Online Dating Sites Find Selling Serial Monogamy More Profitable Than Marriage

January 4, 2013

The last 24 hours has brought a rush of new traffic to HUS thanks to a nice new link in the Atlantic. :)

Alexis Madrigal, Senior Editor in charge of Technology, has challenged the legitimacy of one of the Atlantic’s own articles. In the most recent print edition, Dan Slater’s A Million First Dates claims that online dating is the death knell for monogamy, primarily due to the overwhelming supply of opportunities on offer. He shores up his argument with numerous interviews with executives in the online dating industry, and with the profile of a prize named Jacob. 

Madrigal takes apart Slater’s argument in his new article There’s No Evidence Online Dating Is Threatening Commitment or Marriage

First the ad hom fun part:

One guy’s commitment issues don’t mean the end of monogamy for the country.

…Narratively, the story focuses on Jacob, an overgrown manchild jackass who can’t figure out what it takes to have a real relationship. The problem, however, is not him, and his desire for a “low-maintenance” woman who is hot, young, interested in him, and doesn’t mind that he is callow and doesn’t care very much about her. No, the problem is online dating, which has shown Jacob that he can have a steady stream of mediocre dates, some of whom will have sex with him.

Jacob, a self-described average looking guy in his early 30s, confessed that he figured being in a relationship was better than being single and having to meet new women. According to Madrigal,  “Past girlfriends had complained about his lifestyle, which emphasized watching sports and going to concerts and bars. He’d been called lazy, aimless, and irresponsible with money.” 

His most recent relationship with a 22 year-old ended when she moved out, but it was a blessing in disguise: as the lazy son of doctors he was uncomfortable with her blue-collar military background. He turned to online dating and is now happy as aAs_happy_as_a_pig_in_muck_-_geograph.org.uk_-_981002

Now on to the logical debate. Madrigal cites Slater’s premise:

The argument is that online dating expands the romantic choices that people have available, somewhat like moving to a city. And more choices mean less satisfaction.

Does online dating increase or decrease commitment or its related states, like marriage? 

Madrigal correctly points out that the online dating executives opining on the subject have a huge conflict of interest.

As Slater notes, “the profit models of many online-dating sites are at cross-purposes with clients who are trying to develop long-term commitments.” Which is exactly why they are happy to be quoted talking about how well their sites work for getting laid and moving on.

Here are some quotes from industry players:

“The future will see better relationships but more divorce. The older you get as a man, the more experienced you get. You know what to do with women, how to treat them and talk to them.”

SW: That’s what Booth Jonathan said!

Dan Winchester, the founder of a free dating site based in the U.K.

“Historically, relationships have been billed as ‘hard’ because, historically, commitment has been the goal. You could say online dating is simply changing people’s ideas about whether commitment itself is a life value.”

Greg Blatt, the CEO of Match

“I think divorce rates will increase as life in general becomes more real-time…It’s exhilarating to connect with new people…People always said that the need for stability would keep commitment alive. But that thinking was based on a world in which you didn’t meet that many people.”

Niccolò Formai, the head of social-media marketing at Badoo

“Societal values always lose out…As we become more secure and confident in our ability to find someone else, usually someone better, monogamy and the old thinking about commitment will be challenged very harshly.” 

Noel Biderman, the founder of Ashley Madison

As always, follow the money trail. There was a time when Match was eager to promote the number of marriages it could take credit for. Apparently, they’ve shifted to a strategy of promising poon instead in the hopes of creating more repeat business. Ladies, beware, that’s going to mean more Jacobs putting up profiles.

Justin Parfitt, a dating entrepreneur based in San Francisco, puts the matter bluntly: “They’re thinking, Let’s keep this fucker coming back to the site as often as we can.”

Madrigal proceeds to look at the data (that’s where we come in):

First off, the heaviest users of technology–educated, wealthier people–have been using online dating and networking sites to find each other for years. And yet, divorce rates among this exact group have been declining for 30 years. Take a look at these statistics. If technology were the problem, you’d expect that people who can afford to use the technology, and who have been using the technology, would be seeing the impacts of this new lack of commitment. But that’s just not the case.

Madrigal cites other sources which support the role of the internet in promoting the formation of relationships and marriage.  “The possibility that the relationship “market” is changing in a bunch of ways, rather than just by the introduction of date-matching technology, is the most compelling to me. [A] 2008 paper found that the biggest change in marriage could be increasingly “co-ed” workplaces.” Other influences potentially include changing gender norms (the “end of men,” hookup culture), the economy, the rising marriage age, geography (77% of Millennials say they want to live in big cities), and the role of religion in America (declining church attendance but increasing evangelical fervor). 

Maybe Jacob doesn’t want to get married. Maybe he wants to get drunk, have sex, watch basketball, and never deal with the depths of a real relationship. OK, Jacob, good luck! But that doesn’t make online dating an ineluctable force crushing the romantic landscape. It’s just the means to Jacob’s ends and his convenient scapegoat for behavior that might otherwise lead to self-loathing.

Madrigal says his piece is the first in a series. I look forward to future installments (with or without links) as he explores the changing nature of dating and relationships in America.

Update: Stuart Schneiderman just alerted me to Amanda Hess’ hilarious takedown of the Slater piece at Slate:

Online Dating is a Horrific Den of Humanity

Enjoy.

  • Russ in Texas

    Was Mr. Slater handsomely compensated for what is in effect a piece of brilliant pro-online-dating marketing aimed at shiftless men?

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

      Was Mr. Slater handsomely compensated for what is in effect a piece of brilliant pro-online-dating marketing aimed at shiftless men?

      Seriously. If he was, he’s a scoundrel, and if he wasn’t, he’s a chump.

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

    Online dating is a cesspool and will continue to be so precisely because its infested by feckless men like Jacob and his female counterparts. The pool of people willing to tolerate all the flotsam is actually very small, so the same profiles by the same people keep getting recycled over and over again. It’s certainly not the image the people who own and operate online dating want to present, but the reality is that their customer base sucks. All you have to do to prove it for yourself is randomly sample some male and female profiles and see how awful they all are.

    If any online dating site is actually going to have significant relationship generation success — as opposed to endless coffee dates — they’re going to have to impose some rules on the men in an attempt to balance out the gender ratio. For example, limit men to one email to a new girl per day, to cut down on the spam and stop men from messaging the hotties to death when they’re a Jacob. BUT! If the flow of coffee dates slows, they lose their customer base. Hence why they sell serial monogamy and try to play this as the new norm. Marriage is bad for the online dating business.

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

      BUT! If the flow of coffee dates slows, they lose their customer base. Hence why they sell serial monogamy and try to play this as the new norm. Marriage is bad for the online dating business.

      Exactly. As someone who was long married before the first site ever popped up, I’ve never tried it. Young women have given me mixed reports, but overall have found it to be a huge amount of effort with little to show for it. Meaning, way too many Jacobs, which requires constant filtering and endless coffee dates.

      I found some of the comments by industry execs truly despicable, especially (not surprisingly) the founder of Ashley Madison. Ugh.

  • Holana

    Most Millennials want to live in big cities?

    That’s SWPL White Liberals and NAMs right? Because they are shipping most Blacks and Hispanics (and bringing poverty, family dysfunction and crime with them) to the suburbs around big cities, after whitening and Asianing major cities like Seattle, Portland, San Francisco and Washington, D.C.

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

      @Holana

      Most Millennials want to live in big cities?

      I heard that statistic on NPR last night as a matter of fact. They had a guy on who has written a book about the walkability of different cities, and he shared that. Pretty sure he was including everyone.

      I’m curious to know what you mean by “shipping” minorities to suburbs? Are they being sent out of cities against their will?

      Also, the Pacific Northwest has had a significant Asian population for well over a hundred years.

      You sound like a crazy HBDer.

  • http://eoinmacaodh.wordpress.com Eoin MacAodh

    A few things he should mention in his series, but probably won’t:

    1) The effect on beta males’ view of their future girlfriends/wives after more and more of those girls have spent time with Jacobs. The vast majority of men have come to accept that women have a past, but the contents of that past can be damning – I don’t recall the name of the post on this site, but the metaphor would be the Jacob is shelling out fifty cents for the new york times while future boyfriends are paying five bucks. That breeds resentment.

    2) The effect of these past relationships on men’s standards. Having been a hopeless romantic prior to getting into Game (you know, normal manosphere stuff), it’s hard to go back once you’ve landed that first low-maintenance sex-only relationship. Last year I “dated” a girl I met online for three months, during which I had sex and home-cooked meals constantly, and into which I invested sex and home-cooked meals in return. A year ago I would have been appalled at myself; now I see it as a perfectly equitable relationship. Women are helping to shift their own goalposts, and not in a way that many would like.

    3) The effect on women from more easy access to dates with alphas. Online dating still retains the appearance of regular dating – it has more plausible deniability than a bar hookup. Women can chase alphas in more socially-acceptable environments that resemble traditional dating, even though it will end the same way any alpha fling ends. I would be curious to see if women who rely more on online dating end up with longer sexual histories (with more alphas) and later marriages. Actually, if anyone has data on that, it would be awesome.

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

      @Eoin

      The effect on beta males’ view of their future girlfriends/wives after more and more of those girls have spent time with Jacobs.

      Wait, are you suggesting Jacob is an alpha? If so, that just reinforces my claims about those f*ckers.

      it’s hard to go back once you’ve landed that first low-maintenance sex-only relationship.

      An excellent reason why women should shun unrestricted or promiscuous males. They’re ruined for monogamy.

      The effect on women from more easy access to dates with alphas. Online dating still retains the appearance of regular dating – it has more plausible deniability than a bar hookup. Women can chase alphas in more socially-acceptable environments that resemble traditional dating

      No doubt you’ve heard about the OKCupid study where most women found 80% of men below average looking, yet messaged a high percentage of those men nonetheless. A woman doesn’t need to go online to meet alphas. They’re easily picked up wherever people congregate, and they’re actually pretty difficult to ID online. The women I’ve known have had far more experience online with cads running false beta game than cads being open about wanting casual sex.

  • OffTheCuff

    Great, now women will think all men have it as easy as Jacob. Which means, men are encouraged to act more like Jacob. Go Jacob, go!

  • Tomato

    Absolutely, Mr. Toes. Marriage is bad for online dating sites because it means that source of revenue from both people is gone. The later, rinse, repeat of serial dating garners far more profit.

    /damn glad I never had to try online dating.

  • http://meistergedanken.livejournal.com meistergedanken

    I met my wife using an online dating site back in 2004. It was NOT an easy process, and I devoted more time to it than I had anticipated. At one point I had memberships to three different sites. I must have contacted over 90 women over the course of a year. Out of those, about 9 or 10 replied. Out of those, I think there were 4 women where there were multiple emails with some mutual interest expressed. One woman I actually talked to once on the phone and then two others that wanted to date me. Ultimately, I married the thinner one. If there is interest, I could provide more details. I wonder how much has changed since then.

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

      @meistergedanken

      Although the odds sound daunting, 90 messages leading to a wife in one year is not bad!

  • Erik L

    “It was fairly incredible,” Jacob remembers. “I’m an average-looking guy. All of a sudden I was going out with one or two very pretty, ambitious women a week. At first I just thought it was some kind of weird lucky streak.”

    Is this a typical experience? Not from what I’ve heard.

  • deti

    The technology of online dating isn’t driving serial monogamy. The people who want serial monogamy are driving the technology.

    Off the Cuff:

    “Great, now women will think all men have it as easy as Jacob. Which means, men are encouraged to act more like Jacob.”

    Precisely. There have been many, many stories of average to middling men having no luck with online dating. From what I hear, the women and the alphas make out like bandits in online dating — pretty much as they do IRL.

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

      The people who want serial monogamy are driving the technology.

      I wonder what percentage of online daters are explicitly looking for a life partner. I think it’s got to be well over 50%. With another 25% wanting a serious relationship that could potentially lead to marriage.

      Obviously, it depends on the site. Ashley Madison is specifically for adultery. I’ve heard that OKCupid and POF draw a lot of cads b/c they’re free, and they tend to attract a younger, less serious clientele. More and more sites are popping up that are really hawking high priced escorts, including the Sugar Daddy sites aimed at college females.

  • J

    Interesting post, SW. I took the time to read all the linked articles and there was one point that no one ever alluded to that I firmly believe is true: There is no real difference between abundance and scarcity when it comes to making choices.

    Consider the child who has a overfilled toy box and nothing to play with, the woman with 100 pairs of shoes and nothing to wear, the guy with 1000 cables channels who complains there’s nothing on. An overwhelming numbers of choices not only leads to devalving what you have, but it leads to decision-making fatigue. Sooner or later, that has to impact the ways in which people handle making their choices. People who are looking for real relationships will have to respond by looking for ways to simplify the process or by tightening their standards, lest they launch themselves on impossible searches for a perfection that doesn’t exist.

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

      @J

      People who are looking for real relationships will have to respond by looking for ways to simplify the process or by tightening their standards

      For women at least, it’s got to be the latter, and they need to err on the side of caution. For example, on OKCupid you can say what you’re looking for – a relationship of long or short duration, or “friends with similar interests.” I advise women to immediately eliminate from consideration anyone who checks the friends box. That’s strictly for casual sex. I also rule out any guy who does not have the LTR box checked. Checking both STR and LTR is OK.

      The girls I know who have abided by these guidelines have still found themselves dealing with guys pressuring them for sex on the second or third date. I think some people feel no responsibility because they met online, and are unlikely to suffer any real damage to their reputation as a result of bad behavior.

  • J

    I’m curious to know what you mean by “shipping” minorities to suburbs? Are they being sent out of cities against their will?

    I took his comment to be hyperbole. I do think though that, in some cities, as formerly lower SES neighborhoods close to downtowns are being gentrified, minorities are being outcompeted for housing and thus pushed out of their old neighborhoods.

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

      I do think though that, in some cities, as formerly lower SES neighborhoods close to downtowns are being gentrified, minorities are being outcompeted for housing and thus pushed out of their old neighborhoods.

      A bizarre reversal of white flight? This is happening in South Boston, and also in the North End (Little Italy) part of Boston. Of course, that gentrification is what makes cities economically viable. I recently read that there is no longer a real supermarket within Detroit’s city limits. The whole city is a blight. I’m sure the city planners are furiously dreaming up schemes to encourage gentrification.

  • HanSolo

    The Atlantic article gives the impression that Jacob is just an average schlub who is getting laid by hot women left and right and that there are tons of average schlubs experiencing the same outcome. However, this seems very different than reality. It is unlikely that Jacob is as low in SMV as implied. He likely has some sort of charisma, even if of the douche-bag variety. It’s also hard to know if the women are really as “hot” as implied. At least on POF there are usually 2-3x as many men as women so the typical “average” guy online isn’t getting tons of women. In fact, anecdotally, most men have a rather frustrating time with online dating.

