeared to be losing interest.

      Self-respect /= dread. Heaven help you if you really can’t see the difference.

  • Ted D

    Sai – “(Is Ted D that unpopular? I like him…)”

    LOL no worries. HH and many other ‘sphere regulars think I’m either a fool wasting my time, or a mangina trying to “save all the wimmenz” because I keep pleading my case to deaf ears.

    I don’t think he was implying I’m not liked, he was implying that I’m brushed off and ignored, which may largely be true. Honestly I don’t care. :P

  • Just1Z

    @Sai
    if you’re going to listen to crazy guys on the web, can I suggest that you stick to Marellus and myself?

  • Höllenhund

    Yes, Ted, that’s what I think. Women see you as a loser in the SMP, and thus consider your opinions on this issue irrelevant. Of course, even if you were a winner in the SMP or even the MMP, women may still find you irrelevant if you contradict their feeeeelings. Athol Kay has more than one online female enemies, for example.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Do you have any idea how agentic/narcissistic this sounds? It’s all about you and what you can “get” from other people.”

    I think there are two types of kind people: chumps who take it on the chin, and people who are high-value enough that they’ll be treated kindly back, pretty much no matter what they do.

    I told you, I am trying to improve my narcissism, as it’s really underdeveloped. As parcel of that, it means self-development to fit into the latter category. Until then, all one can do is play tit-for-tat.

    People on the higher end, or even just above-average, really do experience a completely different universe or something… it’s fascinating to watch.

  • Höllenhund

    By the way, Ted, just to give you another example, you may recall our old pal Brendan who commented here but at one point said on TFAMP’s blog it’s no use doing so anymore so he stopped. There was a time when Susan agreed with his arguments and pimped him as the perfect spokesperson of the Manosphere (or the MRM or whatever).

    But then he started making arguments she didn’t like. So she decided he’s irrelevant, because he’s a middle-aged, divorced man with bad experiences with women, and hasn’t been active in the hook-up scene for two decades or so.

    Of course, it was never a secret that he’s a divorced, middle-aged man. But as long as he made “acceptable” arguments, it didn’t matter. But as soon as he stopped doing that, suddenly it mattered.

    See?

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

      you may recall our old pal Brendan who commented here but at one point said on TFAMP’s blog it’s no use doing so anymore so he stopped.

      No, he specifically said that he would not participate because he disapproved of my asking people not to refer to or link to certain other bloggers, men that he respects.

      Brendan has commented here recently. I wouldn’t call him a regular by any means, but he obviously reads and does comment from time to time.

      But then he started making arguments she didn’t like. So she decided he’s irrelevant, because he’s a middle-aged, divorced man with bad experiences with women, and hasn’t been active in the hook-up scene for two decades or so.

      Not true. I treat Brendan with respect and am interested to know his POV. He has an excellent understanding of gender dynamics, though I don’t agree with him on everything. I view him as far more objective than deti, and far more knowledgeable. He is also very civil and reasonable in debate, which helps his cause.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Ted#366:

    Yeah; working on it HARD, and my wife, who’s a naturally hyper-empathic type, helps a ton. My saving grace is that I’m actually far below normal levels of narcissism. So I’m a weirdo who truly wants the best for everybody around me, but has moderate-poor empathy and not the slightest problem putting a hatchet through somebody’s mouth if that’s what needs to happen. The first part is great; the latter? Well, part of being a grownup is the ability to say “see those people over there? They’re better people than I am.” That’s a leap too far for a narcissist.

    MOST men and women are actually pretty awesome, if you give them a chance and aren’t afraid of their rough spots. Time and time again, if we move forward upon a presumption of good intentions, people will surprise us — positively. (A former Reagan staffer once referred to me as the most cynical man he’d ever met, so it’s not like I’m an easy judge here). PUAs seem to be running with a pop-sociology that we’re all neck-deep-in-dystopia. That’s wrong. We definitely have problems (as anybody who’s been raped, or divorce-raped, knows), but MOST people are neither parasites, nor evil.

    The problem with HH (cf#363) is that he accepts the necessity of tailoring speech to the customer, but disdains it as purple farts and unicorns.
    By doing so he explicitly disrespects his audience, yet wants their attention. That’s, um, “sub-optimal.”

    The vast (VAST) majority of women who run evil, relationship-destroying poop on men do not do so because they wish to be bloodsoaked erinyes feeding on the shattered hearts of the naive. They do so because they’re narcissistic, immature, or have gotten **REALLY SHITTY RELATIONSHIP ADVICE.**

    A narcissist is a falling knife — there’s no point trying to catch that person, unless you enjoy fruitless bleeding. The latter two groups, on the other hand, can be helped.

  • Lokland

    @HH

    “Women see you as a loser in the SMP, and thus consider your opinions on this issue irrelevant.”

    This is generally a good way to look at it.

    If a woman doesn’t want to date a certain type of guy, its best not to listen to that type of guy.

    I do agree though, as a general rule if a woman isn’t attracted, she won’t consider your opinion. That extends beyond this blog though.

  • Lokland

    @OTC

    “People on the higher end, or even just above-average, really do experience a completely different universe or something… it’s fascinating to watch.”

    +1

    Just a thought, your never going to get this message through to those who have never experienced being the one who does more giving than taking in life.

  • Russ in Texas

    Oh, Ted. Thumbs-up on the Schlachta thing, btw. Pretty decent chance we actually know some people in common.

  • Russ in Texas

    Sai: I don’t know about your “insides” issue, but for me, what was very helpful was reading up on Emotional Intelligence.

    It sounds all kinds of corporate-stupid, but I was pleasantly surprised once I got into it in some depth and realized it was quite scientifically based, and very effective. And a ton easier than doing 60 hours of zazen (which seems to get one to a similar place: the old adage “know thyself” seems to have legs).

  • Ted D

    HH – “Women see you as a loser in the SMP, and thus consider your opinions on this issue irrelevant. Of course, even if you were a winner in the SMP or even the MMP, women may still find you irrelevant if you contradict their feeeeelings. Athol Kay has more than one online female enemies, for example.”

    Well being in the company of Athol doesn’t seem so bad! And I don’t care if every other woman in the world sees me as a “loser”, I’m happy with the woman I have, and I know beyond all doubt that if I had to, I could find another woman that wouldn’t see me as a loser at all. To be frank, if I wasn’t happily attached I’d probably be coming at this from a totally different perspective. But, at this point the only dog I have in the fight is my kids, so for me this is all mostly academic.

    “Of course, it was never a secret that he’s a divorced, middle-aged man. But as long as he made “acceptable” arguments, it didn’t matter. But as soon as he stopped doing that, suddenly it mattered.
    See?”

    Yep, I get it. I realize that to a 22yo woman I probably look like an old crazy man yelling at kids to get off my lawn. But you know what? That is their mistake and loss. It is the curse of youth that they simply won’t listen to those that have made mistakes before them, because of course THEY are special snowflakes, and we were raised before electricity was invented. :P

    Lokland – “If a woman doesn’t want to date a certain type of guy, its best not to listen to that type of guy.”

    Strangely enough, this is why I feel like women SHOULD listen to Deti, Desi (although he has vacated the premises), and even myself. On paper I appear to be most of what women claim to want in a man: dependable, caring, protective, reliable, secure, blah blah blah… And, it seems I have much in common with the likes of Cooper and INTJ, who by all appearances should be cleaning up with the ladies. So, it seems to me that IF woman want the Coopers of the world, they SHOULD be listening to the OLDER Coopers of the world when they explain how screwed up stuff is. If they want to truly be happy with a guy like me, they should probably figure out what makes a guy like me tick.

    Now, if they think I’m actually a loser? No harm, no foul. I’ve got my kids, a wife, and a relatively good life. So whether or not they listen won’t hurt my feelings. It really is their loss.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Geee…….The return of the stone age phallocracy triad, aka Don Tomassi and Sancho Jareally-oink, riding a hollenhorse, on their new crusade to preaching misogyny. And now this thankforthelaughter. Quest ion for all out here: Do you have special laboratories were you breed them overthere?

    @thanksforthelaughter.
    Your comments on women sound eerily close to these ones:
    “All the women of Belton are venimous vipers! See what you did to me?!”
    “Hiding from me, bitch?”
    “It’s payback day!!”
    “Take that, bitch!”
    -G. Hennard, on oct 16, 1991, sipping coffee at Luby’s cafeteria.
    Keep up your mental state as such, and you’ll be in his company somewhere.

    @HUS: Is this Roissy’s dread game roadmap for real??? So that’s what’s this manosphere everybody was mentioning advocates? This is nothing else than an ABC for sadism.
    I’ve got an entertaining solution for all the likes of Thanksfor and Valerie Solanas: Let’s distribute guns to them all and lock them in together in a stadium…Who knows, maybe they’ll start dancing polka together.

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

      @Damien

      @HUS: Is this Roissy’s dread game roadmap for real??? So that’s what’s this manosphere everybody was mentioning advocates? This is nothing else than an ABC for sadism.

      That’s just the start. Unfortunately, Roissy deleted his most overtly sadistic posts so I can’t link to them. I do recall his stating that he enjoys making bitches writhe in pain as he penetrates them anally.

      Re his dread post, most men will excuse it by saying, “Haha, that is satire.” I don’t buy it, as he references the need for dread almost continuously. Some of the advice is very peculiar – in a recent post about how to be playful in a way that will make women tingle, he recommended putting a sign on her back in the morning that says “kick me.” I haven’t seen a male do that since my babysitting days.

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

    @Rollo

    The first thing I should make clear is that I view Roissy’s post as the defining one on Dread Game. Yours is derivative. Second, this essay on Dread, while objectionable, is not the one I recall where you specifically talked about instigating anxiety and jealousy in Mrs. Tomassi by flirting with other women in her presence. I believe you sprinkled a lot of “heh heh”s around in that one. I’m not going to go looking for it, I don’t even know whether it is still up.

    I have always maintained that deliberately provoking jealousy or anxiety in a loved one is unacceptable because you are inflicting pain for personal gain – to keep the upper hand. Such manipulative tactics prevent healthy relationships.

    I also find Dread lame from a strategic standpoint – the women who will reward Roissy’s tactics are the same women who stay with men who beat them. To any woman with healthy self-esteem – not excessive, but healthy – such obvious schoolboy tactics are a massive DLV.

    And while we can debate the details of what constitutes a ‘natural’, what you can’t debate is the effectiveness and the validity of the behaviors he displayed. By posting this situation and your own take on it, you’ve validated the underlying dynamics of Game, regardless of whether Steven intended to use it or not.

    Stephen has tight Game, no question, and I acknowledged both the effectiveness and the reasonableness of his behavior and responses. I am hardly opposed to men exercising self-respect and refusing to supplicate. If you want to call that Game, it’s fine with me.

    Where I draw the line is in characterizing Stephen’s behavior as deliberately manipulative or designed to instill dread. There was no arbitrary break in communication like Roissy recommends – he simply stopped communicating when she demonstrated a lack of interest. He knew better than to go begging. Has it come to that? Not begging = Game?

    By my reading of Anne’s letter (judiciously edited for publication) he has never negged her, flirted with another woman in front of her, ignored her, used push pull, attempted to sexually escalate with dominance, held back in expressing how much he likes her, or otherwise “gamed” her. It’s clear from her recent comments that she believes your claims are way off the mark.

  • Ted D

    Damien Vulaume – Don’t make any judgements about the “manosphere” based purely on comments here. If you want an objective view, my suggestion is go read for yourself and decide.

    I’ve said before that I can see kernals of truth in the ‘sphere, but much of it is wrapped in bitterness and anger. And keep in mind, Roissy is pretty much 100% PUA, so his writing will be harsh and directed at guys who’s primary goal in life is to bet laid. If you aren’t concerned with how you treat others, the path of least resistance in getting more sex is pretty simple, and “dread game” as presented by him reflects that.

    However, that DOES NOT mean that “dread game” is NOT a useful tool for men that want nothing more than to get and stay happily married. It is a tool like any other, and the morality of it comes down to how you USE that tool. I disagree with Susan when it comes to “dread”, because I can see it as something I *could* use if the occasion presented itself. If my wife for some reason started treating me poorly, “dread” might be one tool I’d use to rectify the situation. I don’t walk around looking for ways to make her fearful or upset, but I like having options, and “dread” is just one of many options I’d have available should the need arise.

    Be warned: you’ll find a LOT of harsh stuff in the ‘sphere. If you decide to educate yourself on it, do your best to set aside your personal feelings on the issues and look at them objectively. Some of this stuff still upsets my “delicate sensibilities”, but that doesn’t mean they are wrong. It simply means that my goals do not align with the uses prescribed for the tool in question.

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

      If my wife for some reason started treating me poorly, “dread” might be one tool I’d use to rectify the situation.

      But that is not how Dread game is peddled. It is recommended as a preventative strategy – a way to keep your woman on her toes so that you never have to worry about being treated poorly.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “Where I draw the line is in characterizing Stephen’s behavior as deliberately manipulative or designed to instill dread. ”

    But the point you are missing is: even IF Stephen was not intentionally running “dread game”, the results he got WOULD BE THE SAME if he was doing it intentionally. His behavior does tend to show how effective dread game can be. Whether or not it is morally acceptable to do so is a completely different matter. And, since you try to stay away from morality conversations, I find it odd that you seem to be taking it in that direction…

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

      even IF Stephen was not intentionally running “dread game”, the results he got WOULD BE THE SAME if he was doing it intentionally.

      We don’t know what his results would be, because he didn’t do anything to provoke anxiety or jealousy. He simply told Anne to contact him when she wanted to see him. She did not do that until yesterday, and he expressed strong interest in getting together.

      All Stephen did was not be a pussy. Good for him, but calling that instilling dread or making her squirm is silly. He simply refused to supplicate and put the ball in her court. She resisted, but after reading here did take the initiative.

      This post has nothing to do with Game. If anything, it addresses Girl Game, which is emotional escalation, something that Anne needs to do pronto.

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

      @Ted

      Whether or not it is morally acceptable to do so is a completely different matter. And, since you try to stay away from morality conversations, I find it odd that you seem to be taking it in that direction…

      I avoid conversations about whether sex is moral. I do not stay away from conversations about treating others with respect and honesty. If I did, I would hamstring myself and be unable to warn women about cads, a large part of what I find necessary.

  • LJ

    “I also find Dread lame from a strategic standpoint – the women who will reward Roissy’s tactics are the same women who stay with men who beat them. To any woman with healthy self-esteem – not excessive, but healthy – such obvious schoolboy tactics are a massive DLV.”

    Yes — any woman with healthy self-esteem/ self-respect would dump a man on the spot for trying any of that stuff in the Roissy article. But those women aren’t their target population, are they?

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Ted: “On paper I appear to be most of what women claim to want in a man […] And, it seems I have much in common with the likes of Cooper and INTJ, who by all appearances should be cleaning up with the ladies.”

    As you correctly observe, that means nothing. And they (rightly) won’t listen to Cooper, who ARE their age. To have them listen to you, requires future time-orientation, which few people have.

    The only way is for someone to make them feel good and then slyly deliver the message, suitably encoded. Either Susan can do that, or men like Jason can do that. Your SMV is your credibility.

  • LJ

    “But the point you are missing is: even IF Stephen was not intentionally running “dread game”, the results he got WOULD BE THE SAME if he was doing it intentionally. His behavior does tend to show how effective dread game can be. ”

    You really think that if Stephen were actually an insecure guy, clueless about women, trying to follow a script he read on a website to build up his “notch” count … that Anne wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between that and a confident, secure guy whose looking for a healthy relationship with a woman who treats him well?

  • Ted D

    OTC – all true. Again, it’s their loss. But they can’t say later they didn’t know, or at least that no one tried to tell them. It doesn’t matter to me whether or not anyone thinks I’m “credible” since most of what I write is opinion based. Thing is, it seems there are plenty of younger men that agree with my POV, and if women want those men, they’ll need to figure out what those men want and need.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Ted D:
    No thanks, I don’t need their teachings, nor do I feel the need to turn into some low grade hunter looking for bimbos. I’m quite a player myself, or, rather, I was. But not the kind they want to breed at Roissy or elsewhere. I gave a look at that manosphere, and while few but some of their strategic advices are sound, I verified that myself, most of it is however based on misogynous assumptions. I’m not even talking about the comments you find there…By comparison, Sancho yareally sounds like a preachy lilly advocating christian love between brothers and sisters.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Re: inner game, Dread, self-esteem, etc. Let’s talk about masturbation, shall we?

    Some of the most LTR-successful guys that I know are both attractive and *almost* ambivalent about whether or not they have sex with their girlfriends/wives or fap off to porn. They don’t tell their partners about this nonchalance, but it’s apparently an important aspect of how they retain hand. I suppose that it’s the monogamous guy’s equivalent of having multiple sexual options.

    This is how the skilled STR and LTR men can have similar negotiation styles: both have very high BATNAs and can walk away from a bad deal at any time. When a player does it, the woman knows that he could be sexting the cocktail waitress on the way home. When the LTR guy does it, the woman may not know that he is going to pour himself a Scotch and have a satisfying pull or two, and then enjoy a clear-headed, private serenity for a few hours.

    Chronically under-discussed, strategic masturbation may truly be man’s best friend. Like an anger management practice that has someone count to 10 before responding to an insult or an SAS commando team putting a brew on before making important mission-planning decisions, the strategic fapper may take a momentary time-out to jack it before responding to relationship tensions. He can then act from a position of personal strength, satiety, perhaps even ironic detachment/amusement.

    It’s difficult to manipulate a guy like that. He isn’t putting on a facade of non-neediness while secretly being obsessed with sexual validation; after blasting himself off, he just doesn’t give a damn. I suppose that this is probably aided by having an overarching personal obsession of the intellectual or aesthetic variety—antiquarian books, sculpting, collecting rare butterflies, martial arts, whatever.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “That’s the main reason I think this tactic is low value. A woman whose husband has options, or who women find attractive in general, is well aware of it.”

    Right. I agree actually. The thing is, sometimes GF/Wives forget that their man IS indeed attractive to other women, and that they should probably make sure he is happy WITH HER before he moves on. And in this particular thread, we were discussing a “budding” relationship, so she would hardly KNOW if Stephen was or was not “in demand” other than in a general sense. I don’t think she has any doubt now, do you?

    LJ – “You really think that if Stephen were actually an insecure guy, clueless about women, trying to follow a script he read on a website to build up his “notch” count … that Anne wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between that and a confident, secure guy whose looking for a healthy relationship with a woman who treats him well?”

    I don’t understand why you think Stephen would have to be “insecure” to run dread game? I’m sure we can all agree that many PUA types are indeed insecure, but it would be a mistake to assume they all are. I’d argue that many are probably OVERLY confident. However, as has been pointed out many times, being overly confident rarely works against a guy if his goal is to get laid. And as far as if Anne could tell? That depends largely on how self-aware she is, and how well she understands her own motivations. You do realize that game is a combination of “aping” successful men’s strategies, and using a woman’s own “nature” against her, right? It is the latter part that depends largely on a woman’s self-awareness.

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

      @Ted

      And in this particular thread, we were discussing a “budding” relationship, so she would hardly KNOW if Stephen was or was not “in demand” other than in a general sense. I don’t think she has any doubt now, do you?

      She stated that she finds him exceedingly attractive and assumes other women do too. She trusts her own judgment enough to know that a guy she is hot for would appeal to others. She does not need a demonstration of social proof. In fact, she states that she gets grief for falling for less attractive men. She appears to discount preselection entirely.

      If anything, Stephen ran the risk here as coming across as a player. She didn’t want it to work out if he was running Game on her. She wrote to me after she saw a comment I made that I hear Jekyll and Hyde stories about men who seemingly change overnight in order to manipulate the women they are seeing, and she was initially worried that is what he was doing. It was after I defended his actions and suggested she take responsibility that she returned to seeing him as a dad rather than a cad.

      I do think that Stephen’s refusing to put up with her shit strengthened his position – he finally passed her shit tests.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “But that is not how Dread game is peddled. It is recommended as a preventative strategy – a way to keep your woman on her toes so that you never have to worry about being treated poorly.”

    I realize this. But, if someone was selling hammers as a weapon, would it make them any less effective at putting nails in wood? You are too focused on one way dread can/should be used, and missing the fact that it IS a multi-use tool. I would never run dread as Roissy suggests, but I’d be a fool to simply disregard it as a tool simply because i don’t like the way he pounds in his nails.

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

      You are too focused on one way dread can/should be used, and missing the fact that it IS a multi-use tool.

      If my husband was treating me poorly, I could start flirting with other men to make him anxious. Now we’re both pissed off. Or I could say the following:

      “I feel that you are taking me for granted and treating me poorly. You don’t show appreciation or respect for me in this relationship. I find that I don’t enjoy your company much these days. I hope you can find a way to adjust your attitude, because I am not willing to remain in a relationship where I am not valued.”

      Now I feel that I have honestly shared my concern as well as my injury. He will know that his poor treatment has been noted and will not be tolerated. He is free to change or end the relationship. If he’s prepared to end it, dread would have done nothing at all but increase misery all around. If he is prepared to change, we can begin the process of communication, forgiveness, and move toward a much healthier dynamic.

      Dread is NEVER the way to go.

  • Ted D

    Susan – and to add… This is where I think we often go astray. Just because someone tells me I should use tool X in a specific manner, does NOT mean I must use it as directed. I fully believe that each and every person should look at the tools available, and choose what is useful to them, and what is not. Along with that, I think they should ALWAYS decide if the tool should be used as intended, or if it serves other purposes.

    I think you get all tied up because of how some men suggest “dread” should be used. Just because their interpretation of the tools use goes against your sensibilities, does NOT mean you can’t use the tool at all.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Bastiat Blogger.

    Not being a “hormone with feet,” it’s actually much simpler than that: if my wife or a ltr partner is behaving poorly, that’s an admirable time to work on chores or one of my various personal projects (of which, like most worthwhile men, I have FAR too many) until such a time as she’s got her head on straight and we can talk objectively. (Or until *mine* is clear enough that I realize “hey dude, you just stepped on your crank and owe her an apology”)

  • Lokland

    “All Stephen did was not be a pussy. Good for him, but calling that instilling dread or making her squirm is silly. He simply refused to supplicate and put the ball in her court. She resisted, but after reading here did take the initiative.”

    I mentioned this before and it was promptly ignored but,

    For some portion of men self-respect is the equivalent of dread game.
    Or at least
    Thats what their mothers, teacher and society in general told them.

    Which is probably a decent portion of the reason we are in this mess to begin with.

    Guys to scared to approach women.

  • Underdog

    @Susan

    This is how I see your argument:

    – Making a girl feel dread because she was rude to you = good.
    – Making a girl feel dread because you want her to like you = bad.

    – Making a girl feel dread when you’re LTR material = good.
    – Making a girl feel dread when you’re a PUA = bad.

    Once again, your disapproval is not one of tactics, but intent. You approve of the guy who’s making the girl anxious when she has the potential for a relationship with him, which would serve her sexual strategy. But when his mating strategy differs, and he’s using dread to serve his own imperative — you dismiss and shame it as “insecurity” and manipulation.

    If you truly despised dread game, then you would’ve told Anne to dump him because he’s caused her too much anxiety — but instead you told her to go crawling back on her hands and knees.

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

      @Underdog

      he’s using dread to serve his own imperative

      This is where you are going astray. He served his own needs by extricating himself from a situation that he perceived had no further benefit. He walked away, and not in hope that she would chase.

      He demonstrated real indifference, with no intent to generate a certain response in her. I think he wrote her off.

      No tactics were used. He simply took care of himself.

  • LJ

    “I don’t understand why you think Stephen would have to be “insecure” to run dread game?”

    Because why would someone who is secure and confident BOTHER playing a game like deliberately turning your phone off for 4 days so you’re GF can’t contact you? A secure person puts their genuine self out there, and is willing to face the possibility of rejection, because they only want to be with someone who genuinely wants to be with them, and if one woman isn’t that person another will be.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    BB: I laughed a lot at that, and am reminded of the “loaded gun” scene in Something About Mary.

    But I think you might have it backwards, the porn isn’t the cause, but the effect of that frame. Some men are denied sex and only use porn, and this obviously doesn’t count if they are still begging for scraps.

    It does, however, explain why women often get SO angry when her man masturbates, even if she unapologetically does it herself (fairness means nothing in emotional matters, it feels wrong). Loss of control.

    As for the Roissy article, I just read that in context – a way to maintain hand in high-conflict MTRs and flings. Which, sorry to say, happens. What the hell does Roissy know about LTRs? Might as well go to omegavirginrevolt for advice on how to get laid.

  • Russ in Texas

    What Steve did is fundamentally different from what Roissy links. Lokland phrased it fairly poorly the first time, but his point is quite valid.

    Steve said “ball’s in your court.” Does that instill dread? Yes, if the woman is paying attention AND wants the attention, because it says “this relationship is in jeopardy, and any fix is predicated upon YOU stepping up.” If it’s not yet an exclusive relationship, going out with somebody else for a while sends that exact same message.

    But it’s nothing even vaguely resembling what Roissy apparently advocates. Men should not regard what Steven did as anything special, and Lokland’s quite right to point this out.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Russ, you have a sound approach. I still have a raging sex drive and frequently need a quick pull before I can relax enough to switch gears.

    Every man really needs a Safe Room, if not a Safe House…Batcave, Fortress of Solitude, Tony Stark’s private lab, etc. At a minimum, it should be equipped with secure access (I recommend Medeco locks), high-quality porn/sports-viewing equipment, sound system, heavy bag(s), a well-stocked bar area, a microwave, and adequate workshop tables and shelving for hobbies and interests.

  • Russ in Texas

    (jeez did I just butcher that poor guy’s name. bad me)

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Lok: “For some portion of men self-respect is the equivalent of dread game.
    Or at least Thats what their mothers, teacher and society in general told them.”

    Bingo. Ignoring a badly-behaving woman is easily categorized as “emotional abuse” if you actually ask a typical woman steeped in feminism. If Anne asked anyone else, ANYONE, the response would be you-go-girl, he’s-an-asshole. Posted on Facebook, a forum, any advice column anywhere, or in person.

    The deltas then see this behavior critique, internalize it, try to mold themselves in what women say they want and… become pussies in the process.

    Is this clear yet??

  • Lokland

    “Men should not regard what Steven did as anything special, and Lokland’s quite right to point this out.”

    Victory achieved
    Someone finally understands.

    What Stephen did is not special or dread instilling. Its normal.
    The fact that a bunch of guys believe it instills dread speaks volumes on how those men were raised.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Re: “If my wife for some reason started treating me poorly, “dread” might be one tool I’d use to rectify the situation.”
    Really? If a woman starts treating you poorly, that means that she starts pity you, and pity for a man in a woman’s mind is never far from irreversible scorn. Why not then simply divorce instead of bending the situation backward with sadistic tactics or worse, sheer brutality.

  • Ted D

    LJ – “Because why would someone who is secure and confident BOTHER playing a game like deliberately turning your phone off for 4 days so you’re GF can’t contact you?”

    Because it works. Plain and simple.

    OTC – “The deltas then see this behavior critique, internalize it, try to mold themselves in what women say they want and… become pussies in the process.”

    +1

  • Russ in Texas

    Bastiat,

    I disagree. If me withdrawing across the house to quietly fold laundry in the bedroom and then get shit done in the back yard does not send that message, no amount of “man cave” will. (ymmv, but in my relationship this is actually a “nuclear” move — this is “you’ve fucked up so badly that I’m not even interested in talking to you” and will frequently produce tears if she’s the one at fault — and proFUSE apologies if I am). Locks and crap says “mine, you can’t get in.” That’s counter-productive and sends a very bad message abou the nature of a relationship.

    At the end of the day, the fix isn’t to retreat-and-consolidate like armies in the field: it’s to address the issue, solve it, and move forward without leaving any wounds or scars.

  • Russ in Texas

    Yeah, Ted loses me there. If I turn my cell off for four days so I can’t be reached, I’m the one being an asshole, by saying “I don’t even CARE if you get your head back on straight.”

    That might work, but it’s abuse. Using emotional abuse “because it works”… DLV. Quality woman’s gonna bail.

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

      Using emotional abuse “because it works”… DLV. Quality woman’s gonna bail.

      Exactly. And the low quality woman will stick around and hate you for it.

  • Ted D

    DV – “Really? If a woman starts treating you poorly, that means that she starts pity you, and pity for a man in a woman’s mind is never far from irreversible scorn. Why not then simply divorce instead of bending the situation backward with sadistic tactics or worse, sheer brutality.”

    This largely depends on how poorly she is treating you, and how long you let it go on. I largely agree with you, so don’t think I’m trying to be obtuse. But the truth is, not all people are self aware enough to recognize any of this. I can’t conceive of any situation where “dread game” would be my goto tool with my wife. Before I go there, I’d probably take a route similar to Susan’s suggestion above. But, that is because my wife is rather reasonable and logical for a woman (sorry easy dig ladies, mean as humor!) and I believe she would take what I said and understand the urgency. However, my ex-wife would NOT have been this simple to communicate with. If I had run “dread game” on her, we might still be married. Now I’m not complaining, because I’m happy where I am now, but I can’t deny the fact that my first marriage would have very likely survived IF I’d gamed my ex-wife.

    Of course, the easier solution is to simply avoid women that need lots of game, but just how many of those women exist is up for much debate. And, I’ll add that in the younger age brackets, such a woman would indeed be a unicorn.

  • Underdog

    @Susan

    He had no choice but to walk away, doing anything else would have lowered his SMV. I wont assume wether or not he wanted her to chase him but it doesn’t matter, what matters is that he caused her to feel dread and thus became more attractive in her eyes — and in yours, also.

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

      he caused her to feel dread and thus became more attractive in her eyes — and in yours, also.

      Haha, in mine? I simply respect his straightforward approach to not tolerating poor treatment. I assume he has been quite attractive all along – she thinks so. She even thought so when she was flaking – which is where the beautiful woman entitlement issues come in.

  • Ted D

    Russ in Texas – “Yeah, Ted loses me there. If I turn my cell off for four days so I can’t be reached, I’m the one being an asshole, by saying “I don’t even CARE if you get your head back on straight.”

    That might work, but it’s abuse. Using emotional abuse “because it works”… DLV. Quality woman’s gonna bail.”

    First of all, WHY does being an asshole get such a bad wrap?! Assholes are very rarely taken advantage of, and in many cases get what they want. Outside of any moral issues, being an asshole IS a good strategy in many cases.

    And the jury is still out on if a ‘quality woman’ would “bail” on a guy running light dread game. I personally can’t say either way, because I’ve never used it. (at least not to my knowledge. I suppose my belief that I *could* replace my wife if necessary might be in and of itself a smidge of dread…) But, that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t work either. Like I said, sometimes women need a reminder that they DO NOT have a monopoly on their men. Their men ALLOW it by choice, and that choice can be revoked. If we were still living in a marriage 1.0 world, I would say that this attitude is completely immoral and wrong. But, since we now have no fault divorce? All bets are off on the “until death do us part” piece of the contract.

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

      women need a reminder that they DO NOT have a monopoly on their men. Their men ALLOW it by choice, and that choice can be revoked.

      If you’re implying that men are doing women a favor by agreeing to monogamy, I don’t buy it. A man who does not desire monogamy should not sign up for it. A relationship is the result of two parties negotiating the best deal they can re wants and needs. Make the deal and then live it. Or renegotiate it if you must. But no whining.

  • Underdog

    One of the recurring themes here when it comes to Roissy is that people take his words too literally without analyzing the underlying principal. Roissy uses hyperbole to amplify his point. Don’t be fooled by his writing style.

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

      Roissy uses hyperbole to amplify his point. Don’t be fooled by his writing style.

      Did I call it or what?

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Russ, I see your point, but my perspective is no doubt very different because I’m not in a co-hab situation. I need my magical island of serenity, for a variety of reasons.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    The deltas then see this behavior critique, internalize it, try to mold themselves in what women say they want and… become pussies in the process.

    Boom, Steel on Target, +1000, Etc

    I have shown this to a bunch of guys and a few girls now. The view of the guys is unanimous: girl is insane. The NICEST thing said is “She is a brat.”

    The (admittedly few) girls think nothing Anne did is wrong, that Stephen is abusive, and that Susan has no idea what she’s talking about. It’s totally the guy’s responsibility to do everything and cater to all emotional whims.

    This seems to be default attitude among young women. All men should ignore this, listen to Susan fine, listen to young women, NO.

    This also makes it extremely difficult to have the kind of “honest” conversation with a girl that Susan is suggesting. Easier to run dread game, unfortunately.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Lokland “What Stephen did is not special or dread instilling. It’s normal.”

    Yep. If a girl did this same thing because the guy didn’t want to see her and didn’t call back, and she next’ed him, would it be called dread game? No, it’d be totally normal.

    Imagine if person A said “Hello how are you?” Person B responds with blank stare. Normal is person A walking away without saying anything else. Abnormal is overanalyzing what’s going on with B and using game to try to get B to respond, and then going “My silence worked like good dread!” when B responds days later.

  • Russ in Texas

    “Jury still out” is an appeal to data-authority which I can’t provide (and nobody can — this is a sub-flavor of the “one true scotsman” fallacy resulting in people going round and round arguing over whose data is superior)

    Let’s set morality aside for a moment and talk about ethics and economy.

    Ethics: Being an asshole priveleges onself at the expense of others. It thereby places the other person in the position of zero-sum-game: an enemy. This is entirely counter-productive for a marriage or long-term relationship.

    Economy: Beginner’s game theory says “always be the dick, and you win.” That’s BEGINNER’S game theory; hawk/dove longitudinal analysis shows quite clearly that the actual winner is the person who returns what is given. Quid-pro-quo wins, and opening with a non-asshole move provides much greater chances for much greater profit. There’s a REASON that christian morality has conquered so much of the globe, even making inroads into places religiously and civilizationally utterly alien to it: while being a dove gets you slaughtered by a “hawk,” pure “hawks” are less efficient over time than people who return dove with dove and hawk with hawk, making the ADMONITION to “open with dove” far more profitable over time.

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

      Ethics: Being an asshole priveleges onself at the expense of others. It thereby places the other person in the position of zero-sum-game: an enemy. This is entirely counter-productive for a marriage or long-term relationship.

      All I want for Christmas is more Russ in Texas.

  • Russ in Texas

    Rollo,

    With all respect, I don’t think you’ve read the women posting in this thread very well. I haven’t seen what you’ve described here.

  • Escoffier

    “Ignoring a badly-behaving woman is easily categorized as ‘emotional abuse.'”

    Really? Because I am from a totally hippy dippy soft-head lib enviornment and I have never, ever heard this.

    Anyway, many years ago in grad school I developed a crush on this older, very beautiful woman. It took some time for me to get the courage to ask her out but I did it (really awful experience, BTW) and I was turned down; she had a BF.

    I basically disengaged after that. I would be polite but not seek her company and avoided small gatherings where I knew she would be or else focused on other people as long as I was there.

    About 6-7 months later, while cooking dinner, she knocked at my door. Total surprise. A summer break had intervened during which I had not seen her even once. We were a couple within a week or two.

    Never occured to me that I was running “dread game” or anything else. I thought, and still think, that I was simply doing the rational thing.

  • Russ in Texas

    Ironic Misread, sorry — comment to Betaguy, not Rollo.

  • Ted D

    Rollo – “What Suz wants is a Game-aware beta who only (unconsciously, not deliberately) uses Game to fulfill the desires of, and fills the sexual pluralism of women she thinks should naturally adore betas”

    Problem is, anyone that succeeds doing things “unconsciously” is either lucky and/or stupid. The ideal would be for men of good moral standing to use game to fulfill THEIR desires, which would in turn fulfill the desire of whatever woman he decided to be with. To me it is the “moral standing” part that separates the users from the winners in Susan’s eyes, and I can’t fault that. In a more ethical society, I’d agree with her on it. But, since we don’t live in a moral and ethical society, I can hardly fault men for taking advantage of whatever they can. It isn’t something *I* would advise, and certainly not how I’d want my boys to behave, but it isn’t my call to make for all men. Best I can do is make sure my kids know the scoop so they can act accordingly.

    So the “build a better beta” plan won’t work until we return to a society that actually values morality, at least in a general sense. The environment is simply not suitable for it.

  • BroHamlet

    @Lokland

    “What Stephen did is not special or dread instilling. Its normal.”

    Absolutely. In fact, we learned a whole lot more about her, and what happens when someone who plays games (whether by necessity or just a bit of caprice in this case) runs into someone who is immune to them. To me it’s a great example of ego vs actual confidence. This would never have been an issue if she’d been acting from the latter, because those who have it don’t have the need to make other people follow their own internal script. She’ll be better for this.

  • Ted D

    ADBG – “This also makes it extremely difficult to have the kind of “honest” conversation with a girl that Susan is suggesting. Easier to run dread game, unfortunately.”

    This.

    Russ in Texas – “Ethics: Being an asshole priveleges onself at the expense of others. It thereby places the other person in the position of zero-sum-game: an enemy. This is entirely counter-productive for a marriage or long-term relationship.”

    Agreed. But I’d like to point out that in general, most people act “at the expense of others” on a daily basis. Now in terms of marriage/LTRs? Yeah, it sets a bad precedent of combativeness in the relationship. Which is why I’d never personally use it as a preemptive strike. However, if my wife started acting in a manner that put ME on the defensive? Like I said, I’d start with an appeal to reason, but I’ve often seen that such attempts fail with women, because appealing to logic isn’t the way they communicate. So, if that failed, perhaps a little dread would induce the emotional response necessary to get her to act and fix the situation. Perhaps it would induce her to act by leaving. Either way, if the situation is bad for me, it will come to a resolution.

    “while being a dove gets you slaughtered by a “hawk,” pure “hawks” are less efficient over time than people who return dove with dove and hawk with hawk, making the ADMONITION to “open with dove” far more profitable over time.”

    I have no problem with this, and in fact is mostly how I tend to behave. I reflect what is given to me, but I don’t usually fire the first volley. That being said, sometimes my ‘reflection’ is indeed assholean in nature, because it is the correct level of reflection for the issue at hand. I have no problems being that asshole when necessary, but don’t make it a point to be that asshole 24/7

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

    What Suz wants is a Game-aware beta who only (unconsciously, not deliberately) uses Game to fulfill the desires of, and fills the sexual pluralism of women she thinks should naturally adore betas. She wants a sanitized, effortless and selfless version of Game that serves the feminine imperative.

    Time for Suz to snoooooozzzzz….

  • Ted D

    Susan – “If you’re implying that men are doing women a favor by agreeing to monogamy, I don’t buy it.”

    Not at all. I’m saying that a man will agree to monogamy when it presents him with enough benefit to “give up” his other options. And, if those benefits should ever disappear, there is nothing keeping him with her. That’s it, no agenda to paint men as “saints” for giving up sexual variety. It is his choice to make based on a risk/benefit assessment. Thing is, men and woman are now free to reassess anytime they damn well please, regardless of marital status.

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

      @Ted

      Thanks for clarifying. You are right about the ease of dissolving marriage, but I’m still a fan for a lot of reasons.

  • BroHamlet

    @Hope

    “Yep. If a girl did this same thing because the guy didn’t want to see her and didn’t call back, and she next’ed him, would it be called dread game? No, it’d be totally normal.”

    I see what you’re getting at, but you can’t “next” someone who has already moved on. People who aren’t operating on ego don’t need to “win” every time. Anna obviously needed to win. Most people are like this. Attractive girls are often even more like this, but you never see it until they run into someone who they consider to be high value. Looks and the external don’t last, for any of us, though, and you’re going to have to address what’s inside at some point, so you might as well do it early.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Susan:

    True, and proven so daily, though I think less relevant here.

    I can’t play in the circles Anne’s running even if single, b/c my family suffered a social collapse a few generations back and squandered all the family wealth (for the historically-inclined, we used to own Maryland). But: “social knowledge” in the circles Anne navigates is very high, and very, VERY few members of it are the sorts who will be cowed by the sort of behavior Ted’s advocating.

    Otherwise, dead on — unless one is a mental sadist, who wants to try to mold their partner into a quietly seething ball of hate?

  • deti

    Interesting to see my name hauled into a thread I haven’t even commented on, called a loser beta chump by Hollenhund, and a know-nothing and wrong nearly all the time by Susan.

    Hollenhund: If I’m wasting my time here, so are you.

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

      @deti

      Interesting to see my name hauled into a thread I haven’t even commented on, called a loser beta chump by Hollenhund, and a know-nothing and wrong nearly all the time by Susan.

      Well, you’re a well known and highly opinionated character in the sphere, you can hardly be surprised just because you haven’t commented.

      As for your not being a knowledgeable and reliable source of information pertinent to young women, I’m not saying anything I haven’t said to your face numerous time. I think your views are seriously warped by the places you choose to do your brainwashing learning.

  • Höllenhund

    I know that well, deti.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Ted#438:

    Okay, so now that we’ve established a common language, here’s being an asshole:

    Round One: You play dove. She returns hawk.
    Round Two: She’s still playing hawk, you also return hawk.

    Round Three: You turn off your phone. She sees you returning hawk and goes, “wait, hold on,” realizes she’s done the girl equivalent of stepping on her dick, gets her head straight, and throws dove.

    But you don’t know that, b/c your phone is off. And you’re still blaming her for playing a card she’s actually abandoned.

    “returning hawk” to a hawk play isn’t being an asshole. Pre-emptively playing hawk, or putting yourself into a position where you can’t receive a dove reply, IS. She’s still playing dove, and throws it a few more times until you finally respond, but you’ve now inflicted a wound and reduced the Total Relationship Value in the process.

    In terms of actual, non-beginner’s Game Theory — this is a completely avoidabel loss.

    See the difference?

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Ted
    “the easier solution is to simply avoid women that need lots of game, but just how many of those women exist is up for much debate. And, I’ll add that in the younger age brackets, such a woman would indeed be a unicorn.”

    Ted, one thing I never quite get in your (and others’ here) logic, is why the girl would want to play games once she’s with you, and why staying with her if that’s the case. A girl who keeps pulling self defense tricks once you have a relationship is because she’s still way too insecure as well as simply NOT ENOUGH INTO YOU, period. My experience taught me that girls always play games, but only when you’re in the courtship phase (but women, never. They’ve grown up), to which I say it’s fair enough, they have to protect themselves with their own tools. It can even be “charming” at times, if you know how to decode those tricks, for seduction IS a game. It can be emotionally exhausting but the result wonderfull if the intent on both sides is noble. And the reward is something else than a pathetic pseudo relationship that started from a sexual angle too early on. Let’s not even talk about those one night stands that drag on for a week.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    “A relationship is the result of two parties negotiating the best deal they can re wants and needs. Make the deal and then live it.”

    This is certainly an interesting way of looking at it.

    It doesn’t really make much sense to me, but hey, that’s life.

    I can’t recall ever “negotiating” a “best deal”.

    I was either in a relationship or not in a relationship.

  • deti

    It’s also interesting to see my name brought in here because a few weeks ago, I was the model on how a man ought comport oneself here and that others could learn a lot from me by my commenting here.

    Today, however, I am “irrelevant” and I “know nothing” about the SMP and I am “so wrong so often” that my advice is useless.

    Oh, how one’s fortunes change with the shifting sands….

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

      @deti

      I was the model on how a man ought comport oneself here and that others could learn a lot from me by my commenting here.

      Hmmm, I do recall saying the former, but not really the latter…

      I appreciate your debating style, which I think is productive and positive. I do not believe that my readers can learn a lot from you, to be honest, and I said as much in highlighting your own comments on the matter at Alpha Game.

      I think you are well qualified to speak on your personal experience. I do not find you credible in the areas of female nature and sexuality or the behavioral norms of college students. I also believe, and have often stated, that you appear to have derived a set of beliefs that sits on sand – e.g. alpha widow, carousel “watchers,” inability of women to bond with husband if not a virgin, and inability of women to find betas attractive.

      None of this is new or surprising. I don’t really understand your taking offense.

  • Damien Vulaume

    “I can’t recall ever “negotiating” a “best deal”.
    I was either in a relationship or not in a relationship.”

    This is what I was going to say. You bargain only once you’re in a long term relationship and things get dangerously into a monotonous habit or an increasingly confrontational one. You never bargain at the begining, unless you both are cold pragmatical partners viewing relationships as something which is discussed like the way you discuss the price of a carpet with the vendor in an Istambul bazaar.. Well, quite a few people are like that.

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

      You never bargain at the begining, unless you both are cold pragmatical partners viewing relationships as something which is discussed

      I did not mean this literally. I mean that from a behavioral economics POV, we all strike deals when we enter relationships, in that we have done some sort of cost/benefit analysis and deemed the idea a good one. Every time you choose one woman over another you are doing this. Every time you agree to monogamy you are weighing the pros and cons.

  • Lokland

    @BroHam

    “Absolutely. In fact, we learned a whole lot more about her, and what happens when someone who plays games (whether by necessity or just a bit of caprice in this case) runs into someone who is immune to them.”

    +1

    I’m specifically not offering advice to Anne because I feel that doing so would be harmful for Stephen.

    The Facebook deletion was too childish for someone who wants a relationship.

    This is one of those rare instances where I feel that Susan is helping the predator.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Russ

    Ironic Misread, sorry — comment to Betaguy, not Rollo.

    Not so ironic. In Real Life, there are a few girls (and guys) that would think me closer to Rollo than Cooper.

    Of course, that’s because, IRL, everything is straight-up blue pill, and normal teasing makes me the “biggest jerk in the world.”

    That sort of brings me back to my point. I didn’t survey people here at HUS, which I consider one of the few Sane places in the world. I asked girls who have no idea what Red Pill or Susan Walsh even are.

  • Ted D

    DV – “Ted, one thing I never quite get in your (and others’ here) logic, is why the girl would want to play games once she’s with you, and why staying with her if that’s the case. A girl who keeps pulling self defense tricks once you have a relationship is because she’s still way too insecure as well as simply NOT ENOUGH INTO YOU, period.”

    I agree. But, if you find yourself married to a woman that is “not enough into you” (as I and many other men have), your choices are: divorce or game. Had I known about game before my divorce, I would have given it my best shot, because *I* took my vows seriously. My ex? Not so much I suppose, since instead of trying to work things out decided she needed to “find herself”. Some people never give up “playing games”, and although we can agree that it is rather immature, it doesn’t change the fact. In many cases, a guy can turn around a “not enough into you” situation with a woman IF he wants to and IF he knows how, which is where game comes into marriage. (and where Athol makes a decent living I might add…)

    ”You never bargain at the begining, unless you both are cold pragmatical partners viewing relationships as something which is discussed like the way you discuss the price of a carpet with the vendor in an Istambul bazaar.. Well, quite a few people are like that.”

    Your last sentence pretty much sums it up to me. Many, many people ARE indeed like that. Many look at relationships from the “what’s in it for me” attitude, and those folks are almost always looking for the best “deal” they can get.

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

      those folks are almost always looking for the best “deal” they can get.

      The only good deals are the ones where both parties are pleased with the outcome.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    ” I mean that from a behavioral economics POV, we all strike deals when we enter relationships, in that we have done some sort of cost/benefit analysis and deemed the idea a good one.”

    Uh, yeah. Do I have a romantic interest in her and does she have a romantic interest in me? I had one failed LTR attempt where at least I was willing to give it a go after talking myself into it over a period of time and one marriage. That’s about it.

    “Every time you choose one woman over another you are doing this.”

    There’s only ever been one person who I’ve been interested in dating at any one time, so not really. Generally, this happened about once every 12 months if I was lucky. Normally I was interested in the same person for about 12 to 24 months and usually was unable to connect.

    “Every time you agree to monogamy you are weighing the pros and cons.”

    It never even occurred to me that non-monogamy was a option. Kind of like “should I go rob a bank”?

  • Iggles

    @ Underdog,

    Manipulating others = bad

    Acting from integrity = good

    It’s not that hard, dude.

  • JP

    @ Susan:

    “The only good deals are the ones where both parties are pleased with the outcome.”

    I’m going to use TedD as an example since he seems to be the one who’s been solidly hit by this. (I’m the one who generally does the firing in my relationships).

    His “outcome” got steadily worse every year. It was best at the beginning and then slid into the abyss.

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

      His “outcome” got steadily worse every year. It was best at the beginning and then slid into the abyss.

      True. It sounds like she didn’t keep up her end of the bargain. Ted has said he made some mistakes too. We all do. Unexpected things happen. We keep reevaluating, making choices every day. Staying is a choice. Inertia is a choice.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Ted
    “But, if you find yourself married to a woman that is “not enough into you”

    Sorry, but getting married to a woman that is not into you in the first place is way beyond me. You normally always sense those things, or I guess you were way to young and inexperienced when that happened, or is it something else? Social pressure, or because it’s a thing to do after college?

  • JP

    I thought that TedD started out fine and then she disintoed him over time.

    I like that word.

    Dis-into-ed.

    Ted, am I mistaken? I’m not really an expert on Tedding.

  • Jesse

    Ian (154):

    I have to say the ‘estrogen poisoned’ woman sounds pretty attractive. I’m imagining her periodical insanity to be roughly equivalent to ‘passionate’ or ‘highly emotional.’ Certainly nothing that is mean, manipulative, vindictive or backstabbing.

    Reminds me of the quote attributed to Marilyn Monroe, which I initially thought of as ‘whoa, crazy bitch’ but eventually warmed to, thinking along the lines of ‘well, I’d put up with a bit of that for a really special girl.’

    HanSolo (307):

    I really don’t understand this need to rate women numerically. It doesn’t mean anything to anyone other than the rater. Does it serve to gratify losers, for lack of a better word, who use it to belittle or reduce women to a number?

    It’s no more accurate a system than the words ‘ugly’, ‘decent looking’, ‘pretty’, and ‘oh my God I have to get to know this woman right now.’ At least the latter doesn’t pretend to be objective.

    For myself, I only need three categories. There are women I’m not interested in having sex with, women I would have sex with, and women I would swear off other women for. (Okay, that last category is sort of made up, because I don’t really see women who make me want to become monogamous.)

  • Underdog

    @Iggles

    Once again, your problem is with intent — not tactics. Read my posts again.

  • Ted D

    DV – “Sorry, but getting married to a woman that is not into you in the first place is way beyond me. You normally always sense those things, or I guess you were way to young and inexperienced when that happened, or is it something else? Social pressure, or because it’s a thing to do after college?”

    In my case, all of the above? She was “into” me in the beginning, but not nearly enough. There were plenty of red flags, but I was never told what they were, and how to look for them. I was 26, she was 21, so lack of experience played a part for sure. The ‘social pressure’ came from my family, that were increasingly telling me it was ‘time to settle down’ and all that. I failed on several fronts spectacularly. :P

    But, head over the MMSL sometime and you’ll see I am in NO WAY alone in finding myself married to a woman that is NOT “into” her husband. In my case, after I got married I took the “time to settle down” speech a bit too seriously, and started dropping outside interests to put my time into my family. I continued to knuckle under to my ex-wife’s desires because I was led to believe that was what I was supposed to do, and my giving in continued to diminish her desire to be with me to the point that she bailed. Of course it became a downward spiral since we were miserable, we both ate worse, got heavier, became more depressed, etc.

    If you really want the gory details, I’ll be happy to provide them, but they aren’t relevant to the discussion. The point is, plenty of men seem to find themselves married to a woman that isn’t attracted to them, and in those situations there aren’t many options for a fix.

  • Russ in Texas

    @betaGuy#453

    Depends on the definition of “normal teasing” and where you l ive.
    I abandoned the East Coast for flyover country and North Texas (back when it was relatively empty before all the economic refugees from the coasts started moving here), and one of the reasons for doing so was that the women are generally just as beautiful, but far less “indoctrinated.”

  • Ted D

    JP – “Ted, am I mistaken? I’m not really an expert on Tedding.”

    LOL nope that is a fair description. Although like I said there were red flags. Just a few months prior to the wedding my ex decided having sex was somehow immoral (although we’d been doing so for months prior) and although I didn’t simply take it on the chin, I did agree to limit our sexual interactions considerably until the wedding day. She and I also had doubts the entire engagement, but we were BOTH told by our families that “its completely normal to get cold feet! You’ll be fine afterwards!” She had some daddy issues that I ignored. (because I figured it was normal for all women to have them believe it or not!)

    Not long after we married, I started giving up hobbies to spend more time with her and our kids. The last straw was me giving up my last remaining friends when she told me I was spending too much time gigging and should be an adult and give up on childish stuff like playing in a rock band. (paraphrased, I can’t honestly remember exactly what she said.) I quit and with that went the last thing I did outside of work and time with the family, and it was damn near close to the beginning of the end for us. It took another five or so years for that to happen, but it was inevitable from that moment on I think.

  • Russ in Texas

    I’d have said that the hypocrisy surrounding sex was the “moment of inevitable.”

    I married a “good girl,” and waiting until married was part of the deal (a painful deal, btw, but well worth it) — that wasn’t something that sprang out of nowhere, but was something she had the integrity to make clear right at the beginning of the “if I date you (exclusively)” discussion.

    We’re not 100% traditional, but we ARE both happy, and candor is a huge reason why.

  • BroHamlet

    @Lokland

    “The Facebook deletion was too childish for someone who wants a relationship.

    This is one of those rare instances where I feel that Susan is helping the predator.”

    I have to say I agree to a point. Susan can’t just turn up her nose to her readers, though. Still, a lot of excuses have been made for the way she behaved (she’s “hot” etc.). The subtext I have noticed seems to be that she should have what she wants just because she was born with one major qualification. But, I am with you in that I think the Facebook thing especially, is a huge strike against any type of “keeper” status she might have had. The root of that behavior is not insignificant, and ties in really closely with the question of why (deep down) she wants to get back in his good graces. Just enabling her to leap a hurdle isn’t enough- Susan realizes this no doubt, but she does have a blog to run.

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

      @BroHamlet

      Still, a lot of excuses have been made for the way she behaved (she’s “hot” etc.). The subtext I have noticed seems to be that she should have what she wants just because she was born with one major qualification.

      I’ll disagree here. I think my language in the OP is very direct and holds her fully responsible for her behavior. I did not state that being beautiful entitles her to treat other people poorly or take them for granted.

      I did observe that her mentality is not uncommon among beautiful women, in my experience. I’ve already laid out the reasons why, so I won’t do it again here. I don’t view the “beautiful woman mindset” as a positive one or one that should be reinforced in any way. Rather than relying on men “negging” Anne to make her question her value, I preferred to give her specific examples of inconsiderate behavior, and suggest the way she might begin to make amends. If Anne returns to that mindset, she’s obviously going to be out of the running fairly quickly.

      While I do have a blog to run, I am not obligated to feature any particular letter. In fact, I’ve only recently started posting them after a pretty long break. I ran hers because I found it interesting, somewhat unusual, and felt that the commenters here might be able to help her. I think the results bear that out.

  • Ted D

    Russ in Texas – Like I said, there were plenty of red flags, I was just never taught to look for them. And, in some cases, I was specifically taught to overlook them. I could spend days and write pages on it, but it wouldn’t change a thing.

    The bottom line: she was originally attracted to who I was when I met her, but through my beliefs in “responsibility” to my family and lots of bad advice, I changed from that man to a pussy whipped yes man, that got massively out of shape and overweight. I can look back and completely understand why she lost attraction for me, but at the time I was completely baffled because I believed I was doing all the right things for her and my family. Turns out, I needed to do more for myself first, like get a backbone. My primary fault was believing that my ex was somehow above taking advantage of me because she was a “good” person. I don’t believe for one moment she intentionally did so, but I offered it to her on a silver platter, and she took it and ran with it.

    FWIW I still think she is a “good” person, and we get along rather well now that we are not tied by matrimony. Which works for me since we have children together. She still has lots of personal issues to work out, and she may go to her grave with them at this rate. But thankfully, that is no longer my problem. ;-)

  • Marc

    @94 Well explained Susan.
    .
    There is a control imbalance for Annes equal. For a woman to be a desireable 9, she must be young and pretty. Hot Mess´s are everywhere. (Ever been to L.A.?). For a man to be a 9, he must be so much more, making her equal much rarer. He must be funny, smart, wealthy, tall, confident etc. The problem is, a female 9 is used to having choices and control. When she meets her “equal”, he is in much more demand than her, and her program gets spun out of control. Her hot chick games dont work anymore and shes rattled.
    .
    High value dudes will give much less effort and you must bite quickly, or the path of less resistance is taken. (your competition).You will never see a circle of high value dudes competing for woman at a cocktail party like you see the average guys doing. They remove themselves from that whirpool of competition as it is seen as being beneath them.
    .
    I know most will disagree, but I advise Anne to NOT swallow her pride and just move on. Ive ended countless relationships for pride reasons and never regretted any of them. Without your pride and dignity, you have nothing.
    .
    BTW, we havent seen this Anne, and we are calling her a 9. Is this a “London 9″? Because that would be an “L.A. 6″ or a “Colombian 5″. For the record, an “L.A. 9″ would be a “London 13″.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Ted:
    “She was “into” me in the beginning, but not nearly enough. There were plenty of red flags, but I was never told what they were, and how to look for them. I was 26, she was 21, so lack of experience played a part for sure. The ‘social pressure’ came from my family, that were increasingly telling me it was ‘time to settle down’ and all that. I failed on several fronts spectacularly”

    I sympathize with that, and to which I say, The faults are neither yours nor your first wife, but that stupid doctrinal social and family pressure. The only thing I don’t understand is why this dramatic life experience with ONE particular woman under tight family peer pressure has made you view women on the whole in such a negative light? I also don’t understand why you would still rant about it since, by your own admission, you’ve found a descent wife with whom you seem content enough to live with.

  • Tasmin

    “I’ve been dating him for around two months now. ”

    I know I’m old and don’t “get” the whole facebook-dating culture, but her story sounds more like hooking-up with a few nice dinners thrown in as opposed to actual grown-up “dating”. It reads like a no-strings deal that she *may want to* turn into more, when she is ready and when he has earned the right to more by assuaging her emotional baggage to the point where she decides the ‘relationship’ is worthy of her emotional investment.

    Thing like texting for late night cocktails, “…that drink would probably lead to him coming back with me.” and yet getting bent when the puppet strings go lax should be clear examples of how sex w/o commitment, exclusivity or even just mature communication can make for a difficult path to such. There are obviously expectations, and expectations w/o communication = trouble. And she apparently sees sex as some kind of carrot here, which is problematic for many reasons.

    Hot or not, PUA guy or not, she doesn’t sound ready for a grown-up relationship. The situation is basically been casual sex with her establishing the rules of engagement unilaterally and then holding him to what she “thinks” should happen.

    “I think until the point of exclusive, the initiatives should be theirs.”

    I know the horse has left the barn in this case, but I don’t think I saw any references to the benefits of establishing commitment and exclusivity prior to giving it up. A lot of the least-interest posturing and frankly juvenile passive-aggressive communication and score-keeping could have been headed off with a bit more work on the front end. That is, if she was in fact ready, which I think is in question.

    A minimal or withholding emotional posture coupled with non-exclusive sex kind of sounds like something other than “dating” to me. She is basically trying to rely on sexual intimacy to inspire him to move the relationship along according to her terms, without acknowledging that she was lowering the price/value of that sex by withholding her emotional investment. Then she wonders why he wouldn’t take that carrot.

    They have yet to establish the mutual respect and level of communication to support anything beyond the casual sex relationship that it seems to be. We can speculate about what this guy is all about, but based on how Anne has approached this situation, to me this has less to do with her being “hot” or a “9” and more to do with very poor sequencing of investments and lacking of alignment and communication of expectations.

    I’m just not convinced she actually wants a full-fledged relationship. The issue of her being hot has little to do with how this situation played out and much more to do with how she will be able to find plenty of men willing to engage her in this kind of “dating” – much more so than “average” women can. Given that, and her willingness to engage in sex first, figure it out later will put this statement: “I can’t figure why, I’m not known as promiscuous,” into serious jeopardy.

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

      @Tasmin

      She is basically trying to rely on sexual intimacy to inspire him to move the relationship along according to her terms, without acknowledging that she was lowering the price/value of that sex by withholding her emotional investment

      This is exactly right. I also share your read of the “not yet relationship.” Unfortunately, this pattern of progression is extremely common among young people today. PLI is the default position, and you can see that Anne is loath to give up hand – it makes her feel very vulnerable.

      She is very young, and still in school. Yes, she said she sees him as a potential husband and father, but everyone matures later today than they did 50 years ago. This is a good example of why marrying at 20 or while in college is generally a very poor idea.

  • Ted D

    DV – “The only thing I don’t understand is why this dramatic life experience with ONE particular woman under tight family peer pressure has made you view women on the whole in such a negative light?”

    Well to be frank, I don’t see it as a “negative light” at all. I see it as a more realistic view in general. I still treat my wife as an individual, which means that I treat her the way she treats me. But, overall, I simply have a negative outlook of humanity, not just women. I simply don’t rant about bad male behavior here because it isn’t the primary conversation. If you look though, you’d see that I am just as judgmental of “trash dicks” as I am of “sluts”. I’m tend to be equally unfair to everyone. ;-)

    “I also don’t understand why you would still rant about it since, by your own admission, you’ve found a descent wife with whom you seem content enough to live with.”

    There are many reasons, but the primary two are:
    1. to be an example of what NOT to do for young guys
    2. Because I have four children that will be wading into the SMP soon.

    Actually, my oldest is 18 and is starting college in the spring. Luckily she is currently in the beginning stages of a relationship with a decent guy a few years older than she is. He could use a little nudge in the alpha direction, but so far my daughter hasn’t shown to be the type that needs a lot of gaming.

    Also, I tend to believe that our current social climate completely sucks, and it is a never ending source of irritation to me that no one really gives a shit. I’d much rather fix everything than have to teach my kids how to cope in a flawed system, but other than ranting there isn’t much I can do to fix that. I’m doing most of what I can, which is trying to instill some decent morality in my children without hindering their ability to succeed in an immoral and unethical society.

    And maybe bitching on occasion makes me feel better. It’s kinda how I tend to work things out. I get pissed/depressed, I bitch and moan, when I get tired of bitching and moaning I fix it. Since I can’t fix this, I often return to bitching and moaning. I haven’t managed to get to the point where I just don’t give a shit anymore. I’m hoping it arrives right after our youngest turns 18. I figure at that point, I’ve done my duty to my kids and they can take the baton and run with it. I’ll be looking for somewhere to live in relative peace to enjoy whatever time I’ve got left however I want. At this point all I’m doing is honoring the responsibilities I chose to take on until the only people I am responsible for/to are myself and my wife.

  • deti

    DV: “I also don’t understand why you would still rant about it since, by your own admission, you’ve found a descent wife with whom you seem content enough to live with.”

    The need to learn, the need to remember so as not to repeat the previous error, and the hope of internalizing it for one’s children so it can be taught to them and hopefully prevent them from making the same error.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Sai @Just1Z

    @Sai

    if you’re going to listen to crazy guys on the web, can I suggest that you stick to Marellus and myself?

    … heh … that’s until we discuss whose granddaddy kicked whose granddaddy’s arse at the glorious battle of Magersfontein … mindjohjyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
    \\\\\\\\\\\\\\,.]

    … ahhhhh … this is what happens when I go outside for a smoke …

    Just call her TC btw

  • HanSolo

    @Jesse

    It’s no more accurate a system than the words ‘ugly’, ‘decent looking’, ‘pretty’, and ‘oh my God I have to get to know this woman right now.’ At least the latter doesn’t pretend to be objective.

    I never said it was more accurate or objective. The advantages are that it gives more granularity than the 4 categories you mentioned and it’s faster to type ‘9’ instead of ‘gorgeous’. Since there are variations between solidly pretty (an 8 to me), gorgeous (9), and 1/100,000 gorgeous (10), and the various degrees of ugly then it is useful to many to talk about it.

    Of course beauty is in the eye of the beholder and there can be systematic and random differences between what a 1-10 scale would mean to each man (and woman).

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Deti:
    “The need to learn, the need to remember so as not to repeat the previous error, and the hope of internalizing it for one’s children so it can be taught to them and hopefully prevent them from making the same error.”

    “The need to learn”.
    Sure, but you should be past that one by now.

    “The need to remember”…
    Come on pal, that sounds already like an eternal rancour against the first heartbreak… I’ve had those as well and moved beyond without viewing the fairer sex as the eternal evil opposite.

    “so it can be taught to them and hopefully prevent them from making the same error.”
    Well, I only hope you don’t give them your view about how women are or how they should be according to you. Nonetheless, I wish you well.

  • Anne

    @ Marc
    I am not from London. English girls are unattractive, but there are hardly any English girls in the capital, just like there are hardly any Americans in New York (which is why, to be honest, you find good-looking women there).
    It comes down to taste anyway – some men prefer Colombian women, in which case I wouldn’t be their type.

  • deti

    “without viewing the fairer sex as the eternal evil opposite.”

    Women aren’t any more evil than men are; but they aren’t any LESS evil either.

  • HanSolo

    @Ted D

    I’ll be looking for somewhere to live in relative peace to enjoy whatever time I’ve got left however I want.

    Come to Glacier Park. Lots of peace and beauty.

    http://bbs.crsky.com/1236983883/Mon_1101/25_187566_007f0766b402b4e.jpg

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Just1Z @Sai.

    #477 Link doesn’t work. Try this. Sorry.

    tumblr.com is a bloody schlep to get a photo’s url.

  • Russ in Texas

    Actually, now that I think of it, I haven’t seen IMG or Max with *any* Colombian types recently, at least not ranked ones.

  • Emily

    >> ” Is this a “London 9″? Because that would be an “L.A. 6″ or a “Colombian 5″. For the record, an “L.A. 9″ would be a “London 13″.”

    Oh snap!!! I’m no Kate Upton, but I experienced a noticeable increase in SMV the second I got to England. It’s a weird experience to go through, and I suspect that I’d have a really hard time readjusting to my “old” SMV if I were to leave.

  • Ted D

    HanSolo – Montana huh? Maybe. That will largely depend on what the U.S. looks like when I’m ready to move on. At this point, I’m not limiting myself to staying within the States, and if things get any worse, I’ll rule them out entirely. Lots of places in the world where you can live a good life on a savings nest egg, and as much as I’d like to be all pro-America, I don’t have much faith in our government at this point.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Hansolo #482

    Homigod,

  • Ted D

    Susan – “It sounds like she didn’t keep up her end of the bargain.”

    I don’t know that she knew exactly what the “bargain” was.

    “Ted has said he made some mistakes too.”

    I don’t know that *I* knew exactly what the “bargain” was either to be honest. We were both working from an incorrect set of rules/scripts, and neither of us had enough raw experience to know any better.

    I sincerely hope she works her issues out, but I don’t know if she has it in her to do the hard work required. Like I said, no longer my problem. ;-)

  • Russ in Texas

    @Lokland#452.

    Disagree. If Anne is a *successful* model, it wouldn’t be all that hard to figure out who she is (since I follow fashion, if she is up in ranked-model territory, I can actually make a pretty good educated guess). Modelling is like acting; LOTS of people wanting in, relatively few “top talent” at the top, and drama splashing all over FB is the LAST thing you need.

    That can be career damage, and it is ENTIRELY appreciable that the account would get the axe instantly under those circumstances.

  • HanSolo

    @Marellus

    Behind that mountain is Iceberg Lake due to the shade of the mountain and here’s a pic I took of the reflection of the sun, clouds, sky and mountain amidst the mini-icebergs in the lake:

    http://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/540368_10151195642145579_1373616213_n.jpg

    A beautiful lake and meadow of flowers before arriving at Iceberg Lake:

    http://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/409581_10151195641140579_265605001_n.jpg

    Here’s some bears I took a picture of:

    http://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/427456_10151188923155579_1875726426_n.jpg

    And a turquoise lake:

    http://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/284908_10151218415815579_1997969755_n.jpg

  • Russ in Texas

    Ted, what HanSolo hasn’t told you is that winters in that section are BRUTAL, much, MUCH worse than you’d normally espect at that latitude.

    I used to live nearby; don’t get me wrong, it’s gorgeous, but it’s not like just slipping off to East Tennessee.

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

      I’m not prepared to jump into a discussion of regional female SMVs, but I can tell you that my claim that Anne is a 9 is based on my own judgment, confirmed by three young males who had no idea who she is. One asked, “Is that Kate Upton?” As I said, Anne looks a bit like the bottom, *good* pic of KU I posted earlier. I guess you could say she’s a Boston 9, whatever that is.

      The only reason her looks are relevant is that I think it explains her unwillingness to meet Stephen halfway, and her assumption that she could win him with little effort and no emotional investment. No doubt it’s worked for her before. However, she really likes this one, he didn’t tolerate her nonsense, so she needs to adjust her mindset.

  • HanSolo

    @Russ in Texas

    Just stay for the summer. ;) Then off to Brazil and catch summer there.

    Actually, it’s beautiful in winter too with the mountains covered in snow and sitting by a warm fireplace watching football.

  • Escoffier

    “just like there are hardly any Americans in New York”

    This is not true.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Emily:

    You know what, I felt an increase in SMV when I was in London too! Among Indian guys at least. Guys bought me drinks, came up to tell me I was “really fit”, hitting on me in pairs — I even noticed one guy turning his head to look at me twice, lol. (It was weird because he was walking in *front* of me.)

    That being said, I also keenly felt a drop in status. Indians in the UK/Europe generally have a lower socio-economic status than they do in the US (rigorous US immigration standards –> different class of people). I heard some racist stuff. Given the choice between Europe and the US, I’d probably still choose the US.

  • Anne

    @ Escoffier,
    I don’t know the stats, but every time you meet an good-looking girl in NY, she will be from another country. Bigger city – more international, less Americans, less obesity. It’s the same with London.

  • Russ in Texas

    Don’t get me wrong, Han. It’s one of the very few and specific parts of the US which would lure me out of the subtle beauty of my lovely, flat, drab, ugly-as-death scrub plains, should I stumble onto the right offer/opportunity (and you guys have got the scrub plains, too).

    I’ve got GREAT memories from that part of the country. But it’s not for everyone.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Susan#498,

    If Anne *is* who I would guess she is (and it’s none of my damned business), then I concur, she would be outside of my usual preferences but an unarguable high-9.

    @Anne#499,

    Yes. Obesity is a HUGE issue in the US. It is elsewhere, too, but we seem to have fallen off the edge of the map into “here be elephants” country.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Hansolo

    There is nothing like this where I live. Nothing. The only place that might have vistas like this, is Lesotho … and there they still practice lobola

    In the area where I live, there are sights like this :

    http://www.walltor.com/images/wallpaper/karoo-8666.jpg

    http://www.thegreatkaroo.com/file/flatmountains.jpg

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8Mp4JEdzhOc/TxhnbWmmthI/AAAAAAAAEoc/SN9tdzsE4YY/s640/IMGP6622.JPG

    http://blog.sa-venues.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/gamkaskloof-02.jpg

    http://homeex.s3.amazonaws.com/photos/108809/2.108809_Prince_Albert_town.jpg

    http://www.africansky.com/img_sa_tours/8-day-capetown-gardenroute-2b.jpg

    Anyway, I can understand why Sam Neil’s character in The Hunt for Red October said he’d love to see Montana.

  • Escoffier

    “but every time you meet an good-looking girl in NY, she will be from another country”

    This is not true either, not even as an exaggeration.

    NYC is a giant vacuum cleaner hoovering up pretty girls from all over the nation. I don’t doubt that there are plenty of pretty foreigners too but the idea that all the good looking girls here are from overseas is preposterous.

  • Emily

    SayWhaat,

    I’m sure that that your American boyfriend makes you a bit biased, in the same way that my adorable English boyfriend makes me a bit biased. ;) I’m very much on TEAM ENGLISH GUYS. :P

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    Suzan, will you kindly unmoderate my latest comment ? Thank You.

  • Anne

    It’s impossible to agree completely on ‘attractiveness’. I understand that male readers, annoyed by my initial email and perhaps bitter from bad experience with an “entitled woman”, will do what they can to convince me I am not “as hot as I think I am”. I have never said anything about my appearance, and I cannot be everyone’s type. All I know is that I am Stephen’s “type”.
    I have observed different levels of female beauty in many larger cities, but the amount of attention I get from men in any European capital or NY or LA, does not vary that much.

    @Russ in Texas
    I am pretty certain I am not who “you think I am”, because there is really little way of knowing.

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

    Russ in Texas wrote:

    Ted, what HanSolo hasn’t told you is that winters in that section are BRUTAL, much, MUCH worse than you’d normally espect at that latitude.

    Skiing dry powder is an awesome, spiritual experience mkay?

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Anne:
    By the way, how’s Stephen doing? Planning on texting him later, say around 5?

  • Russ in Texas

    Anne, you’re almost certainly correct, and it’s is definitely not important. I *do* hope you and Stephen do well — that’s the only actual important thing we’ve discussed in 400-some posts!!

  • Russ in Texas

    Mr. Nervous Toes:

    Sure. Try building a snowman or having a decent snowball fight with the stuff. :p

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Here in Salt Lake we have nice mountains, but I’m not much of an outdoors type. It is a gorgeous view, though.

    Emily, no wonder I sometimes see you posting when I’m up at 5am. You’re in England. Way cool!

  • SayWhaat

    Emily,

    I’m sure that that your American boyfriend makes you a bit biased, in the same way that my adorable English boyfriend makes me a bit biased. I’m very much on TEAM ENGLISH GUYS.

    LOL, I didn’t know your bf was English! That accent must be a major plus. I love accents. BF and I know a couple where the girl is Irish and the guy is from Uganda. I could sit in the same room and listen to them talk all day…

  • Joe

    @Marellus,
    It would really help your cause if you spelled Susan’s name correctly.

  • Emily

    When I first arrived, I pretty much had a crush on every guy I talked to. But I’ve been over here for two years now, so I’ve actually developed an immunity to most of the accents. That being said, you have NO IDEA how much I’m looking forward to bringing my British boyfriend back home and showing him off!

  • Russ in Texas

    Emily,

    My wife’s Hungarian accent still occasionally turns some heads, though she’s “going native” now, and is on the phone with people in Memphis regularly — so sometimes she turns my head by combining something very Buda with a twang that would throw a basketball. :)

  • Just1Z

    @Marellus
    I’m afraid that my dutch is even worse than my german, and I haven’t heard much afrikaans. Had a few dive buddies around SEA from down your way though. Them Aussies, Kiwis and Scandies are endemic out that way – good times weere had!

    spent some time on HRMS Blommendal (Dutch Royal Navy) a few decades ago. unfortunately the phonetic alphabet stuck better than the local lingo.

    (no cheating from books etc – picked up a few words from hearing)
    een, twee, dree…twelf…twintig
    als je blieft
    dank je vel

    Don’t know that any of my 19th century ancestors had an active military history…maybe our great^n fathers just got pissed in a bar together? That’s my experience with you guys anyway…

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Joe #513

    and?

  • Emily

    Russ in Texas,

    Yeah, I’m hoping that I’ll eventually develop a sophisticated Transatlantic accent (like the mom on Downton Abbey!), but we’ll have to see what happens. :)

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Just1Z

    I hope the argument was about who insisted the most emphatically … on paying for all the drinks …

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Iggles: “Manipulating others = bad. Acting from integrity = good. It’s not that hard, dude.”

    Shit test = deception.
    Women who shit test = deserve being deceived, in return.
    Not that hard, babe.

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

      Shit test = deception.
      Women who shit test = deserve being deceived, in return.

      Most shit testing is not intended to deceive at all, the intent is to qualify the male. In fact, most of it is not even conscious. Nothing Machiavellian about it.

  • Just1Z

    @Emily
    can you tell brummie from liverpudlian? devonian from geordie?

    it’s generally to the English guys’ great good fortune that most Americans don’t know a good accent from a bad one (anecdotally speaking, of course). You may well be getting wise to that…damn

    me? I’ve got a non-estuarial generic south-east English one, but one can pile on the plum if required.

    I once had a woman from Savannah ask me to keep talking, didn’t matter what I said because she loved my accent so much…cool! except that in, oh so many ways, it was a shame that she was four decades my senior at the time…FML

  • Just1Z

    @Marellus, that’s a nice thought…

  • Russ in Texas

    Just1z:

    True story. When Reing of Crap (I mean Rain of Fire, sorry) came out (nice little B movie that could have been very good, spoiled by totally inappropriate soundtrack), a lot of my friends here in Texas LITERALLY couldn’t understand the actors’ dialogue — the Geordie was completely impenetrable to them. My wife having lived there and me having friends from not far off, we didn’t have that problem, and the two of us had to translate for the resto f the room.

  • Emily

    @ Just1Z,

    I honestly don’t understand why there isn’t a mass exodus of British guys into North America! I keep telling guys this, and they laugh, but I mean it! You know the part in Love Actually where the two British guys go to America? That’s actually how it works.

    I still have a lot to learn when it comes to the regional accents. I can tell if an accent is a Northern accent or if it’s really posh or if it’s a stereotypical Essex accent, but most of the subtleties get lost on me. I’m slowly learning, but there are SO MANY accents in such a small area!

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Just1Z @Russ

    What about Guy Ritchie movies ?

  • Just1Z

    @Russ
    yeah, I don’t think that the reverse problem crops up much as ‘we’ grow up to a lot of US TV shows.

    I worked with a glaswegian woman that was usually comprehensible, but every now and again she came into work and…oops. She had talked to family back home the night before and her accent went up and the speed with it – cue ‘pardon’, ‘sorry’, ‘did not quite catch that’, ‘come again’, blank stare. She slowed down and toned it down after an hour or two.

    Now there are lovely Sco’ish accents, but glaswegian is not one of them.

    a book that is only really readable to me if I mouth the words on the page (and it is a great book, very funny) is
    The Long Midnight Of Barney Thomson: A Serial Killer Thriller (Barney Thomson #1) by Douglas Lindsay
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Long-Midnight-Barney-Thomson-ebook/dp/B0060CIX6U
    he talks a lo’ a mince. d’ya ken? maybe no’ for the hens.
    (Lindsay toned the accent down a lot for the rest of the series)

    the famous book for the Edinburgh accent is of course:
    Trainspotting by Irvine Welsh (yeah, the source of the eponymous film)
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Trainspotting-ebook/dp/B0031RS588
    (again mouth the words and it works pretty well)

    one’s about serial killing, the other about drugs. Barney’s is the funnier story.

  • Underdog

    @OffTheCuff

    Actually, a woman shittesting a man is the equivalent of the man checking out her body.

    “Deception” on a woman’s part would be wearing makeup, high heels, push up bras, hair extensions, tanning, shaving her legs, plucking her eyebrows, etc. — to unnaturally make herself more physically attractive and manipulate the man’s perception of her.

    Everybody’s cool with that. But as soon as a guy uses dread to unnaturally demonstrate his status and raise her attraction — it’s labeled as insecurity and manipulation.

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

      @Underdog

      Not sure why I’m bothering, but:

      “Deception” on a woman’s part would be wearing makeup, high heels, push up bras, hair extensions, tanning, shaving her legs, plucking her eyebrows, etc. — to unnaturally make herself more physically attractive and manipulate the man’s perception of her.

      Everybody’s cool with that. But as soon as a guy uses dread to unnaturally demonstrate his status and raise her attraction — it’s labeled as insecurity and manipulation.

      The equivalent of a woman’s heightening her physical attractiveness is a man’s heightening his physical attractiveness. In fact, studies of Dark Triad males show that they’re not better looking naturally, they just put a huge effort into their personal appearance. Hairstyling, facial hair, clothing to show off musculature, tanning, etc. Also heel lifts, boots with a heel for added height, as well as clothing that sends a certain message, e.g. black leather jacket = bad boy rebel. Men are no less likely to deceive re their appearance or anything else. It is well known that when dating online, men regularly exaggerate both height and income in their profiles.

      The equivalent of a man’s using dread is a woman’s using dread. Waiting to return text messages, not picking up the phone, giving vague answers about plans, flaking, flirting with other men in front of your partner, wistfully mentioning exes, inside jokes with the gf’s he is not privy to, etc.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    “I’ll disagree here. I think my language in the OP is very direct and holds her fully responsible for her behavior. I did not state that being beautiful entitles her to treat other people poorly or take them for granted.”

    I think your advice was on the money. I was responding to some of your comments earlier in the comment thread where you seemed to be making a big deal about SMV- I wasn’t clear about that. Someone else has pointed out that at the upper end of the spectrum, there’s a big difference between what constitutes hot between a woman and a man, which makes for an imbalance in the numbers and serves to make looks a lot less important at that level. That’s not to kick dirt at all. But it does make the identity piece I have been harping on really important for hot girls who date in their range (which is nearly all of them), since it’s easy to get caught up in the external reinforcement that people are always providing. Personally I’d say you’d be doing a big service by writing something like an inner game primer for women- something less specific and more abstract to balance with the strategy. Anyhow, food for thought. Merry Christmas

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

      @BroHamlet

      Personally I’d say you’d be doing a big service by writing something like an inner game primer for women- something less specific and more abstract to balance with the strategy. Anyhow, food for thought. Merry Christmas

      This is a great idea. If you or anyone else has suggestions, shoot them to me. This is one I’ll have to think about a bit. Merry Christmas to you too!

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    Re : Shit tests

    Her : Do you do sports ?

    Me : No, I’m lazy.

    She cracked up. She couldn’t leave me alone. She was only ten years old.

    Unbelievable.

  • Just1Z

    @Marellus
    I do like Guy’s films. Brad Pitt as cool in Snatch, though he clearly couldn’t speaka-da-pikey. They really pulled that off very well.

