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).
{ 1518 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 2 3 4 5 … 11 »
@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.”
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.
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.
@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.”
@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
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.
@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.
At Hans Solo, huh?
@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.
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.
@ 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.
@Emily
Nooooo! Not another study. I refuse to analyze any more studies.
But, that does sound interesting.
@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.
@Suzan #294
I’m gonna reinforce my pants, and then I’m gonna mow your flowerbeds as well.
Bahahaha .
@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)
@underdog
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.
@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.
” 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?
>> “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.
@OTC
Do you have any idea how agentic/narcissistic this sounds? It’s all about you and what you can “get” from other people.
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.
@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
@ HanSolo:
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..
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.
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.
@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:
The letter writer looks a lot like this:
That’s funny, I have found you to be a very easy grader.
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?
@ThanksForTheLaughs
You contagium. You must go to the hospitium, for you hafnium breathium helium … or else you get a eulogium …
@danny
Of course! Why wouldn’t you be?
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.
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.
@Kathy
I prefer large ass over big tits 
Exactly
@BroHamlet
Yes, I cosign this. I hope Anne will reflect and learn something from this experience. If not, this will go south again soon.
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.
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.
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.
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.
” 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.
@Thanks for the laughs
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.
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.
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.
This cracked me up. I guess I won’t be writing a post on How to Get the Guy By Acting Insane.
“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?
“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.
Like I said, you prefer the rexy version on the right.
“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.
@ 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?
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.
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?
That’s a different issue. We were talking about SMV, not MMV.
@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…
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
@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
@HH
Hmmm, I think you plagiarized this list. Didn’t I see that somewhere as written by deti?
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.
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.
No one is listening. Your communication style is so abrasive that everyone tunes out. You announced yourself as an enemy to women years ago.
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.
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.
Heh heh heh.
Just1Z?
You are way to smart to be fooled my friend.
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.
“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.
@Kathy
I married my now ex-wife… ’nuff said?
Nobody is perfect, mate. Least of all me.
I married my ( first ) now ex- husband, too.
Susan, if I may venture an opinion, I think your most prominent misunderstanding with regards to intersexual dynamics (a.k.a. Game) is your inability to separate the defining of a dynamic from intentional use of it.
I’ve attempted not to link my own posts to your comments, since I know how this provokes you, but in this case I’m afraid it’s necessary:
https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/03/27/dread-games/
This essay wasn’t some diabolical effort to get men to use Dread per se, but rather to educate men (and women) about the effects and influence of dread in our relationships that both men and women use, most times unwittingly. Several times you’ve made melodramatic attempts to vilify and mischaracterize my marriage by giving your readers the impression that I fiendishly and salaciously flirt with any and every woman I may encounter in my wife’s presence. All this does is serve to prove your (willful?) ignorance about the concept of dread as I’ve outlined it here and in other posts, and the underlying principle of dread.
You see the problem you have with anyone bringing to light any principle Game may affirm is that you fear the intentional use of it. Steven, as you say, may in fact be a ‘natural’. 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.
“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?)
@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
“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.
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
“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.
@Underdog#317:
That’s risible, and is predicated upon valuing tool over purpose.
Intent COUNTS.
@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.
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.
“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.
@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.
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.
@Sai
if you’re going to listen to crazy guys on the web, can I suggest that you stick to Marellus and myself?
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.
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.
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?
@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.
@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.
@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.
Oh, Ted. Thumbs-up on the Schlachta thing, btw. Pretty decent chance we actually know some people in common.
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).
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.
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.
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.
@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.
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.
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.
Good question. The idea that women read at HUS to tingle alone at their laptops while the males comment is laughable.
Classy.
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…
“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?
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.
@HH
No, he’s irrelevant because he knows nothing of the SMP.
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.
Google Analytics says otherwise. The proof is in my results.
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 like that on this thread right now. You don’t recognize them because they don’t share your version of the truth.
@Ted
Haha, I planted that just for you.
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.
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
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.
“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?
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.
@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.
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.
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.
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.
@Damien
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@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”)
“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.
@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.
“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.
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.
@Ted
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.
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.
@Ted
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.
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.
(jeez did I just butcher that poor guy’s name. bad me)
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??
@Underdog
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.
“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.
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.
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
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.
By this logic Brazzers should be the definitive authority of intergender dynamics on the web.
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.
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.
@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.
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.
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.
All I do is hold up a mirror, you have to want to look. Red pill knowledge is like fire; you can use it to cook your food and keep you warm, or you can use it to burn down your neighborhood.
You may not like the way someone like Roosh applies Game because it isn’t the way you’d feel comfortable using it, but it doesn’t invalidate Game. Game isn’t intrinsically negative or nihilistic, it only becomes so in the context in which it is used.
How would you ideally use it?
I would presume in a way that you believe is a positive fashion, but at that point I can question your motives in the same way you’d question Roosh’s. You may think Roosh is applying Game to salve his burned ego for all the bitches whoever rejected him in some great revenge scheme, but I could easily presume another guy was placating to his own White Knight sensibilities for using Game to ‘honorably’ get with the girl of his dreams to live happily ever after.
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.
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.
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.
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.
“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.
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.
“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.
Ironic Misread, sorry — comment to Betaguy, not Rollo.
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.
Exactly. And the low quality woman will stick around and hate you for it.
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.
@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.
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.
Did I call it or what?
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
Time for Suz to snoooooozzzzz….
All I want for Christmas is more Russ in Texas.
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.
@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.
@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?
@Ted
Thanks for clarifying. You are right about the ease of dissolving marriage, but I’m still a fan for a lot of reasons.
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.
I know that well, deti.
@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?
@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.
@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.
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….
« 1 2 3 4 5 … 11 »
{ 1 trackback }