    Overall, this Atlantic article is perpetuating the apex fallacy, attributing to most men what is only happening to the few.

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

      The Atlantic article gives the impression that Jacob is just an average schlub who is getting laid by hot women left and right and that there are tons of average schlubs experiencing the same outcome. However, this seems very different than reality. It is unlikely that Jacob is as low in SMV as implied. He likely has some sort of charisma, even if of the douche-bag variety.

      Let’s see what we know about Jacob:

      Had difficulty meeting women when he moved to Portland.
      Was involuntarily single for two years.
      At 26, began 5 year relationship with older woman.
      Doesn’t work full time.
      History of stagnating in relationships but not breaking up. Always the dumpee.

      Now, he’s dating several women at once, most of whom had sex with him on the first or second date. IOW, unrestricted gals. The one he likes is making him wait for sex, so he’s going to dump her.

      Jacob says it best himself:

      “I’m worried that I’m making it so I can’t fall in love.”

  • Deli

    Oh my God, do we have to do that again?

    Men value looks first and foremost, filtering for character and general compatibility later in the dating process, when they are pressed to provide commitment.
    Thus they spam every woman over a certain hotness cut off point.

    Women try to filter for commitment first PLUS them being creatures with predominantly reactive desire, they have little experience in proactively pursuing a mate. Thus all they do is filter the spam responses they get and than set up second round of live interviews.

    And since if you know what you are doing it is easy to mend the words in your profile in order to pass the first female filter – women get a lot of players in the second round, and some obviously get laid.

    This is how human sexuality works. Online dating is human sexuality working as intended (!)
    The fact that something sucks for you does not mean it is not working as intended. It just means it sucks for you.
    Online dating is geared towards People with “Limited Affinity to Yield Emotional Response” Strategy (P.L.A.Y.E.R.S.)

    I honestly believe that it could be changed to provide better precision of landing someone who is comparable with you in the long run, rather than someone who just managed to push the right short term attraction buttons. My company is pretty efficient in weeding out people, who try at the interviews to tell us the right words without being the right people for our job.

    It would require a much more cynical and much more rigorous testing apparatus on the website’s side, as much as a fundamental shift of expectations from both male and female customers – but in my opinion it can be done.

    In the end what is long-term SMP, but not the market where men sell “husband” and women sell “wife”. (credit goes to Ian Ironwood for this metaphor, though I don’t know if he was the first one to use it)

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com Mule Chewing Briars

    Jacob probably stole a lot of Josh Radner’s pictures off of IMDb and parlayed a superficial resemblance to said actor, coupled with a dilettantish knowledge of the indie music scene, into a successful mini-career as a rake.

    Portland would be the perfect place for that.

    [off-topic] I ran into Grace Slick forty years too late at a Shaw’s in Portland. I would have felt stupid asking her to sign my pirated “After Bathing At Baxters” CD, so I didn’t. Portland is like that. [/off-topic]

    Over the holidays, I saw a couple of 女 bloggers openly trumpeting their preference for serial monogamy, so online dating should be a barrel shoot for them until their mid forties.

  • J

    The girls I know who have abided by these guidelines have still found themselves dealing with guys pressuring them for sex on the second or third date. I think some people feel no responsibility because they met online, and are unlikely to suffer any real damage to their reputation as a result of bad behavior.

    It’s also so easy to move onto the next girl if one girl responds poorly to bad behavior.

    A bizarre reversal of white flight?

    Kinda. I think that, in many cities, older low SES neighborhoods tend to surround downtown simply because those are the oldest, cheapest parts of a city. Those areas also tend to attract young professionals since they are close to work and nightlife. Yuppies buy cheap buildings and renovate, prices go up or former rental properties become private homes. With cheap rentals no longer available, minorities leave.

  • Cooper

    “I advise women to immediately eliminate from consideration anyone who checks the friends box. That’s strictly for casual sex. I also rule out any guy who does not have the LTR box checked.”

    +1

    One thing that has surprised be about online dating site is that girls don’t want to “just chat.” They want your first messege to leave an impression (I know, cause so many make a point of saying so in their profiles) – and for it to be one that gets them to want to see you for coffee. There’s rarely an in-between. Perhaps offering an invitation to get to know one another isn’t tingle-inducing enough. Can no screening be done via messeging? I know there are a lot bullshiters out there, but how many of them are going to invest very much time getting to know each other. (A few – for sure)

    Another side note, on OKC there are questions you can answer and compare (if set public – as many of you may already know)

    There’s one question that always gets me: what is more important to you: many meaningful relationships or true love.
    I rarely see the true love answer selected – and will almost always messege when I do.

  • deti

    Susan:

    I disagree with your reading of Jacob.

    There are descriptions of him in Slater’s article that indicates he’s a “Jersey Shore” style douchebag.

    –Lazy, aimless, irresponsible with money.
    –loves going to basketball games and concerts, prioritizes them over the women in his life and dating.
    –gets a lot of interest in his Match.com profile.
    –doesn’t prioritize working (meaning he’s not really seeking commitment and therefore is “safe” for women who are also in it for fun and not commitment).
    –getting texts from other women while on dates with women.
    –he likes independent and low-maintenance women. (This indicates to me that he’s gone the minute a woman starts hassling him.)
    –of the women he’s met online, he’s slept with most of them; and usually by the second date.

    His 5 year relationship at 26 was with a SLIGHTLY older woman. We don’t know how much older and we really can’t draw a lot of conclusions from it.

    There’s no description of him always being the dumpee in his prior relationships.

    He says he wants to be a nice guy but knows that eventually he will “come across as a serious asshole”.

    Susan, you misread Jacob. He’s a textbook alpha douchebag who’s having some pretty good success gaming these girls into bed.

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

      @deti

      I thought it was pretty clear that he tends to stay in LTRs long after their expiration date, and women always leave him. The ones mentioned did, and what he said is that now he doesn’t dread a breakup as much because he knows he can meet new women easily.

      Not sure why he’d be a hit online as a Jersey Shore type – EW! Or why he wouldn’t have been before that. Weird story, we probably are not getting a good picture here.

      In any case, Jacob is the throwaway part of the article. To me at least, what’s interesting is the shifting nature of online dating to a model that promotes relationship failure and returning to the site repeatedly.

      And of course, what Madrigal said – there’s no evidence that online dating is interfering with monogamy. Marriage is alive and well among the very cohort most likely to use online dating.

  • Cooper

    Re: my last post

    I’m not sure exactly, but the OKC question might be worded “one true love.” (If that makes any difference)

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

    What’s amazing is that many online dating sites are membership due revenue driven (e.g. Match, EHarmony) while those that are ad driven (Plenty of Syphilis) do a horrible job of marketing. The obvious place to make your money in online dating is by getting a cut of the _dates_, a la Groupon style local deal buys. Not a single one of the major online dating sites has the ability to setup a date in a similar fashion to a Facebook event. That’s crazy, both in terms of loss of revenue (both from data mining and selling venues) and giving users the ability to police other users for bad behaviour like flaking or outdated/deceptive pictures.

    I think something like 20 % of the population has tried online dating but only 2 % is practicing it at any one time. I think that’s a mark of a bad product.

    There’s so many things that could be done to reduce the number of douchebags and douchebaggettes online, but aren’t. How about needing a credit card to join to stop scammers from Nigeria? Limiting the number of new people a user can contact every week to reduce spamming? Using tineye.com or a similar image search service to reduce the incidence of stolen photos?

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    This raises the question. If he is such a schlub and average looking (we have no mention of what he does for a career) then why are all these women going for him?

    Rather than an indictment on him (assuming the description is accurate and that the women really are so pretty with decent careers) it is actually a compliment about some other thing he has going for him that lures these women in and makes them want to have a relationship with him.

    Yes, since he’s not a great partner things eventually sour and the women leave but that is ignoring why they get with him to begin with. We know that he gives “healthy” lol attention to his other interests and so the women aren’t feeling smothered by him–something that women love–a guy who is too into her just must not be of high enough value! /sarcasm off

    So, I ask again, if he’s such a schlub and these women are so pretty, then why are they going for him? As portrayed, Jacob has a high SMV as evidenced by having lots of women after him. (I’m personally dubious, either the women aren’t so hot or he has some good charisma/game going on that makes up for his lack of looks and ambition. Did the author investigate his claims or is he just a braggart/troll?)

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

      So, I ask again, if he’s such a schlub and these women are so pretty, then why are they going for him? As portrayed, Jacob has a high SMV as evidenced by having lots of women after him. (I’m personally dubious, either the women aren’t so hot or he has some good charisma/game going on that makes up for his lack of looks and ambition. Did the author investigate his claims or is he just a braggart/troll?)

      I have no idea. Madrigal referred to his “mediocre dates” but I don’t know if that’s founded on anything real. My guess is that Jacob is OK looking and comes across as confident. I definitely doubt his claims about pretty women, and I don’t see any evidence that Slater checked out any of it.

      Also, he’s having sex on the first date? Like, they go back to his place from Starbuck’s? What woman does that? A slutty one. He’s got 5 women in rotation, and each one of them probably has 5 men in rotation. Scumbags all around.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    Regarding two other points you made:
    Actually it doesn’t state he doesn’t work full-time, just that “he didn’t think much about…a 40-hour workweek,” whatever that means. It’s vague. It could mean he doesn’t work full-time but not necessarily.

    I would rephrase the unrestricted gals into not on the restricted end of the spectrum. There are some middle-of-the-spectrum gals that will have sex soon if they feel infatuated or attracted enough, at least once or twice in their life.

  • HanSolo

    If this story of Jacob really is true and he is some sort of charismatic, Jersey-shore douchebag then this is an indictment of the poor taste in men that all the women have that are wanting to LTR him.

    These articles miss out on the central theme of mating and dating. To a large extent, during prehistoric times and in modern society, women are the choosers and men respond. (The agrarian-patriarchal societies of the last several thousand years would be periods where women had less choice due to arranged marriages to the extent those happened.)

    Men respond to what women demand.

    Too many modern women (NAWALT) are choosing the Jersey-Shore douches. Then they wonder why they have to move out after 2 or 5 years, like with Jacob.

    They reap what they sow.

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

      These articles miss out on the central theme of mating and dating…Too many modern women (NAWALT) are choosing the Jersey-Shore douches. Then they wonder why they have to move out after 2 or 5 years, like with Jacob.

      That isn’t the point of the article at all. The point is that Jacob’s experience does not prove anything about online dating reducing commitment, including marriage. Madrigal made an excellent case to debunk that notion.

      How about we stop focusing on whether Jacob is alpha or not? It’s such a derailer….

  • Ramble

    Were you made aware of this article because of Abbot?

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

      Were you made aware of this article because of Abbot?

      F for reading comprehension, Ramble. I was made aware of it because it linked to me and hundreds of readers from the Atlantic have been swarming the blog for two days.

  • deti

    “In any case, Jacob is the throwaway part of the article. To me at least, what’s interesting is the shifting nature of online dating to a model that promotes relationship failure and returning to the site repeatedly.”

    I don’t think Jacob’s the throwaway part of the article. He’s held up as the example of what’s “wrong” with online dating. He’s touted as the example of why online dating is going to a “model that promotes relationship failure”.

    All this to me begs the question of why online dating would adapt to this model, which pulls you to to question of “who wants serial monogamy? Why is the market demanding it?”

    The answer is: Women in general, of course, and in this particular context, women using online dating. The current dating paradigm encourages dating and rapid escalation to sex followed by “well, let’s see if there’s relationship potential here”. Men don’t pursue serial monogamy as a strategy, i.e. dating a string of women in consecutive fashion. Men pursue concurrent dating strategies: date a number of women simultaneously. Soft harems, rotating women in and out. Women tend to pursue this strategy: trying out a man one after the other, to see which one or ones work out.

    Lest I be accused of pushing an agenda here, I’m not. I’m just pointing out that online dating seems to be responding to market demands, and who is the most logical group driving those market demands.

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

      He’s held up as the example of what’s “wrong” with online dating. He’s touted as the example of why online dating is going to a “model that promotes relationship failure”.

      No, he’s not. Madrigal says he’s a loser who doesn’t represent online dating at all – an outlier. He acknowledges that online dating companies are working hard to get more Jacobs, but he mostly focuses on the people who are finding committed relationships with the help of the internet. He also rightly points out that there are many factors influencing the relationship market, and that claiming online dating is destroying monogamy is unfounded.

      All this to me begs the question of why online dating would adapt to this model, which pulls you to to question of “who wants serial monogamy? Why is the market demanding it?”

      I think you’ve got it backwards. The online dating companies are aggressively marketing to players. Whereas EHarmony and Match used to advertise with portraits of wedded bliss, now they market hookups. Naturally, that draws a completely different customer. They actually don’t care about the folks who want to marry, and no longer make claims they can help. Those folks are bad for biz. A Jacob will renew indefinitely on Match, creating a steady and endless revenue stream. IOW, the companies have abandoned one population, and gone after another. There are markets for both approaches, but monogamy is not profitable, so the companies choose to get out of that market.

      And there are more sites like Ashley Madison, for married people who want to have affairs. There’s even a site for men married to women who want to have a homosexual adulterous affair. I don’t know how large that target market is, but they’re pouring money into video advertising.

  • Tomato

    @Cooper “There’s one question that always gets me: what is more important to you: many meaningful relationships or true love. I rarely see the true love answer selected”

    Interesting! I wonder why.

    @deti “Men don’t pursue serial monogamy as a strategy, i.e. dating a string of women in consecutive fashion. Men pursue concurrent dating strategies: date a number of women simultaneously. Soft harems, rotating women in and out. Women tend to pursue this strategy: trying out a man one after the other, to see which one or ones work out. “

    Are there citations proving this? I knew plenty of male serial monogamists.

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

    By MCB:

    “Jacob probably stole a lot of Josh Radner’s pictures off of IMDb and parlayed a superficial resemblance to said actor, coupled with a dilettantish knowledge of the indie music scene, into a successful mini-career as a rake.”

    -Excellent paragraph, could be the basis for a thriller

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

      “Jacob probably stole a lot of Josh Radner’s pictures off of IMDb and parlayed a superficial resemblance to said actor, coupled with a dilettantish knowledge of the indie music scene, into a successful mini-career as a rake.”

      -Excellent paragraph, could be the basis for a thriller

      Haha, I thought of a screenplay myself when I read that paragraph! It could be like the boy version of The Truth About Cats and Dogs, but with an unhappy ending.