    The ‘Zombies vs Cockneys’ film that I mentioned recently was funny but probably a little troublesome – kna wot I mene, mate? I gave a short list of translations for cockney rhyming slang to ‘normal’ on HUS (somewhere). It’s very Guy Ritchie-esque.

    http://www.amazon.com/Cockneys-Vs-Zombies-Blu-ray/dp/B008LU8MWO/
    not worth $45 though.

    perhaps it is available *cough* online *cough*?

    no worthwhile reviews on the US link, try the UK one

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cockneys-Vs-Zombies-Blu-ray/dp/B008LU8MWO
    £8 = $12-$13

  • Russ in Texas

    Just1Z:

    I’ll have to look Ritchie up. For somebody with a horribly degraded LOVE of appallingly-bad B movies, I’m actually pretty pathetic when it comes to pop culture – no t.v. and hobbies that are either nerdy as hell, or else high-academic-boring.

    I’ve heard Glaswegian, though, and wow. I find it quite difficult.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Most shit testing is not intended to deceive at all, the intent is to qualify the male. In fact, most of it is not even conscious. Nothing Machiavellian about it.”

    So if I deceive a women with the intent to get laid, it’s ok – so long as I am not conscious of it. Perfect!

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

      So if I deceive a women with the intent to get laid, it’s ok – so long as I am not conscious of it. Perfect!

      If you were not conscious, you could not be held accountable for a conscious choice, could you? I think a better analogy would be your doing a double take at a beautiful woman before you could stop yourself. Or fantasizing about sex with a beautiful stranger.

      It is important to note that shit testing is a response to a woman’s perception of male weakness. If you’re getting shit tested, you’re either going way too soft or you’re dating a ball buster who requires massive shows of dominance.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Susan:
    “In fact, most of it is not even conscious. Nothing Machiavellian about it.Most shit testing is not intended to deceive at all, the intent is to qualify the male.”

    Yes, I strongly believe that most of it is not even conscious. Definitely not something machiavelian, but rather a self protective manner of quantifying man’s value, yet at times definitely subconsciously Machiavelic…

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Russ

    Ever saw Blood Diamonds where Leo Di Caprio plays a Saffa ? His impersonation of the Saffa-accent is good. I’ve read that the Saffa-accent is one of the most difficult accents for an actor can imitate.

  • Just1Z

    @Russ
    “I’ve heard Glaswegian, though, and wow. I find it quite difficult.”

    oh boy, are you right about that!

    the Barney book is very entertaining if you can push through the language. But hey, it’s not any harder than Chaucer (or not by much)…

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Just1Z

    I love Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister. It’s, for me, the finest comedy ever made.

  • Just1Z

    @Marellus
    Coupling is my favourite, Susan is a fan too. Note that we’re talking about the original UK version here. It was written by the guy who went on to re-vamp Dr Who.

    Jeff ‘caravan-shaker’ / ‘sock gap’ / ‘giggle loop’ / ‘Ihave the key to the gates of paradise, but I’ve got too many legs’ Murdoch is the funniest character in a very funny series.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgNezkr89oQ&playnext=1&list=PL243D86636E76E2E5

    Steve: There are three things all men should know, and it’s time you did too. You’re never going to be famous, you’re fatter than you think, and, most important of all, they don’t keep wearing stockings

  • Russ in Texas

    On par with Chaucer is fine, since I happen to be a medievalist. On par with Beowulf, and I’m calling it a day.

  • Just1Z

    @Russ
    to (mis?)quote a great American philosopher, “A man must know his limitations”

    me? my limit is Glaswegian, and ahm no talkin’ mince here

  • Underdog

    @Susan

    “The equivalent of a woman’s heightening her physical attractiveness is a man’s heightening his physical attractiveness”

    That’s not how it works. Men are attracted to physical appearance that signal fertility in women. Women are attracted to behaviors that signify status/dominance in men. I feel like this is basic red pill stuff here and you’re reverting to equalist/feminist thinking.

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

      Women are attracted to behaviors that signify status/dominance in men.

      Women are attracted to men who signal “good genes.” Looks are very important to women. They look for symmetry, strength, and signs of a strong immune system. If you don’t accept that, you’re kidding yourself.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Waiting to return text messages, not picking up the phone, giving vague answers about plans, flaking, flirting with other men in front of your partner, wistfully mentioning exes, inside jokes with the gf’s he is not privy to, etc.

    Sometimes this is not necessarily bad.

    Well some of it.

    If she sends me a text message every 15 minutes, that’s kind of a problem.

    This factors into guys not texting/calling/etc all the time, too. Us Blue-Pill Beta Guys REALLY have to hold ourselves back when we want to express more, which is what is actually necessary to keep attraction, but the way “dread game” is being described in this thread, well, all Blue Pill Beta Guys are Grade-A Dicks.

  • Just1Z

    @Russ
    speaking of unusual music (which we weren’t) and adding in Hungarian (your wife), have you heard any ‘Ladytron’ (kind of ‘Roxy Music’ish). One of the two lead singers is a rather good looking Hungarian lady. I wouldn’t say that it’s a favourite of mine, but it’s catchy when you’re in the mood. Might surprise your wife too…

    Black Cat (2:00+ for Hungarian vocals)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Lwh5gu58oc

    Kletva
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2FwauPpods

    English (my favourite of theirs, the first that I heard):
    Destroy everything you touch
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTTwlAT_AwU

    no vocals – atmospheric
    CMYK
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSz-OvtJP90

    and g’night

  • VD

    Because why would someone who is secure and confident BOTHER playing a game like deliberately turning your phone off for 4 days so you’re GF can’t contact you?

    Ted beat me to it. Because it works. That’s what people here and elsewhere still don’t understand about Game. The tactics WORK. It is only the reasons as to why they work that are in question. Expressing doubt about the tactics only indicates that you genuinely have no idea what you’re talking about. Being secure and confident doesn’t indicate behaving in a sub-optimal manner that reduces your chances of getting what you want.

    It’s not your hitting on other women that creates dread (though I’m sure she wouldn’t appreciate it), it’s other women coming after you. That’s the main reason I think this tactic is low value. A woman whose husband has options, or who women find attractive in general, is well aware of it. Acting creepy and inappropriate with other people’s wives just humiliates your wife, it doesn’t make her want to give you a blow job.

    And that is irrelevant if it makes her give you the blow job whether she thinks she wants to or not. Susan, the main reason you think this tactic is low value is because you were scarred by it as a child. But just because you see your father as low value and you saw him use the tactic does not mean that the tactic itself is of low value, much less the men who utilize it.

    Genuine indifference may be more honest than the synthetic Game imitation, but it’s not necessarily less damaging to the woman involved. Do you really think it makes a woman happier or helps her self-esteem to know that the man in her life genuinely doesn’t care that much about whether she is in his life or not, as opposed to having him fake it every now and again?

    I agree that it would be best if everyone was open, honest, and disdained tactics of manipulation and control. But that’s simply not the case for most of the people most of the time. Here is a question for you: do you agree that once a woman shows she is willing to utilize manipulative and controlling tactics, or play fast and loose with the truth, a man is perfectly justified in doing the same in return?

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

      @VD

      And that is irrelevant if it makes her give you the blow job whether she thinks she wants to or not.

      If she gives you a blow job that she’s not sure she wants to give you, the attraction is already eroding. Sex with resentment is a malignant thing. There is no possibility for a good marriage when dread is in play.

      Susan, the main reason you think this tactic is low value is because you were scarred by it as a child. But just because you see your father as low value and you saw him use the tactic does not mean that the tactic itself is of low value, much less the men who utilize it.

      This is a misinterpretation of what I have shared here. I am actually very close to my father and see him as high value. I believe he was desperately unhappy with a bipolar wife, which is understandable. However, he never used the tactic of instilling dread. He is extremely charismatic, even now, and has always received a lot of attention from women. My mother was pissed because he enjoyed it, but the attention was a DHV. His soliciting it would have been a DLV.

      Why would a man of high value ever need to instill dread?

      Do you really think it makes a woman happier or helps her self-esteem to know that the man in her life genuinely doesn’t care that much about whether she is in his life or not, as opposed to having him fake it every now and again?

      Frankly, I cannot imagine living with this Hobson’s choice. How about the man in my life genuinely does care that I am in his life and openly professes that? I share that sense of gratitude and express it frequently myself.

      Here is a question for you: do you agree that once a woman shows she is willing to utilize manipulative and controlling tactics, or play fast and loose with the truth, a man is perfectly justified in doing the same in return?

      Justified from a moral standpoint? Perhaps. But it’s a loser’s game. A War of the Roses. At that point, you might as well cut your losses and move on.

  • VD

    But just because you see your father as low value and you saw him use the tactic does not mean that the tactic itself is of low value, much less the men who utilize it.

    Let me rephrase that, it came out sounding much too harsh. “But just because you saw your father as low value in this regard etc…

  • derpistan

    Others have touched on it already, but this is my synopsis of what happened. This woman has never had someone turn her down before. She’s has her ass kissed her entire life. She blows off this dude at 8pm because she has to “sleep” for 2 hours (which is bullshit if you ask her, she didn’t sleep, just a convenient lie to make her feel better), then calls him at 11p.m for a late night booty call. She didn’t really want to hang out with him, she wanted to tolerate him for a drink or two and then have another fuck buddy session. Her late night booty call is DENIED. The first time in her life this has happened. She hasn’t dealt with people out of college yet who have lives outside of getting laid, and certainly hasn’t dealt with someone who thinks their career is more important than her vajayjay. This denial gets her PISSED OFF (her words), her ego is so fragile about it that she has to come back and tell him she doesn’t want to hang out with him for the near future, in order to save ‘face’ in her eyes. He, of course being a logical dude, says ‘sure call me when you can’, which enrages her further because it’s not supplicating (some people call it respecting yourself, I would say you need game in this era to reject the feminist mindset enough to respect yourself like this). She then decides to shit on him again by calling him at 1 a.m. and waking him up (to remind him that she doesn’t give a shit about his career) to request another booty call. Again, DENIED. In light of these two rejections, she realizes she doesn’t have ‘hand’ (her words), and since she’s so full of herself she can’t have a relationship without that dynamic, she never asks if they are still on for Saturday, because double checking means she doesn’t have ‘hand’, they would be equals. Obviously, after realizing he’s just a booty call and not wanting to be just that (usually these are called NICE guys and not pursued by 9’s but of course $$$ changes things), he blows her off for the Saturday party he’s been bragging to all his friends that he has a hot date for. She then unfriends him on Facebook, the ultimate 16 year old diss. Then, being of sound hamster solipsistic mind, she wonders why after she unfriended him on Facebook, and called him at midnight on a work night twice for a booty call, why he hasn’t come crawling back to her asking why she defriended him and begging for her attentions again.
    Sounds like high school to me. This woman is in for a rude awakening when she leaves college.
    It’s l

  • Russ in Texas

    @Just1Z#546,

    That’s not Hungarian. That’s slavic, which I speak poorly. Big wide vowels, so something southern, probably Croat or Bulgarian (ALL slavic languages are about as close together as french-italian at the outside, but I speak just enough of the common words and phrases to get around town and play tourist or find my way to the archives — anything else and I need help, bigtime).

  • JuTR

    Bastiat, you said, “Every man really needs a Safe Room, if not a Safe House…Batcave, Fortress of Solitude, Tony Stark’s private lab, etc. At a minimum, it should be equipped with secure access (I recommend Medeco locks), high-quality porn/sports-viewing equipment, sound system, heavy bag(s), a well-stocked bar area, a microwave, and adequate workshop tables and shelving for hobbies and interests.”

    I think I agree with this. Russ didn’t like the locks with his married perspective, but I don’t think many men really disagree with the rest. Introverts need their retreats more than extoverts, I suspect.

  • Russ in Texas

    @VD#547,

    This is the part that throws me:

    Yes, it works. It ABSOLUTELY works, if executed correctly. But does that mean it’s necessarily the right tool for the job?

    If a man’s crossed that oh so special line, I *could* bust his nose and reverse his knee as a way of getting him to see my point. Or, if I’m an actual reasonable human being, I might be able to fix the problem by sitting him down and buying him a beer.

    Given the choice, wouldn’t the buy-him-a-beer non-nuclear option be preferred first?

  • derpistan

    Oh so Anne, how did that text message/email/phone message (hopefully you have enough class to supplicate on the phone) go? It’s been a few days now. Inquiring minds want to know. Or let me guess, this is all mental masturbation.

  • Russ in Texas

    @JuTR

    This one’s fundamentally a de-gustibus thing. I’m heavily introverted, but so is my wife, and we have a very, very quiet house. To the point that I haul my kid to McDonalds, where I would NEVER actually eat otherwise, just to get her around a bunch of rambunctious crazy people playing on slides.

    If my wife were an outgoing social creature with lots of family friends over, a television (which we don’t even own) blaring, and all that, then yes, I would absolutely require a Fortress of Solitude. But outside of the kitchen, which is her territory, it’s my g-d house, and I’m not retreating into a corner in order to do the things I do, unless they involve dangerous chemicals. (withdrawing is what happens to doormats in horror stories who wind up finding themselves living in a garage or basement while the wife runs a house he barely even recognizes).

  • Russ in Texas

    derp — too early. She just contacted the guy yesterday.

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

      derp — too early. She just contacted the guy yesterday.

      He said that he wants very much to see her, and gave her his schedule for the next three days. They have made a plan to see one another during that time.

  • derpistan

    “Has it come to that? Not begging = Game?”

    Who else is going to teach you to respect yourself? Your dad that is never around? Your mom that hates men from her college study days? The football locker room in high school? It is the posters you don’t like, Rollo and Roissy and Roosh (The Triple R(tm) Respect yourself team) that have taken it upon themselves to remind men to ignore everything they were taught in life, and look back on their life and remember what worked, and realize it was -always- bullshit like playing it cool or ignoring her that gave you access to the best sex from the best looking women. Of course, you try to bury those thoughts, because you lose respect for humans, both male and female, when you realize that everything Edward Bernays said was correct.

  • Jesse

    The worst thing I can say about Anne is that she comes across as lacking some some grace, charm and femininity. She seems a bit… stiff.

    Having said that, I’m not comfortable criticizing her very harshly because I don’t know enough about the situation. It seems a bit uncouth to be too definitive.

    Also, Russ, I have seen some very attractive Hungarian women, but I am too ashamed to mention specifically which corners of the Internet I have found them in. Ha ha.

  • Sai

    @Russ in Texas

    This is the only song I know containing Hungarian vocals:
    http://youtu.be/GAdK74gJe04

    (Gonna watch Ahnold in “Collateral Damage” now, yay)

  • JP

    “It is the posters you don’t like, Rollo and Roissy and Roosh (The Triple R(tm) Respect yourself team) that have taken it upon themselves to remind men to ignore everything they were taught in life, and look back on their life and remember what worked, and realize it was -always- bullshit like playing it cool or ignoring her that gave you access to the best sex from the best looking women. Of course, you try to bury those thoughts, because you lose respect for humans, both male and female, when you realize that everything Edward Bernays said was correct.”

    Game is just a brute force social engineering hack.

    Not impressed.

  • Underdog

    @JP

    “Game is just a brute force social engineering hack.”

  • Ted D

    JP – “Game is just a brute force social engineering hack”

    As a former IT security guy, impressive or not, brute force hacks often work. And as Vin Diesel said in the Fast and the Furious, “it don’t matter if you win by an inch or a mile, winning is winning.”

  • derpistan

    “Not impressed.”

    What is it you are not impressed with?

  • Lokland

    @Russ

    “Given the choice, wouldn’t the buy-him-a-beer non-nuclear option be preferred first?”

    Depends.
    If the three bullet hole scars in your shoulder are from the last time you tried to sit a guy down and buy him a beer then no. Shoot him you idiot.

    Dread game works.
    Its effective.

    All other points are moot

    EXCEPT

    Its not the only thing that works.
    There are other things that tend to work more consistently.

    Personally I preferred an approach to women that treated them like what they were.

    Dark women got dark game. (Know I’m gonna get shot. Therefore shoot first.)
    Light women got light game. (Not getting shot.)
    Those who couldn’t make it obvious got dark game. (Your example.)
    Those who are receptive to light and dark game. (Dark game.)

    Maybe if you grew up in a hole with zero social skills and look like a mole-rat light game might not work.

    However on the right women being a ‘gentleman’ (not a pussy) is quite effective.

    The problem with PUAs is they are unable to ID the different types of women.
    And dark women tend to have a lot of pull (slutty hot) vs. the light women most of whom have 0 femininity and 0 pull (least in North America).

    ——————————

    On the FB bit.

    Don’t care.
    Stated above.
    If you can’t tell whether its dark game (temper tantrum FB deletion, insanity game actually) or work related (light game) either do not proceed or treat with dark game.

    Personally from how it was written I went forward with the interpretation that this girl was actually nuts.

    Under no circumstance would I view being turned down as an acceptable reason for what occurred.

  • derpistan

    “Game is just a brute force social engineering hack.”

    I remember back in college I dated an extreme hotty for a few weeks, getting nowhere. We went out to see some music, and I had basically gotten so frustrated with her I decided to be a dick (There was no concept of game in the early 90’s so I can’t call it running game) and scammed on another woman at the table next to me, got her phone number, chatted her for a full hour ignoring the woman I came with, and even said at one point ‘Let me drop of my FRIEND I came with, and we can go find some bar that closes right at 2 after the shows over’. Guess who had hot sex with a hotty that night. Of course the next morning, she went back to ignoring me again, because the GAMING WORE OFF, but it was ok, all my roomates heard the balls slappin’ against her ass, my legend was secured. You can act like a bitch after that but it really doesn’t mean shit to me since we both know you were moaning with my dick inside you last night. That, my friends, is GAME before it was called that. Pull your head out of your ass with these terms and trying to put them in little cubicles for you to shame.
    To summarize, -game works-, -game over-.

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

      @derpistan

      Of course the next morning, she went back to ignoring me again, because the GAMING WORE OFF

      Well there you go. Game is a 12 hour fix. You got balls deep and then kicked to the curb. You could look back on balls slappin’, but you knew it wasn’t real. She didn’t really like you.

  • Lokland

    Note: In all instances where dark game is used. For all you Nice Guys there is the DO NOT ENGAGE option.

    That should be obvious.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Lokland#563.

    These guys remind me of an old adage that seems appropriate: “when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” Yeah, it’s a tool that can work. But holy SHIT if you’re looking for a quality ltr/marriage with a quality woman, is it the worst of all the workable tools to pick. (And I’m *not* a nice guy. I work really fucking hard at being a nice guy.)

    Yeah, I suppose if you just absolutely HAD to screw some hot crazy falling knife, you’d need a hammer. But, uh, for the vast majority of men, there are better women, and better women FOR you….

  • Russ in Texas

    @Sai#558.

    One of the “recent classics” that’s been used in a lot of movies is music by Marta Sebastyen.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Derpistan#556.

    “Who else is going to teach you to respect yourself? ”

    Narcissists don’t need any additional help respecting themselves.
    For the rest of us, how about learning to do something HARD, and developing some skills? Or learning to box? Macho bullshit aside, I can take any spineless dweeb off the street and build him up so that after a year, he doesn’t care about getting punched in the face, let alone some non-quality-chick’s temper tantrum or attempt to manipulate.

  • Lokland

    @Russ

    +1 to your entire comment at 563

    With the added tid bit that sometimes screwing a “hot crazy falling knife” is a welcome respite from the drudgery that is normality.

    Just don’t marry her.

  • Lokland

    BTW, I like the hammer and nail analogy.
    I personally think of it as the kid who got a Bibi gun for Christmas and pegs himself in the eye (can’t remember the name of the movie).

  • derpistan

    If you are an o.g. boxing trainer I have no doubt you can make a man out of most of us. We have been trained by feminists that trying to appeal through muscles is lame. Yet we see it works every day. How to rectify the competing concepts?

  • Russ in Texas

    Lokland.

    Yup. Been there, done that, got the knife wound. Good women put out twice as much for ten times less drama. ymmv.

  • Russ in Texas

    @derpistan.

    No, I’m a guy who got the shit kicked outta me for ten years straight in a ring and would get WIPED by even the lowest of the amateurs…and woke up one day and realized “you know, actually, getting hit in the face is really good stress relief.”

  • Lokland

    @derp

    “Yet we see it works every day. How to rectify the competing concepts?”

    Realize that there is no competition. There is what works and there is what does not work.

    How someone feels about it is irrelevant.

    That applies equally to Susan-dark game and feminists-masculinity.
    (Though unlike feminists Susan is actually…you know…into dudes who act like dudes.)

  • Russ in Texas

    Honestly, I think “quit listening to feminists” is perfectly valid advice all on its own, and plenty to start rehabilitating guys who’ve been fed a line of shit — and women, too.

  • Abbot
  • Russ in Texas

    @Abbot. Yeah, the Futurist laid out the economics quite well and convincingly, I thought.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Susan#580: Right. So it’s way the hell too early for anybody to be bugging her yet.

  • derpistan

    Susan – thanks for the update, you got through to her ; clapclap.

  • derpistan

    “She didn’t really like you.”

    A man would be lying if he said he never tried to punch above his weight, to borrow a fellow poster’s analogy. But you need something extra to punch above your weight. In my case I gamed someone accidentally, and only looking back 20 years later can I see what actually went down. But at least with the 3 Terrible R’s, I have a reason to genuflect what works, and what doesn’t, and why. I wasn’t being a dick to get in her pants (aka thinking ahead with game), I was being a dick because I was through. The only reason she fucked me is to deny the other woman I was going to fuck that night, to spite the other woman. THAT IS HOW CHICKS WORK. Edward Bernays ftw :/

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

      The only reason she fucked me is to deny the other woman I was going to fuck that night, to spite the other woman. THAT IS HOW CHICKS WORK

      There are actually women who aren’t into fucking men to spite other women, because they’re in relationships that are working. Even with my scandalous double digit count, I have never in my life had sex with a man for any reason other than that I wanted him badly.

      I cannot imagine that being the “prize” in a game of female intrasexual competition is gratifying beyond the immediate physical release.

  • derpistan

    I was dumb, I actually thought she liked me and was going to treat me different the next day after fucking me, like I actually had a chance. It was only the next day that I realized that my only prize was the booby prize, a nice fuck. Silly Betas.

  • derpistan

    Susan: on another funny note, the woman at the next table that I got her number, I saw her at another concert six months later, she remembered me and came up to me, we dated for about two months before she told me I was a Goyim and she’s not allowed to marry a Goyim. That was that.

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

      @derpistan

      Susan: on another funny note, the woman at the next table that I got her number, I saw her at another concert six months later, she remembered me and came up to me, we dated for about two months before she told me I was a Goyim and she’s not allowed to marry a Goyim. That was that.

      So the other woman was right – the woman at the next table thought you were hot. Pity about the religious difference…

  • derpistan

    I didn’t even know what the word Goyim was until then :/ Anyway I enjoy your blog (I did find it through the 3 Terrible R’s(tm) ), I’m glad you got through to one person (Anne). I’m impressed she was able to get past all the hazing and find some truth in 600 and counting responses. That makes me smile. I’ll be rooting for her (and him), which is unusual. Cheers :)

  • ExNewYorker

    “So if I deceive a women with the intent to get laid, it’s ok – so long as I am not conscious of it. Perfect!”

    My cad brother the natural does this all the time. He also instills dread, freezes out, and flirts with other women. But he just does it naturally, without thinking about it. Not Machiavellian at all…

    This reminds me of the whole sausage analogy…we all love hot dogs as long as we don’t know the details of how they come to be.

    I guess you gotta fake it till you make it. Then you won’t be faking it at all…

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

      @ENY

      My cad brother the natural does this all the time. He also instills dread, freezes out, and flirts with other women. But he just does it naturally, without thinking about it. Not Machiavellian at all…

      No, I think we’d have to blame the sociopathy for that, with its characteristic low empathy.

      You make a good point though – is a person blameless if they have no conscience? Or if they sincerely believe that bad is good? Or are physiologically incapable of any behavior that is not predatory? Generally, we do hold people accountable for their actions, so I’ll amend my statement to say that the woman who constantly shit tests without thinking about it is “wired” in such a way that makes empathy unlikely, and her satisfaction elusive.

      In both cases, stay far away.

  • Jason

    Beautiful, Intelligent or Sane, pick two.

    Hmm. I’ll pick Beautiful and Sane. From my perspective there’s no difference between a 130 IQ and a 100 IQ, except the former thinks she’s intelligent.

    Anne, as everyone is saying, if you actually want him to want you, eat that crow. He’ll walk otherwise.

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

      @Jason

      From my perspective there’s no difference between a 130 IQ and a 100 IQ, except the former thinks she’s intelligent.

      I have iq one hunnerd and ugreed with evryting u say. I am bootifull and san and cooking reel good. Chilly and mackronie. I also luv fuck! Fuck now big boy!

  • szopen

    @underdog

    your problem is with intent — not tactics

    Yes. Because the intent makes clear whether you employing the tactics just to reach the goal, which is in itself moral – and therefore you probably would not use the tactics lightly.
    Screaming at the child is bad thing, but it may be effective as temporary tactics when you badly need their attention. My son is trying to put a fork into a computer: scream, he throws the fork, tactics worked. However, since I used this tactic just as a last restort, you can be pretty sure that I don’t use it everyday. It does not make tactic good. That’s why intent always matters, as intent is the signal over the future uses of some dubious tactics.

  • szopen

    @Russ in Tex

    These guys remind me of an old adage that seems appropriate:“when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.”

    Yes, exactly. I think a lot of males have an inclination to build systems, which help understand the reality. This is a great thing actually, except when we start to overuse a system. If the system explains a lot and has a lot of inner logic, they guys tend to start explaining EVERYTHING in terms of that system, they tend to became blind to things which prove the system wrong, they tend to interpret reality in terms of their system.

    It only gets worse with intteligent males, since they know they are intelligent, so they are pretty sure their system is good. Moreover, the more intelligent guy, the greater chance most of people he interacts with have lower IQ, hence the larger chance he become convinced he’s got it and when he meets a critique, he will going to assume that the critique is invalid because it surely was formulated by one of those idiots.

    Hence, once a guy swallows the red pill, he is going to see everything in terms of game, and will ignore anything which is contrary to the game. E.g. woman can’t be attracted to beta’s; if woman is attracted to beta, then surely she is attracted to his alpha qualities or maybe she just want to use him. Even if a woman is atracted to beta, then she is not getting wet, so it does not really matter. And when most of woman don’t get wet for ANY sort of guy immedietely and they tend to explain that their attraction works differently, it’s because the woman don’t know themselves and it’s their hamster running.

    Once you a logged in, you cannot leave.

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

      @szopen

      It only gets worse with intteligent males, since they know they are intelligent, so they are pretty sure their system is good. Moreover, the more intelligent guy, the greater chance most of people he interacts with have lower IQ, hence the larger chance he become convinced he’s got it and when he meets a critique, he will going to assume that the critique is invalid because it surely was formulated by one of those idiots.

      This is a widespread phenomenon, even on display here at HUS. You nailed it, right down to the dismissal of experts with at least the same level of intelligence.

      Hence, once a guy swallows the red pill, he is going to see everything in terms of game, and will ignore anything which is contrary to the game. E.g. woman can’t be attracted to beta’s; if woman is attracted to beta, then surely she is attracted to his alpha qualities or maybe she just want to use him. Even if a woman is atracted to beta, then she is not getting wet, so it does not really matter. And when most of woman don’t get wet for ANY sort of guy immedietely and they tend to explain that their attraction works differently, it’s because the woman don’t know themselves and it’s their hamster running.

      Once you a logged in, you cannot leave.

      The only thing you left out is that when a woman demonstrates that she does in fact work differently, she is branded an “outlier.” It sounds like some dystopian designation for the hinterlands. An outcast, a weirdo. Or else she’s treated as the Blessed Madonna of Mating, the one woman ever born without the sin of hypergamy.

      This is why I concluded long ago that debate on certain topics among the “indoctrinated” is not productive.

  • szopen

    @jason

    From my perspective there’s no difference between a 130 IQ and a 100 IQ

    Do you want to have high-IQ children?

  • szopen

    Strange thing, I wanted yesterday to comment on one sentence Anne wrote in her letter, but had no time, and today I can’t find this fragment (or was it somewhere in comments? Or maybe I mixed taht with the previous letter from Karen?). Seems I started to have hallucinations :) … But then I wanted to recommend to remove that sentence anyway :D.

    Good thing for Anne is that she’s just 22. Her market value will raise for the next 8 years. Got plenty time to make mistakes. The only danger is that she will not learn from her mistakes, but she seems not to be that kind of girl.

    ANyway, I find it amusing that from the comments here, the game seems to be about faking the behaviour normal guys in the past just had (like self-respect).

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

      @szopen

      Seems I started to have hallucinations … But then I wanted to recommend to remove that sentence anyway.

      I did remove some content at Anne’s request, on the off chance that Stephen reads HUS. Highly unlikely, but you never know.

  • Just1Z

    @Russ
    my bad, it was late and I didn’t czech her nationality. too late to bed last night. in my defense, having listened to the pretty lady, it’s all greek to me.

    (today is bad humour day, but then every day is bad humour day for me…and don’t say that you hadn’t noticed because I won’t believe you)

  • VD

    If she gives you a blow job that she’s not sure she wants to give you, the attraction is already eroding. Sex with resentment is a malignant thing. There is no possibility for a good marriage when dread is in play

    You’re missing the point. Dread is a means of STIMULATING ATTRACTION. It is also a means of potentially fixing a marriage where the woman has already lost attraction. The calm, well-intentioned reason you tend to advocate is an ideal, to be sure, but for most people, it is not a practical reality. What do you advise when attraction is already shaky, Install Dread, Suffer in Silence, or Nexting? Because in some cases, those are the options, unless you can suggest another one. Pointing and calling “DLV, DLV” isn’t so much wrong as irrelevant.

    This is a misinterpretation of what I have shared here. I am actually very close to my father and see him as high value. I believe he was desperately unhappy with a bipolar wife, which is understandable. However, he never used the tactic of instilling dread. He is extremely charismatic, even now, and has always received a lot of attention from women. My mother was pissed because he enjoyed it, but the attention was a DHV. His soliciting it would have been a DLV.

    Have you not repeatedly brought up your father as an example of the evils of Dread? And now you’re saying that he never used the tactic? Your father didn’t just magically receive attention; no man does. He solicited it, even if only passively, and more importantly, he did not deflect it. What you’re saying here is that Dread is a DHV if it is unintentional and a DLV if it is intentional. That makes no sense, because Dread concerns EFFECT, not INTENT. Dread Game, like all Game, is the synthetic imitation of the natural. Your father naturally instilled Dread. But doing so intentionally and synthetically is no more a DLV than a successful neg or a successful application of kino can be considered a DLV.

    To be sure, a failed attempt to intentionally instill Dread would be a DLV. Why? Because it is a failed EFFECT. But a successful attempt to intentionally instill Dread can only be a DHV. This should be obvious, because if it was not indicative of perceived higher value, it would not work.

    It’s understandable why you would have a strong distaste for Dread. But I think you need to look closely at the strength of your distaste for it and recognize that you are not analyzing the tactic with your usual detachment. There is not inherent separation between self-respect and Dread. Those with a high degree of self-respect will tend to naturally instill Dread because they are self-sufficient. They genuinely don’t need the approval of others, which tends to make others anxious and even hostile. Those with less self-respect may need to instill it with intent.

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

      @VD

      The calm, well-intentioned reason you tend to advocate is an ideal, to be sure, but for most people, it is not a practical reality.

      Why is calm reason not a reality? We can train animals using positive, negative or intermittent reinforcement. Explaining your position in a rational manner is a way of delivering negative reinforcement, which will hopefully be followed by the opportunity to provide positive reinforcement. This should be effective with any creature with higher order thinking. The deployment of Dread is akin to the rat’s receiving a nasty electrical shock at the end of the maze instead of a piece of cheese. I reject any claim that women must be treated as feral creatures incapable of reason.

      What do you advise when attraction is already shaky, Install Dread, Suffer in Silence, or Nexting? Because in some cases, those are the options, unless you can suggest another one. Pointing and calling “DLV, DLV” isn’t so much wrong as irrelevant.

      Stephen seems to have figured it out. Attraction seemed shaky, he cut his losses and moved on. No tactics of the sort Roissy recommends. If you’re talking about Athol’s clients, that’s a different discussion, and I have seen Athol on occasion dip his toe in the Dread pool. However, the posts about Dread that I have cited and objected to were entirely focused on prophylactic maneuvering to keep the upper hand and send the woman into a sustained state of anxiety and jealousy.

      I do not believe this is appropriate, but equally importantly it is not effective. I think it’s bad strategy because it sets up an entirely adversarial dynamic between two people, breeding resentment, conquest and fear. You might as well be Scheherazade at that point. There will be no joy.

      That makes no sense, because Dread concerns EFFECT, not INTENT. Dread Game, like all Game, is the synthetic imitation of the natural. Your father naturally instilled Dread. But doing so intentionally and synthetically is no more a DLV than a successful neg or a successful application of kino can be considered a DLV.

      To the woman on the receiving end of Dread, intent is key. Is my husband so charismatic and funny that women gather round him at parties? (Yes, Mrs. Walsh, he is.) How does he handle that? Is he smarmy, touching them and winking, drunkenly making suggestive remarks, or is he aware of his magnetism, even enjoying it, while maintaining integrity and respecting his marriage? The wife of this man will be well aware of his SMV regardless of his response. The former breeds resentment, as it publicly humiliates the wife (Mrs. Walsh went home early, will weep and yell and refuse to have sex for weeks.) The latter approach reinforces the wife’s belief that she has won the top prize – she will feel proud of her accomplishment and motivated to appreciate this man who other women find attractive.

      If you have to instill Dread, then you’re admitting that other women do not, in fact, find you attractive. You have to make up Russian exes who give good head and phone calls with loud sounds of revelry in the background. Do you not see something pathetic about a man’s getting out of his quiet car and entering a packed bar to call his girlfriend or wife? If he’s a man with those options, he doesn’t need to manufacture them – his wife will be well aware. If he’s not, she already knows it or will figure it out very quickly. This is why Dread is not effective strategy as more than a jump to the battery of a clunker.

      Those with a high degree of self-respect will tend to naturally instill Dread because they are self-sufficient. They genuinely don’t need the approval of others, which tends to make others anxious and even hostile. Those with less self-respect may need to instill it with intent.

      A far better strategy would be to do the work of developing self-respect. I imagine that Dread corrodes a man’s self-respect, thereby worsening the problem. Unless he’s truly Dark Triad, he will not enjoy the Machiavellian approach, nor be able to sustain it. If he is, well then he’s writing blog posts instead of reading them.

  • VD

    ANyway, I find it amusing that from the comments here, the game seems to be about faking the behaviour normal guys in the past just had (like self-respect)

    Do you still not understand what Game is? It is the intentional imitation of the naturally successful. Not the normal, the successful.

    I’ll pick Beautiful and Sane. From my perspective there’s no difference between a 130 IQ and a 100 IQ, except the former thinks she’s intelligent.

    The former is intelligent. The problem is that she thinks she’s a genius and smarter than everyone else, including her cognitive betters.

  • Jason

    The former is intelligent. The problem is that she thinks she’s a genius and smarter than everyone else, including her cognitive betters.

    Good point.

  • Underdog

    @Susan

    “Women are attracted to men who signal “good genes.” Looks are very important to women. They look for symmetry, strength, and signs of a strong immune system. If you don’t accept that, you’re kidding yourself.”

    Hugh Hefner, Donald Trump, Jay-Z (ugliest rapper ever) are all laughing at that comment.

    If looks were important to women, then young, healthy looking guys who act like chumpy betas would be getting laid everywhere — but they are not (I believe most guys can back me up on this). Looks are not the defining factor when it comes to men, Susan. Behavior/status/dominance are.

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

      @Underdog

      If looks were important to women, then young, healthy looking guys who act like chumpy betas would be getting laid everywhere — but they are not (I believe most guys can back me up on this). Looks are not the defining factor when it comes to men, Susan. Behavior/status/dominance are.

      I don’t know whose Kool Aid you’re drinking, but you’re seriously misinformed. Ugly rich men do well, yes. Why? Because Occupational status is the strongest female attraction cue of all. Rich guys are at the top of that pyramid, that’s a huge head start in scoring the weighted formula of female attraction. Status is made up of dominance and prestige, and women select much more strongly for prestige.

      Women do like dominance – the popularity of romance literature proves that. However, the dominance is always coupled with good character in female fantasy, or involves a woman’s bringing out the best in a man of formerly bad character. Women want the benevolent alpha, not the asshole. In the absence of the former, some women do go for the latter, usually with unfortunate results.

      Looks are important. The top males are handsome. I do in fact know handsome betas who are capable of getting ONSs – where they have difficulty is in sustaining attraction, because they act chumpy. Also, a lot of them don’t really want ONSs – they’re not wired for them. Or so I hear.

      Looks are not as important for women as for men – maybe they account for 25-50% of attraction rather than 75%, depending on other factors. But a guy who scores a low rating in the “looks factor” will have a hard time making that up elsewhere to win.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Underdog.
    The examples you take are a poor choice. It equals to saying this: All women are gold diggers…
    Besides, a gold digger having the option to choose between D. Trump and a billionaire that looks like, say, Hugh Grant, who do you think she’s more likely to pick?
    Young and healthy looking doesn’t mean good looking. Looks DO matter for women. The major difference between men and women regarding the importance they attach to looks is that, with women, the good looks of any guy quickly fades if, when he opens his mouth, he sounds as eloquent as Dan Quayle on a bad day.

  • derpistan

    “game seems to be about faking the behaviour normal guys in the past just had (like self-respect).”

    Guys had more self respect in the 80’s and 90’s? Hrm let me dig out my creepers, my skull bolo tie, knox gelatin and eyeliner out of the attic and get back to you.

  • JP

    “To summarize, -game works-, -game over-.”

    Where did I say that brute force social engineering hacks don’t “work”.

    Oh, that’s right.

    I didn’t say that.

  • derpistan

    Oh I just found my china flats and my cassettes of my Heaven 17 12″ remixes (they sold for a shitload on ebay back in 2000), I’m feeling much more respectable already.

  • Underdog

    @Damien Vulaume

    “It equals to saying this: All women are gold diggers…”

    No, it equals to saying all women are dominance diggers. Money, fame, social status, etc. are just various forms of dominance. I can name some ugly, awkward looking PUAs who get beautiful women solely from using behavioral dominance if you’d like.

  • JP

    @szopen:

    “Yes, exactly. I think a lot of males have an inclination to build systems, which help understand the reality. This is a great thing actually, except when we start to overuse a system. If the system explains a lot and has a lot of inner logic, they guys tend to start explaining EVERYTHING in terms of that system, they tend to became blind to things which prove the system wrong, they tend to interpret reality in terms of their system.”

    They are more models than systems.

    In other words, the map isn’t the actual territory.

    There will always be better models.

  • derpistan

    “Where did I say that brute force social engineering hacks don’t “work”.”

    You certainly made it sound like there are more eloquent or ‘respectable’ ways to win over beautiful women, while denigrating what actually works. I’m sure your route leads to a much more fulfilling life, please Cassanova, do tell your privy secrets. Perhaps your own blog even.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Underdog
    The dominance thing is another story. It has nothing to do with the “looks factor” we’re talking about.
    @Tasmin #474
    The most perfect analysis of the Anne/Stephen “relationship”. And very well put.

  • Underdog

    @Damien Vulaume

    “The dominance thing is another story. It has nothing to do with the “looks factor” we’re talking about.”

    I don’t think you’ve been paying attention then. We’ve been discussing the importance of looks vs behaviors when it comes to male attractiveness this entire time.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “I have iq one hunnerd and ugreed with evryting u say. I am bootifull and san and cooking reel good. Chilly and mackronie. I also luv fuck! Fuck now big boy!”

    I believe this might be a slight misrepresentation of average.
    However, Jason does have a valid point.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    “I have iq one hunnerd and ugreed with evryting u say. I am bootifull and san and cooking reel good. Chilly and mackronie. I also luv fuck! Fuck now big boy!”

    LOL. Jesus, Susan, you are in rare form today!

  • Russ in Texas

    Unfortunately, VD appears to have missed my query. But generally….
    If “outliers” crop up on a semi-regular basis, that is, ALWAYS a sign that a given model/system/paradigm is culturally or subculturally bound.

    Game defined as “let’s understand intersex psychology” doesn’t strike me that way. The more pickup-y versions, otoh, tend to — they TEND to seem to describe women in a given culture (London, Paris, US SWPL territories, east and west coasts, and cultural “island cities” such as Dallas). Their understanding of how *most* women work psychologically may be universal, but the model fails flatly in a number of other areas (rural flyover country, especially the Midwest, East-Central and Eastern Europe*, Brazil**, Japan***, etcetera).

    *Where men tend to treat women very dismissively and cad-like behavior (especially in Russia) tends to be the norm; some of your classic “beta” behavior that gets you nowhere in the States can get you laid like a KING if you’ve got substance to back it up.
    **Where feminists absolutely exist but where the male/female dichotomy is much more openly accepted, and acting like a man w/o being a cad (plus a willingness to dance) is openly appreciated
    ***Where, outside of the club venues, women chase the men and the rules are simply very different from the western world.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “Why is calm reason not a reality?”

    Because by and large, people are simply NOT reasonable. And, as you and others have told me in many different ways: in general, women DO NOT respond positively to logic and reason, because it doesn’t make them “feel” good. If a guy is dealing with a woman that is already unhappy with him, do you honestly believe him logically outlining his grievances will get him anywhere at all?

    My wife is certainly reasonable and logical, but for the most part not at all when she is upset. If we were on the rocks for some reason, the LAST thing I should do is try to reason with her, because it simply won’t work.

    If you are imagining a scenario where two people in a relationship that is overall going well run into a snag, your approach is probably the best. (unless one or both of them are already emotionally upset.) A civil and unemotional conversation might do the trick to correct such a snag.

    But, most guys in relationships that resort to dread ARE NOT currently in a happy relationship. In those cases, trying to appeal to his GF/Wife’s reason will fail, because she has already tuned him out. Then dread becomes a useful tool, and that is why Athol has “dipped his toes” into that pool as you said.

    In terms of using dread in the early stages of a relationship? That is a risky gambit, because unless she is really into you, there isn’t much for her TO dread. Of course, a man doing so does send a message that says “you aren’t THAT special, cupcake”, and women used to being the “prize” often find that attitude entirely intriguing. She wants to know why this man isn’t hypnotized by her “magic vagina” and in some cases it will prompt her to pursue. (as we see in Anne’s case to an extent) It takes a man with a very outcome independent view, and one that is confident he can and will find another women in short order. And it is damn hard to deny that such a man IS indeed attractive to many women.

    In terms of self-confidence vs. “faking” it? I agree with you there, but the reason ‘fake it til you make it’ is popular on the ‘sphere is: it works. The morality of it aside, game simply works. Will it work on all women exactly the same? Hell no! Which is why guys that dedicate themselves to racking up numbers learn lots of different techniques to reel them in. And honestly, even hard core PUAs will admit that they don’t score all the time. They get shot down a lot, but instead of being crushed they simply move to the other end of the bar and start over.

    Do I want to be that man? Nope. But that doesn’t mean that I can’t learn something from him that I can use to further MY agenda, and in that way I can take something seen as negative like “dread game” and turn it into something positive: a way to save a marriage. You don’t have to like it (Lord knows there is a LOT about the Red Pill I don’t like), but you can’t deny that it works. And, once you come to grips with that fact, it is simply a matter of deciding your morality about its use and moving on.

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

      women DO NOT respond positively to logic and reason, because it doesn’t make them “feel” good.

      But Dread does make them feel good?

      If a guy is dealing with a woman that is already unhappy with him, do you honestly believe him logically outlining his grievances will get him anywhere at all?

      He is not appealing to her for understanding. He is simply stating what he is willing to do and what he is not willing to do. If she’s lost all attraction and is ready for divorce, might as well rip off that band aid. I can guarantee you that a husband saying that he will not tolerate certain behavior is more effective than his stooping to her level of bad behavior.

      But, most guys in relationships that resort to dread ARE NOT currently in a happy relationship.

      You’re moving the goal posts. Dread as preached by Rollo and Roissy is to be deployed early and often, throughout a relationship. Let’s take this at face value.

      1. Which Roissy dread tactics do you think are OK to use against a woman as insurance against future indifference?
      2. Which ones are OK to use against a wife who is no longer sexually attracted to you?
      3. How long do you think these effects can last? Once you go down the Dread road, can you get off? Are periodic “boosters” required?
      4. How can you demonstrate that you are attractive to other women if you’re not?

  • Lokland

    ” Is my husband so charismatic and funny that women gather round him at parties? (Yes, Mrs. Walsh, he is.) How does he handle that? Is he smarmy, touching them and winking, drunkenly making suggestive remarks, or is he aware of his magnetism, even enjoying it, while maintaining integrity and respecting his marriage?”

    I’m always curious what we make of these woman’s husbands.
    Are the women instilling dread by flocking to another man?

    I suppose the intent is not dread but merely subconscious attraction which makes it acceptable, no?

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

      I’m always curious what we make of these woman’s husbands.
      Are the women instilling dread by flocking to another man?

      I suppose the intent is not dread but merely subconscious attraction which makes it acceptable, no?

      If they have any self-respect they’ll be giving some negative reinforcement of their own. When I am in the presence of a man like that (who, by the way, is often popular with other men too) I enjoy his company at my husband’s side. In the unlikely event he singled me out, I would extricate myself very quickly.

      Frankly, more often than not some guy thinks he’s all that, putting his hand on our lower backs, telling us how fetching we look tonight, winking and insinuating himself, when he is actually completely unattractive. I suspect most of the men trying to induce Dread come off like this. The wife winds up humiliated, because her husband’s behavior is both disrespectful and creepy.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Russ
    “Their understanding of how *most* women work psychologically may be universal, but the model fails flatly in a number of other areas (rural flyover country, especially the Midwest, East-Central and Eastern Europe*, Brazil**, Japan***, etcetera).”
    +1. That needed to be adressed.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Re: Dread. I think this may be a case where the Natural is capable of generating a certain sense of dread simply because he really does have many options (and his partner will continually be reminded of this by the environment), while the Artificial who does not necessarily have many options may feel that he should act in a deliberate, somewhat theatrical manner to create these reminders.

    My intuitive sense is that even the real LTR Nice Guys of the SMP probably should have some “bad boy” tactics, techniques, and procedures held back in reserve, as unfortunately *some* people only seem to really understand and respect sex, violence, money, and dominance and will keep testing and probing until they are satisfied.

    The hybrid that results may actually be liberated from having to employ the hard skills, in the same way that MMA-trained law-enforcement officers have fewer use-of-force complaints and suits against them because they have more “command presence” (vis-a-vis looking like fighters, in shape, etc.) and are more confident in their abilities to handle physical escalations.

    It’s kind of an auto-recursive, catch-22 situation: the guy who has options will know it and so will his partner, so he will have a bit more confidence and she’ll have a bit more insecurity, so a stable strategic detente may result.

    OTOH, the guy who does not have options will also know it and so will his partner, so he will have more insecurity and she may be more brazen in her testing of him. There may be a couple of ways he could play this: one would be to display the ability to walk away from the relationship because he’s perfectly satisfied with being alone (this wouldn’t be “Dread Game” as described here because it wouldn’t involve another woman; it would be based on the man’s emotional self-sufficiency), while a different path would involve displaying an ability to walk away because he has other women available—women who would presumably value his time and attention and treat him better than he was being treated currently.

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

      @BB

      It’s kind of an auto-recursive, catch-22 situation: the guy who has options will know it and so will his partner, so he will have a bit more confidence and she’ll have a bit more insecurity, so a stable strategic detente may result.

      Exactly. It’s quite easy to appear to have options when you actually have them. Not so easy to manufacture them a la The Wizard of Oz, where there is nothing behind the curtain.

      OTOH, the guy who does not have options will also know it and so will his partner, so he will have more insecurity and she may be more brazen in her testing of him. There may be a couple of ways he could play this: one would be to display the ability to walk away from the relationship because he’s perfectly satisfied with being alone (this wouldn’t be “Dread Game” as described here because it wouldn’t involve another woman; it would be based on the man’s emotional self-sufficiency), while a different path would involve displaying an ability to walk away because he has other women available—women who would presumably value his time and attention and treat him better than he was being treated currently.

      How could he pull off the second approach when you’ve just said he does not have options. How does he manufacture a real option when women are not gravitating toward him? By flirting with other men’s wives at the church pot luck? Goosing your best buddy’s wife when he’s not looking? Leering at the boss’s daughter at the company picnic?

      I don’t understand how to create the appearance of options when a woman can see with her own eyes how women respond to her husband. I know precisely how my husband ranks among women. I know exactly how many days would pass before he was inundated with female attention, were I to die or divorce him.

      It seems to me that if a man is unattractive to his wife, he would be better served by making himself more attractive via inner game than relying on behavioral correlates that are easily dismantled by any observer.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “If you have to instill Dread, then you’re admitting that other women do not, in fact, find you attractive. You have to make up Russian exes who give good head and phone calls with loud sounds of revelry in the background. Do you not see something pathetic about a man’s getting out of his quiet car and entering a packed bar to call his girlfriend or wife?”

    Most men do not nor will ever have options.
    Regardless of how much game they learn the best a majority of men are going to do is one girlfriend at a time with periods of loneliness in the middle (see delta, >50% of pop.).

    If the requirement to maintain a relationship is the availability of options and most men do not have those the result must of course be to convince ones partner that you actually do have options when in fact you do not.

    Dread works quite well for this purpose.

    Of course, you and gamers make the mistaken assumption that what occurs at the top of the pyramid can be applied throughout.
    Most women have more options than men but even then are not plentiful.
    They usually do not require their man to have options or else they would be perpetually single or getting P&D’d by high value men.

    This talk of options being required only applies to very attractive women.
    Which constitute only a small percentage of the population.

  • Russ in Texas

    Bastiat,

    “My intuitive sense is that even the real LTR Nice Guys of the SMP probably should have some “bad boy” tactics, techniques, and procedures held back in reserve, as unfortunately *some* people only seem to really understand and respect sex, violence, money, and dominance and will keep testing and probing until they are satisfied.”

    Bastiat, those “real LTR Nice Guys of the SMP” have a phrase for said women. It’s called “damaged goods,” and they generally avoid them, gradually NEXTing them if one slips under the radar.

  • Lokland

    “women DO NOT respond positively to logic and reason, because it doesn’t make them “feel” good.

    But Dread does make them feel good?”

    No.
    A woman who does not feel good will not do what you want anyway.
    Feels right would be a better description.

    Dread is used to re-assert attractiveness which then enables the women to feel right about sexing up her husband.
    Fucking the unattractive schlub is the worst thing that could ever happen to her in terms of evolution.

    Logically explaining why she should be attracted is only good if your trying to troll her before divorce because she is not attracted to you and every word you say is disregarded because your unattractive.

  • Underdog

    @Susan

    There you go. Looks is not the defining factor for male attractiveness. A great deal of other factors trump his physical attractiveness — most notably dominance.

    That was pretty much my original point: A female increasing her physical attractiveness, therefore, is not the equivalence of a male increasing his physical attractiveness. But it is the equivalence of a male increasing his dominance — whether it be socially (money, status) or behaviorally (game).

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “If they have any self-respect they’ll be giving some negative reinforcement of their own.”

    Not sure I comprehend this.

    “When I am in the presence of a man like that (who, by the way, is often popular with other men too) I enjoy his company at my husband’s side.”

    So a bunch of men bring their wives to a guy whom she is more attracted to than themselves? Perhaps its lost on me but to what purpose does this action lend itself? An interesting dynamic but I can’t see any positive gain for the husband.

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

      So a bunch of men bring their wives to a guy whom she is more attracted to than themselves? Perhaps its lost on me but to what purpose does this action lend itself? An interesting dynamic but I can’t see any positive gain for the husband.

      They’re not bringing their wives to a guy, they’re bringing them to the holiday party. It just so happens that Tom Brady is going to be there. Tough shit. If your wife loves you she’ll be gracious and circumspect. Which is exactly what you should be if the most beautiful woman you’ve ever seen enters the room. This is the only appropriate behavior. People should not make spectacles of themselves, especially with the opposite sex while in a relationship. It’s selfish and cruel. It’s the deliberate humiliation of another person for your own ego gratification.

      Alternatively, you could refuse to socialize with attractive people. I would not enjoy that approach.

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

      “If they have any self-respect they’ll be giving some negative reinforcement of their own.”

      Not sure I comprehend this.

      “The way you behaved tonight in the presence of that Channel 7 weatherman was unacceptable. You were undignified and silly. You shamed me. Do not do that again. I will be sleeping in the guest bedroom tonight.”

  • Lokland

    “Frankly, more often than not some guy thinks he’s all that, putting his hand on our lower backs, telling us how fetching we look tonight, winking and insinuating himself, when he is actually completely unattractive.”

    Yes I know these guys.

    Not what I am thinking of.
    I’m thinking more like star QB.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “You’re moving the goal posts. Dread as preached by Rollo and Roissy is to be deployed early and often, throughout a relationship”

    I actually addressed that in the next paragraph. The guy sending the “not special” message? yeah, sorry to say, I’ve seen that work with my own eyes. Truthfully it made me mildly sick to my stomach, but it got a particularly hot woman to chase a douche.

    Lokland just explained the why of it above. No, dread will not make a women “feel good”, but if she is already not “feeling good” about you, then you have little to lose by pushing the envelope a bit. And, in doing so, while making her “feel bad” you might also trigger her to start being attracted TO you, even while she is angry AT you. Yes, I’m saying that intentionally pissing off your GF/Wife can sometimes cause a positive behavior. Would I do it? Not unless my wife really pushed me. But, before I’d “just rip off the band-aid” I’d certainly try running dread on her. And, I’d do it fully believing that it was the best thing I could do FOR HER, because I firmly believe that staying in our marriage IS what is best for her.

    Had I know any of this before my divorce, I’d have gamed the shit out of my ex-wife before I gave up on the marriage. As I’ve said many times, I’m not complaining that I didn’t save it, because I would have had to continue that level of “game” to keep the marriage sound in the long run. But, as someone that took those vows seriously, I would have gamed her to the end of the earth before I gave up.

  • Iggles

    @ SW:

    The only reason she fucked me is to deny the other woman I was going to fuck that night, to spite the other woman. THAT IS HOW CHICKS WORK

    There are actually women who aren’t into fucking men to spite other women, because they’re in relationships that are working

    THIS.

    All these generalizations are really annoying.. NAWALT!

    I have never competed over a guy. I don’t see the point. If he’s into you he will invest in you, doesn’t matter who else likes him. He will shut her down. If he doesn’t then that tells you all you need to know! Why make “winning” the guy’s affections about beating another woman?

    Susan is right, girls who do that are about feeding their ego/getting male validation. I guess that’s fine if you’re into that sort of thing.. but you are just a walking penis and can easily be replaced by another guy. The relationship is built on a foundation of sand.

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

      you are just a walking penis and can easily be replaced by another guy. The relationship is built on a foundation of sand.

      Yup, though it’s more like swamp muck when these kinds of tactics come into play.

  • Deli

    2 Russ in Texas
    Crap, all that time I was reading your comments and thought that Russ was short for Russel, while it must have been short for Рус :)

  • Sai

    @Susan
    “I have iq one hunnerd and ugreed with evryting u say. I am bootifull and san and cooking reel good. Chilly and mackronie. I also luv fuck! Fuck now big boy!”
    Part of me finds this funny and part of me finds it mean. Either way, you’re a better actress than I am.
    (Then again, I don’t get romance novels.)

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “They’re not bringing their wives to a guy, they’re bringing them to the holiday party. It just so happens that Tom Brady is going to be there.”

    No you quite specifically said him not party. I’ve been to many parties and not talked to certain individuals for a multitude of reasons.

    “If your wife loves you she’ll be gracious and circumspect.”

    Would you define the flocking behaviour described prior as gracious and circumspect?

    “Which is exactly what you should be if the most beautiful woman you’ve ever seen enters the room. This is the only appropriate behavior.”

    How did I get dragged into this? I specifically avoid talking to women in a non-professional context.
    Also, behavioUr. :)

  • Sai

    “The way you behaved tonight in the presence of that Channel 7 weatherman was unacceptable. You were undignified and silly. You shamed me. Do not do that again. I will be sleeping in the guest bedroom tonight.”
    That’s pretty eloquent. :) I was thinking more of “you acted like a tramp and I can’t even look at you right now.”

  • Lokland

    “The way you behaved tonight in the presence of that Channel 7 weatherman was unacceptable. You were undignified and silly. You shamed me. Do not do that again. I will be sleeping in the guest bedroom tonight.””

    So he;
    a) got embarrassed
    b) made himself sleep on the couch
    c) isn’t getting laid

    Racking up the wins.
    Better approach.
    Inappropriate speech—->Emotionless sex—–> Now you can sleep on the couch tonight.

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

      Better approach.
      Inappropriate speech—->Emotionless sex—–> Now you can sleep on the couch tonight.

      Haha, you win. That is a better approach. Either way the object is to deny her what she wants or should want. Emotionless sex should do it!

  • Russ in Texas

    @Lokland.

    Yeah, it’s very sad, but you’re right: one-relationship-vs-lonely is what a number of folks have on the table.

    But, and we’re leaving your “triad” guys aside here for a moment, a ONS, gamed or not, will often make guys like this feel WORSE rather than better, precisely because it’s devoid of the relationship they actually want.

  • Lokland

    @Sai

    “That’s pretty eloquent. I was thinking more of “you acted like a tramp and I can’t even look at you right now.””

    +1

    Tramp and slut would probably be involved in any spiel I had to give (which I have not).

  • Russ in Texas

    @Lokland again.

    “Where are you going?”
    “I’m absolutely disgusted by your tramp-like behavior this evening. Good night.” ::goes to couch::

    She nests. She thinks of it as “her bed” *because* she nests. And you just indicated that her nest is full of cooties and slime. For any woman you’d want to be with, this is a truly thermonuclear move. Any woman for whom this doesn’t immediately set off a six-alarm fire, that’s your cue that the relationship is over and it’s time to cut bait.

  • Sassy6519

    To the woman on the receiving end of Dread, intent is key. Is my husband so charismatic and funny that women gather round him at parties? (Yes, Mrs. Walsh, he is.) How does he handle that? Is he smarmy, touching them and winking, drunkenly making suggestive remarks, or is he aware of his magnetism, even enjoying it, while maintaining integrity and respecting his marriage? The wife of this man will be well aware of his SMV regardless of his response. The former breeds resentment, as it publicly humiliates the wife (Mrs. Walsh went home early, will weep and yell and refuse to have sex for weeks.) The latter approach reinforces the wife’s belief that she has won the top prize – she will feel proud of her accomplishment and motivated to appreciate this man who other women find attractive.

    If you have to instill Dread, then you’re admitting that other women do not, in fact, find you attractive. You have to make up Russian exes who give good head and phone calls with loud sounds of revelry in the background. Do you not see something pathetic about a man’s getting out of his quiet car and entering a packed bar to call his girlfriend or wife? If he’s a man with those options, he doesn’t need to manufacture them – his wife will be well aware. If he’s not, she already knows it or will figure it out very quickly. This is why Dread is not effective strategy as more than a jump to the battery of a clunker.

    I agree Susan.

  • Lokland

    @Russ

    Hmm interesting.
    Never thought of that.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Susan, I agree that men frequently fuck this up and become subjects of ridicule. I think that the more savvy “Artificial Options” players are going to try to find subtle ways to create this sense of optionality, while the less-savvy are going to try the thuggish gropes, transparent alpha-mimicking social gambits, and heavy-handed flirting that you mention— or, perhaps just as bad, the self-proclaimed “I have options” speech.

    I agree that it is much better to actually have the options and to let the environment carry the threatening big stick for you, but most guys just don’t have this. If a relationship starts to go sideways on them, they may try the honest communication approach and find that the woman responds poorly—perhaps she really does want confirmation that her man is attractive, a catch, etc. and won’t be satisfied by hearing him talk about how her testing is making him feel. Perhaps she’ll even think that it makes him look weak. Who knows. I don’t think a woman is necessarily being sadistic by conducting these types of probes; it may not be her conscious choice, really (just as some types of bad behaviors are going to naturally emerge from men if they are placed in certain situations).

    Long-term, a man could ingest the so-called red pill—the realization that women ultimately respect and need male strength—and go about addressing his weaknesses through study and training and so on, but in the short-term he could just feel like chopped liver.

    I wish these stupid reindeer games were not part of relationship mgt and envy relationships that don’t feature them, but IME the same basic scripts seem to come up time and time again.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Deli

    Not Pyc, but spent some time in the area. Got more ass than a bus-stop bench, with insanely attractive women, from the “Deep Game Tactic” of acting considerately, looking at her eyes rather than her tits, and actually sharing ideas and listening to what she had to say.

    Stole a good-girl 8 who was hidden in plain view under frumpy clothes and Birth-Control Glasses, and brought her home.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “I don’t understand how to create the appearance of options when a woman can see with her own eyes how women respond to her husband. “

    Easy: learn game. ;-)

    “The way you behaved tonight in the presence of that Channel 7 weatherman was unacceptable. You were undignified and silly. You shamed me. Do not do that again. I will be sleeping in the guest bedroom tonight.”

    I call BS. I never, and I mean NEVER remove myself from my bed. If I’m that upset with my wife (and so far it has never happened *knocks on wood*) I would tell her if she didn’t want to sleep with me, that she could move herself to the guest room. I’m not giving up my comfort because she acted poorly.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Ted,

    Always, ALWAYS, have a comfortable couch. For general couch purposes.

  • VD

    Why is calm reason not a reality? We can train animals using positive, negative or intermittent reinforcement. Explaining your position in a rational manner is a way of delivering negative reinforcement, which will hopefully be followed by the opportunity to provide positive reinforcement. This should be effective with any creature with higher order thinking. The deployment of Dread is akin to the rat’s receiving a nasty electrical shock at the end of the maze instead of a piece of cheese. I reject any claim that women must be treated as feral creatures incapable of reason.

    Because it observably isn’t. This reminds me of all the macroeconomic models that rely upon rational expectations, which simply don’t exist and thereby wreck all of the practical applications. I don’t think anyone is saying that all women must be treated as feral creatures incapable of reason, only that once it is observed that a woman is incapable of reason in a given context, treating her as a feral creature will obtain better results. I, for one, always test to see if a woman – or a man, for that matter, is capable of reason and dialectic. Once it becomes clear that she – or he – is not, I simply switch gears and treat them accordingly. Why would you find that objectionable, much less ineffective, in any context?

    I do not believe this is appropriate, but equally importantly it is not effective. I think it’s bad strategy because it sets up an entirely adversarial dynamic between two people, breeding resentment, conquest and fear. You might as well be Scheherazade at that point. There will be no joy.

    I disagree, because the dynamic is already adversarial. Most women are happiest when they are submissive, when they find a man who defeats their little challenges, when they are conquered and taken. Dread is merely one of the many means of breaking a woman’s pride, and as such, can actually lead to long-term joy if implemented appropriately. Consider that you are actually advocating divorce and breaking up marriages and families instead of utilizing an intersexual tactic that you know makes an impact on women’s attitudes and behavior. I am not saying Dread is always effective or justified, only that it is a reasonable tool in the male arsenal.

    If you have to instill Dread, then you’re admitting that other women do not, in fact, find you attractive.

    You’re not understanding what Dread is. It is not the ex nihilo generation of false options, it is the implied threat to avail oneself of other options. Those options can be real or they can be manufactured for the hamster’s behalf. And real options will strike far more terror into a woman’s heart than imaginary ones.

    A far better strategy would be to do the work of developing self-respect. I imagine that Dread corrodes a man’s self-respect, thereby worsening the problem. Unless he’s truly Dark Triad, he will not enjoy the Machiavellian approach, nor be able to sustain it.

    One needn’t be Dark Triad, one need only be Machiavellian to enjoy it. Your imagination here is off-base due to your misconception of what Dread is. If my options are real, it doesn’t necessarily cost me any self-respect to allude to the possibility that I might avail myself of them… unless, of course, that violates my moral standards, in which case it would. But that is another matter entirely.

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

      Those options can be real or they can be manufactured for the hamster’s behalf.

      This is the crux of our disagreement. I do not believe that options can be manufactured. Women know precisely what their husband’s SMV is. They know it when they marry him, presumably assortatively, they know it when it slips, and they know it when it increases. A woman may take the temperature of how other women view her man at any time very easily.

      Sure, a man could put lipstick on his own collar and slips of paper with phone numbers in his pocket. He may be able to give his wife a good scare. But he will not be able to pull this deception off for long. Unless he has her locked in the basement, she is going to understand very well what his market value is.

      I do not promote divorce over marriages remaining together, I just don’t think the tool of Dread provides that stability, and certainly not a repair to a really troubled relationship. Dread is not about submission, it is specifically designed to produce “anxiety and jealousy,” and to keep your woman in that state perpetually, as far as I can tell, per Roissy and Rollo.

      I consider the instilliation of Dread to be an immoral application of an amoral tool, which is Game. But just as importantly, I don’t think it works, unless by “work” you mean anxious and frightened wife who nervously offers you blow jobs every night. If that’s the objective, I can see that it would work for a brief time, as noted above.

  • Ted D

    Russ in Texas – “Always, ALWAYS, have a comfortable couch. For general couch purposes.”

    LOL. Very true. Our couch would work for a night, but for me it is a matter of principle. I wouldn’t kick my wife out of bed no matter how pissed I was at her, and I’ll be damned if I’m getting a crappy nights’ sleep because of it. I’m not a kid that can be sent to my room (or the living room. LOL) and I won’t act or be treated as one. If she is that upset, she knows where the couch is.

  • Deli

    2 Russ
    I am not disagreeing that having some “nice guy” traits can give you a head start back home in certain conditions, but consider that the allure of marrying someone with a green-“get out of this hellhole for free”-card maybe also played in your favor :)

    Basically being a male foreigner, specifically an American, in Moscow is like being a HB9 girl in the States.
    All you need to get laid is show up and be nice :) You can get scammed once or twice (Moscow is notorious for gold-diggers), but the competition will be fierce.

    I work in the international company and my foreign colleagues really like being sent to Moscow. You live in the city center, you get all expenses paid and you are living the pussy-dream. Lucky bastards :)

  • Russ in Texas

    Deli,

    In many circumstances, that would be utter truth. I try to avoid Moscow for just that reason, actually. Most of my friends over there are Siberians with much better heads on their shoulders.

  • Sai

    @VD
    You know more about this than I do so I’m not calling you a liar… but why are most women happier to be conquered and have their pride broken?

  • Jesse
  • Jesse

    Man, all this talk about dread and now I can’t get this song out of my head!

  • Just1Z

    @Susan
    “The way you behaved tonight in the presence of that Channel 7 weatherman was unacceptable. You were undignified and silly. You shamed me. Do not do that again. I will be sleeping in the guest bedroom tonight.”

    what kind of pussy ‘punishes’ a wrongdoer by removing himself to the guest bedroom? definite loser behaviour.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Ah, forced to make an other analogy again.

    “Most women are happiest when they are submissive”
    VD
    “It is necessary, for their own good, to have the people submit by any means to the will of the party to defeat capitalist imperialism”
    Klement Gottwald

  • Fifth Season

    I know it’s very unlikely that Anne will read this, but this is what I would have said if I was an uninvolved-but-concerned party she came to for advice, or as the manosphere puts it, an “emotional tampon”:

    When people play games in a relationship, they want to keep their distance (emotional and mental) from their partners. Sooner or later this scuppers any real romantic connection the two may have had, and will certainly build resentment among one or both partners. Trying to get someone to stay or become close to you via negative stimuli is like trying to get a dog to fetch you your slippers by beating or starving it–it may do what you want out of fear of getting hurt, but it won’t love you. By your account, it seems Stephen decided to cool it off to see what you would do next, because while you say he invested time with you, he had enough self-esteem to know when to pull back (and possibly move on) when you made it look like you didn’t want anything to do with him anymore.

    You will have to honestly open up with him about your fears and experiences that led you to become suddenly cold, so as to restore any lost trust. This will involve becoming vulnerable, but don’t think of it as a surrender of power; think of it as a chance to give the two of you a chance to bond and further your emotional investment, a chance to open your hearts to one another and build love. If what you’ve told us about Stephen is true, then men like him don’t grow on trees. It would be a right shame to throw all this away if the two of you could be very happy together–you’d be playing the part of the “old flame” from Dan Fogelberg’s tragic Christmas song “Same Old Lang Syne.”

    As for being defensive, this isn’t the Battle of Britain. The Luftwaffe isn’t coming and V2 missiles aren’t exploding over your head this very instant. It’s time to get your heart out of the air raid shelter–it isn’t fair to him that you’re acting as if he was the one who hurt you earlier, and it’s hurting your chances of romance. It is better to judge each man by his own merits (and misdeeds, if applicable) rather than think of him as just another cad out to hurt you. I’m sure you’d resent being called “just another dumb blonde” or “just another plastic pin-up girl” (no offense intended). If you want him to see you as you truly are, then why not grant him the same courtesy?

    In short, it’s time for honesty and humility on your part. If indeed Stephen is a man of character, he’ll listen, understand, and hopefully, forgive you so as long as you don’t pull this kind of routine again. I hope the two of you end up spending a very beautiful Christmas together. The fact that so many women (and a few men) were wearing signs that read “It should have been me!” during the recent Royal Wedding highlights just how rare and precious a good intimate relationship truly is. But you don’t have to be a Prince Harry or a Kate Middleton to build one–don’t throw away that kind of chance, because it’s not something that Santa delivers.

    ——–

    Something I’d like to ask Susan is whether Anne herself fits the stereotype, prevalent in the manosphere, that women only date up, not down. One of the reasons why so many men here have been throwing their “schadenfreude” at her is that they likely feel that “women in your league shoot me down all the time; why should I feel any sympathy when you get shot down?” or “women who refuse men left and right should get a taste of their own medicine.”

    I’m not saying that Anne should have gone pub-hopping in the Elephant and Castle area (a low-income district of London most famously depicted as a breeding pit and training ground for violent chavs, yobs, and assorted scum in the Michael Caine film “Harry Brown”). Odds are she’d rather throw up in her drink than be continually subjected to the leers and pickup lines of ugly and drunken men. I’d just like to know if she’d be willing to date below her socioeconomic status if this relationship gets flushed down the bog, because just as a high SES is by no means a reliable indicator of the strength of one’s character, men of good character can be found in all parts of society.

    Perhaps the beautiful women you said wished that someone could “make it through their filters” would do well to give more men of good character but outside of their SES fair chances. Most women resent being the target of a pump-and-dump; men likewise don’t want to be treated like cigarettes you light up and stub out at the drop of a hat. Certainly some men deserve to have a cigarette stubbed out in their drink, but why don’t those women give more promising men a chance to light their fires?

    In the end, we are all ash in the wind, but we can always burn out more pleasantly with the right person.

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

      @Fifth Season

      Welcome, and thanks for your insightful and thoughtful comment.

      I’d just like to know if she’d be willing to date below her socioeconomic status if this relationship gets flushed down the bog, because just as a high SES is by no means a reliable indicator of the strength of one’s character, men of good character can be found in all parts of society.

      Conventional wisdom says no. I think one factor is parental expectations. Anne actually mentioned that her parents would very much approve of this young man. And then there’s very real hypergamy, or at least the desire for assortative mating. I think there are areas of flexibility – but some sort of status equal or superior to the woman’s will usually be sought.

      I’m not judging this one way or the other – but that’s my understanding. With college ratios in the U.S. quite lopsided and getting moreso, we will be able to have a front row seat as this plays out.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Just1Z#659,

    Frankly, I’m surprised that none of the PUA types here regard it as Dread Game material. As I told Lok, this is a truly thermonuclear move, and can easily reduce your spouse to a sobbing wreck. (hence, don’t pull shit **** casually for light cause)

  • Ted D

    Susan – “But just as importantly, I don’t think it works, unless by “work” you mean anxious and frightened wife who nervously offers you blow jobs every night. If that’s the objective, I can see that it would work for a brief time, as noted above.”

    In the case of a wife that has gone cold, it CAN help by giving her incentive to step up her game, so to speak. If she is simply not attracted to her husband, knowing he might just go out and snag himself a replacement for her might snap her out of whatever hamster induced haze she is in. If it doesn’t, then there was nothing left to save anyway, and at least the guy has a head start on finding that replacement.

    Now I agree that this cannot be maintained for long, but who in their right mind would want to run dread indefinitely? In terms of relationship security goes, it would be completely counter productive. But, after a good dose of dread, if she were to come around, it would make sense then to move on to fixing whatever it was that caused the lack of attraction in the first place. If not, they would find themselves in the same place again in short order.

    So, dread is a quick correction or last ditch effort technique IMO when it comes to LTR/Marriage. I’d say it is a lot like radiation: in some cases a dose or two can save your life, but repeated exposure is guaranteed to kill you. In small doses, dread can be a tool to cure a ‘sick’ marriage, but if it is the only tool used, the marriage will eventually die. Faced with divorce, I’d advise any man to run dread before they give up completely, that is IF they want to try and salvage it. If it fails, they were on their way to family court anyway. If it succeeds? One less divorce for the stats.

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

      So, dread is a quick correction or last ditch effort technique IMO when it comes to LTR/Marriage

      As a last ditch effort I suppose trying to make your wife jealous by trying to fool her into thinking other women want you may be worth a try, but I am more than a little dubious of its efficacy.

      She wants the man she married. If you’re not that man, get him back as quick as you can. And don’t wait until she looks at you with poorly disguised indifference, or worse, revulsion.

  • Russ in Texas

    Wow. I’m such a potty brain that I typed **** and hatched-out “this” in reverse w/o even realizing it.

    More coffee, yeah, yeah, that’ll fix it. ::facepalm::

  • deti

    Ted 664:

    I’ve been watching this debate on Dread between Susan, VD with interest. I think you’ve nailed how Dread works in a marriage. But it can also be effective in a relationship as well, particularly when, as VD said, you have a woman who has used manipulation or is playing fast and loose with the truth.

    But no one’s listening to us anyway….

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

      But no one’s listening to us anyway….

      Male pouting is a DLV. Just saying.

  • Russ in Texas

    Bit unfair ball, Deti, since I *did* ask a question directly but was ignored.

  • deti

    Russ 663:

    Telling your wife about her disrespecting you and then retiring to the guest room is not Dread. It’s beta. No self-respecting husband puts himself out of his own bed, or lets his wife kick him out. If she’s that upset, SHE can go sleep in the guest room.

  • deti

    what’s your question Russ?

  • Russ in Texas

    @Deti#s668/669,

    If it’s beta, that’s fine. I don’t have a status to defend. What I know is that it works, and it’s so thermonuclear that I have to do it only when it’s absolutely an issue b/c its effect is so extreme.

    Original question:

    @VD#547,

    This is the part that throws me:

    Yes, it works. It ABSOLUTELY works, if executed correctly. But does that mean it’s necessarily the right tool for the job?

    If a man’s crossed that oh so special line, I *could* bust his nose and reverse his knee as a way of getting him to see my point. Or, if I’m an actual reasonable human being, I might be able to fix the problem by sitting him down and buying him a beer.

    Given the choice, wouldn’t the buy-him-a-beer non-nuclear option be preferred first?

    Question to VD was: sure, let’s grant that Dread Game works. But many OTHER things work, as well.

  • Russ in Texas

    Ignore last lines, was typing and decided to copy/paste instead.

  • HanSolo

    Deti, stop instilling dread by posting with the comment # 666!!! :D LOL

  • deti

    Russ:

    Your question had to do with a man dealing with another man crossing the line. Either fisticuffs or reason can be the preferred tool, depending on the context.

    Dread is a tool for addressing and responding to a woman crossing her man’s line. Different offender and offense calls for different tactics.

    A man cannot use fisticuffs or brute force with a woman.

    If a woman is in open rebellion, reason isn’t the best tactic. He can’t tell her she’s being illogical and unreasonable. That will simply escalate her anger. He has to do something to tamp down on the rebellion and gain some semblance of hand and leverage.

    He can’t tell her she SHOULD be attracted to him because he’s oh so responsible and earns a good living. At this point she doesn’t care one bit about how great he is; her attraction is gone or never was there in the first place.

    Keep in mind: She, not he, has brought things to a head through rebellion or pushback or dishonesty or disrespect. His response can’t be logical or premised on reason. She has drawn him onto her turf, and he has to respond using tactics that resonate with her, not him.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Question: if a woman refuses to put up with a man’s BS, and freezes him out, is she using Dread Game on him?

  • deti

    Han:

    there are many here who assign to me that designation, I am sure.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Russ, I like the dove vs. hawk analogy you gave earlier. I see our marriage as consistently dove meeting with dove, which is why things go so smoothly. We know the other is capable of hawk, but we tend to avoid other people and situations that call for it.

    deti, I think when a marriage has gotten to that point, it’s basically emergency mode. If a man doesn’t live in that mode, he won’t “get it.” I agree that drastic measures are called for to respond to emergencies, but the best would be prevention and to not let things deteriorate that far.

  • Ted D

    Russ in Texas – “Yes, it works. It ABSOLUTELY works, if executed correctly. But does that mean it’s necessarily the right tool for the job?”

    Maybe, or maybe not. Personally dread would be a last ditch effort for me, but that is also because my wife has proven time and again to be much more reasonable than to NEED dread. My ex? Not so much. A good dose of dread and some decent game would have been the trick with her, had I known about any of it. Now? She is with a “good old boy” (and by that I mean an Ohio Red Neck kinda dude) that is rather chauvinistic and controlling, and she seems to be content with it.

    I suppose the bigger question to me is: knowing what it would take to keep her happy, would I want to? Of course the answer now is hell no, I’m much better off today. But, back when I thought my world was ending because she wanted a divorce? I’d have tried anything, and probably failed because I would have tried anything…

    Anyway to your question: is dread the right tool to use. I would say it depends on the woman’s personality/character, and the situation. I tend to believe that planning for disaster is the best way to avoid it, so to me knowing about “dread game” is simply another tool in my box of tricks should the occasion ever arise. Lord willing it won’t, but I hate to be caught with my pants down. ;-)

  • Underdog

    Sleeping in the guest room is not dread. Sleeping at a hotel is.

  • VD

    You know more about this than I do so I’m not calling you a liar… but why are most women happier to be conquered and have their pride broken?

    I don’t claim to know why. There are various theories, from the Biblical Curse of Eve to the various evo-psych fables. But it is readily observable that the woman whose pride is permitted to blossom unchecked by a man is usually miserable, whereas the woman who submits, either voluntarily or involuntarily, is usually happy. My impression is that this is because women tend to resemble herd animals who prefer following to leading and dislike being accountable for their decisions. But why that would be, again, I do not know. I simply observe.

    This is the crux of our disagreement. I do not believe that options can be manufactured. Women know precisely what their husband’s SMV is. They know it when they marry him, presumably assortatively, they know it when it slips, and they know it when it increases. A woman may take the temperature of how other women view her man at any time very easily.

    It’s an aspect of it, yes, but not the crux. If you believe that options cannot be manufactured, then how can one with genuine options possibly instill Dread? Your position is incoherent. If a man has options, then by your revised definition of Dread, he cannot instill it and no matter how fearful he makes his wife that he will pursue those options, it isn’t Dread. Do you really mean to assert that it is only Dread if she fears the nonexistent threat, but not the real ones?

    If not Dread, then what would you term a woman’s fear of a genuine threat based on a real option? And since Game is the synthetic mimicry of natural behavior, what natural behavior does Dread Game imitate?

    Sure, a man could put lipstick on his own collar and slips of paper with phone numbers in his pocket. He may be able to give his wife a good scare. But he will not be able to pull this deception off for long. Unless he has her locked in the basement, she is going to understand very well what his market value is.

    This, too, makes no sense. A man need not feign an elevated SMV to instill Dread in a woman. Especially considering that women find it particularly insulting to be abandoned for women with observably lower SMV, the fact that she knows his market value doesn’t make him faithful. Even a lowly male 2 involved with a female 3 might instill Dread by demonstrating credible options with female 2s.

    Given the choice, wouldn’t the buy-him-a-beer non-nuclear option be preferred first?

    Of course. I always prefer a calm and rational discussion. And in my experience, about 10 percent of men and 2 percent of women do as well. I absolutely advocate civil discourse and sweet reason as an initial step. And my interlocutor happens to indicate that he prefers a knife fight, it is good to know that I have my .50 caliber Desert Eagle locked and loaded.

    To be clear, I don’t utilize any Dread Game myself. I see no need for it. But I can understand the hypothetical situations where it could be utilized to master difficult women or salvage problematic relationships. Remember, relationships are dynamic. No tactic is always applicable or reliable.

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

      @VD

      I’m actually running out of town for the weekend, so can only be brief and then leave it there.

      If you believe that options cannot be manufactured, then how can one with genuine options possibly instill Dread? Your position is incoherent. If a man has options, then by your revised definition of Dread, he cannot instill it and no matter how fearful he makes his wife that he will pursue those options, it isn’t Dread. Do you really mean to assert that it is only Dread if she fears the nonexistent threat, but not the real ones?

      The woman who is married to a man with options is well aware of them. In many cases, I daresay, more aware than he is. She stays on her toes because she understands that if her husband loses attraction for her or becomes unhappy, he will readily find crying shoulders and soft arms to console him. IOW, the man with options has no need to ever instill dread, the same qualities that make him attractive to his wife will be presumed to affect other women similarly. We saw Anne say this very thing in her comment.

      If a man with options is unhappy with his wife, he should tell her so. She should be able to get the synapses firing rapidly enough to link his unhappiness with his many options, of which she is already keenly aware by virtue of observing other women in his presence.