  • deti

    “The point is that Jacob’s experience does not prove anything about online dating reducing commitment, including marriage.”

    Let me just point this out and then I’ll stop since you think we are derailing the thread with whether Jacob is alpha or not. I think it’s important but since you don’t, I won’t go there again.

    This is about the market responding to what people who use the product/service demonstrate they want, plain and simple. From the articles it looks like a lot of people are using online dating to get hookups. Who does that benefit? Women (like Rachel, a 22 year old pretty girl) and Jacob (apparently an alpha who’s having smashing success with online dating, in contrast to most average men who labor away with piddling results at it).

  • J

    I didn’t see Jacob as a Jersey shore type at all. He’s the slacker son of two doctors. I saw him as a bright but unambitious guy with a big sense of entitlement. A lot of teen boys in my neighborhood seem to be moving in that direction. Lots of time to play around and all on the parental dime.

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

      I didn’t see Jacob as a Jersey shore type at all. He’s the slacker son of two doctors.

      Good point. And he looks down on Rachel for her blue collar roots. He felt that his friends had nothing to say to her.

  • deti

    Tomato:

    “I know plenty of serial monogamists.”

    Let’s assume arguendo that you’re correct. It only proves my point: Online dating is responding to market forces. It sure looks like more and more people using the services want to find a string of hookups, one after the other, if you like.

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

      It sure looks like more and more people using the services want to find a string of hookups, one after the other, if you like.

      Are you basing this on Jacob’s story alone, or have you seen some data? Because this is one humongous leap your making, deti. Talk about anecdotal evidence…Madrigal did the research, and it does not bear out your claim.

      There have always been players and sluts online, that’s nothing new. Most women are extremely cautious online for that very reason. They filter the players out, not in.

      What is new are the marketing strategies of the companies, going after a market that may be one-third as large, but spend ten times as much. And of course, those who are seeking a life partner will continue to use online dating, because no real alternative to it exists.

      Think of it this way:

      Viagra was a drug developed for a rare condition called Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension. Guess what percentage of Viagra users suffer from that disease? How many advertising dollars go into luring PAH patients? It’s all about the dineros.

      Another good example is Febreze. P&G developed it by accident and didn’t realize it had odor-absorbing properties until the wife of a smoking lab tech noticed his clothes no longer smelled like cigarettes. It took the company years of trial and error – they could not find a market for the product. It turned out stinky people didn’t know they were stinky and were not motivated to use Febreze. In the end, P&G created the market from nothing. They convinced super tidy and clean housewives that Febreze is the finishing touch that makes a home perfectly clean. Those women had no need of the product, were not searching for the product. P&G found a way to make them believe they could not live without the product, and sales soared.

  • HanSolo

    @J

    You’re saying Jersey Shore types aren’t slackers? :D I agree that Jacob’s a slacker and for whatever reason he’s getting lots of the kind of results he wants. Now why would that be?

  • Damien Vulaume

    Dan Slater’s A Million First Dates claims that online dating is the death knell for monogamy, primarily due to the overwhelming supply of opportunities on offer. He shores up his argument with numerous interviews with executives in the online dating industry, and with the profile of a prize named Jacob. online dating is the death knell for monogamy

    Why don’t everybody just send the “dating industry” where it belong to?…that is to hell, for those who believe in it…. and move on to try have a go at a real interpersonal contat in the first place? The people mentioned in this post are all in it for business rewards more than anything else. I don’t think there is much room for debate here.

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

      I don’t think there is much room for debate here.

      Ah, but where this is a will there is the Red Pill!

  • Ramble

    I’m curious to know what you mean by “shipping” minorities to suburbs? Are they being sent out of cities against their will?

    It depends on how you define “against their will”. Let me give an example:

    In Baltimore, Johns Hopkins is a big deal. Not only are they the largest and most prestigious Uni in the city, they also have 2 large (and also prestigious) hospitals in the city.

    Johns Hopkins makes major investments in Baltimore, however, they rarely, if ever, make any investments in the neighborhoods just west of the Campus. The neighborhood just south of campus is nice, though nothing amazing. The neighborhood just east is quite nice and the neighborhood just north is not bad.

    However, the neighborhood just west of the campus is not nice at all and JHU currently has a lot of greenery and tall trees walling them off from the student body. Well, it is a somewhat well known secret that JHU purposely doesn’t invest anything in that neighborhood so that it can buy up dilapidated properties on the cheap. After they get enough property, the can start expanding the campus in that (cheaper) direction.

    So, are these underclass blacks forced out against their will? Not really. JHU does not invest much in the eastern neighborhood either and they are doing just fine.

    There are a ton of methods that politicians and major-movers can use to nudge along gentrification.

    The Stop-and-Frisk policy in Manhattan disproportionally affects Blacks and Latinos and has had a major impact on the crime rate in Manhattan. These makes it that much MORE desirable to the “upwardly mobile” to move in an increase property taxes that much more.

    Other things that you see are certain environmental policies being pushed to a crazy level to prevent low cost and Section 8 houses from being built. Instead of the nice white ladies saying that they don’t want undesirables living near their daughters they can rant and rave about how a certain type of Pigweed will be locally extinct if they attempt to build anywhere near that swamp (later on they install solar panels on that same property to improve their carbon footprint [and, you know, prevent anyone else from trying to build there).

    Like I said, there are a bunch of ways to either increase gentrification or prevent undesirables from moving in and still look nice.

  • deti

    deti: “All this to me begs the question of why online dating would adapt to this model, which pulls you to to question of “who wants serial monogamy? Why is the market demanding it?””

    Susan: “I think you’ve got it backwards. The online dating companies are aggressively marketing to players. Whereas EHarmony and Match used to advertise with portraits of wedded bliss, now they market hookups. Naturally, that draws a completely different customer. They actually don’t care about the folks who want to marry, and no longer make claims they can help.”

    Hmmmmm. Chicken or egg?

    These companies are marketing to players because those are the kinds of men the female subscribers want to meet.

    SW: “claiming online dating is destroying monogamy is unfounded.”

    Right. I’m not arguing that. I’m arguing online dating is simply going where the $$ is, and that’s finding more players and Jacobs for the women who want to hook up with them.

    Online dating isn’t destroying monogamy. The hookup culture will probably destroy online dating.

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

      @deti

      I’m arguing online dating is simply going where the $$ is, and that’s finding more players and Jacobs for the women who want to hook up with them.

      Why not finding more sluts for the men who want to hook up with them?

      BTW, have you ever seen really promiscuous people? Swingers, polyamorists, nude sunbathers? I’ve seen plenty of pics of the former two groups and plenty of real life examples on the beach. The average SMV of these folks? 2-3. These people are butt ugly. I invite you to do a little research. Just because someone is getting dates on Match doesn’t mean a thing. He might be inviting messages from all women over 200 lbs. for all you know. It sounds like a joke, but it’s entirely possible.

  • Tomato

    Ah yes, Ramble, dogwhistle politics at work.

    @deti “Let’s assume arguendo that you’re correct. It only proves my point: Online dating is responding to market forces. It sure looks like more and more people using the services want to find a string of hookups, one after the other, if you like.”

    Wait, what? It looked like you were arguing that men pursue multiple women simultaneously while women pursue multiple men sequentially. And since women somehow dictate the online dating market, there’s a movement there toward sequential dating. That argument is fine, but I think such rigid gender breakdowns in dating strategies that you employ are simply untrue.

  • Ramble

    I do think though that, in some cities, as formerly lower SES neighborhoods close to downtowns are being gentrified, minorities are being outcompeted for housing and thus pushed out of their old neighborhoods.

    One thing to keep in mind when discussing this subject is that ‘gentrification’ has taken on a bad connotation because it is almost always associated with one race (usually whites) ‘pushing’ out another race (usually blacks).

    However, there are tons and tons of examples of gentrification being homogenous. In Susan’s backyard, the charming Charlestown neighborhood has gone from being lower-middle class whites to middle and upper class whites.

    In short, Gentrification is usually a good thing.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    That isn’t the point of the article at all. The point is that Jacob’s experience does not prove anything about online dating reducing commitment, including marriage. Madrigal made an excellent case to debunk that notion.

    Focusing some attention on Jacob is not derailing since you devoted a couple of paragraphs to talk about him in a negative light right at the top of this post, quoting Madrigal’s description of him as a “manchild jackass”. But that naturally raises the question of then why is he attracting so many “pretty” women?

    I certainly don’t begrudge you taking a potshot at a slacker douche but don’t be surprised then that people might want to discuss the douche in question.

    Madrigal says that online dating is not the problem (and I largely agree) and chides Slater for ignoring that Jacob himself might well be the problem but he doesn’t afford equal culpability to the women choosing Jacob. However, neither Slater nor Madrigal notice the obvious elephant in the room: women are using online dating (and offline) to choose the Jacobs of the world.

    I agree that the Slater article and Jacob’s experience don’t prove that online dating is reducing commitment. Madrigal says there’s no data set to definitively settle the question right now.

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

      @Han

      However, neither Slater nor Madrigal notice the obvious elephant in the room: women are using online dating (and offline) to choose the Jacobs of the world.

      Jacob is one example. I don’t understand how you can extrapolate from that, especially since Madrigal dismisses him as not representative up front. All we know is that Jacob went online and got some dates with at least five women. We know nothing about looks, profiles, sociosexuality, etc.

      It’s legit to discuss Jacob as an individual, as I did in the post, but Madrigal is taking Slater to task for using him as an example, becasue he obviously believes he is not representative.

      Madrigal says there’s no data set to definitively settle the question right now.

      But he does provide several, ahem, sources that suggest online dating is not reducing commitment, and in fact that commitment among the educated is not declining at all. Madrigal clearly exposes Slater’s argument as specious, IMO. That’s the real reason Jacob is unimportant.

  • deti

    “Why not finding more sluts for the men who want to hook up with them?”

    Yep. That too. That’s why I closed that last comment with “Online dating isn’t destroying monogamy. The hookup culture will probably destroy online dating.”

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

      The hookup culture will probably destroy online dating.

      I don’t think so. Alphas don’t need to go online to get laid. Why would they bother? And sluts don’t need to go on coffee dates to get sex with them. Online dating is an extremely inefficient mechanism for a market that works very efficiently already.

      Reportedly, the fastest growing group online is aged 22-30. I think that’s mostly made up of young people who want an alternative to the hookup scene.

  • slwerner

    Deti – “The technology of online dating isn’t driving serial monogamy. The people who want serial monogamy are driving the technology.”

    SW – “Think of it this way:

    Viagra was a drug developed for a rare condition called Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension. Guess what percentage of Viagra users suffer from that disease? How many advertising dollars go into luring PAH patients? It’s all about the dineros.”

    Looks like you’ve just made Deti’s point for him. Their aggressive advertising is geared towards what most of their potential customers really want – Viagra for sex, on-line dating for hook-ups.

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

      @slwerner

      Their aggressive advertising is geared towards what most of their potential customers really want – Viagra for sex, on-line dating for hook-ups.

      I think the market is more segmented than that. There are people who want strictly casual sex online, there are people who want relationships of 1-5 years duration, and there are people seeking a marriage partner. All of that information is provided in the profile, presumably. (I’m just familiar with OKC.) The profile also indicates how many dates you expect to go on before having sex, ranging from 1 date to 1 year, or even marriage. So like seeks out like, by and large. The casual sex seekers function mostly independently from the other groups, where there is considerable overlap.

      Online dating companies are working hard to woo more of the casual only, no dates required, group. They’re attempting to get them to come over from Craigslist Encounters and pay the fee for online dating instead. That will undoubtedly increase the percentage of casual sex seekers online, but there is no reason it will affect the other groups, other than the fact that they won’t be marketed to as forcefully.

      Online dating offers a wide range of experiences – for every Blendr or Ashley Madison there’s a How About We or Christian Singles site.

      It’s far too simplistic to say that online daters want one thing, or that all online daters are telling the companies to wake up and sell sex. It’s really a question of targeting with market segmentation.

  • deti

    BTW, have you ever seen really promiscuous people?

    Yes I have. College town bar sluts. Drunk college girls. Meathead jocks. Frat boy assholes (some of whom were my own frat brothers). All of whom varied in physical attractiveness from slightly below average to white hot and slammin’.

    I’m gonna shut up now. Back to online dating.

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

      @deti

      Yes I have. College town bar sluts. Drunk college girls. Meathead jocks. Frat boy assholes (some of whom were my own frat brothers). All of whom varied in physical attractiveness from slightly below average to white hot and slammin

      Well this is one post where we can’t use college students as our representative sample, because they don’t date online. But I can say that you forgot to mention the hairy legged Women’s Studies types and their manboob admirers, who drag the average way down. :P Also, we know that men rate 80% of women as above average, lol. You guys are visual, but you’re not very discerning.

      Check google images for the most sexually adventurous folks in the U.S., but don’t do it right after a meal.

  • J

    OT–I/E and the holiday party

    http://www.livebetteramerica.com/healthy-living/health/well-being/articles/Introverts-vs-extroverts?nicam1=CONTENT_PPC&nichn1= OUTBRAIN&nipkw1={ad_Title}&niseg1=TDCORE_LBA&ersc=16670

  • http://asinusspinasmasticans.wordpress.com Mule Chewing Briars

    “There are markets for both approaches, but monogamy is not profitable”

    That statement was like a seed crystal hitting a saturated solution. It is true in so many ways it boggles the imagination, from real estate to family law to cosmetics to fitness to organic foods and beyond.

    Our twilit Empire of Manufactured Anxieties would founder against an outbreak of widespread domestic contentment like the Titanic against the iceberg.

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

      Our twilit Empire of Manufactured Anxieties would founder against an outbreak of widespread domestic contentment like the Titanic against the iceberg.

      More great wordsmithing from Mule. I live for these tidbits.

  • Russ in Texas

    I have a confession.

    I LOVE online dating sites.

    Not because I need to get laid – as said before, I’m happily owned and kennelled, and my ears are scratched lovingly and regularly.
    Rather, I love to laugh my puerile little ass off at the women who frequent these sites. While there are clearly exceptions, these are the women for whom PUA were made — women in their forties posting pics five years old b/c they can’t understand why it’s only “old men” who are interested; uneducated trash-mouth women who wonder where all the “good men” have gone….but still want a bad-boy; women who ditched their husbands in order to trade up, and suddenly can’t understand why nobody wants to pay for them to live the lifestyle to which they would like to get accustomed…..

    Online dating sites are a smorgasbord of schadenfreude, and a constantly-updated textbook regarding the phrase “don’t be these people.” True and serious online romance is absolutely possible there, and I’ve known some folks who got results….but the majority of what’s there appears truly to be human wreckage.