      For the man who does not really have options, and whose wife is no longer attracted to him, how would he manufacture credible faux options? She will already be aware that his unattractiveness has produced pre-unselection. If he starts flirting and strutting with an asshole vibe, he’s just going to come across as an unattractive asshole.

      In short, if you lose the attraction of your wife, and you can’t really produce women to make eyes at you in front of her, it’s game over. Your best shot is to do whatever it takes to become attractive to her again, especially in the area of dominance, as you suggest.

      Even a lowly male 2 involved with a female 3 might instill Dread by demonstrating credible options with female 2s.

      Agreed – my lipstick and love notes example may be used by a man of any SMV. The 2 wife will worry that he has a 2 mistress. If said mistress does not materialize in some generally recognizable form over time, she is going to sniff that out immediately.

      But I think that most times when a woman loses attraction for her husband, it does reflect a declining SMV. Hers may be declining as well, in which case she’s being unrealistic, but it doesn’t change the fact that he no longer appeals.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Hope,

    You’re seeing what I’m seeing. I posted the *male-on-male equivalent* for purposes of discussion. Deti appears to be positing “dread” as a reactive rather than prophylactic action.

    @Deti,

    I think your theoretical assumptions don’t match my anecdotal ones (and this is a problem for *anybody’s* theoretical discussion since, as the old saw puts it, “the plural of anecdote is not evidence”). I have, in fact, and on more than one occasion with more than one woman, gotten the desired result precisely by doing exactly what you’re saying does not and cannot work. Quality women can comprehend “your behavior has endangered this relationship, and the ball is entirely in your court as to whether YOU are going to step up and fix it.” I don’t hang out with non-quality women; they’re a waste of my precious hours and seconds.

  • Underdog

    @Hope

    “if a woman refuses to put up with a man’s BS, and freezes him out, is she using Dread Game on him?”

    She sure is. But then the question would be: does dread game usually work on men. The answer for that is in the original post.

  • Ted D

    Hope – “Question: if a woman refuses to put up with a man’s BS, and freezes him out, is she using Dread Game on him?”

    Perhaps. It would be more “dread” if she also went on more GNO and/or put herself in places where she is likely to meet and interact with other attractive men.

    ” I agree that drastic measures are called for to respond to emergencies, but the best would be prevention and to not let things deteriorate that far.”

    Sure, and this was what I alluded to in my post to Russ above. Knowing what I do now, it really should be relatively simple to NEVER find myself needing to use dread in my marriage. I certainly hope so, because it would hurt me to intentionally hurt my wife. However, if it came to hurting her feelings briefly to get things under control or finding myself preparing for divorce #2, you can damn well be sure I’d be running dread like mad.

    I find this line of thinking truly distasteful, but I refuse to limit my options and live in fantasy land where such tactics are never necessary. The only place that will get me is chumpsville. When it comes down to it, I’ll do what is necessary to protect myself and my family, even if that means hurting their feelings in the process.

  • Ted D

    Russ in Texas – “Quality women can comprehend “your behavior has endangered this relationship, and the ball is entirely in your court as to whether YOU are going to step up and fix it.” I don’t hang out with non-quality women; they’re a waste of my precious hours and seconds.”

    You are assuming that every man has the same definition for “quality women” which would likely be wrong. It seems that your ideal of “quality” hinges largely on a rather mature and self controlled woman, which is perfectly fine. But, by and large, that is NOT what all men are looking for in a mate, and to be frank you’d be damn hard pressed to find such a women in her early 20’s. My wife is in her 30’s, and well past being massively immature and unreasonable, but she herself has told me that she was NOT always that way, and in her 20’s would probably NOT have passed my ‘quality woman’ test, or yours.

    My ex is a great person, truly a better person than me in fact. But, she is rather immature when it comes to relationships, and frankly a bit of a brat. I don’t like having to “control” bratty behavior, but didn’t have a clue as to seeing it as a red flag before we married. I pretty much assumed ALL women were bratty and went with it. I don’t know that she will ever change, so instead she hitched her wagon to a guy that is more than willing to treat her like a child when she acts like one. It is what it is…

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

      @Ted

      your ideal of “quality” hinges largely on a rather mature and self controlled woman, which is perfectly fine. But, by and large, that is NOT what all men are looking for in a mate, and to be frank you’d be damn hard pressed to find such a women in her early 20′s.

      Two points:

      1. Perhaps men should be more discriminating re character in a woman.

      2. Early 20s is too early for most women to marry.

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

    I’m curious to know, how many of the men here have read a ‘light game’ book, like David Deida’s, “The Way of the Superior Man,” for example? I read it recently, and given that it came out in 1997, I’m left to wonder how much guys like Neil Strauss poached from that area of tantric yoga. It’s very full of concepts that are very gamey: men being masculine and establishing their own frame (i.e. purpose in life) and not supplicating to the whims of a women, social dominance, etc. It’s just that compared to Game it has a very positive message and reinforces the need for men and women to cooperate to fulfill their roles.

    Does anyone know of similar books aside from Athol Kay’s work?

  • Russ in Texas

    @Mr. Nervous Toes,

    Similar ideas are universal to the western canon. I distinctly remember similar sentiments expressed in Nietzsche’s “on the uses and abuses of history.” Similarly, most western philosophers assume that a real man will examine the world around himself and test his acceptance of various hypotheses — one who accepts an idea — ANY idea — uncritically is a lesser man.

  • Russ in Texas

    Ah. Here we are. Found you a link.

    http://records.viu.ca/~johnstoi/nietzsche/history.htm

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

      It occurs to me that we have no testimonials from men who have run Dread game. Ted thinks it might have worked had he tried it when his marriage was failing. Deti has previously shared some straight, harsh talk of the calm and reasonable variety.

      Has any man here successfully convinced his indifferent wife that he was truly a catch and that other women would love to scoop him up, even if no such evidence of these other women existed?

      We know that the tactic is decidedly Machiavellian, and we know that Machiavellian types of both sexes are wired for STRs, and generally fail at LTRs.

      What evidence is there that this theory has ever worked? (The R’s don’t count.)

  • HanSolo

    @Mr. Nervous Toes

    I read Deida’s The Way of the Superior Man and really liked it.

    I think his 3 scenarios–where you have a masculine husband and feminine wife, vice versa, and neutral husband and wife–are a bit to limiting and simplistic (and he even acknowledges this) but as long as the reader is willing to provide a little more imagination and take the general principles he gives and apply them to one’s own situation then it is a great read.

    @Deti FWIW, I don’t find you diabolical

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    Early 20s is too early for most women to marry.

    I think this is mostly due to the culture not requiring maturation at an early age. Such maturation is possible but we have extended adolescence for both men and women. I’m generally of the opinion that children and young adults are more capable of responsibility and maturity when they’re expected of them but we live in a society where young people are too coddled and little is expected of them.

    As an example from a more conservative subculture that promotes marriage and makes it seem like something very valuable for a woman to do (and not that Mormonism doesn’t have its flaws), my mom and sister both married at 20 and are going strong in their marriages many, many years later. My sister married her then 22-y/o fiance and both were still in college and finished.

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

      @HanSolo

      I think this is mostly due to the culture not requiring maturation at an early age. Such maturation is possible but we have extended adolescence for both men and women.

      Absolutely. It is a question of what we require, and our expectations are that adults may not finish their education and be settled into a career until their mid to late 20s. We focus a lot these days on the delayed maturation of males, but it’s true for many females as well.

  • Mike C

    I’ve been watching this debate on Dread between Susan, VD with interest.

    Ha, me too…although I don’t think VD is going to make any headway at all with his arguments.

    But no one’s listening to us anyway….

    Male pouting is a DLV. Just saying.

    Wow…really. That is pretty snarky, passive-aggressive attack there Susan. Just saying.

    Deti, word of advice to you…and Ted. There is a certain relief you have when you simply stop giving a f*** about persuading someone of something who is not persuadable.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Mr.Nervous Toes:
    You may want to try Kirkegaard’s “Either or”, which in short explores two alternatives “styles” of interaction with a woman.
    Or Stendhal’s “De l’amour”, which in English is I think simply translated as “Love”. It’s an in depth psychological analysis of the woman’s psyche and emotions, as well as all the facets of what we call love: Carnal love, passionate love, courteous love, conventional love, etc. written in the romantic vein (by romantic I mean the first part of the 19th century). Most fascinating study.

  • VD

    I’m actually running out of town for the weekend, so can only be brief and then leave it there.

    No worries. First things first… have a Merry Christmas.

  • Russ in Texas

    What concerns me there, Mike, is that if the theory dismisses outliers, is it a universally-applicable theory, or an exercise in confirmation bias/post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc thinking?

    Most of these arguments are being answered with the assertion “it works.” But counter-arguments such as my own “it works” are being readily dismissed.

    Good theory doesn’t dismiss outliers: it attempts to comprehend provide explanatory power *for them.* Good theory TRIES to fail.

  • Mike C

    Susan,

    Earlier upthread, you talked about the use of calm reason. I’m going to challenge you to head over to Rollo’s and at the very least watch the video excerpt of First Man Awake, and note the behavior and speech of many of the women protesters. I then want to know if you think they could be calmly reasoned with. I would argue what you see there is literally the apex of histrionic emotionality.

    I think women vary in their ability to suppress emotional outbursts and emotions taking over higher level thinking JUST AS men vary in their ability to suppress anger taking over higher level thinking. When I was bouncing, there were certain guys who could be reasoned with and up to a point, but at some point the only language was physical.

    Honestly, I think it is very unfortunate if a relationship gets to a point where games of brinksmanship have to take place. Ideally, it never gets to that point, but if you are in the relationship, and either cannot or don’t want to NEXT the relationship, then some short-term extreme measures may be called for to benefit the long-term. Chemotherapy makes you sick, but it gets rid of the cancer.

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

      @Mike C

      Ideally, it never gets to that point, but if you are in the relationship, and either cannot or don’t want to NEXT the relationship, then some short-term extreme measures may be called for to benefit the long-term.

      First of all, I will once again note that the goal posts have been moved. Rollo and Roissy both advocate for the instillation of dread as a preventative practice to be instituted and perpetrated from the start. This is what I have strenuously objected to all along. It has not been promoted by them as something as a last ditch effort to save a failing relationship, or to save a marriage to keep a family together, as Vox mentioned.

      Chemotherapy makes you sick, but it gets rid of the cancer.

      Because it kills the bad cells, right? So what is the source of the sickness when a woman loses attraction for her husband? The treatment cannot succeed unless it gets rid of the problem at its root. Has he let himself go? Is he uncommunicative? Does he work all the time and leave her on her own? Is he not an involved father? Has the sex become rote? Does he lack ambition? Is his career faltering due to his own lack of performance? Is he moody? Whatever the cause for her disinterest, that is what must be addressed. There is a reason she stopped wanting him. Fixing that is the only thing that might work, if it is not already too late.

      I have yet to hear a single example of how men can convincingly conjure up attracted women in this situation. We hear a lot from men here about how few men women find attractive at all, and now we’re supposed to believe that a guy who cannot sustain the attraction of his spouse has a bunch of beauties waiting to take her place? It just doesn’t make sense to me. How would you go about instilling dread if your fiance confessed she no longer found you attractive and no longer wanted to have sex?

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Self-control/future-orientation/willpower/maturity don’t just translate to better relationships. They help other things like better social ties, overall health, lower rates of overweightness/obesity, more conscientious parenting, etc.

    Obviously both men and women vary in their levels of the aforementioned traits, but two high-trait individuals will have a much smoother relationship than any other combination. I think what people like Russ and Damien are saying is, if you are a mature, actualized person, why waste time on someone who needs constant correction?

  • deti

    Mike C:

    Yeah, between you and Hollenhund, and now Susan’s snark, message received.

    The fact that Susan’s reading my posts and taking the time to snark at them indicates she’s listening, even if she’s not persuaded.

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

      @deti

      The fact that Susan’s reading my posts and taking the time to snark at them indicates she’s listening, even if she’s not persuaded.

      I always read your posts and consider them thoughtfully, even when I disagree. I do not understand your getting butthurt over my saying something I have said to you on many previous occasions. I think your ideas about women are seriously off and not justified. I’ve explained why in each case. If you can substantiate your arguments I’m always willing to listen.

  • deti

    “Male pouting is a DLV. Just saying.”

    Losing an argument (again) with VD on your own blog is a DLV. Just saying.

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

      Losing an argument (again) with VD on your own blog is a DLV. Just saying.

      I have not lost an argument with VD. He is wrong, he just hasn’t admitted (or perhaps understood) it yet. The fact that Vox admits he’s never had to use dread proves my point. If a man has high SMV in his wife’s eyes, dread is unnecessary. If he doesn’t, she can’t feel dread.

  • Mike C

    What concerns me there, Mike, is that if the theory dismisses outliers, is it a universally-applicable theory, or an exercise in confirmation bias/post-hoc-ergo-propter-hoc thinking?

    Most of these arguments are being answered with the assertion “it works.” But counter-arguments such as my own “it works” are being readily dismissed.

    Good theory doesn’t dismiss outliers: it attempts to comprehend provide explanatory power *for them.* Good theory TRIES to fail.

    Russ, I’m not sure if you are addressing me or a different Mike, but you raise some good points and questions.

    First, let me say on the record that I would never say any theory is UNIVERSALLY applicable. That has never been my position. It is convenient for some to paint something that way, because it is easy to dismiss. I’d bet VD agrees with me. The running joke is that just about every statement a red-pill guy makes has to have NAWALT tacked on to the end of it otherwise it would be assumed the person is talking universal applicability.

    JP had an excellent point that I am in full agreement with. The MAP is NOT the territory. Of course, in the real world, the objective is to navigate the territory to get from A to B. So even if a map has some errors in it, the answer isn’t to say “fuck the map, and throw it in the trash” and just say I am going to wing it and hope I find B. The issue is we have a lot of different maps, and everyone says there map is better, and tries to highlight the mistakes in the other person’s map. But if you are navigating the brutally treacherous terrain of intersex relations and mating/dating you’ve got to use some map knowing full well that ALL the maps have some mistakes or are maybe missing some aspect of the terrain. That said, there are better and worse maps, and there are some maps that some people have that show a big pretty blue pool where there is big lake of quicksand.

    It gets further complicated because some people want to get from A to B while someone else is trying to sell someone on how to get to C never telling the person that. And then some people have financial interests in selling a certain map. It can get quite complicated.

  • deti

    I’ll just leave this blast from the past here. Regulars will remember this isn’t the first time at this rodeo for Dread.

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/03/15/relationshipstrategies/the-sad-reality-of-using-anxiety-to-generate-attraction/#comment-108667

    “@deti

    “In a marriage or LTR, the only time “dread” can really be effective is if she has already done something to destabilize the marriage/LTR and the husband runs “dread” for a short time to bring order and balance back, to gain some hand.”

    To which Susan replied:

    “That makes sense. Not to hit below the belt, but honestly, in that case I totally understand instilling dread, in the form of an ultimatum, let’s say. My husband once told me, when I turned down sex too many times in a row, that he was not interested in remaining married to me unless I changed my attitude. Which I did, fast. Our trust was maintained, even though the relationship had been threatened. He could have gotten me back into bed by flirting with other women, certainly, but the trust would have been broken by the threat. The way he handled it, he was saying he wanted more of me, not someone else instead. It made all the difference.”

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

      @Deti

      in that case I totally understand instilling dread, in the form of an ultimatum, let’s say. My husband once told me, when I turned down sex too many times in a row, that he was not interested in remaining married to me unless I changed my attitude. Which I did, fast. Our trust was maintained, even though the relationship had been threatened. He could have gotten me back into bed by flirting with other women, certainly, but the trust would have been broken by the threat. The way he handled it, he was saying he wanted more of me, not someone else instead. It made all the difference.”

      I’m so glad you found this quote, I was going to search for it myself! Note my description of what worked. My husband spoke to me with calm reason. No games, no tricks, no manipulation. In reviewing Roissy and Rollo’s writings, it is clear that he did the opposite of what they recommend. He motivated me to change by negatively reinforcing my behavior in precisely the way I have been recommending in this thread. I may have felt a sense of dread as a result, but never at any point did he attempt to make me anxious or jealous, especially by reminding me that he had options, which is the cornerstone of instilling dread. As always, intent is key.

      I may have misspoken here, but if you read the quote again, you’ll see that there was no intention on his part to make me worry that he would leave me for another woman. If he had, I would have responded by withdrawing further, not having more sex. What he did was state his love for me, commitment to our family and our marriage, and state his expectations. I never for one moment feared he might leave, because I knew what I had to do to make him happy, and was able to do that literally within a few days.

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

    HanSolo:

    I actually backed into Deida from his other work. In the body of his work, the sexual typing is only the first stage of, for want of a better word, spiritual awakening. In his model for yoga is a tripod, with yoga as therapy (90 % of what’s practised in the West), yoga as a muse, and yoga as a spiritual practice being the three legs. Typing someone as masculine or feminine is mostly for therapy, because for the muse component you really have to let go of that identity.

    I am sort of mulling it over as this way: A man may prefer 3x as much masculinity as femininity, but ultimately how strong a person (sexually) is determined by the absolute levels of masculinity and femininity, and not the ratio of the two. If a man actively suppresses his femininity, he either: 1.) also limits his masculinity, or 2.) becomes hypermasculine and hence unbalanced in his approach to life.

    I may be mostly preaching to myself on this one, and I’m having a bit of trouble finding appropriate English words for the concepts.

    Russ:

    Ah, yes, the classics are all full of so-called, “Red pill wisdom.” I guess if we’re talking about stolen ideas, I have to wonder how much of European philosophy evolved from what came out of India.

  • deti

    “Has any man here successfully convinced his indifferent wife that he was truly a catch and that other women would love to scoop him up, even if no such evidence of these other women existed?

    What evidence is there that this theory has ever worked? (The R’s don’t count.)”

    Even if someone did come here and relate an account, you would simply dismiss it as an anecdote, an isolated incident from which no conclusions could ever be drawn. You’ve done that with Fly Fresh and Young, who told a story here of having sex with a woman while on some errand away from her boyfriend. Your interest in the story was limited to trying to poke holes in it and detract from his credibility.

    Or if you didn’t dismiss it as an aberration, I suspect you’d simply ignore it. You are convinced that Dread won’t work, cannot ever work. How can anyone ever hope to convince you otherwise?

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

      Even if someone did come here and relate an account, you would simply dismiss it as an anecdote, an isolated incident from which no conclusions could ever be drawn

      Well we don’t know, because I have never seen or heard of a single instance of the effective use of dread to improve a relationship over the long-term.

      You’ve done that with Fly Fresh and Young, who told a story here of having sex with a woman while on some errand away from her boyfriend. Your interest in the story was limited to trying to poke holes in it and detract from his credibility.

      My interest was in calling him out as the slacker punk of poor character that he is and dismissing him from my blog. It worked.

      You are convinced that Dread won’t work, cannot ever work. How can anyone ever hope to convince you otherwise?

      I believe Dread can make women jealous and anxious, as Rollo reports success with this in his dealings with Mrs. Tomassi. I do not understand the need to use it in a healthy relationship where mutual attraction is present. It strikes me as an unnecessarily cruel thing to do to someone you love. I also don’t believe it reflects a good understanding of female psychology. Roissy coined the term, and wrote the strategy. He has recently openly stated that Chateau Heartiste is geared to what he called “cad Game.” Dread is a tool for cads. Even its author would agree.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Just to go along with what Mike is saying: the archetype for a HUS-endorsed husband appears to be a 25-27 year old STEM nerdling of limited sexual experience, introverted Nice Guy/beta personality trait cluster, N=1-3 with extreme intolerance for promiscuity, and safe, stable, SAMH-compatible technical job. He will actively want an LTR, will not consort with dark alpha swordsmen types, and will be unaware of his attractiveness to mate-poaching, increasingly-desperate, wall-hitting sluts facing stiff intrasexual competition for scarce resour—er, “eligible males with provisioning potential.”

    The problem is that this guy may also be a bit boring to the ambitious, hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP. He doesn’t play a particularly strong hand or start from a dominant position of strength and sexiness (his value proposition—“Mr. Good Enough beta provisioner”— sounds cuddly, guileless, and adorable, like a pet rabbit).

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

      @Bastiat Blogger

      the archetype for a HUS-endorsed husband appears to be a 25-27 year old STEM nerdling of limited sexual experience, introverted Nice Guy/beta personality trait cluster, N=1-3 with extreme intolerance for promiscuity, and safe, stable, SAMH-compatible technical job.

      Yikes, that would never have worked for me. My HUS endorsed husband was a 28 year old Wall St. hire with a string of ONSs and several girlfriends in his past. Introverted, yes, but smart, funny and possessing a wide range of interests. He never asked my number, is relatively more liberal about promiscuity than I am, for both sexes. He works in an industry that is anything but safe and stable. It is fairly technical in that it requires considerable understanding of complex instruments, and he’s exceptionally good at it, which has led to high status. Oh, and I almost forgot – he is a beta male.

      That is what I want for my readers. :)

      Your description actually sounds more like something a lot of the guys on here would like to believe.

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

      The problem is that this guy may also be a bit boring to the ambitious, hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP.

      Yup, she’ll eat him for breakfast. Since she is generally not focused on LTRs, much less marriage or having a family, she is best served by her alpha male counterpart, who shares her priorities and most likely her sociosexuality. Explorers mate well with Explorers, and not well with anyone else.

  • Mike C

    Good theory doesn’t dismiss outliers: it attempts to comprehend provide explanatory power *for them.* Good theory TRIES to fail.

    Russ, I’m going to disagree with you here strongly. From a pragmatic view, who cares about explaining the outliers. Let me give you an example, and I hope Bastiat shows up to add to it.

    I trade financial markets. They are highly chaotic with perhaps hundreds of input variables determining the path of various asset/security prices. Some people get really, really, really, filthy stinking rich building maps and models that capture/explain only some segment of security prices (maybe Bastiat is one of them, examples are guys like Buffett or Soros, or Tudor Jones or Steve Cohen).

    No one model could fully explain everything. There may be some security that behaves in way that is not explainable. Maybe the academic might take up the challenge, but the real-world trader says “who gives a fuck”. I’ve got 20 other securities that my model predicted perfectly, and my bank account proves it.

    Re the term “outlier”, someone upthread tried to assign some pejorative meaning to it which I thought was quite silly. It simply refers to a statistical property that in any sample/population you are going to have the + and -2 SD that don’t resemble the mean. The real debate is what is the outlier and what is typical. None of us knows the population. We all have our particular samples that we extrapolate. Arguably, and I am open to this, some of us may have self-selected samples. That is where the criticism comes in that you can’t extrapolate your anecdotal experience to the overall population.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Hope#700,

    Yes. So far as I’m concerned, even finding such women (or their male equivalents) attractive is DLV.

    That’s not going to win me any friends by saying so…

  • Russ in Texas

    @MikeC#703,

    Great. Let’s build a better map. From what I’m seeing, my “native mode” clearly isn’t going to cut it for Deti, and his doesn’t do it for mine, either.

    I despise Hegel, but in this case, synthesis may be appropriate.

  • Fifth Season

    @Susan 3:27PM

    Yes, but the Cinderella fairy tale and James Cameron’s Titanic remain such popular stories because they feature love stories where the partner in the underclass is lifted up. I’d like to see just how the attitudes will change in the future. I also mentioned Prince Harry and Kate Middleton because it’s the most well-known and recent SES “upgrade” that Anne would be familiar with.

    I don’t think Anne reads this thread anymore (the posters here never seemed primarily interested in giving her further advice, only in arguing about how her exchange fits in with their own mindsets), but I’d like it if you could pass along my message. More letters in this vein could help unravel the notion that “hot women” have it the easiest of all in the SMP/MMP.

  • Russ in Texas

    @MikeC#708,

    In context, fair enough. I’m accustomed to fields where you crash-test any theory you’re working, HARD, and outliers signify “back to drawing board.”

    But put into your intellectual language, could we not presuppose an alpha where instead of adjusting for risk, we are instead adjusting for social context? That seems within bounds to me.

    (now, I may be misusing the term, as my background is quite different, so pls feel free to pimpslap if so)

  • Mike C

    I think what people like Russ and Damien are saying is, if you are a mature, actualized person, why waste time on someone who needs constant correction?

    Hope,

    Of course, but what do you do if you are already in the situation. Of course, the answer to drug addiction is not taking drugs in the first place, or the answer to obesity is not overeating in the first place. But sometimes, you find yourself in a situation where course correction is a necessity. But yes, thinking ahead and trying to avoid those situations is better.

    I think this gets even more complicated with relationships because of all the moving parts, and the injection of emotions and sexual attraction/chemistry into the picture. Say you get married to someone and later on you realize he/she has some issues that need to be “course corrected”. Do you bail or try to course correct? I think that depends on a number of things that can get quite complex and messy.

  • Mike C

    More letters in this vein could help unravel the notion that “hot women” have it the easiest of all in the SMP/MMP.

    Fifth season,

    Just curious, in your opinion, who has it easier?

  • Russ in Texas

    @Mike#713,

    Absolutely.

  • pvw

    @Ted at 683: Re. quality as mature and self controlled, that is not what all men are looking for.

    Me: Wow, that is surprising; now, I don’t mean mature in terms of age, but in terms of emotional outlook. The opposite is the drama queen, it seems to me, or the woman who is so out of control that life with her is one long roller coaster. I suppose that if a man likes that kind of thing, he will want the constant dopamine rush…Or if he likes controlling a woman who gets out of control….he will want that.

    Thus I agree with hope at 700:

    Self-control/future-orientation/willpower/maturity don’t just translate to better relationships. They help other things like better social ties, overall health, lower rates of overweightness/obesity, more conscientious parenting, etc…. if you are a mature, actualized person, why waste time on someone who needs constant correction?

    Me: I was specifically looking for that in Mr. PVW: his emotional maturity, integrity, problem-solving abilities, whether he was a grown-up responsible individual who wasn’t constantly living on a roller coaster. Since we saw that we each fit the other in that sense, things are ridiculously smooth between us. Not that there hasn’t been dramatic moments, but we deal with them and move on…..

    @BB 707: The problem is that this guy may also be a bit boring to the ambitious, hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP.

    Me: But he would be ideal for his female counterpart, paraphrasing your text and drawing upon the actual experiences of various HUS female commenters who are happily married/partnered: the 25-27 year old female nerdling of limited sexual experience, introverted Nice girl/beta personality trait cluster, N=1-3 with extreme intolerance for promiscuity and an interest in domesticity. She will actively want a LTR.

    The question is whether he can find her in the midst of the “hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP” who take advantage of the fact that he is clueless that the “increasingly-desperate, wall-hitting sluts facing stiff intrasexual competition for scarce resour—er, “eligible males with provisioning potential.” are hunting him down…

  • Mike C

    @MikeC#708,

    In context, fair enough. I’m accustomed to fields where you crash-test any theory you’re working, HARD, and outliers signify “back to drawing board.”

    Good point. If we are talking about airplane crashes as outliers then we definitely need a better model than hey this one is good enough and we can disregard the outliers. It is just so complicated with human beings. You can’t reduce a human being to a set of deterministic equations. What you can do is test, observe, and compare notes. Repeat ad infinitum and keep refining the map.

    But put into your intellectual language, could we not presuppose an alpha where instead of adjusting for risk, we are instead adjusting for social context? That seems within bounds to me.

    I’m not clear on your point/question here so perhaps this response is off the mark. I definitely believe being “alpha” is or can be contextual. NO. DOUBT. ABOUT. IT. To use Susan’s term of prestige, I think there are men who can be 11s on the 1 to 10 scale of prestige (Spinal Tap reference there) in a particular social environment, but yet in their minds and mindsets they may be different.

    (now, I may be misusing the term, as my background is quite different, so pls feel free to pimpslap if so)

  • Russ in Texas

    No, Mike, I agree, and it’s one of the fundamental weakness I’m seeing with a lot of stuff I read and comments I see over on Alphagame and CH – the theory doesn’t seem to adjust for make room for those sorts of adjustments, and context, as we both agree, COUNTS.

    I’ll percolate and see what I can come up with.

  • pvw

    @BB further thoughts:

    The question is whether he can find her in the midst of the “hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP” who take advantage of the fact that he is clueless that the “increasingly-desperate, wall-hitting sluts facing stiff intrasexual competition for scarce resour—er, “eligible males with provisioning potential.” are hunting him down…

    I’m adding: and will he appreciate his counterpart when he might very well be transfixed by the possibilities presented by the alpha female types?

    I’m thinking here of the story from a few days ago of Karen v. Chloe.

  • INTJ

    @ Lokland

    Always interesting to see the tables turn.

    You fucked one alpha, your no good for an LTR.
    Crazy rant (from women here) about how unrealistic the man is.

    You dated on crazy chick, your no good for an LTR.
    …..

    +1. Personally, I’d sign up for this.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Effective Dark Game, maybe I have an example….not marriage-related though, and about my current SO, of course.

    I had been dating my SO for only a few months. She had moved away, and about a month into that I felt I was getting side-lined, but even earlier than that, if I had brought problems up, they weren’t really being addressed.

    Fuck this. I was tired of being ignored and tired of having “a conversation” where nothing changed. So I wrote a long, angry email, sent it off to her. It detailed many things I considered faults, in great detail, along with specific examples of her poor behavior and how I was sick of her shit.

    From what I understand, she was a bawling wreck for days and figured I was about to break up with her (another week later, and, yeah, I came really close).

    I did not communicate that I had options, nor do I think it was a matter of “lost attraction.” On the other hand, I think she figured I DID have options: one of my friends from college was recently single, we had gone out with friends a week before, and my SO was rather suspicious of this girl who was recently single, attractive, and liked to hang out with me.

    From what I understand, she was a bawling wreck for days. And maybe I was being immature, but she wasn’t listening when I actually TALKED to her, so what else was I supposed to do? Maybe FIDO? I wanted to give it a chance.

    She didn’t dump me.

    She tried 10 times harder to impress me and keep me.

    She hasn’t outright ignored anything I’ve said since, though it’s only been a year in.

    Beats me if this counts as “Dread Game” or whatever. I wasn’t trying to run a game. I had a friend I wanted to hang out with, who was also an attractive girl, and I had numerous problems with my girlfriend, who wasn’t listening, so I informed her that she was fucking up and I wasn’t taking her shit anymore.

    But she wanted to keep me, I suppose, and the feeling of dread provoked her to try extra hard to keep me. This was the result of me being mean to her, enough so that Blue-Pill ADBG would have NEVER done anything like this because girls are special snowflakes, etc.

    Red-Pill ADBG just didn’t give a shit.

  • SayWhaat

    Me: But he would be ideal for his female counterpart, paraphrasing your text and drawing upon the actual experiences of various HUS female commenters who are happily married/partnered: the 25-27 year old female nerdling of limited sexual experience, introverted Nice girl/beta personality trait cluster, N=1-3 with extreme intolerance for promiscuity and an interest in domesticity. She will actively want a LTR.

    Are Susan and I the only extroverts at HUS?

    Extroverts get no love. :(

    /DLV

  • SayWhaat

    Beats me if this counts as “Dread Game” or whatever. I wasn’t trying to run a game.

    That’s not Dread Game.

    That’s Self-Respect Game.

  • INTJ

    @ pvw

    Me: But he would be ideal for his female counterpart, paraphrasing your text and drawing upon the actual experiences of various HUS female commenters who are happily married/partnered: the 25-27 year old female nerdling of limited sexual experience, introverted Nice girl/beta personality trait cluster, N=1-3 with extreme intolerance for promiscuity and an interest in domesticity. She will actively want a LTR.

    The question is whether he can find her in the midst of the “hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP” who take advantage of the fact that he is clueless that the “increasingly-desperate, wall-hitting sluts facing stiff intrasexual competition for scarce resour—er, “eligible males with provisioning potential.” are hunting him down…

    There’s only one problem here. The female HUS commenters are happily married/partnered, as you pointed out. Unless he wants to mate-poach, that target demographic is relatively useless.

    What one has to do is figure out what distinguishes a single female commenter on HUS like Sai from all the other female commenters who are successfully paired up. That’s the target demographic for us guys.

  • Emily

    Well we were all single once! ;) And there are plenty of similar girls out there. Of course, the problem is that the introverted beta females are all at home watching Jane Austen movies with their girlfriends (which is their fault, not yours.) But they exist!

  • SayWhaat

    What one has to do is figure out what distinguishes a single female commenter on HUS like Sai from all the other female commenters who are successfully paired up. That’s the target demographic for us guys.

    It’s the same demographic, INTJ.

    I spent a long-ass time being single before getting a relationship. I don’t even know where it is appropriate to say where my single period begins! :P

    Point is, there are plenty of single women in all demographics. Also, maybe you should get Sai’s email address. ;)

  • SayWhaat

    Ha, cross-posted with Em. :)

  • pvw

    @INTJ:

    There’s only one problem here. The female HUS commenters are happily married/partnered, as you pointed out. Unless he wants to mate-poach, that target demographic is relatively useless.

    Me: Hi, I didn’t mean in the sense of mate-poaching, but that these are examples of the male type finding his match in a woman who is like him. Most of the women in this category, from what I can tell, find their male counterparts quite desirable; they made successful matches, meaning that we and our husbands/partners were once single versions of what both BB and I described.

  • HanSolo

    @Mr. Nervous Toes

    I agree that having the right more balance is important too. An ultra-“masculine” man who could never enjoy a romance movie with his wife (maybe too much alpha) will turn her on in some ways but leave her feeling empty that he doesn’t have that emotional connection that she wants. OTOH, if he’s all chick flicks and feelings and emoting then she won’t feel much attraction even though she feels comfortable with him. Probably about 3 or 4 parts masculine for 1 part feminine is a good balance for a man.

    And then strengthening and refining the good aspects of one’s masculinity and femininity is important.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ SW

    That’s not Dread Game.

    That’s Self-Respect Game.

    Thank you. That means a lot to me. I’ve heard more than once in the past that I am somehow a bad boyfriend for standing up for myself and what I want. At one point someone said “guys like you are the reason girls can’t trust guys,” or something like that. Which kind of sucks to hear, because I like to be a Nice Guy (a little bit anyways).

    So thanks for saying that :)

    Here’s the thing, I still have a tiny bit of me that doesn’t like that side, or actions like that. And like Lokland said, basic self respect is now considered “game,” because guys are taught to NOT respect themselves. Or demand things of women-folk, because that’s un-gentlemanly.

    Blue Pill ADBG would say “oh no, I did something wrong” and flood her with emails and texts and maybe call her crying, I dunno.

    It’s why a lot of us say that the MOST important thing for guys to do, is to remove anti-game and learn basic self-respect, NOT to learn Game, per se.

    What the PUAs do is take my example and ask “hey, how did that work?” They correctly surmised that for some reason this girl liked me and that I instilled fear that the relationship was ending, therefore she tried REALLY hard to fix the relationship. They then use that dynamic for their own purposes.

    If my relationship was constantly this? My SO would burn out right damn quick. PUAs aren’t interested in LTRs, they’re interested in milking a girl for all she is worth.

    I can see how it can work, and how it can be abused, and I don’t see why it wouldn’t necessarily work in a LTR. If the woman values a relationship she will work harder to fix it. She may also take it as an assertion of dominance and her attraction might increase, I guess, or maybe the emotional roller coaster afterwards (make-up sex?) can provoke that reaction. Beats me.

    All I know is that my relationship was improved at least somewhat by something that resembles instilling dread. On the other hand, because I am not an asshole, I am not going to use this as a preventative measure.

    Also, I am an extrovert too :P

  • Emily

    Yeah, I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with guys standing up for themselves if a girl is being a brat (in fact, I encourage it.) But I do have a problem with preemptive “dread game” on a girl who’s being perfectly nice. IMO there’s a massive distinction between the two.

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

      @Emily

      Yeah, I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with guys standing up for themselves if a girl is being a brat (in fact, I encourage it.) But I do have a problem with preemptive “dread game” on a girl who’s being perfectly nice. IMO there’s a massive distinction between the two.

      There is indeed, and none of the men here can bring themselves to defend Roissy’s preemptive “dread game,” so they’re only addressing the marriage with a death rattle.

      When I argue against Instilling Dread I am referring to Roissy’s Dread post. When I hear men here advocating it in marriage, I find myself wondering how it might work if my husband suddenly told me his Russian ex gave good head. Or turned off his cell phone on alternate days. Or admired the labia of another woman. I would literally think he had lost his mind.

  • Russ in Texas

    @ADBG#721,

    Yep. Self-respect game, at the risk of sounding presumptuous, exactly what I advise in the circumstances.

    When you rant and bitch and scream, it’s very easy for the one who’s done wrong to say “they’re out to lunch.” By calmly laying out exactly what the issue is in a factual way, you DHV (no monkey ranting, personal restraint, fact-based argument, clear communication that shit tests and bad behavior are out of line and won’t be tolerated).

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

      @Russ

      By calmly laying out exactly what the issue is in a factual way, you DHV (no monkey ranting, personal restraint, fact-based argument, clear communication that shit tests and bad behavior are out of line and won’t be tolerated).

      Exactly. And I’m not buying the notion that women do not respond well to this. This is exactly how I dealt with toddlers when they misbehaved, and they understood perfectly.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    The only addendum to that, Russ, was that I wasn’t calm about it. I was pissed, and I wrote that letter with damn full intention of making sure she knew it.

  • Russ in Texas

    You stopped and wrote, rather than just flaming her up one side and down the other. Emotions are morally and socially neutral; how they’re handled demonstrates personal value.

  • Fifth Season

    Mike C @ 4:51 PM

    Well, the ones who have it easy are those who are looking for NSA sexual activity and don’t experience any pangs of attachment because that’s what the hook-up culture is catering towards. “Hot” women, as Susan has outlined, may have the pick of the (unwanted) litter but are saddled with unique wants and needs like the rest of us, and still have to sort through so many if they want to get what they’re looking for.

  • Marc

    @595 “Good thing for Anne is that she’s just 22. Her market value will raise for the next 8 years.”
    .
    Lets not single out Anne for this, but any 22 yo. Twenty two is probably the peak for a woman. There are very few woman who are prettier at 22 than when they were 15-18. Most will not acknowledge this for fear of being labeled a perv and such. America has brainwashed people into buying into the “we cant talk about teenagers in a sexual way unless they are 18+.”

  • Russ in Texas

    Very much disagree, Marc. There are significant but subtle changes in bone structure which are still occurring, and depending on how rapidly the woman is aging, quite a number of women who are absolutely nothing to look at as teens for their peers (but just happen to have good skin), will look MUCH better at 22 and then 26.

    Women who are at their best from 15-18 are the CLASSIC “peaked too early” syndrome. They’re not the norm.

  • VD

    it’s one of the fundamental weakness I’m seeing with a lot of stuff I read and comments I see over on Alphagame and CH – the theory doesn’t seem to adjust for make room for those sorts of adjustments, and context, as we both agree, COUNTS.

    You’re either not paying sufficient attention or you are, as Roissy would say, sperging. The theory is quite adjustable and is specifically asserted to be contextually relative as well. Only the most focused pick-up artists have a rigid formula.

  • Russ in Texas

    Or, as I said way upthread several HUNDRED posts ago but you probably missed b/c tl;dr from hell (DAMN threads here go long!), am relatively new to the theory. In fact, since I’ve not the *foggiest* idea what sperging is, let’s make that a definite.

    Could you respond to 670 with an example in context? Deti has flat-out stated that my response 644 is hopelessly beta and will never work; his theory is contradicting my (obviously anecdotal) evidence. Would be interested in your take.

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

    In both cases, stay far away.
    Pity the crazy, don’t date them.

    It only gets worse with intteligent males, since they know they are intelligent, so they are pretty sure their system is good. Moreover, the more intelligent guy, the greater chance most of people he interacts with have lower IQ, hence the larger chance he become convinced he’s got it and when he meets a critique, he will going to assume that the critique is invalid because it surely was formulated by one of those idiots.

    Yeah they get used so much to being right that they cannot conceive ever being wrong. I particularly think that the day you declare yourself a teacher and never wrong is the first day of your intellectual death because you cannot learn anything else if you think you already know it all.

    Always, ALWAYS, have a comfortable couch. For general couch purposes.
    And the guest room also works for this purposes…

    Perhaps. It would be more “dread” if she also went on more GNO and/or put herself in places where she is likely to meet and interact with other attractive men.
    I’m quite familiar with female dread game usually applied by Dominican ladies when their husbands start to show the “signs” of an affair. I know a couple that dress to the nines, go out in a night they usually don’t without telling the hubby where they are going on advance or just a passing “going to a party with some friends…” and just staying a few hours in a park bench, drinking some soda… I don’t criticize it if you are in an emergency and trying to save a marriage but is indeed pathetic regardless the gender.

    The problem is that this guy may also be a bit boring to the ambitious, hypergamous alpha female carnivores that stalk the female side of the SMP.

    I never understood the obsession with finding an entertaining partner, the few times I had been bored I found many things to do to entertain myself, never though it was anyone’s job but mine to keep me entertained.Maybe the new wedding vows should add for exciting and boring times…

    From a pragmatic view, who cares about explaining the outliers.
    Tell that to the dozens publishing houses that rejected Harry Potter…
    I know you cannot make a living out of hoping to hit the jackpot, but isn’t dating essentially weeding out the handful of outliers that might be a right match? I mean if we could just have a successful relationship with anyone people will probably be randomly matched by a mathematical system, not even arranged marriages assume all people will match they do filter in some other ways. My point being outliers are not to be ignored in many aspects, YMMV.

    Are Susan and I the only extroverts at HUS?
    Extroverts get no love.

    Extrovert here! :D
    Although I do prefer introverts, I found this cartoon adorable and fitting: http://www.intellectualbubblegum.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/how_to_live_with_introverts_guide_printable_by_sveidt-d5b09fj.jpg

  • JP

    @Russ

    Sperging (showing Asperger traits) is being rendered obsolete by the DSM-V due to the rolling of the term into general autism.

    So you don’t need to worry about the term because it’s being psychologized out of existence.

    And yes, this blog is very commenty.

  • Anne

    @ Fifth Season,
    I read some, but it’s mostly just PUA conversation now.
    I know some people saying they are ‘allergic’ to debate about social class and whether it matters (or whether they even exist).
    Most women I know value confidence, social status, wealth, ambition, success etc. very high. I cared about looks a lot when I was a teenager, now much less. I know some girls who talk a lot about biceps and abs all that very often, but I don’t think they’re being honest with themselves about preferences, because their actions speak otherwise.
    Confidence is the most important attribute to attract women, and men who are born into well-off families have a confidence other men don’t. My impression is that things can go into a positive or negative circle from a young age. A lot of men link their self-esteem and self-worth to their ability to get women, if they do well early – they continue to do well.
    Undoubtedly some young guys are so full of themselves it makes them impossible to deal with. But most have certain demands from their families and if they will be in charge of a business some day, they can’t be messing around.
    As Susan said, family expectations is one part of it. My sister brought home a bartender and my mother had sleepless nights. They eventually broke up, as much as my sister insisted she “could do as she pleases”.
    I don’t feel the pressure for a guy to cross an “income level”, but my mother has been clear on me not letting a guy move into my apartment and live there for free and if we were to get a place together, he should bring 50% at least.
    It is not as if you have candidates lined up with their incomes listed. I didn’t know Stephen’s “situation” when I first agreed to the dinner date. There is a certain gap between us (firstly because he’s already working), but not so much that it worries me. Of course his parents are wealthier than mine (albeit in a billionaire vs millionaire sort of way). His brother is in an LTR, her background is similar to mine.
    Realistically speaking, I would look for a guy from upper middle class or above (but I find that too ‘vague’, since social class is defined differently in different countries).
    Of course there are great guys of all backgrounds. I don’t think of this mindset as ‘exclusion’ though. Firstly, a girl’s options are geographically limited – my school, gym, local bars and restaurants. I don’t approach or initiate contact with men, so the selection of those men again is limited to those who approach me. I would have to either start approaching men (not happening) or change my social circle (why?) for the socio-economic group of men I date to change.
    I can add that my impression has always been that men aren’t really looking to ‘date up’ in terms of wealth. I think it often makes them uncomfortable.

  • JP

    “Confidence is the most important attribute to attract women, and men who are born into well-off families have a confidence other men don’t.”

    That’s because not being well off is kind of demeaning.

    You know that you really don’t matter, economically speaking, so you feel inferior.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Bah, this “confidence” spiel again…

    Yeah, confidence is important, as in, if you don’t have it, you’re screwed, but Anne, that isn’t enough by far.

    My co-workers argue with the federal government and insurance companies all day long. That can get intense. They enjoy physical sports and tackle football without pads and are fiercely competitive. If you challenge them to a fight, they will obliterate you without a second thought. They do not give a single fuck about workplace rules: they cuss up a storm, they drink up lunch, and “hostile work environment” means nothing to them.

    On my job interview, I told my job interviewer that she was wrong, to her face, still got the job.

    Confidence is not what separates me from them.

    What separates me from them is that I have Roissy, and they have Feminism.

  • JP

    “My co-workers argue with the federal government and insurance companies all day long. That can get intense. They enjoy physical sports and tackle football without pads and are fiercely competitive. If you challenge them to a fight, they will obliterate you without a second thought. They do not give a single fuck about workplace rules: they cuss up a storm, they drink up lunch, and “hostile work environment” means nothing to them.”

    They sound profoundly subhuman.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Yeah, male intrasexual dynamics can look that way from the outside, but, tbh, I prefer it to some sewing circle nonsense where we all talk about our feelings and sip tea :P

  • Russ in Texas

    Regarding Anne#742’s comment.

    This is correct. My wife and I both come from ruined family (mine from squandering and wastage, hers from the Communists); social standing counts. We can socialize with anyone, but we can no longer pay the price of entry required to circulate in the same circles (and, of course, each of us had to scrape for an education our great-grandparents took for granted).

    The problem with marrying up, as a man, is that so often the families of the ladies in question will make it impossible unless the gal is willing to abandon her family, which is a heavy price. That situation was in play with me once in college, with a lovely french girl from a good family, and because abandoning her family was a non-starter and I wasn’t an acceptable match, that was that.

    Worked out better eventually; I prefer Hungarian cooking. But anyone who says SES doesn’t matter is involved in self-delusion.

  • INTJ

    @ Emily, SayWhaat, pvw

    Well my point is that the young female commenters on HUS have a much lower probability of being single than the young male commenters. This is reflective of the general trend in society too. Sure, the introverted female nerdlings might find their male counterparts attractive. But there are far too few female nerdlings to go around for all the male nerdlings.

    @ Emily

    Of course, the problem is that the introverted beta females are all at home watching Jane Austen movies with their girlfriends (which is their fault, not yours.) But they exist!

    Ahh well it’s not like the introverted beta males are any better. :D

    @ SayWhaat

    Also, maybe you should get Sai’s email address. ;)

    Yeah considered that but AFAIK, she’s several thousand kilometers away.

    @ Sai

    Sorry for talking about you in the third person. :D

  • J

    @Deti

    I probably lead the pack of your detractors, and I don’t find you diabolical. A bit curmudgeonly perhaps but not diabolical. ;-)

    I do find your situation sad and your marriage, at least as you describe it, untenable. FWIW, I think you and the wife need to forgive each other and move on–or just split up. I personally would hate to be stuck in the relationship you describe. It’s got to be very hard on both of you.

    @Hope re women instilling dread

    I find the notion of instilling dread as a relationship strategy to be sort of pathetic, but I will say that when both parties have real options outside the marriage, it does increase their appreciation for each other. I don’t think that can be faked though.

    @Marc

    There are very few woman who are prettier at 22 than when they were 15-18. Most will not acknowledge this for fear of being labeled a perv and such. America has brainwashed people into buying into the “we cant talk about teenagers in a sexual way unless they are 18+.”

    No, there is actually a large cadre of men who prefer to be with a full grown woman. To most men, 15 is cute and coltish; 18-27 is young enough to be maximally attractive but also fully grown and fertile.

    As a point of fact, pregnancy outcomes for 15 year olds are comparable to outcomes for 35 year olds. A women needs hips to give birth.

  • J

    I can add that my impression has always been that men aren’t really looking to ‘date up’ in terms of wealth. I think it often makes them uncomfortable.

    It does make them uncomfortable; it interferes with the natural male role of provider and also intimidates those men who who see financial dependency as a force that holds relationshops together. IME, the usual hypergamous trade-off is her looks for his money. A rich man can usually get a better looking woman than his poor twin can.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Say: “I spent a long-ass time being single before getting a relationship. I don’t even know where it is appropriate to say where my single period begins! ”

    Funny how, by this criteria, the women count, but the men don’t.

  • J

    Someone: Women are attracted to behaviors that signify status/dominance in men.

    SW: Women are attracted to men who signal “good genes.” Looks are very important to women. They look for symmetry, strength, and signs of a strong immune system. If you don’t accept that, you’re kidding yourself.

    Me: Yep. I’d agree that the first thing women notice are the good gene markers, followed by prestige, the social dominance.

  • J

    The only thing you left out is that when a woman demonstrates that she does in fact work differently, she is branded an “outlier.” It sounds like some dystopian designation for the hinterlands. An outcast, a weirdo. Or else she’s treated as the Blessed Madonna of Mating, the one woman ever born without the sin of hypergamy.

    LMAO. You should do a post where we play a game in which each female commenter emails you to say if she views herself as normal, an outlier or a madonna. She also guesses how the guys will see her. Then the guys rate each woman. You could give out HUS t-shirts as prizes to the women who guess the male view of her the most accurately.

  • Mike C

    Confidence is the most important attribute to attract women, and men who are born into well-off families have a confidence other men don’t. My impression is that things can go into a positive or negative circle from a young age. A lot of men link their self-esteem and self-worth to their ability to get women, if they do well early – they continue to do well.

    Anne,

    I’m hoping I can get you to flesh this out some more. As an extremely hot young woman (per Susan’s evaluation) I think it would be instructive to hear *exactly* how you go about evaluating a man’s confidence. The more specific you can be here the better. What exactly are you observing and assessing to make the determination a man is confident versus lacks confidence.

    I’ll say you are very correct about your last few sentences. There is a virtuous circle and/or negative feedback cycle depending on which train a guy gets on at a young age. And I think for most men….probably close to all actually, self-esteem is tied to the ability to “get girls”.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    J, we could rate the male commenters similarly! Pretty much, we all suck, except for… Wait, who?

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    I have not lost an argument with VD. He is wrong, he just hasn’t admitted (or perhaps understood) it yet.

    Ahh yes. I’ve heard that before. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/IRejectYourReality

    There’s also this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4

  • INTJ

    @ OTC

    J, we could rate the male commenters similarly! Pretty much, we all suck, except for… Wait, who?

    There’s always Megaman to white-knight when needed. :D

  • Mike C

    First of all, I will once again note that the goal posts have been moved. Rollo and Roissy both advocate for the instillation of dread ****as a preventative practice to be instituted and perpetrated from the start.****

    Well, that isn’t my position so I would agree with you that “instilling dread” as a preventative practice in an otherwise healthy relationship is wrong and counterproductive. From that perspective, I’d note that one component of healthy is one where the woman fully appreciates and is highly attracted to the man who has chosen and committed to her. Instilling dread only becomes necessary if she gets complacent.

    To my recollection, Rollo’s position wasn’t as you describe so I went back and read his post which I am going to link to since you brought it up:

    http://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/03/27/dread-games/

    Lets be clear, the vast majority of women are secure enough not to allow this condition to get the better of them, and it’s in the extreme cases I’ve used above that real neuroticism flourishes. Contrary to popular belief I’m not an advocate of the Dark Triad methodologies of Game. Not because I think they’re ineffective, but rather because, with the right art of Game they’re not even needed.**** Only in extreme cases are the dark arts to be employed****, and if a situation necessitates their use it’s important for a guy to understand that a line has been crossed with a woman who necessitated their use.

    So yes, you should be seeking to reassure an LTR of your love and devotion,

    I don’t know any other way to read that and come up with your characterization. You are probably correct about Roissy, but I don’t read him literally and actually I don’t read his blog much anymore.

    Because it kills the bad cells, right? So what is the source of the sickness when a woman loses attraction for her husband? The treatment cannot succeed unless it gets rid of the problem at its root. Has he let himself go? Is he uncommunicative? Does he work all the time and leave her on her own? Is he not an involved father? Has the sex become rote? Does he lack ambition? Is his career faltering due to his own lack of performance? Is he moody? Whatever the cause for her disinterest, that is what must be addressed. There is a reason she stopped wanting him. Fixing that is the only thing that might work, if it is not already too late.

    I agree with some of this. Many guys would benefit from running basically Athol’s MAP. It isn’t the only thing though. In my view, the main place you are going wrong is in underestimating the complacency some women in LTRs/marriages might drift into, and it is only by a shock to the system of losing to other options that is the catalyst for course correction from bad behavior to good behavior. I’d actually agree with J that in many cases, staying in the relationship doesn’t make sense even if it is marriage, and might as well cut your losses and move on. Screw playing games and instead of displaying options, simply end it, and go exercise them. This gets trickier possibly if there are dependent children involved and lots of financial entanglements. In the current legal system, many wives have their husbands “over the barrel” so to speak in terms of divorcing them so whether to leave or play the games of brinksmanship to “course correct” the relationship is a difficult choice.

    How would you go about instilling dread if your fiance confessed she no longer found you attractive and no longer wanted to have sex?

    I’m assuming you are asking me directly so I’ll answer. The first thing I would do is elevate to a top priority getting my bodyfat back down to 12-15%. After that, I’d switch gears to being more flirtatious and I’d also be more responsive and engaging to IOIs which is a mode that I’ve basically completely turned off. I have limited interaction these days with other women especially while in the presence of my fiancee. To the extent I do, I’m polite and matter of fact, never flirtatious. There is one girl we encounter regularly who I am pretty sure likes me, but I don’t give her anything to run with. Under your hypothetical, I’d start playing that interaction differently.

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

      @Mike C

      I recall a different Rollo post, where he specifically discusses his effective use of Dread in keeping Mrs. Tomassi on her toes. He describes flirting with other women in her presence, and offers his opinion that it is both useful and powerful to directly cause anxiety and jealousy in one’s partner. I asked him specifically about that description earlier in the thread, but he did not reply. Perhaps he has taken it down.

      You are probably correct about Roissy, but I don’t read him literally and actually I don’t read his blog much anymore.

      Here is his famous post:

      http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2008/03/27/dread/

      There are two ways to guarantee a healthy relationship. Meet your soulmate. Instill dread.

      Women respond viscerally in their vagina area to unpredictability, mixed signals, danger, and drama in spite of their best efforts to convince themselves otherwise. Managing your relationship in such a way that she is left with a constant, gnawing feeling of impending doom will do more for your cause than all the Valentine’s Day cards and expertly performed tongue love in the world. Like it or not, the threat of a looming breakup, whether the facts justify it or not, will spin her into a paranoid estrogen-fueled tizzy, and she’ll spend every waking second thinking about you, thinking about the relationship, thinking about how to fix it. Her love for you will blossom under these conditions. Result: she works harder to please you.

      The key for the man is to adopt a posture of blase emotional distance alternated with loving tenderness.

      This is the post I have always argued against. It is the post that inspired Rollo, presumably. Roissy invented Dread Game, he defined it. It bears no resemblance to the practice of not putting up with poor treatment or making your expectations clear when a relationship is in trouble.

      I have no interest in debating Dread Lite. The debate is about Roissy’s codified method for guaranteeing a “healthy relationship.”

      it is only by a shock to the system of losing to other options that is the catalyst for course correction from bad behavior to good behavior.

      But few men in LTRs actually have options – hell, most men didn’t have options when they were single, right? Only alphas have options? How is the beta who has lost his wife’s attraction supposed to come up with these options?

      I’m assuming you are asking me directly so I’ll answer. The first thing I would do is elevate to a top priority getting my bodyfat back down to 12-15%.

      You’ve just admitted that you would actually need to become more attractive to run Dread. If you became more attractive, you would likely solve the problem. Even now, you state that you are getting IOIs from one woman the two of you see regularly. Surely your fiancee is aware of her attraction to you? IOW, you have one option, and she’d be a fool to be oblivious to that woman’s attraction. That real option, rather than some kind of “pretend” option, is part of what keeps your fiance attracted to you.

      It’s a question of preselection, which is why I’m surprised the men here are not getting it. You can’t fake preselection. Even PUAs have to find some decent women to parade around with.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    INTJ: “There’s always Megaman to white-knight when needed. ”

    I think BB and Han are on the +1 list, Mega just says what they wanna hear (even if it is mostly true, things ain’t so bad; we just disagree on tactics).

    I enjoy my position here as the well-reviled man who went off-reservation. Am I good or evil? It’s fun to watch the wheels spin and the gaskets blow…

  • Mike C

    I do not understand the need to use it in a healthy relationship where mutual attraction is present. It strikes me as an unnecessarily cruel thing to do to someone you love.

    I wholeheartedly agree with you on this statement.

  • J

    J, we could rate the male commenters similarly! Pretty much, we all suck, except for… Wait, who?

    Actually, I have a soft spot in my heart for many of you guys.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Bb: ‘the archetype for a HUS-endorsed husband appears to be a 25-27 year old STEM nerdling of limited sexual experience, introverted Nice Guy/beta personality trait cluster, N=1-3 with extreme intolerance for promiscuity, and safe, stable, SAMH-compatible technical job.”

    Sue: “Yikes, that would never have worked for me.”

    Yeah, we have to definitely purge the earth of such men. An N of below average and strict idealism for LTRs is a definite dealbreaker! Sleep around, guys, your respect hinges on it.

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

      Yeah, we have to definitely purge the earth of such men. An N of below average and strict idealism for LTRs is a definite dealbreaker! Sleep around, guys, your respect hinges on it.

      I was simply pointing out that it would be hypocritical for me to make such an endorsement since I made a very different choice myself, and in fact, would never have been found acceptable by the man BB describes.

      This is not some conservative Christian blog. I’ll happily endorse any man who is capable of long-term commitment without cheating.

  • Mike C

    There’s always Megaman to white-knight when needed. :D

    Haha. Spot on.

    http://www.dropbox.com/s/9l0jnhbyoxbe7oi/internet_white_knight_colored_4350.jpg

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

      There’s always Megaman to white-knight when needed.

      Ha, the newest post is dedicated to Megaman, who has done more research to back up his claims that the lot of you put together. He does not suffer from confirmation bias, or have an agenda of any kind. In fact, it was his thoughtful prodding that got me to take a new look at the state of relationships on college campuses. And I have reversed my previous beliefs as a result.

  • Mike C

    Yeah, we have to definitely purge the earth of such men. An N of below average and strict idealism for LTRs is a definite dealbreaker! Sleep around, guys, your respect hinges on it.

    LOL…got to love the mixed messages. :) What it boils down to, if you are handsome nice guy beta who happens to luck into casual sex from sexually aggressive women, you can retain you “good guy” card. But if you are a guy who does even one iota of planning, systematizing, tactical analysis to get casual sex than you are a “bad man”.

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

      But if you are a guy who does even one iota of planning, systematizing, tactical analysis to get casual sex than you are a “bad man”.

      If you can do it without deceit of any kind, that’s OK. Most men who scheme to get casual sex use deceit as a primary tool.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Susan:
    -Chemotherapy makes you sick, but it gets rid of the cancer.

    “Because it kills the bad cells, right? So what is the source of the sickness when a woman loses attraction for her husband? The treatment cannot succeed unless it gets rid of the problem at its root. (…) if it is not already too late. ”
    THIS is excactly the core of the problem with the, how should I call them, the manosphere supporters. It is based on their biased view and lack of knowledge of women, and their lack of discerning judgement between different kind of women, largely based on one negative experience with one particular woman.

    @Mike C
    “probably close to all actually, self-esteem is tied to the ability to “get girls”.

    To some extent yes, but I wouldn’t reduce male self esteem to just this, which is only the vain side to any man’s self esteem. But yes, let’s not kid ourselves, we all have it, just like women have their own vain side, which translates differently (see the chapter on stringing along, friend zoning, etc).

    And to close that dreadful discussion about dread or no dread. Applying dread games to your woman IS a form of imposing your will by force (this also what I meant with the wrong piece of the puzzle being “forced” in) ending in having someone put into submission and at your mercy. This not only humanely wrong, but also dangerous.
    We all have a sadistic trait deep somewhere, and nothing brings it out better than knowing you have someone at your mercy…. I prefer to keep mine in check.

  • J

    You all will never guess what I’m watching on TV right now. ELP!

    I didn’t read the book or see it in the theater. As suspected it would be, it’s a huge pantload of self-indulgent BS, but I’m enjoying watching Julia Roberts eat Italian food and wear saris. Right now , I wish I had a meatball sandwich and a salwar kameez. And an elephant because she’s petting an elephant.

    I also caught the last half hour of that Fireproof movie that people are always on about. I can’t believe what a simplistic view of marriage is espoused in that movie.

    Now, Julie is in Bali listening to some craziness about smiling in her liver. The scenery is pretty as is Javier Bardem, who just literally ran into her. Talk about “meeting cute”! This is turning into a rom com. I hate rom coms.

  • Mike C

    To some extent yes, but I wouldn’t reduce male self esteem to just this, which is only the vain side to any man’s self esteem. But yes, let’s not kid ourselves, we all have it, just like women have their own vain side, which translates differently (see the chapter on stringing along, friend zoning, etc).

    Right….I didn’t mean to suggest that 100% of male self-esteem is tied to being successful with women. More broadly speaking, I’d say male self-esteem is very connected to what I would call skillful competence at producing successful outcomes or high achievement. Now that could manifest itself in any number of different ways. For some guys, maybe it means being a great Halo player, for other guys being one of the strongest guys in the gym, etc. Just about every guy has something that his self-esteem is tied to in terms of being skilled at something. The guy who has nothing in that regard is dangerous because he has nothing to live for. But in any case, being successful with “getting girls” is part of the equation. It is why guys will pay $5,000 to presumably learn how to be successful at “getting girls” while no such comparable market opportunity exists for women to “get guys”.

  • Mike C

    But few men in LTRs actually have options – hell, most men didn’t have options when they were single, right? Only alphas have options? How is the beta who has lost his wife’s attraction supposed to come up with these options?

    I’m not an expert on Athol’s system but I do believe the lynchpin/starting point is actually boosting your attractiveness. I agree with you that creating real options out of thin air is ridiculous.

    If you became more attractive, you would likely solve the problem. Even now, you state that you are getting IOIs from one woman the two of you see regularly. Surely your fiancee is aware of her attraction to you?

    Honestly don’t know. Although generally speaking, I do believe women are much more “in tune” with sort of the dynamics that go unsaid, I think it is possible to be oblivious to things if you aren’t looking for them especially if the other person’s display is somewhat understated. With a woman, there is that fine line where she is just being friendly to where she is perhaps being overly friendly because she likes you. Not always easy to call that one perfectly.

  • Emily

    INTJ (748),

    I think part of the issue is that the female nerdlings and the male nerdlings often have separate interests and social circles. I was recently at an anime convention and I couldn’t help but notice that there were way more girls than guys. I remember thinking that they should merge the event with Comic Con. :p. IMO, it’s more a logistical issue than anything.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Mike C #777
    Totally agree.
    “while no such comparable market opportunity exists for women to “get guys”.”
    Too bad, I’m sure there’s a sizeable market niche for it. :-)

  • Emily

    … what about the countless self-help books out there? (The Rules, He’s Just Not that Into You etc etc.). Lots of the advice is terrible, but they’re all about how to ‘get guys’.

  • Emily

    Also, FWIW, Bestiat’s “ideal HUS male” sounds like somebody that I’d like.

  • VD

    I will once again note that the goal posts have been moved. Rollo and Roissy both advocate for the instillation of dread as a preventative practice to be instituted and perpetrated from the start. This is what I have strenuously objected to all along. It has not been promoted by them as something as a last ditch effort to save a failing relationship, or to save a marriage to keep a family together, as Vox mentioned.

    No, the goal posts haven’t been moved at all. You’ve claimed the tactic does not work and cannot be a part of a healthy relationship. Rollo, Roissy, and I all disagree; the distinction between what you’re saying Rollo and Roissy have said and what I’ve said is merely the timing of the application. You’ve confused intent and effect as well as functionality and application. You’ve also cited your father as a primary example of the inefficacy of Dread then claimed that he never used it. And you’ve drawn a quixotic distinction between Dread that is based on real threats and Dread that is based on imaginary ones.

    I don’t know if this is striking too close to home or what, Susan, but this is not your usual calm and collected analysis.

    He is wrong, he just hasn’t admitted (or perhaps understood) it yet. The fact that Vox admits he’s never had to use dread proves my point. If a man has high SMV in his wife’s eyes, dread is unnecessary. If he doesn’t, she can’t feel dread.

    No, he certainly hasn’t understood that. But my not using it proves nothing; I don’t use negs or numerous other Game tactics either. If a man is perceived to have sufficiently high SMV, Dread is unnecessary… at the moment. Rollo and Roissy are simply advocating the use of it as a preventative measure. Furthermore, you’re failing to understand that Dread is a means of elevating one’s SMV in the woman’s eyes; it’s basically an ex post facto version of pre-selection. Would you find it less objectionable if it was termed post-selection?

    He describes flirting with other women in her presence, and offers his opinion that it is both useful and powerful to directly cause anxiety and jealousy in one’s partner.

    Are those women invented? In light of your earlier comments, how can this be Dread if the threat is real and not invented. More importantly, how is this any different than the behavior of your father, who you informed us never used Dread?

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

      @VD

      You’ve claimed the tactic does not work and cannot be a part of a healthy relationship. Rollo, Roissy, and I all disagree; the distinction between what you’re saying Rollo and Roissy have said and what I’ve said is merely the timing of the application

      But timing is important – Roissy advocates dread from the get go.

      the threat of a looming breakup, whether the facts justify it or not, will spin her into a paranoid estrogen-fueled tizzy

      If you can’t see anything wrong with that from a moral POV, there’s no point in discussing it further.

      You’ve also cited your father as a primary example of the inefficacy of Dread then claimed that he never used it.

      You are still misunderstanding. My father was a natural and did have a lot of options, but he did not deliberately employ a strategy of making my mother aware of those options. He didn’t need to. That is the difference. It is significant that as the wife of a man who had options and was responsive to other women, his behavior did not create a desire on the of my mother to keep her man happy, it created enormous anger and resentment, and she frequently froze him out. His SMV, had he not been an attention seeker, would have made her feel that she had won the prize. Instead she was humiliated on a regular basis. So, to summarize, he did not have an intention to create a paranoid tizzy in my mother or threaten a looming breakup. He just enjoyed the attention of women. What his behavior did produce was anger rather than dread.

      And you’ve drawn a quixotic distinction between Dread that is based on real threats and Dread that is based on imaginary ones.

      The whole point of Roissy’s post is to create imaginary threats. It’s all duplicity. There’s not a single recommendation in his post about the male’s real SMV or desirability. The idea is to make the female imagine a threat.

      As an aside, I do not find it credible that many men whose wives no longer find them attractive have any options whatsoever.

      Are those women invented? In light of your earlier comments, how can this be Dread if the threat is real and not invented.

      The difference is that in Rollo’s scenario, the male actively seeks and cultivates flirtatious relationships for the express purpose of causing his wife anxiety and jealousy. That would be thoughtless and devoid of empathy even if the male did initiate the flirtation, as with my father. It is sadistic and selfish to purposely create that dynamic for the express purpose of inducing paranoia.

  • VD

    Yeah they get used so much to being right that they cannot conceive ever being wrong. I particularly think that the day you declare yourself a teacher and never wrong is the first day of your intellectual death because you cannot learn anything else if you think you already know it all.

    I see this behavior most often in academics and those whose lives are structured in such a way that they experience no consequences for being wrong. It’s pretty much impossible to have that attitude in finance or economics; it’s only a matter of time before you’re wrong and there will definitely be consequences.

    never though it was anyone’s job but mine to keep me entertained.

    You are wise beyond your years. It isn’t. But many women don’t understand that.

    Always, ALWAYS, have a comfortable couch. For general couch purposes.

    Temporarily pulling away from the situation for effect, whether it is going and sleeping on the couch or sleeping in the guest bedroom is a BETA move. I have a friend or two who does this from time to time and he is absolutely of lower SS rank. Basically, it’s a feminine, passive-aggressive response. “I am going to deprive you of my wonderful presence until you are nice to me.”

    By way of contrast, compare that action with the High Alpha move of kicking a girl out of her own bed, in her apartment, just so one can sleep more comfortably on an initial overnight visit. That is supreme confidence and the tightest of Indifference Game.

    What would your idea of those two men be if you saw a) a man come out of his own apartment with blankets and a pillow, asking if he could sleep on your couch because his wife was being mean, versus b) a woman come out of her own apartment, asking if she could sleep on your couch because she’d been kicked out of her own bed by some guy she’d picked up? Who is the Alpha, (a) or (b)?

    It would only be Dread Game if you called a woman, then left the house and spent the night away from it. Or, I suppose, if you slept in the guest bedroom after inviting a woman over and having her spend the night in there with you.

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

      By way of contrast, compare that action with the High Alpha move of kicking a girl out of her own bed, in her apartment, just so one can sleep more comfortably on an initial overnight visit. That is supreme confidence and the tightest of Indifference Game.

      I hope you are joking. Does she sleep on the floor next to the bed? Will you let her come up to the mattress for sex in the morning?

      Any woman who didn’t throw your ass out on the spot is pathetic. I don’t deny there are some pathetic women.

  • OlioOx

    My impression is that things can go into a positive or negative circle from a young age. A lot of men link their self-esteem and self-worth to their ability to get women, if they do well early – they continue to do well.

    A similar sentiment from an old dead white male:

    “There is a tide in the affairs of men.
    Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
    Omitted, all the voyage of their life
    Is bound in shallows and in miseries.”

    (For you landlubbers, he’s talking about high tide and low tide; the ‘flood’ is high tide.)

  • Damien Vulaume

    “… what about the countless self-help books out there? (The Rules, He’s Just Not that Into You etc etc.). Lots of the advice is terrible, but they’re all about how to ‘get guys’.”
    True, as well as those countless girl’s/women’s magazine which, besides promoting fashion names, do mostly just that.

  • Benton

    I’m sorry, but I have no sympathy for complaints from someone who won the genetic lottery. They have so many advantages compared to everyone else. I’m speaking from experience here- beautiful women will always get favorable treatment and will always receive attention from the more desirable guys. Sure, they have challenges too (no one’s life is perfect), but it is so much easier for them than for others.
    If a beautiful woman has even half of their act together, they will have a far better life than an average looking woman who has it 90% better. And don’t get me started on the women who have great personalities, but were born with physical characteristics that will always hold them back.
    As a guy, I know how I can get caught up in someone’s beauty. Sometimes I wish I could be like the main character in “Shallow Hal,” where I only saw the good in people and not their physical characteristics. But it’s not that easy.

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

      @Benton

      I’m sorry, but I have no sympathy for complaints from someone who won the genetic lottery.

      I don’t believe your sympathy was requested. The post merely describes a real dynamic in the SMP and attempts to explore that dynamic. I am interested in the way people mate. Believe it or not, that even includes the beautiful people.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    All these dreadnoughts in their lines … to dethrone … the Guns of Navarone …

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Benton:
    “I’m sorry, but I have no sympathy for complaints from someone who won the genetic lottery. They have so many advantages compared to everyone else. I’m speaking from experience here- beautiful women will always get favorable treatment and will always receive attention from the more desirable guys”

    I also totally agree with that, and didn’t want to put that up for the sake of discussion, hence my more than moderate empathy for mademoiselle good looks Anne from a likely Paris-seizième or Neuilly background whose dramatic problems are now temporarily limited to break ups in seemingly superficial relationships caused by text messages or fb deleted items tricks.
    I do not want to sound too harsh but, sometimes those kind of “sissy” problems are a bit exasperating given the current economical situation.
    Anyway, it is nonetheless true that “too obviously” good looking girls have much more of a hard work to do in filtering in a discerning way through the fog of all those male propositions.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Susan, my composite character was based on various recommendations that have been put forth at HUS over the past several months—STEM, Beta, avoiding high N males, finding guys who were disgusted by hook-up culture, etc.

    I have a suspicion that you are a closet Explorer and that this occasionally leaks out into posts. You have your own appetites, but you also realize that a Mr. HUS Wall Street/Wharton/structured financial products guy is typically—in this SMP—going to be a wild, uncontrollable STR beast where most women are concerned, and so you don’t generally recommend that template to today’s college girls.

    I have frequently thought that you should have both a public HUS with safe and conservative recommendations, and a more private sanctum sanctorum version—safe from the hypervigilant, greedy eyes and keyboard-poised hands of male readers like myself—where elite alpha girls can discuss topics that would be considered too risky and controversial for open dissemination. Perhaps your focus groups serve this purpose…?

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

      @Bastiat Blogger

      Susan, my composite character was based on various recommendations that have been put forth at HUS over the past several months—STEM, Beta, avoiding high N males, finding guys who were disgusted by hook-up culture, etc.

      I’ll cop to directly recommending beta guys as relationship partners. I didn’t pull that out of a hat. There is ample evidence that hypermasculine/high T males cheat more and divorce more. I have suggested that women should avoid very high N males, and I have defined the limit (admittedly somewhat arbitrarily) at around 40. I do believe that men who have a very high number of partners are men who spend considerable time and energy chasing tail, which I do not consider a noble life purpose. I also believe their demonstrated preference for sexual variety implies poor suitability for monogamy.

      I cannot recall promoting STEM males, nerdy males, virgin males, etc. Not only did I not suggest finding guys who are disgusted by hookup culture, I incurred the wrath of several male commenters here last week when I stated that I would be wary of a man who was “extremely disgusted by casual sex.” I have also stated that I have no regrets about the casual sex I have had, nor do I resent the casual sex my husband had before we were married.

      I have a suspicion that you are a closet Explorer and that this occasionally leaks out into posts.

      I definitely have a lot of Explorer in me! I don’t think I’m really in the closet – I generally laugh off all of the ‘spherians’ branding of me as a slut who married a beta provider. I’ve also defended what I perceive as harmless fun in the Bridesmaid/Groomsman fling, for example. I don’t think my SOI score would make any sense after being married for so long, but I suspect that in my youth I would have been in the middle, at least. I’ve stated this on the blog as well.

      It is interesting though – I have been able to maintain a thriving monogamous relationship with mutual sustained attraction for a very long time, so there must be a bit of another Fisherian type in there as well.

      you also realize that a Mr. HUS Wall Street/Wharton/structured financial products guy is typically—in this SMP—going to be a wild, uncontrollable STR beast where most women are concerned, and so you don’t generally recommend that template to today’s college girls.

      I’m a big fan of catching these guys in their late 20s and up. My posts and comments about dating older tie into this. I think that a lot of these “STR beasts” will in fact want to be husbands and fathers, but not yet. (St. Augustine). As long as they didn’t go full blown PUA or get jaded and cynical about women, they’re potentially high value mates. What’s changed since my youth is that women today must filter much more aggressively. You think that equity trader is cute? Go for it, but be ready to kick him to the curb after the first douche move.

      elite alpha girls can discuss topics that would be considered too risky and controversial for open dissemination. Perhaps your focus groups serve this purpose…?

      They do indeed, but that is only a couple of dozen women. When I do share real tidbits from those sessions, the guys have fits. A woman whose count is 40! Someone said “boyfriends are ugly!” The Atlantic quoted one as referring to a dick the size of her pinky. Stupid, selfish sluts!

      In private, I have answered a vast array of questions in a manner that might surprise you. One of my focus groups alums works for Creative Artists Agency in LA and was recently asked out by a bonafide movie star. She was beside herself and asked me what she should do. My advice was “Go for it, but realize that you are visiting a foreign land. You will not live there. Make the most of your holiday.” Now, I know that such advice is likely to send Escoffier into paroxysms of indignation. And sometimes I really would just rather not get into it on the threads – it’s draining and ridiculously time consuming. In fact, I’m an idiot for writing this on Dec. 22. I think I’ll disappear shortly. :)

  • deti

    Susan:

    VD is right. You’re not evaluating the Dread issue with objectivity or, candidly, with credibility.

    Please understand: My interest in this issue is purely academic. I know how things go when heated discussions, this blog and Christmas all converge. So I’m going to leave this here and wish all of you a very merry Christmas.

    I’m pressing on this because VD has hit on something here: Dread aims for a specific result or effect. This is what the male is interested in: undertaking certain conduct to achieve a desired result. Susan, you on the other hand appear to be far more interested in the INTENT or the MENTAL STATE, the “mens rea” if you will, WHICH MOTIVATES the behavior and not so much what results from it. This is where you’re getting bogged down, I think, because the intent really doesn’t matter as long as the outcome is reached.

    Game, and male sexual behavior, seeks desired results. The intent is much less relevant to us.

    susan, you did use your dad as an example of Dread.

    From “The Sad Reality of Using Anxiety to Generate Attraction”, March 15, 2012, Hooking Up Smart:

    “Apparently our man is lining up alternatives, “just in case.” We know he’s desirable, other women lighting up when he’s around tells us that. What we wish we didn’t know is that he’s milking it, wants more of it, is getting off on it. It’s deeply humiliating and painful for a woman in love.

    “A man who does this is displaying low relationship fitness, in one of two ways:
    1.He is genuinely interested in generating sexual attraction with other women, even while professing to love you.
    2.He is using this behavior as a ploy to keep you on your toes.

    “If he’s employing the first strategy, he’s a cad. Enough said.

    “If he’s employing the second strategy, he is operating from a mindset of lack, or scarcity. This is ironic, since he is attempting to secure your sexual attraction by conveying abundance. However, he is waging the battle to secure the Position of Least Interest, which means that his win is your loss. There must always be a winner and a loser. That is a very poor paradigm for a successful relationship.

    “How do I know this? Because I watched this dynamic with my own parents. My father is a highly charismatic and witty man. He is a great storyteller. The first full sentence I ever uttered, as I fished an olive out of his martini, was to tell my mother to go wash his shirts and leave us alone. My entire life I have watched people drawn to my father like moths to a flame.

    “Women always flirted with my father, and he always flirted back. I recall the late 60s, lying awake while waiting for my parents to return from a party, then the muffled sound of my mother’s weeping as they returned and she spoke of the humiliation of watching this spectacle. Once I peered out of my bedroom to watch the grownups in our living room, and saw my father being dragged into the middle of the room to dance with a neighbor, who threw her arms around his neck. He was enjoying himself. At 10, I knew how my mother would feel about it, and it made me feel sick.

    “I was perpetually afraid of learning that my parents were divorcing. It was clear to me, even as a child, that my father would not stop, even though it hurt my mother. His own mother had left when he was three, so perhaps that explained his insensitivity and need for female validation. Once my best friend told me how much she loved my dad, how everyone loved my dad, but that she was glad he wasn’t her dad. How I longed for a boring and staid father when I was a child!”

    And yet you’ve said on this thread, at 579;

    “This is a misinterpretation of what I have shared here. I am actually very close to my father and see him as high value. I believe he was desperately unhappy with a bipolar wife, which is understandable. However, he never used the tactic of instilling dread. He is extremely charismatic, even now, and has always received a lot of attention from women. My mother was pissed because he enjoyed it, but the attention was a DHV. His soliciting it would have been a DLV.

    Why would a man of high value ever need to instill dread?”

    I don’t see how these two statements are reconcilable. In the first quote you talked of Roissy-style Dread and then related your dad’s conduct as an example of the very thing you objected to. Why? Because of its EFFECT, on both your mother and on you. Then in the second quote you say that it wasn’t really Dread because he was high value. Well, yes it was, because of its EFFECT. It made you “perpetually afraid of learning that your parents were divorcing”.

    WADR, the intent of your father, the operative actor, is really not relevant to a detached understanding of Dread and how it works. The EFFECT is what was important. It got him the desired attention and control.

    I want to use my own experience as an example here, which when I look back on it is also an example of Dread (perhaps not Roissy Dread, but still Dread nonetheless). When Mrs. deti told me she wasn’t attracted to me and had been treating me with disrespect that day, I knew I had to do something, because “I love you but I’m not in love with you” was just around the corner. Visions of a process server dropping divorce petitions at my feet in my office, sliding down the razor-lined divorce slide and being forcibly divested of my life’s work danced in my head.

    I knew I had to do something, and I wasn’t going to live like that. I simply told her I had no intention of putting up with this anymore, that I would not remain married to a woman who treated me like shit; and that if she did not change her ways and that right soon, the marriage would be over and that the next communications would be through lawyers.

    Intent does not matter. I had a desired result in mind: For reasons not really relevant here, I didn’t want a divorce. I wanted and needed to gain some leverage and control to get the marriage back on track, and to change it. If threatening divorce was the way to do it, fine. I didn’t need to create fictional women. I let her know I had (and have) another option, which is to not be married to her anymore. And that option would mean she would be alone and unmarried. It would also mean that a man of my (admittedly) low sociosexual value had divorced and rejected her simply because I had finally sacked up and said “fuck off, I don’t need this shit. I’d rather be alone than be married to a bitch who publicly disrespects me and doesn’t want to sleep with me”. I can’t imagine Mrs. deti would find middle-aged solitude or my beta chump ass rejecting and divorcing her for being intolerable to be optimal or even desirable prospects. What is this if not Dread?

    This might be distasteful to you or other readers, but I know I still have that option. I know I can still leave and divorce her if my marriage ever fails to serve my purposes and if Mrs. deti fails to meet my needs. I don’t need other women, real or imagined, to serve those purposes. Whether it’s Roissy-style Dread or not, the EFFECT is the same: to bring the marriage back in line, to give me some hand and leverage, and to gain what I wanted in the marriage (more respect, more sex).