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

      Online dating sites are a smorgasbord of schadenfreude, and a constantly-updated textbook regarding the phrase “don’t be these people.” True and serious online romance is absolutely possible there, and I’ve known some folks who got results….but the majority of what’s there appears truly to be human wreckage.

      That sounds like Bastiat Blogger’s description of his crowd. It is my earnest hope that my readers will be in a position to enjoy that delicious schadenfreude one day.

  • deti

    Russ:

    You do realize, don’t you, that you’ve made my point for me?

  • Ramble

    Too many modern women (NAWALT) are choosing the Jersey-Shore douches.

    Han, I am going to disagree with you here. I think it is a fairly small minority of girls that genuinely like that level of douchiness. However, guys with that level of douchiness can do better than your average schulb.

    The reason why, IMO/IME, is that girls DO demand some amount of douchiness/cockiness/whatever-you-want-to-call-it and most betas/schlubs have none of it, or rarely display it when it would help them most.

    So, a lot of girls are left choosing between “nice guys” and “douches”. From their POV, it sucks.

    Susan (I think it was her) gave a great example of this the other day. Some girl was on a date with some guy and she told him that she had a tattoo. He asked about it, and she said it is not visible. It is a small star on her hip and you, again, can’t see it. Well, this proceeded to tell her that that star was his. He is going to own it and that he will be seeing it a lot.

    SPLOOSH!

    She loved it. Here, the d-bag prevailed. But, apparently, later on, he ruined it by being a d-bag.

    Now, I am willing to bet that that guy probably, in general, does better with girls than your average nice guy. But that doesn’t mean that girls want d-bags.

  • Ramble

    I misspelt schlub a few times.

  • Ramble

    Fuck! I misspelled “misspelled”.

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

      Fuck! I misspelled “misspelled”.

      Haha, that’s the best laugh of the day so far.

  • Russ in Texas

    Actually, Deti, I wasn’t even aware that I was in the debate, let alone that I had a staked-out position. I think you’re assuming motives I don’t actually have.

  • Ramble

    F for reading comprehension, Ramble.

    Jesus Christ Susan, it was just a question.

    I was curious because most people don’t respond to Abbot but Marellus did the other day in thanking him for the interesting links.

    You know, I have asked you before if I come across as too abrasive or if I should tone things down, and you had said that I was fine. If you don’t like something, just tell me. I am not looking to fuck up your shit.

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

      You know, I have asked you before if I come across as too abrasive or if I should tone things down, and you had said that I was fine. If you don’t like something, just tell me. I am not looking to fuck up your shit.

      Sorry, Ramble, I was just teasing you. That got lost in the written word. I guess I need to use more winky faces. You are more than fine. I have no problem with your demeanor online. And you’re fair, which also makes you a great commenter.

  • Russ in Texas

    On review, yes, Deti, I’d agree with your assessment (and by extension, Damien’s rejoinder regarding online dating in general). The people who run online dating sites can’t afford to stay in business if they try to swim against their income base.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    I was actually dismissing Jacob as representative of men online, if you recall my initial comment:

    The [Slater] Atlantic article gives the impression that Jacob is just an average schlub who is getting laid by hot women left and right and that there are tons of average schlubs experiencing the same outcome. However, this seems very different than reality. It is unlikely that Jacob is as low in SMV as implied. He likely has some sort of charisma, even if of the douche-bag variety. It’s also hard to know if the women are really as “hot” as implied. At least on POF there are usually 2-3x as many men as women so the typical “average” guy online isn’t getting tons of women. In fact, anecdotally, most men have a rather frustrating time with online dating.

    Overall, this [Slater] Atlantic article is perpetuating the apex fallacy, attributing to most men what is only happening to the few.

    I was pointing out that the Slater portrayal of the ease average-looking men have with getting pretty girls with online dating seemed false. Either Jacob had some unmentioned attractive traits (like charisma or some aspect of game) and was thus much more attractive than his negative portrayal or that the women weren’t as pretty as Jacob claims.

    The Slater article does give the (unfounded) impression that Jacob is the norm for online dating (I don’t agree with that). I was simply pursuing the logical implications of that assertion: If he really is such a slacker and bad for relationships then why are the women pursuing him (and as is implied by Slater, others like him)? Especially when on POF there are 2-3x more men than women and surely some of them are looking for more sincere LTRs/marriage.

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

      @HanSolo

      Yes, I see. Thanks for clarifying.

  • Tomato

    “However, neither Slater nor Madrigal notice the obvious elephant in the room: women are using online dating (and offline) to choose the Jacobs of the world.”

    Temporarily, anyway. It appears that Jacob can initially attract women because of his appearance/charm/whatever but cannot keep them due to his selfishness and laziness. Men and women are often drawn to someone because of their initial qualities but become put off upon discovering their negative aspects. Such a relationship typically lasts as long as one partner is willing to put up with those negative aspects. Some people bail right away, others wait to see if the person can change or see if they can ignore the negative qualities in favor of the positive ones.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Susan#75,

    Yes, I’d hope so. Many very real social ills could be cured by women getting advice that was real and worked, as opposed to what’s being spoonfed to them now. “Sex and the City” is behavior suited for a very specific breeed of gay man, not for a romantically successful woman.

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

      “Sex and the City” is behavior suited for a very specific breeed of gay man, not for a romantically successful woman.

      SATC is the most malignant cultural event to hit the SMP in the last 20 years.

  • Escoffier

    I’m the only one who found value in Slater’s piece then?

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

      @Escoffier

      What was valuable about it?

  • HanSolo

    @Ramble

    Too many modern women (NAWALT) are choosing the Jersey-Shore douches.

    Han, I am going to disagree with you here. I think it is a fairly small minority of girls that genuinely like that level of douchiness. However, guys with that level of douchiness can do better than your average schulb.

    You’re not disagreeing with me because you counter what I said with a claim that isn’t in disagreement. I said too many women are choosing douches. Too many doesn’t mean most or even a large minority (like 40%). I think it is probably more in the 20-30% range that are choosing to be with them at least a few times.

    That brings up the second point. I didn’t refer to women that “genuinely like that level of douchiness,” just that they choose it.

    It constantly amazes me as I talk with girls and they tell me how they used to date assholes and are now looking for a good guy (I’m sure there’s a lot of hyperbole in their claims)–most recent example was a girl I dated for a while and had a low N so not some raging slut at all.

    Just last night I was out with a girl who has a phd and told me about how she couldn’t get over the guy she had an intense 3-week, nearly everyday fling with a month ago who then balked when she said they were dating. From her description of his problems, this guy totally sounded like a slacker Jacob type (except that he wouldn’t even get into an LTR with her). She wanted to save him and be the one to make him responsible.

    Now, some might try to sweep away my experiences by just saying these are all trashy girls but I really don’t buy that. They don’t seem trashy to me. They all have reasonable jobs and most don’t have raging N’s.

    I’m not making the claim that a majority of women often choose assholes in their 20’s but enough do that so it really upsets assortive mating for many men (and the women who claim they want relationships but go for the players/cads/douches)*.

    *players=/=cads or douches

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

      @Han

      From her description of his problems, this guy totally sounded like a slacker Jacob type (except that he wouldn’t even get into an LTR with her). She wanted to save him and be the one to make him responsible.

      Yes, this is the 50 Shades of Grey fling. I imagine many women could get caught up in this, and of course the success rate is extremely low. Do you have the sense that this was a one-time deal, or does she make a habit of trying to rescue men?

  • Ramble

    I guess I need to use more winky faces.

    No, don’t do that.

    I am just a little sensitive and butthurt after you called me tiresome. I’m all better now.

  • slwerner

    SW – ”It’s far too simplistic to say that online daters want one thing, or that all online daters are telling the companies to wake up and sell sex. It’s really a question of targeting with market segmentation.”

    Earlier, you made the point that:

    ”The online dating companies are aggressively marketing to players. Whereas EHarmony and Match used to advertise with portraits of wedded bliss, now they market hookups. Naturally, that draws a completely different customer. They actually don’t care about the folks who want to marry, and no longer make claims they can help.” You even lead off the title Online Dating Sites Find Selling Serial Monogamy More Profitable Than Marriage

    Yes, it’s undoubtedly an oversimplification to say that the customers desires are driving the change from commitment-oriented to casual. And yet, you seem to be making that very point. And, if they ”… actually don’t care about the folks who want to marry, and no longer make claims they can help”, are they even still targeting that market segment at all? Or, are the larger services simply abandoning that segment to smaller niche players, clearly recognizing that the casual/sex market segment is more larger and more lucrative?

    A wannabe player or Jersey Shore style douche-bag who does have some (sexual) success with women (who might think they are looking for long-term, but are apparently all too ready to settle for a series of ONS’s) would be more likely to continue to pay for a service than would a guy who was actually interested in a longer-term commitment, but who cannot seem to compete with the faux-playa’s and douche-bags for the on-line interests of women (who, again, are apparently willing to put-out for the latter). If frustrated commitment-oriented guys give up and stop paying for it, it makes more sense to simply target those who are likely to find their measure of success (sex). But, then again, that seems to be what you were saying to begin with.

    SW – ” Why not finding more sluts for the men who want to hook up with them?”

    Well, they wouldn’t advertise it that way. But, it is necessary either. Enough women are apparently signing up and putting out as it is.

    Perhaps while we can easily understand the more promiscuous man’s measure of dating success (sex), we need to try to better understand what women consider “success”. Are woman who set out looking for commitment simply ending up selling out for sex as a proxy for dating success? Either the sluts were already going to on-line dating claiming to want commitment…until they got a date for sex; or those women who thought they were looking for commitment are giving up on that goal often enough that the douche-bags and Jacobs are satiated – and the money keeps rolling in.

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

      @slwerner

      Yes, it’s undoubtedly an oversimplification to say that the customers desires are driving the change from commitment-oriented to casual. And yet, you seem to be making that very point.

      There have always been customers interested in casual. I see no reason to suspect that market is growing. I see mainstream online dating companies possibly trying to capture a greater share of that market. IOW, Match wants to get those people away from Ashley Madison, Craigslist, etc. For the record, I know very little about the dating industry. I’m going entirely off these two Atlantic articles and offering some theories.

      And, if they ”… actually don’t care about the folks who want to marry, and no longer make claims they can help”, are they even still targeting that market segment at all? Or, are the larger services simply abandoning that segment to smaller niche players, clearly recognizing that the casual/sex market segment is more larger and more lucrative?

      I don’t know the answer to this question. They’d be foolish to abandon those customers, as they do produce revenue and represent extremely small incremental expense. I imagine a very large number of people do seek life partners online. At one point I think Match claimed it was responsible for something like 25 or 50% of all American marriages.

      I don’t see those folks going to small, specialized sites, because the selection is small. The advantage of an OKCupid or POF for a 20 something is a huge customer group on that same site in their demographic. If an oboe player leaves OKC for the Woodwind Singles site, they’ve just lost access to 99% of the men online.

      My guess is that online dating sites are trying to grow the market, make the pie bigger. They’ll no doubt want to hang on to the customer’s they’ve got. It was overstatement to say that companies “don’t care” about those customers. But I suspect the Strategic Planners at these companies aren’t focused on them.

      the on-line interests of women (who, again, are apparently willing to put-out for the latter).

      Do you have information on this? Because it’s always been my understanding that women are extremely cautious and wary of players online, generally speaking. “Good guys” complain of the need for too many messages back and forth, phone calls before meeting, etc. And women are worried about letting men online know where they live. Evan Marc Katz talks a lot about this in his online dating blog/business.

      All I know is that a guy named Jacob got 5 dates he seems psyched about.

      Are woman who set out looking for commitment simply ending up selling out for sex as a proxy for dating success? Either the sluts were already going to on-line dating claiming to want commitment…until they got a date for sex; or those women who thought they were looking for commitment are giving up on that goal often enough that the douche-bags and Jacobs are satiated

      I imagine that there are women looking for Jacobs at Match the way there are women making dates with Mr. Goodbar on Craigslist. There is a fair amount of NSA sex being set up online already, so there’s obviously a willing group of both women and men. That’s my point. The market is segmented, for both sexes.

      I don’t think there are restricted women going on to Match to find a serious relationship, choosing Jacob’s low occupational status profile, banging him after coffee, and then returning to the Husband Search. I really don’t think so. All the evidence suggests that people mostly behave according to their sociosexuality. Sure, a restricted person may have an occasional fling, and a promiscuous person might get married, possibly even to a Craigslist sex partner. But mostly I don’t have a sense that these groups overlap.

  • Ramble

    I didn’t refer to women that “genuinely like that level of douchiness,” just that they choose it.

    Oh, OK, I hear you.

    It constantly amazes me as I talk with girls and they tell me how they used to date assholes and are now looking for a good guy

    You are not alone.

    One of the shames, here, IMO, is that these girls could serve themselves better by saying, “My decision making has been poor. I think that I am smarter, or at least, more aware, now.”

    Or, something like that.

    Unfortunately, in their attempt to paint the “appropriate” picture, and one that is supported in pop culture, they, like you said, describe the guys as being assholes (which they may very well be).

    They don’t realize that they are basically saying to you, “Han, you have the wonderful opportunity to date a fucking idiot who spreads her legs for the worst guys”.

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

    Consider this :

    Hello there…. It’s about time you stopped aimlessly browsing through these profiles, and tell me if you possess any of the things that I’m looking for. i.e. spontaneity, kindness, grace, intelligence, muliebrity, valor, fortitude, warmth, romance, daredevil, recklessness, beauty.

    Who am I?

    -I’m artistic, intellectual and enjoy the finer things in life, I like to take photos, plant trees, sing in the shower and cook.

    -if that last sentence made you queasy, don’t worry, I also like to be extremely cheeky, tear the labels of mattresses, tease and make fun of people, drive really fast across Spain in my car with the windows down, sun shining and the music blaring. I am a proud organ donor, my kidney bought me my Playstation.

    -I’m the raconteur, the guy that’s travelled the world, and has a story for every situation. I’m the bad guy in the movie that everyone has a soft spot for, Russell Crowe in 3:10 to Yuma, a mix between Nelson, Homer, Professor Frink. and Snake. (if you don’t enjoy the Simpsons, please stop reading now)

    -I’m not short of confidence, I have no problems making the first move, taking what I want. Kissing you on a traffic island while crossing the road with cars whizzing past would be our first kiss… maybe.

    -I travel a lot for my work, and with my friends any time I get the chance. For my last trip, I took 10 friends to a spot in Spain that seems like no one knows about, we spent a week drinking wine, eating tapas and laying by the beach. Be nice, and ill tell you where it is.