    I know you think we’re talking about two different things, but we’re really not. Dread is Dread is Dread. It’s used to bring about an effect. The intent really isn’t important, so long as it brings about the desired effect.

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

      @deti

      Susan, you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth. I thought morality didn’t matter on this blog.

      I have never said that. I have written many posts concerned with the morality and ethics of interpersonal relationships. I write frequently about the immorality of deceit, selfishness, manipulation of others for personal gain, and hypocrisy.

      What I have said is that I do not concern myself with sexual morality. If two consenting adults are engaging in sexual activity and not injuring another party, that’s their business. I have no interest in entering other people’s bedrooms. Nor do I feel that virginity should be saved for marriage. I don’t even claim that promiscuity is immoral – though I do believe it is poor strategy for most people.

      This is where you’re getting bogged down, I think, because the intent really doesn’t matter as long as the outcome is reached.

      The ends justifies the means.

      Niccolo Machiavelli

      This really says it all. We’re discussing Machiavellian tactics. Other quotes by NM relevant to Game:

      It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot be both.

      A prince never lacks legitimate reasons to break his promise.

      One who deceives will always find those who allow themselves to be deceived.

      A wise ruler ought never to keep faith when by doing so it would be against his interests.

      The promise given was a necessity of the past: the word broken is a necessity of the present.

      This cavalier justification for manipulating others for personal gain without regard to the injury exacted is known as the “agentic” or “exploitative” personality. Such individuals are not fit for long-term relationships, and rarely seek them. This is not a personal opinion – the field of study on the Machiavellian personality is very deep and rich.

      I cannot control what men do.

      “O, what men dare do! What men may do! What men daily
      do, not knowing what they do!”

      Claudio, Much Ado About Nothing

      What I can do is warn women about men who employ Machiavellian tactics. They make very, very poor relationship prospects.

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

      @Deti

      OK, let’s clear up the semantics. You and I are on the same page.

      I simply told her I had no intention of putting up with this anymore, that I would not remain married to a woman who treated me like shit; and that if she did not change her ways and that right soon, the marriage would be over and that the next communications would be through lawyers.

      I hope you recall that I strongly supported your actions in that matter, and I still do. I do not consider that Instilling Dread, as outlined in Roissy’s Dread post. You responded to being disrespected and insulted by your wife in a manner which is fair, honest, and free of manipulative tactics. You stood up for yourself, making clear under which conditions you would leave, and what it would take for you to stay. This is what Mr. HUS did, and in a much smaller way, Stephen in the OP did this as well.

      Creating dread is something very different, as it depends on a prolonged state of anxiety and uncertainty. “Will he leave? Why is he flirting with other women in front of me? Why does my husband humiliate me this way?” If anyone instilled Dread, Mrs. deti did!

      Dread: Anticipate with great apprehension or fear

      Mrs. Deti knows that she need not fear if she gets her act together. She has a roadmap to continued and even improved marital relations, and she knows you prefer not to divorce. Presumably, she has enough trust in your character to believe that if she makes the effort you require of her, you will not leave. She needn’t feel apprehensive or fearful, and you didn’t seek to make her feel that way. Your intent was to assert yourself and your needs in a straightforward manner. That could not be less manipulative.

      Intent always matters. Always. Our justice system, and in fact all societal institutions recognize this. There is a world of difference between harming someone intentionally and accidentally. Civilization depends on it.

  • deti

    “If you can’t see anything wrong with that from a moral POV, there’s no point in discussing it further.”

    Susan, you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth. I thought morality didn’t matter on this blog.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Roissy’s preemptive “dread game,” so they’re only addressing the marriage with a death rattle.”

    It also has uses on woman who are not worthy of an LTR.
    Dread game is for P&D material.
    Treat a whore like a whore and a wife like a wife. Simple really.

    On another note, if your wife requires dread game to be kept in line.
    I’d prefer divorce.
    Assuming the problem was not with me (eg. chubby fuck syndrome).

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

      @Lokland

      Dread game is for P&D material.
      Treat a whore like a whore and a wife like a wife. Simple really.

      On another note, if your wife requires dread game to be kept in line.
      I’d prefer divorce.

      Cosign.

  • Lokland

    @youknow

    “The reality is game is designed for the Anne’s of the world and like it or not, it worked like gangbusters on her.”

    +1

    Certain principles of game can be used to artificially trigger attraction in lower SMV women. Which is a good thing, kinda like make up can trigger attraction in lower SMV men.

    Whats ridiculous is if those low SMV individuals start expecting high SMV treatment continuously.

    An SMV 5 woman demanding a man with lots of options is kinda like a beggar demanding $20 bills.
    An SMV 5 man demanding a woman with perfect skin is …

    Whats even more annoying is we only seem to discuss the SMV 8+ categories which constitute a small percentage of the population yet dominate 90% of the conversation.

    Can’t blame people. There human.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Bastiat Blogger:
    “Mr. HUS Wall Street/Wharton/structured financial products guy is typically—in this SMP—going to be a wild, uncontrollable STR beast where most women are concerned, and so you don’t generally recommend that template to today’s college girls. ”
    Sure, that is one of the results of today’s over-obsessed money seeking western societies.
    I think that “psw” mentioned the “sacred cows” factor in one of those threads at some point.

  • Russ in Texas

    @youknowwho#800,

    Dueling experience.
    I wasn’t aware that tailoring your approaches to a given culture constituted gaming. If that’s the case, then the bar is set so low as to be pretty meaningless. While I’m sure that game works like a charm there, the model of female behavior indicating that it would be necessary is simply silly. Culturally speaking, EE, Japan, and Brazil are places where traditionally-western men can clean up without the slightest need for gaming. In Japan particularly, where the culture says *women pursue the men,* the idea that you need game to succeed there is simply ridiculous.

    Now, there is a caveat here regarding audience. If you’re referring to somebody who’s been turned into a “feminist victim” and hasn’t Clue One about how the world actually works b/c like a tragic goose he’s been force-fed advice which is literally designed to emasculate him….then any amount of game would be in that man’s favor. But I don’t think you can posit that this man is the norm — perhaps the infection and rot is worse up north.

  • SayWhaat

    Well my point is that the young female commenters on HUS have a much lower probability of being single than the young male commenters.

    I don’t think so. Like I said, I didn’t get into a relationship until I was 22. Same thing with Emily.

    I view your comment to be equivalent to Where Have All the Good Men Gone?. The good guys and good girls are out there, you just have to know where to look. And/or not ignore them when you find them.

    Funny how, by this criteria, the women count, but the men don’t.

    *facepalm*

  • Russ in Texas

    @VD
    “Basically, it’s a feminine, passive-aggressive response. “I am going to deprive you of my wonderful presence until you are nice to me.”

    By way of contrast, compare that action with the High Alpha move of kicking a girl out of her own bed, in her apartment, just so one can sleep more comfortably on an initial overnight visit. That is supreme confidence and the tightest of Indifference Game.

    What would your idea of those two men be if you saw a) a man come out of his own apartment with blankets and a pillow, asking if he could sleep on your couch because his wife was being mean, versus b) a woman come out of her own apartment, asking if she could sleep on your couch because she’d been kicked out of her own bed by some guy she’d picked up? Who is the Alpha, (a) or (b)?”

    Thanks for the response. I’m still hoping you’ll respond to the first query as well. (My position is separate from Susan’s. I agree that Dread and other forms of game work — I simply don’t think they should always be the go-to tools.)

    The last paragraph is self-evident, but moves the goalposts, particularly as you’re trying to reframe the question as one of dominance — for ltr/marriage if binary dominance/submission is an issue, that’s a sign of a relationship that’s in trouble — by comparison, both parties benefit WILDLY by continually “throwing dove to dove.”

    Now, caveat: if I had a shit-hard uncomfortable couch, or crashing on it was somehow a punishment, then I would agree with Ted and HELL no, I’m not to punish myself because she acted poorly. But I’m an avid catnapper and crashing on the couch is no punishment.

    (re: Ted notice I haven’t mentioned sex. If I want sex, I get sex. That’s a different discussion: I’m the gatekeeper and she gets sex when I want to give it to her, brutal as that sounds.)

    Feminine and passive-aggressive would be withholding affection and trying to make the poor bastard guess why….a unredeeming and fairly puerile shit-test. There is in my opinion *nothing* either feminine or passive-aggressive about saying “you have fucked up royally, and if you want a return to situation-normal you had better get on the stick.”

  • VD

    But timing is important – Roissy advocates dread from the get go.

    How can timing possibly be an issue when you say that it cannot work at all?

    If you can’t see anything wrong with that from a moral POV, there’s no point in discussing it further.

    A moral POV? By what moral standard do you make that claim? Is it the same one that asserts premarital sex to be moral?

    I hope you are joking.

    Not so much.

    Any woman who didn’t throw your ass out on the spot is pathetic. I don’t deny there are some pathetic women.

    That may well be. And yet, you would likely find it surprising how high the SMV of those “pathetic” women can be. You recognize that Game is powerful, I don’t think you recognize the full extent of its potential power over women. There is a reason, after all, that a certain subset of men regard all women as more or less pathetic.

    I do not find it credible that many men whose wives no longer find them attractive have any options whatsoever.

    I think you need to revisit your logic here. Do you really believe that a male 8 whose 9 wife no longer finds him attractive has no options whatsoever.

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

      @VD

      How can timing possibly be an issue when you say that it cannot work at all?

      Timing is an issue in the debate, not in the deployment of a tactic I don’t endorse.

      I am asking you point blank whether you believe it is acceptable to prophylactically induce anxiety, fear, and jealousy, creating a sense of “impending doom” in a passionate relationship that is going very well? I assume your answer is no, as you have not done this in your own marriage.

      There is a gulf between Instilling Dread as insurance against future waning of attraction and doing it to jump start a troubled marriage. I am asking you to qualify whether you endorse both of these strategies.

      Do you really believe that a male 8 whose 9 wife no longer finds him attractive has no options whatsoever.

      I think there are very few male 8s married to discontented 9s. The question is merely theoretical. However, the real question is why is his wife turned off by him? He was obviously a catch when she married him – he needs to get that back. If he does have options, of the Real Housewives variety, his wife may indeed feel dread when he starts tomcatting around at neighborhood barbecues. But whatever turned her off is still not fixed. He may be able to fuck his wife silly after the barbecue, but the next day, she is going to hate, hate, hate that thing he does when he chews with his mouth open.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Russ:
    “If you’re referring to somebody who’s been turned into a “feminist victim””
    Haha, I guess you mean a “”bullpost”…

  • Russ in Texas

    @Lokland#802,

    Actually, the old game saying from our grandparents’ generations is “treat a whore like a princess, and a princess like a whore.”

  • Marc

    @742 “I don’t approach or initiate contact with men, so the selection of those men again is limited to those who approach me.”
    .
    Men constantly compain about approaches and rejection, but should realize what an advantage it is that, as men, we are the approachers. I am only interested in .0000001253% of the female population and cant imagine if the rest were constantly approaching me. Would make me insane. Thats why I understand the “bitch shield”. Mine would be more fierce than any I have ever encountered.
    .
    To those who commented about 22 year olds being more attractive because their bones have matured and so forth. The bones maturing is exactly what has made them less attractive. Many tests were done where men have to choose girls based on attractiveness. They are shown 3 pics of the same girl, only slightly manipulated to give them younger, baby like features such as a larger skull, larger forehead, smaller chin, fatter cheeks etc. Men overwhelmingly chose the girls with the baby like features. That is what made Kate Moss so desireable back in the day, even though she was far from attractive in the traditional sense. The name escapes me, maybe someone can help out. It is a syndrome where women keep their baby like features throughout their lifetimes. (Except for the skin obviously!).

  • HanSolo

    @Russ in Texas

    It sounds like your wife is nice and really into you and values your company. So, in your case, your removing your company from her prized nest feels like a rejection and not that she has the upper hand. So, for you it works.

    However, for most men going to the couch will be seen by their less-into-them wives as a pussy move.

    Thoughts?

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

      However, for most men going to the couch will be seen by their less-into-them wives as a pussy move.

      Thoughts?

      First of all, whoever is pissed is the one to deny the pleasure or comfort of sleeping together. It’s much harder to kick someone out of the bedroom – I would never, ever agree to that. My husband has on occasion said, “I have no interest in sharing your bed.” and gone off to the guest room. I felt lonely and deserted in our big bed by myself. And I was afraid to look him in the eye in the morning.

      Removing yourself from someone’s company is a rejection and feels terrible to that person. It doesn’t matter where you sleep – though I can understand why going to sleep somewhere uncomfortably is a weak move. Anyway, I’ve experienced it as a punishment.

      Again, for the record, it was not Dread.

  • Marc

    @742 “I don’t approach or initiate contact with men, so the selection of those men again is limited to those who approach me.”
    .
    Men constantly compain about approaches and rejection, but should realize what an advantage it is that, as men, we are the approachers. I am only interested in .0000001253% of the female population and cant imagine if the rest were constantly approaching me. Would make me insane. Thats why I understand the “bitch shield”. Mine would be more fierce than I have ever encountered.
    .
    To those who commented about 22 year olds being more attractive because their bones have matured and so forth. The bones maturing is exactly what has made them less attractive. Many tests were done where men have to choose girls based on attractiveness. They are shown 3 pics of the same girl, only slightly manipulated to give them younger, baby like features such as a larger skull, larger forehead, smaller chin, fatter cheeks. Men overwhelmingly chose the girls with the baby like features. That is what made Kate Moss so desireable back in the day, even though she was far from attractive in the traditional sense. The name escapes me, maybe someone can help out. It is a syndrome where women keep their baby like features throughout their lifetimes. (Except for the skin obviously!).

  • Lokland

    @Russ

    “Actually, the old game saying from our grandparents’ generations is “treat a whore like a princess, and a princess like a whore.””

    My grandparents were part of the greediest, most self absorbed, self indulgent generation that displayed zero empathy or understanding of future generations (even their own children).

    The only thing we can learn from them is what not to do.

    note: Grandparents on moms side are going to celebrate 53-54 years.
    Grandparents on fathers side would be 52 this year if they hadn’t passed away accidentally a few years back.

  • Damien Vulaume

    VD:
    “I think you need to revisit your logic here. Do you really believe that a male 8 whose 9 wife no longer finds him attractive has no options whatsoever.”

    Zzzzzzzz….Moron here, or the old mustached christian macho type? Can’t decide yet, although I should.
    Your own kind of logic is the perfectly well articulated yet totally autistic one that leads to make me hope that you’ll never be at the head of an army at some point. Joyeux Noel.

  • Lokland

    ““you have fucked up royally, and if you want a return to situation-normal you had better get on the stick.””

    Stupid question.
    Does stick mean penis in this scenario?

  • Lokland

    @Han

    “However, for most men going to the couch will be seen by their less-into-them wives as a pussy move.

    Thoughts?”

    +1

    If wife is still into you then yes it’ll work.
    If wife is not into you, you just schlub’d out.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @OlioOx

    “There is a tide in the affairs of men.
    Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
    Omitted, all the voyage of their life
    Is bound in shallows and in miseries.”

    In these shallows and miseries.
    Which, taking no flood, leads to being immune;
    Omitted, and cossetted by friendly flames
    While outside … weeps the winds of change.

    @MikeC

    I see that you’re in finance, and that you know something about the investment strategies of Buffet et al. My question to you is this :

    Have you ever heard of Nicolas Darvas ?

    He was a ballroom dancer. He got into the stock market by sheer accident. At first he got his ass handed to him, but after a certain time he happened on a certain strategy. And his strategy was this :

    Buy rising stocks with a trailing stop-loss. For those of you that don’t know what a trailing stop-loss is, it’s a bit like an old fogey with a nymphomaniac … when it’s rising, he’s staying in … but when it’s not rising, he starts running …

    Darvas knew he would only be right about 50% of the time. And his stop-loss would get him out without him agonizing over it. All he did was read a Barron’s and look for stocks that were rising on unusual volume.

    He started following these stocks, and if the pattern looked right, he’d do a pilot buy. If the action was still good, he’d buy some more.

    All this via telegrams between him and his brokers, while he did his act across the world.

    He made a fortune that way.

    He was mentioned in Time Magazine. (Suzan-deary, why are all the women that reach the cover of Time Magazine so damn ugly ?)

    And that was in the 1950’s

    Is such a thing still possible ?

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “It’s a question of preselection, which is why I’m surprised the men here are not getting it. You can’t fake preselection. Even PUAs have to find some decent women to parade around with.”

    Most women don’t get to marry a guy with preselection/options.
    Most men don’t get to marry an 8.

    Never having been apart of the lower categories you might not understand but they do somehow manage to carry on through generations without these things.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    There’s always Megaman to white-knight when needed.

    Boy, I knew the truth hurts, but the facts positively burn… :twisted:

    @SW

    He does not suffer from confirmation bias, or have an agenda of any kind.

    Or willful ignorance, which is typically PC BS or a mask for certain personal inadequacies.

    It’s ironic that a lack of hostility towards women in general, on a female-oriented blog no less, is perceived as bias. Back on Planet Earth, it’s the other way around. But what can you expect from the Knights who say Ni? :wink:

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Re: womanizing in Japan. It is even easier than in the U.S., if that’s possible. Even those who have not experienced the Asian circuit will probably enjoy the book “Black Passenger, Yellow Cabs.”

    Marellus, re: Darvas. I know the q was addressed to Mike and I share your interest in his response, but I thought I’d jump in for a moment because I’ve been running money for about 10 years and have fairly deep familiarity with the approach that you describe.

    That type of strategy is frequently employed by both global macro hedge funds and trend-following CTAs. They basically enter when prices break free of pre-determined tripwires (imagine that market prices have a heartbeat—the trading models define a “normal” heartbeat using recent historical data and then seek aberrations, or periods in which markets are starting to behave abnormally).

    The programs will typically take directional positions—long or short, they don’t care—and will use a position-sizing algorithm to keep risk down to about .5%-1% of equity on each trade. This can get a bit complicated in practice, and optimal bet sizing is a discipline in itself. A fairly tight initial stop loss is determined; if a trade turns sour, it usually does so pretty quickly and the position is exited with a small loss.

    A winning trade, on the other hand, can last for many months—I run a strategy like this and have been long gold futures for years. The trailing stop loss thing is not trivial and cannot be set too close; holding a winner can be likened to riding a bucking bronco and you do need to give the trade some room to breathe.

    These strategies tend to enjoy conflict and crashes; they are “long volatility” and Nassim Taleb would say that they are “anti-fragile.” They don’t normally show steady 1-1.5% returns month after month; the big profits tend to come in bursts, punctuated by long periods of relative inactivity in the P&L. This can make them psychologically demanding to implement.

    **(This is a heavily simplified version of a systematic trend-exploitation approach and there are many problems that have to be overcome before running one in practice, on leveraged instruments).

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Bastiat Blogger #823

    My thanks to you for such an unexpected and thorough answer. I must admit that I do not know what a CTA is. Can you shed some light on this please ?

    As for global maco-hedge funds doing this; is this not a case of a herd, and at that, a dangerous herd forming that might destabilize markets ?

    Is there a contrarian approach to this ?

  • Russ in Texas

    @Marellus,

    It’s OT, but happy to hear. What I know about the market can be carried in a thimble. If I understood it enough to get in and make a consistent two-percent profit, I’d be a very, very happy man. As it is, I’m having to rebuild the family wealth much more slowly, over the course of decades rather than years.

    @HanSolo,

    You’ve surprised me butt good there. That’s a very valid point. While I have been a FWB, I’m not even remotely interested in ONS or pickups, and so wouldn’t consider myself a”natural.” If you’re right, that suggests that *I’m* an outlier.

    If my wife were seriously not into me, I’d let her go and go get somebody else who was. While I couldn’t *replace* her (she is a very unusual woman and my near-perfect match), finding a new mate would not be an issue.

    @YouKnowWho

    “If there we no laughter, there would be no Tao.”
    If your only exposure to cultural fluency is via game, then I suggest that you’d benefit considerably from broadening your horizons. The notion that c.f. is “a part of game” (rather than game relying upon competent c.f.) is risible.

    @Lokland

    Yes, they suck, no, it doesn’t mean penis. It’s an old piloting metaphor.

  • Russ in Texas

    “On the flip side I can see a smokin’ hottie and go over and find out if she’s someone I want to spend time with, I have total freedom as a man. It’s really a blessing, once you learn not to attach your entire self-worth and confidence to whether or not a girl you’ve just met rejects you or not.”

    Yep. EVERYbody is a waste of time for SOMEbody.

  • Russ in Texas

    @youknowwho

    “The main thing we care about is that YOU, as a man, know what YOU want. You’d be surprised how many men really don’t. When you know what you want it actually makes a lot of game easier because you start developing standards and expectations that you didn’t have when you were wishy-washy and settled for whatever the universe provided you.”

    Couldn’t begin to disagree there. “Know thyself” and “Be true to thyself” are part of the fundamental building blocks of our culture. All a man needs to reject “blue pill” victim status is to develop this. Boxing, math, philosophy, hell, FRISBEE, so long as it works to give a man an understanding of who he is (upon which the latter is predicated).

  • Russ in Texas

    Yeah, YouknowWho: I think the main issue with the “dread game” concept is that we’ve got a lot of dueling definitions floating around (bearing in mind that my argument differs from Susan’s). While that wouldn’t be the first tool in the kit I’d pick up, d.g. as you’ve expressed it certainly doesn’t seem out of bounds to me.

  • Russ in Texas

    @YouKnowWho#830:

    I know dick about Mystery (it’s a long thread, and so it would be entirely understandable if you missed my intro, but while I’ve always geeked about relationships, I’m quite new to the game scene and don’t say otherwise or pretend to knowledge I don’t have. “Ignorant” is no insult). That said, I’m not seeing anything unusual in what he’s saying; that’s relationship 101 stuff. Any man who doesn’t feel out how the girl feels about herself, her environment, all that jazz, is committing relationship death by orienting to an “image” of the girl he’s made in his mind, rather than to the ACTUAL woman in front of him.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @YouKnowwho
    “But it’s incorrect to say PUAs don’t care about more than a one night stand or STR. We have entire boards dedicated to LTRs and mLTRs and oLTRs and monogamy and polygamy etc.
    The main thing we care about is that YOU, as a man, know what YOU want.”

    So what do you exactly want with and from a woman?

  • Russ in Texas

    Example for my argument regarding DG (it’s a pity Vox didn’t reply to that, but it’s a big damned thread).

    antidote to sexless dvd roommating:
    1. go dread game and hit up a strip club with buds
    2. come out well-dressed and say “come on, put on (this, your) dress; we’re going dancing.”

    Both are totally legitimate tools. The first is throwing a hawk card, the second a dove card which addresses the problem head-on. VD thinks I trend hard-beta, and that’s okay – it works for me. I *suspect* it would work well for most guys as well if you’re in a salvageable relationship. (otoh, I *believe* in divorce. Breaking up was the best thing that ever happened to my hilariously-mismatched parents)

  • Russ in Texas

    Rather, I’m saying that your phrasing suggested that CF exists inside of Game– as a game concept – rather than Game necessarily relying upon and using CF. It’s a bugs/beetle problem. Working within Game may in fact be a lovely and enjoyable means of developing some cultural fluency. But there are plenty of others equally worthwhile.

    nota bene, though, if you’ve followed the thread, you’ll note that I have *never* agreed with Susan’s argument about DG, and took a very different position from the get-go when it came up. It’s a mistake to conflate my argument with hers.

  • VD

    Example for my argument regarding DG (it’s a pity Vox didn’t reply to that, but it’s a big damned thread).

    Post the reference number here and I’ll do so.

    VD thinks I trend hard-beta, and that’s okay – it works for me

    I don’t have any opinion on you, merely on one specific tactic. If it works for you, great.

    Zzzzzzzz….Moron here, or the old mustached christian macho type? Can’t decide yet, although I should. Your own kind of logic is the perfectly well articulated yet totally autistic one that leads to make me hope that you’ll never be at the head of an army at some point.

    My own kind of logic is the Aristotelian one. But splash all the rhetoric about you like if it makes you feel better, by all means. And your army comment is indeed amusing….

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Marellus,

    Re: CTAs. These are “commodity trading advisors” that typically fall under CFTC regulations and exclusively trade futures contracts (vs. equities-trading hedge funds that typically fall under SEC regs). This affects registration and so on.

    Most CTAs run money through individual managed accounts rather than through a pooled structure like a limited partnership, but this isn’t a hard-fast rule. So a CTA investor would normally open a trading account with a futures broker and then give the CTA manager trading authorization over the account (but the CTA would never have taken custody of the money—it would just trade the account on the named client’s behalf). Meanwhile, a hedge fund investor would normally join a limited partnership and wire money to the HF’s trading account with a prime broker, where it would be pooled with money from other limited partners.

    There are pro and con elements to both structures.

    Re: destabilization. Well, it really depends on the number of similar strategies hogging up a particular niche. You could probably separate most HF/CTA strategies into “short volatility” and “long volatility” categories.

    A short volatility strategy will bet that prices tend to revert to a long-term moving average; they are “mean-reverting.” So let’s say that there is a sudden downwards break in the S&P. The short volatility guy might buy the market under the assumption that this is a temporary thing and that prices will soon return to some normal level. The long volatility guy will probably short the market under the assumption that this could be the start of a new bearish trend. In this example, the guys are taking opposing positions in a zero-sum game.

    Normally the market will in fact bounce around noisily and thus the short-volatility guys will make regular money month after month. However, when something serious does happen, the short-vol guys will be betting against the trend, and in some cases a single really bad position can metastasize, blowing up the entire fund as the managers continually double-down and bet that the “stupid market will get back to normal” (and variations on this story have occurred many times historically—arrogant traders can become married to their positions and unable to admit that they are wrong).

    The long-vol guys, in contrast, risk the death of a thousand cuts, where a market is caught in a meandering trading range and the traders keep betting on false starts for trends that never appear, losing small amounts of money each time (small losses that may add up to larger amounts over months of trendless market conditions).

    Does this make sense…?

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @YouKnowWho

    I see that Jezebel.com had a rant against PUA’s. What struck me is that Jezebel.com knows about Mystery, and this :

    I completely understand why you are doing this. Being alone is hard, and right now always feels like forever, and it seems like these people are offering you a solution. That is a very human, very relatable, and very sympathetic impulse. The problem is that these techniques are ineffective and they hurt the people that you are trying to attract. And in that way, they hurt you. Aside from the handful of outliers that I’m sure exist out there, at the end of this process, you will most likely wind up equally alone but with less money. That is stupid and unfair.

    There’s a cruel adage that goes, “It’s not sexual harassment if you’re hot.” As in, nobody minds getting hit on by someone that they’re actually attracted to—it’s only the unwanted advances that are offensive. But that’s an oversimplification. I am thrilled to have a conversation with anyone, as long as that “conversation” isn’t built on dehumanizing and commodifying me.

    The louder they protested their virtue, the faster we counted the spoons.

    What I find amazing is that Jezebel.com has set its sights on the PUA community, and even more so, that when Jezebel.com fires a salvo at them, their comment threads are overwhelmed with angry men.

    (Note : I say angry men. It’s hard to see if they’re PUA’s, MRA’s or just plain bullshitting.)

    This did not even happen two years ago. Two years ago, I went on that site, and said something unbecoming and got roasted.

    So my question to you is this : Will this increased awareness of Game not diminish its effectiveness ?

  • Russ in Texas

    VD: 552, though I used a purely masculine example which obviously wouldn’t translate. “Throwing dove,” as I call it, would be the equivalent of sitting the guy down with a beer before deciding that it’s hopeless.

    YouKnowWho: Yeah, if the dove card doesn’t work, THEN another tool like dread game seems perfectly appropriate, starting with “okay, then I should be back around 11.” (Stay out ’til 2, at a cafe with a book, if necessary)

    Like I said, at NO point have I said that Dread Game is evil (unless actively run as a pre-emptive thing, which is a fight between y’all and Susan in which I have no dog) or that it doesn’t work. That’s Susan’s argument, not mine. My argument is simply that it’s one tool among many, not always the best tool for the job, and probably (given a bazillion contextual circumstances and thus an inherent ymmv) not the tool best reached for first.

  • Russ in Texas

    “This is the equivalent of basing your opinion on politics etc. on Fox News. Do some research. ”

    Link to a quality bibliography. :p

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Bastiat Blogger

    Thanks again, and yes, it helped a lot. The way you describe this, there seems to be a truth in the saying that the market exists to make fools of us all … me, all I want to do, is see where the fools are going.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “There is a reason she stopped wanting him. Fixing that is the only thing that might work, if it is not already too late.”

    What if that reason were that other women were not attracted to him?
    She could be but others are not. Hence she is not happy in the relationship.

    You cannot have monogamy and hypergamy (preselection feeds hypergamy) without sexual attraction not existing on the women’s part. (An issue you have not yet addressed wrt the dread game issue). Its simply a matter of numbers.

    As a guy, that doesn’t sound fun.

    Therefore artificially or actually convincing her that preselection is occurring will cause her to be attracted or be with a woman who is with you and is not attracted.

    Those are the two options created when the dichotomy of having options or not determines attractiveness or not.
    Dread game + attraction, LTR – attraction or failed LTR.

    Simply a matter of biology, moral considerations irrelevant.

  • Just1Z

    @YKW

    the thing that repeatedly surprises me about anti-gamers and jezzers is that they deny something works (fair enough – they are allowed opinions). But if you disagree they turn their rage up to ’11’.

    If it doesn’t work, what is their damn problem?

    There are plenty of game sources that are free, so they aren’t trying to save suckers from losing their money. So, what is their issue if ‘game does not work’?

  • HanSolo

    @Just1Z

    They want the true alpha cock, not the sheep in wolf’s clothing. lol

    And since they can’t tell the difference between the natural wolf and the learned wolf they want to stop the sheep from learning to put on wolf’s clothing.

    Also, the natural wolves don’t like the sheep in wolf’s clothing because it dillutes the market.

  • HanSolo

    @Just1z

    That said, only a small % of the sheep really learn to wear wolves clothing and even fewer effect such a change in their inner game that they become true wolves.

  • Just1Z

    @Han
    true words.

    but even if one learns about game and doesn’t use it at all, it is good to understand ‘teh rulez’. men like that shirt.

    I was talking to someone last night and did something purely instinctually. just after that, I thought, what a confident thing to do. I wasn’t trying to pull her (she is literally half my age), but it just felt good to make the connection, I thoroughly enjoyed the conversation – the hangover that I had today from drinking till 2 am and the walk back through the deluge – not so much. I think that it helped a lot that I was truly outcome independant – I wasn’t trying to pull her. But I felt good because I believed that I understood why what I was doing improved my standing with her. Plus, she might have older single female friends…maybe I’ll claim to have improved my inner game.

  • Just1Z

    p.s.
    literally half my age makes her legal in any country in the world – FML

  • Mike C

    I see that you’re in finance, and that you know something about the investment strategies of Buffet et al. My question to you is this :

    Have you ever heard of Nicolas Darvas ?

    He was a ballroom dancer. He got into the stock market by sheer accident. At first he got his ass handed to him, but after a certain time he happened on a certain strategy. And his strategy was this :

    Marellus,

    Oh yeah….I am familiar with Darvas….I have that book in my library of investing/trading books.

    There actually is some skepticism/doubt about whether Darvas achieved the cumulative results he achieved (not unlike the skepticism that some have over the results PUA guys or Game guys claim). Suffice it to say, I am relatively confident Darvas made the money he claimed.

    His approach wasn’t anything that new. There is truth to that expression there is nothing new under the Sun. His approach was essentially the approach Jesse Livermore used to build his fortune (which he lost and rebuilt several times and finally ended up committing suicide most likely because he was married to a crazy woman).

    Darvas called it Box Theory, but if you read Livermore’s original book, you’ll see it is basically the same strategy. For the few guys who might be interested, I actually have a pdf that is a scan of Livermore’s 1940 How to Trade in Stocks which is a pretty rare book. If you e-mail me, I will send it to you. If you read Philip Carret’s Art of Speculation which is from the early 20th century, you will see basically the exact same strategy outlined.

    Does it still work? Read about Dan Zanger:

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

    Daniel J. Zanger is a technical stock analyst and equities trader. Having turned $10,775 into $18 million between June 1998 and December 1999,[1] he is the world record holder for the largest percent change for a personal portfolio for a 12-month period of time and an 18-month period of time in the history of the stock market. This success brought him coverage from Fortune, Forbes, and Stocks & Commodities Magazines.[2]

    He was a contractor building pools.

    I’ll point out that for me this draws the distinction between practitioners and theoreticians. In the early 20th century, you didn’t even have academics studying stock market behavior. It was only practitioners.

    I find the parallels to SMP analysis striking. It is why I have such disdain for any approach that relies exclusively on academic theoretical analysis and credentialism, and always questioning the credibility of practitioners. Nicholas Darvas and Dan Zanger have no credentials or credibility outside of making a ton of money. They know a thing or two about stock price behavior without having the appropriate suffix attached after their name.

    Arguably, some market environments are more conducive than others to their approach which is essentially buying a “breakout” with a stop at the “floor” of the previous range. I had accumulated a pretty good trading stake by 2010 from saving from a job and I had a really good 2010 and 2011 essentially trading aspects of that approach. 2012 has been quite bad because I happened on a bunch of failed breakouts so I got stopped out numerous times.

    But the short answer to your question, is Yes I absolutely believe Darvas approach works today and will still work because I think it captures IMMUTABLE aspects of overall market psychology. Similarly, I believe many aspects of Game work because they capture IMMUTABLE aspects of female sexual psychology. It is interesting to me that the red-pill view of intersex relations essentially is what the Greeks and Romans understood thousands of years ago. Correct principles tend to stand the test of time.

  • Russ in Texas

    @YouKnowWho@851,

    Thank you for the link. Definitions are the key, since otherwise I can’t address you in the language you speak – it’s not like anything y’all have been talking about isn’t common sense, but I’m coming in from left field with different metaphors.

    Respectfully, I think y’all share some of the blame for the way the thread degraded; that wasn’t all Susan. 300-some posts ago, talking about different tools for different purposes? I was the only guy in the thread talking about that.

    Any one of y’all on the PU side of things could have said “yeah, I think Roissy was being over the top; straight-up, if he actually meant that, and for the record I don’t think he actually did, then that’s not Dread Game as I know and/or use it. So for purposes of argument, let’s call what I’m talking about Dread Game Golgafrincham B.”

    Bang, done, differences settled on the spot.

    For the record, Jezebel is a waste because it’s the bastard offspring of the Redstockings flavor of Boston Feminism, and its fundamental assumptions are hostile to all of mankind which either possesses testicles or enjoys the company of men who do.

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

      Any one of y’all on the PU side of things could have said “yeah, I think Roissy was being over the top; straight-up, if he actually meant that, and for the record I don’t think he actually did, then that’s not Dread Game as I know and/or use it. So for purposes of argument, let’s call what I’m talking about Dread Game Golgafrincham B.”

      Rollo highjacked the thread fairly early by suggesting that Stephen in the OP might be a PUA. That brought out the rather ridiculous Yareallypua and it became all about pickup tactics and dread game, with every one of its advocates either dodging questions, qualifying their positions, or attempting various degrees of rhetorical gymnastics to justify Roissy’s demented and rather ridiculous post.

  • Russ in Texas

    Mike,

    Interested but no idea how to email you; I’d like to get my feet wet on a very, very cautious basis,and prefer proceeding from a position of theory.
    scholarsvoices@gmail.com

  • Russ in Texas

    ” It is interesting to me that the red-pill view of intersex relations essentially is what the Greeks and Romans understood thousands of years ago. Correct principles tend to stand the test of time.”

    +1
    Best gift you can give your little boy is a classical education.

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

      ” It is interesting to me that the red-pill view of intersex relations essentially is what the Greeks and Romans understood thousands of years ago. Correct principles tend to stand the test of time.”

      Can you provide the Greek and Roman views of intersex relations? IIRC, Greeks thought that sodomy between older men and young men was the highest and most noble form of sexual expression. And the Romans got pretty crazy with orgies, incest, etc. I’m curious to know more about their “wisdom.”

  • Underdog

    @Marellus

    “So my question to you is this : Will this increased awareness of Game not diminish its effectiveness ?”

    Not really… That’s like thinking an increased awareness of makeup and spanx and pushup bras will make girls look uglier to guys. The primal brain overrides all that shit.

    I think an oversaturation of PUAs will caution the younger generation of girls to be more sexually conservative and put out less. But they will still be attracted to game.

  • Just1Z

    @Han
    the other interesting part of talking to ‘Anna’ was during several hours of wide ranging discussion (Cockneys vs Zombies, Gun Control and Newtown etc) was that when we wandered on to ‘feminism’ as a subject (before I said much about it at all) she said quite firmly that, ‘she was NOT a feminist’ and that she, ‘just wanted to compete against the men in her field’, with no favours required, ‘thank you very much’. She is/was quite capable of doing that (in a STEM field too).

    interesting to meet a self identifying non-feminist STEM…cool night. Very pretty face too…and her’s.

  • Mike C

    That type of strategy is frequently employed by both global macro hedge funds and trend-following CTAs. They basically enter when prices break free of pre-determined tripwires (imagine that market prices have a heartbeat—the trading models define a “normal” heartbeat using recent historical data and then seek aberrations, or periods in which markets are starting to behave abnormally).

    Bastiat, are you one of the Turtles? :)

    Excellent description, and I find the bet sizing to be the most difficult part. I’ve got reading about the Kelly criteria on my to do list.

  • HanSolo

    @Just1Z

    Glad you enjoyed the convo. You should keep having them but don’t ask the woman for phone number or anything. If she bangs you over the head with IOI, sure then go for it or if she gives you her number or shags you right there. But just keep on talking with women with no intention of asking them out.

    One other point is that game, especially inner game and a non-women-hating version of the red pill is needed to counter all of the anti-male propaganda that so many men imbibe (especially the betas who in theory need it least though perhaps in practice it’s just a massive shit test to separate the alpha wheat from the beta chaff).

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    If it doesn’t work, what is their damn problem?

    There are plenty of game sources that are free, so they aren’t trying to save suckers from losing their money. So, what is their issue if ‘game does not work’?

    Remember, 80% 0f men are not attractive and therefore do not exist.
    I also like to use my body to secure the 20% of men that do exist and are considered “real men.”
    Frequently these “real men” treat me like shit. It’s brutal, brutal, brutal, brutal competition, and I have to accept it.

    You are now telling those 20% of men how to hack my mind and in fact encouraging them to treat me like shit! And you are removing the sympathy of the 80% of the other males that I like to rely on sometimes!

    The immature mind, which let’s be honest describes most women AND men in their 20s, does not see potential in people, just “unattractive, move on.” The idea that you are making more attractive men does not compute.

    Instead, there are two sides to this SMP, and from the girls POV, it is already murderous out there, and you are giving the other side the power and moral justification to be even MORE murderous.

    You are also eliminating their pedestal, and, let’s face it, everyone likes the pedestal.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Also, how you frame things matters a lot. If you frame things in terms of “girls have abused me, then I learned how to use them however I want, they are basically like little children, here are tricks that work!” then women aren’t going to sign on-board.

    A lot of men will probably sign out, too.

  • Just1Z

    @Han
    it was just cool talking to her, I have no agenda beyond that. I don’ t need a number to meet her again anyway. Sometimes it’ s just nice to connect to a pretty member of the opposite sex. it’ s nice to know that despite all the shite men and women can still enjoy each other’ s company, but that’ s probably why I spend time here. I am trying to cut back on the on line hours though…they were getting out of hand!

  • Mike C

    Most CTAs run money through individual managed accounts rather than through a pooled structure like a limited partnership, but this isn’t a hard-fast rule. So a CTA investor would normally open a trading account with a futures broker and then give the CTA manager trading authorization over the account (but the CTA would never have taken custody of the money—it would just trade the account on the named client’s behalf). Meanwhile, a hedge fund investor would normally join a limited partnership and wire money to the HF’s trading account with a prime broker, where it would be pooled with money from other limited partners.

    Bastiat, do many CTAs set up CPOs. I’ve got to think with the minimum size of future contracts that it is hard to standardize position size across individual contracts (going from 1 contract to 2 contracts is a pretty big increase in exposure….and yes I am a piker when it comes to future trading…my account isn’t big enough for much more than 1-2 contract positions and still having reasonable risk exposure)

    However, when something serious does happen, the short-vol guys will be betting against the trend, and in some cases a single really bad position can metastasize, blowing up the entire fund as the managers continually double-down and bet that the “stupid market will get back to normal” (and variations on this story have occurred many times historically—arrogant traders can become married to their positions and unable to admit that they are wrong).

    Victor Niederhoffer and John Meriweather come to mind. What is unbelievable is each has blown up more than once betting on mean reversion and still got new investors for new funds.

    The long-vol guys, in contrast, risk the death of a thousand cuts, where a market is caught in a meandering trading range and the traders keep betting on false starts for trends that never appear, losing small amounts of money each time (small losses that may add up to larger amounts over months of trendless market conditions).

    That is my 2012 in a nutshell. The U.S. T-bond contract has just killed me this year with false breakdowns and breakouts.

    Not sure if you saw my previous question or want to keep it to yourself, but do you think the Yen is on the verge of a massive multi-year breakdown?

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    HanSolo, I have to run soon to dinner with the family, but here’s a post I wrote some time back on wolf, sheep and sheepdog:

    http://www.rosehope.com/a-walk-of-bonding/

  • HanSolo

    Thanks, Hope. I agree that there are good and evil alphas. Both have the ability to “kill” in the metaphor of the wolf and the sheepdog but their use of that power is for different ends.

  • HanSolo

    Hope, I left a comment at your blog.

  • deti

    susan: “If you can’t see anything wrong with that from a moral POV, there’s no point in discussing it further.”

    ??????

    Let me get this straight.

    Are you saying an act or course of conduct is moral if it serves the interests of the woman or the relationship; but an act or course of conduct is immoral if it serves the interests of the man, or does not serve the interests of the woman or the relationship?

    What is the basis for the “moral” judgment on what is “right” and what is “wrong”?

    Interesting.

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

      @deti

      What is the basis for the “moral” judgment on what is “right” and what is “wrong”?

      First, standards of morality apply equally to all human beings, regardless of sex. All the great religions lay out principles of right and wrong. I feel extremely confident in saying that Machiavellian tactics are directly opposed to the teachings of Jesus Christ.

      Personally, I feel that any tactic or behavior designed to benefit oneself at the direct expense of someone else must be unethical. That is the zero sum game – the gender wars in this case. I advocate a standard that ignores gender politics in favor of one-on-one human interaction without regard to who maintains control or “the upper hand.”

      Giving from a mentality of abundance and self-respect trumps taking 100% of the time. What you give you get back in spades. At a very minimum, we should all be held to a standard of “do no harm.” Instill Dread violates that rule of basic human decency, IMO.

      BTW, this applies to women just as much – we are guilty of plenty of Machiavellian tactics as well.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    What I have said is that I do not concern myself with sexual morality. If two consenting adults are engaging in sexual activity and not injuring another party, that’s their business. I have no interest in entering other people’s bedrooms.

    In the United States, if you are growing your own food on your own land for your own consumption, you are engaging in activity that materially affects interstate commerce and can be regulated by the federal government.

    There is no such thing as a private action, everything hits the marketplace eventually and eventually someone has to deal with shit. It’s sort of like shooting a rocket into space, it’s eventually going to hit SOMETHING.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Okay, you cosign that.

    What is “P&D” material in this context? Your groomsman and bridesmaid scenario sounds pretty much like a P&D to me, and you consider this “in the middle” of women’s sexual behavior.

    To relatively restricted guys, even “average” looks like “whore.”

    So Cooper can run Dread Game on all girls he wants, right?

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

      What is “P&D” material in this context? Your groomsman and bridesmaid scenario sounds pretty much like a P&D to me, and you consider this “in the middle” of women’s sexual behavior.

      Pump and Dump implies the woman would like to see the man again or perhaps even be in a relationship with him. You can’t get dumped if you don’t give a sh*t.

      The wedding party scenario, which I believe is fairly common, is one where two people have a fling, often away from home, knowing it can only last a couple of days at most. Expectations are clear, objectives are in alignment, and no one is injured in the process.

      To relatively restricted guys, even “average” looks like “whore.”

      Then they’d better avoid women of average SOI. To relatively unrestricted women, “relatively restricted” in a male looks like “abnormally low sex drive.” It’s important, IMO, to partner with someone whose views on sexuality are similar to one’s own.

  • Mike C

    I see that Jezebel.com had a rant against PUA’s. What struck me is that Jezebel.com knows about Mystery, and this :

    I went over and checked out that article. Behold the masterful wordsmithing in the introductory paragraph:

    “Here at this site, we spend a lot of time railing against the shitty shit that dudes do, because, come on, shitty shit is shitty.

    Now how can you argue with such a display of verbal eloquence and logic. Seriously, one wouldn’t be at fault to think a pre-teen or kindergartner wrote that sentence.

    And here is the key philosophical divide:

    Or, rather, there kind of is. Attraction is way more like magic than science. It’s intangible and surprising and there is no formula.

    The truth is no, you are not a special little unique snowflake, and the same stuff works to attract a good percentage of the female population. Any guy who takes any of that tripe to heart sort of deserves the lack of success he is most likely experiencing

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

    I see this behavior most often in academics and those whose lives are structured in such a way that they experience no consequences for being wrong. It’s pretty much impossible to have that attitude in finance or economics; it’s only a matter of time before you’re wrong and there will definitely be consequences.

    Yeah but if you are in the top 10% of intelligence of any given environment regardless you are going to spent so much time being right that being wrong can become hard to experience or even spot.

    So my question to you is this : Will this increased awareness of Game not diminish its effectiveness ?

    The theory is that even if more women are aware of Game that won’t make then less attractive look at Athol and his wife as other’s bloggers whose female SO are aware it seems to not really matter unless the woman has a personal vendetta against it.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Jezebel is telling me to read a Cosmo online poll for definitive instructions on how to create my dating life.

    I don’t think I need to say anything more than that.

  • Society’s Disposable Son

    …. To make a long thread short don’t bother trying to date unless you have options….the whole fake vs real alpha comments have been quite enlightening…

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    You can just see the oozing nonsense out of this article. Women don’t want to be treated like crap, they don’t want to be hit on by creeps, they DEFINITELY don’t want to be told they are not special snowflakes and that they are in fact humans with predictable reactions.

    All of the typical reasons she is anti-game…all coming from…

    A raging sense of insecurity.

    Oh, but here is their one game advice:

    “6. They’re just going to spend your money on 5 Hour Energy.
    For fuck’s sake, give it to the ASPCA or something. 100% guaranteed panty-dropper right there”

    There you go men. Just donate to ASPCA and you will have sex with all women you want, ever. 100% guaranteed from an insecure girl on the internet.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Sue: “When I do share real tidbits from those sessions, the guys have fits. A woman whose count is 40! Someone said “boyfriends are ugly!” The Atlantic quoted one as referring to a dick the size of her pinky. Stupid, selfish sluts!”

    Fits? No, this is very good and useful information! It means we men have justification for being as nasty.

    Had I known stuff like this at 18, I would have acted less polite, and more like these woman act. I would have laughed off any women or elders who may have tried to scold or judge my nascent behavior like these women, because I would have known the women were the same, or worse. I would have not bothered to expend the effort to be kinder to women than they were to me.

    Instead, I would have gladly been as unapologetically crass as these women with no remorse.

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

      @OTC

      I would have not bothered to expend the effort to be kinder to women than they were to me.

      I believe you are one of the commenters who has taken particular exception to quotes from my focus group members.

      I’m glad you realized that it is not good strategy to be giving to people who are not interested in you or have no intention of reciprocating.

  • INTJ

    @ Emily

    I think part of the issue is that the female nerdlings and the male nerdlings often have separate interests and social circles. I was recently at an anime convention and I couldn’t help but notice that there were way more girls than guys. I remember thinking that they should merge the event with Comic Con. :p. IMO, it’s more a logistical issue than anything.

    Well those are geeks (on both side of the equation), not nerds. I’m only somewhat of a geek, but I’m an uber-nerd, so I can’t really comment on the gender ratios re: geeks.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    There are always options. A person can always walk away and maintain his/her self-respect. Being single is preferable to being in a bad situation. That’s why even though my husband was single and not plate spinning, he never once struck me as “without options.”

    So anyone can do it, regardless of whether or not that person has another in the pipeline or can even attract another partner. I would much rather be alone than put up with a negative energy vampire.

    But there are also lots of people who would much rather think they have the “prize” and put up with anything, including abuse. I’ve had to learn my own lessons about this.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Em: “I was recently at an anime convention and I couldn’t help but notice that there were way more girls than guys. I remember thinking that they should merge the event with Comic Con. :p. IMO, it’s more a logistical issue than anything.”

    It’s a bad idea, thats why. For one, sexual zoning. Then, the women would think the men are creeps.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Then, the women would think the men are creeps.

    Somehow I increasingly do not give a damn about this “threat”

  • J

    Had I known stuff like this at 18, I would have acted less polite, and more like these woman act.

    Doesn’t that run the risk of alienating any decent women you might happen to meet?

    I’ve told the story here about meeting my husband at a b’day party for a friend of a friend in a bar. In that same bar, possibly on the same night, some guy came up to me a delivered a nuclear neg to me. In reading in the ‘sphere it’s become clear to me that his objective was to pick me up, but my reactions wasn’t tingles, it was WTF?!

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Creepy = incongruence of intention and action. A guy who wants to screw a girl’s brains out but acts all nice and totally non-sexual often comes across as creepy. On a tamer scale, a waitress who does friendly chatter but is thinking she’d rather do something else can come across a little creepy. On a worse scale, a person who intends to kill but acts all pleasant is massively creepy.

    So a guy going to anime convention because he genuinely likes anime isn’t seen as creepy, but a guy going because he is only there for the girls comes across a bit “off” because the internal and external don’t match up. Most people don’t fully understand this mismatch but can still detect it on some level, so they label it “creepy.” If a guy’s internal and external states are in sync, he is no longer creepy but “confident.” He goes to the anime convention and is shameless about his purpose, to hit on the girls.

    That is why people often talk about “inner game.” It’s actually the whole game.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Along this same vein, there’s more to a “neg” than just a backhanded compliment or to knock the girl down a few pegs. A guy who truly doesn’t give a damn will be authentic, honest and will not be afraid to offend — which ends up the same as a “neg.”

    It’s the way of the natural who pulls off the “neg” because he didn’t mean it to offend, just saying what’s on his mind, and possibly what’s on other people’s minds as well, but those other guys are too scared to say it out loud. The natural is also witty and charming, so he also probably phrased it or delivered it in such a way that people don’t take it quite as badly. Or, at least, can’t react to it with actual anger and indignation.

  • J

    When Mrs. deti told me she wasn’t attracted to me and had been treating me with disrespect that day, I knew I had to do something, because “I love you but I’m not in love with you” was just around the corner. Visions of a process server dropping divorce petitions at my feet in my office, sliding down the razor-lined divorce slide and being forcibly divested of my life’s work danced in my head.

    Deti, I don’t believe that anyone should supplicate themselves to maintain a marriage, so I understand your putting your foot down. What I don’t understand it is whether or not this woman who said that she never was attracted to you ever became attracted to you or if you two love each other.

  • J

    @Marc

    The word you’re looking for is neoteny. It refers to the retention of childlike characteristics in adults, like puppyish yipping in dogs or big eyes and small chins in adult women, not childlike characteristics in children. There’s a different word for the attraction to childlike characteristics in children or adolescents.

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

    Removing yourself from someone’s company is a rejection and feels terrible to that person. It doesn’t matter where you sleep – though I can understand why going to sleep somewhere uncomfortably is a weak move. Anyway, I’ve experienced it as a punishment.

    One day hubby decided to take a nap in the guest room who is its project room too and he overslept I woke up around 4 am in the morning and not finding my husband in bed, gave me a horrible feeling of abandonment and dread and it was obviously not something born out of misconduct , I can’t imagine even falling sleep if he would had go because I did something to him. A woman that doesn’t care about her husband not sharing their bed for a real reason is a woman long gone to the other side IMO. I don’t disagree with dread after everything else has failed, but as preventive measure is bound to get tiresome and loss effectiveness after a while, people are not designed to be on a state of constant fear they will solve the situation whether by disconnecting or removing themselves, just my two cents.

  • VD

    I am asking you point blank whether you believe it is acceptable to prophylactically induce anxiety, fear, and jealousy, creating a sense of “impending doom” in a passionate relationship that is going very well?

    Since you’re phrasing this as a moral question, the various caveats are irrelevant. What it boils down to is this: “is it acceptable to induce anxiety, fear, and jealousy in another”. By the moral standard to which I adhere, one is to fear God only. So, no, it is not acceptable, because one is attempting to usurp God’s place.

    But this is a very different question from the one we have been discussing, which is whether Dread works. And I do believe that prophylactically inducing anxiety, fear, and jealousy, and creating a sense of “impending doom” in a passionate relationship that is going very well can stabilize and strengthen a relationship because people are fallen, passions are ephemeral, and women in particular tend to be ruled by fear.

    Fear is the most reliable means of manipulating women. The best politicians do it all the time; look at how the fear of the statistically improbable is being used to fuel the latest push for gun control. If you look at the sex of the four percent of Americans who have changed their position on the issue post-Newton, you can be sure that at least 3/4 will be women. Since women break up most marriages and since fear is a proven means of successfully manipulating female behavior, it should be readily apparent that instilling anxiety, fear, and jealousy in women can be an effective means of not leaving the relationship to the whims of female passions.

    I don’t use Dread because I have a very high level of natural indifference to everything non-abstract. In Athol’s terminology, I have to add Beta to maintain my marriage; I don’t need more Alpha. I do not seek to instill fear or anxiety in my wife, but to allay it. But that isn’t the case for most men, and in a fallen world where women are permitted to voluntarily divorce their husbands without cause, there is an unfortunate justification for immoral tactics such as Dread.

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

      @VD

      But this is a very different question from the one we have been discussing, which is whether Dread works.

      Perhaps this explains at least partly why we have been speaking past one another. I am interested in the ethical question of whether it is acceptable to use Machiavellian tactics on a fellow human being for personal gain. At least 80% of my commentary on Dread addresses this point.

      I also have real questions about the efficacy of Dread over the longer term. I do not doubt at all that it may work in the short term. I daresay Roissy’s prescription would have a woman in love nearly insane with worry. That level of insecurity may indeed produce behavior very pleasing to the male as she goes all out to try to keep him in her “paranoid tizzy.”

      I am unable to conjure a mental image of a marriage ruled primarily by fear for decades. Earlier I likened it to Scheherazade. It strikes me as an inherently unstable state for the female, and would likely produce behavior over time seen in former hostages or POWs.

      I don’t believe love can survive the use of fear as a tactic.

      In summary, does Dread work to make your wife feel anxious and insecure? Yes, but those feelings are malignant, at least in her, and she cannot remain suspended in that state of being eager to please for long. In my own observations of women in that state, anger and resentment were a more likely expression of emotion than increased ardor.

      As an aside, I would also stipulate that creating the appearance of options when there are none will fail. If a man whose wife has lost attraction wants to recapture her desire for him, he must address the root cause of the problem. I do not believe most men are capable of the Dread strategy, nor would they welcome the result. I believe we are talking about a method utilized by an infinitesimal portion of the population – this discussion is entirely theoretical.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Oh we should all aspire to politician levels of machiavellianism. /sarcasm

    This is the antidote:

    http://therawness.com/on-awareness/

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

      @Hope

      As always, Ricky Raw nails it on these kinds of questions.

      It occurs to me that we all know that Dark Triad personalities succeed. They employ a short-term mating strategy that has survived. They tend to attract people with specific personality traits.

      In a very real way, we’re discussing whether narcissists who lack empathy and are willing to manipulate others can be successful. We know that the answer is a resounding yes, with certain types of people. No doubt, they select those types as partners from the start, so Dread may work for them in creating an extreme version of the dynamic already present in the relationship.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    Re : Machiavelli

    … because … I have taken it upon myself to write something that is useful to a reader with some understanding, it is wise to contemplate the true nature of events, instead of what is supposed. In our minds many kingdoms have been built that has seen neither the light of day, nor will ever see the light of day, for how we live differs so much from how we are supposed to live, that he who makes a study of these suppositions, instead of what is done in reality, will ultimately walk a road towards his ruin, instead of his salvation.

    -Machiavelli

  • Lokland

    “Giving from a mentality of abundance and self-respect trumps taking 100% of the time. What you give you get back in spades. At a very minimum, we should all be held to a standard of “do no harm.””

    Great idea.
    Until your the one who has had many things taken from you.

    As a general rule, unless the person has a reason too, they will not give anything back to you.
    Return in spades is a pipe dream.

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

      As a general rule, unless the person has a reason too, they will not give anything back to you.

      This is why the most important thing you can do is filter “takers” out of your life and refuse to have anything to do with them. It’s true in mating, friendships, even business.

      The raw material is the most important ingredient. If you choose the wrong person, you will be abused. An extreme example is loving someone who does not experience empathy. You will get nothing back from a person incapable of love or giving, obvs.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Hope, while I agree, there is that is logical, rational version of creepy is only used by people like you. Most of the time when the word creepy is used openly, it means “someone unattractive dared to talk to me, and now I’m going to creep-shame publicly them so everyone knows that this is unacceptable”, congruent or not.

    J: “Doesn’t that run the risk of alienating any decent women you might happen to meet?”

    Of course not, you don’t say it to their face, but save it for private discussion. I’m sure Susan’s focus group women don’t say this to men directly.

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

      when the word creepy is used openly, it means “someone unattractive dared to talk to me, and now I’m going to creep-shame publicly them so everyone knows that this is unacceptable”

      In my experience, women use this word to describe the way a man makes them feel. This is achieved via a specific set of behaviors rather than looks. An inability to read social cues, or even facial expressions, inappropriate levels of intense eye contact without speaking, and a tendency to violate the boundaries of personal space are all actions that have led me to call a man creepy. Social anxiety also makes other people uncomfortable.

      I understand that men who exhibit these traits are often not able to control them or change them. This is unfortunate, but you can’t shame women into viewing them differently when they are experiencing a physiological response of mild alarm or revulsion.

  • Just1Z

    @Marellus #887

    Sounds like a guy who knew his shit.

    That is not the way to popularity – everyone knows that. That’s why politicians gave that truth-crack up decades ago.

    He might have a better rep if he’d thrown in a few smileys and lols whilst telling uncomfortable truths…just putting that idea out there.

    In the only Borgia series featuring Ol’ Mac, he isn’t stand out evil by the standards of the times. Not looking to beatify the guy, but hell the Pope wasn’t very holy, was he?

    Both modern series are cool BTW, they are both worth a look as they tell the stories differently. After all your hussy harping on about GOT characters that I don’t know or care about. I’m giving a male Shout out to the two gorgeous Lucrezias.
    Borgia – http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1736341/ (Isolda Dychauk)
    The Borgias – http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1582457/ (Holliday Grainger)

    Yankie John Doman makes the more physically impressive Borgia Bull in the euro version (imho), Limey Jeremy Irons has the brains, but not the physical presence in the US version (imho).

    iirc uk netflix had the euro version online (though it might have been lovefilm). got viewing of interesting times.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “An inability to read social cues, or even facial expressions, inappropriate levels of intense eye contact without speaking, and a tendency to violate the boundaries of personal space are all actions that have led me to call a man creepy.”

    I was standing in line behind a group of women (tall ppls) to get onto a patio bar.

    I was texting on my phone when one decided to scream that there was a creepy guy behind her.

    They were neither my type nor particularly attractive. I honestly hadn’t really payed them any attention before then.

    I know quite a few women who use the creepy label to elevate themselves. Similar to the fat chick who rejects all men approaching her group in an attempt to appear selective.

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

      I was texting on my phone when one decided to scream that there was a creepy guy behind her. I know quite a few women who use the creepy label to elevate themselves. Similar to the fat chick who rejects all men approaching her group in an attempt to appear selective.

      Obviously, the only thing to do is ignore such people. The world is full of idiots and assholes. I’m sure it’s no consolation, but a young woman I know was recently turned away from a frat party at the door because “no lardasses allowed.” She is overweight, but not obese – just chubby.

      It’s natural to feel shame when being singled out, even by worthless scum, but it’s important to develop a thick skin. I know you’ve done that.

  • Russ in Texas

    Remember that Macchiavelli was a Republican who despised the man he was describing. The Prince is a vicious six-letter word rhyming with “flat tire.”

    Anyways, on the Romans, and relevant if one adjusts the context:
    Epictetus, from the Discourses
    Next to this, if you are a senator of any state, remember that you are a senator: if a youth, that you are a youth: if an old man, that you are an old man; for each of such names, if it comes to be examined, marks out the proper duties. But if you go and blame your brother, I say to you, You have forgotten who you are and what is your name. In the next place, if you were a smith and made a wrong use of the hammer, you would have forgotten the smith; and if you have forgotten the brother and instead of a brother have become an enemy, would you appear not to have changed one thing for another in that case? And if instead of a man, who is a tame animal and social, you are become a mischievous wild beast, treacherous, and biting, have you lost nothing? But, (I suppose) you must lose a bit of money that you may suffer damage? And does the loss of nothing else do a man damage? If you had lost the art of grammar or music, would you think the loss of it a damage? and if you shall lose modesty, moderation (καταστολήν) and gentleness, do you think the loss nothing? And yet the things first mentioned are lost by some cause external and independent of the will, and the second by our own fault; and as to the first neither to have them nor to lose them is shameful; but as to the second, not to have them and to lose them is shameful and matter of reproach and a misfortune. What does the pathic lose? He loses the (character of) man. What does he lose who makes the pathic what he is? Many other things; and he also loses the man no less than the other. What does he lose who commits adultery? He loses the (character of the) modest, the temperate, the decent, the citizen, the neighbour. What does he lose who is angry? Something else. What does the coward lose? Something else. No man is bad without suffering some loss and damage. If then you look for the damage in the loss of money only, all these men receive no harm or damage; it may be, they have even profit and gain, when they acquire a bit of money by any of these deeds.

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

      @Russ in Texas

      A few years ago I developed a massive crush on the Stoics and read a lot of them. I adore Epictetus. Thank you for injecting that very important passage.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    In my experience, women use this word to describe the way a man makes them feel. This is achieved via a specific set of behaviors rather than looks. An inability to read social cues, or even facial expressions, inappropriate levels of intense eye contact without speaking, and a tendency to violate the boundaries of personal space are all actions that have led me to call a man creepy. Social anxiety also makes other people uncomfortable.

    Whenever I’ve thought that a man was creepy, it was definitely due to the reasons you have described above. I’m nice enough to not call a man creepy to his face though. I can’t imagine what would happen if I ever did.

  • Russ in Texas

    I prefer to sit in the Garden with the great master (Epicurus), myself, but the Stoics are more accessible, and by a good margin, when it comes to discussions of ethics.

  • Anne

    @Susan,
    I don’t know how much I’m comfortable ‘giving’ in this scenario.
    He had asked if I was going out one of these days, I said “maybe Saturday”. He had plans (Christmas party), but if I was out anyway we could meet up. All my friends have left town now so I really didn’t have the opportunity to go out. Also my phone died, I forgot to bring the charger, spent the entire day trying to find a new one, with no success. So if he texted me, there is no way of knowing. I ended up sending him a fb message instead (even though we’re not friends there…) saying I wasn’t going out and asking if he’s in town the coming week. The message is “seen” last night, but I have no reply.
    Honestly, I’ll just wait it out but I am afraid of ending up in a scenario where my efforts is the only thing that is holding the ‘relationship’ up and I’m not interested in that. If he is gaming me now and this is his “new personality”, I don’t want to date that person.

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

      @Anne

      Honestly, I’ll just wait it out but I am afraid of ending up in a scenario where my efforts is the only thing that is holding the ‘relationship’ up and I’m not interested in that. If he is gaming me now and this is his “new personality”, I don’t want to date that person.

      I don’t like the meetup scenario. I’m not saying it signifies a lack of interest, necessarily – many, many young guys use this approach when they are truly interested. I’m out, you’re out, let’s meet up. It’s the Principle of Least Interest at work again – we can both pretend we’re not invested and see if we “bump into” one another.

      In view of your recent experience, however, it may be that he is wary and playing his cards close to the vest. I agree that the only thing you can do is wait it out. It is very possible that he saw your message on a Saturday night and will respond soon with a suggestion for the coming week. But you should not initiate again. You sent a message, it was received. No further effort from you is required or even advisable. The ball is in his court.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Why, everyone is quite good at disagreeing and ignoring the point of anything I say today – I must be creepy.

    Point 1: What seems to be lost is that the types of men who visit a comic-con are a lot more likely to be called creepy, both fairly and unfairly. Putting them together with some girls in tight cosplay costumes, seems like a disaster waiting to happen, rather than a good idea to get people to date.

    Point 2: If it’s OK for women to disparage not only men in general in a private group, but their own boyfriends, then its fair game if men do it too. I was always taught that “locker-room talk” was juvenile, boorish, and disrespectful, so I would remove myself from situations. (I do draw the line, however, at not taking poorly about my own girlfriend/spouse. I won’t go there even if women do.)

    This has nothing to with how to you treat people who specifically treat you poorly (duh, that’s obvious), its about your attitude to the other sex in general. Personally, I think it’s a race to the bottom, but since that race exists whether we like it or not, it’s better to be in that race than lose it.

    That’s why I like reading HUS so much…

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Just1Z

    I wish I could see The Borgias, any series, but no, the TV here in SA is up to shit. I’ve got to take a chance on the internet (*cough*) or just plain buy a DVD set. It’s gonna be expensive.

    In that genre though, a series that I was crazy about, were The Winds of War and War & Remembrance. Their intro was some of the best music I ever heard.

    Here it is.

    And no, I didn’t read the novels. I should though.

    Have you ever read any Alexander Kent btw ?

    *******************************************************************

    @Russ in Texas.

    REASON, v.i. To weight probabilities in the scales of desire.

    RESPONSIBILITY, n. A detachable burden easily shifted to the shoulders of God, Fate, Fortune, Luck or one’s neighbor. In the days of astrology it was customary to unload it upon a star.

    – Ambrose Bierce

  • Damien Vulaume

    -I don’t know how much I’m comfortable ‘giving’. I don’t want to date that person.-

    There.

  • Just1Z

    @Susan
    “It’s natural to feel shame when being singled out, even by worthless scum, but it’s important to develop a thick skin. I know you’ve done that.”

    But they were just using it as a weapon, yeah?

    this is the best reason to laugh at them. otherwise you are giving worthless idiots power over you by using the kind of word that should be restricted to six year olds.

    Sassy makes an interesting point with,
    “I’m nice enough to not call a man creepy to his face though. I can’t imagine what would happen if I ever did.”

    Those women were assuming that their attack on Lokland could be made without any consequences to them. Luckily, whatever ‘creepy’ is supposed to mean, Lokland wasn’t one.

    But what if they were right? and what if they couldn’t actually count on other men around them to protect them if he went postal? these women that walk around bitching about ‘teh patriarchy’ and insulting men at random are actually relying on men in general to remove the consequences of their actions. they should stop writing cheques that they are not willing to cash personally – that was considered a manly virtue, taking responsibility for your own actions.

    I really think that the world would be a better place with a little more mutual respect. and without dumb bints putting down other human beings to boost their already overblown misplaced feelings of self worth. I’ve seen enough comments on HUS to know that these women would do the same to other women who were not ‘of the herd’. again, relying on the victim not to respond.

    GirlWritesWhat – “feminism, y’all gotta own this sh*t”

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    Re : Creepiness.

    Consider this :

    A guy and a girl get on at a tube stop close to my house. The girl sits next to me and the guy sort of looks at her, at me, and then hesitantly sits across from me. I mistakenly thought they were together and that they wanted to sit next to each other. So I said to the guy:

    Me: ‘Hey buddy, you sit here, I’ll swap places, you can sit with each other’

    Guy: ‘Ha ha. Thanks. But we’re not together’.

    Me: ‘Hahaha. I do apologise. God, I”m sorry, I thought you were together, you sort of walked on like you were really good friends’.

    You would have thought that would have been the end of it, but for whatever reason the girl then said to me:

    Girl: ‘Why don’t you go and fuck some shit. I have had a bad night and I don’t want you and your dirty shit in my face’.

    Me: ‘Is that a quote from an Audrey Hepburn film’.

    A few people smirked. The girl stormed off. Feminism in action. A Spice Girl. A woman who is ‘confident’ and ‘knows what she wants’.

    For about 5 minutes myself and the rest of the carriage, the ice now broken, all end up talking to each other and the conversation hinges much around how women these days are often drunk, aggressive and unattractive in their manner. There is an older lady nearby and I see her gravely nodding at some of the points.

    My tube pulled up at my stop and I got off and then out of nowhere the girl ran up to me on the platform and shouted in my face….

    Girl: ‘I’ll have you know I am better educated than you. I went to Oxford’.

    Me: Hands in pockets to demonstrate absolute non threat to anyone watching. ‘I’m not interested. You’re being drunk and aggressive and I just don’t want to know you’.

    Girl: ‘You’d be lucky to even get near me. You’re nothing, I’m better than you’.

    Me: ‘I hear you. I’d like to stay away from you. You’re aggressive and I don’t like it. Please leave me alone’.

    Girl: ‘STAY AWAY FROM ME, STAY AWAY FROM ME’.

    She stormed ahead of me and ran up to the first official looking man she could see. Some tube workers in ‘High Vis’ vests.

    Girl: ‘That guy there just attacked me on the platform, get him arrested. Get him. HE’S JUST ATTACKED ME’.

    I carried on walking slowly out of the tube station. Hands in pockets. Deliberate in all movements and very calm. I am just lucky that the guys weren’t Police or London Underground station staff, but Polish lads working on the Northern Line. They just look at her blankly as she tried to get them to arrest me or attack me. She realized they weren’t interested and ran out of the tube station, maybe to look for a policeman, I don’t know.

    She seemed perfectly happy to lie in order to get me in as much serious trouble as possible to make her feel better for her nose being put out of joint.

  • Just1Z

    Wave bye-bye to him Anne.

    he clearly read your games, returned the favour and you don’t like it.

    he’s better off without you. and worse, he knows it.

    I can’t find an image, but I have seen a poster saying something along the lines of, “However beautiful the woman, there is always a guy somewhere who got sick of putting up with her shit”

    The ever wise Dr Tara Palmatier – not saying that this applies, necessarily, just food for thought
    10 Reasons You Can’t Communicate with a Narcissistic or Borderline Woman
    http://shrink4men.wordpress.com/2009/09/17/10-reasons-you-cant-communicate-with-a-narcissistic-or-borderline-woman/

    Cappy Cap was informaive and amusing too
    http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/dealing-with-female-hysterics.html

    but, you are young…things could well work out your way, just not with this guy (as far as I read your story)

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Anacaona

    The theory is that even if more women are aware of Game that won’t make then less attractive look at Athol and his wife as other’s bloggers whose female SO are aware it seems to not really matter unless the woman has a personal vendetta against it.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Mike, starting CTAs frequently have the problem that you mention re: lack of granularity in position sizing. You really want to be in a position where you can demand large enough minimum account sizes that this becomes less of a problem.

    With smaller accounts, particularly in volatile markets, your position sizing calculation will often spit out something like, “Go long .75 Aussie dollar contracts”. You end up either taking a full contract so that the account can be in the trade (and taking on more risk than you want to) or skipping the trade entirely. Both are bad; we had a lot of this type of stress when we started because we were new and couldn’t demand large enough minimum accounts. With the rise of the mini contracts, you do have more flexibility with some markets and smaller accounts, but you really want to have adequately funded accounts to play this game.

    Some firms deal with this by doing pools, but this can get frustrating because you frequently will have an investor who is liquid and wants to get started right now, another who will be unwinding some stuff and who will be ready to fund a trading account in six months, yet another who keeps putting you off…

    You also get situations where a guy will say something like, “Trade everything on this list except the energy complex—I already have exposure to that through another fund.” So individual managed accounts can give you some flexibility in terms of bespoke tailoring the portfolio universe to a client’s specific needs, and some guys really like that.

    Re: Japan. I know well the folly of geopolitical prediction, but this situation has reached such a state of demographic and economic criticality that I think we will see a sovereign default scenario playing out in Japan. Their balance sheet is just so bad that an increase in borrowing costs of about 300 basis points will leave them unable to pay the interest on their debt, even using 100% of central tax revenue. Italy’s 10-year cost basis went up 100 basis points and that was enough to create full-blown crisis, and Japan’s predicament is far worse in many ways. It’s the sad, logical conclusion of the ultimate Keynesian experiment.

    The conventional wisdom is that they can and will print with abandon and nuke the yen to try to get out of this, will suffer 20%+ inflation for a few years, and then will have a reset opportunity having destroyed the life savings of many vulnerable people. Certainly we are hearing about extraordinary efforts to this effect (“unlimited stimulus” and “3% inflation targeting”). I suppose that it’s going to be a drag race between printing press-fueled “growth” in tax revenues and rising interest rates. Their balance of trade has been deteriorating and several sharp HF managers think this will be the catalyst for an interest rate jump, with the interest rate jump in turn triggering the restructuring event after approx. 6 months of wild fiscal flailing and politicos being fired/resigning.

    We all know that the default will be called something benign, almost pleasant—a “technical restructuring” or a “maturity-enhancement opportunity for bondholders” or whatever. But I think it will still constitute a CDS trigger event and then all hell is going to break loose.

    What do you think?

    On another note:…VD: new novel is excellent! I’ve been really enjoying it. I’d like to see you turn your hand to a modern techno-thriller at some point!

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Justiz
    Although a bit brutal in your way of putting things, +1. I give it the same reading. la petite comtesse du 16ème n’est pas prête de changer.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Creepy isn’t always evolutionarily hard-wired, it’s also socially defined.

    For example, how acceptable it is to touch people during normal conversation, and what “personal space” is can vary widely by the culture.

    If some Spanish guy moves to the United States and is playing by Spanish social norms, he is going to be standing closer and touching you a lot more.

    Calling this guy a creep because he is violating your personal boundaries strikes me as hilarious. I can understand feeling uncomfortable, but he’s playing by a different set of rules. That’s not “creepy” and the guy doesn’t deserve to be treated like a predator.

    Particularly when plenty of actual predators get laid like tile.

  • Just1Z

    @Danien
    chui d’accord, je te comprends.

    Marellus adds a well timed comment. The ‘lady’ assumes that she can throw accusations around without regard for the consequences for the guy. Her feelings have been hurt, someone has to pay.

    ‘Over here’ women do occasionally actually get sent to prison for false accusations. not for very long, but hey that’s more justice than available in many other places. also their accusations are made anonymously in the press, whereas the guy’s name is fair game – he can be destroyed whether he is innocent or not.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Underdog

    Not really… That’s like thinking an increased awareness of makeup and spanx and pushup bras will make girls look uglier to guys. The primal brain overrides all that shit.

    I think an oversaturation of PUAs will caution the younger generation of girls to be more sexually conservative and put out less. But they will still be attracted to game.

    You have a point. But I think Game is headed for increased MSM exposure, and then there will be scandals questioning its credibility, until it retreats and reinvents itself on the fringes, yet again.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Marellus,

    I suspect definitely for those of us to whom pushups bras are DLV/unattractive, for example. For the low-self-awareness-crowd, I see little effect.

    My mother was a victim of Principle of Least Interest; spent her whole life being unhappy with the universe for never giving her those things that he couldn’t risk to ask for.

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

    @Marellus
    As a married woman I don’t take flowers from men other than my husband, but thank you for the gesture ;)

  • SayWhaat

    But I think Game is headed for increased MSM exposure

    It’s already there.

  • Anne

    @ Susan
    Yes that’s what I figured.
    To be fair, in my original text to him I told him when I’d be back in town, and he was the one asking to get together here. He asked me if I was going to the ball or the Christmas party, and I said no (the “ball” is for people in this city and our part of town, he probably assumed I was invited, but I don’t know them). That’s when he said we could meet after I was going out.
    I know my deleting him was a total overreaction, but I don’t think it should be a dealbreaker. I took your advice and initiated with him – as you say, the ball is on his court, otherwise I would be artificially holding this ‘relationship’ up. At least I would have wanted to meet him so that I could explain why I was upset to begin with, in case he didn’t know. Men have acted childish with me before, but you can overlook a mistake if you really like someone. It’s only been 24 hours – maybe I’m being paranoid.

    The men of HUS are probably cheering at the idea of him never contacting me again – without knowing any of us. One small victory for the bitter male population.

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

      @Anne

      Well I am hoping he does contact you, and that the two of you have a chance to talk it through. Having it fizzle now would be unfortunate, but as I said in the post, if that happens I hope you will take this opportunity to reflect on what you might have done differently. You’re only 22, at an age where we all make mistakes. I made some big ones at that age that would no doubt have men here calling for my head. None of us knows you.

      Take what you find useful from the thread and discard the rest.

  • Russ in Texas

    It’s only been 24 hours. Yes, you’re being paranoid. Relax and enjoy your Christmas.

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

      @Anne

      It’s only been 24 hours. Yes, you’re being paranoid. Relax and enjoy your Christmas.

      24 hours during Christmas week! The normal rules around timing don’t apply. I’m with Russ. Also, I don’t expect Stephen to react with eagerness. He’s not gaming you if he fails to request an immediate meeting. If he’s smart, he’ll let you stew for a bit. Just saying. If he had contacted me, I would definitely advise him to avoid putting himself in a position where he is taken for granted again.

  • Underdog

    Game as Mystery defined it has been mainstream for quite some time. Every girl in America knows what a “neg” is now. But game as in RSD and beyond are not mainstream and most likely will never make it mainstream. It’s brilliant, really. All the guys who want to learn game will eventually find RSD and Roissy and whatever new crap is out there. While all the girls will be looking out for fur hats and platform boots and badly executed routines thinking that’s what “game” is.

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

      While all the girls will be looking out for fur hats and platform boots and badly executed routines thinking that’s what “game” is.

      The young women I know are all well acquainted with the basics of Game. They may not know the PUA jargon, but the tactics are widespread by guys everywhere. I recall my son and his friends talking about them at age 17 in 2005 after reading The Game.

      It’s also evident that most of the female commenters are well acquainted with the moves when they show up here initially.

  • Just1Z

    @Marellus
    sorry, got distracted cooking my roast beef, roast parsnips, brussell sprouts and tatties and mixed veg and gravy…and then eating it – mmmmm mmmm mmm mmm mmmmm
    fizzy perry during the cooking and Shiraz during the eating
    life is good even though the main rail line is washed out, the flood alerts map is basically the lit up map of England and Wales, and the idiots doing their xmas shopping have endured the queues that they deserve.

    Anyway, Alexander Kent looks good, is this one recommended?
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/In-Kings-Name-Alexander-Kent/dp/0099528266/

    I read about half of the Master and Commander / Aubrey Maturin series (ten out of twenty-one books) before temporary burnout
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Commander-Captain-Surprise-Aubrey-Maturin-Chronicles/dp/0007319304/

    It also expanded my French with, “tes moeurs crapuleuses… tu cherches a corrompre mon paresseux… va donc, eh, salope… espèce de fripouille,”. These sentences proved invaluable in my day to day life en Provence. Well, maybe not, but they had me in stitches for a while (see below for context and Damien for the translation).

    REALLY good reading, but I over-egged the pudding by reading them consecutively…I will be back. As an example of the humour;
    (Jack = Russell Crow’s character in the movie, Stephen = the surgeon / naturalist)

    ‘I cannot imagine,’ said Jack, recovering the chaplain and guiding him along the gangway, ‘what that sloth has against me. I have always been civil to it, more than civil; but nothing answers. I cannot think why you speak of its discrimination.’

    Jack was of a sanguine temperament; he liked most people and he was surprised when they did not like him. This readiness to be pleased had been damaged of recent years, but it remained intact as far as horses, dogs and sloths were concerned; it wounded him to see tears come into the creature’s eyes when he walked into the cabin, and he laid himself out to be agreeable. As they ran down to Rio he sat with it at odd moments, addressing it in Portuguese, more or less, and feeding it with offerings that it sometimes ate, sometimes allowed to drool slowly from its mouth; but it was not until they were approaching Capricorn, with Rio no great distance on the starboard bow, that he found it respond.

    The weather had freshened almost to coldness, for the wind was coming more easterly, from the chilly currents between Tristan and the Cape; the sloth was amazed by the change; it shunned the deck and spent its time below. Jack was in his cabin, pricking the chart with less satisfaction than he could have wished: progress, slow, serious trouble with the mainmast – unaccountable headwinds by night – and sipping a glass of grog; Stephen was in the mizentop, teaching Bonden to write and scanning the sea for his first albatross. The sloth sneezed, and looking up, Jack caught its gaze fixed upon him; its inverted face had an expression of anxiety and concern. ‘Try a piece of this, old cock,’ he said, dipping his cake in the grog and proffering the sop. ‘It might put a little heart into you.’ The sloth sighed, closed its eyes, but gently absorbed the piece, and sighed again.

    Some minutes later he felt a touch on his knee: the sloth had silently climbed down and it was standing there, its beady eyes looking up into his face, bright with expectation. More cake, more grog: growing confidence and esteem. After this, as soon as the drum had beat the retreat, the sloth would meet him, hurrying towards the door on its uneven legs: it was given its own bowl, and it would grip it with its claws, lowering its round face into it and pursing its lips to drink (its tongue was too short to lap). Sometimes it went to sleep in this position, bowed over the emptiness.