    – I work in Fashion, In the past I’ve worked as a Croupier, a landscaper, a boatswain, and as a snowboard and mountain guide.

    -All my friends are confident and comfortable in their own skin, so you will need to field the same qualities. Most of them are Artistic, so an interest in the arts will be admired.

    -I have a Turtle named George Clooney, a Dog named Rooster and an impossible to quench thirst for Mango Rubicon.

    What Else…

    I’m 28 years old, I’m proudly Australian, and I hate the walkabout and all other Australian Activities in London.

    I’m also living in Bear Grylls shadow. I love the wilderness and I’m an avid Snowboarder and Surfer. I miss my very small hometown, and all the people in it, but for my heartbreak, I get to see amazing countries, like Russia, Mexico, Lichtenstein, and Denmark. I also get to try things like pickled octopus, rice wine, and buffalo meat. I love being in restaurants where the menu has no English… I just point to something and hope for the best.

    I’ve lived in America, Austria, Germany, Portugal, Canada and of course Australia and the UK.
    One of my favourite places is definitely Canada though, the raw beauty of the place is astounding.
    I stood on the sea to sky highway, after i had taken the shot above, and i was almost hypnotized by the place, the amazing smell of the ocean, the cold air against my face, and the sound of the wind rushing past me was unbelievable. The view of the rockys shook me to the bone, something i will never forget. and something one day i want to share with my family.

    There’s also a photo of my little nephew Isaac. What a kid… this was taken a few weeks ago in Australia. he kept copying my expression…. it was the funniest thing i’ve ever seen…. Im going to teach him how to surf when he turns 7. This little guy rocks my world.

    What would you find in my house:

    Lots of records (all Blues, jazz, rock and soul), an open bottle of red wine, Rosemary and sage, fresh Garlic, photos of my cousins and nephews, Bukowski novels, posters of Steve McQueen and Paul Newman, photography equipment, maps of my next holiday destination and a script from my last compere job.

    What wouldn’t you find in my house:

    Black eyed pea’s CDs, Broccoli, microwave meals, an umbrella, an open letter to the X factor, telling them I love their show, Hair Straighteners.

    Why am I here : I’m taking the online dating thing with a grain of salt, I’m not chasing models and actresses, but if you are a model or actress please get in touch and show me that your not all crazy…. id like to meet someone who is everything and nothing at the same time, like me. To hang out with, to watch old movies with, to walk in regents park, to wander through Chinatown and explore weird shops that sell wares from the 1980’s.

    Please:

    No girls who want a leg up in the fashion industry.

    No stalkers, or girls who have a history of stalking.

    No emails with topless photos attached. Or just emails saying ‘hi!’ these will be deleted. You need to tell me something that your profile doesn’t.

    No women with a deeper voice than mine.

    No racists, sadomasochists or extreme vegans (yep! You know the people I mean… the people that wont drive through towns with ham in the name)

    So email me now, any thoughts or a joke you heard today… maybe tell me what you saw on the bus this morning, or about the creepiest guy in your gym.

    Look forward to hearing from you

    Captain Strangelove.

    If you haven’t read the link, then the whole story is this :

    A guy basically copied and pasted this profile on a dating site, and managed to snag a wife with that. So why is this important ?

    The winners in online dating are the men with an ability to write well.

    It’s that simple. And more like as not ole Jacob, despite his many faults, could spin an impressive yarn.

    And how many men can do this ?

    Not many methinks.

    There are not that many regular male commenters on HUS, as compared to traffic. And all the male commenters are good writers.

    Which begs the question; why are there not that many good male writers then ?

    It has nothing to do literacy, and everything to do with an ability to elicit a response from a woman, any response from a woman, and then effect a seduction via subversion or sublimation.

    And for that a man must learn how to write. Above all else, and in these times, a man must know how to write … and write well.

    Not many men do.

    … hence the wordsmiths have become the womanizers.

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

      @Marellus

      Great link, great comment.

      I sorta want to date Captain Strangelove now.

      I once wrote a post on dating ads in the London Review of Books. Some of my favorites:

      Have books destroyed your life too? Shy shallow Anglophile, 34, seeks young woman to recreate timeless epic romance. Ability to ride camels, bribe border guards and write letters by whale oil lamp a must.

      If forced to commit, I’d say I feared geese more than ducks. Man, 47. Fears geese more than ducks.

      I refuse to let my sadomasochistic tendencies and love of koi define who I am, but if our relationship is to progress to any meaningful level then we will be spending an awful lot of time in the Japanese ornamental garden section of Worcester Homebase.

      My door is always open. Mostly because I live in a barn. Farm-dwelling survivalist and rural hedge enthusiast.

      I’d go out with the ducks geese guy in a heartbeat.

  • Russ in Texas

    Marellus,

    It’s entirely possible that your thesis explains my success pre-marriage. I’m no looker (no false humility – I put a photo link in the christmas-greetings thread), and I’m not rich.

    But when I was 17 one of my best friends posited that learning to build a fire was great, but *communication* is probably the best survival skill a man can have.

    In retrospect, could just kiss the guy. But his wife would object. Or take photos. Both would be embarrassing.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Russ:
    True and serious online romance is absolutely possible there

    Hahaha, do you mean it? The online dating stuff is no less than the abstract, although more immediate, version of our elders’ add in the newspapers “mating” column. I guess you used the word “romance” as something meaning something close to : Let’s put our savings together and see if it works out.

  • Escoffier

    At least these two things:

    1) I think the point about the dangers of choice addiction, and thinking “the grass is always greener,” is a real danger from the explosion in online dating.

    2) Whatever Jacob may or may not be, it seems inarguable that online dating has expanded the options of some non-trivial number of men. Perhaps they were only constrained by proximity and logistics before the dating sites came along. Whatever the old contraints, the fact is they now have many more chances to meet and screw girls.

    3) Similarly, I found valuable the implied point that women who want flings STRs with alphas now can get them more easily and with less reputational risk and, where relevant, pangs of guilt or shame.

  • Russ in Texas

    Damien,

    Yes. Believe it or not. I know a gal who got married with a guy discovered there.

    Now, color me shocked. I don’t think her story was anywhere near usual (and she’s far out into uberubernerdland AND works on old cars, and thus to a certain kind of guy, qualifies as “a unicorn.”)…it did happen, though.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    She recently broke of an engagement that had become emotionally dead for sometime. Then met the fling guy. And then me. I don’t think she makes a habit of wanting to save a guy. She said she’s only felt that intensity of infatuation 3 times in her life and the other two weren’t restoration projects.

    She thought that she just had her buttons pushed by him and he was all too happy to stay at her house most of them time and be in a mini-relationship that she assumed was going to last more. When she threw out the, “so we’re kind of dating, right?” he responded no and she ended it with him. However, she is still feeling some of the drug-like effects of intense infatuation and is thinking that it was her fault for bringing up the relationship thing too soon and part of her wants to give it another try with the guy with no mention of LTR for now. I told her that he likely wouldn’t have changed later on (though it’s possible) and after living together for 3 weeks it was not too soon to ask where things were at.

    BTW, I’m not pointing her out in a woe-is-me way. I actually don’t want to date her but we have good conversations.

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

      @Han

      is thinking that it was her fault for bringing up the relationship thing too soon and part of her wants to give it another try with the guy with no mention of LTR for now

      I hear this a lot. And I don’t think it usually ends well. If the guy can give an emphatic NO after three weeks, without stating that he is happy to see where things go and is open to a relationship, then she is right to get out now and stay out.

      I agree with you that she definitely did not ask too early! She might even have asked what he was looking for about two and a half weeks earlier.

      Playing casual is a very risky strategy for women who want commitment.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    I started this topic in the HUS forums over a year ago:

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/forum/hooking-up/online-dating-the-discussion/

    I wrote then that I disliked dating sites, always have. I’m glad my husband and I met in a different way, albeit still online.

  • Tomato

    Geese are mean creatures with razor bills and angry hisses. They stand up to anything. I don’t even like to bike past them! Ducks waddle and say please and thank you to a crust of bread.

    Point for DucksGeese guy.

  • Escoffier

    A movie I love, called 32 Short Films About Glenn Gould, has a scene in which Gould reads aloud a personal ad he has just drafted. I wish I remembered it word for word but I do recall the phrase “Tristan-esque trip-taking.” It was wordy, ridiculous and brilliant. The he picks of the phone, dials, the person at the other and answers “Toronto Star Classified,” whereupon Gould giggles and hangs up.

    UPDATE: I love the Internet, here’s the full text:

    “Wanted: friendly, companionably reclusive, socially unacceptable, alcoholically abstemious, tirelessly talkative, zealously unzealous, spiritually intense, minimally turquoise, maximally ecstatic moon, seeks moth or moths with similar qualities for purposes of telephonic seduction, Tristanesque trip-taking, and permanent flame-fluttering, no photos required, financial status immaterial, all ages and non-competitive vocations considered, applicants should furnish sets of sample conversation with notarized certification of marital disinclination, references re: low decibel vocal consistency, itinerary and sample receipts from previous successfully completed out-of-town moth flights, all submissions treated confidentially… “

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

      @Escoffier

      That is a brilliantly written piece, but I suspect he would not have had many takers. Too offbeat.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Russ:
    Yeah, maybe like my sister…
    What on earth is uberubernerdland?

  • Russ in Texas

    Damien,

    I’m describing a girl who not only reads Tolkien, but can recite all the poetry.

    And I mean, ALL the poetry.

    Odd duck, that one. Also, she did ballet in college, which is how we met and I learned her weird story.

  • INTJ

    @ Marellus

    There are not that many regular male commenters on HUS, as compared to traffic. And all the male commenters are good writers.

    Not all though. ;) I often have a poor ability to communicate my thoughts, and Ted D also often expresses the same frustration.

  • slwerner

    SW, responding to my statement: ”the on-line interests of women (who, again, are apparently willing to put-out for the latter).”
    ”Do you have information on this? Because it’s always been my understanding that women are extremely cautious and wary of players online, generally speaking.”

    Like you, I have little information about the industry. But, if the companies are aggressively and successfully targeting men who’s only marker for dating success is sex, then it seems an obvious conclusion that there must be women who ARE putting out for such men. We don’t need that stats (which have likely never been compiled anyway) to make a rational judgment about as to what seems to be going on, we simply need to know a bit about human nature.

    SW – ”I imagine that there are women looking for Jacobs at Match the way there are women making dates with Mr. Goodbar on Craigslist. There is a fair amount of NSA sex being set up online already, so there’s obviously a willing group of both women and men. That’s my point. The market is segmented, for both sexes.”

    The relative size of those segments seems yet another area where I doubt they are making any effort to gather stats and make distinctions (at least not that they are going to be willing to make public, they are likely doing some “internal polling”).

    Personally, I don’t find either Slater’s nor Madrigal’s arguments compelling. As Madrigil himself points out, there is no ”… historical look at how commitment rates have changed in the past and what factors drove those increases or decreases.” upon which to try to make a determination if there has been any change due to on-line dating and/or social media.

    I think the only rational point to be made is the very first one you made, Online Dating Sites Find Selling Serial Monogamy More Profitable Than Marriage, because that’s what their words and their (advertising) efforts point to.

    In my opinion, there was a chicken before there was an egg in this situation – and that is, as you yourself allude to, a lot of NSA sex-seekers were already using on-line sites which purported to be out to match people in long-term relationships; and the services noticed that the best repeat customers were those who would report that sex was the ultimate outcome for their previous on-line dating experience. Those for whom the match-making is truly successful are only going to be one-time customers (statistically speaking, of course). And, if the aggressive advertising to the NSA crowd is as successful as it seems to have been, then serious relationship-seekers are going to have an even harder time finding one-another. If no effort is made on their behalf, then, yes, the services are effectively abandoning them (if not to smaller, more selective services, then to flounder about until they are frustrated enough to give up). The net message is clear, there is more money to be made in selling sex than in selling marriage/commitment. The on-line dating services aren’t (directly) ruining monogamy or commitment, they’re just increasingly ignoring it – just as their consumer-base (society as a whole) is.

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

      @slwerner

      The net message is clear, there is more money to be made in selling sex than in selling marriage/commitment. The on-line dating services aren’t (directly) ruining monogamy or commitment, they’re just increasingly ignoring it – just as their consumer-base (society as a whole) is.

      I was with you up till the very last statement. I generally don’t find it very accurate to discuss society as a whole, because there are sub-SMPs that differ wildly by SES.

      There is a greater incidence of serial monogamy, for the reasons that Madrigal pointed out, though that too varies a lot by SES group, and most educated people do marry. Perhaps unsurprisingly, Jacob himself appears to be a card-carrying example of “the end of men.” Delayed maturation, prefers games and leisure to work, is entirely passive in relationships. He is not marriageable, despite his parents’ impatience that he settle down with “the one.”

      I don’t see a time when online dating is all about casual sex. Subscribers don’t require much in the way of assistance to sign up and use the service. As long as people can filter effectively according to objectives, I’d still give online dating a place in the portfolio of dating strategies. It’s worth trying, anyway. For women looking for serious commitment, takeover by Jacobs should be fairly obvious.

  • Cooper

    @Tomato
    “Interesting! I wonder why.”

    Beats me.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    I will add though that she is feeling a lot of pressure from her family and herself to get married and have kids and so she is being “impatient” as she says. She’s wanting the end result so much that she didn’t filter well for LTR intention in the fling guy nor for sufficient love and attraction on her part with the ex-engagement guy.

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

    Escoffier, I also found the Slater piece to be informative and thought-provoking and pre-order 1-clicked his book.

    Susan, re: my group. I did make it sound pretty bleak! However, I have to say that the “happily married” men in the cohort are not exactly helping, as probably 75% of them advise bachelors to avoid marriage unless it is structured outside of the reach of U.S. courts; perhaps as many as 25% would even claim that this Jacob character is some kind of philosopher-king.

    I think that this is a development that doesn’t get enough play in the MSM. When guys who are well into their careers hear or read (sensationalized?) stories about current campus hook-up culture or about men like Jacob cleaning up post-college, there are of course a certain % of males who are disgusted.

    However, others, perhaps a larger number, become enthused and wish they could participate on some level. The thing is that a variation on Jacob’s lifestyle may actually sound highly attractive to many men.

    A brief vignette: when I was a child, one of the most popular shows on television was “Magnum, PI” (for the young folks here, this was a long-running series in which former volleyball player Tom Selleck portrayed a former SEAL officer living in Hawaii and working as a private investigator). Here is a Wikipedia description of part of Magnum’s appeal:

    “Magnum seemingly lives a dream lifestyle: he comes and goes as he pleases, works only when he wants to, has the almost unlimited use of a Ferrari 308 GTS Quattrovalvole as well as many other of Robin Masters’ luxuries. He keeps a mini-fridge with a seemingly endless supply of beer (‘Old Dusseldorf in a long neck’), wears his father’s treasured Rolex GMT Master wristwatch, is seemingly surrounded by countless beautiful women (who are often his clients, victims or connected in various other ways to the cases he solves).”

    At the time that this show was aired, I think that guys may have enjoyed these antics from an escapist, voyeuristic perspective, but felt that such lifestyles were simply unavailable for average Joes. This may be entirely anecdotal, but I still feel comfortable making the statement that more and more guys are now seeing this kind of experience as legitimately attainable. I don’t think that this effect can be neatly pre-determined by using a stark, binary “unrestricted” and “restricted” schema to describe male sociosexuality, either; I think this is a case of normal men responding to incentives and to their perceived self-interests in very unusual, structurally uncertain dating/mating conditions.

    While these articles may have had the intention of casting Jacob as an imbecile, this may not be the effect at all. To many, Jacob sounds like he’s playing the SMP on his own terms and being rewarded for it.

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

      @BB

      perhaps as many as 25% would even claim that this Jacob character is some kind of philosopher-king.

      I’m curious about a statement you made earlier. You described how men are very loyal to the women they are in relationships with, and loath to trade up or even date serially. Yet this suggests that the founder of Ashley Madison speaks for men:

      Societal values always lose out…As we become more secure and confident in our ability to find someone else, usually someone better, monogamy and the old thinking about commitment will be challenged very harshly.

      Are men becoming increasingly hypergamous, assuming “better” in this case means hotter and younger?

      While these articles may have had the intention of casting Jacob as an imbecile, this may not be the effect at all. To many, Jacob sounds like he’s playing the SMP on his own terms and being rewarded for it.

      Slater certainly gives him ample praise – I believe his point is exactly as you say. Madrigal doesn’t call him stupid, he calls him:

      immature, callow
      selfish
      unempathic
      lazy
      aimless
      irresponsible
      a worry to his parents

      All of this was true before Jacob found Valhalla. My greatest hope is that all of the Jacobs pursue their boyish dreams, rather than clog the drains of female filters. I have no doubt that some good guys will go that route, and find it “hard to go back” as a commenter said upthread. Jacob is afraid he’ll never be able to fall in love again. His agentic and self-indulgent behavior today precludes it in future. We all make choices.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Han Solo:
    By the way, time to answer your questions about the fish bones. Just a French metaphor for your “red pills” overthere. Just a warning for your apparent naivety, but I don’t know you, and wish you well, like all of you here.
    One last thing worth mentioning is the language used here sometimes. As shown in the last post, you put forward in a naive (yet I believe sincere) way all the love you had to offer to a woman, yet ended by delicately writing : In the meantime, I fuck the occasional Pussy…
    It got me making yet another analogy: Instead of being decorated by Titian’s Bacchanal, what if this blog was ornamented by porn pictures or college students throwing up during spring break in Fort Lauderdale?

  • Russ in Texas

    @Damien,

    Except insofar as I’d never have gone more than a single click before closing the browsing window? A picture speaks a thousand words….

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

    @Russ

    But when I was 17 one of my best friends posited that learning to build a fire was great, but *communication* is probably the best survival skill a man can have.

    I remember GeishaKate saying something quite profound in one of Heartiste’s threads :

    “… women NEED words …”

    … and hence, the men must supply them.

    *******************************************************************

    INTJ,

    Not all though. ;) I often have a poor ability to communicate my thoughts, and Ted D also often expresses the same frustration.

    … yet you and Ted are doing pretty well with all the women here … much better than Höllenhund, who communicates his thoughts very well …

    Here is some food for thought :

    The Ideal Man should talk to us as if we were goddesses, and treat us as if we were children. He should refuse all our serious requests, and gratify every one of our whims. He should encourage us to have caprices, and forbid us to have missions. He should always say much more than he means, and always mean much more than he says. -Oscar Wilde

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

    @Suzan.

    I’m reprinting this blog post in its entirety :

    *********************************************************************

    THE GIRL’S GUIDE TO… Men: How To Get Laid When You Place An Advert On A Casual Sex Website.

    1. Be grammatically correct. Placing an ad that is badly spelled or with terrible sentence construction doesn’t bode well to anyone reading it; it just makes you appear stupid. Plus, you’ll look like you’re typing with only one hand, which although might be true, really won’t assist you: horniness is no guarantee of success in the field of sex (actually, it probably lowers your ability to get lucky, if anything).

    Example:

    “cum smole weed with me today and let me get the munch where the sun don’t shine,ill go down there for hours!”

    I’m not sure where you might be going down darling, but it wouldn’t be between my legs, that’s for sure: I expect a man to be able to converse on at least a semi-intellectual level (when he comes up for air, anyway).

    2. Don’t appear desperate (even if you are). Have a wank, get rid of your excess horniness, and then post the ad. Do not, in any circumstances, be tempted to write something like this:

    “i have the whole weekend scheduled off for sex but have no-one to do it with as yet”

    Evidently. Looks like a weekend spent watching those new DVDs. Again.

    3. Don’t appear too picky:

    “‘m 35yrs, 191cm, 80kg, handsome, cultivated, successful and am looking for female companion (younger than 35yrs, BMI less than 25) to have fun with.”

    Specifying a particular ratio of a woman’s height/size is not going to get you in her pants. Fact.

    4. However, don’t appear not to be picky at all – and then contradict yourself (using bad spelling and zero punctuation):

    “can`t accomadate no time wasters looks unimportant pic a must”

    And if you’re going to request a picture, it makes sense to offer one in return. Otherwise women will just suspect you’re going to use their image to wank to and not take you seriously. (See below.)

    5. If you want to get laid, try offering more than just a soggy photograph:

    “I’m looking for a woman to email me a sexy picture of herself, that I can print off and wank over. I’ll then take a picture of my cock over your cum soaked picture and email it back to you.”

    Been looking at too much porn, methinks, if a bloke cannot relate to a woman unless she is 2D.

    6. Be thoughtful about what you are going to offer the woman:

    “Maybe you would just like to sit on top and ride me – I don’t mind honest…”

    Thank you – how generous of you.

    7. Don’t be arrogant:

    “Sex can be devastatingly bad or just devastating. Choose the latter and drop me an email.”

    You won’t pull if you come across as a wannabe-Casanova. Men who appear full of themselves generally turn out to be shit in bed. Most women know this, and those that don’t soon learn – and spread the word.

    8. Conversely, a man who shows basic wit and intelligence, and who can be mildly self-deprecating, would probably appear more considerate of a woman’s needs in bed. Thus, more women would reply to his advert, ensuring a higher probability of him getting laid:

    “Watery eyed albino seeks large gins and absolutely no sympathy from women who aren’t that bothered about the fact that, to me, you probably just look like a shapely, yet smudgy blob in the middle distance. Must be prepared to put up with my walking into doors, abusing people with 20-20 vision and never getting a sun tan.”

    I’m betting this guy has had a few offers.

    9. Don’t bother putting pictures of your penis in the advert. Or, if you must, put a picture of your face alongside it. However nice your cock may be, in and of itself it isn’t going to market your worth as a potential lover.

    If a woman was only interested in a phallus to play with, there are plenty of vibrators out there – and she’d be guaranteed a good orgasm with one. So please, be funny, be honest, show your face in the ad, and you’re much more likely to get a response – and perhaps get lucky.

    10. However, if your objective in the advert is not to get laid, and you don’t mind women printing off pictures of your erection and using them to masturbate with, then please, feel free to post the cock pics – I need a few more for my collection.

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

      @Marellus

      That blog post is hilarious. I don’t know why, but misspelling always makes me laugh.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Russ
    Hence the need to have that pathetic “men talk” toned down here. I don’t know if you ever had to deal with the army at one point in your life, but for me it was something more than ridiculous. Men put together in a large group can become potential rapers/killers. Women put in the same situation equally can become venimous defaiming vipers, and so on. Group culture is something I always tried to avoid. This here is already an open debate how every culture “breeds” its individuals…

  • Ramble

    SATC is the most malignant cultural event to hit the SMP in the last 20 years.

    And the one most celebrated by young women, in general.

  • Ramble

    Kissing you on a traffic island while crossing the road with cars whizzing past would be our first kiss… maybe.

    Fucking great move. I am stealing that.

  • Cooper

    “My greatest hope is that all of the Jacobs pursue their boyish dreams, rather than clog the drains of female filters.”

    Care to explain that one? Isn’t Jacob clogging the female filters in his pursuit of his boyish dreams?

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

      Isn’t Jacob clogging the female filters in his pursuit of his boyish dreams?

      No, because unless he pretends to be a “dad” – if he makes his preferences for casual sex known, most women won’t waste a coffee date on the guy at all. Yes, women filter on the dating sites themselves, but I meant the more active phase of nexting guys who are in it just for sex.

  • Ramble

    I often have a poor ability to communicate my thoughts, and Ted D also often expresses the same frustration.

    I have always struggled with words.

  • Ramble

    I did make it sound pretty bleak! However, I have to say that the “happily married” men in the cohort are not exactly helping, as probably 75% of them advise bachelors to avoid marriage unless it is structured outside of the reach of U.S. courts;

    This has been my experience.

    The advice you get from the older divorced guys is a little different (and not nearly as bitter as you might think, though, that may be the specific people I choose to associate with).

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “The effect of these past relationships on men’s standards. Having been a hopeless romantic prior to getting into Game (you know, normal manosphere stuff), it’s hard to go back once you’ve landed that first low-maintenance sex-only relationship. Last year I “dated” a girl I met online for three months, during which I had sex and home-cooked meals constantly, and into which I invested sex and home-cooked meals in return. A year ago I would have been appalled at myself; now I see it as a perfectly equitable relationship.”

    Eoin what would you have been “appalled” by?

  • http://@ Iggles

    @ Mr. Nervous Toes:

    What’s amazing is that many online dating sites are membership due revenue driven (e.g. Match, EHarmony) while those that are ad driven (Plenty of Syphilis) do a horrible job of marketing.

    On a side note, IME I preferred the free sites to the paid membership ones. You would think paying for the service would yield higher quality, but they allow people who haven’t paid to create profiles – and these folks CANNOT message you back. There’s no distinction between full members so it’s frustrating.

    @SW:

    I found some of the comments by industry execs truly despicable, especially (not surprisingly) the founder of Ashley Madison. Ugh.

    + 1!

    Especially the Match exec. They used to tout marriages and it’s sad they’re selling “meet new people” (I.e., find new tail!) instead. At lease eHarmony still keep the values it was founded with..

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    Traditional marriage, even the kind we know of now, will be completely finished in this country within two decades. That’s not bad for adults. I just worry about the children.

  • http://@ Iggles

    Reportedly, the fastest growing group online is aged 22-30. I think that’s mostly made up of young people who want an alternative to the hookup scene.

    Spot on Susan! That’s my demographic and that’s exactly why I tried online dating. It’s hard to meet folks in a big city when we spend most of our days in the office (mine had no eligible bachelors!).

  • http://@ Iggles

    Traditional marriage, even the kind we know of now, will be completely finished in this country within two decades. That’s not bad for adults. I just worry about the children.

    PJ, is that you???

  • Russ in Texas

    Damien,

    Or, simply having taste. I don’t want to poo-pooh popular culture, because it comes up with good and interesting things (to this day I can still remember several albums worth of Weird Al Yankovic lyrics).

    But regarding pop culture? The “battle” of the sexes? Yike.

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

    Susan, re: men being loyal, etc. I have no idea what is going on, but I seem to be surrounded by married men who simultaneously claim to be quite happy, to love their wives, etc., AND who say that they’d have done things if they had started dating in today’s SMP. One would think that such a person would be a wild cheerleader for marriage, but these guys just aren’t. I suppose that I would best describe their positions as “sober”.

    …And these aren’t the dregs and slackers, either—the guys I am talking about are typically senior portfolio mgt professionals with deep and varied qualifications and skillsets. Some do fit a gregarious, risk-taking playboy lothario stereotype and it is easy to see why they would chafe under marriage, but most are soft-spoken and serious quants. They aren’t angels, but I don’t think any of them would consider leaving their wives unless something unspeakably heinous happened.

    I think that a problem with Madrigal’s easy description of Jacob is that it basically implies that a “responsible SMP winner” should be committing himself before sex, working harder to provide provisioning resources, and seeking high-maintenance girlfriends who dominate his life and take priority over his other interests.

    But the hard-nosed Sexual Economics/SMP framework for understanding the mating game typically posits a social marketplace in which a Buyer who wants something (SEX) seeks to find a Seller who has SEX and wants something else (COMMITMENT) discover an agreeable price for the SEX in COMMITMENT units, at which point the market successfully clears.

    If someone subscribes to the SMP model of human sexual relations, then it might appear to that person that, ultimately, Madrigal is basically taking Jacob task for being too effective in his role as a Buyer. But Jacob is not asking Madrigal to have sex with him—unless Jacob is some kind of coercive figure or date rapist we must assume that multiple Sellers (perhaps all low SMV females, we don’t know) are willingly sleeping with our little fun-loving sports- and live music enthusiast.

    I can’t say that I understand his appeal—he may have been being very modest when he said that he was average-looking, he may be holding out on us when it comes to the black Aston-Martin that he recent purchased with trust fund money. I would guess that he doesn’t explicitly tell girls some of the darker elements of his personality profile (that he prioritizes sports and concerts over relationships, etc.) , so he may well come across as a popular man with developed “inner game”— fun, non-needy, artistic, highly developed hobbies and interests, and so on.

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

      I seem to be surrounded by married men who simultaneously claim to be quite happy, to love their wives, etc., AND who say that they’d have done things if they had started dating in today’s SMP.

      That is strange. I understand a guy saying to another, “Dude, the sex dries up, she starts looking haggard 5 years in, don’t do it. Don’t get married.” I do not understand people saying, “It’s awesome! I’m happy! Don’t be like me!” Perhaps there is a grass is greener element at work here, IDK.

      I remember reading a statistic that something like 80% of American men believe they could throw a 96 mph fast ball if given the chance. And we know that men tend to overestimate by a mile the degree of attraction females feel for them. Perhaps these men with awesome wives figure they coulda been a contendah of the Clooney variety if only they hadn’t been suckered into marriage.

      I think that a problem with Madrigal’s easy description of Jacob is that it basically implies that a “responsible SMP winner” should be committing himself before sex, working harder to provide provisioning resources, and seeking high-maintenance girlfriends who dominate his life and take priority over his other interests.