    ‘In this bucket,’ said Stephen, walking into the cabin, ‘in this small half-bucket, now, I have the population of Dublin, London and Paris combined: these animalculae – what is the matter with the sloth?’ It was curled on Jack’s knee, breathing heavily: its bowl and Jack’s glass stood empty on the table. Stephen picked it up, peered into its affable, bleary face, shook it, and hung it upon its rope. It seized hold with one fore and one hind foot, letting the others dangle limp, and went to sleep.

    Stephen looked sharply round, saw the decanter, smelt to the sloth, and cried, ‘Jack, you have debauched my sloth.’

    On the other side of the cabin-bulkheads Mr Atkins said to Mr Stanhope, ‘High words between the Captain and the Doctor, sir. Hoo, hoo! Pretty strong – he pitches it pretty strong: I wonder a man of spirit can stomach it. I should give him a thrashing directly.’ Mr Stanhope had no notion of listening behind bulkheads, and he did not reply; but he could not prevent himself from catching isolated sentiments, such as

    ‘tes moeurs crapuleuses… tu cherches a corrompre mon paresseux… va donc, eh, salope… espèce de fripouille’, for the dialogue had switched to French on the entrance of the wooden-faced Killick. ‘I hope they will not be late for our whist,’ he murmured. Now that the air had grown breathable Mr Stanhope’s strength had revived, and he looked forward keenly to these evenings of cards, the only break in the unspeakable tedium of ocean travel.

    I really do recommend the books, they are full of realism, history, hunmour and drama.

    @Merellus – fave theme musicy type stuff?
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USW5adqt5Oo
    two steps from hell – heart of courage
    the visuals include a little Daenyrs (sp?) from GOT to me (non-expert)

    rousing stuff. not my normal stuff, but I bought it when I heard it.

    also
    two steps from hell – freedom fighters (“used in the cinematic trailer for the Star Trek movie”)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJm6b-o2pTM
    with the foot of the Tour Eiffel in the backdrop I believe. (Eiffel Tower in Paris)

    Just feel the blood flow…

  • Just1Z

    Sorry about mis-spelling your name…I did mention perry (pear cider) and Shiraz, did I not?

  • HanSolo

    @Lokland

    Did you say or do anything? You should have replied in a loud voice “there’s an ugly/fat/anorexic chick in front of me.”

    @Susan

    The chubby chick should have cut the power cable to the house.

  • HanSolo

    @Anne

    Did you ever apologize for deleting him on facebook? If not, and if it were me, that would still grate on me as a very immature, mean or inappropriate things to do.

  • Just1Z

    Regarding what happens when knowledge of game amongst men becomes widespread, I came across a post by GritArtisan on his blog called “Santa Claus isn’t real, but Game is”
    (nothing really racy in it, I don’t think that anyone here would find the post objectionable, but I’ll let those that want to find it, google it. I don’t know about the rest of the blog as I am not a regular there)

    emphasis mine

    I wish all my readers a Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. I am hopeful and enthusiastic for the future of Game, because with Game all perception past and future gets changed, usually in the favor of the guy running Game.

    I am saddened for the future of our society which was built on trust and reality. A society of contracts, spoken word agreement, and hand shakes has become infected with cries of racism and feminism. We cannot trust each other any more. The last step is for the creators of society to admit that reality is useless and perception rules. The towel is thrown in.

    From here on, a man achieves nothing by admitting that Game exists. As much as men love the feeling of figuring it all out, women resent that knowledge. A guy who knows Game but never admits it is much more attractive that a guy who rubs it in her face. “Haha, fooled ya!”

  • HanSolo

    @Anne

    Since I am writing what I believe to be good advice I think you can infer that I am wishing you the best with him. And if it doesn’t work out with him the lessons that you learn from this and how to both trust more and emotionally escalate with men and even just treat them with a bit more decency will serve you very well. I will come across as criticizing you somewhat but don’t take that personally. We all (I too) make mistakes and the question is whether we’ll learn from them or not.

    I recall you texting him and saying something to the effect that you were sorry for being flaky. Did you ever address deleting him from Facebook? If not, then that’s going to loom as the unspoken elephant in the room.

    Reviewing the earlier happenings:

    It sounded like before that that he really liked you but when you left him hanging for a couple of hours expecting to hear from you about when and where to get a drink and then you were not being willing to meet up with him the next few days after he said it was too late (either because he really did have to work or he had grown tired of waiting so long for you to respond) that he was disappointed and just didn’t think you were that into him. I imagine this would have compounded his feeling neglected by you not offering him coffee or breakfast in the morning when he would stay at your place.

    Then when you deleted him from Facebook that must have seemed to him like you were not interested, fickle, or worse. I say that because that is how I would feel if someone I had gone out with for a few weeks with and had sex with did that.

    I would still like the woman probably but also be very wary and unless she addressed the situation enough to make me realize what happened and that the deleting me from facebook and overall aloofness were mistakes she was sorry about then I wouldn’t open up to her much. If I got a message on facebook, the very facebook she deleted me from, I would think, “what the fuck is she thinking? She deletes me and still writes me here?”

    I disagree that the ball is in his court. I think it’s still in yours and though you did a good thing in saying you were sorry for being flaky that you haven’t done enough to show that you are sufficiently sorry for your somewhat entitled behavior and that he can really trust you with his heart again.

    Since he said he wanted to see you again I think he probably still likes you but is really feeling wary. The ball is still in your court. Good luck.

  • HanSolo

    @Anne

    I may be missing some additional information about you addressing things with him when you said sorry for being flaky. So, if I am missing something feel free to fill me in.

    And, I am not trying to attack you. I’m simply trying to present how I would feel if I (and other men I know) were in that situation, based on my limited knowledge of the circumstances.

    Assuming he still likes you (and I think he probably does, or at least to some extent) then I think he is just being wary.

  • Underdog

    @Susan

    I think game hit its peak popularity around 2008 when that VH1 show was in its 2nd season. I had the misfortune of being a newbie and practicing MM right around that time and quite a few girls caught on when I ran around asking them the brush or floss question and tried to read their palms. Interestingly, I’ve never had a single hard rejection from girls who called me out on it. Most of them instead tried to keep me around to learn more.

    One of my most memorable nights was meeting this HB10 who caught on and asked if I knew any of Mystery’s magic tricks (I didn’t) she then “isolated” herself with me until her coworkers came and got her. I was a dumb noob at the time and never learned how to escalate further so she took the initiative and invited me to go with them for pizza. She eventually lost interest at the restaurant because I never sexually escalated. I was too busy pissing my pants because she also happened to be one of my first number closes. I ended up stalking her modeling page for the next 2 months and she eventually appeared in Playboy just like she said she would. My eyes opened soon after that.

  • HanSolo

    @Marellus

    That was a rather sickening display by that woman on the tube (and if it were a man behaving like a jerk I’d call him out too).

    Basically, that woman serves as a template of how women SHOULD act: do the exact opposite and make your attitudes the exact opposite and you will be a breath of fresh air to men.

    I don’t know what percentage of women are that bad–extreme bitchiness. I suspect it would be a lower percent, maybe 10%. Probably another 30% have a somewhat entitled and bitchy attitude but don’t feel as strongly as her or explode like that. Nonetheless, whatever the %, this minority of entitled and bitchy women really does upset the market and provides a huge opportunity for giving and pleasant women (like Hope of the last few years, but not Hope in her late teens ;) ) to have huge relationship/marriage value.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Susan

    What do the young women think of game and what it consists?

    Most women seem to misunderstand the concept of a neg….though that’s okay, most men seem to as well. Maybe even I do. :P

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

      @ADBG

      Contrary to what one often hears or reads online, the women I know accept Game as normal male behavior, and will even giggle and admit it works. Basically, they seem to welcome the idea of guys not being supplicating, and ruining a perfectly awesome physical attraction! I’ve also seen their frustration when a guy is too eager – “Ugh, he’s got no game! He texted me 6 times while I was getting my hair cut!” So I don’t buy that women dislike men having more control. After all, the reason Game is effective is that women like it when men are dominant. (Obviously, I’m not talking about feminist types here – they don’t want men to have anything.)

      The neg is very misunderstood, and also much abused. I think it’s very difficult to get right – it requires wit, timing, and a great ability to read people. Most men go way overboard and say something downright insulting. The worst one I have ever heard about from a girl in my focus group was “There’s spinach in your teeth.”

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @MikeC @Bastiat Blogger

    I love reading your convo’s.

    If the Japanese Bond Market implodes, what’s next ? Will this usher in a new bull market in the Nikkei. I mean will money flee bonds and go hide in (good) stocks ?

    Other than that, if the Yen manages to devalue, will that not improve the Yen value of their US Bonds, and hence their balance sheet ?

    *******************************************************************

    @Ana.

    As an unmarried man, I’ve come to realize that one must enquire about the lady’s marital status … only AFTER the flowers has been given.

    *******************************************************************

    @Russ

    My mother was a victim of Principle of Least Interest; spent her whole life being unhappy with the universe for never giving her those things that he couldn’t risk to ask for.

    My mother almost got divorced, because another (married) woman was trying to make a move on my father. She never understood why this was happening, until another woman paid her a visit, and told her what was really happening. Before that, my mother and this homewrecker were the best of friends.

    *******************************************************************

    @SayWhaat #918

    There you go again; trying to haul me over a barrel … ai yai yai … very well … I’ll play along, but that barrel had better look pretty, with lots and lots and lots of green cushions surrounding it, and even more of them covering it. And I want pictures of cute little pink elephants on each every one of those cushions. I want to listen Mozart. I want a bucket full of cool beers.

    And I want you to look absolutely ferocious when you hand one of those beers to me.

    *******************************************************************

    @Just1Z

    Good on yer mate. When I heard this song, I couldn’t believe it came out of an Anime. Enjoy.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33pw2nEAHgc

    I’m reading 1Q84 right now. It starts slowly, but lemme tell you, that book is the tits !

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Hansolo

    Nonetheless, whatever the %, this minority of entitled and bitchy women really does upset the market and provides a huge opportunity for giving and pleasant women (like Hope of the last few years, but not Hope in her late teens ;) ) to have huge relationship/marriage value.

    This.

    The question is this though : Where do you get lots of good women that’s single ? Church ? I don’t like the church. Bars ? In bars I just get drunk and write poetry.

    So where then ?

  • Just1Z

    That’s a song from an anime soundtrack? woah

    I’m off, cheers all

  • HanSolo

    @Marellus

    I think churches do have some of them. Back when I was a Mormon at most of the singles congregations there was usually anywhere from an even ratio in man-heavy places of the country to a 3:2 women to men ratio (in Boston) and even though there were a few bitches the vast majority of the women were anywhere from somewhat nice to really nice, as they were constantly trying to be better people.

    I think a good online strategy would be for women to blatantly advertise that they are sweet and feminine yet know what they want, have goals and aren’t pushovers.

  • SayWhaat

    There you go again; trying to haul me over a barrel … ai yai yai … very well … I’ll play along, but that barrel had better look pretty, with lots and lots and lots of green cushions surrounding it, and even more of them covering it. And I want pictures of cute little pink elephants on each every one of those cushions. I want to listen Mozart. I want a bucket full of cool beers.

    And I want you to look absolutely ferocious when you hand one of those beers to me.

    Marellus, I don’t get you. Like, at all. Lol.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Marellus,

    I was flat-out seduced by a falling knife. My wife forgave the issue, but we had a long sit-down going over what had happened that she got her claws in to begin with, and me figuring out where my weak spots were (turns out I’ve got one or two good buttons that can be easily pushed if I’m not watching for them).

  • SayWhaat

    @ Russ:

    Can you elaborate on those weak spots? I suspect that intrasexual competition will get even more fierce for those women who do get married. What sort of things should women be looking for to prevent homewreckers from closing in?

  • Russ in Texas

    @SayWhaat,

    This will sound fairly strange coming from a man who’s got huge Macchiavellian tendencies, but I also have a very strong weak spot for the truly unfortunate. This was a person I’d known long enough, but not quite well enough, to see through manipulative stuff, particularly given that the individual is basically a pathological liar. She had my number, but I didn’t have hers. Bad combo.

    Those people have to simply be avoided- we’re wired to not assume that EVERY thing a person says is a lie, and this makes people easy to manipulate. Recognizing one or two truths bent does NOT inoculate you from three or four more that slip in under the radar.

  • Russ in Texas

    (you know the kind of cardboard villain who won’t hesitate to monkeystomp a village, but stops to adopt one of the orphans, Jackson-style? Yeah, whenever somebody comes across an example like that, friends of mine pipe up with “hey, Russ, just read about you in a book.”)

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    HanSolo, funny thing is, in my teen’s and early 20’s, I had no “bitch shield” but a “shy shield.” I would be very nice and pleasant to anyone who spoke to me, but I would also be painfully socially awkward. I was quite unaware of social dynamics and never noticed guys who checked me out or anything, plus I never went to bars or clubs. I felt ugly, and my self-estimation of my SMV back then was like, 3 or 4. Which is just as well, because it kept me out of trouble.

  • SayWhaat

    Thanks for elaborating, Russ. :)

    There was a similar discussion a few threads back about the appropriate-ness of asking an SO to end communication with a “friend” who appears to be a threat to the relationship (e.g. a former FWB). The consensus on that thread was that it was a deal-breaker for any SO to maintain such a friendship in light of the past sexual relationship between the SO and said friend.

    However, we’re admittedly in our own bubble here at HUS. Outside of HUS, I have a couple friends who told me that insisting my SO end communication with a prior sex partner was a “red flag” — it made me look like a crazy girlfriend.

    I’ll admit that it worries me to hear these stories of men who are so easily “stolen” from their wives. I would like to think that I can trust the man that I love to know what boundaries are in a marriage — or even just a regular LTR. I want to be a wife…not a warden. :(

  • Russ in Texas

    Hope, my wife was the same way. I knew we had potential b/c we argued CONSTANTLY, from scholarly theses to which kinds of cherry were better. My luck was that nobody else was chasing her behind those Birth Control Glasses.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Russ is really impressing me. Former player, married a virgin, cheats with a free pass. That’s credibility there.

  • Russ in Texas

    @SayWhaat,

    Well, “stolen” wasn’t quite so likely, though she did try it. More to the point was her keeping me from doing something truly vile and permanent to the…unpleasant person…. once I realized that I’d been played. I ended the affair and broke the news of it out, but hadn’t realized just how far the hooks had gotten in for another couple weeks.

    Most of the issue from your end, SW, would be to watch for bad communication. She-wench was only able to slip in the stilettos b/c the wife and I already had developed some very flawed habits on both our ends. End story is that the marriage was actually improved (markedly). Paranoia isn’t really a good response — just make sure you’re both OBVIOUSLY happy, and make it a priority to fix it if not, rather than letting it fester.

  • Russ in Texas

    OTC – Yeah, no. “Forgave” isn’t an equal sign for “was pleasant and/or painless.”

  • SayWhaat

    @ Hope re: bitch/shy shields

    I’ve talked to my boyfriend about his initial impressions of me when we first began dating. He mentioned that I have a “wall”. After one of my girlfriends brought this guy back to our apartment (allegedly so that he could meet me — he was a greasy-looking law student who was definitely way more into her despite the fact that she had a boyfriend), she told me, “you laugh and crack jokes and it seems like everything is normal, but I also wonder what it is that you’re really thinking.”

    In my case, I think it’s more self-protective, and maybe judgmental. I’ll crack jokes, I’ll smile, but I’ll only let a few get close. My boyfriend was really surprised the day I let my “wall” come down. I wonder how often I put (keep?) it up, and whether or not that’s a good thing… : /

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Russ, the “free pass” isn’t from your wife (I aint that dumb) it’s from the judgement of others.

  • SayWhaat

    @ OTC: Well I think the lesson is to 1) make sure you are very happy with your partner, and 2) make sure you aren’t marrying a player/slut.

    Though that’s still not a guarantee…

  • Russ in Texas

    @OTC: If so, I think it’s because I’m far and away my own harshest critic. High (VERY high) Macchiavellian, unusually LOW narcissist. It’s an odd combo, so I tend to be a bit of a weirdo, and not somebody you’d want to try to emulate.

  • SayWhaat

    Also who said anything about a free pass from judgment? Lol.

  • Anne

    @HanSolo
    Thanks for the message.
    I agree that the facebook remove is the “elephant in the room”. However, I don’t know how to address that right now. Even though it’s my fault, I do want to mention why I was upset, and some of these things are best done in person.
    Now he has my message, with a question, so I feel like he needs to reply to that first. If he wants to see me again, I can’t see why he won’t? He replied cheerily to my message on Wednesay and I haven’t done anything awful since. He always poses questions in his texts, even meaningless ones, to keep the conversation going. If he was trying to let me down gently, I don’t think he’d bother.
    He’s probably thinking what you’re saying “she’s deleted me off fb, and now she’s messaging me here?”. Maybe that’s why he’s hesitant. I have his brother on fb (from years ago, never speak to him). He’s even online. I wonder if they talk about me.
    I am of course afraid not to hear back, but he doesn’t seem like a person who just cuts off and ignores. I can be rash and overly emotional too, but if I had been dating a guy I care about (to the point of sleeping together) I would not ignore a specific text asking to hang out, I would say something.

  • Russ in Texas

    Anne,

    It’s a conundrum, but it’s also Christmas Week. I’d relax, enjoy the holiday, and wait. There’s lots of point-specific advice us outsiders COULD give you, but we lack the background and contextual knowledge to do so (such as, does he know that you slept with him because you cared for him? Given the “coffee issue,” and given the amount of data those of us in the thread possess, that strikes me as something he might perceive as an open question.

    You did, I hope, try to undelete him, or however that works, on FB.

  • Sai

    @ADBG
    I get the impression your email went something like “The quality of our relationship has degraded recently. I feel ill-used because of your bad behaviors X (like the time you did such-and-such a thing), Y and Z. I am displeased with how long this has gone on.”
    That doesn’t sound Dread-ful to me. It sounds like the clearest, most honest message somebody could give without grabbing their SO’s shoulders and yelling “I’M TIRED OF BEING DISRESPECTED.”

    “In the United States, if you are growing your own food on your own land for your own consumption, you are engaging in activity that materially affects interstate commerce and can be regulated by the federal government.”
    !
    I did not know that. Thanks for the warning.

    @INTJ
    It’s not like you said I was a terrorist/feminazi/destined to fail at everything, so it’s OK. :)
    (You could do a lot better, though. Dr. F. and I still have a LOT of progress to make, and I don’t live anywhere near Texas.)

    @OffTheCuff
    “It’s a bad idea, thats why. For one, sexual zoning. Then, the women would think the men are creeps.”
    Aw… I wish to Crom people would/could treat conventions like dating sites. At least I’d know he wouldn’t judge me for… never mind. How can you call somebody else creepy when you’re dressed as zombie Snow White?

    “Does knowing women wear push-up bras and get fake tits make a set of titties hiked up on display in a sexy corset less effective at attracting men?”
    Wait, I thought when women didn’t try to look their best they were lazy/unattractive.(?)

    “In that same bar, possibly on the same night, some guy came up to me a delivered a nuclear neg to me. In reading in the ‘sphere it’s become clear to me that his objective was to pick me up, but my reactions wasn’t tingles, it was WTF?!”
    That’s been my experience with PUAs and guys who wanted to imitate them. I thought they hated me.
    (plus I don’t like for male or female strangers to touch me)

    Re: broad on train
    http://images.seemsgood.com/facepalm.jpg

  • Sai

    @Anne
    I have no experience to draw from, but I hope you have a good Christmas and do your best to be happy with this guy, or find someone else to be happy with.

  • Jason

    Add him back on Facebook, feel free to add something like, “sorry, mea culpa, I goofed.”

    As for explaining your actions? Not sure that’s the greatest idea. Have to say maximum peace comes with less explanations.

  • Emily

    I think the Comic Con people and the anime convention people would be perfect assortative mating counterparts. There were a lot of chubby Sailor Moons who would probably love to get approached. I think the main problem would be getting the people to actually talk to each other.

  • Lisa C

    @Anne

    “Even though it’s my fault, I do want to mention why I was upset …”

    Sometimes, the “apologize and explain” route is inferior to a simple apology. I guess my experience has been that the explanation can easily become something that negates the apology by seeking to justify your actions/emotions (or is really a disguised request for an apology from the other person.) If it were me, I would be happy to hear from him and would focus on that point forward unless he took the initiative and wanted to rehash how things went awry.

  • Russ in Texas

    “Because it risks nothing and is often predicated upon defending one’s pride rather than admitting fault and seeking forgiveness, the ‘apologize and explain’ route is almost always inferior to a simple apology.”

    There, ftfy.

    :)

  • HanSolo

    @Hope 945

    Thanks for elaborating. Can you just clone 50 of you now? :D

  • BroHamlet

    @Anne

    Dunno if I count as one of the “men of HUS” but I don’t know you and don’t wish you any ill will at all (on Christmas? c’mon man…). You’re learning emotional self control and you are beginning to recognize what’s going on in your own head. Many people aren’t all that willing to cop to their own missteps like that. As for your dating situation someone above said “Sometimes, the “apologize and explain” route is inferior to a simple apology”. I cosign this. If a girl acts this way with me, a simple apology that demonstrates that she knows what she did and takes responsibility for overreacting, without making any excuses, would be more than enough, and would make you very reasonable. Many guys (and probably your guy) know that women are emotional, so no need to belabor the point. For me, a key to a girl being a relationship prospect, is that she does think about her actions, and an apology shows that.

  • Iggles

    @ Jason:

    Add him back on Facebook, feel free to add something like, “sorry, mea culpa, I goofed.”

    I agree with this.
    From past experience I know that when you receive a message from someone who is not your friend Facebook can treat the message differently according to your privacy settings. Meaning Stephen may not have gotten a email notification that he received a message from you.

    Mail from non-friends gets lumped into “other mail”. An Ex tried contacting me once and I didn’t see the message from him for months. (Not that I cared to respond, but in your case you want to hear back from your guy!)

    On a side note, I don’t see the point of maintaining Principle of Least Interest at this point. You want to continue to see him and have already slept together. It’s time to piss or get off the pot — either emotionally escalate or this relationship won’t develop farther. Instead of keeping score, speak from your heart and say what you mean to say.

    That’s my $.02. As always, your mileage may vary.

  • Anne

    @Iggles
    I thought about this because it has happened to me – but it says “Seen 9pm” on the bottom on the message – which FB has now launched to let you know when messages have been read.
    I am still torn whether to add him again, because I feel like it might be ‘too much’ all at once from my side. I sent him a message, it has a question (not an urgent one though), I think he should reply if he still is interested. He was enthusiastic Wednesday, and I don’t know what would have changed since then.

  • Lokland

    @HanSolo

    “Did you say or do anything? You should have replied in a loud voice “there’s an ugly/fat/anorexic chick in front of me.””

    :)

    I won.
    No worries.

    Knowing every bartender, waitress, bouncer, DJ and owner were helpful. Knowing half the patrons was more helpful.

    I think the clincher was my blonde friend (one I’ve mentioned before) who is smokin’ hot coming up putting her hands around my neck and asking if everything was okay as she pecked me on the cheek (over the railing to the sidewalk).

    Those women lacked enough social pull (i.e. HB points) to touch me.

    The head bouncer (good buddy) told them to get lost.

    Wouldn’t have happened if she hadn’t screamed it for half the neighbourhood to hear. I’ll take an insult from a no body without blinking but an attempt at public embarrassment will not go unnoticed.
    I didn’t get everyone to stare though. That was all on her.

  • Lokland

    Ohh and no. I didn’t say or do anything.
    I was standing a few feet behind them texting my buddy )the bartender) to come let me in.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Obviously, the only thing to do is ignore such people.”

    Or up the ante and beat them at their own game.

    “I’m sure it’s no consolation, but a young woman I know was recently turned away from a frat party at the door because “no lardasses allowed.” She is overweight, but not obese – just chubby.”

    That is not appropriate. Thats merely a lack of basic decency.

    “It’s natural to feel shame when being singled out, even by worthless scum, but it’s important to develop a thick skin. I know you’ve done that.”

    Lol.
    No its not.

    If someone were to single me out for being bald or fat (I am neither) I would not be ashamed.
    If someone were to single me out for being short (I am) I do feel slightly ashamed.

    Shame is dependent upon a) truth, b) caring about others opinions

    I am short. There are negative correlations associated with that. There is no reason I should not be ashamed about it.
    I would feel no shame at being called bald merely confusion.

    Being called a creep (especially by someone whom I was only transiently aware of) was more of a comical in a wtf? situation. It would have made an excellent movie scene if I had looked around after I realized she was looking in my direction.

    No shame.

    Just pointing out that creep is not just a word used to display uncomfortableness but an actual tool(weapon) used in an attempt to gain social proof.

    I would suspect that its used as a weapon on those who look like easy targets.
    Ie. short, not good looking and alone would be a hell-0f-a-lot easier to embarrass than tall, good looking and surrounded by women.

  • Lokland

    To expand upon my last point.

    I’ve been called a creep twice. Both times I was alone, strangely on my phone and it was by someone who was drunk.

    The other was walking behind a group of girls, I was heading home. texting (weird coincidence?).

    Its never happened when i was in a group of people or with even one other person.

    Alone, I look like an easy target. its not surprising people take shots.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Anne, I agree with the advice from Iggles. Also what the guys said about a simple apology. The “game” is won by not playing. Open your heart and give it your best.

    But, don’t do it if your heart’s not in it.

    SayWhaat, I definitely have a “wall,” too. I don’t talk about a lot of things with people, but if someone opens up to me first, I will reciprocate. I think extroverted intuitives can be extremely private, even more than introverted intuitives. I’ve met several who are like that, and even when I divulge, they keep their walls.

    HanSolo, I always did want to make all the lonely guys not lonely anymore, but I was just one person. I went for the outcasts, nerds and geeks. The boyfriends I had were into anime, comic books, D&D, video games, science fiction, fantasy, and quantum theory. So I got into those, too. Unfortunately it means I have a harder time connecting with many mainstream people.

  • HanSolo

    @Anne

    Have you charged your cellphone yet? Maybe he messaged you there. Did you tell him on facebook that your phone died and that’s why you emailed him there? Or do you know his phone number?

    I mean, all this saving face stuff is good to a point but this is someone you’ve slept with and so I don’t think calling him and hearing each other’s voices would be a bad idea.

    If you don’t have a charger and you can’t get his number any other way I would suggest buying one. (After all, isn’t your family millionaire rich ;) ? $10 or $20 for a charger seems like a small price.

    I guess there just comes a point where you have to let it hang out and take a risk. I doubt he’ll be pissed if you call him.

  • Russ in Texas

    Anne,

    If you’re trying to land this man for more than a divorce settlement, if you’re looking at this man to be yours for life, then why are you playing dignity games?

    If you insist on keeping score, then your relationship would be doomed anyway, and you deserve to lose this man.

  • HanSolo

    @Sai and others that format similarly

    I actually read your comments but it’s hard to tell where you begin and where what you’re quoting ends. Could you maybe blockquote or leave a line btw or put a line of dashes? lol Obviously you can do whatever you choose. Just saying.

    “Quote”
    ———
    Sai’s comments?

  • Abbot

    High earners must try harder too…

    “The marriage market, as economists bluntly call it, clears much less often in regions in which more women have the potential to out earn men”

    http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2012/12/gender-roles

    .

  • Damien Vulaume

    “The “game” is won by not playing. Open your heart and give it your best.
    But, don’t do it if your heart’s not in it.”
    “if you’re looking at this man to be yours for life, then why are you playing dignity games?
    If you insist on keeping score, then your relationship would be doomed anyway, and you deserve to lose this man.”

    I hope that Anne gave a real thought about those two comments. It’s all there, really.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Hansolo #938

    I think a good online strategy would be for women to blatantly advertise that they are sweet and feminine yet know what they want, have goals and aren’t pushovers.

    What really upsets me about online dating, is that the women who write an interesting profile are few and far between. What a well written profile shows to me, is that this woman has character.

    I mean, if Gwyneth Paltrow wrote a profile, you just know that there’s gonna be lots pf pretty pictures and something totally bland written to accommodate it.

    Boring.

    But if Janeane Garofalo wrote a profile … homigod homigod homigod !

    Yes, I like Janeane Garofalo.

    Other than that, I wish Suzan would write a post on online dating. What she must do is ask her female readers to send her e-mails about their online experiences … the good, the bad, the ugly.

    She should reproduce their texts and interactions just as it is, so that we may see what is working, and not working.

    No “How to’s” please. I never read such things anyway. I want the undiluted good stuff.

    And maybe then I can stop making bugger-ups like this.

  • VD

    Now he has my message, with a question, so I feel like he needs to reply to that first. If he wants to see me again, I can’t see why he won’t? He replied cheerily to my message on Wednesay and I haven’t done anything awful since. He always poses questions in his texts, even meaningless ones, to keep the conversation going. If he was trying to let me down gently, I don’t think he’d bother.

    Anne, your main problem is that you keep insisting that he has to see things your way. Get this through your pretty little head: he doesn’t have to do that. He won’t. He obviously likes you, but he also clearly has other options, some of whom are probably indicating that they like him far better than you are willing to show. You keep trying to demonstrate the minimum possible level of interest to get him to pursue you the way you want him to pursue you, (either to preserve your feelings or your pride, I don’t know which), and this is a suboptimal strategy in this scenario.

    Let me give you a real example. I have a very attractive wife, as Susan can also verify. If you’re a hard 9, she’s probably a soft 9. Think blonde Sandra Bullock with a fitness model’s body. When we met, she quickly came to understand that I had no shortage of options. We went on a first date, which went very well, but to keep it short, I’ll just say I unintentionally gave her some reason to doubt that my interest in her was particularly strong. Instead of responding by demonstrating a minimal level of interest, she bid a strong hand. The next day called me up and suggested we take our dogs for a walk that afternoon. Low risk, no big deal, etc. It went fine but was complicated by some minor car troubles that distracted me.

    As a result, I forgot my dog’s leash at her place, which was 45 minutes away from mine. The next evening, after returning from a workout, I saw the leash hanging from my doorknob. She had clearly driven up after her classes and brought the leash in the hopes of seeing me. I correctly got the message: “I am not like the various other women you know, I am very, very interested in you.” So, I called her up, thanked her, and told her I would be there in an hour. Less than a year later we were married. She went all in, and that made her stand out from the others I’d been seeing. I never even called another woman after seeing that leash.

    Regardless of how it turns out for you here, remember that men and women are different. We think differently. What works for you will not work for him, and vice-versa. If you think he is worth it, then take some risks with your heart and your pride. If you’re not willing to take the risk, then you probably aren’t as interested as you think you are. One of the reasons less attractive women often beat out their more attractive rivals for the most desirable men is that the less attractive woman bids a stronger hand, trumping her more attractive rival who is sitting around waiting for the best man to behave like a supplicating man with far fewer options.

    Or, as Damien put it more succinctly: ““if you’re looking at this man to be yours for life, then why are you playing dignity games?”

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

      If you think he is worth it, then take some risks with your heart and your pride. If you’re not willing to take the risk, then you probably aren’t as interested as you think you are. One of the reasons less attractive women often beat out their more attractive rivals for the most desirable men is that the less attractive woman bids a stronger hand, trumping her more attractive rival who is sitting around waiting for the best man to behave like a supplicating man with far fewer options

      STRONGLY COSIGN!!!

      Anne, you have nothing to lose. Liking someone and saying so does not cost you dignity points. Your earlier actions did, and required an apology. Now it’s simple. I like you, I want to see you. That’s it. If I hadn’t done that with my husband, I am certain we would not have gotten together.

      BTW, Vox, Sandra Bullock should be so lucky.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @SayWhaat

    Marellus, I don’t get you. Like, at all. Lol.

    It looks like you need a a cactus as well.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Russ in Texas.

    I was flat-out seduced by a falling knife. My wife forgave the issue, but we had a long sit-down going over what had happened that she got her claws in to begin with, and me figuring out where my weak spots were (turns out I’ve got one or two good buttons that can be easily pushed if I’m not watching for them).

    Don’t we all have buttons ? What counts in your favor is that you’re keenly aware of them. And that there’s someone in your life that will tolerate them, and aye, even deal with them. You’re a fortunate man.

  • Just1Z

    Oh Marellus I feel daft for never asking if you had a blog!
    I’m going to try and follow what you say there, but I must admit that you lose me from time to time.

    Regards dating, are you sure that you’re not aiming a little high? She’d be a dream allright. When you find her, if she has a sister in the UK, can you send her over to me? get her to bring me some lasagne, that’d be nice.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Just1Z

    I only started the bloody blog to post the Whitlaw Lectures . I thought it was important. It still is methinks. Other than that, I trawl other wordpress blogs, and if I see anything interesting I reblog it.

    As for my being a little bit weird :

    It all started when I was only eight years old … with one end of a string tied to a tooth of mine … and the other end tied to a door handle … and there was this beyeeewtiful woman that was telling me how it’s not gonna hurt … on our third attempt …

    And that day I learned something that has stood me in good stead for the rest of my life … and what is it, that I learned, you may ask ?

    Why Just1Z, that it’s never a good idea, to be alone in a room with a woman … she might just slam the door shut …

  • Damien Vulaume

    @VD
    That was not my quote but the “If you’re not willing to take the risk, then you probably aren’t as interested as you think you are” puts it pretty much and as well succinctly into the same nutshell.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Justiz
    By the way chef, your comment about talking naturally to a girl in a pub without having any idea in the back of your mind sounds like you’re on a great and promising way for better prospects in 2013. Girls are great to talk to, if you take it in a casual way, and nothing brings your “charm” more naturally than doing it just the way you described your encounter. Sometimes it’s simple as that. Girls that are worth the effort invariably like witty, lively and confident guys not posturing as the boorish/Roissy groomed animal. I discovered those american manospheres and womanospheres when reading the comments on this blog and what the little I saw of it in there tells me that it is false advices given to make a buck for inept suckers. Both sides of the sphere are toxic and inept, and only fuelled by gender hating assumptions and driven by the “anything for a buck” religion.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    VD’s story is poignant: a woman who goes “all in” is intoxicating to a man. It pierces straight through any emotional armor he has. It is the highest order of “winning through surrender.”

    A woman going “all in” can even seduce him from wife and family given certain circumstances, and if the man is not vigilantly on guard against it. The best prevention that the wife has against this is to always be “all in” for her husband. That is, unless he’s a real jerk.

    Anne, no matter how beautiful you are, if you rely on your looks alone, and constantly try to get the upper hand, you will lose. You will age (just as your mother and grandmother did before you), you will wilt, and another beautiful flower in bloom can take your place.

    You may not find utter sweetness, devotion and loyalty to be attractive, but men do. If you play the aloof, uninterested and cold shoulder game, you’ll keep getting the same results. If that’s what you want, keep at it. If you actually want love, though, you have to risk your heart and go “all in.”

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Marellus, if you’re headed to Asia, you will find lots and lots of women, just like the girl you found interesting on the site. No doubt about it. Your problem will be trying to decide between all the girls after you!

    My mother-in-law said that if my husband had gone to SE Asia to live, he would have definitely found a wife, made a home there and never came back. So she was glad that he found me, and she can have her son and grandson nearby.

    I’m a little wary of visiting China with my husband, actually. He’s going to have so many girls flocking after him.

  • pvw

    @VD, not only was she interested and letting you know it, but I would imagine her consideration went a long way–she was willing to drive 45 minutes to drop off something important to you.

    @Hope, this story makes me realize the serious problems not only with combat dating, but with sex before real emotional intimacy.

  • Just1Z

    @Marellus

    nothing wrong with weird. I like weird just fine. In fact I lay claim to a bit of weirdness from time to time too…but I can’t compete with you :(

    I blame my STEM roots, a twisted sense of humour can only take you so far. But I will persevere, after all I am a very trying man, many people say so.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @pvw
    “this story makes me realize the serious problems not only with combat dating, but with sex before real emotional intimacy.”
    You seem to have it emotionally and intellectually all together and, yet confused about the sexual intimacy going to soon. According to what you are looking for, then wait without having to feel guilty and pressured by jerks wanting to drag you into the bedroom before knowing you. The “combat dating” is already a war terminology. Nobody wants that.

  • Russ in Texas

    Blame where deserved: the dignity-games comment was mine.

    @Just1Z: Damien is right. The best part about enjoying women’s company is talking to them. I got accused of having once been a player, but that’s not actually true – I just like women, happen to have a couple easy “ins” for conversation (an honest interest in clothing and fashion helps), and as a single man was *honestly* interested in sex (b/c let’s not lie about that) but every bit as happy to sit and have a cup of tea, because it’s intimacy, not sex or beauty, that’s the coin of the realm — beauty is just the (very important) gift certificate.

  • Damien Vulaume

    -Hope: “Anne, no matter…”

    Again, sincere and wise words, but that sounds like preaching in the desert.

  • Just1Z

    @Damien
    personally speaking I have never had much problem getting on with women socially. This has only gotten easier with age, me online is very much the me IRL (even when I get cranky from time to time). My humour works better face to face, or usually…

    I was a shy kid, but that slipped away as I left Uni and realised that I was pretty competent at lots of stuff. Trying new things out, being okay (or better) at them, causing me to try other things…a virtuous circle of self-confidence. (boys should be encouraged to try this, it’s a great way to grow as a young man).

    This is how I ended up working in France, for French companies, without any skill in French (when I arrived it was 20+ years since I studied the language up to the age of 16 – ‘O’ level grade). I liked the idea of experiencing France, applied, got the contract, drove down there and just did it. I only met a couple of native English speakers in my time there, it was cool.

    My problem has always been that I fit the ‘just let her get to know you’ path as a natural (i.e. that is my nature). I know that this sounds great according to the values that I was brought up with. The problem is that it doesn’t work with women IRL! It is a path to LJBF.

    Succesfully getting a girlfriend has only happened when pushing for such a relationship from the get-go. Do not get pigeon holed as a nice guy, you never get out of the LJBF zone.

    I am also hampered by being (believe it or not) a natural nice guy. Also a path to LJBF. Since taking the red-pill I have come to very much restrict by nice guy tendancies to those who reciprocate. I am a very good friend to a couple of women who return favours. I work away a fair amount, people who help maintain my house while I’m away are very useful to me. I make sure that their favours are returned with interest.

    To go back to the last woman I was talking about, she is/was just great fun to talk to again, this was not our first meeting. we have a common interest, so meeting is a natural thing. Smart, funny, very pretty face, but young. I fully intend to keep the friendship growing, but there is no agenda. If there was, I am sure that I would be far more clumsy – c’est comment ca marche chez moi…VDM. I don’t artificially add game to my interactions with her, but I recognise them in restrospect – it’s very interesting to my amateur psychologist self. I believe that game (not PUA level, I’m not looking for a pick up, but just internal game – exhibiting confidence) does work.

  • Anne

    @Underdog
    I think you see this a bit too much in terms of what you WANT the scenario to be (for all women, I’m guessing). It was my choice to sleep with him and I don’t think I have lost anything there. If he wanted to get laid once, he would have ‘nexted’ me long ago. My mistake was not making up my mind and going for it soon enough. If I hadn’t been difficult and deleted him, we would have still been dating and both gotten what we wanted. I’m guessing men on here use game to achieve one goal – to make a woman upset. Never mind if you get to date the woman you like – who wants that anyway.
    I thought the clue here was to drop the combat mentality. I might allow myself to drop my guard, but I do not agree to the mentality that he has “all the hands” – perhaps if I add him again, but not now.
    Anyway you have a mentality where the woman is always at disavantage, so I won’t bother arguing this.

    @HanSolo,
    I charged my phone. In the message I wrote “my phone is dead”. Could be the fb delete is the only thing that’s really ‘in the way’ here. Considering it’s Christmas, I’m tempted to wait it out.

  • Just1Z

    @Russ

    @Just1Z: Damien is right. The best part about enjoying women’s company is talking to them. I got accused of having once been a player, but that’s not actually true – I just like women, happen to have a couple easy “ins” for conversation (an honest interest in clothing and fashion helps), and as a single man was *honestly* interested in sex (b/c let’s not lie about that) but every bit as happy to sit and have a cup of tea, because it’s intimacy, not sex or beauty, that’s the coin of the realm — beauty is just the (very important) gift certificate.

    yes, this is all cool with me.

    in fact one friend has privately given me the stink-eye for talking to ‘her’ as a woman. i.e. she is a woman, not the way I talk to her… He dislikes the fact that I noticed that she was a she. somehow this has offended his sensibilities (much to my amusement :) ). he seems to think that as the relationship is not about sex, that I should not even notice that she is a woman. :0

  • pvw

    @Hope:

    I’m a little wary of visiting China with my husband, actually. He’s going to have so many girls flocking after him.

    Me: Before I brought Mr. PVW back to the Caribbean to visit with the non-US based relatives he had not met, I realized from my years of going back to visit that the wariness factor was not exactly the same (bf/wm intermarriage); we got more of the looks of curiosity about us and how we related, ie., checking for the rings, our accents (for example, was I Canadian, British or American), were we merely tourists or did we have local ties…?

  • Escoffier

    Machiavelli never said “the end justifies the means.” You can infer that from a lot of what he wrote but he never actually did say it. The closest he came was “when the deed accuses, the effect excuses” which is a better sentence. (Discourses I 9)

  • Damien Vulaume

    @justiz
    Yes mon frère, I understand. And I guess that the way you were brought up in one given culture (England, or Wales?) was a radically different experience than mine, starting with the way boys and girls are “taught” to interact at school from a young age. Sometimes I believe Latin countries have it easier in that regard….. well, if only… All this doesn’t change anything about what you wrote about the pub comment. It’s all there. To be confident, focused on one “prey” without the intention of deceiving, and getting the habit of it. You’ll get a few “Norvegian wood” et alors? it is part of the game. And remember, that game is “their” game. You’ll never beat them at it. When it comes to mating, we’re amateurs and they’re professionals. Knowing this should never make you feel bitter about women, only aware of it.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Anne:
    “Anyway you have a mentality where the woman is always at disavantage”

    Dans ton cas, on va pleurer….
    There is one thing called simple human interaction, and it’s called talking. You’ve been together already in an intimate relationship, and you apparently live in the same neighborhood, and I assume have each other’s phone numbers. What more do you need to solve the “problem”? Those sissy pretexts about dead cell phones are not insurmontable, are they?
    C’est ce soir Noel, appelle-le et demain vous embrasserez sous la neige…if it snows in London.

  • Underdog

    @Anne

    That was what I meant — drop the combat dating script (thinking of interactions in terms of “hands” and stuff like that) because he’s already won if you want to go by that script.

    Your only option now is either to 1) cut him off completely and learn from your mistakes or 2) run vulnerability game on him and hope he reciprocates — which is probably hard for you since you’ve been hurt in the past? But one thing you must do is drop the combat dating mentality. It doesn’t serve you at this point.

  • underdog

    Yes, that means adding him back on facebook and not worrying about “giving him too much”.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Escoffier#998,

    Unfortunately, I think we’re seeing the emergence of a miserable and rare example.

  • SayWhaat

    It looks like you need a a cactus as well.

    I still don’t follow….

  • SayWhaat

    Anne,

    I haven’t weighed in on your situation so far because I think you’ve received a lot of good advice from plenty of the commenters here. I just want to share something with you that I recently observed from one of my girlfriends.

    I’ve mentioned this girl on HUS before — she’s the one with the galaxy of beta orbiters. Previously I had assumed that it was her good looks and excessive flirtatiousness that had boys wrapped around her finger, as well as her various feminine trappings (never mind that her bank account is always near-zero: she looks good, lol). She visited me recently and I realized that she had one other key component to her charm: generosity.

    She always compliments random people she doesn’t know. She buys gifts for people who are “just friends” (she lives and breathes plausible deniability). She gives and doesn’t expect anything in return.

    In the spirit of the season, I think that is something that we could all learn from her. Give for the sake of giving, and don’t expect it to be reciprocated. Be detached from the fruit of your actions, and be generous. And maybe, after all of that, we can be more happy, despite the curveballs life throws at us.

    Just my $0.02.

  • Russ in Texas
  • Cooper

    @Anne

    You still seem to think your Facebook friend status actually means something… It most certainly means absolutely nothing!

    I don’t know why your over analyzing such a minute point.

    I’d be willing to bet he never noticed.

  • Cooper

    ..when’s my Christmas avatar gonna load!!

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Russ in Texas #1006

    Hahahahaha !

    See this. I couldn’t help myself.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Anne,

    I’m guessing men on here use game to achieve one goal – to make a woman upset. Never mind if you get to date the woman you like – who wants that anyway.

    Are you sure you want to start this argument with the men-folk here?

    You slept with a man shortly after meeting him, got pissed he didn’t do exactly what he wanted, then you deleted him off of Facebook, now you are worried that he might be a player, isn’t giving you the time of day, and you’re asking the internet for help.

    Now you are suggesting that really all the men here are bitter woman-hating monsters. When many of us have wives, SOs, mother, and some even have daughters.

    You are acting like a child, not a young woman.

    This is why a few pages ago we were discussing whether or not you were mature enough to have a relationship at all.

  • Russ in Texas

    ADBG; +1

  • Cooper

    Awesome post Hope!!!

    -#986

  • Russ in Texas

    ADBG,

    At the end of the day, the more “Game” becomes more public knowledge, the more I see its misunderstanding and misapplication as an oncoming train wreck for women.

  • JuTR

    Marellus, that Whitlaw lectures was a great read. It reminded me of an author named David Gerrold who wrote a sci fi book called ‘The War Against the Chtorr’. This was a series where aliens came to the Earth and began to terraform it.

    In it a military man delivers a lecture to students about freedom and what it means, and that always stuck with me, and he came to similar conclusions as Sr. Whitlaw. Very important stuff to think about, and delivered in a manner that forced you to think about what he was saying.

    I may not always ‘get’ your comments, but I still appreciate reading them.

  • JuTR

    Haha, I just saw that was actually from the book. I went to the second page and saw the link that I missed on the first.

    It has been 25 years since I read it. That was refreshing to read again.

  • Cooper

    @VD #979

    +2

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Hope

    … a woman who goes “all in” is intoxicating to a man. It pierces straight through any emotional armor he has. It is the highest order of “winning through surrender.”

    This.

    When I was in school, I once sat in a biology class while the teacher read out our class-test marks. We had to write a class-test every Friday, so there were quite a lot of class test marks over the half-year. And then she started reading out my marks.

    I got lost and confused. I told the teacher about my problem, but she didn’t care. She really didn’t care.

    “Don’t worry, I wrote it all down as well” said a voice behind me.

    It was L. We only ever exchanged pleasantries in class. I still do not know why she did such a thing … such a beautiful thing.

    It was so unexpected.

    And I’ll remember that … and her … till the day I die.

    She was, and probably still is, one of the most remarkable women I’ve ever met.

    Marellus, if you’re headed to Asia, you will find lots and lots of women, just like the girl you found interesting on the site. No doubt about it.Your problem will be trying to decide between all the girls after you!

    What can I possibly say .

  • Underdog

    @ADBG

    You have no idea how hard I suppressed my urge to make references to a certain domesticated rodent in my reply to her.

  • HanSolo

    @Anne

    I think that calling him today or tomorrow and wishing him a Merry Christmas would be a good idea, even if you only end up leaving a voice message.

    I think at some point you need to apologize for deleting him from Facebook. I think that you could say that you though he wasn’t interested when he didn’t bring up the party but that you were wrong for not getting back to him sooner and saying when you could meet up.

    OTOH, you can wait it out a bit longer.

    Big picture is in line with what many have said here (whether it’s for this guy or not), including Hope, that a woman will get much further by emotionally escalating than by being aloof.

    Remember that men are not women. Outside of the player crowd that just wants to get laid, most men will respond much better to affection and emotional escalation. As long as you choose well and don’t pick a player that is just looking for sex or someone that just doesn’t like you.

    To 80% accuracy, men are like dogs (and I don’t mean that in the derogatory sense often used). Think of how dogs love receiving affection.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Russ 1013

    Yep, poorly run game=creepy douche and just makes the whole thing 10x worse.

    I remember my first time trying to run “game.” Poor girl. Negged once, negged twice, negged for 5 minutes straight…ooof.

    My best friend doesn’t have a whole lot of game. Talked to a mutual friend in a social circle one night, no kino escalation, no isolation, no cocky-funny.

    But he did get the girl’s phone number, so, hey, good enough.

  • Russ in Texas

    Or worse, ADBG, women trying to use those ideas on men, on the hopeless theory that man and woman are alike. “Girl Game” hasn’t changed for thousands of years, and doesn’t need to – it would be hilariously awful if they threw that away in favor of something guaranteed to fail.

  • Damien Vulaume

    “Are you sure you want to start this argument with the men-folk here?

    Yes…but just stop right here. Your question just nails it.
    I’m impressed to see that, for once, all the men-folk here come into a one and only agreement, without any name calling about girls. Do we all feel part of the same band wagon? I don’t know. Sometimes maybe, sometimes not.
    In any case, that Sissy young Parisian countess is not helping Susan’s cause by any mean, but it’s just one example. It’s more the tree than the forest here, obviously.

  • HanSolo

    @Marellus

    Yeah, it would be interesting to get the women’s experiences about online dating.

    The one thing is that there seems to be about 2x or more men than women so it really makes things hard off the bat. That said, I do a lot of online dating and so it is possible.

    I read your blog and it made me laugh. You are a very clever and funny guy.

    I think in your case that to begin with you should take the motto that less is more. Too much attention and women flee for the hills. Let them get a SMALL taste of you and then long for more instead of the fire-hydrant treatment.

    I’ll give you the same advice that I gave Anne but the other side of the coin.

    Women are not men.

    To 80% accuracy women are like cats. Cats are not like dogs. Cats do not want to mate with dogs. So, you need to show a little more catlike behavior at first to get that pussy(-cat) interested in you. Remember how cats come up and sit on the lap of the person who ignores it and only once it’s decided it wants you does it want to be petted and start receiving the more “doglike” affection. Also, think of how cats love to chase the spot of light from your flashlight as you zip it up and down the hall.

    And no, not all women are more catlike but to men who tend to go overboard with too much affection too soon (that act too much like affectionate dogs that run up to their master when she gets home and bury her with attention), keeping that exaggerated metaphor in mind will help them to treat them in a less smothering and more balanced way. (For the small % of men that are more naturally catlike and aloof then they should incorporate more affectionate dog into their personalities and behavior–or build on that side of their personalities and let it out more.)

    They don’t like to be overwhelmed with attention at first. They like to see or experience something in the man that draws them over but they want to be the one that decides she’s liking him and wondering whether he’s really into her or not.

    Let me know what you think.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @SayWhaat

    I still don’t follow….

    Why oh why, do I get the impression that we’re gonna discuss this over coffee one day … and milkshakes … and sweetcakes … and a lemon meringue … *sigh* … and I won’t mind paying for everything.

  • Just1Z

    @Damien
    yes, I did enjoy the natural feminity in la belle france…there was a difference imho. the french accent adds a certain frisson as well.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Just1Z

    Mate, the Good Lord made me just smart enough not to be stoopid … and just stoopid enough not to be smart.

    Please tell more stories of your interactions with women.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @JutR

    My thanks to you. The pity about that story, is that the last book in the series is still not finished. I wish the author would move his arse. From your profile pic, you look like you’re a tough guy, so won’t you please go and pay him a visit ?

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Justiz
    France since I left it doesn’t seem to make it any better than the rest, in many regards, especially if you look at Paris…
    But I suppose some French girls have managed to “keep it together”. Have you ever dated a French girl? If so, I’d be more than curious to hear your opinion on the gallic female gender. It could make a best seller in Britain, and outrage the French, err, rather the Parisians. :-)

  • Cooper

    Heh, it loaded!!

    HUS on the big screen! –>>

  • INTJ

    lol Cooper love the avatar.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @HanSolo

    They don’t like to be overwhelmed with attention at first. They like to see or experience something in the man that draws them over but they want to be the one that decides she’s liking him and wondering whether he’s really into her or not.

    This.

    I can’t possibly argue with this. I wish I could though, but I can’t.

  • HanSolo

    @Marellus

    As a more doglike man myself I wish I could too. But, alas, life has beaten it out of me somewhat and I have developed a more catlike nature. The dog in me is always longing to get out with the right woman though and cover her with affection.

    I have so much love waiting for the right woman.

    I feel like I have built a dam to hold it back but the rains keep falling and the reservoir is always brimming to the top.

    I want to find the woman who wants my love. That thirsts for it. Whose heart is a desert. Who will open the spillways and let me love her fully. Who will love me back. Completely, fully, with abandon.

    Until then, I fuck the occasional pussy and wait.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Marelus.
    “This.
    I can’t possibly argue with this. I wish I could though, but I can’t.”

    Why not? As much as the child that comes out of his/her mother’s womb starts crying because terrified by the light of day, there is a need to accept the fact that women “lead” the game, up to a certain point of course. If you don’t want to accept that, you’re bound to join the Roissy assembly line… Just saying.

  • Just1Z

    @Damien & Marellus
    imagine my delight when I discovered that French people find the English accent as sexy as the English find the French one…especially as I discovered that I had the strongest possible accent when speaking French.

    In fact I was talking to one young woman, she was entranced, wide eyed, bemused…couldn’t reply coherently in either language…after a couple of minutes then she ran off in embarrassment.

    Sadly, she was the four year old daughter of a friend, he explained that she didn’t realise that I was talking French…FML / VDM!

    I’m not saying that English / American women lack anything, but that French women have something different. imho, my amateur opinion that is, they don’t feel like they have to compete with men in being men. they are happy to be women. women are not less than men, just different and frankly, vive la difference*. As I said, I find the accent attractive as well. I was in Cassis / La Ciotat (tourist areas during the summer), not Marseille or Paris.
    http://www.cassis.fr/en/index.html

    regarding interactions, well…given my accent and willingness to give a conversation en francais a try, it was quite easy to start a conversation that rapidly had the other smiling broadly… the locals were not great at English, they appreciated a foreigner giving French a try, top it off with a comedy, (sexy for ze womenz) accent et voila – it was fun. I have always preferred feminine women, that is absolutely not the same as weak women. Unfortunately the do tend to be more complicating of my life though. C’est l’ amour, one prefers what one prefers.

    I am in no way a PUA, so don’t be reading much more than that into what I’m saying. Most of the women that I met at work were married, and I don’t go there (I don’t care that the marriage vows were theirs, that is not who I am).

    *Susan might well be making the same point with her lists, but I have no intention of putting words in her mouth.

  • Just1Z

    pour les hommes

    Nolwenn Leroy – Histoire Naturelle
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gi3JRkRiuWo

    Vanessa Paradis – Il Y A
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hm7z_NCCZWk

    Olivia Ruiz – La femme chocolat (the perils of chocolate for women)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLKOfwJodEA

    SUPERBUS – Apprends-moi (‘teach me’ – like Blondie)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcYAeL3hTBs

    Superbus – Addictions

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Nailed it, ADBG.

    Aside from the occasional PUA shot across the bow, most men here view game more holistically, than just negs to make women feel bad. 90% of game is dropping anti-game. 20% is frame control, understanding core principles, and inner game. 5% is knowledge of specific tactics, if that.

    Specific tactics might be defensible if such “knowledge goes mainstream”, but the true inner work cannot be detected and countered – witness Stephen’s solid frame.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @DV #1033

    … amantes sunt amentes …

  • Just1Z

    et pour les femmes

    Gerald De Palmas – Dans Une Larme (in a tear)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJGhrAcAEfM

    GERALD DE PALMAS – Au bord de l’eau (at the water’s edge)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8_xIiEuwHg

    Stromae – Alors on danse

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Justiz
    “they are happy to be women”
    And there is no reason why they shouldn’t be.
    But well, the grass is always greener in the yard next to yours, or is it spelled out differently?
    It’s also all about cultural perceptions. While I found quite a fair amount of English women absolutely repelent, the ones I liked where simply wonderful: The accent, the manners, the tolerance, I could go on about it.
    As for the politeness….the English coded game for hypocrisy maybe, or a long burden inherited from puritanism? I guess I can’t decypher it to this day. Another thing that is for sure is that in Anglo-saxon cultures (Britain, Australia-N.Z, North America ), there is always a more than obvious tendency at the “female bashing game”…

  • Just1Z

    last one

    Mylène Farmer – Paradis inanimé
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQ7L9XLjBic

    et bon soir, je parts

  • Just1Z

    @Damien
    “the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence”
    and you could well be right, it’s not like all the women were paragons of femininity, j’ai rencontré des merous aussi (or is that just a regional word?). The were female french chavs / chavettes. So maybe there is an element of ‘other side being greener’. tu as raison.

  • Just1Z

    “there is always a more than obvious tendency at the “female bashing game”…”

    I hope that I made plain that there wasn’t a lack of anything in anglo women…I tried to…

  • JuTR

    Marellus, I so wanted him to finish that series, and I checked the book stores for years, hoping to find the next one released. Until I read that passage, I had forgotten about it, and I wiki’ed it to see if he had ever come out with the next. Ahh, that series gave me an appreciation for lifeboat ethical questions and the nature of humanity. I hope all this time has allowed him to hone his prose.

    And I have found that looking like a tough guy is a helpful environmental factor when cool headed logic and reason are needed most.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @justiz
    Yes, well, rather, awful. Mylene Farmer?? :-)
    I’ve got to “locomotion” early tomorrow to my “chère moitié” at her grandma’s place in Moravia. We’ll keep on going here next year if I get to comment again…… too much time in front of the computer while the loved one is away.
    Anyway, I wish you well. Bonne chance dans la vie et l’année 2013 va t’apporter beaucoup de surprises dans le domaine de l’amour. Tu verras.
    Ciao mate, I’m off now.

  • Just1Z

    ‘Mylene Farmer’, yes, I saw the jokes about ‘her career falling of a cliff’, a picture of a falling rocks roadsign with ‘her’ superimposed…sue me!

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @JuTR

    And I have found that looking like a tough guy is a helpful environmental factor when cool headed logic and reason are needed most.

    Consider a career in politics one day.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Just1Z

    I like Nolwyn Leroy and Superboss.

    The only truly French song I ever went gaga over, was this one :

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @HanSolo

    I want to find the woman who wants my love. That thirsts for it. Whose heart is a desert. Who will open the spillways and let me love her fully. Who will love me back. Completely, fully, with abandon.

    Until then, I fuck the occasional pussy and wait.

    This is quite a bomb you dropped. Why ?

  • Lokland

    @OTC

    “Aside from the occasional PUA shot across the bow, most men here view game more holistically, than just negs to make women feel bad. 90% of game is dropping anti-game. 20% is frame control, understanding core principles, and inner game. 5% is knowledge of specific tactics, if that.”

    Ummm.
    I’m not a mathematician but I think % is measured out of 100.

    Also, I’d say dropping anti-game is 95% of game which involves frame control.
    The other 5% used for bars.

  • HanSolo

    @Marellus

    This is quite a bomb you dropped. Why ?

    Why? I felt a kindred spirit and a listening ear in you and so I shared what is really in my soul.

    Though I like flings at a certain level I’m tired of them and want love. It’s what I always wanted.

    Both I and certain women from my past were too picky or too imcompatible to make it work but I feel more ready now.

  • HanSolo

    @Lokland

    Perhaps he meant removing some of frame control (the 20%) falls within removing anti-game and so the numbers still add up. Or…whatever.

    I usually try to be creative and find how someone’s statement makes sense and get whatever I can from it.

  • Sassy6519

    I feel like I have built a dam to hold it back but the rains keep falling and the reservoir is always brimming to the top.

    I want to find the woman who wants my love. That thirsts for it. Whose heart is a desert. Who will open the spillways and let me love her fully. Who will love me back. Completely, fully, with abandon.

    What is this? I don’t even………………

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @HanSolo

    Though I like flings at a certain level I’m tired of them and want love. It’s what I always wanted.

    Both I and certain women from my past were too picky or too imcompatible to make it work but I feel more ready now.

    … then I hope that all your journeys and destinations are safe and prosperous. Other than that, you managed to charm Anne, and I see the other women on this site not being abashed to talk to you. So a similar thing must be happening in real life. From your previous profile pics you’re also handsome, but I suspect you can be shy. In your case, it’s then simply a matter of seeing the signals women make at you, and responding.

    You’re doing fine now … and you’re gonna do even better.

    Have faith.

    Please.

  • Lokland

    @Han

    Ahhhhhh

    I was trying to be a sarcastic PITA with a touch of humour.
    I need to consider the use of emoticons no matter how much doing so will tear my man card to shreds.

  • HanSolo

    Thanks, Marellus.

    I am more shy in large groups but quite engaging one-on-one or in small, intimate groups where there is more trust.

  • HanSolo

    @Lokland

    I have this mental image of you as a serious, thoughtful man and so I tend to read you more literally.

    As to showing emotion and emoticons, think of the ying-yang symbol (whatever it’s called) where the yang has a touch of ying in it.

    I won’t revoke your mancard. ;)

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Sassy

    What is this? I don’t even………………

    … understand ?

    It’s a guy thing.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Hey, men are not the only romantics around!

    http://www.rosehope.com/how-do-i-love-thee/

    Also, relevant to the issue of “hand”:

    http://www.rosehope.com/the-color-blue/

  • INTJ

    @ Sai

    It’s not like you said I was a terrorist/feminazi/destined to fail at everything, so it’s OK.

    Heh.

    (You could do a lot better, though. Dr. F. and I still have a LOT of progress to make, and I don’t live anywhere near Texas.)

    Well, I’m not that into the whole touchy-feeliness anyways. :D

  • J

    @Marellus

    Here is my favorite French pop song:

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

    The French lyrics are much better than the English version (which is sort of dumb):

  • J

    I want to find the woman who wants my love. That thirsts for it. Whose heart is a desert. Who will open the spillways and let me love her fully. Who will love me back. Completely, fully, with abandon.

    That is very touching, Han. It’s what the right woman is waiting to hear.

    Until then, I fuck the occasional pussy and wait.

    This, not so much.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Lok: “Ummm. I’m not a mathematician but I think % is measured out of 100.”

    Maybe for you, but I always give 115% in my love life.

    IOW: the intentional percent error was an inline example of frame control.

  • VD

    On another note:…VD: new novel is excellent! I’ve been really enjoying it. I’d like to see you turn your hand to a modern techno-thriller at some point!

    Glad to hear it. I hope you’ll pop a review up on Amazon when you finish. I’m toying with the idea of writing a mystery set in Italy, and writing it in both English and Italian at the same time. That might be a stretch, but it’s a lot easier than cranking out over 1,000 pages in a year.

    @VD, not only was she interested and letting you know it, but I would imagine her consideration went a long way–she was willing to drive 45 minutes to drop off something important to you.

    It was even more than that. She was willing to drive that far to drop off something I wouldn’t have missed. I had leashes to burn. It definitely made an impression.

    BTW, Vox, Sandra Bullock should be so lucky.

    It’s a low bar to clear, that. Rest assured that Spacebunny knows very well that I am not the easiest man with whom to live.

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

      @VD

      It’s a low bar to clear, that. Rest assured that Spacebunny knows very well that I am not the easiest man with whom to live.

      Ha! Solipsism? I meant that Spacebunny, is, IMHO, much better looking than Sandra Bullock. Much more feminine, especially.

      Though I do agree you are a better catch than Jesse James. :)

  • Anne

    Susan,
    I got an email from him tonight. It had a short video attached of him saying Merry Christmas but of course I have no way of knowing if it was just for me or made for several people (can’t be for his ENTIRE contact list, as it was not in English). Either way, I decided to add him again. It’s still an initiative, right?

  • Anne

    I think this message was for several people (due to the sign on my account). Now I don’t feel so cheery. More stupid.

  • Abbot

    This will come in very handy

    The Catalogue of Anti-Male Shaming Tactics’

    Shaming tactics are emotional devices meant to play on a man’s insecurities and shut down debate. They are meant to elicit sympathy for women and to demonize men who ask hard questions. Most, if not all, shaming tactics are basically ad homimem attacks.

    http://exposingfeminism.wordpress.com/shaming-tactics/

    .

  • Russ in Texas

    Anne,

    If you somehow think that re-adding him to Facebook is a gigantic and meaningful concession, then this whole thread is moot.

  • Anne

    @ Russ,
    No I don’t. But it was really the ‘elephant in the room’ as someone put it, so surely it’s worth something getting rid of it. It’s the most ‘obvious’ thing I can do.
    Right now I’m just pondering whether he really thought about sending me a Christmas greeting or if it was meaningless.

  • HanSolo

    @J

    Merry Christmas.

    That was a sincere expression of what I’m feeling (both the part you found moving and the part that you didn’t), of the duel drive to find a deep and meaning love but, if that’s not there, to once in a while have sex. I believe a majority of men are similar to me (neither pure players that never want a true love nor men that are never willing to have a fling) but I suppose what other men think is irrelevant. I was kind of dating someone and she asked my N. I told her. It was much higher than hers and what she expected but it wasn’t a deal breaker, though it was a slight turn off to her. I believe that most women are like this, though there are some who are firmly set on a very-low-N man and that’s fine. I wish them well.

    I’m more than ready though to find that deep love. That woman will hear the “moving” words and more importantly feel it in every one of my actions. I won’t parade my past flings in her face but I won’t hide the general details and the exact N if she wants to know. I was a voluntary virgin for many years. I am able to control myself when I choose to. In my post-virgin relationships I have been faithful, even when extra-relationship sex was available. I will be faithful in my future relationships as well.

    I’m certainly not the kind of man for a woman that wants a virgin or someone who’s never had a fling. I also don’t have the same degree of N revulsion that most men on here do (though I respect their right to feel turned off at whatever level they wish and let the chips fall where the may, and I do have a slut threshold that some women are beyond). On the other hand I would also be fine with a virgin. I’ll just take the whole person into consideration.

  • HanSolo

    @Hope

    Merry Christmas. I hope you’re enjoying time with your family. I am with mine. We’re having a brief break right now before we start singing Christmas Carols.

    I read your blog entry about love and the color blue and loved the quoted words below. Thanks for sharing. I’ll read the other one when I get a chance.

    Many relationships are about possession, control, or having the “upper hand.” If you let go of that dynamic, you can have a relationship that is incredibly loving, but without the damaging aspects of trying to control another person. You love in a way that is freely given, freely received, freely and mutually flowing, and transcending personal ego and desire to change the other person.

    When both people love in this manner, you create a love that is infused with the joy and wonder of the universe itself. It is an amazing, spiritual and transcendant love.

    It is love that comes with clear sight and bright vision, seeing the full spectrum of beautiful colors.

    I end with this wonderful quote from an older, wiser man named Mr. Munson:

    I do know this–love is a circuit. You feel it and send it out, perceive its reception by your lover, and accept and acknowledge your lover’s returning it to you, where again they signify its importance, not simply that they love each other but also the other loves them, and in this endless cycle love does indeed expand forever, is constantly replenished, is living, being such a natural part of the universe that its gravity bends the light as it approaches, continually rising into that light until it becomes it.

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

      @HanSolo

      I’ve not been online much in recent days, but just read everything you said about what you’re looking for, and literally broke down. I had goosebumps from head to toe. Obviously, there is a range of female responses, but if there’s such a thing as a real “tingle,” that’s it for me. You have so much to offer, I know you will find that woman.

      Re Munson:

      I do know this–love is a circuit. You feel it and send it out, perceive its reception by your lover, and accept and acknowledge your lover’s returning it to you, where again they signify its importance, not simply that they love each other but also the other loves them, and in this endless cycle love does indeed expand forever, is constantly replenished, is living, being such a natural part of the universe that its gravity bends the light as it approaches, continually rising into that light until it becomes it.

      I miss him so much. I am humbled by his wisdom. And selfishly, I realize that this one paragraph would have been a complete and eloquent rebuttal to all the stuff in this thread about dread.

  • HanSolo

    @Anne

    Merry Christmas.

    The following is meant as sincere advice.

    Obviously you know much more than we do and have to make the decisions and do the deeds in the end. We’re just spectators.

    I still get the feeling that you’re trying to avoid losing face or avoid the chance of him rejecting you.

    I also think that a simple and sincere apology for deleting him from Facebook would be a good idea. Some variation along the lines of, “Hey sorry for deleting you from Facebook. I overreacted and thought you weren’t interested in me. I would love to see you soon.”

    I think you’re too focused on what you think he should be doing and still haven’t quite made amends for what you have done. Until you have made amends then you don’t have any business demanding things from him.

    Of course, you may choose to take the low-key route and see if things blow over and work out.

    If I were the guy in a similar situation I would still be wondering why I was deleted and I would take it as a mild but not insignificant insult that I was removed. Without some acknowledgement of that I would still have a queasy feeling about being reinvited again: either the girl doesn’t like me that much, or she acts rashly, and finally, she isn’t capable of admitting when it was “her bad.” I could certainly get over it but I would take it as a sign of things to come and without some simple apology about it and recognition (and I’m not saying I would want a grovelling apology, just a quick admission) there would always be that very small thorn in my shoe that would gently poke me.

    Do what you will and good luck. I’m just telling you how I would feel if I were a guy in that situation.

  • HanSolo

    @Anne

    See, you’re worrying about whether he sent you a personalized Christmas greeting but did you send him one?

    Obviously both people have to reciprocate and let the love freely flow for a relationship to work and so if someone never does anything then it will fail. But you two are not in a relationship and I really think it would be good for you to do a full-hearted gesture for him.

    So far you seem like you want to do something but you’re also afraid of him rejecting you and that would really hurt.

    It seems like you want things to still work and you ARE making efforts, like writing him and adding him. However, instead of doing these really small things I think a more courageous and warm gesture on your part is warranted. Love is about giving and sometimes you just have to risk something.

    Sincerely. Best of luck. I guess I’m just feeling generous in giving my advice since it’s Christmas. :)

    Anyway, my dad has started playing the piano, the Christmas Carols are rolling and soon we’ll be singing. I’m off. Cheers!

  • Mako

    Hello Anne and Susan.

    Merry Christmas to you and this forum. I stumbled on it this evening, and while I simply lacked the resolve to read EVERY post, I read a lot of them.

    Anne, your story was very interesting and I can see why Susan gravitated to it. I wish you nothing but the best of luck in this situation. I would not beat yourself up to much on the situation. I think it is remarkable that someone so young has the courage and humility to seek advice from relative strangers, especially on a medium that is typically not tolerant at all.

    There has been a lot of exceptional advice here (and some not as much). This is the first I am reading of Susan’s posts and I am quite impressed. Coincidentally, my mother’s name is Susan, and she is a behavioral psychologist. Sorry, did not mean to get off on a tangent.

    I concur that if you really do care for this guy and see that you may have over-reacted, it would show additional courage and maturity to admit your mistake and see what the next steps are, together.

    I strongly encourage a face-to-face, or at least a phone call. I am guilty of texting and emailing as much as the next person, but the medium fails to adequately convey a lot of information that is important in this sort of situation.

    I have had similar things happen to me, where a woman gave me, at least what I perceived to be, mixed signals. As difficult as it can be, having clear and rational dialog can go a long way. I define emotion as the lack of rationality. =) We behave irationally when emotional. He seems like a smart guy and will likely understand the situation if you talked to him honestly and openly. Yes, you will make yourself vulnerable, but love is not a game as many have suggested (or implied). One of my guiding principles (which I also find difficult at times), is “in order to succeed, you must be willing to fail”. This means being vulnerable.

    Hopefully it will all work out in the end for you. Finding someone special, whether you are beautiful, average, rich, poor, is a very difficult thing. But to find that, you have to put yourself out there… you have to be vulnerable on occasion, and you have to explore.

    Much luck and again, Merry Christmas.

    P.S. Do not be to paranoid, especially around the holidays. ;)

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

      @Mako

      Welcome, thanks for the feedback, and more importantly, thanks for giving Anne such great advice. I am moved by people taking the time to offer advice to a stranger at this very busy time.

  • Infantry

    @ Lokland

    “90% of game is dropping anti-game. 20% is frame control”

    I’d increase the importance of frame control. Frame is related to strong personal boundaries which is related to self-esteem and independence.

    If you raise your personal boundaries high enough, you become a Sigma.

    Add in social acumen (which becomes easier when all that mental energy spent on defence and insecurity goes instead into presence) and a sigma becomes Alpha.

    If your force of personality is strong enough, anti-game becomes less of an issue because the rules no longer apply to you. Frankly a sigma/alpha can say “I like you, lets meet up tomorrow for ice-cream” and have it work for this reason.

    One of my favourite clips of a Sigma in action:

  • Anne

    @HanSolo & Mako
    Thanks for this advice, I see a lot of people are saying the same things. The reason I take ‘small steps’ is that I want to try and make up for my mistake without actually starting ‘chasing’ and artificially holding up a relationship he wouldn’t initiate otherwise. This is not related to ‘the upper hand’. It’s the fact that I still believe a man should do the chase.
    As I read on this blog
    http://www.therulesrevisited.com/2011/09/dont-initiate-contact.html

    I just had a realization about the Xmas message. Someone else made that video and probably posted it and sent to all his contacts. Otherwise it’s weird to make a dorky clip saying merry christmas and I know for a fact his brothers are the type to pull pranks like that. So there is a chance it was not him at all. And now I sent a request. Great.

  • Mako

    Anne,

    What request did you send? I can certainly respect your feelings to not artificially support a relationship. You also have far more facts and intuition about what is happening, than we ever will.

    Susan and others have certainly provided a strong foundation of perspective to give you tools to make good choices. I have no doubt that you will proceed in a way that is best for you.

    Regarding the paranoia and reading to much into various messages, texts, etc… I would counsel against reading to much into any of this until you have had the opportunity to speak in person. It is human nature to look at signs and try to read into them based on our fears or desires.

    Disclaimer:
    I have absolutely zero background in any behavioral science, but am merely fascinated by it. =) …which is why I find this forum so intriguing.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Anne, that rulesrevisited blog post doesn’t apply here. You’ve already had sex with this guy, so you’re not trying to filter out a cad. The not initiating rule doesn’t matter.

    If you play too hard to get, you’re going to make the guy go away. Most men nowadays will not jump through hoops for a girl who’s paying hard to get, unless they’re socially inept or a player looking for a conquest.

    Your own experience should bear this out, as a player made it through your hard to getness, correct?

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

      @Anne

      Anne, that rulesrevisited blog post doesn’t apply here. You’ve already had sex with this guy, so you’re not trying to filter out a cad. The not initiating rule doesn’t matter.

      If you play too hard to get, you’re going to make the guy go away.

      I have the highest respect for Andrew at RR. I think his advice is gold. However, this is a different situation. You are the one who must make amends, whatever that takes. Of course, you could refuse and hope for the best. You could try and still get rejected. In my view, though, your best shot at a relationship with this guy is open and honest communication.

      Stop trying to analyze all this random digital communication. Call the guy on the phone. If you only knew how many people contact me because they’re essentially derailed their love lives via bad texting and weak moves!

  • Society’s Disposable Son

    Anne @ 1075

    If you truly want a relationship that attitude of I think men need to chase needs to get lost. The only guys interested in a lot of chase are bedpost notchers. Good luck finding a player with a heart of gold

  • Fifth Season

    Anne,

    Regardless of how this turns out, this is a valuable learning opportunity for you. Consider this a free gift from an unexpected Santa.

    In the future, don’t think of love as a contest you win and which the other loses. It’s supposed to be a winning proposition for both sides. Love is something the two of you build together, not where one side conquers and plunders everything from the other. Being defensive for fear of getting hurt and losing power in turn hurt your relationship. No man who “knows when to fold ‘em” is going to look to build love with you if your heart is locked in a castle behind a moat, drawbridge, lowered portcullis, and barred gates. Or if you prefer a more modern alternative, a military bunker surrounded by minefields and covered with snipers and machine guns.

    If you see him and he doesn’t reject further association, take the opportunity to rebuild the foundation of your relationship and give yourself the opportunity to trust him more fully. Free yourself of any unwarranted preconceptions and let his words and deeds stand alone and speak for themselves.

    —-

    So, I suppose in your view Rose Dewitt Bukater and Jack “I got ten bucks in my pocket” Dawson from Jame Cameron’s “Titanic” should have had nothing to do with each other after that first encounter on the poop deck because he was a ne’er-do-well, not because he couldn’t buy her “Pate de Foie Gras” and “Vegetable Marrow Farci” (actual menu items for the First Class’s last meal on the real Titanic) and that he didn’t have a first-class ticket. Similarly, in the real Britain, Ladies and Dames don’t date chavs and hooligans, while Lordlings and Knights don’t date ladettes and . . . Essex girls?

    I’m not entirely certain I understand what you meant when you said that a man’s confidence is influenced by his social background. There’s positive confidence (the kind you have when you invest in a carefully vetted company) and negative confidence (the kind people killed by things like speeding in cars had, or the kind hooligan firms have when they tussle with other firms and the police). People can be born into wealth, but common genes are by no means an indicator that one is truly worthy to inherit an estate/businesses. Just look at how many well-educated businessmen run their businesses into the ground due to overconfidence and overly-large egos. I hope your peers will be able to spot the false confidence that the PUA community is teaching to many jilted and frustrated men too.

    Your mother lost sleep over your sister bringing home a bartender? Don’t most Britons drink so much to the point that the liquor business is hugely profitable over there? Or was he shown the door because he was the kind to take advantage of inebriated patrons? And is there a reason why you wouldn’t approach men instead? Is it because your peers would quickly deem you “unladylike” or give you another negative label? If that’s the case, then I can’t think of a reason why such a prejudice would exist in this day and age of “liberated” women.

    As for a victory by the bitter male population, you still have to admit that the common perception is that women of your caliber have a line of men out the door vying for their attention. I’m glad that Susan decided to do her part in debunking this common misperception. Still, the fact that you’re part of the “golden demographic” targeted by PUAs (and the wildest dreams of men), which is 18-24 years of age, with the looks of a Kate Moss/Lily Donaldson/Nikki Sanderson/etc. makes you ripe for objectification and ridicule. The funny thing is those people don’t realize you didn’t choose to be born that way, and most don’t realize the problems that kind of appearance comes with.

    One question that’s been nagging me is why you slept with him early on when you remained so defensive. If you weren’t willing to entirely trust him with your heart, why sleep with him? Did this feed into the feeling of betrayal you felt when you deleted him from your fb account?

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @J

    My thanks for the music. That Patricia Kaas has a serious voice on her. Do you know if she’s Dutch by the way ?

    Anyhow, here is a song that knocked me off my feet when I first heard it.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wO9Vs_ohtRU

    In the violent silence
    Of a dream within a dream
    You fill my soul with beauty
    You’re my shiny man machine
    I’m sinking in the roses
    Falling down to fade away
    The velvet blade of apathy
    Makes the crush so bittersweet

    (CHORUS)
    And I, I could have died last night
    But I heard the voice of a smaller god
    And I, I could have died last night
    But I heard the voice of a smaller god

    Your presence is the night
    Your absence is the morning
    I’m searching your dark hallways
    Trying to find the light
    Swimming your sad ocean
    I’m drowning in your sea
    This will all be over soon
    And we’ll learn to live again

    (CHORUS)
    And I, I could have died last night
    But I heard the voice of a smaller god
    And I, I could have died last night
    But I heard the voice of a smaller god

    In the evening stars I see your eyes
    I hear you speak to me
    I miss you now so much it aches
    So broken so afraid

    (CHORUS)
    And I, I could have died last night
    But I heard the voice of a smaller god
    And I, I could have died last night
    But I heard the voice of a smaller god

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Hope #1058

    You really know how to discombobulate me, don’t you ? Oh well.

  • Just1Z

    “My thanks for the music. That Patricia Kaas has a serious voice on her. Do you know if she’s Dutch by the way?”

    IDK, I can’t listen to her without thinking of a nice piece of Stilton / Cheddar or, at a pinch Edam / Gouda…

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Just1Z

    Hahahahaha !

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    HanSolo, thanks, and merry Christmas morning (5:50am here) to you!

    Marcellus, good word. Had a teacher who loved to use it!

  • Just1Z

    @Marellus
    a cheesy joke, but I’ve only just broken open the alcofrol…12:50 is respectable isn’t it?

    merry christmas

    I have a gorgeous smelling boeuf bourguignon on the slow cook bubble…mmmmm

  • Just1Z

    @Marellus

    if you want some new words, I have just bought ‘The Horologicon’ cheap off of amazon uk…

    is one dressing for dinner? or partaking of the festive repast as a flabergudgion? (tatter-wallop, ragabash or tatterdemalion)

    as an ultracrepidarian I am able to avail you of my wisdom on any subject this fine afternoon (deluge has paused and I currently have a blue sky!)

    today I intend to fudgel the whole day long…

  • Underdog

    @Anne

    Why should this Stephen guy chase you? That’s not a rhetorical question and I’m not trying to be mean. Take a moment to answer it for yourself.

    Should he chase you because you’re hot? Or should he chase you because you’re relationship material? If you want him to chase you because you’re relationship material, then what have you done to show him that you’re relationship material?

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    @Just1Z

    Look at this That is what’s lying on my bed. That also drank one of my Guinness’. That did not shower today. But was very good at the barbeque. That is my brother. I love him (no homo). It’s good I’m reading Terry Pratchett now. So if there’s a word that can describe all this, it would be sorely appreciated.

    @Hope

    One of these days, me and your husband are gonna have a little talk about all those strategic places in the house, where one can hide smelly socks, so that the Mrs can never hope (heh) to find it.

  • Anne

    @Underdog
    The simple answer to that is the reason every man chases every woman. I know that sounds a bit wrong to some men, but men do take the ‘dominant’/active stance towards females almost everywhere in nature. By “chase” I don’t mean putting a woman on a pedestal. I simply mean initiating contact most of the time. I don’t see it as a negative thing for men – they are more in control of their love life, they can choose to approach or not and they can choose to pursue further or not. Women don’t have to chase (or outright shouldn’t IMO) but are left to choose from the men who pursue them and will sometimes realize things aren’t working out the hard way – waiting by the phone.

    I know that in my scenario I’ve been way too “off”. I took Susan’s advice to heart – she told me to text him, and I did. Someone said deleting him was the problem, so I added him back. The reason I have only made these small advances is that I want to show interest while not ending up in a situation where I’m chasing him. Not because it hurts my pride (although of course that too, more as a woman than a man would) but because most men would take what comes easily to them, and I feel that I would risk him saying yes to seeing me again, and in reality his heart isn’t in it.

  • Underdog

    @Anne

    The motivation for every man when he chases a woman is sex. If I’m reading this correctly, Stephen’s already gotten his fair share of sex from you.

  • Anne

    @Underdog
    So what you’re saying is give up, there is no hope anywhere?
    He pursued me without trying for sex a long time and he pursued me as much after we’d done it. If I was under the impression he had what he wanted and got tired, I wouldn’t bother. But my impression was that there was a specific problem that made him stop – such as thinking I wasn’t interested enough.
    Most women expect men to be on the ‘active’ side even after sex. Even the blog post I linked to said “well into a relationship”. It’s fair enough that things have gone equal, but I don’t think any woman should put herself in a situation where she ‘chases’ a man. If she feels like she has to, I’m guessing he’s not interested enough.

  • Anne

    I can add that I thought there was enough ‘material’ here. I wouldn’t have slept with him if I didn’t think he had feelings for me. We had an awesome first date – he mentioned it later in the night and said the dinner was “fantastic”. He called me several evenings just to talk. He said I was the ‘sweetest girl he’d met’. I assume there are reasons a guy will continue to pursue a girl after sex, and I suppose I thought we had enough of those.

  • Underdog

    @Anne

    Giving up is one of your options, sure. The other option, as I said earlier, is to run vulnerability game on him. That means putting your pride on the line, taking the initiative to emotionally escalate and risking rejection. Don’t think of the process as you chasing him, think of it as you presenting yourself as commitment material instead of just a hot girl whose main draw is sex.

  • Russ in Texas

    Anne,

    Merry Christmas!
    Everything you’re writing says that this is a man who was sincerely looking at you for a keeper. (Great!) And it’s certainly that nothing’s lost (Underdog’s opinion is too jaundiced for this context). It’s Christmas, you’ve got time, and when you get the time, you should clearly throw dignity to the wind and pursue. And yes, I *did* read what you wrote above regarding men and pursuing, but the simple fact is that you don’t know men anywhere near as well as you think you do.

    “Not because it hurts my pride (although of course that too, more as a woman than a man would) but because most men would take what comes easily to them, and I feel that I would risk him saying yes to seeing me again, and in reality his heart isn’t in it.”

    My dear, grown-ups have this wonderful thing called “talking.” If you can get yourself to where he is and apologize in person for having been a ninny, you can find out how he feels right there. Risk? Of course you risk! You are wanting this man for life! Is that worth no risk to you? If there is any time in your life to lay down your dignity and fear aside, Anne, this is it!

  • Cooper

    ” By “chase” I don’t mean putting a woman on a pedestal. I simply mean initiating contact most of the time. I don’t see it as a negative thing for men – they are more in control of their love life, they can choose to approach or not and they can choose to pursue further or not. ”

    Did I miss the memo on guy chasing girls?

    I don’t think I’d pursue a girl, very actively, if I was the one who always has to initiate contact. I’d choose not to, cause I’d guess she wasn’t that interested.

  • Lisa C

    Hey Anne –

    I agree with what others have said about being more straightforward/vulnerable in the future, but you may have to give him some space while he is home over the holidays. It sounds like he has a thriving social life, and there may be many relatives and old friends making demands on his time. (I doubt he is sitting home alone avoiding you!) Since the two of you just went through a rough spell, you shouldn’t expect to be a high priority given the circumstances. I think you may find it easier to get things back on track once you return to London.

  • Cooper

    Anne, I don’t know how I can be more clear about having to initiate contact.
    When I’m getting to know a girl, I practically insist on effort and communication being 50/50 – and it usually doesn’t matter how much I like her, at all, whether or not I drop contact cause she has too. Anything I do over the 50, half way mark, would be devaluing myself – just as this guy has refused to do.

    I think playing with Principle of Least Interest (PLI) is very risky. I don’t like it at all myself, namely because if it starts being played I. Will. Win.
    If that’s the game your playing , he’s already won. Time for a new script.

  • Just1Z

    @Marellus
    looks like your brother is taking care to avoid being wamblecropt (more than ‘quesy’ after his meal). ‘cropt’ (being incapacitated) by ‘wamble’ (rolling or uneasiness of the stomach). He is takjing a nooningscaup.

    You may consider him to be lollygaging. Perhaps he is a lolpoop or one of those loobies.

    Right now I can see that the dimpsy murkens, the sky obnubilates and so my day sidles supperward. But first it is time for me to skink – Cheers Marellus.

    (Horologicon – 99p today on amazon.co.uk)

  • Russ in Texas

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    Just1Z

    You do realize that the way you’re going on, you’re just gonna have to write a book one day you gungnaspritzim Oboliacious word-smiter-eer !

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    Anne,

    Luv … looks like you could make use of a good hug.

  • Sai

    @HanSolo
    :(
    I didn’t know you felt like that. Now I REALLY hope you can find a good wife.

    @INTJ
    “Well, I’m not that into the whole touchy-feeliness anyways. :D”
    ———
    I wasn’t either, but there seem to be years of figurative crud and ‘Groucho Marx disease’ that need clearing out… I had an epiphany recently: I was watching “Babes in Toyland” and Mary is just plain adorable, she’s friendly, pretty, helpful, I want to give her a hug (she could use better math skillz though). But it’s like somebody here said, it’s not an act (it IS, since it’s a movie, but bear with me), it’s natural and honest. There is a hole in me where some emotions are supposed to be -I don’t know if my DNA causes that or if I broke it at some point, but I guess next year’s resolution will be to work on improving EQ. Dr. F. will help me on the 19th.

    Everyone: Merry Christmas!
    Anne: Good luck!

  • YB

    Apology + explanation = excuse

    I might come off as being too hardcore and nasty: I see no hope for this woman. The fact that she’s talking instead of doing tells me flat-out that she’s not really hat into him.

    Eight-odd years of mental entitlement and bad habits are not going to be extinguished for this guy, and I’d say that he’s smart enough to know it also. Cie la vrie.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @HanSolo

    Where you live, if there is a front garden with a some kind peculiarly shaped bush on the right side of the (wooden) front gate, do the following :

    Leave via the front gate and turn left.

    Keep straight and take the first left turn then.

    You’ll come up to a set of traffic lights; there you turn right.

    There should be shops in that street.

    Keep straight.

    On the left hand side of that street, look for something big and yellow. You can’t miss it.

    In the vicinity of the big yellow there is shop and a woman behind a counter with red in her hair.

    Ask her about toad stools.

  • Just1Z

    @Marellus
    today the predecessor to the weird word book, that I talked about yesterday, is on offer on Amazon.co.uk £0.99 / 99p

    you might very well love it. he has a very casual wit. in the excerpt he explains why ‘turkey’ is ‘turkey’ in English, but ‘dinde’ in French

    As a festive treat I’ll talk turkey;
    (from Etymologicon)

    Turkey
    Early explorers in the Americas saw flocks of turkeys singing in the magnolia forests, for the turkey is native to America. Indeed, it was domesticated and eaten by the Aztecs. Why it should therefore be named after a country in Asia Minor is a little odd, but explicable. Many animals are misnamed. Guinea pigs, for example, aren’t pigs and they aren’t from Guinea. They are found in Guyana in South America, and it takes only a little mispronunciation to move them across the Atlantic. The pig bit is just weird. The same is true of the helmeted guinea fowl, or Numidia meleagris, which was once native to Madagascar but not Guinea. The helmeted guinea fowl is an ugly bird. It has a big bony knob on the top of its head (hence the name), but it tastes delicious. People started importing helmeted guinea fowl from Madagascar to Europe, and the people who did the importing were usually Turkish traders. They were known as Turkey merchants, and the birds that they brought were therefore called turkeys. But those aren’t the turkeys that we eat at Christmas with bread sauce and relatives. That bird is Meleagris gallopavo, which is also delicious. It was the Spanish conquistadors who found Meleagris gallopavo in the magnolia forests and brought it back to Europe. It became popular in Spain and then in North Africa. And though it’s a different species from the helmeted guinea fowl, the two birds do look surprisingly alike. People got confused. The birds looked the same, tasted similar and both were exotic new dishes brought from Somewhere Foreign. So it was assumed that they were the same thing, and the American bird got called turkey as well, in the mistaken belief that it was a bird that was mistakenly believed to come from Turkey. In Turkey itself, of course, they didn’t make this mistake. They knew the bird wasn’t theirs. So the Turks made a completely different mistake and called it a hindi, because they thought the bird was probably Indian. The French thought the same and they still call turkey dindon or d’Inde, which also means from India. It’s a most confusing bird but delicious. In fact it was so delicious that, though it was introduced to England only in the 1520s or 30s, it had become the standard Christmas meal by the 1570s. None of which explains why people occasionally talk turkey. Indeed, they demand to talk turkey. This all goes back to an old joke, that isn’t, I’m afraid, very funny. The joke involves a turkey and a buzzard. Now, it may be possible to eat buzzard. I don’t know. But the bird’s absence from any menu that I’ve ever encountered makes me suspicious. I suspect the buzzard is a foul fowl, and that’s certainly the point of the story. Once upon a time, a white man and a Red Indian went out hunting together. They killed a tasty turkey and a buzzard. So the white man said to his companion: ‘You take the buzzard and I’ll take the turkey, or, if you prefer, I can take the turkey and you can take the buzzard.’ To which the Red Indian replied: ‘You don’t talk turkey at all.’ This joke was immensely popular in nineteenth-centuryAmerica. It was even quoted in Congress, though history doesn’t recall whether anybody laughed. But it was popular enough to spawn two phrases. By 1919 talking turkey had been altered somewhat: people had started inserting the adjective cold. Talking cold turkey is like talking turkey only more so. You were getting beyond the brass tacks and down to the barest of bare essentials. Talking cold turkey was the bluntest, directest form of speech. And a couple of years later, in 1921, people started to use the phrase cold turkey to describe the bluntest, most direct method of giving up drugs. So going cold turkey has nothing whatsoever to do with the miserable leftovers so sorrowfully consumed in the week after Christmas. Cold turkey isn’t a food at all, even though it sounds like one. It’s a blunt way of talking, and a blunt way of giving up drugs. However, when you give someone the cold shoulder, that is a   food.

    Forsyth, Mark (2011-11-03). The Etymologicon: A Circular Stroll through the Hidden Connections of the English Language (pp. 39-40). Icon Books. Kindle Edition.

    He also has a section on Thomas Crapper – who was NOT the inventor of the flushing toilet. He is the root of the American word ‘crap’, but not the English one…!

    I definitely recommend the book…

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Sue: “I’ve not been online much in recent days, but just read everything you said about what you’re looking for, and literally broke down. I had goosebumps from head to toe. Obviously, there is a range of female responses, but if there’s such a thing as a real “tingle,” that’s it for me. You have so much to offer, I know you will find that woman.”

    Such a curious response here – as lots of men feel this way. What gets the tingle response vs. the creep response? The cynic in me says its tingle-generating from a highish-N guy only because he’s needs to be “saved by love”, but it’s creepy for a guy who has no current prospects.

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

      What gets the tingle response vs. the creep response? The cynic in me says its tingle-generating from a highish-N guy only because he’s needs to be “saved by love”, but it’s creepy for a guy who has no current prospects.

      For me, it is really clear that Han Solo is all about finding a woman of quality before he bestows this gift. He is selective. He acknowledges that he is not perfect, nor does he expect his partner to be. He’s about finding the right match.

      As I expressed previously, IME “creepy” is usually reserved for men who 1) either presume too much intimacy as strangers, or who 2) get annoyed or angry when their interest is not reciprocated. Han Solo does neither.

      It was the sentiment and implied passion that was tingleworthy, not the man. (Though Han Solo seems like an attractive guy.)

  • Cooper

    OTC,

    I was kinda thinking the same.

  • Ted D

    HanSolo – “I want to find the woman who wants my love. That thirsts for it. Whose heart is a desert. Who will open the spillways and let me love her fully. Who will love me back. Completely, fully, with abandon.”

    THIS. I fully and utterly cosign this statement. It is EXACTLY how I feel about my wife, and partly whey “game” is so freaking frustrating to me. It requires me to constantly keep all that “in check” so that it doesn’t just pour out of me in a torrent, which women mostly seem too overwhelmed to deal with. I’m literally getting back into writing music JUST to find an outlet for some of it. I honestly don’t know if my wife could handle all the emotion I feel for her if I simply let it come out however it wants. I’ve come to the conclusion that THIS is where I needed the most work on frame control. Not that I don’t stand up for myself in general (although I really did NOT stand up for myself with my ex, because of bad programming…) and I’m certainly bullheaded enough to stand my ground. But Lord, there are days I feel so much love for my wife that I fear it would scour her soul bare if I let it flood out.

    See? Us INTJs are full of emotion, we simply DO NOT let it out often. ;-)

    “That was a sincere expression of what I’m feeling (both the part you found moving and the part that you didn’t), of the duel drive to find a deep and meaning love but, if that’s not there, to once in a while have sex. I believe a majority of men are similar to me (neither pure players that never want a true love nor men that are never willing to have a fling) but I suppose what other men think is irrelevant. “

    Well having spent most of my youth in LTRs, I can’t say I’ve ever found myself at “if that’s not there, to once in a while have sex.” I’ll fully admit that since I’ve not gone without for longer than about 9 months in one stretch, I can’t say with 100% assurance that I wouldn’t have made a few casual attempts. What I can say is, knowing how I feel about sex, I believe I would have found casual to be a very empty and depressing encounter, so I’m not upset I’ve completely avoided it.

    The nagging concept in the back of my head though is: what if I DIDN’T hate it so much?

    “ I was kind of dating someone and she asked my N. I told her. It was much higher than hers and what she expected but it wasn’t a deal breaker, though it was a slight turn off to her. “

    My wife told me straight up she was really surprised to learn my N was so low. When I explained how I essentially went from LTR to LTR with very little “single” time in between, she said it made perfect sense knowing how I feel about casual and relationship sex. (especially considering I postponed much of our shared sexuality until I felt she was in it for the long haul) She certainly didn’t see it as a DLV, but I suspect that if I’d spent less time in those LTRs, it might have sent up a warning flag for her. Sad but true, many women view low N for a guy to be about as bad as high N.

    Lokland – “I need to consider the use of emoticons no matter how much doing so will tear my man card to shreds.”

    Bullshit. I’ve been using emoticons for years now in texting, and so far no one has questioned my masculinity because of it. Written communication is SO prevalent now that you simply must find ways to impart some “emotion” on your written words. At least I do, because my writing tends to be dry and bland anyway. Comes from spending years writing technical documentation for NON-techie type people I imagine. :p

    Marellus – “… understand ?
    It’s a guy thing.”

    Yep, another hard lesson of the Red Pill. Women simply CAN NOT love a man the same way a man loves a woman. I believe that men and women certainly FEEL love, but I believe that the way men and women translate love into thoughts and actions is COMPLETELY different, and because of that a woman will never understand how her man loves her. Of course, the same is true in the other direction, and unfortunately for men, a woman’s love tends to often feel very utilitarian. That is, unless a woman knows how to show love in a way her man understands, he can often feel rather unloved by a woman that is nuts for him. This is where communication and “acts of love” go a long way for women I think.

    J – “That is very touching, Han. It’s what the right woman is waiting to hear.”

    Yeah but common Red Pill wisdom says you should NOT admit to this to a woman, at least not before a relationship is WELL established. Common wisdom says most women would run screaming from the reality of such a statement, despite saying that she finds it to be awfully romantic.

    Anne – “Right now I’m just pondering whether he really thought about sending me a Christmas greeting or if it was meaningless.”

    He took the time to add you to the send group either way right? It was certainly NOT meaningless. Look, I don’t know you really, but good Lord it seems to me that you are over thinking this. If you like him, SHOW him you like him and quite messing around. If you aren’t sure, then you aren’t really into him and perhaps you are simply chasing because he isn’t?

    I wish you the best of luck honestly. You’ve been given a ton of advice here, so you have plenty of POVs to work from. But seriously, don’t spend every waking moment examining what is going on with him. As my grandpa used to say “shit or get off the pot!” You want him? Go get him!

    Hope – From HS posted from your blog: “When both people love in this manner, you create a love that is infused with the joy and wonder of the universe itself. It is an amazing, spiritual and transcendant love.”

    I agree. But, I think that in many cases such a relationship MUST contain some “compartmentalization” to survive. By that I mean, I feel this type of relationship with my wife, and we tend to share a rather egalitarian view of our love, but when it comes down to the nitty gritty of life, we have an established “pecking order” of sorts, that emulates the Captain & First Officer setup from Athol. That is, we love each other without limits, bottlenecks, or any holding back. (for the most part. Like I said above, if I let it all just flow out, I truly believe it would overwhelm my wife…) But, when things need to get done, we kinda set all that aside and simply work on the task at hand. If that means my wife simply follows my “orders” then she does. If it requires a bit of democracy, we vote. If it is something one of us is particularly good at, we take the lead on it. To the outside world, I imagine it looks very much like an egalitarian marriage, but the truth is, behind the scenes it is NOT completely equal. We simply manage to do most of that “jockeying for position” within the relationship without a whole lot of verbal communication. I suspect that in a few more years, we should be able to function at this level with little to no actual communication to set the rules for the encounter. We are still learning to trust each other’s abilities to an extent, and being that I spent most of my life in a rather submissive role with my ex, it is understandable that I need more practice, and she needs to feel like I’ve got a handle on it. But, it makes me chuckle anytime the “who is the boss” line of talk comes up regarding our marriage. My wife says that neither of us is the boss, and that we work things out quickly. That is 100% true, but I also reserve the right to pull rank at any moment on any issue and take the reins, which makes me the “boss” by default. Thing is, we have NEVER found ourselves in a place that required me to do so, but we BOTH know that it WOULD happen if we failed to manage it correctly until things started getting bad. And, if/when I verbalize this during those conversations, my wife acknowledges that it is true but that we try VERY hard to never end up in that spot.

    Susan – “I miss him so much. I am humbled by his wisdom. And selfishly, I realize that this one paragraph would have been a complete and eloquent rebuttal to all the stuff in this thread about dread.”

    I echo all the statements above. I hope you realize that I am not advocating the use of “dread” in any solid relationship. It will cause an implosion, and if it doesn’t then there are bigger issues at work. I’m simply not willing to toss the concept aside because I currently have no use for it.

    As someone who thought he would be spending his life with one woman and found himself single again, I will never again allow myself to be completely unprepared for anything that comes down the road later in life. I promise you that I am doing everything in my power to NOT be in a position that “dread” is the best solution, but I can also promise you that IF I found myself in that position with my wife, I’d damn sure try it out before throwing in the towel.

    For guys that for whatever reason want to spend their lives with a woman that needs high “game” though, “dread” may be something he needs to use on a regular basis. I would never sign up for such a relationship, but who is to say that two people can’t actually enjoy the constant jousting match?

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

      @Ted

      Yeah but common Red Pill wisdom says you should NOT admit to this to a woman, at least not before a relationship is WELL established. Common wisdom says most women would run screaming from the reality of such a statement, despite saying that she finds it to be awfully romantic.

      To be clear, it is one thing for me to find Han Solo’s romantic and passionate statement tingle-inducing online as it applies to someone else. If someone said this to me on a first or even 5th date I would indeed run for the hills.

      Ideally, emotional investment should always be calibrated in step with the other person. Failing that, expression of that commitment should be calibrated.

      I would never sign up for such a relationship, but who is to say that two people can’t actually enjoy the constant jousting match?

      I’m leaving Dread behind in this thread, and not debating it in 2013. However, I will say that many people enjoy the jousting match, which has nothing to do with dread. If she’s ready to give as good as she gets, you can’t make her feel dread. I suppose at its worst, this marriage would look like Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner in The War of the Roses.

      As someone who relied heavily on banter when I was single, I can affirm that it generates a lot of sexual tension. In my experience, it’s better for flirtation or STRs than LTRs, but I’ve known couples who are happy keeping each other on their toes.

  • INTJ

    @ Cooper, OTC

    Same sentiment here.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Ted D

    Yep, another hard lesson of the Red Pill. Women simply CAN NOT love a man the same way a man loves a woman. I believe that men and women certainly FEEL love, but I believe that the way men and women translate love into thoughts and actions is COMPLETELY different, and because of that a woman will never understand how her man loves her. Of course, the same is true in the other direction, and unfortunately for men, a woman’s love tends to often feel very utilitarian. That is, unless a woman knows how to show love in a way her man understands, he can often feel rather unloved by a woman that is nuts for him. This is where communication and “acts of love” go a long way for women I think.

    When I originally commented in response to HanSolo’s post, my reaction was not mean spirited. I simply can’t relate to what he said.

    For reasons unclear to me, I experience very averse reactions to male emotions like those, at least verbally stated emotions. I experience a visceral sensation of nausea, and it creeps me out. My actor ex-bf used to say things like that to me, and it made my skin crawl. I’m not very comfortable with very raw emotional outpourings. Emotionally, I’m a woman of few words, and I prefer to show affection through actions instead.

    Honestly, my internal system shuts down whenever I read or hear something like what HanSolo said. I don’t know how to handle emotions like that, so I’m wary of them.

  • OTC

    oops, creepy wasnt the right word here, and that word created an undesired tangent. I meant that the same sentiments expressed by a Ted or Cooper would probably not generate a tingle post, but rather be ignored, or disagreed with. My question was why this is so?

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

      @OTC, Cooper, INTJ

      WHY HAN SOLO IS SEXY AND YOU’RE NOT ;)

      I meant that the same sentiments expressed by a Ted or Cooper would probably not generate a tingle post, but rather be ignored, or disagreed with. My question was why this is so?

      I don’t agree that is true, but I do allow that Han Solo expresses himself very well in writing, and I found his sentiment not only romantic but poetic. Part of what moved me was his way of expressing himself, in addition to the sentiment.

      Let me highlight what worked especially well:

      “And no, not all women are more catlike but to men who tend to go overboard with too much affection too soon (that act too much like affectionate dogs that run up to their master when she gets home and bury her with attention), keeping that exaggerated metaphor in mind will help them to treat them in a less smothering and more balanced way.

      I have developed a more catlike nature. The dog in me is always longing to get out with the right woman though and cover her with affection.”

      HS understands female attraction cues. Instead of complaining that women don’t like “nice guys” he chooses a value-neutral metaphor that is apt, and signals his willingness to adjust his behavior without judgment.

      I have so much love waiting for the right woman.

      Not just any woman, the right woman. HS is selective. He knows what he is looking for, and despite his frustration at not having found her, he will save his love rather than give it to someone who disrespects him as an orbiter, or exhibits a STR orientation, or takes him for granted.

      I feel like I have built a dam to hold it back but the rains keep falling and the reservoir is always brimming to the top.
      I want to find the woman who wants my love. That thirsts for it. Whose heart is a desert. Who will open the spillways and let me love her fully. Who will love me back. Completely, fully, with abandon.

      Poetry. Mastery of language. Romantic.

      I felt a kindred spirit and a listening ear in you and so I shared what is really in my soul.

      HS has the self-confidence and maturity to speak his mind without shame. That is a very attractive quality in a man. If I heard a man say this in a group, I would immediately feel tempted to qualify myself as a potential mate. Note: This is not the same as confessing a deep and abiding love for a woman one does not know well. His speaking theoretically does not amount to supplication, as their is no actual object.

      Though I like flings at a certain level I’m tired of them and want love. It’s what I always wanted.

      Again, speaking only for myself, HS’s willingness to have flings when offered is at the very least neutral, and possibly attractive. I have already expressed that a man who was “extremely critical” of casual sex is not someone who would appeal to me.

      I am able to control myself when I choose to. In my post-virgin relationships I have been faithful, even when extra-relationship sex was available. I will be faithful in my future relationships as well.

      A clear pledge to be monogamous with a woman he loves. Huge.

      Re HS’s number, you referred to him as “high N.” I don’t know what his N is, but recall that I don’t balk at N at the level you do. The sweetest boys I know who would prefer a gf to any ONS are all in the range of 10 in their mid-20s.

      I also don’t have the same degree of N revulsion that most men on here do.

      +1

  • J

    @Marellus

    Thanks for the link. That song is very dark; I love the guitar work.

    As to Patricia Kass, it depends on what you mean by French. Her mother is West German, and her dad is from Alsace Lorraine. The song was written by a popular French songwriter named Jean-Jacques Goldman. France is pretty multi-cultural these days.

  • J

    @SW

    God, I miss Munson. He was terrific!

    @Ted

    J – “That is very touching, Han. It’s what the right woman is waiting to hear.”

    Ted–Yeah but common Red Pill wisdom says you should NOT admit to this to a woman, at least not before a relationship is WELL established. Common wisdom says most women would run screaming from the reality of such a statement, despite saying that she finds it to be awfully romantic.

    J–Depends on the tone, the woman and the context. There are probably a few women who should never hear it, but as long as it’s not said as a declaration of love to some woman Han just met 20 minutes ago, it’s great. It’s a wonderful answer to a question about long-range goals, as in “So, Han, what do you want out of your life?” in one of those late night, soul-searching conversions that new couples have. It should be prefeaced with, “I hope one day to find…”

    @Han

    I hope I didn’t sound snarky. I believe that you sincerely meant both statements and think that’s fine. I was trying to convey that the first statement was romantic and would tug at a woman’s heart strings. The second will sound to the average woman like, “But until I find that love, I’m willing to kill time screwing you.” You don’t want to say that on a date.

  • J

    @SW #1114

    That’s a great explanation.

    @Ted

    My wife told me straight up she was really surprised to learn my N was so low. When I explained how I essentially went from LTR to LTR with very little “single” time in between, she said it made perfect sense knowing how I feel about casual and relationship sex.

    DH had a similar pattern. Starting with his high school gf, he had LTRs that lasted 4-5 years each before meeting me. He was faithful to all those women and did little messing around between women. This indicated to me that he would loyal if we married, so big DHV as far as I was concerned.

    Sad but true, many women view low N for a guy to be about as bad as high N.

    Depends. Is the guy desirable but loyal or does he have weird circular scars from where women who worked hard to overcome their repulsion touched him with ten foot poles?

    Are guys are any different? Thee are probably plenty of low number size 20 gals, but many men wouldn’t have them. They want that low number 9 or 10.

  • J

    As someone who relied heavily on banter when I was single, I can affirm that it generates a lot of sexual tension. In my experience, it’s better for flirtation or STRs than LTRs, but I’ve known couples who are happy keeping each other on their toes.

    DH and I still do that. There are lines we don’t cross, but we regard a little banter as foreplay.

  • SayWhaat

    To be clear, it is one thing for me to find Han Solo’s romantic and passionate statement tingle-inducing online as it applies to someone else. If someone said this to me on a first or even 5th date I would indeed run for the hills.

    Ideally, emotional investment should always be calibrated in step with the other person. Failing that, expression of that commitment should be calibrated.

    +1. One time my boyfriend gazed at me admiringly and said, “how did I get you?” Early on in our relationship, this sentiment would have made me cringe. Instead, I giggled and blushed.

    That sort of thing means more after time invested — not so much from someone you barely know.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Just1Z

    You, my dear sir, art more of a Talleyrand than a technician. I think you’ve won quite a few battles by never mobilising your armies.

  • Sassy6519

    @ SayWhaat

    +1. One time my boyfriend gazed at me admiringly and said, “how did I get you?” Early on in our relationship, this sentiment would have made me cringe. Instead, I giggled and blushed.

    That sort of thing means more after time invested — not so much from someone you barely know.

    Exactly.

    I have definitely cringed at some of the things men have told me during the initial stages of dating. It was way too much and too soon. I don’t think some men realize just how off putting such declarations can be to some women.

  • J

    Honestly, my internal system shuts down whenever I read or hear something like what HanSolo said. I don’t know how to handle emotions like that, so I’m wary of them.

    I think this speaks more to your system of emotional defenses than it does to the actual content of what is being said. You really should explore this Sassy; if you have a better understanding of why this sets you off, you’d have an easier time with trust and relationships. I think you (wisely) distrust words over actions, but words don’t necessarily belie actions. You still need to compare words and actions to see if they’re conguent (Everyone does.), but you might want to hold on to the distrust until you actually see the incongruence.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Ted D

    … so to conquer a woman, one must march to an alien drumbeat … battle with an emotion … and surrender … to an idea …

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    J,

    listen to Beethoven’s 7’th symphony movement 2 … and think of this : There are no sad songs in Heaven …

  • SayWhaat

    I don’t think some men realize just how off putting such declarations can be to some women before really getting to know her.

    FTFY.

  • Sassy6519

    @ SayWhaat

    That’s exactly what I meant.

    For the record, I have recently started dating someone. This discussion actually couldn’t come at a better time.

    I was honest with him on our last date and told him that I’m not the overly emotional/sappy/sentimental type. I also explained to him that I didn’t like such declarations. He didn’t say anything like that before I mentioned it to him, but I figured I would cut him off at the pass. Since I knew that such declarations bother me, I figured I would let him know about that pet peeve so that he didn’t accidentally step on that “dating/relationship landmine”.

    I opened up to him about it after he mentioned that he wasn’t overly romantic. I stated that I was okay with him not being overly romantic and explained why. We appear to be a good match, in that regard.

  • J

    @Marellus

    I will.

    @Sassy

    It looks like this guy may be compatible. Good luck!

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Sassy

    So the choice is between a quiet romantic, or a quiescent acerbic.

  • Sassy6519

    @ J

    It looks like this guy may be compatible. Good luck!

    Honestly, I need all the luck I can get. I can objectively admit that my relationships typically don’t last very long. I won’t talk about him much, considering my past track record with such things.

    I’d rather just see how things go. I’m not trying to get my hopes up, at this point.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Marellus

    Yeah, pretty much.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    … and for my more intrepid readers, I have heard from a doctor who works in the psychiatric ward of the Tembisa Hospital, that the moon is in fact an Alien Spaceship that’s buggering up everything on Earth … heh … cheerio.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    It’s fine to feel that way, and even admit to random people on the internet.

    But, in person, saying it to a woman you like… I really believe too much overt gushing is a real attraction-killer. Yes, too early in a realtionsip is a killer, but it does not follow that more time allows men to gush freely. Hasn’t reading MMSL has taught you anything?

    It’s not about time, so much as it’s about not showing more beta traits than you are alpha.

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

      it does not follow that more time allows men to gush freely. Hasn’t reading MMSL has taught you anything?

      Gushing about true love from a strong frame does not land one at MMSL. Instead, it’s a page right out of a romance novel.

      Frame. It’s all about that.

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

    Hi HUS friends,
    I have no idea what’s been happening over the last few weeks around these parts but just wanted to let you all know I had another bipolar episode and for that reason have not been around. Hope everyone is having merry festivities! There’s been some crazy snow around here, which made for a lovely white Christmas. :-)

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

      @Olive

      Thanks for checking in. I for one have been wondering and hoping for the best. I’m really sorry to hear you had an episode – I hope that your meds get squared away quickly (assuming some adjustments will be made). We’ll be thinking of you and I hope you will return to chit chat asap! I need you Olive, you keep me honest.

      xoxo

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Susan, cosign on the romantic/poetic language. If I recall correctly, HanSolo is an NF, so it probably appeals to the NF in you. :)

    My husband gushed at the beginning, but very eloquently. He doesn’t do that so much anymore, and so I’ll go back and read his old emails and chats to me from those days just to get a dose.

    I actually got a bit upset when a couple of months into living together, he stopped being quite as demonstrative with his affections. We had a talk about it, and I dialed back my expectations.

    These days he doesn’t write me long letters expressing his feelings. But he’s very free with physical affection and tells me he loves me often.

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

      @Hope

      My husband gushed at the beginning, but very eloquently. He doesn’t do that so much anymore, and so I’ll go back and read his old emails and chats to me from those days just to get a dose.

      I recently read your blog post containing excerpts of his letters, and I was struck by the eloquence. I can understand why you like rereading them, but also why he no longer writes that way. We cannot possibly remain in that frame of mind and still get our work done!

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

    Hope,

    My husband gushed at the beginning, but very eloquently. He doesn’t do that so much anymore, and so I’ll go back and read his old emails and chats to me from those days just to get a dose.

    Totally rings true for me, which makes me think my BF is NF as well. I’m at my parents’ right now and found an old card he wrote me for our one-year anniversary and totally got all mushy about him and sent it to him in a facebook message with a note saying how much it still means to me.

    I actually got a bit upset when a couple of months into living together, he stopped being quite as demonstrative with his affections. We had a talk about it, and I dialed back my expectations.

    These days he doesn’t write me long letters expressing his feelings. But he’s very free with physical affection and tells me he loves me often.

    I also can totally relate to this. I’m such a “wordsy” person and that part of my relationship is fairly over at this point. But we’re both very affectionate physically just the same. Being away from him right now is quite draining on the relationship, I fear. Not in a “we’re going to break up” way, but in a “we need to see more of each other soon” way.

    Susan,
    Thanks for the kind words!

  • Ted D

    “Gushing about true love from a strong frame does not land one at MMSL. Instead, it’s a page right out of a romance novel.

    Frame. It’s all about that.”

    That may be true, but the more a man “gushes” the stronger his frame will have to be. I would need a Superman sized frame to counteract the amount of “gush” I am fully capable of I suspect.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Ted:

    Then be her Superman.

    :)

  • Anne

    @Susan,
    No worries, I heard from him today :) He said he tried to call the other night (when my phone was dead). He wanted to see me tonight, but I had a family get together. His message was sweet so he doesn’t appear cold at all!

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

      @Anne

      You silly girl! Here you are giving yourself an ulcer and all appears to be well!

      I’m glad things feel positive – but it does not change the value of all the good advice you’ve gotten here. Russ and Han Solo in particular have been very supportive and helpful, I think. You would do well to consider their feedback. I understand that you will let him initiate moving forward, and it sounds like that’s on track. Your job is to make him feel secure that you really, really like him. Do the nice, feminine gestures starting now. It’s your job to escalate emotionally. That’s the takeaway message from this post.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Olive, I hope you’ve been having a good holiday season aside from your flare-up, and sorry to hear that you couldn’t be with your boyfriend for the holidays.

    It’s funny how guys claim that gushy words don’t work on teh wimmenfolk, but it really depends on the thoughtfulness and romance that go into the words! I’m also glad to not be the only one to re-read old love letters. :)

    Susan, it’s true, we can’t get much work done with too much limerant obsession. Sometimes he is still very eloquent verbally when we talk at length, which is difficult to reminisce unless I actually record our conversations, and that’s a bit weird. :P

  • J

    I can understand why you like rereading them, but also why he no longer writes that way. We cannot possibly remain in that frame of mind and still get our work done!

    It’s the inevitable death of dopamine love; our brains just can’t pump it out on a steady basis year after year. We couldn’t survive if they did. The good news is that, if you have a solid basis, oxytocin love, which is far more trustworthy IMHO, replaces it.

  • J

    @Olive

    Sorry to hear about your flare-up; these things often seem tied to the holidays. Glad to hear that you are feeling better.

  • Kathy

    Hans : “I have so much love waiting for the right woman.”

    Susan: “Not just any woman, the right woman. HS is selective. He knows what he is looking for, and despite his frustration at not having found her, he will save his love rather than give it to someone who disrespects him as an orbiter, or exhibits a STR orientation, or takes him for granted.”

    Hans: I feel like I have built a dam to hold it back but the rains keep falling and the reservoir is always brimming to the top.
    I want to find the woman who wants my love. That thirsts for it. Whose heart is a desert. Who will open the spillways and let me love her fully. Who will love me back. Completely, fully, with abandon.”

    Susan: “Poetry. Mastery of language. Romantic.”

    Hans: “I felt a kindred spirit and a listening ear in you and so I shared what is really in my soul.”

    Susan: “HS has the self-confidence and maturity to speak his mind without shame. That is a very attractive quality in a man. If I heard a man say this in a group, I would immediately feel tempted to qualify myself as a potential mate. Note: This is not the same as confessing a deep and abiding love for a woman one does not know well. His speaking theoretically does not amount to supplication, as their is no actual object. ”

    I totally agree with your take, here, Susan.

    HS is a very romantic kind of guy . Extremely articulate.

    He’d have me swooning if I was a young single woman. :)

    I see no supplicating in his writings. Just confidence strength and complete honesty..

    No playing games. No subterfuge.

    I was reminded of the Romantic Poets.
    HS ‘s writing certainly is romatic poetic Susan. :D

  • Russ in Texas

    ::applause::

    Good job, Anne.

  • HanSolo

    @Sai Thanks

    @Marellus, I’ll let you know when I find the woman behind the counter

    @Susan, thanks for thinking I have a lot to offer

    @OTC, I felt the same way about wanting to love and be loved when I had N=0. I don’t think that anyone would find INTJ or Cooper creepy on here if they expressed the emotion of really wanting to love and be loved. I think the regulars on here know they want that and are cheering for them.

  • HanSolo

    @Ted

    I love that you’re a hopeless romantic at heart.

    I think most of the time you should keep the spillways shut but once in a while you can let out a surge of love and take her by surprise. But it can’t be so often that it loses it’s specialness.

    @J

    No problem. I probably wrote too much in response to you anyway. By ending with the line about fucking and waiting it was meant as a contrast to the kind of love I really want and drive home the point of the feeling of futility and shallowness of the flings in comparison to sex with love. Yes, the flings are sometimes exciting and pleasurable but in comparison to a deeper love they are relatively empty.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan 1136, and Kathy 1150

    Thanks for the compliments.

    It’s been some painful experiences that taught me to gush less and be more catlike around women.

    I do find it fascinating how many women love to have the man she finds attractive and starts to fall in love with EVENTUALLY fall for her. But she needs that struggle and uncertainty about his level of interest for her love to grow. The two steps forward, one step back to give her time to miss and process his interest and let her heart grow its desire and feelings.

    It’s like a woman’s love is a seed growing into a flower and the man’s love is the water.

    No water and it will never grow.

    Too much and it the seed or tiny plant will be swept away.

    The right amount allows the seed to stay put in the soil and roots to take hold. As the plant grows larger, more water is needed.

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

      @Han Solo

      It’s like a woman’s love is a seed growing into a flower and the man’s love is the water.

      No water and it will never grow.

      Too much and it the seed or tiny plant will be swept away.

      The right amount allows the seed to stay put in the soil and roots to take hold. As the plant grows larger, more water is needed.

      Damn, you’re good! Between you and Damien, the metaphors around here have been awesome lately!

      Seriously, this explains it very well. I would also note that some women can grow feelings with little water – a strange and deformed “love” may desperately seek the light. It should not be mistaken for a healthy plant.

  • HanSolo

    Something that helped drive home the need for a man to not direct too much emotion to a woman too soon was imagining how I would feel if I picked up a woman for a first or second date and she comes to the door in a v-string and a sexy bra with her purse in tow and says let’s go as she steps outside and closes the door.

    Yeah, I want to see her in that eventually but at the right time and place. Too soon or for all to see will make me feel like it’s not something special.

    Not a perfect analogy but the power of the vivid image is enough for me to remember in moments where I want to “walk out” with my emotional pants down and bare all too soon. :D

  • Just1Z

    @Han
    this guy might be of interest to you
    http://22to28.wordpress.com/2012/12/26/the-people-who-are-supposed-to-love-you-the-most/

    but generally his posts are interesting, not just that one, try this excerpt

    Gentlemen,

    I hold a trump card that can bring any dinner party, conversation or debate to a sudden stop. At 26 years of age, I’m still a virgin.

    When I admit to this online, where most anyone reading what I am communicating hasn’t actually met me in person, the typical response is to question my qualifications with women. This throws an interesting monkey wrench in the online persona of C.T. West, as he is know as the man with the game blog.

    an interesting combination of facts. If you add in the fact that he was the guy who had a screaming harpy feminist having hysterics at him and calling him scum at the University of Toronto, Warren Farrell contretemps. He acted with supreme dignity (avfm has a lot of coverage of the event and has named names). Interesting guy.

    he’s got a variety of posts which I’ll be continuing to peruse in the future. I can’t sum him up, but…he’s very picky about the woman that he wants and is waiting for her…take a gander, or not, best of luck either way.

    I wish we lived in a world where being a decent guy automatically lead to a happy life, but that isn’t my impression of how things work.

  • szopen

    @Anne
    Good luck with the relationship :)

    Remember, you are 22. You have a lot of time to do mistakes. Just make sure you learn something from them. Stephen does NOT have to be THE ONE.

    However, if you want him to be the one, make him hand-made present. Something, which is not bought. Give him in privacy. Smile.

    @Anacaona
    Yes, you have summarised what i have written very well. My point was exactly that: smart people are so often right, that they start to use heuristic “I am right” always. The same is with guys having “models” of reality. With the wrong models you can at least point that they are wrong. The problem is with models which are “almost true”.

    @Everybody
    Szczęśliwego Nowego Roku, spełnienia najskrytszych marzeń i wystarczająco dużo zdrowia i wolnego czasu, by móc się tymi spełnieniami cieszyć :)

  • Kathy

    “I wish we lived in a world where being a decent guy automatically lead to a happy life, but that isn’t my impression of how things work.”

    Yes, Just1x, you make a good point.

    I had that very same thought.

    Men are reticent to lay their cards on the table for good reason.
    There are quite a few ball busting feminists out there, that have ruined the natural order between men and women…
    I find that very sad.

  • Just1Z

    @szopen
    “Szczęśliwego Nowego Roku, spełnienia najskrytszych marzeń i wystarczająco dużo zdrowia i wolnego czasu, by móc się tymi spełnieniami cieszyć”

    that’s easy for you to say…
    (hopefully the humour translates from British :) )

    Happy New Year

  • Just1Z

    @Kathy
    yeah, the videos of the University of Toronto protest were disgusting. Warren Farrell is nobody (sane)’s idea of a woman hater. It turns out that Mr 22to28 was going because he’d lost two male friends to suicide, he was looking to understand.

    anyway

    I’m glad that you survived xmas, and may your new year be happy

    Best wishes from Atlantis to all…

  • Russ in Texas

    Lord. My IQ in Polish is about the same as my shoe size…
    Dzenkuje! Ale gdzie jest Han Solo kralowa kruka?

  • Ted D

    HanSolo – “I love that you’re a hopeless romantic at heart.”

    If I could figure out how to kill that off without breaking the rest, I’d rid myself of it in the blink of an eye. Unfortunately, it is that “hopeless romantic” that probably keeps me from going postal on people. “Love” is one of the emotions I feel for individual people that gives me hope for the rest that piss me off on a regular basis.

    As it is, digesting the Red Pill had me almost to the point that I wanted to simply give up on it entirely and simply do my best to live in a logical and reality based manner. But the truth is, that world is too damn stark for me to survive with whatever humanity I have in me intact. Love for my family and friends is what keeps me connected with the rest of humanity it seems.

  • Mako

    Anne,

    I am happy to hear that things sound to be moving forward. If I may be a little selfish here, this is sort of like a living novel and I cannot wait to hear how the story ends. =)

    It is very inspiring an I continue to wish you well.

  • Ted D

    Anne – Glad things seem to be working out for you. Keep it up! And whatever you do, DO NOT over think this!

    (Of course I’m not suggesting you go in dumb and blind, but you really do seem to be thinking far too much about this. How can you enjoy falling in love if you are so stressed about the details?)

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

    Yes, you have summarised what i have written very well. My point was exactly that: smart people are so often right, that they start to use heuristic “I am right” always. The same is with guys having “models” of reality. With the wrong models you can at least point that they are wrong. The problem is with models which are “almost true”.

    Sadly the self selecting nature of first world friendships/relationships guarantees that people very unlikely get challenged on their false assumptions till is too late and they start to screw themselves over without any idea how to fix it.

  • Just1Z

    @Ana
    “Sadly the self selecting nature of first world friendships/relationships guarantees that people very unlikely get challenged on their false assumptions till is too late and they start to screw themselves over without any idea how to fix it.”

    first world men (not counting leftist/liberals) are pretty likely to argue out differences of opinions (aka false assumptions). check out any number of manosphere sites – there is no shortage of differing opinions out there…quite the opposite, in fact(!)

    political correctness is what prevents the destruction of false assumptions, and that is not a masculine attribute, quite the reverse…you can fill in the blanks, can’t you? I can’t be arsed to start a flame war, but I couldn’t let your false assumption stand (which kind of proves my point, I believe)

  • Cooper

    Best of luck Anne!!

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

    first world men (not counting leftist/liberals) are pretty likely to argue out differences of opinions (aka false assumptions). check out any number of manosphere sites – there is no shortage of differing opinions out there…quite the opposite, in fact(!)

    I meant in real life, Internet allows for the people that are inclined to search for more than confirmation bias to do so, but in real life most people avoid the people they don’t agree with in important matters, at least that is what I had observed.

    And not for something completely different:
    Dating just got more difficult, just what we needed:
    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/perfect-10-never-mind-ask-015017521.html

  • Just1Z

    @Ana
    we clearly never met IRL… lmfao

  • Ted D

    Just1Z – “we clearly never met IRL… lmfao”

    LOL cosigned. Some of the most spirited “debates” I’ve had were with friends of friends that I KNOW BEYOND ALL DOUBT do not agree with most of my viewpoints. I’ve purposely gone to the occasional social event JUST to strike up such a debate. ;-)

    Strangely enough, although most of my friends are as conservative as I am, many of them have some VERY liberal friends…

  • Just1Z

    @TedD
    yes – that is a masculine friendship to me. have a strong disagreement, heated discussion and then have a beer and let it go if no resolution was possible. the herd instinct is not something that I sign up for.

    as I have previously said; there is no difference between me online and me IRL – I am the same person. I would be very surprised if you were different round the BBQ than around the keyboard. that is not a grown-up, masculine trait imho.

    I have, however, seen women go to extraordinary lengths to paper over deep differences of opinion – I just fail to see the point. If there is no honesty, there’s no point in the conversation…(imho) but then I am neither a herd or pack person unless there is a pressing need. Someone said that INTJs don’t like to be lead, or to lead unless it is necessary, that sounds awfully like me…

  • Just1Z

    @TedD
    perhaps the ladies here fail to recognise how much the conversation IS toned down (by many of the masculine minded men)… :)

    just a thought (a funny one)

  • Ted D

    Just1Z – “I would be very surprised if you were different round the BBQ than around the keyboard.”

    Well, other than the fact that I purposely “choose my words” online, I’m pretty much the same in person. I would simply warn people with more sensitive ears that such “debates” are usually filled with expletives and generally foul language. Think drunken sailor combined with irate truck driver, and you’re pretty close to the mark. ;-)

    “I have, however, seen women go to extraordinary lengths to paper over deep differences of opinion – I just fail to see the point.”

    Well that is mostly because women want to be “part of the herd” more than they want to be right. It is more important to keep people from being angry at you, because of the fear of being kicked out of the accepted group.

    “but then I am neither a herd or pack person unless there is a pressing need.”

    I am part of a pack (my friends) but only because I choose to be, they choose to be, and we mutually benefit from being in the pack. Otherwise? I really don’t care much about what anyone thinks.

    “Someone said that INTJs don’t like to be lead, or to lead unless it is necessary, that sounds awfully like me…”

    I don’t mind being led, provided the “leader” is someone I respect and trust, AND I feel that they are leading towards something productive. I HATE being led by people that use propaganda (think rhetoric) to “convince” me they are worthy of my efforts.

    And I truly HATE leading. Not because I am not capable, or even that I fear the responsibility. I truly don’t like depending on others to get things done, and knowing how different I tend to think from the average person, I often feel that my ideas are not good for mass consumption. This has been a sticking point with the Red Pill for me since day one. I have very little doubt of my abilities and solutions for myself, but I question if any of it is valid at all for anyone other than myself. To be frank it is still something that troubles me in my marriage, but I continue to take the lead role figuring that my wife trusted me enough to marry me, so she must have faith in my abilities to lead her and our family down the right path.

  • Cooper

    @Anacoana

    Maybe credit score should go on the backside of the “Got INTJ?” T-shirts.

  • Russ in Texas

    that kind of golddigging, (male OR female) is why I stopped bothering to date women in Dallas.

  • OffTheCuff

    Han: “@OTC, I felt the same way about wanting to love and be loved when I had N=0. I don’t think that anyone would find INTJ or Cooper creepy on here if they expressed the emotion of really wanting to love and be loved.”

    Creepy wasn’t the right word. Ignored, or found boring, might be better. I think preselection has a lot to do with it, if you posted that same stuff with n=0. The flowery language helps.

    Sue: “WHY HAN SOLO IS SEXY AND YOU’RE NOT ”

    Heheh, nice try… enough women in real life find me sexy to make me happy. You should worry about the other guys, who are still looking.

  • HanSolo

    @OTC

    Well, I wouldn’t ignore them. Though I’m different than them, I do feel a certain fraternity with them and wish them well and understand (to some extent) where they’re coming from since I was a voluntary virgin for many years back in my religious days.

    I think if they expressed their desires with no complaining or neediness (not saying they are that way or are doing it) that it would be well-received.

    I don’t doubt you are sexy. Obviously Susan was being a snarkess with that comment.

    I really don’t think my non-zero N had anything to do with them liking the words I shared with Marellus. In fact, I think they liked them in spite of my N.

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

      I really don’t think my non-zero N had anything to do with them liking the words I shared with Marellus. In fact, I think they liked them in spite of my N.

      Yes.

      How come I’m called snarky when I used a winky face?!? Anyway, just teasing.

      I think the answer to the question, in a nutshell, is that Han Solo has fully digested the perfect dosage of the red pill. No bitter aftertaste, no angry flareups.

      It’s clear that not all men accomplish this the same way, or in the same timeframe. The fact that Han Solo can talk about sex differences without rancor indicates that he has done so, and that he is ready for the relationship he wants. The man who resists the truths, for whatever reason, will carry resentment into any relationship, holding the woman accountable for something biological (assuming he has filtered effectively for character).

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Re HS’s number, you referred to him as “high N.”

    But I said high-ISH.

    Sue: “I don’t know what his N is, but recall that I don’t balk at N at the level you do.”

    You must have me confused with someone else. I don’t balk at high N – which I define as around 2x median, age-adjusted. Now, I might balk at very high N, which I consider more like 4 or 5x the age-adjusted median. Even then, it’s not an absolute dealbreaker.

    Age adjusted is everything. A 32-year old is very different than an 18-year old.

    Sue: “The sweetest boys I know who would prefer a gf to any ONS are all in the range of 10 in their mid 20s”

    Of course they prefer GFs, girlfriends come back for more, over the uncertainty of a random ONS.

    But they are all high N to me.

    Sue: “Gushing about true love from a strong frame does not land one at MMSL. Instead, it’s a page right out of a romance novel. Frame. It’s all about that.”

    Agree, frame is what allows, not time itself.

  • Just1Z

    @Ted’s
    we don’ t appear to have any significant differences of opinion…though I doubt that you expected many

  • Ted D

    Just1Z -“we don’ t appear to have any significant differences of opinion…though I doubt that you expected many”

    Oh I’m sure we’d be on the same side of the BBQ debate team most of the time. Cool thing is to me it doesn’t really matter. As long as its a good debate played fair and square, like mindedness isn’t a requirement for friendship and shared beers.

  • Just1Z

    @Ted’s . true

  • Cooper

    “I really don’t think my non-zero N had anything to do with them liking the words I shared with Marellus. In fact, I think they liked them in spite of my N.”

    I think this just highlights what OTC was originally saying, CMIIW, when he suspected the “saved by love” tinge can only come from a man that is inured. (if that’s the right word)

  • Cooper

    I shouldn’t have said “can only,” but what I think OTC was pointing out was that such declarations of wanting love, coming from seasoned man, seems like they could get accepted with a tingle compared to perhaps the “skin crawl” or cringe (#1115/1122) that the girls feel coming from a guy too early – if it came from one with less preselection.

    just a thought

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

    Anacoana…”dly the self selecting nature of first world friendships/relationships guarantees that people very unlikely get challenged on their false assumptions till is too late”

    G K Chesterton wrote about this…”The man who lives in a small community lives in a much larger world. He knows much more of the fierce varieties and uncompromising divergences of men. The reason is obvious. In a large community we can choose our companions. In a small community our companions are chosen for us. Thus in all extensive and highly civilized societies groups come into existence founded upon what is called sympathy, and shut out the real world more sharply than the gates of a monastery. There is nothing really narrow about the clan; the thing that is really narrow is the clique….The men of the clique live together because they have the same kind of soul, and their narrowness is a narrowness of spiritual coherence and contentment like that which exists in hell”

    Related post: Drucker and Chesterton on the Individual and the Community

  • HanSolo

    @Cooper

    I just don’t think it was the saved-by-love tingle at all. I think it was the words and the feelings themselves. I think they would have been more powerful spoken by someone who was committed to only sex within love, not someone like myself who takes the easy way out at times and has flings.

    I don’t like the fact that women get turned off by what they perceive to be excessive male interest in them too soon. But I accept it and work with it. I do understand the point about them wanting to be loved for more than their looks and I actually agree that really rapid “love” on the part of the man is more likely infatuation/lust than not. However, I think a man can learn enough about a woman’s character to begin to love her sooner than most women would imagine and so I don’t like that it’s still a turnoff to many women after what would seem like a reasonable amount of time to get to know her but the bottom line is that that’s how most women are. So, we can either adapt to that or we can hunt within the small part of the female population that doesn’t get turned off by such male emoting.

    I personally don’t want to date a woman who is overly turned off by my being emotional since I want that strong emotional connection. I am, however, willing to search for the right woman in the middle of the spectrum and exercise self control long enough for her to fall in love with me.

    @Susan

    A teasing snarkess in smiley-faced clothes! j/k lol I realized you were teasing.

  • OffTheCuff

    Cooper, exactly right.

    Han: “I think they would have been more powerful spoken by someone who was committed to only sex within love, not someone like myself who takes the easy way out at times and has flings.”

    Yes, but only if they had in the past had flings and now turns them down.

    An alpha is: A man who has immediate, known, conscious prospects with multiple women right now, knows it, and either:

    1. Excercises those now (player), or
    2. Exercised them in the past, but stopped due to his own volition (reformed) and not external pressure, or
    3. Refuses to excerise them out of his own volition (unicorn) and not external pressure

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

      As the person who found Han Solo’s impassioned defense of love tingle-worthy, I can assure you that my response had nothing to do with perceiving Han Solo as alpha or as a former or current player, or even as a man with previous sexual experience.

      I have always been drawn to emotionally expressive men, and that includes one “love at first sight” relationship where such mutual declarations were made within days.

      In terms of whether a woman would find that attractive being (eventually) directed at her will depend on whether or not she finds the man attractive or not (and in whatever combo of alpha and beta properties she likes).

      The alpha/beta dichotomy is a red herring here. I find Han’s sentiment attractive in general, but obviously would only want to be the recipient of that love if I was very attracted and invested myself.

      As for #3, it’s clear both from the research and from the male commenters here that many men prefer relationships to flings. And many women prefer relationship-oriented men to players.

  • HanSolo

    I agree, and #3 is the most powerful, and perhaps the rarity makes it even more powerful.

  • HanSolo

    But I disagree that only an alpha can say that and have it be powerful. The sentiment in the abstract can be admired in anyone. In terms of whether a woman would find that attractive being (eventually) directed at her will depend on whether or not she finds the man attractive or not (and in whatever combo of alpha and beta properties she likes).

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

    @david foster
    Its good to see that someone already noticed that. Great read in your blog. I recommend it to anyone here. :)

  • szopen

    @just1z

    political correctness is what prevents the destruction of false assumptions, and that is not a masculine attribute, quite the reverse

    Yes, but it seems that what is typical for the males is the struggle to make evertyhing to fit into nice, simple models. I do not mean this is typical only for males. However, from my experience the females, ‘xcept the few (feminists? or scientists) do not have this strong, almost subconscious drive to find HOW THINGS WORK just for the sake of finding out, and to built internal models of world.

    I said this is not a vice. However, as a result, once a male builts good enough model -this is at least in my experience – a lot of males starts to see a world through his model, and if something does not fit the model, it is chopped away.

    This is not a question of refusing to discuss, or to refuse to confront your model – it is about inability to see that the model is just the model, the inclination to not see the vices of the model no matter what the results of the confrontations are. As one said before in this thread, a map reflects real terrain, but map is not real terrain.

  • Just1Z

    @szopen
    I agree about remembering that a model is just a model, I also think that one should always be able to adapt the model to reality as an ongoing process.

  • Russ in Texas

    As the old saying goes, “the map is not the terrain.”

  • Lokland

    “But I disagree that only an alpha can say that and have it be powerful.”

    As a general rule, the readiness with which an idea is accepted is directly proportional to the attractiveness of its speaker.

    Natural human state of being. We ignore the ugly and watch the attractive.

    So a man with higher N is typically more attractive and thus it would be expected that woman would give his opinion more weight. The same could be said for the proper musculature, height, vocal tone etc.

    A woman who gets a boob job would likely find an increase in the value of her opnion from men.

    Simply is. Not necessarily fair but thats irrelevant.

    Last,

    Some commenters propose ideas that are more readily accepted than others. Part of that is delivery style, the content etc.
    Some could deliver a woman are evil are speech and have it accepted with applause and giggles (ie. dogsquat, not saying he would merely that he could).

    A significant portion is the percieved attractivness of the commenter. Its not surprising merely a fact of life. More weight is given to the opinions of the attractive.

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

      Some commenters propose ideas that are more readily accepted than others. Part of that is delivery style, the content etc.
      Some could deliver a woman are evil are speech and have it accepted with applause and giggles (ie. dogsquat, not saying he would merely that he could).

      A significant portion is the percieved attractivness of the commenter. Its not surprising merely a fact of life. More weight is given to the opinions of the attractive.

      Considering that few here are aware of physical appearance, I find this comment very interesting. IIRC, Han Solo, Cooper w/o a shirt, and INTJ w/o a shirt have all elicited their share of oooohs and aaaaahs from the female commentariat.

      Online demeanor certainly plays a role in how one’s ideas are received by others. It’s the same IRL, no? Dogsquat (where is he?) is quite diplomatic, but I disagree with your assessment. I have gone toe to toe with him on the topic of female agency and whether they are responsible for being deceived by cads. What sets DS apart is his continued civility and lack of fist pumping. That makes all the difference.

      It must also be said that there are some commenters whose insights are generally profound and thoughtful regardless of which side they’re arguing, and I am far more likely to consider their arguments than someone who is very invested in the adversarial Team Man vs. Team Woman battles.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Online demeanor certainly plays a role in how one’s ideas are received by others. It’s the same IRL, no?”

    Its to close to Christmas to debate. :P

    I believe the way something is delivered is based upon perception which is correlated to attractiveness. Ie. Two people could say something argumentative in exactly the same voice/ body language and the less attractive individual would be considered more argumentative.

    “Considering that few here are aware of physical appearance”

    I know what a decent number of the men here look like (5 or 6). Women few.
    I’ve listened to self described characteristics and could probably provide a decent profile for quite a few commenters just off the top of my head. But I have a memory that sucks up numbers and facts like a 5 year old does candy.

    Also, people have provided their own SMV ranks or given enough personal details that I would be able to guesstimate their SMVs within a couple points.

    I suspect that subconsciously these perceptions do play a part in perception of another persons argument.

  • Lokland

    Note: Demeanour likely trumps attractiveness online. Just so thats clear.
    Looks (perceived) likely also plays a part but smaller.

  • Russ in Texas

    Quality of photograph makes such a huge difference online as to be moot, in my opinion. (and ability to communicate far outweighs, imho – I’d comfortably say I’m a five who can look either good or awful, but never supersexyfantastico, and haven’t had any difficulty having ideas accepted…..though that may have to with Mr. Chesterton….)

  • HanSolo

    An article about the high school grads going into the oilfield or college. A lot are working for a couple years with plans to then go to college. Others are opting for technical or trades training.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/26/us/26montana.html

  • INTJ

    @ OTC

    3. Refuses to excerise them out of his own volition (unicorn) and not external pressure

    This is a unicorn because preselection means that one who doesn’t exercise such options is not likely to continue to have such options.

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

      This is a unicorn because preselection means that one who doesn’t exercise such options is not likely to continue to have such options.

      Preselection does not depend on sexual relations. Remember, preselection is a “first impression” phenomenon. We observe which males attract females to their orbit. Women generally achieve consensus quite easily on who the top males are.

      The more selective the male, despite his options, the more women will want him. The men that women want the most are those who are selected by a wide variety of women, but who select very few women themselves.

      On another note, the researcher Robert Bowers, Indiana U. prof and author of the preselection study we debated here last week, wrote me with some interesting thoughts after reading the thread.

  • INTJ

    @ HanSolo

    An article about the high school grads going into the oilfield or college. A lot are working for a couple years with plans to then go to college. Others are opting for technical or trades training.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/26/us/26montana.html

    To be fair, though, if one wants to work in the oil industry, going to college is a good investment. Petroleum Engineering has a starting salary of ~100k.

  • HanSolo

    @INTJ

    I agree but most people probably aren’t smart enough to become engineers, and so for the average to slowly-lower intelligence people the manual labor that they can become skilled at is a good option.

    I don’t think lack of sex means lack of preselection. You can have women showing interest that other women see without sexing them up.

  • Cooper

    I feel like my point is being lost. Firstly, I think what Han said was great.
    But I do feel like perceived craziness, or desperatation, from such emoting is inversely proportionate to the man’s preselection.

    The girls commented on how hearing such things “too early” could induce a cringe. So, I’m going to out on a limb and argue that with enough preselection, there is no “too early” – and that “too early” is merely a replacement for “not enough preselection” or “lower smv.”

    IOW, declarations of wanting to be exclusive, go “all in”, ect. would get received well proportional to the guy’s preselection.

    A guy that’s is known to seeing other girls, or having hookups, is going seem far less nuts, or creepy, trying to DTR than a guy with little preselection.
    When it comes from a preselected man, the thought go like “he knows what he wants, he gets what he wants, and he wants it with me!! Yippy”
    Where as a guy with little preselection it’s going to be “wow, hold on..”

    It’s something about the no-preselection scenario that gives girls the impression that the interest is not in them, individually. (Iow, the guy just wants a GF – not them)
    Where as when it comes from a preselected guy, it seems more like a choice based on them being a special snowflake.

    I say this cause I think a lot, if not most, men do truly look for women that allow them to emote. And I think the preselection plays into how women receive such emotion, cause the difference isn’t in the men, it’s based on how “appropriate” is it for him to feel this way. (And like I said, I think “too early” doesn’t exist)

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

      @Cooper

      When it comes from a preselected man, the thought go like “he knows what he wants, he gets what he wants, and he wants it with me!! Yippy”
      Where as a guy with little preselection it’s going to be “wow, hold on..”

      I agree 100% with this. Women want the most desirable man to want them alone. That is the fantasy.

      However, I’ve seen these relationships go south very quickly. The very handsome guy is preselected on his looks, goes all in quite quickly, and the woman says Yippee! Soon his mushy declarations erode the initial perception of him as a dominant male and he is unable to sustain the attraction.

      Men want to work for sex.

      Women want to work for commitment.

      A very hot guy may be able to pull a woman into a relationship very quickly but she’ll put him in the “emotional slut” pile.

      The exception, as noted above, is the “love at first sight” phenomenon where two people jump off the cliff together. Generally, those two people will have closely matched SMV.

  • Cooper

    To touch on this even further, I think it relates to a concept that I’ve quite understood myself, and that is “having to find out what you like” (by trial)

    I completely understand the allure of “variety” to men. Although I don’t entire share the desire, at least strongly. I don’t share the same understanding with the concept that says one must try various types to know ones type.
    We’ve seen this present when young women say they haven’t dated enough men to know what they want, or that they feel obligated to “date a few” before settling down.

    I don’t understand this concept.
    And I don’t think girls understand how a guy can ever choose them, without preselection. It’s truly a case of “how can he know he truly likes me, if he hasn’t had to discover what it is he likes.”

    Like I said before, when a guy comes off as creepy, or whatever, when emoting his affection, or his desire to DTR exclusive, I don’t think timing has as much to do with as the guy’s preselection, or past.

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

      Like I said before, when a guy comes off as creepy, or whatever, when emoting his affection, or his desire to DTR exclusive, I don’t think timing has as much to do with as the guy’s preselection, or past.

      This doesn’t really make sense. If she’s been hanging out with you regularly, showing interest and sexual desire, you’ve already cleared the bar. At that point, it’s all about timing. You gotta make her work for the cookie. There is something quite suspect about a man initiating the DTR, especially early on. Why? Because so few men do it. It’s not the norm. It’s like wearing a sign that says “I’m not like other guys.” That scares women – we want you to be a normal guy, only better.

  • Cooper

    Last post should read: that I’ve *never quite understood

  • HanSolo

    @Cooper

    I basically agree with your comments. I think that another way of putting it would be to say that a woman doesn’t want the man to desire a relationship with her (or at least to know about it) until she has sufficient interest herself.

    Basically the man can get one or two steps ahead of where the woman is in order to lead and show interest but he should not go any steps beyond that until she has taken a step or to make the number of steps even. This can apply to meeting her, sex, relationships, etc.

    In her mind/heart there will be some amount of attraction and interest (assuming there is any) and the man can basically move up to that point and slightly ahead and everything will be fine. However, if he goes way ahead then it will push her red alert, needy man buttons and she will lose attraction and respect for him, even if he is objectively what she wants and he is sincere in his interest.

    So, if a man meets a woman and for whatever reason is able to trigger her attraction buttons very quickly then he can move fast for either sex or a relationship. In other cases, if she is always a slow-to-respond girl or he can only trigger them more slowly then he must proceed more slowly.

    There are also some few “lucky” guys that are able to trigger her attraction and interest in such a way that she is the one that is instigating and the one taking steps ahead of the man and waiting for him to catch up. This may happen more frequently in cases where the man is of higher value than her and he’s not as interested in her or in cases where he’s interested in sex but not a relationship but she finds him attractive enough to try for the relationship.

    Bottom line, both parties need to be taking roughly equal number of steps forward in feeling attraction and interest. This is the most important point. It’s not so much a matter of being fast or slow, it’s a matter of verifying that the other partner is moving along with you at the same pace and not building the top part of your bridge way out into the valley without having the underlying girders of the other person’s interest moving along at the same pace.

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

      Bottom line, both parties need to be taking roughly equal number of steps forward in feeling attraction and interest. This is the most important point.

      That is why it is called the mating dance. Two partners must be in step. That is symmetry. Any relationship that varies much from that balance is unlikely to last.

  • Cooper

    @Han
    Yes.

    The cynic in me still says a guy with known high-ish N isn’t going to be criticized, as much, for taking (extra) steps forward. (Ie emotionally escalating)

  • HanSolo

    @Cooper

    I can see that happening with some women. With more cautious women, though, I could see it backfiring and her thinking, “he just says that to every girl to get into her pants.”

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

      @Han

      With more cautious women, though, I could see it backfiring and her thinking, “he just says that to every girl to get into her pants.”

      Ha, you’re anticipating my next post! I decided to return next week with a post about this, and this is a key point. Cads lie about being in love to get sex. Women are right to be wary of such early (and in our eyes, unfounded) declarations.

      Remember, the “cost” of sex is much higher for women than it is for men. That is why we are the gatekeepers. The most important thing a woman can do is filter males aggressively to avoid being impregnated by a cad or other male not interested in commitment. At the same time, we also want to filter out men who don’t have “good genes.” Early bidders are suspect because they appear to be in a hurry to lock down the commitment before the woman has time to evaluate other options – the declaration appears to come from a mindset of scarcity or fear.

  • Cooper

    “That scares women – we want you to be a normal guy, only better.”

    Smh.

    “Soon his mushy declarations erode the initial perception of him as a dominant male and he is unable to sustain the attraction.”

    And how stupid is that!!

    ” If she’s been hanging out with you regularly, showing interest and sexual desire, you’ve already cleared the bar.”

    Or set up from fore mentioned “erosion.”

    Anyways, I think you guys are just proving my point: that a guy saying what Han said, with a established N, induces a “oooow!” – where as the same setiment from one without induces a “eeeew!”

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

      Anyways, I think you guys are just proving my point: that a guy saying what Han said, with a established N, induces a “oooow!” – where as the same setiment from one without induces a “eeeew!”

      Preselection has nothing to do with N. I have no idea what Han’s N is. If you’re saying that attractive men are perceived differently than unattractive men, I agree.

      In my experience, some women want the guy who is “not good at talking about feelings.” Other women want the emo guy. Wherever women lie on that spectrum of personal preference, they’re going to find some meatheads more attractive than others, and some emos more attractive than others. The unemotional guy who is unattractive to women gets nowhere, nor does the emo who is unattractive to women.

      What is so important about Han’s statement is that his confidence and self-respect in stating what he wants implies that he feels attractive and worthy of a woman who would say Yippee. And therefore he is. It’s Inner Game. Men who stop fighting women (and stop shaking their heads over female sexuality) will get much further with them, or at least with the women they actually want.

  • Mike C

    Early bidders are suspect because they appear to be in a hurry to lock down the commitment before the woman has time to evaluate other options – the declaration appears to come for a mindset of scarcity or fear.

    Right. Which is why the “right play” for the guy is to maintain a slight air of aloofness. The conventional wisdom is for the man to “chase” the woman and “win her over” whereas the more effective route is the opposite.

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

      Right. Which is why the “right play” for the guy is to maintain a slight air of aloofness.

      I’d say he should appear non-committal rather than aloof – there’s a key difference. Either will work, but these distinctions in male behavior will alter which women respond and in what way. For a guy who wants to go all in too soon, I can see where “aloof” might be a good strategy, assuming there’s no way he is really going to run asshole game.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Cooper#1216,

    Well, I wasn’t going to say this, because I’m an unusual duck, I think, and I suspect that how things strike me have a bit less relevance. But since you’re drawing the distinction….I found a lot of “eww” in what HS wrote, too. That has nothing to do with N at all, but with the notion that those feelings could exist prior to meeting the chick with whom possessing said feelings would be appropriate. This strikes me very similar as Susan’s “unhealthy plant” metaphor — how can love exist without the object of the love? (brain explodes in a sausage of Saussure)

    ymmv and likely does.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Susan “Two people jump off the cliff together” — yes, this was my husband and me, talking about love within a week.

    Very cool about the author of the study contacting you! You’ll have to let us know more.

    Cooper, not all women want a “normal” man. Just have to find your niche.

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

      @Hope

      Here is the body of Prof. Bowers’ email:

      “I think the one discussant’s effort to quantify the effect was slightly misguided. I agree in principle with his dissociating the extent of the effect from its reliability (statistical significance). However, our study doesn’t really allow us to make claims about how strongly or weakly mate-choice information affects real mate choice, just that such an effect is present. The roughly 0.4 increase in ratings we observe depends on the particulars of our set up: the scale, the particular questions asked, the 20-second exposure, the fact that you are sitting in a small room watching people on a computer monitor you will never meet, etc. My guess is that mate choice information has more of an influence in real social settings than we are able to capture in the lab. How big this effect is remains an important question, but one that would require different methods to address.

      Another point to consider is that people generally don’t like to believe that they are affected by social information themselves (while generally willing to accept it in others). This is not just conceit. Probably the effects of social information are subtler than people imagine. Intuitively, I also don’t feel that I like a woman more when I witness her receive another man’s attention. But that doesn’t mean that I am not affected by social information. How it operates is still quite mysterious, probably much subtler than “he likes her, therefore I should like her more”. We’re working on it.

  • HanSolo

    @Russ

    No offense taken at you finding my words ewww inducing.

    It simply is part of my nature to want to give and love a woman that I’m attracted to, admire and that loves me. The fact that the specific woman that would receive that love isn’t currently in my life doesn’t make the feeling any less real.

    It’s like a power source charged and waiting to be plugged into.

    OTOH you could have people who feel no love inside them but that it materializes when the right person is present.

    I believe both things are real and exist on opposite ends of the spectrum.

  • Mike C

    There is something quite suspect about a man initiating the DTR, especially early on. Why? Because so few men do it. It’s not the norm. It’s like wearing a sign that says “I’m not like other guys.” That scares women – *****we want you to be a normal guy, only better.****

    Haha….I’ve got a link for this one….but I’ll ask you to define what specifically you mean by “normal” guy. I’m curious what *YOU* specifically mean by this in contrast to what most men would assume constitutes a “normal” guy

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

      @Mike C

      I’m curious what *YOU* specifically mean by this in contrast to what most men would assume constitutes a “normal” guy

      I literally mean less than one standard deviation from the mean. I’ll give you an example. Romeo could sing below Juliet’s balcony – I assume this was a normal courtship behavior at the time. The handsomest QB1 could sit down on the lawn beneath a dorm window and sing a song of love to a woman he had met an hour before and it would be a massive DLV. It’s very romantic – the girl’s friends would say, “OMG, Tom Brady is singing about you in the quad!” But the woman herself would have a sense of disquiet. She would likely say Yippee, at least initially. She now has sky high status among the women, and the hottest guy on campus is in love with her. But his tendency to constantly emote is going to wear on her. I know, because I’ve been that woman. The final straw was his singing a ballad of heartbreak, with tears running down his face, in the quad with a guitar after we broke up. My friends were in tears themselves, sooooo moved by his undying love, but what they were feeling was pity, not attraction. Meanwhile, I was repulsed, and his strategy was unsuccessful. I know that sounds callous, but I’m just being honest. By the end I thought he was a pussy, and not entirely stable to boot.

      P.S. If this appears to not answer your question, or to offer more than you asked for, it is not intentional. This is actually the way I think and communicate.

  • Ted D

    “We want you to be a normal guy, only better”

    Sounds a bit like fried ice, don’t you think?

    Besides, who the hell actually wants to be “normal” anyway? Normal is boring. Normal is mundane. Everyone should try to be something more than “normal” for their own sakes…

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

      “We want you to be a normal guy, only better”

      Sounds a bit like fried ice, don’t you think?

      No, not when normal = middle of the bell curve. Normal means “not too different.” It means behavior that follows social mores and scripts. This is what is so fascinating about hookup culture – it provides the script for sexual mores today, but casual sex is clearly far from the norm.

  • Ted D

    Susan – I don’t know. Perhaps your QB wasn’t very good at singing and guitar? I’ve never once suffered such a response by serenading a woman, and I’ve done so in any number of different situations, but most often impromptu at a party, or on rare occasion a dedication during a gig. (For instance I sang a song for an ex-GF at a show in the middle of our set because it was her birthday. Being as we were a metal band, and we played her a love song, it was very well accepted by the crowd in the bar that night.)

    Music is a powerful attraction tool when used properly. Either you are “immune” to it, or he wasn’t using the tool properly. I once wrote a song for a woman I wasn’t even dating. We were together for 4 years after she heard it. ;-)

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

      @Ted

      Perhaps your QB wasn’t very good at singing and guitar?

      He has made a very good living as a singer songwriter in LA.

      I’ve never once suffered such a response by serenading a woman, and I’ve done so in any number of different situations, but most often impromptu at a party, or on rare occasion a dedication during a gig.

      Did you weep? It’s not the singing that’s a fail, it’s the emoting.

  • Marc

    @Anne You made a comment about Mr. X being from a billionaire family. I will speculate by saying there are less than a 1,000 billionaire families in the world. Most people, rich or poor, will never even see, let alone have contact with a billionaire family. Even people worth 100million dont rub elbows with them. You´d be surprised to see the balance sheet of people you think are rich. A kid with a nickel that lives in the Congo is wealthier than Nicholas Cage for example. That kid is not negative 25 million).
    .
    So, 1,000 families. Lets assume his is one of them. Now start subtracting…
    How many live in the UK? 50
    London? 25
    Have a son around your dating age? 15
    He´s single? 8
    He´s handsome? 2
    (Do you see where I am going with this?)
    He thinks YOU are in his league? 0
    .
    Just go find some other cat. You probably have some good prospects. But like was mentioned before, the guy that is in your league is not going to chase you. You have to be a bit more accomodating or you will lose out to women of less value. Then its just yoga pants and wine from there. Good luck. Happy New Year!

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    I’ve been reading Bettina Arndt’s “The Sex Diaries” and it is a frightening, fascinating book. Most of the marriages and LTRs depicted in the book are challenged by a gradual loss of libido on the female side and there is plenty of discussion of how damaging this is to the male partners, many of whom are basically on the equivalent of sexual starvation rations.

    Another thing that struck me as particularly insightful: under the normal conditions of male sexual deficit, “women select”, “men should work for it”, etc., the assumption is that the man wants sex more than the woman does, and a negotiation takes place in which the man typically makes some form of resource-commitment display to interest the woman in sex.

    The woman gets three things from this transaction: 1) sex; 2) access to a valued resource of some kind; and 3) validation of her attractiveness.
    The man, however, gets only one—sex. Because he has in a sense “paid” for the sex, however, his attractiveness as a hot sexy alpha beast is not actually being directly validated, and this can have serious long-term psychological consequences.

    This observation really resonated for me and explained why I have so frequently found a ONS with a desirable woman to be an almost spiritually enriching experience, as these events provide almost pure validation of my attractiveness in a way that is presumably a “costly signal” or otherwise risky for the women involved.

    I know that many men here feel debased by these situations and I respect their ethical stands, but I can honestly say that I usually feel rather jaunty and virile after a high-quality ONS, walking home with a spring in my step, like a young Travolta prowling the streets in “Stayin’ Alive”, and feeling a deep sense of primal satisfaction that I didn’t necessarily gain from sex within an LTR context (which give me a different kind of buzz).

    I think an important practical ramification of this in terms of Girl Game may be that women should attempt to make sex at least appear to be a spontaneous act of female need, confirming the male’s dominance and hotness, rather than allowing the man to ever feel that he is paying for sex with a reluctant partner as part of a contrived tit-for-tat (see what I did there? lol) resource exchange.

    Anyway, six of the book’s scenarios struck me as particularly discussion-worthy:

    1. Scenario in which a high sex-drive woman is paired with a lower sex-drive man and frequently suffers rejection from him when she physically escalates.

    2. Scenario in which a low sex-drive woman is paired with a man who loses his sex drive and essentially calibrates to her level of sexual interest.

    3. Scenario in which traditionist woman feels conjugal duty to have faux-enthusiastic sex with her husband when he is interested in it, even if she’s not particularly turned on at that time.

    4. Scenario in which a high-libido man paired with a low-sex-drive woman seeks hypersexual affairs while on business trips, and his reasons/rationalizations for doing so.

    5. Scenario in which feminist-trained woman feels that she should say no to sexual advances of husband unless she’s really turned on. Guess the long-term results of this?

    6. Various scenarios in which women paired with perfectly nice, supportive husbands still have torrid sexual affairs with other men, and their reasons/rationalizations for doing so.

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

      @BB

      Were there any depictions of high sex drive women with high sex drive men, or the low sex drive equivalent? Or does Arndt, as a sex therapist dealing with troubled couples, not explore the sexual relationships that work well?

  • HanSolo

    @Bastiat Blogger

    I agree that the unobligated lust and wanton desire that a woman will feel for you in a fling feels great.

    However, I’m the type of person who wants that lust plus the romantic connection. For me, in the end, although I do like flings at a certain level and do experience some level of exhilaration during and after, I simply am a romantic guy at heart and want a deep and lasting and lustful connection with a special woman. I would trade all future flings for that.

    The resource exchange relationship you describe churns my stomach and she would soon be out on her ass soon if I didn’t sense her really into me. For whatever reason, too much straying into the trading resources for sex territory turns me off. For the same reason and others, I have never gone with a prostitute. I don’t enjoy sex if the woman doesn’t want me.

    And, I’m certainly not criticizing men who are more into flings than relationships.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Oh la la… Just a quick peep into HUS while I’m away and I get to read this:

    -Susan:
    “Men want to work for sex.”
    “Women want to work for commitment.”

    Looks like a textbook for mammals, but we all are, so I won’t argue about that. In the end, it’s true. But, as humans, isn’t it where all the work is to be refined?

    “A very hot guy may be able to pull a woman into a relationship very quickly but she’ll put him in the “emotional slut” pile.”

    Lol! Yes, well put, and a fair enough “revenge” since I saw some of the guys’ comments mentioning girls being divided into the “committed pile” or the “slut pile”…

    “The exception, as noted above, is the “love at first sight” phenomenon where two people jump off the cliff together. Generally, those two people will have closely matched SMV.”

    This, however, is to me absolutely false. I don’t know if you’ve ever experienced the “love at first sight” or, as we say “coup de foudre”, but when it strikes it has very little to do with the SMV. In fact, when it does, it is often BECAUSE the smv is different…. Long debate.
    And happy new year everybody!

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

      @Damien

      In fact, when it does, it is often BECAUSE the smv is different…. Long debate.

      Interesting. I have had this experience once, and it was compatible SMV. It seems to me that “love at first sight” or “coup de foudre” must be lust or infatuation based on looks alone – so how would the lower SMV person merit the passion?

  • JQ

    @ Susan in re 1223 (Prof Bowers):

    Looks like I either missed a good one by not reading the comment threads or else I simply don’t remember it. Either way, it’s nice to have the voice of the author(s) injected into the conversations here.

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

      @JQ

      Either way, it’s nice to have the voice of the author(s) injected into the conversations here.

      I agree! I was so surprised – my guess is he has a Google alert on his name. But he was very willing to discuss his study and he also thanked me for providing the earliest known reference to mate choice copying – Doris Langley Moore in 1928. In my small way I have contributed to the advancement of knowledge!