      I think you’re being a bit hard on Madrigal there. He didn’t dwell on commitment at all – and seemed to disrespect the nature of Jacob’s prior relationships. I think he views Jacob as a slacker in the way that men will – a dude who obviously grew up with privilege scratching his balls with one hand and going for low hanging fruit with the other. If I were a guy, men like Jacob would disgust me. But then, I’d be a benevolent alpha of the old-school variety. Imagine what General Patton or even FDR would think of men like Jacob today.

      As for Jacob’s like of “low maintenance” gf’s, that clearly translates to “has no expectations of me.” It’s like the guys who scream “Psycho!” the minute a woman asks what their intentions are.

      I can’t say that I understand his appeal—he may have been being very modest when he said that he was average-looking, he may be holding out on us when it comes to the black Aston-Martin that he recent purchased with trust fund money.

      If that were true of our fun-loving friend, I would have expected a more adventurous carousel-provider type decade in his 20s. The guy was incel in Portland for 2 years. There’s definitely something missing in his story. I truly suspect something very offbeat – morbid obesity seeks same, that kind of thing.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Are men becoming increasingly hypergamous, assuming “better” in this case means hotter and younger?

    Whoa there! Did you just use the manosphere definition of “hypergamous” (trading up)?

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Iggles#127:
    I hope so! She’s been so far one of the few to have something original and independent to say. Well, if she’s on her meds, that would be very intersting to read her comments. And I am not sarcastic.

  • INTJ

    PJ doesn’t strike me as the type that would be a rebound girlfriend for a Cuban lazybum. My gut tells me the story is true, and that The Rebound Girlfriend is definitely not PJ.

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

      I think the Rebound Girlfriend is the genuine article with some sass and a lively manner. Smart too. Yes, please.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Traditional marriage, even the kind we know of now, will be completely finished in this country within two decades. That’s not bad for adults. I just worry about the children.

    It’s already finished in the western world, at least in terms of “traditional marriage” and I doubt there will be some kind of turning back towards it anytime soon.
    As for the children, I don’t think it has anything to do with marriage in terms of their well being…

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Russ:
    I guess there was some kind of, how do you say in English, miss/passed or crossed understanding? Can’t remember. Whatever you say about pop culture (which I despise and ignore), I agree as well, but I was talking about something entirely different.
    Sometimes, trying to look smart and cultured hurts the effort. A trend not unknown neither in New York nor in Paris…

  • Russ in Texas

    @Damien#133.

    While I am profoundly cynical, I believe this is overstated. Plenty of women are marrying, and plenty more regard marriage as “aspirational” in nature.

    Once the feminists have finished discrediting themselves (a process that’s well in hand), I think this will rebound, to everyone’s benefit.

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

      @Russ

      While I am profoundly cynical, I believe this is overstated. Plenty of women are marrying, and plenty more regard marriage as “aspirational” in nature.

      Once the feminists have finished discrediting themselves (a process that’s well in hand), I think this will rebound, to everyone’s benefit.

      I agree.

  • Russ in Texas

    It’s just as likely that the misunderstanding is entirely mine, Damien. I am frequently not only clueless, but VERY clueless.

  • Ramble

    Imagine what General Patton or even FDR would think of men like Jacob today.

    Well, that is something to think about.

    Patton seemed to prefer spending his time in a place where he ate terrible food and had a good chance at dieing and FDR married a lesbian and had at least one affair.

    It would be interesting to get their take.

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

    Damien Vuluame…you’re French, right? How about a guest post here on the dating/mating environment in France?…Susan, is that something you think would be worthwhile?

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

      Damien Vuluame…you’re French, right? How about a guest post here on the dating/mating environment in France?…Susan, is that something you think would be worthwhile?

      I would love it. It might be nice to get Mireille in too.

  • Escoffier

    It’s far from proved that ER was a lesbian.

    Patton had a rather tolerant attitude about soldiers going to hookers in France. He even procured condoms in bulk for his boys in WW1, much to the dismay of Mrs. Patton.

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

      It’s far from proved that ER was a lesbian.

      I hope she was, because God knows FDR didn’t want to screw her. (I hope Hillary is a lesbian too.) Didn’t ER have a sort of Petit Trianon with a lady friend?

      I just read a book about WWI and the soldiers going to hookers in France. I wish they could have had that every night. Nowadays the military is dealing with all sorts of adulterous affairs within its ranks. I sat next to a woman on a plane who has served as a prison guard at Guantanamo and Bagram. When she finished telling me all the incredible tidbits about her total dominance of terrorist thugs (feeding them with the left hand, always) she described the sexual hijinx she witnessed in the army in Afghanistan. Woof.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Plenty of women are marrying, and plenty more regard marriage as “aspirational” in nature.

    Yes…..and yet so many novel have been written about it, and plenty more to go…

  • Jonathan

    Free sites like POF and OKC are ad based and make money in proportion to page views. It’s in their interest to maximize views even at the expense of user (not customer: the advertisers are the customers) satisfaction. So they do everything to encourage use of their sites as social-networking platforms with lots of features to encourage page loads. It’s not in their interest for users to marry or otherwise stop using their sites. And the pay sites want subscribers to continue subscribing, of course.

    The suggestions for improving these sites by, e.g., restricting the number of messages that men can send to women, aren’t likely to be implemented because they won’t make anybody money. These sites are zero-sum environments where the interests of significant user subgroups (e.g., players vs. LTR guys) conflict. In this respect the sites resemble search engines, and it’s naive to think that you can optimize a site for one type of user without penalizing another type and thereby creating incentives for fraud that degrades the system, as when players pretend to be LTR guys. A user who wants to do well needs either a natural advantage, such as good looks, or a way to game the system. There is no getting around the competitive nature of mating.

  • Russ in Texas

    “the hypergamy” is a distraction, and a rather hoary one at that.

    “We live better than you Romans; for we consort openly with the best men, whereas you are debauched in secret by the worst.”

    Predates “the manosphere” by, you know….a bit.

  • Russ in Texas

    ER’s petite Trianon was more than a little one: it lasted for years, and we have letter after letter after letter. If you’re really curious, I can look up the gal’s name. Fairly talented photog, if I recall.

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

      @Russ

      Yes, I remember it from Doris Kearns Goodwin’s biography. There seemed to be little doubt about the nature of that relationship.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @David Foster:
    No, I’m actually Monegasque, or maybe Wallonian :-)
    No, I’m kidding. I am French, originally from Toulouse (south western France) but I have been living in Prague for the past 10 years now, meaning that I’m already a bit cut off from the current socio/cultural evolutions of my country right now. Thus I’d be very presumptuous to tell you about what the French MDH looks like right now. But about the general “!mentality”, interactions between the genders, rules, family anecdotes, yeah, I could go on for ever…. Not tonight though :-)

  • Tomato

    “9. Don’t bother putting pictures of your penis in the advert”

    Wait, that actually happens? Haha, WOW.

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

      “9. Don’t bother putting pictures of your penis in the advert”

      Wait, that actually happens? Haha, WOW.

      Here’s a true story for you – I heard it just before Christmas. One of my focus group alums is now working as a consultant in Boston. Her boyfriend is in graduate school in Seattle – they’ve been doing the LDR thing for more than a year. She and a coworker have very intense chemistry – to the point where I think she needs to break up with her bf. It’s just not right. Anyway, the coworker has been trying to get her to cheat for a while now, and of course she gives him hope but always backs away at the last moment.

      His most recent move was to text her a picture of his erect dick, which is apparently huge. These two work together.

  • pennies

    Susan,

    Happy 2013!

    Have you ever seen this tumblr?

    http://niceguysofokc.tumblr.com/

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

      @pennies

      OMG LMAO that tumblr is beyond hilarious. I love how every single loser guy says women have an obligation to keep their legs shaved, and that men should be the head of the household. Happy New Year to you too, thanks for the laugh!

  • J

    The winners in online dating are the men with an ability to write well.

    Where is Cyrano when you need him?

  • Escoffier

    There is plenty of doubt.

    There are so many stories like this. For instance, everyone now “knows” that Jefferson had a child by Sally Hemmings but that also is not proved and likely will never be proved. But since it’s so “juicy” and since as a culture we are obsessed with trashing everyone we used to consider a hero (especially if they are white males), it is “known.”

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

      For instance, everyone now “knows” that Jefferson had a child by Sally Hemmings but that also is not proved and likely will never be proved

      I thought there was DNA testing? I know the white and black descendants of Jefferson had a big family reunion. Surely this wasn’t arranged without some real evidence? I seem to recall that the testing proved they were related.

  • Russ in Texas

    Escoffier,

    Have you read the letters? This isn’t based on some sort of revisionist history — if I put my name at the bottom of some of those and sent them to my wife when she was travelling, her blackberry would catch on fire.

    “Subtle and understated” these gals were not.

  • Russ in Texas

    Susan,

    So many of these stories are anecdotal or second-hand that it sort of offends myselse of “amateur sociology.” So FSAG I have made a profile on POF and entered in a seriously cheesy profile about clarinets and trombones. No picture or deep test material beyond the basic required stuff, nothing at all which might create any actual interest.

    Responses, if any, should prove illuminating.

  • Escoffier

    There are no “letters” that I know of, there is one letter in which Eleanor told Loreana Hickock that she wanted to kiss her cheek. Not dispositive to say the least.

    Look, no question that she & FDR were not hot & heavy and he probably had some affairs though that is not proved either. But all this certainty is misplaced and simply stems from A) prurience and B) the smallness of our age in which we pygmies must tear to shreds everyone greater than ourselves. Even when we are full of shit.

  • Escoffier

    Susan, that guy is going to get fired.

    At the very least, he has handed your girl the power to ruin his life.

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

      Susan, that guy is going to get fired.

      At the very least, he has handed your girl the power to ruin his life.

      Not really. How could she prove it’s his penis? Bill Clinton managed to cast significant doubt on Paula Jones testimony, even though she could identify a winestain birthmark and sharp curvature to the left. (I assume this means left while facing him.)

  • J

    The Ideal Man should talk to us as if we were goddesses, and treat us as if we were children. He should refuse all our serious requests, and gratify every one of our whims. He should encourage us to have caprices, and forbid us to have missions. He should always say much more than he means, and always mean much more than he says. -Oscar Wilde

    Of course, Wilde was gay………

  • Russ in Texas

    Escoffier,

    It is generally accepted that FDR had a significant affair with Lucy Mercer. Letters to and from ER *definitely* exist, and in some quantity — I’ll see what I can dig up for you, if you’re interested. This is neither prurience nor moral dwarfism — it’s history. Since that’s my field, I’m pretty passionate about obtaining the closest knowledge available (and changing my mind on the next dime if needed when new data arrives). Particularly so with ER; my grandfather was in the White House regularly and had very good relationships with her, and though I know some didn’t care for her, my family never had even the inkling of a bad word to say about the woman.

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

      @Russ in TX

      Your family history sounds fascinating!

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “PJ doesn’t strike me as the type that would be a rebound girlfriend for a Cuban lazybum. My gut tells me the story is true, and that The Rebound Girlfriend is definitely not PJ.”

    Who’s this PJ? And Cuban? Where’d ya get that?

    “It’s already finished in the western world, at least in terms of “traditional marriage” and I doubt there will be some kind of turning back towards it anytime soon.”

    No its not. People still get legally and religiously married. That’s what I’m talking about. Divorce rates will plummet because nobody will actually get legally married anymore, they will simply live together. And its still seen as the thing to do in the USA, that’s why there’s all these huge wedding shows on TV and The Bachelor and The Bachelorette.

    “As for the children, I don’t think it has anything to do with marriage in terms of their well being…”

    Most kids of baby mamas that I know got serious missing daddy issues.

  • Escoffier

    There are lots of letters but there are IIRC only two which in any way talk about physical intimacy, and one is clearly metaphoric and the other is so mild it proves nothing.

    It may be “generally accepted” that FDR had affairs but it is far from proved in the way that, say, JFK’s affairs are certain knowledge.

  • Escoffier

    There is DNA testing which shows that it’s likely that SOME member of the Jefferson family fathered a Hemings child. It does not show that TJ did and other evidence suggests that if anyone did it was Randolph Jefferson, not Thomas. In any case, there were about 25 possible fathers.

    Remember, it’s not a coincidence that this was “proved” in 1998. Gee, what else was going on in that year that might have made this “proof” very welcome to someone in high office?

    The reason for that reunion should be easy to surmise; I can spell it out if need be.

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

      Remember, it’s not a coincidence that this was “proved” in 1998. Gee, what else was going on in that year that might have made this “proof” very welcome to someone in high office?

      Haha, wag the dog! I love it. I recall being disgusted that Bill left Martha’s Vineyard that summer to fly home and order a bomb drop on that pharmaceutical factory in the Sudan. He looked so presidential for a day.

      Please do spell out why the reunion really took place, and while you’re at it, I’m still wondering why women should not buy shirts for their men.

  • Escoffier

    I’m sure she could prove it if she has an electronic trail, which she does.

    This guy is not a liberal president, he will not have an army of sophists, liars, spin doctors, and a sycophantic media leaping to counter-attack on his behalf. No, he will have a femme-centric HR looking to castrate him.

    He’s an idiot.

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

      This guy is not a liberal president, he will not have an army of sophists, liars, spin doctors, and a sycophantic media leaping to counter-attack on his behalf. No, he will have a femme-centric HR looking to castrate him.

      He’s an idiot.

      True! She could do him in. It seems that men take great and foolish risks where sex is concerned.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “OMG LMAO that tumblr is beyond hilarious. I love how every single loser guy says women have an obligation to keep their legs shaved, and that men should be the head of the household.”

    Awwww heeeeeeeeeeeeelllllllllllll naaaaaaaaawwwwww.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “No, I’m actually Monegasque, or maybe Wallonian :-)
    No, I’m kidding. I am French, originally from Toulouse ”

    Holy Grail blood running through your veins heh?

  • Damien Vulaume

    @The rebound girlfriend/launch pad girlfriend-
    C’mon, change your acronym :-)
    And its still seen as the thing to do in the USA, that’s why there’s all these huge wedding shows on TV

    What on earth these debilitating tv shows have to do with reality?

    Holy Grail blood running through your veins heh?

    Oh là là……You must surely have a very different sense of geography as well as history than mine.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Holana January 4, 2013 at 12:28 pm

    Most Millennials want to live in big cities?

    That’s SWPL White Liberals and NAMs right? Because they are shipping most Blacks and Hispanics (and bringing poverty, family dysfunction and crime with them) to the suburbs around big cities, after whitening and Asianing major cities like Seattle, Portland, San Francisco and Washington, D.C.”