  • Damien Vulaume

    Also:
    “Besides, who the hell actually wants to be “normal” anyway? Normal is boring.”
    ROFL! Shake my hand! You’ve got a friend here.
    What’s normal anyway? In every culture that definition is “by definition” utterly boring or worse, mind shaping..

  • Russ in Texas

    Marc,

    She seems to be doing fairly well so far. I’ve rubbed shoulders with one of these guys on more than one occasion. Once he’s out of a context where his messiah complex (which is well-known and which he cops to) is relevant, he’s just a guy like anybody else (complete with atrocious taste in ties).

    I can talk to an American family which made their money fairly recently, or to the side of the family which doesn’t want anything to do with mine (for good reason – a generation or so of my kin preceding mine were simply embarrasments, and no amount of filial piety will prove otherwise)….NO amount of recovering from the family fall would have allowed me to pursue and land my old friend Estelle, who was from a “good family” in France; those doors were closed.

    It’s not money — it’s CULTURE. If she’s within the culture, she’s fine and it’s a non-issue. If she weren’t, none of this situation would have happened in the first place.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Ted, Damien,

    Today, “normal” is semantically equal to “has no identity other than what is offered by manufactured ‘culture products.’ ”

    While odd isn’t always good, “normal” in what passes for cosmopolitan society today is hardly something to which any thinking man should aspire.

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

      While odd isn’t always good, “normal” in what passes for cosmopolitan society today is hardly something to which any thinking man should aspire.

      Women do not find abnormal male behavior sexy.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Russ:
    Estelle… as far as memory is concerned, that sounds like a melody that went that way: A lovely, nonchalant and flaming brown eyed proud flower wrapped in a Chanel 5 perfumed cotton summer dress back in 1991… Sigh.
    One thing (I guess you’re aware of) is that the class distinction in Europe, at least in Britain (and specifically in England) and in France, is not only drawn in the sand by money but also by heritage. By this I mean the aristocratic families. The kind of people who live in the upper upper class and who won’t even talk to you if you don’t have a “particule” attached to your family name. A long story as well. In the US, it’s more the “nouveau riche” thing. Although by today’s standards, they evolve in the same privilged yet exclusive bubble.

    “While odd isn’t always good, “normal” in what passes for cosmopolitan society today is hardly something to which any thinking man should aspire.”
    Aka-La palissade.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Susan, there are some couples in the book who are still going at it like rabbits after many years of marriage, and I found their stories to be quite touching and inspirational…!

    I think that a key takeaway from the book, at least for some women, may be just how depressed and hurt men can be when they are regularly turned away and sexually rejected by their partners, or made to feel that sex is part of a transaction rather than a validation of attractiveness.

    I don’t think that the women involved normally are doing any of this on purpose; perhaps ladies have a natural blind spot for this because they are habituated to the thought that men want sex purely for a physical release, rather than for a cocktail of psychological reasons.

    It may be interesting to note that in the unusual cases of high-libido women who were regularly sexually rejected by their low-libido husbands, the women seemed to have left these men after very short periods of time (and/or had affairs), and were generally encouraged to do so by their peers, while the far more numerous men who suffer the same fate are basically told that they should “grow up”, develop empathy, and be more realistic about sex within LTRs. It’s just cruel and absurd and hurtful.

    There is a section in the book in which a woman promised her husband a year of daily sex (IIRC) on his birthday or Christmas or something. She went through with it and found that even when she really didn’t feel sensual, she still would normally end up enjoying the sex and the warmth and confidence that her husband displayed afterward (Arndt has apparently been bashed by feminists for recommending a similar Just Do It approach for women who are facing this typical domestic issue).

    Alas, here is where things took a wrong turn: the woman and her husband were discussing what she wanted for *her* birthday, and he teased with “How about a year of sex?” She immediate responded with something like, “Are you fucking kidding? After all this? How about a year WITHOUT sex?”

    He was just uprooted, destroyed. Her vehement and thoughtlessly stupid response, which was probably meant to be funny, killed the illusion that he was hot, sexy, irresistible man in his wife’s eyes.

    This is complex and I’ve had too much 15yo Redbreast whiskey tonight to articulate it well, but I believe that most men want to provide resources and protection for their women, but also want the women to have sex with them because they are hot alpha-type males (rather than having sex with them because they are solid, reliable “provisioning” type males). They need the pure affirmation of attractiveness in order to feel psychically charged. Even loyal beta “sheepdog” type guardians may need this distinction.

    I am not sure how this all works out, even in my own mind, but I’m sure it would make for a fascinating discussion here at HUS and would equip your female constituency with some tactical intelligence that could really give them a leg-up in the mating game, especially if they could communicate awareness of this stuff to the men that they feel are worthy.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “Did you weep? It’s not the singing that’s a fail, it’s the emoting.”

    LOL I did not. I must have missed that in your description.

    But to be fair, playing and especially singing is a very emotional performance art. I’ve certainly had to fight back tears and perhaps let one or two slide while playing something very heartfelt and/or emotionally charged. Actually for me, since singing is a primary emotional outlet for me, I often find myself playing a game of internal tug of war between breaking down and performing to he best of my ability. I found gigging to be an enormous high and a massive low at the same time. The rush comes from the energy the crowd provides, and the low comes from all that emotion just pouring out of me in torrents while performing. I’m literally exhausted at the end of the night, but I feel good like I had an aggressive workout, only it’s all mental.

  • Ted D

    Susan – ” Women do not find abnormal male behavior sexy.

    OK so explain how a guy can be normal but better?

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “No, not when normal = middle of the bell curve.”

    Hypergamy is not compatible with the statement unless we assume most women are lower in value than men.

    Ie. most ‘normal’ woman are lower in value than ‘normal’ men and thus attracted to them.

    Its either that or that woman are attracted the the higher end of the bell curve to satisfy hypergamy and thus not ‘normal’.

    Ex. Height.

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

      The world normal only applies to behavior, not appearance, and is not meant to mean “average.”

      What I’m getting at is that there is a range of mating behaviors that women find attractive, and a larger range they find acceptable, and also a range of behaviors they find unattractive or unacceptable.

      An early (and unmerited) offer of unconditional commitment is unattractive. A refusal to commit at all is unacceptable.

      It goes without saying that any overture from a man a woman is not attracted to is not going to be attractive to her. If she is attracted, then her attraction may be increased or decreased by behaviors. On the spectrum of male mating behaviors, supplication on the left and inability to demonstrate love and affection on the right are outside the range of what women find attractive or acceptable in a mate.

  • Lokland

    and thus ‘normal’ men are not attractive.

    Ex. height

  • Jesse

    I have not read the pertinent comments very carefully, but perhaps this ‘creeped out by expressions of male love’ has something to do with whether it’s done in a more dominant or submissive way. For example, gushing adoration along the lines of “Gosh, you are so unbelievably beautiful that I can’t believe you chose to be with me” can come across as very submissive and mushy. Certain women may not like the feeling that their man is powerless in the face of their beauty. They don’t like feeling that their man is powerless, period.

    That’s not to say that a man can’t think very highly of his woman’s looks. If I were in the early stages of a (potentially) serious relationship, I would certainly communicate my appreciation of her beauty, but in a more restrained way. I’d probably compliment her just once that evening – “you look lovely” as she opens her door when I’ve come to pick her up for the date.

    I would be less restrained but probably still follow similar lines once we were in a relationship. There is a significant difference in tone between “you’ve got cute lips” and an awed utterance of “you are amazingly gorgeous.”

    (Perhaps ‘looks’ in the above paragraphs can be replaced with something else, like personality or overall compatibility. I haven’t checked. What I do know is that personally I would prefer not to gush in any event. I have no doubt that I can let a woman know she is very special to me without getting mushy. And for the record I see this as very separate from emotional intensity, i.e. what I’ve outlined above does not mean a man can’t be a passionate force in the relationship.)

    Jesus. Does that make any sense? Fingers crossed that it does.

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

      @Jesse

      What I do know is that personally I would prefer not to gush in any event. I have no doubt that I can let a woman know she is very special to me without getting mushy. And for the record I see this as very separate from emotional intensity, i.e. what I’ve outlined above does not mean a man can’t be a passionate force in the relationship.)

      I think it does have a lot to do with dominance and submission. When a man is supplicating, submissive and even smothering in his love, it gives a woman all the power in a relationship. She is completely emotionally dominant by virtue of the fact that she is less invested. Most women do not enjoy that role in a relationship. Not only that, it is well documented that women find dominance arousing. When a man assumes a submissive role, he denies her her preferred role, and makes her uncomfortable.

      In my experience that kind of early gushing is generally correlated with other behaviors as well, such as a tendency to become easily threatened or jealous. A resentment of independence and an expectation that a woman will account for her time.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Susan,

    If you define abnormal as a categorical pejorative, then obviously.

    @Damien,

    Actually, that’s precisely what Estelle was, down to the brown eyes and sundress, and you’re absolutely right on the second part, too — “good family” in that world means “those few people who aren’t scum of the earth.” But hating everyone who’s not them is the defining characteristic of nobility in France since before the Vikings stopped trying to sack Paris. There are many parts of French society I quite admire, but their “good families” are not one of them.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan and JQ

    It was I that wrote the author and told him about HUS. lol

    JQ, you can see where this started in

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/12/11/relationshipstrategies/girl-game-today-same-as-it-ever-was/#comment-173908

    where I asserted that “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.”

    Susan replied with a post she made a couple years ago that quoted excerpts of a study that said that men were “significantly” impacted by other men (especially if they were more attractive) showing interest in a woman. However, the translation from the research world to the layman’s world misused the word ‘significant’. In the common usage it means large or notable whereas in a statistical sense it just means very likely not to be by chance, assuming that all the assumptions of the experiment hold.

    However, on a 1-9 scale (and the scale has problems in directly applying it to looks like we do, perhaps) the men increased their rating of the women’s looks by about 0.225 (or 0.24 if you subtract off the control ratings) more, when other men showed interest, than when they didn’t.

    This is a small effect and so I say it’s consistent with my claim that men are not affected very much in what they think of a woman’s looks (I believe I allowed for somewhere in the 0-0.5 range on a 1-10 scale).

    The author says that you can’t make this comparison between those that showed interest and those that didn’t, but if you can’t do that then you can’t even cite this study to argue against my position above. The men actually rated the women as more attractive in both the cases where other men did and didn’t show interest, they just did it more in the cases where interest was shown.

    I still stand by my personal observation that the way I rate other women is not affected very much by other men’s opinions of or interest in them. But I do allow that as much as about 0.25 or even 0.5 could happen.

    In terms of practical advice, improving her looks by losing weight, getting better hair and makeup and clothes (assuming the typical woman that has room to improve there) will make a larger difference in how men perceive her looks than being seen with other men showing interest. Next to looks, smiling more and being more friendly and approachable will likely have more influence on actually being approached. Once those two areas are exhausted then it might make sense to worry about being seen with other men showing interest. But even there, that raises the potential problem of her also being perceived as having too much competition or being slutty and making a man decide that his effort has a lower chance of success.

    You can follow the argument later on in the comments of the link I provided.

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

      @HanSolo

      It was I that wrote the author and told him about HUS. lol

      How interesting! Did he respond to you directly? I am curious to know what you think of his assertion that most people have a defensive posture wrt being influenced by social information. I ask because this particular debate seemed extremely important to you in a personal way – in that you were very invested in “proving” social information does not affect men much.

      I don’t believe anyone ever suggested that being seen as attractive to other men was a practical strategy along the lines of maximizing physical attractiveness. Indeed, social proof for women is likely to result directly from physical attractiveness. I made this point in the debate – for both sexes, the same qualities that make one person attractive to others generally make them attractive to you. Attractive people are preselected, so I’m not sure how much information preselection provides. I think it’s most likely to be useful when a less attractive male attracts female attention for other qualities, e.g., brilliant sense of humor, wealth, fame, etc.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Susan:
    “It seems to me that “love at first sight” or “coup de foudre” must be lust or infatuation based on looks alone – so how would the lower SMV person merit the passion? ”

    I see how you view it, and I guess the “SMV“ would need a less strict categorizing definition. We all base our comments largely on our own anecdotal experiences. I’ve had two of those “love at first sight“, and do not wish to indulge in it anymore, in order to survive.
    However, what I can say about the “coup de foudre“ is that, yes, the looks and infatuation are a stronger factor than in other male/female encounter, but it is more than that. My own first one happened when I was at a much lower social/economical scale than hers, yet the way our glances “clinched“ immediately were overwhelmingly infatuous. I guess you’ve read Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina, when Anna meets Vronsky for the first time at the ball. It’s all there…
    The second happened when it was the other way around: She was on a much lower “scale“ than me. I think the social difference in both cases had increased that instant “insane“ passion. In other words, on top of the infatuation was this element of “breaking society’s rules because we were so much into one another“ that enhanced the will to “jump off the cliff together”, as you put it. Anyway, Stendhal, who was by far no stranger to this, labelled it a disease, and it is indeed. In French, we very commonly call it “la maladie d’amour“.

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

      @Damien

      I think the social difference in both cases had increased that instant “insane“ passion. In other words, on top of the infatuation was this element of “breaking society’s rules because we were so much into one another“ that enhanced the will to “jump off the cliff together”, as you put it.

      Yes, I see. The forbidden fruit. Sexual rebellion is often intoxicating. I was defining SMV more strictly in terms of looks. Also, in the U.S. we have fewer class distinctions. A liaison that would raise eyebrows and excite passion would probably need to be waaayyyy out there – like a female PhD from an independently wealthy New England family mating with a rap singer with no record deal.

  • Damien Vulaume

    “Women do not find abnormal male behavior sexy.”

    Abnormal, no, but different from the norm, certainly…
    And in the end they always marry the normal ones. A depressing thought for passion here, and I guess something that justifies the saying that women are of the earth, more dominated by physical, rational facts than anything else. Their need for security trumps everything else in the end.

    Jesse #1248
    It makes more sense than you think: It’s DEAD ON RIGHT. It’s all about the manner, the spontaneity and the moment when you express those things. You must be quite a seducer yourself.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Russ.
    ”But hating everyone who’s not them is the defining characteristic of nobility in France since before the Vikings stopped trying to sack Paris. There are many parts of French society I quite admire, but their “good families” are not one of them.”

    Looks like we totally agree on some of the nastiest socio-cultural aspects of “French culture” at large. I however would substitute the phrasing “hating” by “despising”, which is in my book even worse.
    Yes, there are some Estelle, Florence, or Claire flying around in France. They are the pinacle of flowers, the French way. Every culture has its own “Estelles”, or, flowers with a different colour, sometimes more hidden than in others.
    As an aside that relates to our observations about the nobility in France, I guess you and everybody else here noticed my rather snarky comments on “mamzel Anne” problems… I was once “Anne’s sister’s bartender” (I mean that in a figurative, way), hence know very well the depth of love and emotions these people are capable of displaying: Close to zero.

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

    Some of the less-loveable attributes of traditional aristocracies are being copied in the U.S. by those who place excessive emphasis on educational credentials.

  • OffTheCuff

    Jesse, I agree totally.

    And how do men learn how to approach this from the right frame? Experience. Which leads me back to my point of experience/preselection/frame being far more important than the actual words themselves, which Cooper picked up on perfectly.

    There are limits. Even SayWhaat, who’s BF said exactly that, would probably get icked out if he did it too much – because it would show his frame has slipped. A short window into a sensitive soul, that’s quickly closed shut, is mysterious and intoxicating. An unconstructed firehouse spewing goeey liquid everywhere just makes a mess.

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

      A short window into a sensitive soul, that’s quickly closed shut, is mysterious and intoxicating. An unconstructed firehouse spewing goeey liquid everywhere just makes a mess.

      Are these our only choices? Why must it always be binary? This is the failure of Game, I think. The first option is certainly preferable to the second, but it is by no means the sweet spot – far from it.

  • OffTheCuff

    *unconstrained firehose.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @David Foster
    “Some of the less-loveable attributes of traditional aristocracies are being copied in the U.S. by those who place excessive emphasis on educational credentials.”

    Nodding quiet smile here: To me, witnessing the Beacon hill and “Harvard-related-areas” crowd mimicking the English aristocracy was indeed an instructive lesson about human nature, especially in a country that takes pride in promoting self achievement over class distinctions…

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

    Re: expressive language,
    I was never icked out by it (and…. erm, let’s just say there was lots of expressive language in the beginning of my relationship. My BF bought us notebooks to write love letters to each other while we were separated and as a gift to me, he filled his!).

    However, I do get the keen sense that Hope and I actually are outliers on this front. We both got very emotional very quickly in our respective relationships (it is weird how similar my BF and her hubby are… math-oriented, built the same, even somewhat similar faces) which is not something many young people are apt to do these days. I like to talk about my BF and how expressive he is and was in the very beginning, but the honest truth is that I’m just one person. While I know the ladies here hate the outlier label, I’m going to go ahead and apply it to myself when it comes to rapid emotional escalation on the part of the man.

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

      @Olive

      While I know the ladies here hate the outlier label, I’m going to go ahead and apply it to myself when it comes to rapid emotional escalation on the part of the man.

      I don’t think anyone would mind your describing yourself in any way you choose. What does create resentment is having one’s observations or experiences dismissed as not representative of the vast majority by another commenter.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Damien#1253,

    Certes honi soit qui mal y pense.

    ::sarcastic agreement::

  • Russ in Texas

    As a Texan I tend to find East-Central and Eastern Europe considerably more sympathetic. And the brandy’s (much) better.

    Since I seem to recall that you go to Moravia, may I recommend the following to you? It’s about a woman (and a distinctly “low SMV” woman), you’ll recognize well:
    http://www.amazon.com/Valerias-Last-Stand-Marc-Fitten/dp/1608192091

  • Sassy6519

    For me, personally, too much emoting is a turn off. I like it when a man can strike a balance, with regards to emotional expression. If a man does share his feelings with me, I like it when he can deliver them from a place of masculine strength instead of whining or supplication.

    The guy I’m dating actually has a surprising knack for it. When he talks about his emotions, which is very rare (thank god), he states them from a very strong frame. It’s a turn on. I had a date with him last night actually, and he revealed himself to be way more dominant than I originally assumed. It was tingle inducing, to be sure.

  • Damien Vulaume

    “Are these our only choices? Why must it always be binary?”

    I was just about to say that. Blessed are the chalenging views defying those dreadful binary solutions.

  • Russ in Texas

    Sassy,

    I trend towards the same – I show my feelings through my actions. If I talk about my feelings explicitly, it’s sure not every-day-oatmeal on the plate.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Are these our only choices? Why must it always be binary? This is the failure of Game, I think. The first option is certainly preferable to the second, but it is by no means the sweet spot – far from it.”

    The window is short, not nonexistent. Of course it’s a continuum – but if your feelings about a woman are constant, then any emoting is going to be short relatively, by definition.

    That is, that short window IS the balance, to me.

    Personally, I’m an actions-type of person. But I know how much words mean. I don’t even buy sappy cards for most of those typical birthday/anniversary occasions. That means, when I have my overtly sappy moments, they have a lot more impact.

    Example: I once wrote a love song to my wife, while she was away for the summer break. But I did it my style, on some paper sheet music. She’s a good piano player, so, she had to sit down at her piano to hear it. I like contemporary music, so it came out like a Debbie Gibson tune interpreted by Charles Ives.

    I found out a recently, that she kept this silly little piece of paper for 20 years.

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

      Example: I once wrote a love song to my wife, while she was away for the summer break. But I did it my style, on some paper sheet music. She’s a good piano player, so, she had to sit down at her piano to hear it. I like contemporary music, so it came out like a Debbie Gibson tune interpreted by Charles Ives.

      I found out a recently, that she kept this silly little piece of paper for 20 years.

      That’s a lovely story. Obviously, you struck the right balance of whimsy, creativity, uniqueness and sentiment.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Russ-1264
    Why sarcastic? :-)
    Thanks for the link.

  • Russ in Texas

    Only because, to go from the sublime to the ridiculous, “well friend, ah mallyponse it.”

    :)

  • OffTheCuff

    Russ & Sassy, that’s exactly what I meant.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    I feel like I have built a dam to hold it back but the rains keep falling and the reservoir is always brimming to the top.

    … it never was about a dam … and it never was about the rains … it never was … it never will be …

    It was, and it always will be about one word … and only one word :

    ‘Hello’

    … the only word you have to say … the only word that has ever had any meaning …

    … that one word with which you can say this :

    It was worth it … I could say ‘Hello’ to you … I have thought of you … I have dreamed of you … and now I’ve met you …

    … now don’t go all teary-eyed me … I’ve met you … I have really met you … now you’re gonna do your duties … now you’re gonna do your stuff … and you’re not gonna complain … you’re not gonna moan … because you’re gonna finish this … you will not cry about this … never cry about this … nobody cares.

    … because in another life you’re gonna say ‘Hello’ to me … for it’s your turn to say ‘Hello’ to me …

    … and it will be worth it … it will really be worth it … because then I can say : ‘How have you been’

    … and mean it …

    With great love comes great tragedy. We’ve always known this. We will always know this …

    … and between the tragedy, and that Brownian Motion which is modern Game Theory … there is a reason, and only one reason … that would should a challenge to all of this :

    Hope.

    For is love not a hope in the visible of the intangible ?

    And is faith not a hope in something tangible, from the the invisible ?

    It all leads back to hope. The only that has always mattered is …

    hope.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    How interesting! Did he respond to you directly? I am curious to know what you think of his assertion that most people have a defensive posture wrt being influenced by social information. I ask because this particular debate seemed extremely important to you in a personal way – in that you were very invested in “proving” social information does not affect men much.

    Yes, we have emailed a few times. I can agree that most people wouldn’t admit to being affected much by social information. To the extent it happens it is likely subconscious and so people might feel defensive if apprised of it.

    I initially responded to point 4 of Doris Langley Moore’s 10 general principles because it just seemed so foreign to my experience. I gave examples of famous men married to average or slightly above average looking women and that it really did not make me rate their looks higher or want them more than if they weren’t with those men. Khloe Kardashian and Michael Jordan’s 1st wife are two that come to mind. For that matter, Michael Jordan’s current girlfriend is quite attractive but not overly gorgeous and I sincerely don’t think that I rate her looks any higher than I would if she weren’t with him.

    http://www.zimbio.com/dating/qKZIb1jDLUF/Michael+Jordan+engaged+Yvette+Prieto/Yvette+Prieto

    The one area where I would admit that it affects me is in giving a second look at a woman to see if I had been missing something. I might subconsciously start focusing on her more positive physical aspects and so I could see that raising her looks by maybe 0.25 or, at most, in rare cases, 0.5.

    I went into reading the studies with a fairly open mind but found that the effects were fairly small (to the extent that you can glean anything about it).

    Where I got more invested had mostly to do with SayWhaat snarking out (IMO) on INTJ for pointing out some possible alternative explanations of why the male interest rose in the original Skyler Place paper and my feeling a fraternal desire to defend him (not so much team man but more someone I like). TBH, at the time I was getting tired of Megaman’s constant attacks on INTJ (not that INTJ’s behavior, opinions and ideas are never worthy of criticism) and so a further attack on INTJ pushed those buttons and I took it upon myself to try and really see what was in the paper and when I found the effects to be small I felt compelled to share and explain that.

    So, a small amount of personal investment in the idea but most of it was a desire to restore fairness and justice to the universe. :)

    I think that when the author says that his study can’t be used to show the magnitude of the effect of male interest on how men rate female looks that that is due to the experiment not being set up to really focus on that and also, perhaps, that in subtracting the two numbers like I did that then you would have to combine the uncertainties from each number (at the most simple level by take the square root of the sum of the squares) and that would make that difference statistically not significant. Anyway, I just did the best I could with what was presented in the paper to try and answer the question of how much men showing interest makes other men change their ratings of the women’s attractiveness compared to men not showing interest.

    I don’t believe anyone ever suggested that being seen as attractive to other men was a practical strategy along the lines of maximizing physical attractiveness. Indeed, social proof for women is likely to result directly from physical attractiveness. I made this point in the debate – for both sexes, the same qualities that make one person attractive to others generally make them attractive to you. Attractive people are preselected, so I’m not sure how much information preselection provides. I think it’s most likely to be useful when a less attractive male attracts female attention for other qualities, e.g., brilliant sense of humor, wealth, fame, etc.

    I agree.

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

      @HanSolo

      Thanks for explaining, that makes sense.

  • HanSolo

    That should read Javert-ian constant attacks on INTJ….

  • J

    The girls commented on how hearing such things “too early” could induce a cringe. So, I’m going to out on a limb and argue that with enough preselection, there is no “too early” – and that “too early” is merely a replacement for “not enough preselection” or “lower smv.”

    Sometimes it just translates to “This guy barely knows me. How can he really feel what he says he feels?” Back in the day, I had a few men ask for exclusivity on the first or second date. I really distrusted men who felt that they knew me that well that early. It seemed to me that they either wanted to lock me down immediately soley because of my looks or that they were desperate for a girlfrined. Either way, I didn’t feel that they knew the inner me well enough for the commitment they were offering to be real or worthwhile.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @J
    Yep…
    “I was on a date with an American guy once. We had met only once before, and then he asked me out. So, we’re on a date, and he’s telling me what he’s expecting of a girl. Something along the lines of “I’d like to see us dating, and then get exclusive maybe in a month or so, and then develop a relationship”. I wanted to tell him, but dude, I just met you! Chill! I don’t even know if I like you yet. I thought it was totally creepy and very insecure of him. ”

    A foreign girl commenting on her dating experiences on an american campus…

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

      Something along the lines of “I’d like to see us dating, and then get exclusive maybe in a month or so, and then develop a relationship”. I wanted to tell him, but dude, I just met you! Chill! I don’t even know if I like you yet. I thought it was totally creepy and very insecure of him. ”

      Dating is shopping for a mate. Being pressured to “buy” the first person you see, hurried out the door before you have a chance to see for yourself, is going to arouse suspicion.

      It obviously implies insecurity, but even more worrisome, it’s very controlling – it’s a high pressure tactic. Major red flag.

  • Ted D

    J – “Back in the day, I had a few men ask for exclusivity on the first or second date. I really distrusted men who felt that they knew me that well that early.”

    Just to be contrary, I’d like to point out that this isn’t too far from my normal dating script. By date 2 or 3, I’m either ready to go exclusive or move on. At that point I don’t know a woman well enough to know if I love her and that we are compatible, but I DO NOT follow the “spinning plates” model of dating. Which means, as soon as I decide I want to pursue a relationship, I want all other avenues shut down during the trial period. I won’t even start the task of truly getting to know a woman until exclusivity is in place. To that point, all I’m doing is looking for reasons to next her. If I don’t find one by date 3, it moves on to exclusivity or being over.*

    Note* – this is not a hard date 3 rule. But we either get exclusive pretty early on or it ends. I’m not interested in wasting my time and energy on a non-exclusive relationship, and I want her undivided consideration once I start putting in the time and effort.

    Is this an unreasonable request? Perhaps. But it isn’t asking for more than I offer myself.

  • Cooper

    “Dating is shopping for a mate. Being pressured to “buy” the first person you see, hurried out the door before you have a chance to see for yourself, is going to arouse suspicion.

    It obviously implies insecurity, but even more worrisome, it’s very controlling – it’s a high pressure tactic. Major red flag.”

    But, that’s a red flag in return.

    I’ve displayed myself to a girl, (like by date 3, as Ted has said) .. And then she wants to “keep looking” I’M GONE!!

    That’s called being placed on the back- burner – red flag

    I’m not going to get “taken up to the till” and wait, while she shops around to see if there’s anything else she likes. Better is out there – fact. If she wants to keep looking – I move on.

    Is that not simple? Or is it that being overly insecure?
    I’d argue it’s common self-respect.

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

      @Cooper

      If she wants to keep looking – I move on.

      Is that not simple? Or is it that being overly insecure?
      I’d argue it’s common self-respect.

      I think this depends on how well you have gotten to know one another. Date 3 strikes me as an OK time to discuss being exclusive – and to escalate sexually. Commitment of the sort where you meet each other’s families? That seems awfully soon to me. I read somewhere that the typical timetable for a relationship with a Capital R is 4-6 months – generally that is set by the guy. I could do 4, but 6 seems a bit long to me. This is a matter of personal preference to some degree, and if you aren’t on the same page it’s not a good match, and moving on is definitely the right move.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    It often takes longer for female attraction to grow, and this has been verified many times. Male attraction is largely visual, so he knows at a glance whether or not he would date a girl. This discrepancy means the male is often “waiting” for the female to catch up to his level of interest. It also means that if he chases too fast and too soon, the female is probably going to balk.

    By the way, my husband and I were in the same “social circle” for several weeks before we really started talking. He “grew” on me during that time, and I found him more and more interesting (I would refer to him as “the guy with the hot voice”). So when we did start talking more, we moved at a brisk pace. I was more willing to make initiation and escalation. There was no traditional date 1, date 2 timeline, but that relaxed and slow build-up process made me much more receptive to his gushing.

    But if he did that on day one, I would have been like “WTF.” Timing is key here.

  • Emily

    If a guy expresses strong feelings too soon, then if often comes across as either desperate or insincere. IMO it will often make the girl assume that he goes around doing this with everybody (emotional slut). One the one hand, it looks like beta supplication, which is a turnoff. But also, if this guy is able to fall in love based on nothing, then what’s to stop him from developing sudden passionate feelings for another girl down the line? This sort of thing can be an indication of a very impulsive personality.

  • Ted D

    Emily – “But also, if this guy is able to fall in love based on nothing, then what’s to stop him from developing sudden passionate feelings for another girl down the line?”

    The thing is, I can feel as HanSolo described without being “in love” with a particular woman. A lot of the “mushy” stuff is abstract to me, meaning that it is an ideal feeling or state, and any woman I was “in love” with would be the focus of them. In a way, I am “in love” with the idea OF love, and any woman I fall “in love” with would be the beneficiary of those feelings of love.

    I can see that from a woman’s perspective, it seems like an awful leap of faith for a guy to “catch feelings” by date 2 or 3, but understand that in some ways I am always in that state of “catching feelings” when single, and much of the intensity involved is not based on my opinion/knowledge of her, but on those ideals I hold and how as she passes my filters I can begin to see her fit into the structure. So an early desire to get exclusive to me is NOT an indication of being “in love” so much as my conclusion that the possibility exists and I am interested in pursuing it. I simply do not put an ounce of effort into falling “in love” until exclusivity is established.

    As far as what keeps me faithful? In short, conscious effort and focus on my family and wife are what keeps me from “developing feelings” for some other woman down the line. I don’t allow it, and I keep myself out of situations where it is likely to happen. On rare instances when I find some other woman on my radar, I ruthlessly squash any whiff of interest on my part and drop ice on the situation. I’ve only had to do so once, and it is why I work harder now at simply avoiding those situations entirely.

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

      @Ted

      much of the intensity involved is not based on my opinion/knowledge of her, but on those ideals I hold and how as she passes my filters I can begin to see her fit into the structure.

      This is precisely what women object to. We want the intensity to be based on your knowledge of us, not on some relationship requisition order you’re looking to fill.

  • J

    Just to be contrary, I’d like to point out that this isn’t too far from my normal dating script. By date 2 or 3, I’m either ready to go exclusive or move on. At that point I don’t know a woman well enough to know if I love her and that we are compatible, but I DO NOT follow the “spinning plates” model of dating. Which means, as soon as I decide I want to pursue a relationship, I want all other avenues shut down during the trial period. I won’t even start the task of truly getting to know a woman until exclusivity is in place. To that point, all I’m doing is looking for reasons to next her. If I don’t find one by date 3, it moves on to exclusivity or being over.*

    I can understand your policy as a self-protective move and have never been one to spin plates myself. My question is though, do the women involved feel unduly pressured into a relationhip with you? To me that’s the scary part of having a guy come on too strong in the beginning.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Emily, yes, here’s definitely a part of it where women think if a guy can develop intense feelings based on very little other than looks, then he is likely to fall for some other pretty face.

    On the other hand, if he is not easily impressed by appearances alone, but only develops feelings after getting to know her well, then he is both choosy and also confirms that he wants her for her. Sure, it’s a bit of “snowflaking,” but it is what women want.

    A few dates cannot possibly be enough time for the man to know a woman well, unless they also talk outside of those dates for hours at a time. My husband and I talked for 3-6 hours a day for a week before we started really emoting to each other. That’s on top of the previous amount of time being acquaintances.

    So yeah, I think the men are being unreasonable in demanding date 3 exclusivity.

  • J

    @DV

    Yep, that quote just about sums it up. Thanks!

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

    I can see that happening with some women. With more cautious women, though, I could see it backfiring and her thinking, “he just says that to every girl to get into her pants.”

    Yeah if the guy is attractive, confident and has a reputation of ladies man this looks like “a pick up line’ not sincere for the unrestricted type. I would be more likely to think he is sincere if he is a bit nervous about expressing this, like is really the first time he felt strongly for a woman and he just can’t help himself and tells me. But I’m weird like that.

    I think an important practical ramification of this in terms of Girl Game may be that women should attempt to make sex at least appear to be a spontaneous act of female need, confirming the male’s dominance and hotness, rather than allowing the man to ever feel that he is paying for sex with a reluctant partner as part of a contrived tit-for-tat (see what I did there? lol) resource exchange.

    Very good general advice but with the caveat that you are unrestricted your brain is wired to get an extra reward from spontaneous sex from an attractive mate. Some men might not find it as rewarding and some other men might find it meaningless and cheap. Women need to calibrate, don’t sell the sex but don’t assume that making a man feel like a million dollars for sleeping with him means he will wife you up.

    In fact, when it does, it is often BECAUSE the smv is different…. Long debate.
    IME love at first sight is a mystery I mostly think they are probably genetically compatible to a high level more than about looks, given that I had seen many apparently mismatched couples like you say falling so hard for no apparent reason.

    but I believe that most men want to provide resources and protection for their women, but also want the women to have sex with them because they are hot alpha-type males (rather than having sex with them because they are solid, reliable “provisioning” type males).

    You are assuming that being reliable cannot be part of what makes you hot for some women. I never looked at a man as a prospect till he showed some reliable signs, hot is cheap, reliable is worth gold, IMO. I know men don’t see it that way but is true for some women that knowing they can trust a man is a way to keep their legs opened to them, YMMV.

    In French, we very commonly call it “la maladie d’amour“.

    Interesting in my culture “Mal de Amores” means when you get rejected, betrayed or cheated on by a person you love and comes with all sorts of things, like depression, binge drinking, drug use and even suicide.

    Dating is shopping for a mate. Being pressured to “buy” the first person you see, hurried out the door before you have a chance to see for yourself, is going to arouse suspicion.

    I guess it gives a used car salesman vibe i”f he wants to sell that car so fast the car most have some defect…”
    Now I will add this depends on the culture, in mine you were supposed to
    get exclusive fast and then continue dating unless something really bad happens or you fell in love with someone else. Being boyfriend/girlfriend was the equivalent of dating.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @HS

    Javert-ian constant attacks on INTJ…

    Heh, he’s certainly no Valjean. I don’t recall him stealing anything, just having a very low opinion of Susan’s work. Hence my low opinion of him. An ironic waste of time…

    But Ms. SayWhaat was correct in the main: why should the boy who constantly cried “crap statistics” be taken seriously when HE cites *anything*? :???:

  • Iggles

    @ Cooper:

    I’ve displayed myself to a girl, (like by date 3, as Ted has said) .. And then she wants to “keep looking” I’M GONE!!

    I’m late to the party here.. but as an restricted girl I don’t see the issue with this.

    I think by date 3 you can/should have a sense if the person you seeing may be LTR potential. Nothing wrong with putting dates on hold to see where it goes. Give yourself a month just dating that person. If you’re still unsure if you want to be boyfriend/girlfriend then perhaps you should end it and resume dating others!

    Honestly, by date 3 if the topic of not dating others makes you uncomfortable than it’s probably best for the other person to next you! If you’re really into someone taking the time to date them exclusivity before making it official shouldn’t send you running for the hills! If it does, than THAT’S a red flag.

    YMMV.. My bf and I went on 5 dates before I brought up exclusivity (not dating other people) and he was happy to call me his girlfriend — which was a welcomed surprise! I was not like, “whoa, let’s slow down here before we decide to be official!”. We’ve been dating for almost a year now.

  • Iggles

    @ Ted D:

    I can see that from a woman’s perspective, it seems like an awful leap of faith for a guy to “catch feelings” by date 2 or 3

    Only if there has been no communication between dates. Then you don’t have enough information to go on.

    My bf and I had a 3 hour phone conversation before meeting up for date 1. In between dates we spoke a lot. I could see the situation being different if you only speak (or rather text these days) a few times a week and meet in person of just 1 date a week.. but maybe I’m a unicorn but that’s not my style. I would want to meet up as much a possible to get to know each other.

    but understand that in some ways I am always in that state of “catching feelings” when single, and much of the intensity involved is not based on my opinion/knowledge of her, but on those ideals I hold and how as she passes my filters I can begin to see her fit into the structure. So an early desire to get exclusive to me is NOT an indication of being “in love” so much as my conclusion that the possibility exists and I am interested in pursuing it.

    +1

    I feel the same way. Filter hard upfront and then see if any red flags appear later. Much better than casting a wide net and getting attached to someone you’re incompatible with.

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

    I feel the same way. Filter hard upfront and then see if any red flags appear later. Much better than casting a wide net and getting attached to someone you’re incompatible with.

    I think that is the difference between negative dating and positive dating a negative dater looks for reasons to “pick the person” so his/her list is probably high “Looks, feminity/confidence, education…” is working from adding stuff and the lack of some stuff break the idea of dating or at least the exclusivity while the positive dater start from eliminating red flags and adding positive points to the reasons to keep seeing this person. So without red flags the person gets a chance to earn love, sex/commitment even if he doesn’t have a ton of good qualities.
    I do think that positive daters probably grow slowly into someone and are preoccupied for things like character and the future while the other type is probably more into having fun and having less issues to deal with in a relationship, they are probably unrestricted too, YMMV.

  • OffTheCuff

    J: “Something along the lines of “I’d like to see us dating, and then get exclusive maybe in a month or so, and then develop a relationship”. I wanted to tell him, but dude, I just met you! Chill! I don’t even know if I like you yet. I thought it was totally creepy and very insecure of him.

    There are two interpretions of this. One is that he see it as a possibility, and is interested in monogamy as a concept. The latter is that he knows he wants it with you specifically, right now.

    Either way, even if you feel this way as a possibility – which as I see it is merely admitting the absence of plate-spinning and the willingness to date serially, NEVER SAY IT OVERTLY! Creep!

    Women will auto-translate what was *intended* into a worst-case scenario of: “I love you and want to have your babies!!”

    I was happy when my wife told me that she never parallel-dated anyone. That means, she would rule out with 100% certianty a man, before even considering the next. It meant we were on the same page in dating philosophy, back then. However, in accordance with Game, she was the one to ask me. I just kept my mouth shut – unintentionally, but correctly.

    Keep those emotions in check, shut up, act aloof, and let her figure out you intentions from your actions.

  • OffTheCuff

    P.S. The crime J talks about, if it’s the first interpretation – is not want that sort of thing, but rather, being overt, killing off plausible deniability, and boxing her in to making a decision. All which is anti-game that can be easily eliminated… by keeping your trap shut, and avoiding putting words to emotions.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sorry, that wasn’t J, but DV quoting someone else, perhaps. Same point, though.

  • OffTheCuff

    Emily: “If a guy expresses strong feelings too soon, then if often comes across as either desperate or insincere. IMO it will often make the girl assume that he goes around doing this with everybody (emotional slut). One the one hand, it looks like beta supplication, which is a turnoff. But also, if this guy is able to fall in love based on nothing, then what’s to stop him from developing sudden passionate feelings for another girl down the line? This sort of thing can be an indication of a very impulsive personality.”

    Yes! Like chastity or virginity for a man, it’s a *huge* downside at worst, and neutral at best, even if her assumptions turn out to be 100% wrong. Hence the best strategy for men is to shut up, and either parallel date, or at least leave it as a tacit possibility, until she emotionally escalates.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan, Han

    Cool that you got the guy to read HUS. :D I’m curious what his thoughts were (I’ll read through the rest of this thread to see if you’ve already posted them here).

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

    If a guy expresses strong feelings too soon, then if often comes across as either desperate or insincere.

    Interestingly enough, I’d say my BF and I were both a little “desperate” when we got together. I escalated physically almost immediately, because I was giving up all my cards hoping for love. He escalated emotionally almost immediately after in the same vein, sort of giving up all his cards as well.

    “Desperate” is a rather loaded word sometimes, I think. It sort of conjures images of forlorn lovers clinging to each other pathetically. With my BF and I, I think it was that we’d both struck out so many times and were so ready to find someone that we immediately were like “Let’s call a draw! Here’s what I have in my hand!” It wasn’t necessarily a bad thing and it worked for us.

    I think too many people worry too much about coming off as desperate, or about the other person coming off as desperate. If anything, people are desperately trying to not seem desperate. That, to me, is sad.

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    As far as what keeps me faithful? In short, conscious effort and focus on my family and wife are what keeps me from “developing feelings” for some other woman down the line. I don’t allow it, and I keep myself out of situations where it is likely to happen. On rare instances when I find some other woman on my radar, I ruthlessly squash any whiff of interest on my part and drop ice on the situation. I’ve only had to do so once, and it is why I work harder now at simply avoiding those situations entirely.

    Going on a tangent, this was why I was so angry at Rob Stark in GoT. He did the exact opposite. He knew he was already bethroted and shouldn’t have let feelings develop for someone else, especially knowing the geopolitical consequences involved. Instead, he did the exact opposite, actively pursuing meetings with that girl.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Hope,

    “On the other hand, if he is not easily impressed by appearances alone, but only develops feelings after getting to know her well, then he is both choosy and also confirms that he wants her for her. Sure, it’s a bit of “snowflaking,” but it is what women want.”

    I don’t think that’s snowflaking – I think that’s a sign of a mature man (no offense to HS, with whom I likely have simple constitutional differences); I could very easily have wound up married to a lovely Estonian lass who can only be described as a charitable 4 — not even a little fat, but oh, did she take a swan dive in the ugly tree. “Naturally homely” is the only way to say it. GREAT gal whose company I have always enjoyed and with whom I was quite compatible.

    Since she did eventually get married to a guy who’s NOT a cave troll, I think that more discerning men may not be all THAT rare.

  • Russ in Texas

    (my internet is down, and I”m at a cafe – if I’m very hideously slow to respond, it’s not personal but technological; no fix expected until Monday earliest)

  • Cooper

    “The thing is, I can feel as HanSolo described without being “in love” with a particular woman. A lot of the “mushy” stuff is abstract to me, meaning that it is an ideal feeling or state, and any woman I was “in love” with would be the focus of them. In a way, I am “in love” with the idea OF love, and any woman I fall “in love” with would be the beneficiary of those feelings of love.” – Tes

    I think this is the way traditional (relationship-oreinted) guys are going to feel.
    So, I don’t see why looking for love is so “gross” compared to looking for sex.
    (Cause it seems more appropriate to hide one, for the other)

    It once again makes it more acceptable to date for sex than love.
    And that, it’s more a DHV to have other women available to fuck, than it is to have other women possible to love…
    (Both are cases of having other options, simply with different intension behind them, but with totally different impressions)

    I hate being so black and white, but clearly *when it comes down to it* (like pure alpha over pure beta) it obviously much better to follow the dog-for-sex paradigm.

  • Kathy

    @ Bastiat Blogger

    “This is complex and I’ve had too much 15yo Redbreast whiskey tonight to articulate it well, but I believe that most men want to provide resources and protection for their women, but also want the women to have sex with them because they are hot alpha-type males (rather than having sex with them because they are solid, reliable “provisioning” type males). They need the pure affirmation of attractiveness in order to feel psychically charged. Even loyal beta “sheepdog” type guardians may need this distinction. ”

    You raise a good point, BB.

    I too believe that most men want a woman to love them for who they are, not what they can give a woman.
    I think it’s a basic human need, really. Don’t we ALL want to be loved by someone who thinks the world of us?

    A way that a woman shows her love for her man is to have sex with him. Even when she is not in the mood for it. I’ve initiated when I haven’t been in the mood for it, and just THAT act of initiating has gotten my motor running. So it’s all good. ;)

    Initiating, turns me on.. And it also makes my husband feel desired..

    Years ago when the kids were babies, and I was often tired and not in the mood, I would still initiate for my husband’s sake.. Because I loved him and because I knew that he needed sex..

    It’s just second nature, to me.

    My husband is reassured of my love, because even after 17 years he knows I still desire HIM and no other.

    Mind you, I have to be careful these days about groping his goods in the kitchen, (whilst he is making one of his yummy stir fries) in case our 16 year old daughter makes an unscheduled appearance. :)

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    Early bidders are suspect because they appear to be in a hurry to lock down the commitment before the woman has time to evaluate other options – the declaration appears to come from a mindset of scarcity or fear.

    This makes sense, hypothetically-speaking. I’ve disagreed in the past when you’ve equated first-time sex (for women) with long-term commitment (for men). They’re tangibly different IMO, and though not unrelated, it’s a bit like comparing apples and oranges.

    Given your oft-stated advice to young 20-something women: if you’re looking to get married, begin fielding candidates immediately post-college and “lock down” the most compatible mate as soon as he appears (paraphrased), this poses somewhat of a problem. Nobody wants to come across too strong, male or female. But this canard where guys wear their hearts on their sleeves on Date #1? I’ve never observed that IRL. Being overly eager or seeking to impress, sure, perhaps on blind dates. I’m not a fan of dating complete strangers anyway…

    But I’ve known some very successful couples who just clicked shortly after being introduced. No zero-sum games, no PLI nonsense, no strategic deception, no multiple partners, no harsh prejudging. Just 2 highly compatible singles who seal the deal after dating for about a month. I think that’s plenty of “get to know you” time.

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

      @Megaman

      But I’ve known some very successful couples who just clicked shortly after being introduced. No zero-sum games, no PLI nonsense, no strategic deception, no multiple partners, no harsh prejudging. Just 2 highly compatible singles who seal the deal after dating for about a month. I think that’s plenty of “get to know you” time.

      One of the things I can’t help doing is constantly asking young married couples how they met and got together. I find that most people love to tell their story, and most of them match your description. My guess is that these are the same folks who find ways to have relationships in college.

      To be clear, I am not suggesting that women kick guys to the curb for being interested. Or that women enjoy being tormented with worry about whether a guy likes them. In fact, I advise women that if you have to wonder, he doesn’t. Here we are discussing something a bit different – the guy who is not content to “go with the flow” but who laying down long-term plans from the start. Once you’ve got one party applying pressure – you’ve already ruled out the natural progression you described above, which I think is what most people want. Negotiating a sex for commitment deal sounds perfectly awful.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “This is precisely what women object to. We want the intensity to be based on your knowledge of us, not on some relationship requisition order you’re looking to fill.”

    And I want a woman to want me for who I am inside without having to fulfill some basic “dominant/alpha” role model for her. I want unconditional love to be real between a husband and wife.

    I completely understand your statement above, but as the song goes, you can’t always get what you want. Don’t get me wrong, I have a great deal of love and passion for my wife based on her being her. But the truth is some of the passion and love I provide in our relationship simply is NOT driven by her existence in my life, and would be there for any other woman that was in her shoes as my mate. That same passion burns in me regardless of if I’m in a relationship or not.

    It was this realization that cured my oneitis. Once I realized that my love and passion are not tied to any one woman, I understood that some of it simply exists even in the absence of a love interest in my life. I can understand how a woman might be disappointed at learning this, but it is what it is. I imagine it is about as disappointing as learning that “being nice” does nothing to attract a woman’s desire.

    But in a way it is exactly how I see “inviting a woman into my world.” I’m basically saying: “I’ve got all this to share with you if you want it, but you must accept that it isn’t all about you. Some of this is for me, and you will be my means to an end.” Thing is, my “means to an end” is mostly being the person I get to love and protect. I derive much joy and pleasure simply loving my wife. I love her for her, but I also love her for myself. If I ever love another woman (as I have in the past) I will love that woman differently for herself, but I will love her the same way for myself. Loving her fills her needs AND my own. She simply must accept that any number of women could fill that “for myself” role. It doesn’t make my wife any less special to me, it simply means that some of my basic love needs could be met by many, many other women.

    I suppose it might be rather similar to most men’s desire for sexual variety. At a basic level, they only have to pass the “boner” test. Some of my love needs simply have a low “boner” threshold. Keep in mind however how picky I am about anyone I spend time with. I screen everyone in my personal life like mad, so it is actually a rare occurrence that any woman makes it far along enough to trip my “romantic boner” threshold.

  • OffTheCuff

    Mega: “But this canard where guys wear their hearts on their sleeves on Date #1? I’ve never observed that IRL. Being overly eager or seeking to impress, sure, perhaps on blind dates. I’m not a fan of dating complete strangers anyway…”

    They never even get to date one. Boy says to girl in his social circle: “I really like you, can we go on a date sometime?” And then nothing happens. Happened to me once when I was 16, or so. Then, a second time, a few yesrs later, when a girl was really flirty but I failed to ask her out in time, because she had a boyfriend and I didn’t understand monkey-bars.

    Mega: “But I’ve known some very successful couples who just clicked shortly after being introduced. No zero-sum games, no PLI nonsense, no strategic deception, no multiple partners, no harsh prejudging. Just 2 highly compatible singles who seal the deal after dating for about a month. I think that’s plenty of “get to know you” time.”

    That would be me – and way less than a month. Maybe a week or two. But it required dropping a lot of anti-game as posted above. Even she would have been scared off with that shit, even if it was on my mind. Somehow I knew unconsciously how to dial back just enough.

    But she also *assumed* I had casual partners, and asked me to stop. She was suprised when I had none.

  • Lokland

    I think their are two types of exclusivity being dicussed here.

    1. Dating
    2. DTR talk, bf/gf labels

    If I was dating someone for three months and she DTR’d and I later found out she had been dating other guys up to that point.
    Shudder.

    Theres a hell of a lot of difference between “will you marry me” on date 1 and only dating one individual at a time (after the first few dates) which could be labelled as a form on unofficial exclusivity.

    Without that unoffical exclusivity period I don’t see actual exclsuvity being on the table. IMO.

    Also, guys don’t need to do the emoting intially. I get what the ladies are saying, giving away the goods for free is not a good idea when running any form of business.

    @Mega

    “No zero-sum games, no PLI nonsense, no strategic deception, no multiple partners, no harsh prejudging. Just 2 highly compatible singles who seal the deal after dating for about a month”

    Most (succesful) couples I know have followed this script with one caveat.
    There may have been multiple partners beforehand or leading up to (most cases not) which all disappeared pretty much instantly after meeting one another.

    Other than that, the line between first meeting and DTR was straight forward.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Ted D, that’s not very romantic at all lol… I have oneitis like crazy. My husband is not replaceable to me. My passion and love for him is 99.99% because he is HIM, not some random guy who could fill in his shoes. So I guess I can’t relate to the idea that mates are a dime a dozen.

    Maybe he would replace me rather quickly, but I definitely wouldn’t replace him in the blink of an eye…

  • Ted D

    Hope – I know it isn’t romantic. Taking the Red Pill pretty much killed all that nonsense off. Oh to be sure I’m still a hopeless romantic at heart. Now I just ALWAYS keep that all under wraps and do my best to only “show” it in controlled bursts. It seems simply allowing it to flow out naturally is a DLV for most women, and becomes a huge attraction killer.

    Why do you think I’m so torn about this stuff? What I want is to simply love my wife naturally, but it seems my natural state of “love” is just too freaking mushy and romantic for the vast majority of women. My “natural state” is all blue pill behavior straight out of he beta handbook. I can’t simply enjoy being “in love” because my natural “in love” behavior just sucks for long term attraction.

    I will never fully have oneitis again. I love my wife and I could never replace HER, but I could find another woman to fill her role. And in many ways, much of the emotion and feeling on my part would be exactly the same if it were with another woman. The new woman would be special to just as my wife is now, although from my limited experience she would be special in different ways.

    I can’t allow myself to have full on oneitis because it would kill our relationship. My natural oneitis is the worst kinds described by Athol and the ‘sphere, and I just don’t think that can coexist with a red pill mentality. Like I said, I have a lighter form of it for my wife, but she will never be “the one” to me, because logically I know there are other women out there I could be just as happy with.

    I hate being so unromantic, but the kind of romance I grew up believing in simply doesn’t exist.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Ted D, yeah but the kind of oneitis you grew up with said to be a total doormat, let yourself stagnate or regress, and it’s okay become mentally and physically unattractive (because the other person will love you “no matter what”). A lot of men and women have this attitude, which end in bad results.

    I never got that message growing up, because female looks were emphasized from the beginning. I have 20 BMI 3 months after giving birth and am still constantly vigilant.

    Self-development is a lifelong process, and doesn’t stop just because you marry your love. In fact because I love him, I don’t want to stop improving and being the best I can for him. Likewise he’s always working on one project or another, and he continues to be very attractive.

    So we can be very mushy with each other and tell each other all kinds of things that are supposed to be total no-no’s according to game terms, but we both have the “red pill” understanding underneath.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com Bastiat Blogger

    Kathy’s post gives me hope

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

      @BB

      Kathy’s post gives me hope

      You are a puzzle, BB. The unrestricted Explorer who wants the dopamine high but who wants to skip the mundane. Sky high SMV, could do the Clooney thing with ease. And yet you hope – but for what? Marriage? Family? Monogamous attachment? What do you want from a woman, and what are you prepared to give in return?

  • Ted D

    Hope – “Ted D, yeah but the kind of oneitis you grew up with said to be a total doormat, let yourself stagnate or regress, and it’s okay become mentally and physically unattractive (because the other person will love you “no matter what”). A lot of men and women have this attitude, which end in bad results.”

    LOL! What a fine description!

    All true. So I’m sure you can understand that from my perspective “oneitis” simply isn’t an option. In fact, there were many behaviors/ideals I had to give up on and/or go “cold turkey” on after finding MMSL. Yes, overall I am a happier person with a successful relationship. But part of me will always mourn my blue pill idealism, even while I logically understand how flawed it was. I certainly have a better relationship now than in the past, but it will never be the relationship I once believed it will be. I’m glad to know the truth and have the opportunity to make smart choices, but the price is there is no “magic” and “romance” in it from my POV. I do my best to manufacture a little of it for her sake, but to me it feels a bit like giving presents at Christmas did when our children believed in Santa…

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    Ted D, well there’s your problem then! We never had a Santa. :P

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    Negotiating a sex for commitment deal sounds perfectly awful.

    Yeah, my point exactly. A woman following this strategy probably fails 9 times out of 10. Men too, perhaps. Also, depending upon how strong his feelings were to begin with, the guy can withdraw commitment for any reason he wants in order to exit the situation. The girl can too, for that matter. That’s probably the nature of STRs: sex too soon, real commitment too late (or not at all).

    First-time sex is a defining event, no doubt, but long-term commitment applies to both parties. Restricted guys and girls want both, and there’s a lot of overlap in preferences as you’ve pointed out. After sex, nobody’s obligated to be loving, affectionate, and exclusive… unless they already were going in! That’s why it’s an apples and oranges comparison IMO.

    Happy New Year in advance!

  • Ted D

    Hope – “Ted D, well there’s your problem then! We never had a Santa. ”

    It’s all built on a foundation of lies I tell you!

    I kid, I kid. :-p

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Susan & Megaman
    Ah….., those incomprehensible, “magic killing, emotionally castrating” DTRs… Who in his right mind would, in order to approach a deer in a quiet forest, shout sentences like “do you speak my language?”, “Come near me, I will do you no harm!”…instead of softly coming back regularly in that forest, and slowly but surely gain the trust of the said deer to the point of having it coming near you because it feels no threat?

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Ted
    That is one thing to bury one’s “romantic side” based on stereotypical fairy tale types of ideals, because inadapted to reality, or, rather, inadapted to the way most women will perceive it, (i/e as something weak and grotesque) and another in trying to find the extraordinary passionate potential in them. By the way, did you grow up with any sisters around you?
    Where I do agree with you about the lie is when it comes to the life long term, which necessitates some kind of rational adjustment and compromise.

  • HanSolo

    @Marellus 1275

    Enjoyed your words.

    I wish a damn were never necessary but it is and so it is there.

  • J

    Mind you, I have to be careful these days about groping his goods in the kitchen, (whilst he is making one of his yummy stir fries) in case our 16 year old daughter makes an unscheduled appearance

    Then how can you enjoy that look of disgust that passes over an adolescent face when they realize that people over 45 still have sex?

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Anacoana:
    “love at first sight is a mystery I mostly think they are probably genetically compatible to a high level more than about looks, given that I had seen many apparently mismatched couples like you say falling so hard for no apparent reason.”

    Yes, you summarize it in a better way than I did. A mystery indeed, yet bound to fail in the long term for it is never a kind of love that leads towards a solid and profound link that makes us “sensitive” and inclined to learn who the other really is.

    “Mal de Amores” means when you get rejected, betrayed or cheated on by a person you love”

    I guess “mal de amores” translates more like “le mal d’amour”, whereas “la maladie d’amour” would rather be “la enfermedad de amor”, which is in French positive or negative, depending on the situation. But well, my Spanish dates back from High school from a a short mustached tyranical teacher from Valencia. We almost ended up killing him in the end. Lol.

  • Ted D

    DV – “By the way, did you grow up with any sisters around you?”

    Nope. I was an only child of an unwed mother born in 1970. I had two younger female cousins. I was raised by my mother living with my grandparents, and spent the majority of my youngest years home with my grandmother. I also had two aunts, and for a few years (until I was around 11) two uncles by marriage.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Ted
    Ok. At some point I wanted to adress you the remark that I thought you were probably a single child but refrained from doing so since it would have looked like making assumptions…
    Anyway, lots of what we are when we turn “adults” is based on who and how someone hits our fingers with a fork or knife when we were children at the dinner table.,,

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I relate to 100% to all the sentiments being expressed by Han and also Ted here.

    We crave to love and be in love and part of that is internal, not specific to any one woman.

    Women do not like this expressed too soon and want it to be specific to them.

    So the dams must go up to seal off this emotion and that emotion has to go into other things.

    Such is how life is, there is no point in being pissed about it, and women have their reasons for being this way. The mindset behind this is similar to a girl who wants to have sex just to have sex, some of us men are the same way except with emotion/love/etc.

    I don’t blame women for being disgusted by this, tbh.

    The nice thing is that this passion CAN be directed into other things, and probably is better suited going into other things anyways. Creative writing is a ton of fun, and I got a guitar for Christmas. So that’s pretty awesome.

    Although my fingers hurt a lot…

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

    Yet bound to fail in the long term for it is never a kind of love that leads towards a solid and profound link that makes us “sensitive” and inclined to learn who the other really is.

    Oh I wouldn’t say they are doomed. I don’t know if there is any statistics but given that my experience is second hand it might be that they do last, depending on other factors.

    I guess “mal de amores” translates more like “le mal d’amour”, whereas “la maladie d’amour” would rather be “la enfermedad de amor”, which is in French positive or negative, depending on the situation.

    Yep that seems like a better translation.

    But well, my Spanish dates back from High school from a a short mustached tyranical teacher from Valencia. We almost ended up killing him in the end. Lol.

    Heh sorry to hear but Spaniards were not nice to us either so maybe that was his problem :p

  • Damien Vulaume

    “We crave to love and be in love and part of that is internal, not specific to any one woman.”

    A d-beta guy, H-Solo….. Ted D sophomores apparently. Strange country.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Hmmmm. What do you mean by sophomore, DV?

  • Damien Vulaume

    Maybe the younger version of senior Ted, aka not yet married?… Don’t get offended about that.

  • HanSolo

    This love that is just there in me independent of any woman wants to be given to that one special woman. It is not just sitting there for any woman. Since I’m quite careful of who I give it too then it will be meaningful and specific to her. But, I will only let it out bit by bit. The only woman that would be pissed is one that wanted to feel like she created love in a barren heart.

    Also, my love will grow in ways that are unique to her and so it won’t just be a plug and play thing…she will have creative power and artistic license in the matter too.

  • Damien Vulaume

    ♫”This love that is just there in me…
    I will only let it out bit by bit…
    my love will grow in ways that are unique to her”♫

    I guess (and hope) you’ve swallowed some fish bones already, but beware of the bigger ones you might choke on later…

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    @Ted

    much of the intensity involved is not based on my opinion/knowledge of her, but on those ideals I hold and how as she passes my filters I can begin to see her fit into the structure.

    This is precisely what women object to. We want the intensity to be based on your knowledge of us, not on some relationship requisition order you’re looking to fill.

    I don’t see why women object to this, as long as the love gets directed at her. Either the love exists beforehand and gets directed to her, or the man has no romantic love and generates it as he gets to know her or it’s some combo. As long as it is for her then I don’t see much difference or why it should matter.

    Now, if the man literally feels that for any woman, and especially if he can’t turn it off for the others then I can see that as a reasonable objection for women to have.

    I also don’t see the problem with having a “requisition order.” Everyone has one (probably mostly subconsciously) and is looking for that person that pushes their attraction/love buttons and sufficiently “fits the bill.” In fact, I think women’s lists tend to be longer than men’s these days, though men are waking up and realizing they need to be pickier too (myself excluded since I’ve been a bit too picky).

    I don’t think that Ted is saying that just any woman can fit his bill or that he doesn’t direct his love towards her and love specific things about her.

  • HanSolo

    @Damien

    Not sure what you mean by fish bones.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I gotcha 100% Solo. Yes, I have this love inside of me, and I want to give it only to one girl. It is not unique to any girl, yes, but it special nonetheless and I don’t want to be giving it away to any old girl that bats her eyelashes. I like to share her interests, I like to make her feel like the most special girl, I like to use her as a model for characters in my stories, once in a while I like to write a poem…

    But we gotta wait, same way girl has to wait to have sex, or else it’s going to be devalued, just because, well, most relationships aren’t going to work out.

    Me, I’ve only been in love twice. The first time, purely on accident. She was a girl that came up to me after Econ class. She was impressed with something I said in class. She very obviously was totally taken with me, would message me all the time, follow me around, her friends said she talked about me all the time, etc. I was actually crushing on another girl, so this girl was complicating things, ya know?

    She grew on me over time…daily contact will do that sometimes. Plus there was always some sexual tension. At my house, she took off her shirt and jumped into my arms from the top of a flight of stairs. That was fun…back then, though, I didn’t believe in casual sex, and I didn’t really care for her yet, so it just seemed unfair to take advantage of this girl’s affections.

    It wasn’t until a year after I met her that I sat back, drank a beer, and thought “dammit.”

    Because by then, she had understandably gotten sick of waiting. Started dating some other guy. Should’ve killed it there…didn’t. Lots of painful months there, the worst was when she broke up with her boyfriend, but revealed to me it was only a “pretend” breakup, and they were actually still dating.

    Ouch. Ouch.

    Had to stop talking to her for 4 months.

    Ouch ouch ouch.

    I hope to avoid anymore accidents like that, but this last one was kind of an accident, too. She was SUPPOSED to be a one month fling…

    Sometimes, I am just idiot, I guess.

    Our job as the emotional men is to be as minimally stupid as possible.

  • Mike C

    I don’t see why women object to this, as long as the love gets directed at her. Either the love exists beforehand and gets directed to her, or the man has no romantic love and generates it as he gets to know her or it’s some combo. As long as it is for her then I don’t see much difference or why it should matter.

    Han,

    I think for most women more so than men they place a very high level of importance on their “uniqueness”. The idea that the love a man could feel is transferable to some other woman (who may be a “right” woman as well) diminishes that “uniqueness”. I actually can see it both ways.

    Susan,

    Thanks for you reply upthread. That makes sense. As 2012 winds down to a close, I realize that for much of 2012 we have been in contentious disagreements unlike the previous years. That said, I do genuinely wish you a Happy New Year.

    I will say from the perspective of meta-analysis of the blog, what you accomplished in 2012 from was something to behold. It was impressive in that you managed to completely change the frame and dynamics of the blog through one incremental step after another. You really are a brilliant tactician in terms of managing interpersonal dynamics to accomplish your objectives. If there is a “running Game” of Internet blogs, you are a master.

    I’ll be interested to see the direction you go in 2013.

  • Mike C

    Felt like taking a quick trip down memory lane….almost bizarre to read comments like this:

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/12/07/relationshipstrategies/who-is-susan-walsh/#comment-79364

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/12/07/relationshipstrategies/who-is-susan-walsh/#comment-79369

    Amazing how much can change in a year amongst various people.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Mike C, yes, uniqueness is important. Men already can easily want sex with multiple women (who are sexually interchangeable). If a guy views love the same way, what’s the point?

    HanSolo, that sucks. But love is basically accidental by its nature. If you try to force yourself to fall in love, it’s not going to happen. That is a reason why I am vigilant against “romantic intruders.” It can still happen to either of us, if a “friendship” goes on for too long…

  • Ted D

    Mike C – “I think for most women more so than men they place a very high level of importance on their “uniqueness”. The idea that the love a man could feel is transferable to some other woman (who may be a “right” woman as well) diminishes that “uniqueness”. “

    Yep, and it was a serious blow to my ego to find out I wasn’t a snowflake either. The fact is, I would love some other woman if my wife wasn’t part of my life. To me, it makes more sense for her to be happy that I am currently focusing it on her, than for her to be upset that if she were gone, someone would take her place. I’m the type of guy that wants to be in a relationship, so I would certainly be interested in finding another mate if my wife would somehow exit my life. No, I’m not going to spend the rest of my life alone and single because my wife died in a tragic accident. Yes, I would be devastated and heartbroken, but I wouldn’t spend the rest of my life alone. I suppose I can see how that knowledge could be a blow to my wife’s ego, but it is what it is. Thing is, my wife knows that about me, and she is OK with it. In fact, she said that she would rather know that I went on with my life than to spend the rest of it miserable at her loss. I feel exactly the same way about her, so I guess it works for us. *shrug*

    Hope – “Men already can easily want sex with multiple women (who are sexually interchangeable). If a guy views love the same way, what’s the point?”

    Ahhhh well you’ve asked a great question! You see, I DO NOT feel that way about sex at all. Don’t get me wrong, any number of random woman can ‘turn me on’, but that doesn’t mean I would even consider trying to sex them up. So, although I am in NO WAY casual about my sexuality, I do tend to view love from a rather practical standpoint. (especially post Red Pill). I’m in no way loose with my affections, but the truth is that some of it simply is NOT keyed to any particular woman. I could direct much of my love and affection at any woman that treated me well and was attractive enough to raise my interests. This is also why I’m not a “grass is greener” kind of mate. As long as I’m with a woman that is happy to be with me, accepts what I have to offer her, and meets my needs, I’m content to continue on indefinitely in the relationship without much fuss or muss. (which is also why I have to carefully watch that I don’t start getting lazy and complacent…)

    I remain faithful in the face of my “loose love” with will and choice. I know that I could find another woman to be happy with, but why would I even bother when I’m happy with the one I have? She has been loyal to me and treated me with respect and care, so I don’t even entertain the idea of another women. Truth is, now that I understand how I “work” behind the curtain, I don’t feel “oneitis” or “scarcity” much anymore. Sure, I worry on occasion that I would miss my wife terribly, and if something happened I’m positive I would mourn for some time. But, I also know beyond all doubt that if/when I’m ready to find love again, I will succeed. In fact, finding love has never been a problem for me. Keeping it has always been the hassle. :P

  • Cooper

    Anyone else always remember exactly where and when it was you had a first kiss with someone?
    I had one of those last night =D

  • HanSolo

    That’s awesome Cooper. I remember my very first kiss. It was her first kiss too. I was 21, she was 18, both pretty old for a first kiss lol.

  • Cooper

    @HanSolo
    It was the last night for the (Christmas) Festival of Lights, at the botanical gardens. I definitely would’ve got 10 10 10 from the judges, for romance. She latched onto my arm afterwards, with a huge smile.

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

      @Cooper

      It was the last night for the (Christmas) Festival of Lights, at the botanical gardens. I definitely would’ve got 10 10 10 from the judges, for romance. She latched onto my arm afterwards, with a huge smile.

      Tingle-worthy FR from Cooper! There goes OTC’s theory just in time for the new year.

      Well done Cooper! Way to escalate!

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Cooper, glad to hear it! Happy NYE!

    Ted D, I don’t even want to think about what I’d do if my husband was gone. You know how most parents never stop worrying about their kids? I feel that way with both my husband and our son.

    And, contrary to your experience, finding love has been a problem for me. I have a hard time falling in love. With my husband, it was a transformative and spiritual experience. Plus, he is a very special snowflake…

  • Ted D

    Hope – “And, contrary to your experience, finding love has been a problem for me. I have a hard time falling in love. With my husband, it was a transformative and spiritual experience. Plus, he is a very special snowflake…”

    Falling in love for me is a simply matter of allowing it to happen. Not to make light of anyone that has issues, the harder part for me is figuring out of the woman in question is trustworthy and deserving (for lack of a better word) of that love first. But honestly, once passed the filtering stage, I can quickly move along to “falling in love” right in to “being in love” with a woman pretty quickly, provided she is moving along at the same pace.

    I know this sounds very callous, but “love” by itself is just not very special or unique to me. Each relationship is different, and the ways love manifests is different for each woman, but “being in love” is just a state of mind to me. And I can ‘be in love’ with any number of women given the right set of circumstances. It takes a time and filtering for me to trust someone, but once trust is established all the emotional connections come fast and hard. I’m sure to many people it seems like an awful lot very fast, but that is because most people don’t realize just how much I filter from the first meeting. Truth be told, if I decide to ask a woman out, she has already cleared a number of roadblocks with me. If we make it to date 3, I’ve already concluded she is worth the effort, and I’m ready to get down to the business of moving the relationship along.

    It doesn’t take me time to warm up to people. In general, by the end of our first meeting, I’ve already decided if there will be a second. By the end of a second meeting, I’ve usually concluded if a friendship is possible. No, I’m not a mind reader. My filtering is set to dismiss most people from the gate. People don’t grow on me, I either like them pretty much from the start, or they never get the chance to prove themselves. I’m not highly social, and don’t want or need more than a handful of friends, so I don’t have a problem with the fact that I may be filtering out a lot of perfectly good people. I can count on two hands the number of people I’ve considered a real friend for the entirety of my life, and I like it that way.

    So, any woman that makes it to date 3 with me SHOULD feel like a special snowflake because 99% of the people I meet every day NEVER make it that far into my personal life. ;-)

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

    @Mike 1339

    I’m curious to know what you meant by change here. First, Yohami’s advice:

    Shame players, shame hardcore sluts, give the unattractive guys some game so they increase their threshold and can land a girl, but keep them beta enough so they still want a relationship (Im lucky, I got saved), polarize things, etc.

    Not sure if that can work, but as a person´s mission, why not.

    I would still heartily endorse this strategy. As for Deti’s advice on how to choose a woman:

    1. She has a low partner count (>3). This is crucial. She has to worship your di*k.
    2. She submits to your leadership with few questions.
    3. She fashions her life around yours.
    4. She loves sex with you.
    5. She knows how to cook, clean a house, dress well, and make the most of her physical appearance.
    6. She comes from a good family.
    7. The things she tells you about her life check out; i.e. she’s being honest with you.
    8. She has a pleasant disposition. She is kind to you, her family, your family, and her friends.
    8. There are no slut tells.
    a. She isn’t talking incessantly about sex.
    b. She isn’t profligate in her use of profanity or vulgar terms, words or phrases.
    c. She does not have a hard, coarsened look about her.
    d. She does not become defensive or accuse you of judgmentalism when you bring up the topic of past sex partners.
    e. She has a sunny, optimistic disposition. She is not jaded, coarsened or cynical.

    I still endorse this as well. Personally, I think the N he demands is too low in terms of the effect on worshipping a man’s dick, but as always I respect the right of every man to make that judgment for himself.

  • Ted D

    DV – “At some point I wanted to adress you the remark that I thought you were probably a single child ”

    When you have some time, would you care to elaborate?

    I know I have some behaviors from being an only child, like never learning to lose a game “gracefully” or even having a competitive streak. (I generally hate competitions, and I get no pleasure from “beating” someone.) But I’d be interested in your thoughts on the issue, as you seem to have gleaned by lack of siblings based only on what I’ve posted here. You’ve piqued my interests!

  • Ted D

    Copper – Nice work! Here’s hoping you keep that momentum in 2013!

  • JQ

    @ Susan and HanSolo

    I would have to look at the original article (is there a link close at hand?) before making any specific comments on the research. The key to this whole issue of social influence is how and what is being measured. Again, I need the original study to go further vis-a-vis their finding, but perhaps the author would be so kind as to chime in again. What I can say is that there is no accounting for taste.

    As for the issue of what does “significant” mean . . . I’m a Bayesian, so I think of this as whether or not I believe the value of the parameter falls in some specified range (usually relative to zero) given the data available, my prior beliefs, and the model chosen. The probability that the parameter is greater than zero may be large, but the probability that it is large enough that I care may still be small.

    Based on what Susan relayed to us in 1223, the author isn’t saying “you can’t make this comparison between those that showed interest and those that didn’t” (HanSolo at 1250), but rather that because the effect way measured in a contrived labratory setting it cannot be used as an estimate of the effect in the real world. Ergo, arguments about the real world based on his value are facially invalid.

    His statement, “My guess is that mate choice information has more of an influence in real social settings than we are able to capture in the lab” (Bowers via SW at 1223) reflects a belief that his value is a lower bound on the size of the real world effect. His prior explicitly disagrees with yours which says any social influence effect lies between zero and perhaps 0.5. Reasonable people may disagree about where they think the real world effect value lies relative to zero and Prof Bowers’ estiamte and I defer to Prof Bowers’s assertion that his study has no ability to help decide the question. In fact, I would be highly suprised if he is wrong on this issue.

    As a side note for Susan, I put up a few questions I have about the study she cited in the article of 21DEC12 in the comments.

  • HanSolo

    @JQ

    I agree with your comments.

    I was not attempting to use the study to show that it’s a small effect. Quite the opposite. Susan presented the article as evidence that there is an effect. I was simply undergoing the exercise of calculating how much is the effect as reported in the study (with its limitations and small sample size).

    I went in expecting to see evidence that my original hypothesis of a small or negligible effect was wrong or underestimating things. However, upon reading both studies, I found them to be consistent with it, though not “proof” thereof.

    Here is the first Skyler Place article, that received less attention here since it doesn’t measure change in attractiveness, only change in desire for STR and LTR:

    https://www.psychologie.hu-berlin.de/prof/per/pdf/2010/PlaceEHB2010.pdf

    And my comments on it:

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/12/11/relationshipstrategies/girl-game-today-same-as-it-ever-was/comment-page-4/#comment-174493

    Here is the Bowers article that actually rated change in attractiveness due to interest being shown:

    http://www.skylerplace.com/pdfs/bowers.be.2012.pdf

    and my initial analysis of it:

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/12/11/relationshipstrategies/girl-game-today-same-as-it-ever-was/comment-page-4/#comment-174670

    You can find my and others’ comments later on.

  • HanSolo

    @JQ

    See this comment too where I subtract off the control but it gives nearly the same magnitude anyway:

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/12/11/relationshipstrategies/girl-game-today-same-as-it-ever-was/comment-page-5/#comment-175657

    I never concerned myself with what statistical significance there would be in subtracting the two but it will be less than the reported measurements that were right around the P=0.05 level for the men.

    Also, at the beginning I messed up the average by adding in my head and said it was 0.2 instead of 0.225 (not that the average is very meaningful but instead of reporting 4 numbers I just wanted one that was a rough estimate of the order of magnitude of the effect).

  • Mike C

    @Mike 1339

    I’m curious to know what you meant by change here.

    That the dynamic, tone, and perception of people (especially on the Internet) can be very ephemeral. “Friends” can turn into “foes” in the blink of an eye when agendas diverge. It is what it is, but as a lifelong student of human dynamics, I find it interesting to ponder.

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

      @Mike C

      That the dynamic, tone, and perception of people (especially on the Internet) can be very ephemeral. “Friends” can turn into “foes” in the blink of an eye when agendas diverge

      Dalrockgate, 12/23/11, changed this blog forever. It was not until then that I fully understood the extremism, sadism and misogyny of some elements of the manosphere. Divorcing HUS from those characters was essential and overdue. I’m relieved that my brief association with that particular element did not brand me as a lunatic.

      A reader informed me that Dalrockgate II is in full swing. Seeing him dance around trying to justify his tactic of having his rabid followers rip apart an opponent while he looks on was quite amusing.

  • JQ

    @ HanSolo in re 1353/1354

    Thanks for the links.

    Perhaps I should rephrase: I (and Prof Bowers if I read him correctly) are not disputing the maths you’ve done, we’re disputing that they have any meaning outside the confines of the experiment.

    To quote you, if I may:

    I think this is consistent with my assertion that most men’s judgments of a woman’s looks isn’t (very) dependent on what other men think if only about 0.25 points is added by seeing men interested in a girl. Now, if it was shown that the women’s looks went up by 1 or 2 points then that would be a different matter.

    This statement makes an implicit assumption that the results of the experiment are reflective of what happens out in the real world. So does all the math which lies beneath it. I think Prof Bowers put it very well in his email why this assumption is invalid. If you disagree, I would like to know why.

    Even if the effect size you estimate is correct to within an order of magnitude (as you seem to imply in 1354), then the real-world effect would lie somewhere between 0.02 and 2.2. I’m not sure how valuable your estimate is if this is the kind of precision available.

  • INTJ

    Aww Cooper! That’s nice.

  • Mike C

    A reader informed me that Dalrockgate II is in full swing. Seeing him dance around trying to justify his tactic of having his rabid followers rip apart an opponent while he looks on was quite amusing.

    LOL….I continue to be amused by the person (s?) that apparently feel it is their duty to inform you of the various conversations of various blogs. I picture the high school cafeteria and the person who goes around gossiping at tables :)

    I’m actually reading and commenting on this particular exchange. Neither here nor there, but I believe this Zippy Catholic character went after Dalrock first with a post, and he simply responded. And then there is a self-righteous, pretentious, shrew commenting extensively. I only mention this since you brought it up. I actually didn’t even have Dalrock in mind with my comment…but someone else.

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

      LOL….I continue to be amused by the person (s?) that apparently feel it is their duty to inform you of the various conversations of various blogs

      Once again, you are amused by Google. I have no idea why Susan Walsh is relevant in the current debate, but sure enough I’ve been mentioned in the comments at Dalrock’s and it showed up in my Google Reader. I also noticed that Rollo is still twisting and fuming over me, lol.

  • HanSolo

    @JQ

    This is an interesting reversal of roles. I really am not the defender of using this study in this debate.

    I started out by asserting that men don’t base their views of how physically attractive a woman is very much or at all on what other men think.

    Susan pointed out these studies as perhaps a counter-argument to say they do or they might.

    So, I looked into it to see how much the effect is. It is a small one in the experiment. My point was that even if it could be extrapolated to real life that it was still a small effect. I also gave some reasons why I think part of the increase might be due to other effects than simply the interest of the men and thus the real-life effect would be even smaller. If it can’t be extrapolated to real life then Susan never should have offered it as a counter-argument to my original claim. And no one has provided any evidence that the effect would be much larger than what I or the study showed. People can speculate that it might be larger in men (I was focused on men) but that’s just that. In contrast, at least I have my own anecdotal experience and that of other men I know that supports my hypothesis/assertion.

    So, I am happy to completely disregard the study, as irrelevant to the assertion I made.

    If anything, I think you should ask Susan and SayWhaat why they think it has any bearing on the question.

    Overall, though, it’s not a big deal. I’m not highly invested in what the study says or does not say. I’m happy to hear any further thoughts you have.

    But, I do think it is a good example of how the media can misinterpret research, using the word “significant” to mean large and noticeable instead of having a high probability of being reproducible or not by chance, regardless of the size of the measured quantity.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @HanSolo

    … bullets for an idea … blood for an emotion … and bravery for neither …

  • Mike C

    Once again, you are amused by Google.

    But that is NOT what you just claimed in 1358:

    ****A reader informed me that Dalrockgate II is in full swing.****

    This is the type of contradiction where I’m left wondering if you simply miswrote something or you think I’m stupid and won’t note the contradiction. At the least, you’d want to separate a contradiction like this by hundreds of comments not just a few comments apart. I’m sure you get stuff by Google alerts, but it seems clear you are admitting that you have “readers” who write you to inform you of various goings on across blogs. Can you either confirm or deny that this is the case?

    I have no idea why Susan Walsh is relevant in the current debate,

    FWIW, I think some people will bring you up in debates when the topic is about various bloggers or commenters who appear “friendly” to a male POV but who have different agenda/mission as their main priority. To be clear, I’m not saying anything about that myself (I don’t want to be confrontational :) ), but whenever the discussion turns about “allies” some people bring you up as example #1 of someone who seemed like an ally but was not.

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

      @Mike C

      but it seems clear you are admitting that you have “readers” who write you to inform you of various goings on across blogs.

      I have readers with whom I communicate outside the comment threads, and sharing laughs and other tidbits is common. In this case, the response to my WTF about the latest round of gratuitous insults was an observation that a full blown Dalrockgate II of several days making was in full swing.

      It’s embarrassing, as always, to see the usual playground bullying tactics by the petulant and pouting Dalrock. I am sure he appreciates your loyalty and service at this difficult time.

  • JQ

    @HanSolo:

    This is a classic existence vs size issue. So to summarize:
    1) I think it is fair to say that a pre-selection effect may be reasonably believed to exist*.
    2) I agree that if all of the technical issues** are okay then the experiment supports the existence of a pre-selection effect.
    3) I agree that in the real world there are many factors which will influence how much a pre-selection effect acts in any particular encounter.
    4) I disagree that 0.225 or almost any other estimate*** derived from the experiment in question is useful for any context outside the experiment (i.e. in any of the contexts in which this blog primarily interested).

    Hopefully that makes my position explicit.

    * I would never argue otherwise and hope I have not given the impression I would, regardless of the size of such an effect. I state it this way because I am, as noted, a Bayesian.
    ** I’m not a design of experiments expert, so I won’t comment on such things.
    *** The sole exception being to say that the effect has a positive sign, but this is so vague as to be almost useless in and of itself.

  • HanSolo

    @JQ

    I agree with your 4 points, with one clarification.

    In point 4, where you say that you disagree about the “0.225 or almost any other estimate [being] useful for any context outside the experiment,” I’m not sure if you’re saying that you are disagreeing with me or just the general idea. Just to be clear, you are not in disagreement with me.

    Cheers.

  • JQ

    @HanSolo:

    I don’t think we can use this study to estimate *how much* men or women are affected by pre-selection out in the wild (so to speak). Hopefully this is a better statement.

    I’m certainly not trying to disagree with you because it is you.

  • HanSolo

    @JQ I agree. Happy New Year!

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Tingle-worthy FR from Cooper! There goes OTC’s theory just in time for the new year.”

    What’s my theory?

    Coop – my first kiss was at 18 with a high school sophomore. Fourth of July party. Her friend told me she had a thing for me, so, armed with that knowledge and a lot of beer to overcome my Christian upbringing, I made a risk-free move. We never got together again. Years later I discovered we were both each other’s first.

    Congrats. Score one for the good guys!!

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

      What’s my theory?

      Didn’t you recently say that a FR is seen as tingle worthy when told by a highish N guy and creepy when told by Cooper?

  • Cooper

    Since two people have mentioned their first kiss stories I thought I should clearify I meant ‘first kiss with someone’ opposed to ‘first ever’.

    I try to plan to have them happen at cool places. Whether or not anything comes of them, I still like remembering them, and exactly where.

  • OffTheCuff

    First with someone? As opposed to first by yourself?

    Oh, you mean first with some person, as opposed to first with anymore.

  • Cooper

    Oops.. Yes.

  • Cooper

    “Didn’t you recently say that a FR is seen as tingle worthy when told by a highish N guy and creepy when told by Cooper?”

    What HS has said wasn’t a FR – it was expressing a desire for love. OTC’s point was simply about emoting.

    I have been thinking about what Ted/Hans have said about thier love (or capacity to want to love) always being present, and how emoting such a thing can be a turn-off.
    I totally get how a guy wanting to fill a spot with *you* could be very off putting.
    How about thinking about it this way: we have a heart, and we let who we love *hold it*. We always have it, and we can give it someone else. It takes away the special snow flake / individuality, but it kinda fixes the metaphor.
    It’s not that the women we choose isn’t unique, cause we only entrust our heart being *held* by special people.

    Would that alleviate the ‘creepiness’ of a guy knowing he wants to love?

    Otherwise I fear looking for guys that show *no sign* of that “Love or heart” being already present, on some level, is going to yield players, and guys that don’t really want to love.
    Having that “heart” already exist shouldn’t necessarily signal a emotional slut.
    Just my 0.02.

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

      @Cooper

      How about thinking about it this way: we have a heart, and we let who we love *hold it*.

      That’s lovely. I don’t think any woman could object to such a sentiment. But I think there’s a big difference between showing the heart and showing the love. The heart is ready to be filled if and when the right woman appears – and when she does love can take root and grow over time.

      It is impossible to love that which you do not know.

  • Ted D

    Cooper – consign your last post. Much better put than my attempt, as usual. ;-)

    All – happy New Year! Wishing everyone a prosperous and joy filled year.

  • INTJ

    @ Cooper

    Since two people have mentioned their first kiss stories I thought I should clearify I meant ‘first kiss with someone’ opposed to ‘first ever’.

    I try to plan to have them happen at cool places. Whether or not anything comes of them, I still like remembering them, and exactly where.

    Yeah that’s what I figured. It was your first kiss with that particular girl, and it would be a memorable one at that. I got kinda confused when everyone started mentioning stories of their first ever kisses.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Cooper “having that heart already shouldn’t signal an emotional slut”

    But even Susan said it doesn’t, because she loved HanSolo’s post. You’re moving the goalposts from what she said was a red flag.

    The objection is to moving too fast before knowing her well. If she has made it through filters, then it’s real. No one called Ted D or you “creepy” here. In fact we cheer on the desire for genuine love before sex in general! What we don’t want would be sex or love when neither side knows the other much at all.

    The replace-a-spouse in event of death discussion is a separate thing. J also talks about it from time to time. It’s probably healthier psychologically. I just don’t feel that way.

    Anyway, happy new year’s! Baby’s 4 month sleep regression seems to have started, so I’m up after all. :P

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    (I perhaps should not comment on middle of thread. That is page 5 on comment thread, when there is 10 pages. Perhaps this is addressed. )

    Susan Walsh:

    For the man who does not really have options, and whose wife is no longer attracted to him, how would he manufacture credible faux options?

    In that discussion there is assumption that being alone is not option ?
    Why?

    Susan Walsh:

    In short, if you lose the attraction of your wife, and you can’t really produce women to make eyes at you in front of her, it’s game over.

    If she does not like you, what is reason to continue? Children?

    Or that you can not be alone?

    Which one is better?

    / Kari Hurtta

    (Well, now I found how to change spell checking language from Finnish to English for that text box. There was almost all words underlined …)

  • Cooper

    @Hope

    “But even Susan said it doesn’t, because she loved HanSolo’s post. You’re moving the goalposts from what she said was a red flag.”

    I’m not seeing the comparison – Susan liking HS had, literally, nothing to do with how preselection could affected the perception of emoting.

    “No one called Ted D or you “creepy” here. In fact we cheer on the desire for genuine love before sex in general!”

    I get that, and I didn’t take it as such.

    “Anyway, happy new year’s! Baby’s 4 month sleep regression seems to have started, so I’m up after all. ”

    Happy News Years too!! I spent the evening with family, and my 1month nephew – he’s so cute! I never thought I’d be so found of a toddler, before, but I can’t get enough of this little guy.

    Anyways, I’m far too happy about the other night to even care about arguing.

  • Jesse

    ‘Let me show you how big my love is…’

    Come on, that’s just a bad erection joke. ;-)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Kari Hurtta:

    Perhaps this is addressed.

    In that discussion there is assumption that being alone is not option ?

    OK, that was here.

    deti:

    I let her know I had (and have) another option, which is to not be married to her anymore.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    SayWhaat:

    Well my point is that the young female commenters on HUS have a much lower probability of being single than the young male commenters.

    I don’t think so. Like I said, I didn’t get into a relationship until I was 22. Same thing with Emily.

    Well, 22 is quite early. ☻

    I’m male, but not very young now. I was about 28 (story, in Finnish) when that happened.

    / Kari Hurtta

  • deti

    “It’s embarrassing, as always, to see the usual playground bullying tactics by the petulant and pouting Dalrock. I am sure he appreciates your loyalty and service at this difficult time.”

    Even MikeC is not immune from being thrown under the HUS bus.

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

      @deti

      Even MikeC is not immune from being thrown under the HUS bus.

      That suggests that Mike C is loyal to HUS in some way. Not so. Check out his passive aggressive comment #1338. It was the final salvo in a year-long campaign of adversarial and contentious challenges. It saddens me, or it did, but mostly it’s a drag. Here’s hoping that all the disgruntled members of Team Feral Female move along to meaner pastures in 2013.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @ Kari Hurtta; Paste error. Should be:

    I was about 28 (story, in Finnish) when that happened.

    / Kari Hurtta

  • INTJ

    @ Kari Hurtta

    Well, 22 is quite early. ☻

    I’m male, but not very young now. I was about 28 (story, in Finnish) when that happened.

    Yup late 20s is typical for most restricted guys. Might not apply to the UMC Vox Betas that Susan hangs with, but it’s certainly the case for most everyone else.

  • Pingback: Barbarism.net: Girl Game()

  • 7 1/2 Year Marriage License
    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @7 1/2 year

      That’s a fascinating premise for a book. I’ve put ff21st on my reading list!

  • deti

    “Check out his passive aggressive comment #1338.”

    Susan, you’re being hair-trigger sensitive. I don’t read that comment as passive-aggressive at all; merely a compliment on how you’ve changed your blog.

    “It was the final salvo in a year-long campaign of adversarial and contentious challenges.”

    It’s too bad that you see it this way. What you see as “adversarial and contentious challenges”, I saw as good faith spirited debate in which there was some vehement disagreement with you. I remember them and know them, especially since I was a participant in some of them. Some truth was reached and a lot of light shed on difficult to understand concepts.

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

      @deti

      Susan, you’re being hair-trigger sensitive. I don’t read that comment as passive-aggressive at all; merely a compliment on how you’ve changed your blog.

      That is very naive. I am far from thin-skinned, and I am quite used to Mike C’s edgy, left-handed compliments. It’s no big deal, I wouldn’t have called attention to it, except to point out to you that he has expressed his disappointment many times in what he perceives as a change in the blog’s direction. I don’t see it myself – as you may have seen I still endorse the statements by you and Yohami that I did a year ago.

      I saw as good faith spirited debate in which there was some vehement disagreement with you. I remember them and know them, especially since I was a participant in some of them. Some truth was reached and a lot of light shed on difficult to understand concepts.

      I agree that some conversations were productive for all parties, and especially for the readers. Still, Mike C is well aware of my particular objections to some of his tactics here. I’m not revealing anything new here. Anyway, it’s a new year and I continue to feel best about the blog when there is less debate of that nature, especially when we’re going over the same ground repeatedly without any real change in understanding.

  • Mike C

    Susan, you’re being hair-trigger sensitive. I don’t read that comment as passive-aggressive at all; merely a compliment on how you’ve changed your blog.

    Correct. It was a compliment on her skill set. But when it comes to me, Susan’s MO for a long time has been to vastly overreach the words on the page to ascribe some nefarious motives to me. I’m used to it :)

    As far as the rest, “good-faith” versus “adversarial” is simply a matter of perspective. When you disagree on core foundational principles and truths there is simply no way to not break some eggs while making the omelette.

    I’m going to venture a prediction here. Maybe I will be wrong….we shall see. But my prediction is that in 2013 Susan will move even further away from “red-pill” territory into conventional “blue-pill” territory of intergender dynamics. It would not surprise me if at some point during the year she disavows or paints as wrong the Athol Kay Captain-First Officer model of a relationship, and states the purely Equalist model is the only correct model for a LTR/spousal relationship. You heard it here first. :)

  • Mike C

    That suggests that Mike C is loyal to HUS in some way. Not so.

    You are correct. Given my personality type and temperament (I’d say I am an assertive ISTJ) my first and foremost loyalty are ALWAYS to abstract concepts like truth, fairness, and what I perceive as correct, not individual blogs or bloggers.

    So you are incorrect that I am loyal to Dalrock…..

    I am sure he appreciates your loyalty and service at this difficult time.

    I simply think he is correct in this exchange with the trad-cons/so-cons.

    Check out his passive aggressive comment #1338. It was the final salvo in a year-long campaign of adversarial and contentious challenges.

    As noted above, it was a compliment on your skills.

    It saddens me, or it did, but mostly it’s a drag. Here’s hoping that all the disgruntled members of Team Feral Female move along to meaner pastures in 2013.

    Ha. Someone has to keep you sharp, and have the stones to challenge you from time to time. :)

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

      @Mike C

      Ha. Someone has to keep you sharp, and have the stones to challenge you from time to time.

      I like it when you are dominant. That alone will keep my from ever going 100% equalist.

  • Mike C

    I don’t see it myself – as you may have seen I still endorse the statements by you and Yohami that I did a year ago.

    LOL. You are good. Of course, I know that you know exactly what I mean. It isn’t about one isolated statement. For example, at one time Yohami was full of wisdom (the now purged post) but now he is a crazy hateful misogynist. Deti was once a guy with good insight, but now he is just a crazy old uncle type who is IRRELEVANT to a discussion with younger women. The substantive change was the dismissal and marginalization of individuals that you once believed had something useful to say. When you say something like “you don’t see it” I’m left scratching my head wondering whether you really believe that or if it some Orwellian tactic.

    I agree that some conversations were productive for all parties, and especially for the readers. Still, Mike C is well aware of my particular objections to some of his tactics here.

    And I have abided by some of your requests. I have not linked to other blogs like Vox or Badger per your demand. And I have NOT brought outside debates in here. Ironically though, you have done so yourself such as bringing up Dalrock out of the blue and introducing the term “Dalrockgate 2″.

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

      @Mike C

      It isn’t about one isolated statement. For example, at one time Yohami was full of wisdom (the now purged post) but now he is a crazy hateful misogynist.

      This is an interesting example of why it’s dangerous to commit too early. Yohami sailed through the infatuation stage with me – initially he was generous, insightful, and supportive of others. Over time, he revealed a more complicated portrait. He was angry and defensive. He revealed a history of profound self-loathing. His relationship fell apart, which led him to offer many cynical, even damning opinions of women. He admitted that having had sex with more than 200 women had left him feeling empty and disconnected. He began to be highly critical of those with successful relationships. He routinely insulted individuals here, and derided both my husband and my marriage.

      Yohami is a profoundly unhappy man in his 40s with a history of dysfunctional family dynamics and not a single healthy relationship with a woman in his past. He is a tragic figure, and while I believe he is extremely gifted creatively, he has zero credibility as an advisor on relationships. He is probably well positioned to advise PUAs and other guys looking for ONSs, but he is all wrong for HUS.

      Deti was once a guy with good insight, but now he is just a crazy old uncle type who is IRRELEVANT to a discussion with younger women. The substantive change was the dismissal and marginalization of individuals that you once believed had something useful to say.

      deti was never an advisor at HUS. He arrived on the scene with a “what might have been” essay about an ex and went on to expose a rather sad and trying crisis in his own marriage. deti’s advice on how to choose a woman is right on, as it is painfully born of his own experience of not being selective. Inexplicably, deti has gone on to advise both men and women on topics he has no knowledge of whatsoever. Recently he penned a description of “the ideal female sex strategy” that is so off the wall it could only have been written by a disenfranchised denizen of the MRA sphere.

      If only people were willing to restrict themselves to the areas in which they have experience and expertise.

  • deti

    Susan:

    “I am far from thin-skinned,”

    Ha. If that’s the case, then why this little nugget of passive-aggression?

    “I am sure he appreciates your loyalty and service at this difficult time.”

  • J

    Happy New Year to everyone!

    My New Year is starting off with a bang. I’ve spent the last few days doing my Rudoph imitation. My nose is red and swollen from constant wiping and blowing. I spent last night huddled under the sheets fighting the chills and trying to stay warm. Damn flu!

    I’m too weak and tired to pick the opening battle of the new year, but I do want to make an observation about this:

    FWIW, I think some people will bring you up in debates when the topic is about various bloggers or commenters who appear “friendly” to a male POV but who have different agenda/mission as their main priority. ….whenever the discussion turns about “allies” some people bring you up as example #1 of someone who seemed like an ally but was not.

    I do agree that this is the crux of the ‘sphere’s problem with Susan, but I’ve witnessed this dynamic with a number of women commenters, myself included. I was one of Dalrock’s original female commenters. When he started the blog, I really saw him as the family man alternative to many of the other bloggers and he semed to have some respect for me. As points of disagreement arose, things got tense and those tensions erupted. I don’t want to rehash the whole ugly deal, but suffice it to say, I no longer comment there. I have however continued to read there off and on, especially when I see D’s blog referenced on other blogs.

    One thing I’ve noticed is that female commenters seem to some in waves there. My generation of commenters, which included Hope and Lily IIRC, eventually was replaced by a more conservative and traditional group that included Kathy and Butterfly Flower. Sooner or later, they too had their disagreements with D or his commenters and moved on to be replaced by an even more conservative, traditional and submissive group. This pattern has repeated itself several times over until now, when even one of the most submissive of his female commenters, a woman who commented on the blog of another of the other submissives that she relies on her husband to spank her because it helps her control her emotions, is currently being raked over the coals.

    Now, I can understand ‘spherian objections to me; I can be pretty uppity. ;-)

    I can understand their objections to Susan, based on some of her positions and amount of betrayal they felt when Susan could not move toward some of what I would call their less realistic goals and positions. What I find interesting is the alienation of the truly submissive women. It’s seems to me that even they can’t quite submit enough.

    That’s one hard bunch to please. I’m happy to be with a guy who’s significantly less complicated. ;-)

    I also notice that this stuff seems to escalate around Christmas, which is often the unhappiest time of the year for many people. When I worked in mental health, we always had a big jump in admissions around Xmas. Police deal with big increases in DV and alcohol and drug related offenses. This is frustrating time of year for those without happy relationships. That a female blogger would catch hell after questioning a red pill concept and then flaunting the details of her sexual relationship with her husband is really sort of predictable.

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

      @J

      I am sorry you have been under the weather! Mr. HUS has also been unwell, poor baby.

  • deti

    Mike C:

    “But when it comes to me, Susan’s MO for a long time has been to vastly overreach the words on the page to ascribe some nefarious motives to me.”

    I am just a commenter, just a middle aged man with a few opinions who wants to learn and who brings to bear his experiences. Like you, I have no allegiances to anyone or anything but the truth. But I am discredited as a disgruntled sexual loser who has nothing relevant to say. It’s too bad, really.

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

      @deti

      But I am discredited as a disgruntled sexual loser who has nothing relevant to say. It’s too bad, really.

      Who at HUS has ever called you a sexual loser? Whether you have anything relevant to say depends on both your expertise and your agenda. I have not seen any evidence that either relates to HUS. Why is it “too bad?” What would you like to say that I am preventing you from saying? What is it about your experience that makes your observations relevant to my target audience?

  • Mike C

    Like you, I have no allegiances to anyone or anything but the truth. But I am discredited as a disgruntled sexual loser who has nothing relevant to say. It’s too bad, really.

    You forgot bitter. :)

  • Mike C

    I can understand their objections to Susan, based on some of her positions and amount of betrayal they felt when Susan could not move toward some of what I would call their less realistic goals and positions. What I find interesting is the alienation of the truly submissive women. It’s seems to me that even they can’t quite submit enough.

    The entire discussion and dynamics is a lot like politics in terms of the Republican-Democrat divide and extremists you have on both sides. If you equated the most extreme conservative Republicans with the most extreme manosphere types and the most extreme liberal Democrats with the most extreme feminazi types (such as an Amanda Marcotte) then it shakes down this way. In Susan’s case, you have someone who appeared to sell herself or at least give the impression she was a staunch middle of the road Republican but in reality when it comes to vote she is probably more a moderate Democrat…..maybe Blue Dog Democrat.

    Then you have the manosphere types who are probably the equivalent of Ron and Rand Paul. They also tend to the be the most vocal and passionate on the blogs. And they attack middle of the road Republicans who are not conservative enough. In my view, there are a few women who come to mind who are genuinely trying to tackle and introspect on some ideas in a honest and genuine way that I don’t think it makes sense to attack them. For example, women like Stingray and SunshineMary are basically solid Republicans but they are still going to draw fire from the Ron and Rand Paul types.

    I also notice that this stuff seems to escalate around Christmas, which is often the unhappiest time of the year for many people. When I worked in mental health, we always had a big jump in admissions around Xmas. Police deal with big increases in DV and alcohol and drug related offenses. This is frustrating time of year for those without happy relationships.

    This is a fascinating insight, especially that last sentence as I just had an incident this past week that fits this bill. There is a person in my life who I believe is very frustrated over the lack of a happy relationship. I had always believed this person was very cool, logical, and rational, but some events that have transpired over the past several days lead me to believe this person does in fact have some mental health issues. I’m really not sure how far I should push this, or just leave the person be to maybe conclude they need to see a psychiatrist and maybe get on some meds.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “I can understand their objections to Susan, based on some of her positions and amount of betrayal they felt when Susan could not move toward some of what I would call their less realistic goals and positions.”

    What are their goals and positions?

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

    Mike C,

    I had always believed this person was very cool, logical, and rational, but some events that have transpired over the past several days lead me to believe this person does in fact have some mental health issues. I’m really not sure how far I should push this, or just leave the person be to maybe conclude they need to see a psychiatrist and maybe get on some meds.

    I’m obviously nowhere near qualified enough to correctly assess this situation, plus I don’t have enough information. But as someone who does need psych meds, I’m of the opinion that anti-depressants and some other psych drugs are way over-prescribed. Especially since a lot of stuff can be worked out with a good therapist.

    My stuff obviously cannot, since I hear voices and hallucinate when I’m manic. But at one time I was prescribed anti-depressants (handed out like candy on college campuses and family docs can prescribe them), and they are known to induce mania in people with bipolar. In other words, they could have been very dangerous for me. Just some food for thought re: the helpfulness of psych meds.

    I’m sure J can weigh in on this though, and may have a totally different perspective.

  • Kathy

    Re comments 1398 & 1399

    What you two guys seem to overlook here, is that Susan’s blog is aimed at College aged young people.
    I am around your age Deti, and yet, even to me you come off as a very negative carping kind of guy.

    I don’t really see anything positive in what you say. You need to have a balance, if you want to make an impression.

    You need to temper your delivery

    Young women (and I believe it is those whom you are targeting here) will eventually switch off after awhile if all they hear are the negative aspects about women in general.

    Look at Just1 Z.
    He has been through some very hard times .. Divorce and the resulting aftermath.. I sure as heck know he means business when he states his opinions, and I respect his views. His writing overall, though , is upbeat.. He is realistic whilst at the same time striving to be evenhanded. He has a sense of humor.. He understands that not all of us are “ebil wiminz” and it comes across in his interactions, here, with women.

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

    Plain Jane and Feelist/Michael?

  • J

    Like you, I have no allegiances to anyone or anything but the truth. But I am discredited as a disgruntled sexual loser who has nothing relevant to say. It’s too bad, really.

    Oh, deti…. Virtual hugs and all the best in the coming year. No snark.

  • Mike C

    Susan @1414,

    Interesting response. This is an excellent example of the deflection that you are highly skilled at. I wasn’t really asking for you to analyze Yohami and Deti for me but thanks anyways, but simply using them as examples of how you and the blog had substantively changed which you originally wanted to pretend as if nothing had changed over the past year.

    Your response here is a tacit acknowledgement that I am correct in noting that change, but you go on to ascribe that to “misjudging” Yohami and committing too early. Being a reader of Yohami’s blog, I think your armchair psychoanalysis of him is 180 degrees off the mark which makes this statement quite ironic:

    “If only people were willing to restrict themselves to the areas in which they have experience and expertise.”

    Recently he penned a description of “the ideal female sex strategy” that is so off the wall it could only have been written by a disenfranchised denizen of the MRA sphere.

    I thought you don’t read these manosphere blogs. I could be wrong, but this post didn’t have any mention of Susan Walsh so your Google alerts couldn’t have triggered this. Was this one of your “informants”? I don’t know…for someone who wants to ignore the manosphere, you always seem very dialed int to what everyone is saying everywhere. :)

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

      @Mike C

      I wasn’t really asking for you to analyze Yohami and Deti for me but thanks anyways, but simply using them as examples of how you and the blog had substantively changed which you originally wanted to pretend as if nothing had changed over the past year.

      Why do you assume that my responses are meant to gratify your requests? Neither I nor the blog have substantially changed this year. I believe that you are the only reader who has made such a claim, which should give you pause.

      My sharing the story of Yohami’s fall from grace at HUS does not confirm your claim that the blog has changed, only that my opinion of Yohami changed. I was wrong about him. As a “loser” in relationships, he doesn’t have anything to offer here. I made a mistake by promoting his ideas before I understood that the wizard behind the curtain was a sad little man.

      I could be wrong, but this post didn’t have any mention of Susan Walsh so your Google alerts couldn’t have triggered this. Was this one of your “informants”? I don’t know…for someone who wants to ignore the manosphere, you always seem very dialed int to what everyone is saying everywhere

      Your obsession with my reading habits is starting to creep me out. Why do you care what blogs I read or why? Or whether I have “informants?” I don’t have Flying Monkeys if that’s what you mean. There is no one individual who sends me regular reports from around the interwebz.

      I probably should read more stuff by my enemies, but I just don’t have the interest or the stomach for it.

  • J

    The entire discussion and dynamics is a lot like politics in terms of the Republican-Democrat divide and extremists you have on both sides. ….In Susan’s case, you have someone who appeared to sell herself or at least give the impression she was a staunch middle of the road Republican but in reality when it comes to vote she is probably more a moderate Democrat…..maybe Blue Dog Democrat.

    OK, but in the grander scheme of things, there’s some overlap between moderate Dems and Repubs. It’s not a hard switch to make. I, for example, am basically a lifelong Dem, but I’ve cast the occasional Repub vote. The odds of my ever voting American Nazi Party are slim to none though. I don’t see Susan as making a radical shift. I think that some red pill ideas rang true to her for a while (like the shit test story) and then, as time passed, the more radical stuff just didn’t ring true. New evidence emerged, and she was persuaded by that evidence. It’s not the big betrayal these guys perceive it to be.

    Then you have the manosphere types who are probably the equivalent of Ron and Rand Paul. They also tend to the be the most vocal and passionate on the blogs.

    I’d have continued the metaphor with George Lincoln Rockwell as opposed to the Pauls, but OK.

    For example, women like Stingray and SunshineMary are basically solid Republicans but they are still going to draw fire from the Ron and Rand Paul types.

    The spanky-pants gals? I’d put them way to the right of that. Intrigued by a post of HH’s, I visited their blogs and a few of their sister blogs. I believe the combination of encouraging their husbands (some of whom seem quite reticient) to physically discipline them and of the homeschooling of kids to prevent them from interacting with mainstream kids to be indicative of more than a simply “traditional” lifestyle. There is a group of Hasidic Jews in my neighborhood that’s more mainstream than that; they have an accredited private school and, AFAIK don’t spank their wives.

    There is a person in my life who I believe is very frustrated over the lack of a happy relationship. I had always believed this person was very cool, logical, and rational, but some events that have transpired over the past several days lead me to believe this person does in fact have some mental health issues. I’m really not sure how far I should push this, or just leave the person be to maybe conclude they need to see a psychiatrist and maybe get on some meds.

    That’s hard to respond to without more detail. In general, I would advise two things. The first is to be supportive and to offer a non-judgemental ear. Ask questions; don’t offer advice. Just let them open up and talk. Hearing themselves talk may spur them to consider getting help. The second is to encourage them to see a primary physician for any physical symptoms they be having (insomnia, stomach or headaches, etc). The primary may refer your friend on to a mental health professional.

    Olive’s advice is good. If there is a problem that requires medication, yes, by all means get medication–but only from a really trustworthy source. For example, I would be reluctant to take psychotropic drugs from a primary physician as opposed to a psychiatrist. Psychiatric diagnosis is more art than science, and even experienced psychiatrists often need time to adjust medication just right.

  • Mike C

    Susan,

    And even though you say “it is a drag”, I know part of you enjoys the verbal battle of wits with me :) The truth is there aren’t many people that present the level of challenge I do :)

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

      And even though you say “it is a drag”, I know part of you enjoys the verbal battle of wits with me The truth is there aren’t many people that present the level of challenge I do

      I said I liked you dominant, and now you’re adding cocky funny. Nice.

  • J

    @Copper

    Congratulations on your success!! Way to start the new year!

    I don’t remember my very first kiss; I would guess it occurred during a game of “spin the bottle” in junior high.

    I do remember my first kiss with my husband. It took place on the beach at sundown on a hot summer night after a discussion in which we agreed that common decency was the most important thing in a relationship. It was our first date; I was pretty sure that I was going to marry him before the night was over.

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

      @J

      It was our first date; I was pretty sure that I was going to marry him before the night was over.

      I love this. I hear this a lot, actually. When it’s the future husband, women KNOW.

      My first kiss with my husband had me reeling – it was out of the blue while we were having a conversation, it led to a casual hookup, and I was already in love with the guy. I did everything ass backwards with him.

  • Mike C

    I don’t see Susan as making a radical shift. I think that some red pill ideas rang true to her for a while (like the shit test story) and then, as time passed, the more radical stuff just didn’t ring true. New evidence emerged, and she was persuaded by that evidence. It’s not the big betrayal these guys perceive it to be.

    I’d agree it wasn’t radical. To me, radical would be if I woke up one day and she started sounding like Amanda Marcotte. Still, there was a substantive change. You go down the line….me, Badger, Obsidian, we all have observed the same thing. I’m not judging that negatively…it is a free country and we are all entitled to our philosophy/views. For me, Susan is a bit of an enigma but I don’t feel any sense of betrayal at all although that may not be true in the other direction.

    The spanky-pants gals? I’d put them way to the right of that. Intrigued by a post of HH’s, I visited their blogs and a few of their sister blogs. I believe the combination of encouraging their husbands (some of whom seem quite reticient) to physically discipline them

    I am not aware of them encouraging physical discipline. Honestly, I think you make a bit too much of this “spanking” thing. I “spank” my fiancee from time to time, but we both clearly get it is NOT any sort of actual physical discipline but sexual foreplay/teasing/physical banter. She enjoys it, and there is no attempt on my part to inflict any actual pain which would be the case if it was actual discipline such as with spanking a child. Without having read what you are referring to, my guess is this is similar in that is sexual play, and not actual discipline. If it actually is the latter, then I would agree that is quite bizarre.

  • Mike C

    Why do you assume that my responses are meant to gratify your requests?

    Well…because you were responding to me in that comment. I was simply notating that you were providing me with information/analysis I wasn’t interested in. You can respond in whatever manner you would like. You don’t have to gratify my requests, but I will then point out when you dodged my initial point. :)

    Your obsession with my reading habits is starting to creep me out. Why do you care what blogs I read or why?

    Ahhh…the “creep” word. You really are better than that. Why do I care? Simple….you seem to be contradicting yourself and I am simply trying to highlight that. You have mentioned a great number of times that you no longer read manosphere blogs, that you don’t care about them, yet when you make statements like mentioning Deti’s comment post, you betray an intimate familiarity with what is being said on manosphere blogs. Again, it just seems bizarre to be aware of a comment like that unless either A. You yourself are on top of reading various manosphere blogs or B. You have people who actively report back to you things that someone like Deti says. There is no other explanation for you being aware of that comment.

    Or whether I have “informants?” I don’t have Flying Monkeys if that’s what you mean. There is no one individual who sends me regular reports from around the interwebz.

    I probably should read more stuff by my enemies, but I just don’t have the interest or the stomach for it.

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

      Ahhh…the “creep” word. You really are better than that.

      I don’t use the word lightly – but it has its place.

      You have mentioned a great number of times that you no longer read manosphere blogs, that you don’t care about them,

      I don’t think this is true. I have stated that I don’t read Rollo, which is true. Nor do I read Dalrock. However, there are some manosphere blogs that I still subscribe to, including Alpha Game, Roissy, Red Pill Room, Danny, Athol and a few others. I also read other blogs by men not really in the sphere, including Rules Revisited, Ricky Raw and Postmasculine.

      I am interested in reading people whom I respect. It is true that there are times when people I do not respect appear on my radar for any number of reasons, and I may opt to have a look. This happens most often when my name has been mentioned, but not always. If my curiosity is piqued, I’ll read a post, and that generally happens when I’m alerted by someone else, though not always.

      Again, it just seems bizarre to be aware of a comment like that unless either A. You yourself are on top of reading various manosphere blogs or B. You have people who actively report back to you things that someone like Deti says. There is no other explanation for you being aware of that comment.

      I won’t claim to be “on top” of reading sphere blogs, because it’s very hit or miss, and I’m generally only interested if HUS is directly impacted. In the case of deti’s description of the ideal female sexual strategy, that serves two purposes:

      It lets me know that deti is as completely off the mark as I suspected, and that despite his claims that he is here to learn, he continues to spout unfounded and ill-informed opinions about female sexuality. This suggests that deti is still responding very personally to his own circumstances and is not able to be objective.

  • J

    I am not aware of them encouraging physical discipline. Honestly, I think you make a bit too much of this “spanking” thing. ..

    To tell you the truth, I’m pretty neutral about spanking as “sexual play.” Spanking’s not my thing, but I’m not above some horseplay myself.

    What’s been said by some of these ladies and by some of the male spankers in the ‘sphere, is different, at least to me. One gal, IIRC, said she needs to be spanked because she needs as a way of handling “out-of-control emotions.” Her DH uses a hairbrush. Another likes to be hit with a belt or hairbrush until she cries. One male commmenter brags, not only of his wife wanting to be spanked, but also claimed that she asked him to “rough her up.” That’s more than a little horseplay in my book. I don’t know that it rises to the level of abuse as obviously it is consensual. A lot of it, especially the need to be controlled as a sort of protection or caring, smacks (Pardon the pun!) of BDSM to me, but it’s clothed in this guise of Christian wifely submission. The whole emotional dynamic is disturbing to me.

    There’s also a bit of exhibitionism in all this that is odd to me. I’m fairly closemouthed about the particulars of my love life. I’ve seen read some fairly graphic descriptions of these ladies’ “sacred” marital relations as well as seeing a couple of nude shots that I really didn’t need to see. I found SSM’s gun and panties pic a bit gratuitous as well.

    I dunno, may be I’m old-fashioned, but back in the Pleistocene, people used to be more straightforward in their expressions of love.

  • J

    My first kiss with my husband had me reeling

    OMG, Susan, this made me giggle as if you and I were two 12 year olds sharing confidences at a sleep-over. When it’s right, you just know it.

    I did everything ass backwards with him.

    And when it’s right, very little can fuck it up.

    Nonetheless, kids, do not try this at home. ;-0

  • Mike C

    I don’t use the word lightly – but it has its place.

    Yes, it can be a very effective “male shaming” tactic when a woman wants to get a man to back off/back down. Throw out the “creep” term and most men will back off. Since I am well acquainted with the transparency of the tactic, it won’t work on me, but I will call it out. The male parallel might be to accuse a woman of being “irrational, illogical, or histrionic” to throw her off kilter. I try to stay above those sorts of tactics myself :)

    In the case of deti’s description of the ideal female sexual strategy, that serves two purposes:

    It lets me know that deti is as completely off the mark as I suspected, and that despite his claims that he is here to learn, he continues to spout unfounded and ill-informed opinions about female sexuality. This suggests that deti is still responding very personally to his own circumstances and is not able to be objective.

    Good deflection! Again, you didn’t answer my A or B on how you read this comment, but instead went on tangent of analyzing Deti for me. I am enjoying the psychoanalysis of Deti!

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

      @Mike C

      The fact is that men get creepy. The comic illustrates just what a cliche this has become, and it’s not without merit. One thing that creeps women out is any sense that a man is stalking them. Your keeping tabs on what blogs I read, something you’ve mentioned frequently, makes me uncomfortable. It seems controlling and also like an attempt to catch me out or make me feel ashamed, which is rather ridiculous. I do not owe you any explanation for what I read, or why I read it. If I had an army of paid PIs it would be none of your concern.

      Good deflection! Again, you didn’t answer my A or B on how you read this comment, but instead went on tangent of analyzing Deti for me.

      I don’t owe you any explanation of how or when I read deti’s comment, and I wonder that you feel justified in asking. It is none of your business, and I can’t for the life of me figure out why this interests you.

      As for analyzing deti, I was merely pointing out that his comments on other blogs serve to inform his commentary here, which I find valuable.

      You are the most literal, male-brained person I have ever interacted with. Please try to understand that other people make associations in their thinking.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “My first kiss with my husband had me reeling – it was out of the blue while we were having a conversation, it led to a casual hookup, and I was already in love with the guy. ”

    This is why I can’t understand why withholding sex from a date when there is off the charts chemistry and sexual fire works between the two is advice that is commonly dished out to women.

    ” One gal, IIRC, said she needs to be spanked because she needs as a way of handling “out-of-control emotions.” Her DH uses a hairbrush. Another likes to be hit with a belt or hairbrush until she cries. One male commmenter brags, not only of his wife wanting to be spanked, but also claimed that she asked him to “rough her up.” That’s more than a little horseplay in my book. I don’t know that it rises to the level of abuse as obviously it is consensual. A lot of it, especially the need to be controlled as a sort of protection or caring, smacks (Pardon the pun!) of BDSM to me, but it’s clothed in this guise of Christian wifely submission. The whole emotional dynamic is disturbing to me. ”

    These women clearly have some very serious mental health issues and probably suffering from some abuse or neglect in their childhood that they have never gotten help for.

  • Mike C

    I’d add that for the tactic to be effective, I’d have to believe myself at least somewhat that was my behavior which I know is ridiculous in this back and forth. Now if you accused me of being obstreperous, I’d have to at least partially cop to that :) But I figure my obstreperousness is a good match for your evasiveness :)

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue/J: “It was our first date; I was pretty sure that I was going to marry him before the night was over. I love this. I hear this a lot, actually. When it’s the future husband, women KNOW. My first kiss with my husband had me reeling – it was out of the blue while we were having a conversation, it led to a casual hookup, and I was already in love with the guy.”

    Compare and contrast with the latest article – if you fall in love too soon as a man, then you’re a needy emotional slut. If you’re female, then it’s totally awesome.

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

      Compare and contrast with the latest article – if you fall in love too soon as a man, then you’re a needy emotional slut. If you’re female, then it’s totally awesome.

      Compare and contrast this:

      If you have sex on the first date as a woman, then you’re a slut worthy of no more than a pump and dump. If you’re a man, it’s totally awesome.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Compare and contrast with the latest article – if you fall in love too soon as a man, then you’re a needy emotional slut. If you’re female, then it’s totally awesome.”

    This. And gender swap with sexual escalation.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    If only people were willing to restrict themselves to the areas in which they have experience and expertise.

    Heh, good luck enforcing that dictum!

    As someone who’s been called a weasel (here, at HUS) for using data to support an argument, and also an outlier for pretty much everything else, I’m careful not to overrate my own importance. :wink:

  • J

    Compare and contrast with the latest article – if you fall in love too soon as a man, then you’re a needy emotional slut. If you’re female, then it’s totally awesome.

    That raises an interesting issue or two–reciprocity and familiarity.

    I think I was pretty sure that the feeling was mutual. I not only felt that I wanted to marry him; I felt sure that he would eventually ask. He did not ask that night though, which would indeed have scared me off, since we still needed a bit more time to date. At this point, we had been part of the same social circle for about six months. Had it been our first actual contact, it would have been insane.

    I atually got my engagement 8 months after that first official date. We were engaged another 6 months. By the time we married, it was obviously more than a whim.

  • Mike C

    The fact is that men get creepy. The comic illustrates just what a cliche this has become, and it’s not without merit. One thing that creeps women out is any sense that a man is stalking them. Your keeping tabs on what blogs I read, something you’ve mentioned frequently, makes me uncomfortable.

    Yes, I have a Excel spreadsheet where I track all your blog activity…and then I report it to Rollo….LOL (there is some agree and amplify for you :) ). The fact is I have a great memory, probably better than 99.95% of the population. It isn’t as good as in my twenties but it is still very, very, very good. I remember all sorts of facts, figures, verbal statements people make in a variety of places. People are often shocked at my recall ability.

    I don’t owe you any explanation of how or when I read deti’s comment, and I wonder that you feel justified in asking. It is none of your business, and I can’t for the life of me figure out why this interests you.

    Of course you don’t owe me any explanation. I already answered why it interested me. Your knowledge of this specific comment contradicted your supposed uninterest. I am merely pointing that out.

    For all your accusations against me, it sure seems like you are stalking Deti. I wonder if he should be “creeped out” by the fact that you apparently are aware of everything he says everywhere. I wonder if you are stalking me online to see what I say elsewhere. Once in the past, you knew exactly what I said in a comment on Rollo’s. I guess you were stalking me. Two can play that game.

    You are the most literal, male-brained person I have ever interacted with. Please try to understand that other people make associations in their thinking.

    I understand that your go to move is the non-answer answer where you avoid directly answering a person’s question. And I realize that “making an association” is the way to avoid directly answering the question. I understand all that.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    deti:

    But I am discredited as a disgruntled sexual loser who has nothing relevant to say.

    Of course males (here) are disgruntled sexual losers. What else? ☺

    Mike C:

    You forgot bitter. :)

    Of course, but isn’t disgruntled ∼ bitter ?

    Mike C:

    But I figure my obstreperousness is a good match for your evasiveness :)

    I failed to follow that discussion. ☻ (checking obstreperousness)

    ( Well, actually I have still on page 6 on that thread. )

    / Kari Hurtta

    ( I guess that after posting this redirects to page 8 and not page 10 and need to manual edit /comment-page-8/ ⇒ /comment-page-10/ to see was this posted.

    Girl and boy are sleeping. Missus is gone to work. I (and children) are on vacation. )

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @ Kari Hurtta; I screwed with HTML here. Sorry.

    / Kari Hurtta

    IMHO software should give error message and give same comment form prefilled, if it founds that HTML tags are not balanced. Now that “fixes” HTML on posting. It should give possibility to verify that “fix” is correct. But that is not operation mode of that software.

    (Seems that this browsers spell checking does not accept “prefilled”. )

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

    Susan,
    Because of the history, I generally try to avoid weighing in when you talk about Yohami, but this:

    Yohami is a profoundly unhappy man in his 40s with a history of dysfunctional family dynamics and not a single healthy relationship with a woman in his past.

    For heaven’s sakes. For starters, IIRC the man is about 36. Let’s start by representing his age correctly. Statements like “he’s never had a healthy relationship in his life” assume quite a bit that you probably don’t know about his past.

    Yohami is more than capable of defending himself, but sometimes I do get tired of seeing him shitted on when he’s not even here.

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

      @Olive

      Yohami is more than capable of defending himself, but sometimes I do get tired of seeing him shitted on when he’s not even here.

      Well you can thank Mike C for bringing him up. I can’t imagine a reason to mention him, but Mike C cited him as an example of my change in direction on the blog, which is simply not accurate. As for my comment, I assume nothing. He has said those things himself – in fact, I have said them directly to him and he did not disagree.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Cooper:

    Heh, it loaded!!

    HUS on the big screen! –>>

    Beg your pardon?

    / Kari Hurtta

    (Hmm. Clock is at 14 here and boy is still sleeping. On what time zone he is?)

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

      @Kari

      Haha, your son is still sleeping at 2 PM? He must be a teenager!

  • Kathy

    “Yohami is more than capable of defending himself, but sometimes I do get tired of seeing him shitted on when he’s not even here.”

    I don’t! He’s a cocky asshole! I expected some cool good looking dude considering how he presented himself.
    When I saw his pics I was underwhelmed..
    It’s called oversell.

    And, I would hazard a guess that Susan would get sick and tired herself of being shitted on, on some of these manosphere blogs.. When SHE isn’t there either, Olive.
    Happens frequently.. I’ve seen the nasty jibes and downright rude remarks.

    To rub salt in the wounds these blokes come around here and suck up to Susan and engage pleasantly with her while in the meantime having stabbed her in the back elsewhere. Gutless! (Perhaps they think she is a sap?)

    Wouldn’t care if Susan was a bitch, but she is not!

    She makes an effort to engage honestly with others, in a civil tone, on her blog and elsewhere..

    Which is more than I can say for many others out there!

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    Mike C is correct. The overall tone has changed quite a bit.
    For better or worse is not my problem and dependent on POV.

    Originally you had a lot of guys digesting the red pill which created an environment that was not conductive for women to learn how to get a relationship.

    You’ve altered the readership, as Mike C says, quite easily, you would make an excellent politician.

    This has created a more girl friendly environment.

    Also, whether or not this is related or unrelated I am not sure, you’ve swung farther left as well. Not entirely surprising, I’ve read some of your older posts, I expect theres a cycle of left to right and I came in at a point near the maximal rightward swing.

    This has had the affect of alienating(?) or at least strongly not encouraging talk from more conservative folk.

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

      @Lokland

      Originally you had a lot of guys digesting the red pill which created an environment that was not conductive for women to learn how to get a relationship.

      You’ve altered the readership, as Mike C says, quite easily, you would make an excellent politician.

      This has created a more girl friendly environment.

      I think it’s created a more friendly environment, period. As a girl, I know I like being around HUS more now. It’s nice not to have to defend myself from accusations of having been a disease-riddled slut who married a beta I’m secretly repulsed by and will probably ass rape in divorce court sometime soon.

      I also enjoy not spending my time defending a woman’s right to vote.

      The wack jobs who come here choking on that red pill are such a pain! It happens on almost every single thread, still! Angry and slightly scary men who despise women with a white hot hate.

      This has had the affect of alienating(?) or at least strongly not encouraging talk from more conservative folk.

      I don’t object to the conservatism – I object to the nuttiness that prompts a man to say a woman is a bad wife because “she gave him only two children, and not even home schooled!” American evangelical wingnuts are heavily represented in the manosphere, unfortunately. I would never choose to live among them geographically, so I’m not too keen on mixing it up with them online.

  • deti

    Mike C 1429

    It’s pretty clear the purpose of Susan’s mentioning my comments elsewhere and attempts at psychoanalyzing me is solely to discredit me personally. I don’t feel stalked or “creeped out”, but I do find it curious that she is so interested in what I say elsewhere about matters that don’t concern her or her readers. Why does she feel such a need to discredit and denigrate me personally? I am just a man commenting on blogs. In this vein my opinions are no more or less valid than those offered by anyone else.

    What Susan reads elsewhere is very relevant because it suggests motivations and bases for opinions. Susan holds herself out as an authority on intergender relationships and invites others to rely on her advice and opinions. No other blog around these parts gets anything like the traffic this blog gets. It is also relevant because HUS is a prominent blog hosted by an experienced well meaning woman who backs up her opinions with what purports to be scientific research, giving her opinions an imprimatur of authority and finality; suggesting that any challenge to those opinions is ab initio flawed and invalid; and suggesting that mere anecdotal evidence can never, ever be of any value.

    I for one think HUS has changed quite a bit, so I share your opinion in that regard. It’s a free country and everyone is free to hold the opinions they wish and run their blogs any way they wish. But let’s not kid ourselves: there has been a noticeably more aggressive and challenging response to dissenting opinions here. Is that a bad thing? Doesn’t matter. But to say the blog hasn’t substantially changed just isn’t correct, in my view.

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

      @deti

      I do find it curious that she is so interested in what I say elsewhere about matters that don’t concern her or her readers.

      Really? Here’s how I see it. Let’s take a look at your description of the Ideal Female Sex Strategy:

      The ideal sex life for a woman looks much like the ones that younger women live now.
      Age 17: first BJ to captain of high school football team.

      18: Becomes girlfriend to HS football team wide receiver.

      18-19: Gets college boyfriend, first P in V sex. Breaks up with him when a senior frat brother pursues her.

      19: STR with frat bro.

      19: STR with senior pre-law student. Ends at conclusion of sophomore year when he graduates and goes on to Yale Law.

      20-21: Second college BF. She is a college junior; he is a 24 YO junior bureaucrat. She has young tight body; he has a degree, money and status.

      22: Graduates college; breaks up with Bob the Bureaucrat. Moves to Big City with her degree in Mass Communications; takes cubicle job in PR department of MegaCorp.

      22-25: Rides the carousel. Has LTRs with alphaest alphas.

      25: Alpha she has been dating for the last year proposes. They marry.

      25-32: Married to alpha, 4 BR colonial in the suburbs; quits sucky job, has 2 children. Youngest child in kindergarten; returns to work at MegaCorp.

      32: Meets a new, better looking, higher status, richer alpha. He’s her boss at MegaCorp. She divorces First Husband and marries MegaCorp boss six months later.

      32-45: remains married to MegaCorp Second Husband. Quits job again. Lives in suburbs with summer home in the Michigan Upper Peninsula, winter home on Florida Gulf coast, and vacation homes in Rio de Janeiro, Monaco and Singapore.

      46: Divorces Second Husband amicably. She gets the house and a tidy settlement.

      47: Starts having sex with the 21 year old pool boy and the 24 year old gardener.

      47: Gardener turns out to own his own business and turns out to be rich and sensitive. The fact that he is built like Brad Pitt, has the face of Channing Tatum and the charm of George Clooney doesn’t hurt. Gardener proposes and becomes Third Husband. He stays with her until she is 65.

      65: She divorces third husband amicably, and splits the remainder of her days between Marco Island in Florida and her beachfront home in Monaco.

      Now. You say that you come hear to learn and discover the truth. Yet your screed makes clear you have learned nothing at HUS. Despite reams of data and productive discussion, you cling to a version of female sexuality that has no basis in fact.

      Why do you do this? Because this is the woman you married? The thing is, deti, you came on the scene sharing your personal horror show, and you appear to use your own experience as the source of your views about women. This is perhaps understandable, but dangerous as a means of instructing others. You appear to want to warn men not to marry a woman like Mrs. deti, and for whatever reason you find it easier to believe that Mrs. deti is typical of her sex.

      That has a potentially huge affect on my readers, because it colors every comment you make here. You have an agenda, and people need to understand that. You are not objective. You are not dispassionate. You are not even really interested in getting at the truth. You are interested in peddling a view of women that brings you accolades and comfort among certain men. That may work for you elsewhere, but I view it as a contaminant here.

      I don’t want young men or women here exposed to your jaundiced outlook, to be perfectly honest. It’s negative, it’s cynical, and it’s unproductive, at least from my POV. It’s everything I don’t want HUS to stand for.

      I’ve given you considerable latitude in expressing yourself here, and you’ve been good enough to keep the more rabid views to yourself at HUS. But I am concerned by what I know to be your real beliefs, and I don’t believe your commentary here can remain untainted by them.

  • deti

    “You say that you come hear to learn and discover the truth. Yet your screed makes clear you have learned nothing at HUS. Despite reams of data and productive discussion, you cling to a version of female sexuality that has no basis in fact. ”

    Leaving aside your further attempts at psychoanalysis of me: You say a lot of good things. But no one, not even you or your readers, has or expresses a full understanding of female sexuality. Nor is a full understanding or picture of female sexuality expressed here. I think you offer some keenly good insights; but HUS by no means offers a full picture of female sexuality, especially as perceived by men.

    If you don’t want your readers exposed to my “jaundiced” outlook, why did you reproduce it, in lengthy pertinent part, here?

    I note you have no problem at all with the description of the caddish ideal male sexual life — because it is in fact what most men would do if they could. But they can’t, so they don’t. In any event, the caddish ideal male sexual life isn’t at issue here and doesn’t get to your target audience.

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

      @deti

      I have no interest or inclination to psychoanalyze you. It is hardly necessary, as you have chosen to be transparent. Observing that your view of women is no doubt colored by your personal traumatic experience is not exactly insight. Nor is it necessary to do much analysis to realize that the common experience among so many in the sphere is profound disappointment and rejection in personal relationships with women. It is essential to understand where people are coming from when they offer their views, and whether they have an agenda. You have an agenda, and it’s only fair that people understand that.

      If you don’t want your readers exposed to my “jaundiced” outlook, why did you reproduce it, in lengthy pertinent part, here?

      Because I found in necessary to illustrate your level of extremism in order to provide context for this conversation.

      I note you have no problem at all with the description of the caddish ideal male sexual life — because it is in fact what most men would do if they could. But they can’t, so they don’t. In any event, the caddish ideal male sexual life isn’t at issue here and doesn’t get to your target audience.

      You just answered your own question. I do, in fact, have a problem with it, but it’s not relevant here. I would simply point out that humans have evolved over millions of years to behave very differently than your “ideals,” and they are not doing so grumpily. Many people are in fact very happy in their relationships, and would not recognize themselves or their partners in your descriptions.

  • deti

    Susan:

    Thanks for the back and forth, by the way. I’ll always listen to what you have to say, even when it doesn’t drill down all the way to the bedrock truth.

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

      @deti

      Thanks for the back and forth, by the way. I’ll always listen to what you have to say, even when it doesn’t drill down all the way to the bedrock truth.

      Likewise. FTR, I don’t claim infallibility. I confess I was troubled when I read that comment by you – after all the listening and exchanging, how could you cling to that set of beliefs? It doesn’t even make sense. If you were correct about mating strategies, human behavior would look very different, on a much different scale.

  • Trina

    Susan,

    I am wanting to know if that’s all you have to say to the woman wanting to know why her bf ignores her for days, would rather watch porn than have sex. Was that really your answer to her problems?? This really bothers me because I have been going thru the same situation. I have been searching for answers and all I see from people is basically the same “blame the woman” and if she is pretty blame her for that too!!

  • deti

    “If you were correct about mating strategies, human behavior would look very different, on a much different scale.”

    IMO, men and women don’t engage in those mating strategies because nearly all of them cannot do so, not because they don’t want to.

    OK. This horse is dead. Gotta move on.

  • Trina

    What a typical email I just got from whoever replies to my post. I am guessing that you are. That’s all you had to say. Instead of your smart reply. I’m positive that you are perfect and haven’t ever needed a answer to a serious problem that a lot of women have. Ugly women on the outside hate pretty women. It sounds like you are both ugly on the inside and out!!! As you put it “this horse is dead”.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Susan Walsh:

    Haha, your son is still sleeping at 2 PM? He must be a teenager!

    Correct.

    Boy is born 1995 and girl 2002.

    I do not know when he has woken, but it was about 17 clock when he was up. He was on bed at 14 clock (but answered, when I asked. )

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    I’m definitely not Susan and I’m not sure is it wise that I say anything. ☺

    Trina:

    I am wanting to know if that’s all you have to say to the woman wanting to know why her bf ignores her for days, would rather watch porn than have sex.

    Masturbation is much more easier that trying fill someone other’s expectations.

    Finding correct time for sex may also be difficult.

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

    Kathy,

    And, I would hazard a guess that Susan would get sick and tired herself of being shitted on, on some of these manosphere blogs.. When SHE isn’t there either, Olive.

    I never said that wasn’t a problem. At one point though, Yohami was a friend of sorts so I did feel compelled to defend him. I will point out that I have, at times, felt compelled to defend Susan and her mission at other blogs. Most recently at Alpha Game.

    Susan,
    A number of times, though, you have brought up Yohami out of the blue, unprompted. I just happened to choose this time to respond, when it happens that Mike C is the one who brought him up.

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

      @Olive

      A number of times, though, you have brought up Yohami out of the blue, unprompted. I just happened to choose this time to respond, when it happens that Mike C is the one who brought him up.

      I stand by my assessment, but I’d be delighted if his name was never mentioned again. A resolution for 2013?

      The truth is, several previous commenters here have taken their leave and are entirely irrelevant to HUS. I’ve asked Mike C to stop dragging in the names of other bloggers with whom I disagree but I suppose old habits die hard. Henceforth I will delete, because the derailment that occurs each and every time is unpleasant for everyone else.

  • Ted D

    “I think you offer some keenly good insights; but HUS by no means offers a full picture of female sexuality, especially as perceived by men.”

    THIS!!!!!

    Susan – it isn’t so much that some of us “bitter old men” think you are wrong, but the views expressed and “approved” by you are VERY one sided. Yes, I get that you are attempting to talk to young women, but your male audience here is not very likely to sit by and watch “advice” go unchallenged if we feel it is biased. I’m not talking about debating stats either, I’m thinking more along the lines of advice to women that we either see as:
    1. bad for women AND men
    2. bad for men
    3. based on a limited viewpoint (which is why you get accused of being ‘femalecentric’ so often I’d imagine)
    4. will lead the poor beta guys that find HUS down the wrong path.

    Unless you find a way to block all male commenters here, I don’t know that it will ever stop entirely. And as always, I’m not attempting to say that my views are correct, or even better than yours. But, my views are different, and the only way for a person to make an educated decision is to look at as many different views of the problem as they can, and decide the best course of action. Unless they just charge head long into the abyss and hope for the best. I suppose lots of people go that route with mixed results.

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

      @Ted

      I’m not talking about debating stats either, I’m thinking more along the lines of advice to women that we either see as:
      1. bad for women AND men
      2. bad for men
      3. based on a limited viewpoint (which is why you get accused of being ‘femalecentric’ so often I’d imagine)
      4. will lead the poor beta guys that find HUS down the wrong path.

      We’ve been over this before. Start your own blog. I am happy to host earnest debate, but have no patience for anyone’s speaking directly to my readers in opposition to me. You can either support the HUS mission or go away.

  • WomenAreGutlessCowards

    Unless I’m missing them, Susan Walsh deleted ALL of the posts I made yesterday, as well as apparently some other man/men’s posts. What a ridiculous joke!
    Aren’t your ideas capable of standing in the open marketplace of ideas, Susan? Why bother allowing people to comment, if you’re going to DELETE things that YOU don’t like, even though they are entirely on topic? Maybe you’re wrong, has that occurred to you?

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

      Why bother allowing people to comment, if you’re going to DELETE things that YOU don’t like, even though they are entirely on topic? Maybe you’re wrong, has that occurred to you?

      All of your comments are in violation of the following rule in the HUS Rules of Engagement:

      Good comments do not include sweeping generalizations about any group of people based on sex, religion, race, age, profession, income, or education level.

  • deti

    “And, I would hazard a guess that Susan would get sick and tired herself of being shitted on, on some of these manosphere blogs..”

    There’s a wide spectrum between being shit on, on one hand, and having one’s views criticized, held up for examination, and flaws and inaccuracies pointed out, on the other hand.

    Legitimate criticism is not “being shitted on”.

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

      @Deti

      Legitimate criticism is not “being shitted on”.

      I could produce 200 examples of gratuitous and illegitimate criticism right now if I were so inclined. In fact, you’ve dished some up yourself, deti.

      It’s all just petty jealousies anyway. Which is actually a shame, because if someone had real, constructive criticism, I’d be happy to listen. In fact, I’ve gotten some offline that I’ve considered carefully and have made some changes as a result. There is the problem of credibility – if I passed muster with some of these men I’d be alarmed.

  • Ted D

    Deeti – TO MEN “Legitimate criticism is not “being shitted on”.”

    Sorry man, but that correct just SCREAMED out to me. :P

  • deti

    WAGC:

    Well, if you come in here saying all wimminz is beyotches, expect the host to delete it. I’m “extreme” according to SW, and even I don’t believe that.

    This ain’t your house, and neither you nor I get to shit on the carpet.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “I think it’s created a more friendly environment, period. As a girl, I know I like being around HUS more now.”

    Yes, passive-agressive is a female form of argument. It makes sense that its increase coincides with increased female enjoyment.
    As a man it makes me want to go out for a smoke.

    “I don’t object to the conservatism”

    I know. Its become increasingly difficult to set a conservative standard for ones potential spouse. Ex, Would you say an N of 3 or less is unrealistic?

    Last, about deti’s description.

    What exactly do you disagree with?

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

      @Lokland

      Yes, passive-agressive is a female form of argument. It makes sense that its increase coincides with increased female enjoyment.

      As I said upthread, I view Mike C as the passive aggressive one around here, so I guess we disagree.

      Its become increasingly difficult to set a conservative standard for ones potential spouse. Ex, Would you say an N of 3 or less is unrealistic?

      It’s highly realistic in the overall population. It’s highly unrealistic in certain subgroups. It’s important to fish in the right pond.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @ WomenAreGutlessCowards; Yes, posts definitely are filtered here. Author of site have of course right for that.

    I have also noted that posts goes often to moderation queue, if not white-listed. White listing seems include both Name and E-mail fields at least. I noticed that post was moderated, when I mistyped address on E-mail field here. Also post was moderated here when I used Kari Keeper of Acronyms as Name field.

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

      Links throw comments into moderation. I can’t really adjust that without getting flooded with spam links. I do try to whitelist regulars, but even then it won’t always work when there are links. Marellus is an example of this – he’s always going into mod.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @ Kari Hurtta; I screwed HTML again. ☹

    Sorry.

  • Ted D

    Deti – “This ain’t your house, and neither you nor I get to shit on the carpet.”

    I think the more important question here is: do you shit on your own carpet often? :P

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @ Kari Hurtta; Also then it make sense to write critique on own blog and not direct on that blog to where critique is targeted.

    That of course infuriates blog owner then.

    But that is valid other side of coin.

    / Kari Hurtta

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

      Kari’s Wisdom:

      Also then it make sense to write critique on own blog and not direct on that blog to where critique is targeted.

      That of course infuriates blog owner then.

      But that is valid other side of coin.

      It is indeed! I have suggested this on many occasions! My ideas are regularly criticized at several blogs, and I don’t lose a minute of sleep over it. It’s fair, that’s the way things work. No one afraid of criticism can be a good blogger, but there are common courtesies.

      As deti said, you don’t shit on the carpet. In the past, I’ve suggested that it’s not polite to come to HUS and piss in the punchbowl. :P

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    It’s nice not to have to defend myself from accusations of having been a disease-riddled slut who married a beta I’m secretly repulsed by and will probably ass rape in divorce court sometime soon.

    I also enjoy not spending my time defending a woman’s right to vote.

    That’s a straw man right there. We’re talking about your actions/comments towards dissenters, not your actions/comments towards extremist trolls.

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

      That’s a straw man right there. We’re talking about your actions/comments towards dissenters, not your actions/comments towards extremist trolls.

      Those lines get pretty blurry. I view Hollenhund as an extremist troll, perhaps you see him as a dissenter. YareallyPUA is an extremist troll for sure, but he would call himself a dissenter.

      I actually tolerate almost anything that is civil. Even Rollo comments here and links without interference. Overall, the blog is a lot more civil than it once was, and the personal insults are almost, though not entirely, gone. That directly reflects the disappearance of some rather unpleasant characters.

      And now I’ll say sssshhhhhhh, we don’t want them showing up.

  • INTJ

    @ Lokland

    Yes, passive-agressive is a female form of argument. It makes sense that its increase coincides with increased female enjoyment.
    As a man it makes me want to go out for a smoke.

    Same here. And I’m not a smoker. :D

  • Ted D

    “Yes, passive-agressive is a female form of argument. It makes sense that its increase coincides with increased female enjoyment.
    As a man it makes me want to go out for a smoke.

    Same here. And I’m not a smoker. ”

    Same here, and I quit months ago…

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @ Kari Hurtta; continuing

    Trina:

    I have been searching for answers and all I see from people is basically the same “blame the woman” and if she is pretty blame her for that too!!

    Yes, I can image several several reasons and many of them can also be interpreted as blame the woman. That depends point of view (POV).

    Of course these reasons are not something to say to the woman.

    Another suggestion to say: (I can also guess environment wrongly.)

    Male sexuality is often demonized. Are you said to boyfriend that it is OK to suggest sex?

    / Kari Hurtta

    (Seems that spell checking of this browser does not accept word demonized.)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    szopen:

    Szczęśliwego Nowego Roku, spełnienia najskrytszych marzeń i wystarczająco dużo zdrowia i wolnego czasu, by móc się tymi spełnieniami cieszyć :)

    Hyvää uutta vuotta.

  • deti

    “In fact, you’ve dished some up yourself, deti.”

    Of course, as have you on occasion. I don’t claim to be perfect and I’ve overstepped the bounds before.

    I’ve been happy to defend you when you’ve been right, but I won’t shy from criticism when you’re wrong.

    But legitimate criticism isn’t petty jealousies, either.

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

      @deti

      Of course, as have you on occasion. I don’t claim to be perfect and I’ve overstepped the bounds before.

      I’ve been happy to defend you when you’ve been right, but I won’t shy from criticism when you’re wrong.

      But legitimate criticism isn’t petty jealousies, either.

      Agreed. You are very fair, and I’ll say again how much I appreciate your reasonableness and your extremely civil demeanor here and elsewhere.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Susan Walsh:

    Links throw comments into moderation. I can’t really adjust that without getting flooded with spam links.

    There is no regular expression for allowed links?

    that is:
    allow /^http:\/\/http:\/\/www\.hookingupsmart\.com\/.*/
    allow /^\/.*/
    allow /^#.*/
    allow /^\.\.\/.*/

  • Ted D

    Susan – “We’ve been over this before. Start your own blog. I am happy to host earnest debate, but have no patience for anyone’s speaking directly to my readers in opposition to me. You can either support the HUS mission or go away.”

    LOL you really are starting the New Year off with some spunk!

    I’m not necessarily talking about my own viewpoint though. I’d say that the vast majority of your regular male commenters (of course excluding a few) have found themselves at least on occasion unable to keep quiet on a particular issue. Now we do tend to have our own “pet peeves” so to speak, but in general the male way to communicate in an environment where opposing views are presented is by direct methods, often referred to as “calling out” the opposition. And to most guys, there is nothing at all unfriendly or even aggressive about such behavior.

    THAT is what I mean when I don’t see how you can change it. Men in general simply “debate” in an aggressive style. We don’t take it personally when someone tells us we are full of shit. In fact, I bet I hear those exact words from one of my friends at least once a week! I know I tell someone the same thing at least once a week, and probably more often than that.

    And honestly, I see such declarations of my wrongheadedness as an invitation to convince them otherwise, and set about doing so until someone concedes, or we decide a beer is in order.

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

      @Ted D

      I do understand about sex differences in communication style – I’ve been trying to get more comfortable with that. I also think there are some personality trait differences at work too. I recognize that I am wired to think and speak very differently than a lot of my readers. I don’t mind having that pointed out to me, though I would appreciate it if it weren’t always couched in terms of nefarious tactics. :)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    @ Kari Hurtta:

    allow /^http:\/\/http:\/\/www\.hookingupsmart\.com\/.*/
    allow /^\/.*/
    allow /^#.*/
    allow /^\.\.\/.*/

    OOPS. I repeated http:

    Should be
    allow /^http:\/\/www\.hookingupsmart\.com\/.*/
    allow /^\/.*/ (link relative to root of site)
    allow /^#.*/ (link to same page)
    allow /^\?.*/ (perhaps not needed)
    allow /^\.\.\/.*/ (relative link)
    allow /^[A-Za-z0-9_-]+\/.*/ (relative link)
    allow /^\.\/.*/ (relative link)

    Basically allow links which refer towww.hookingupsmart.com.

    Of course I have just guessing possible regular expression syntax.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Kari Hurtta; OOPS. I messed with HTML again. Sorry.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “As I said upthread, I view Mike C as the passive aggressive one around here, so I guess we disagree.”

    I’m just noting an increase in general which probably explains the increased female enjoyment.
    I’m more surprised that a decent amount of it is coming from the men actually.

    “It’s highly realistic in the overall population. It’s highly unrealistic in certain subgroups. It’s important to fish in the right pond.”

    Would you qualify groups with above that number with a different set of adjectives (ex. good vs. bad) than you would those below or would there be different groups receiving different sets of labels on each side of the given divide?

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

      @Lokland

      Would you qualify groups with above that number with a different set of adjectives (ex. good vs. bad) than you would those below or would there be different groups receiving different sets of labels on each side of the given divide?

      Well, the research has already done that for us. There is the natural sociosexuality of each individual, which is thought to be at least 50% hardwired. Then there are the personality traits that correlate to promiscuity for both sexes: low conscientiousness and low agreeableness. There’s the DRD4 dopamine receptor mutation, correlated with all manner of addictive behaviors, including casual sex.

      The most important thing, IMO, is to find someone who rolls the way you do. Promiscuous types are not going to be happy with more restricted types, and again, that goes for both sexes.

      Personally, I would not call an N over 3 “bad,” or I’d have to call myself heinous, lol. But I would say it’s a bad match for a man who wants to marry a virgin.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “I recognize that I am wired to think and speak very differently than a lot of my readers. I don’t mind having that pointed out to me, though I would appreciate it if it weren’t always couched in terms of nefarious tactics”

    I never thought about it, but you DO have an awful lot of introverted judgers and feelers here! You are almost the odd man out. LOL

    My wife is an ENFJ that is surrounded by introverts, so I’ll do my best to empathize with you through her. I’ve seen first hand how frustrating we are to your MBTI type. ;-)

    (although on some level I think her occasional high frustration level with me actually works in my favor. But only because I’ve learned not to be affected by it…)

    Also, nefarious is a matter of perspective much of the time.

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

      @Ted D

      My husband is INTJ, so I know it can work, but IIRC that is one of the “bad matches” for my personality type. I guess it’s a good thing I didn’t consider Myers Briggs when I fell for him. :)

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    Anne, if you’re still around may I suggest adopting an attitude of “outcome independence”? Put in a good effort to attract and keep this guy if you really like him but know that there are million factors out of your control and ultimately, what will be will be.
    Its less stressful that way.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Beautiful women are human candy, the perfect object to be objectified. Higher-estrogen comes with a higher sex drive”

    Is this true? I thought it was women with unusually higher T levels that had the high sex drive?

    “….higher emotionality, higher subjectivity. The prettiest girls in my town met the worst ends, and people still don’t pity them – because they’re the physical version of the 1%ers. Even now, at this low point, a part of me is tempted to address her directly with negs or false sympathy.”

    In other words, you and the people in your town don’t consider the prettiest girls around you to be as human as you?

  • Tom

    a lot of differing opinions here.
    Some pretty women do have to try harder, some dont…

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “I would still heartily endorse this strategy. As for Deti’s advice on how to choose a woman:

    1. She has a low partner count (>3). This is crucial. She has to worship your di*k.
    2. She submits to your leadership with few questions.
    3. She fashions her life around yours.
    4. She loves sex with you.
    5. She knows how to cook, clean a house, dress well, and make the most of her physical appearance.
    6. She comes from a good family.
    7. The things she tells you about her life check out; i.e. she’s being honest with you.
    8. She has a pleasant disposition. She is kind to you, her family, your family, and her friends.
    8. There are no slut tells.
    a. She isn’t talking incessantly about sex.
    b. She isn’t profligate in her use of profanity or vulgar terms, words or phrases.
    c. She does not have a hard, coarsened look about her.
    d. She does not become defensive or accuse you of judgmentalism when you bring up the topic of past sex partners.
    e. She has a sunny, optimistic disposition. She is not jaded, coarsened or cynical.

    I still endorse this as well. Personally, I think the N he demands is too low in terms of the effect on worshipping a man’s dick, but as always I respect the right of every man to make that judgment for himself.”

    You endorse this as what, a strategy model for ALL men or just for the compiler of the list? The list is obviously talored to his particular tastes, values and life experiences.

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

      You endorse this as what, a strategy model for ALL men or just for the compiler of the list? The list is obviously talored to his particular tastes, values and life experiences.

      I endorse deti’s list for qualifying a woman for himself, and more generally, to men like him who are deeply fearful of marriage. I believe that a woman who meets those criteria would make deti et al very happy. There are other male commenters here who would not relate to this list, though there are some items, e.g. optimistic disposition, that most men want.

      I personally would not make the cut, nor would I wish to. But I think it’s a fine list for deti.

  • Mike C

    Well you can thank Mike C for bringing him up. I can’t imagine a reason to mention him, but Mike C cited him as an example of my change in direction on the blog, which is simply not accurate. As for my comment, I assume nothing. He has said those things himself – in fact, I have said them directly to him and he did not disagree.

    Ha. Don’t blame me that Olive felt it necessary to reply to your comment. I simply noted his disappearance and deletion of his post as an example of the change in blog direction. Lokland who is a smart guy and read older posts as noted the same thing. I’m not sure if you think people are stupid or oblivious.

    Regarding Yohami, it was you who to chose to reply using him as an example of committing too early and with a full fledged analysis of his psyche and history. I neither asked for or was interested in any of that. You chose to go in that direction of your own volition, and that is what Olive felt like she needed to respond to. So don’t blame me because you take something and run with it on some other tangent that someone else feels compelled to comment on.

    I’ve already abided by a great number of your arbitrary requests for comments. It simply is ridiculous that you cannot mention someone’s name.

    As far as passive-aggressive, make up your mind. In the past you’ve accused me of being too direct and confrontational. The one comment you cited was actually not passive-aggressive, but I have realized the best way to communicate with you is under the same frame you utilize with me. In any case, don’t take it so seriously.

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

      @Mike C

      I’d like you to comment on something Mike C. Your Boy Rollo is mocking my looks over at Alpha Game with a link to a photo of me. Do you consider that legitimate criticism? Does it fall under the heading of “Gee, I thought she was an ally!” ???

      Case closed.

  • Trina

    Being raised by parents that believed in Deti’s list frankly has gotten me nowhere!!! In my experience of living by the “list” has a reverse affect. Men start thinking you are needy, have low self esteem that “you need to find another hobby besides me”.. I could go on but I think you got my point.

  • Mike C

    @Mike C

    I’d like you to comment on something Mike C. Your Boy Rollo is mocking my looks over at Alpha Game with a link to a photo of me. Do you consider that legitimate criticism?

    That is wrong, and I am absolutely opposed to that sort of thing. That is absolutely NOT legitimate criticism.

  • Mike C

    I just went over to Alpha Game, and couldn’t find the comment you are referring to, but I only spent a minute looking.

    I have a high priority item to attend to so I won’t be responding to any other comments for several hours in case you make another request of me to comment on something.

  • J

    It’s easy to find, Mike. Go to Vox’s latest post and Control F “Aunt Giggles.” You probably made the mistake of assume that Rollo referred to SW by her name, you know, in the manner that an adult might.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    There is the natural sociosexuality of each individual, which is thought to be at least 50% hardwired.

    Source? I understand that SOI scores don’t vary much over time, but that’s largely due to the type of questions asked.

    For example, two of the three SOI-R behavior questions are obviously going to be correlated across time (“With how many different partners have you had sexual intercourse on one and only one occasion?” & “With how many different partners have you had sexual intercourse without having an interest in a long-term committed relationship with this person?”). Additionally, attitudes are unlikely to change over time, but that doesn’t mean SOI-R attitude is hard-wired.

    P.S., I’m not arguing that SOI isn’t hard-wired. I would guess that it mostly is, though there will be a balance of nature and nurture at play. But I don’t see how one can measure the level of hard-wiredness of such an arbitrary measure as SOI.

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

      @INTJ

      Source?

      Sociosexual orientation (just like all other personality traits) is half heritable, half environmental.

      A study of a large sample of Australian twins conducted by the great behavior geneticist J. Michael Bailey and colleagues shows that sociosexual orientation is another personality trait that roughly follows the 50-0-50 rule. Their behavior genetic analysis shows that 49% of sociosexual orientation is heritable (determined by genes), 2% is attributable to shared environment, and 47% to unshared environment.

      http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/200811/the-50-0-50-rule-in-action-sociosexual-orientation-and-ris

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    I’d like you to comment on something Mike C. Your Boy Rollo is mocking my looks over at Alpha Game with a link to a photo of me. Do you consider that legitimate criticism? Does it fall under the heading of “Gee, I thought she was an ally!” ???

    Case closed.

    Did I miss something? It appears to me that he is mocking your short haircut, not your looks.

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

      Did I miss something? It appears to me that he is mocking your short haircut, not your looks.

      Haha, that’s like saying someone mocked your lack of pectoral muscles, not your chest.

      The point of Vox’s post is how short hair is a man repeller. I have no problem with that, though I never lacked suitors when I rocked a pixie cut. *Shrugs*

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    I googled this deti guy and all I can say is WOWZERS.

    deti says:
    December 28, 2012 at 11:09 am

    SSM:

    You took the description of the ideal male sexual life personally, and that’s why you hate it so much. You also hate it because you and I know that there are men out there who are getting away with it; they are the most attractive and desirable men; and it is not fair.

    I hate the ideal female sexual strategy. I hate it because of the wreckage it created in my life and in the lives of others. I hate it because I know there are women out there gaming the system who are getting away with it, who did get away with it, and who didn’t get justice and fairness. I hope that the women who do pursue this strategy get what’s coming to them: either an inability to find any man willing to marry them; or once they divorce, a complete inability to find a suitable remarriage partner. A woman’s greatest fear is isolation, rejection and lack of attention, and I hope it happens to the carousel riding sluts who slam into The Wall with no husband and no prospects for a husband. It won’t happen to most of them, but for some there will be justice.

    http://thewomanandthedragon.wordpress.com/2012/12/28/in-the-war-of-playas-against-sluts-im-sweden/#comment-8995

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Cooper:

    Anyone else always remember exactly where and when it was you had a first kiss with someone?

    Well, I think that I do not have that kind first kiss.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Susan Walsh:

    That suggests that Mike C is loyal to HUS in some way.

    Why someone should be loyal to some blog ?

    This is not marriage.

    / Kari Hurtta

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

      @Kari

      Why someone should be loyal to some blog ?

      This is not marriage.

      Haha, I agree completely. In which case the idea of me “throwing a reader under the bus” is also ridiculous.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Mike C:

    The entire discussion and dynamics is a lot like politics in terms of the Republican-Democrat divide and extremists you have on both sides.

    This is difficult to follow, but yes — I have hear that on USA is effectively two political party system.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @intj

    That’s a straw man right there. We’re talking about your actions/comments towards dissenters, not your actions/comments towards extremist trolls.

    So says the dissenter living under the HUS bridge who’s committed just about every other fallacy in the book. Good grief… :???:

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    I don’t know that beautiful women “must try harder”. If they have a harem of suitors at any given time, I’d say no, they don’t have to try at all.

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Keeper of Acronyms

    @ YaReallyPUA; I noticed today that I do not longer found some post (do not remember poster), which I considered to comment.

    / Kari Hurtta

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    Kari Keeper of Acronyms; Oops. I should check what browser fills to Name field.

    ( That name is from Susan Walsh.)

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    The Rebound Girlfriend:

    I don’t know that beautiful women “must try harder”.

    I can image that title of this post is controversial.

    It seems saying that rejecting is harder than initiating.

    / Kari Hurtta

  • Ted D

    Susan – I remember reading somewhere (I’ll try to dig it up…) that the INTJ/ENFJ couple is as you said not ideal, but when it works it works VERY well. I can easily stress my wife out (as I’m sure you can imagine) but make a conscious effort to avoid doing so. She does her best to curb her “enthusiasm” for life and doing stuff, and tries hard to NOT be offended by things I say. Unlike you, she does not have a very strong Extroverted score, so she doesn’t seem to have the same amount of wanderlust many ENFJs show. (that is, my wife is content to stay in most of the time rather than be constantly out in public doing something, which suites me just fine!)

    It also helps that she deals with the public at work, so she gets a fair amount of “social interaction” during the day, which means she needs less in the evenings and weekends. Me? I could go a month straight without being in public or seeing my friends/family, other than my wife and children of course. (although we do spend the summers without the kids…)

    We do have to be aware of our moods though, because once we start snarking at each other, it can get bad quickly. We also tend to talk past each other sometimes (much like you and I do actually…) but we are getting better. I’m doing my best to put all my new “communication style” information to good use at home. ;-) Although I can’t help but feel a bit silly “learning” to talk to someone at 42 years old.

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

    @Hollenhund

    You fool, you linked to the comments of a 26 year old virgin who was outed by a manosphere nutjob at HUS. He pieced together her identity and sent her pic to Roissy asking for an honest evaluation. He also revealed a lot of details about her personal life, including names. Roissy was not kind, but he did take the post down when she explained it was a hoax. The last I heard she had hired an internet reputation management firm in hopes of getting it off the net. She has never returned.

    You are tedious, neighbor.

  • Höllenhund

    What does any of that have to do with my comment that you just deleted?

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    INTJ:

    Yup late 20s is typical for most restricted guys. Might not apply to the UMC Vox Betas that Susan hangs with, but it’s certainly the case for most everyone else.

    OK. You are referring to this:

    Psychology Today: The 50-0-50 rule in action: Sociosexual orientation and risk of divorce

    Evolutionary personality psychologists classify men and women on sociosexual orientation between the extremes of unrestricted and restricted.  Relative to sociosexually restricted individuals, sociosexually unrestricted individuals are more likely to:  1) engage in sex at an earlier point in their relationships; 2) engage in sex with more than one partner at a time; and 3) be involved in sexual relationships characterized by less investment, commitment, love, and dependency.  Sociosexual orientation (just like all other personality traits) is a relatively stable trait of individuals over the life course; in other words, people are either sociosexually restricted or unrestricted most of their lives.  While men in general are more unrestricted in sociosexual orientation than women, the variance within each sex is much greater than variance between the sexes.

    Or maybe
    Susan Walsh: Restricted vs. Unrestricted Sociosexuality: What Does It Mean?

    / Kari Hurtta

  • Womenaregutlesscowards

    Hollenhund said “What does any of that have to do with my comment that you just deleted?”

    Susan Walsh likes deleting things, she is terrified of dissent, terrified of free speech, like most ‘moderators’ or blog owners, she wants you to hear only ONE opinion: her own.

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

      Susan Walsh likes deleting things, she is terrified of dissent, terrified of free speech, like most ‘moderators’ or blog owners, she wants you to hear only ONE opinion: her own.

      Yes, for proof that HUS is an echo chamber, please note that this post has garnered only 1,500 comments.

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

    @Gutless

    how many more comments which dared to disagree with you, have you deleted? How can anybody know what people really think if YOU are deleting things you don’t like?

    I generally delete between 0 and 3 comments per post. It depends on whether someone is trolling, as you are. I think you’re the only person I have had to delete in this thread.

    Like all women, you will continue to censor any discussion of ‘one way ask out’, and millions of women will continue to suffer as a result.

    Like I said earlier, how’s that Grumpy Butthurt strategy working for ya?

  • Lana

    I love this post! I never realized how bratty I’ve been. I’m very pretty, and I have a great personality, in that I’m very friendly and sweet. But this post really shows me where I have gone wrong. Basically being a controlling, sometimes manipulative, bratty girl. So enlightening! But after reading books like “The Rules”, I’ve been really confused. Women need to blink first? I know men need to initiate contact. But how do we learn when to do this blinking first, without chasing a man? I also thought doing too much for a man is a turn off. I’m very confused!