    Took me 5 minutes of googling to find out what a “NAM” is, thought it meant a Vietnamese person, but it appears even you, in your attempt to dig at “minorities” on this blog and gain sympathy with the “majorities” also got it twisted. NAM means NON Asian Minority, which would be the very “Blacks and Hispanics” you say are being “shipped out” of the urban centers that your “SWPLs” (also had to google it) are currently gentrifying.

    Had to google HBD too. Wish I hadn’t. And how are these guys making headway onto relationship oriented sites?

  • Ramble

    I often like to communicate ideas through stories. And every now and then I get this idea of Susan being hired to give Guidance Counseling seminars to whole classes of, say, 12 year olds (or 14, or whatever). And in this scenario, she speaks as honestly to them as she does to us. No more, or less, politically correct than she does now.

    I just read a book about WWI and the soldiers going to hookers in France. I wish they could have had that every night. Nowadays the military is dealing with all sorts of adulterous affairs within its ranks.

    I would love to see this play out in real life where Susan answers all of the kids’, and adults’, questions. It would be great.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    Mon Cheri, didn’t some Merovingians become the Counts of Toulouse?

  • Damien Vulaume

    There is DNA testing which shows that it’s likely that SOME member of the Jefferson family fathered a Hemings child. It does not show that TJ did and other evidence suggests that if anyone did it was Randolph Jefferson, not Thomas. In any case, there were about 25 possible fathers.

    Hmmm, who would care about it in the first case anyway?
    Maybe Napoleon was a closet poofter as well? I’ll keep my fingers crossed until next week’s edition of the National Enquirer…

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    If I were a guy, men like Jacob would disgust me. But then, I’d be a benevolent alpha of the old-school variety. Imagine what General Patton or even FDR would think of men like Jacob today.

    People are the sum of their experiences and incentives. Jacob is an outcome of the society that exists, and indeed he has agency, but something fucked him up right and proper along the way.

    The proper question is how do you think FDR and Patton would have turned out if they were raised on a diet of American Pie and Jersey Shore?

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

      @ADBG

      The proper question is how do you think FDR and Patton would have turned out if they were raised on a diet of American Pie and Jersey Shore?

      Touche, I can’t argue with that.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Mon Cheri, didn’t some Merovingians become the Counts of Toulouse?

    “Ma chérie”, right now only Magda calls me that way, and my heart is monogamous. Can’t help it.
    I’m sure you mixed up Merovingiens with Carolingiens… No bloody german savage tribes ever left their dirty finger prints on the “cité rose”. :-)

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

      “Ma chérie”, right now only Magda calls me that way, and my heart is monogamous. Can’t help it.

      This makes my heart sing.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Where you been? Did you forget my recent post?

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/11/14/whatguyswant/the-hypergamy-acceptance-movement/

    I see the mainstream definition of hypergamy there (marrying up in status), not the common manosphere definition (trading up) that you have objected to in the past.

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

      @INTJ

      I see the mainstream definition of hypergamy there (marrying up in status), not the common manosphere definition (trading up) that you have objected to in the past.

      Sorry, the discussion about that took place in the comment threads. Anyway, I stated that I had amended my thinking to consider hypergamy as being on a spectrum. There are no doubt women who are extremely hypergamous throughout their lives, regardless of marital status. And of course, many more women who marry men of equal status and never even consider trading up (that 83% of educated marrieds that does not divorce).

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    I hope she was, because God knows FDR didn’t want to screw her. (I hope Hillary is a lesbian too.)

    Didn’t Eleanor refuse to screw FDR after he had an affair?

  • INTJ

    @ pennies

    Happy 2013!

    Have you ever seen this tumblr?

    http://niceguysofokc.tumblr.com/

    Lol did you see that on intjforum?

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Thus I’d be very presumptuous to tell you about what the French MDH looks like right now. But about the general “!mentality”, interactions between the genders, rules, family anecdotes, yeah, I could go on for ever”

    Well, are extra-marital affairs really accepted by the mainstream and seen as marriage enhancing?

  • pvw

    @DamienV on TJ 181:

    Hmmm, who would care about it in the first case anyway?

    Me: Oh, not very surprising. Escoffier mentions one take on this–in our PC era, tearing down the memory of famous white men who were not PC in their time.

    I was at at an academic conference (I’m a historian) at Mr. Jefferson’s University (the Univ. of Va.) back around ’99 or 2000, when Annette Gordon Reed’s book came out–serious heavy duty hitters working in the field of the history of American slavery and the question of the dna testing and Jefferson’s ostensible parenting of Sally Hemings’ child/ren.

    Members of the white descendants’ group (Jefferson’s descendants) were pissed off at it, arguing that it was made up. Blacks claiming to be descendants were there as well, or if they were not there, their spokespersons were.

    It is a very touchy thing in the US, the oral history having to do with knowing one has white ancestry, but there has been a long heritage of disinheritance, meaning lack of recognition, and not just about inheritance rights, the lack of recognition for one’s ancestors and one’s heritage, because their ancestors were enslaved women. They did not have the official recognition that white women had as wives.

    An interesting book I read on this: Fathers of Conscience, Mixed Race Inheritance in the Antebellum South–legal cases involving white men leaving bequests of inheritance to enslaved women and their children–the women alleged to have been concubines/mistresses. Marriage against the law and contrary to the demands/mores of white society. But these men acted totally against the grain, in being quite clear that they had long term relationships with these women whom they wanted recognized through inheritance law….Fascinating stories.

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

      @PVW

      I’m sure you’ve read The Known World. I was captivated by that book. Fiction, obviously, but apparently he really did his research, and he described relationships I had no idea were not at all unusual.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “I have no doubt that some good guys will go that route, and find it “hard to go back” as a commenter said upthread.”

    Eoin was talking about minimal investment, exchanging sex for sex, and said nothing about promiscuity. That’s a big leap you make.

    Sue: “I do not understand people saying, “It’s awesome! I’m happy! Don’t be like me!”

    It is possible to like where you ended up, but not the road you took to get there.

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

      @OTC

      Eoin was talking about minimal investment, exchanging sex for sex, and said nothing about promiscuity. That’s a big leap you make.

      Exchanging sex for sex = promiscuity. Eoin also stated that having had a “relationship” where he was plied with no strings sex and good food, he now finds it difficult to have a different kind of relationship. Jacob also stated he believes he is ruining his ability to fall in love. Zach has voiced similar concerns on this blog. Men having casual sex know it changes them, and it changes sex.

      It is possible to like where you ended up, but not the road you took to get there.

      I wonder what’s so unappealing about being a senior portfolio manager and marrying a gorgeous woman who makes you happy.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Well, are extra-marital affairs really accepted by the mainstream and seen as marriage enhancing?

    Like anywhere else, they are frowned upon, but it would never make a scandal if, say, the president had an affair. The Clinton/Lewinsky story would have made everybody yawn in France, and the media quickly accused of being nosy barkers.
    However, what is funny is the perception people have of adultry there. A guy having multiple conquests, or even affairs is considered a seducer. It goes as far as having our president being caught into an extra marital affair: This would boost his popularity instead of making a scandal.
    On the other hand, a wife cheating on her husband is often considered as a “femme volage”, meaning that she has light morals, but the blame is put on the husband for not being able to keep/satisfy her. The cuckold stories are the national jokes in France, and if you go to a café and ask the bar tender if he’s seen your wife/gf, everybody’s first reaction will be to chuckle, aka “aha, the beggar is looking for his girl”…

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

      On the other hand, a wife cheating on her husband is often considered as a “femme volage”, meaning that she has light morals, but the blame is put on the husband for not being able to keep/satisfy her.

      Interesting – I imagine that results in French men having a better understanding of female sexuality, and unlikely to be blindsided by a woman’s desertion, saying, “I thought everything was fine. I never noticed she was no longer attracted to me.”

  • OffTheCuff

    The new PJ has already advocated cheating, and done the strawman sex-swap trick. Waiting for the inevitable yoga and meditation references.

  • Thrasymachus

    No serious historian or biographer doubts that FDR had an affair with Lucy Mercer during World War I. (To be fair to FDR, Eleanor barred him from her bed after the birth of her last child). When Eleanor found out about the affair she offered him a divorce. FDR’s mother, Sara, who controlled the money in the family, threatened to cut him off without a cent if he left Eleanor. A divorce would also have meant the end of FDR’s political career. Although at the time he was a mere Assistant Secretary of the Navy he already had aspirations for far higher office. Lucy, who was a devout Catholic, also had qualms about marrying a divorced man.

    The evidence for FDR’s other supposed affairs is far less robust. We know that he was not impotent after being struck down by polio, and several people saw his secretary, Missy LeHand, sitting in his lap when dressed in only a negligee. He also resumed contact with Lucy Mercer Rutherfurd after her husband had died. She was with FDR when he died at Warm Springs. Nobody knows whether this was a physical or merely an emotional affair at this time. FDR’s daughter, Anna, arranged several of their meetings, and her mother reputedly never forgave her for that.

    As for Eleanor, she clearly had an intense emotional relationship with Lorena Hickok. As far as I know no one can say definitively whether or not this was a sexual relationship, much less whether Eleanor should be considered a lesbian.

    With respect to Jefferson, the DNA evidence shows that a member of his family (not necessarily Thomas himself) fathered at least some of Sally Hemings’s children. At present it cannot be made more precise than that. The circumstantial evidence, however, strongly suggests that Thomas was the father. Sally’s children were conceived when he (and not Randolph or any other Jefferson male) was in residence. This issue has been investigated quite extensively by historians over the past dozen years or so, and the case for Jefferson’s paternity cannot simply be dismissed as a liberal conspiracy. See here, for instance:

    http://www.monticello.org/slavery-at-monticello/enslaved-families-monticello/sally-hemings

  • Damien Vulaume

    @pvw.
    Members of the white descendants’ group (Jefferson’s descendants) were pissed off at it, arguing that it was made up. Blacks claiming to be descendants were there as well, or if they were not there, their spokespersons were.

    Ah oui!… I dismissed that too soon as a foreigner. That was dumb from me.
    I shouldn’t have forgotten about that, since I’ve so often noticed how people were so obsessed and/or so uneasy between blacks and whites there. Then it sure is an episode of American history that is worth investigating, and something more than symboliclly significant. I’ve always found an extraordinary irony in the myth of the founding fathers preaching freedom yet at the same time being slave owners themselves.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “On the other hand, a wife cheating on her husband is often considered as a “femme volage”, meaning that she has light morals, but the blame is put on the husband for not being able to keep/satisfy her. ”

    Its the same here. Men here are particularly keen on learning various sexual techniques to keep us women satisfied. I’m not complaining. ;)

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    ” I’ve always found an extraordinary irony in the myth of the founding fathers preaching freedom yet at the same time being slave owners themselves.”

    Right. And some sections of society hold up their ideas as if they can’t be challanged or improved upon, as if they are the word of g-d or some “natural universal law”.

  • pvw

    @DamianV: Then it sure is an episode of American history that is worth investigating, and something more than symboliclly significant.

    Me: Oh, it is very big, this type of topic, within African American history and genealogy, trying to discover one’s roots. The author of the book I mentioned was interviewed about that type of thing, how to find records, etc. You might find this interesting, a whole chapter on Louisiana–French speaking Creoles, the descendants of the colonists who lived there; placage (I need an accent there), les gens du couleur libres, quadroon balls, a whole fascinating culture….

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

      @PVW

      I have found Skip Gates’ work in this area very interesting too:

      “Well, here’s the shocker: If we tested all the black men, say, in the NBA, about 35 percent would trace their male ancestry back–not to Africa at all–but to Europe! That’s right: 35 percent of all African-American males descend from a white man, a white man who most probably impregnated a black female during slavery. And before I started the research for African American Lives, I had no idea that this was true. And many of these white male ancestors, it turns out, were Irish. (Ever wonder what part of Africa Shaquille O’Neal’s ancestors came from?!)”

  • J

    Lucy, who was a devout Catholic, also had qualms about marrying a divorced man.

    But no qualms about sleeping with a married man?

    As to Jefferson–When I visited Monticello (an extremely cool house–visit if you can), the staff admitted to the veracity of the Hemings story, which was the subject of much talk even during Jefferson’s lifetime. Sally Hemmings was Martha Jefferson’s half-sister and is said to have been a slightly darker-complected, younger version of Martha. She was the personal maid of one of the Jefferson daughters and was sent off to school with her. It’s possible she had some education. It’s not really surprising that a widower would end up in bed with a woman so similar in appearance to his dead wife, especially if she had some level of cultural.

  • Abbot

    All the large dating sites have now expanded globally. What are the implications domestically?

    http://www.match.com/international/index.aspx

    .

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    Thanks for that Abbot. I’m on it now searching the countries with the hottest men. :)
    Just for fun. Let’s see what happens.

  • Abbot

    “they are happy to be quoted talking about how well their sites work for getting laid and moving on”

    So its online pimping

  • Abbot

    “I’m on it now searching the countries with the hottest men”

    Try SE Asia. Of course, hot women does not mean hot men too

    .

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Try SE Asia. ”

    Been there. When they’re hot, they’re REALLY hot. ;)

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Rgf
    as if they are the word of g-d or some “natural universal law”

    Yes, this I personnally witnessed there, and went into some heated arguments about it, always with the same type of Americans: Suburbian whites, conservative, often gun owners and or christians, etc. They were also the most ignorant about the rest of the world, and also the most agressively patriotic…

    @pvwFathers of Conscience, Mixed Race Inheritance in the Antebellum South

    I will definitely try to get a hand on that book. Sounds fascinating.
    I once met a guy from Baton rouge in Paris who told me about les gens libres de couleurs, as well as what it was like for him to grow up in Louisiana as a black kid in the early 60’s…

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

      Suburbian whites, conservative, often gun owners and or christians, etc. They were also the most ignorant about the rest of the world, and also the most agressively patriotic…

      LOL, that’s the manosphere.

  • Abbot

    In SE Asia, the ratio of super hot is much greater than in the West and they are so doe eyed ga ga. Wanting to marry young and be mothers is another widespread bonus there.

  • pvw

    @DamianV: I will definitely try to get a hand on that book. Sounds fascinating.
    I once met a guy from Baton rouge in Paris who told me about les gens libres de couleurs, as well as what it was like for him to grow up in Louisiana as a black kid in the early 60′s…

    Me: Like I said, that chapter was fantastic, les gens, placage, quadroon balls, etc., the whole lifestyle and culture it came from and which it created, very Gallic, n’est-ce pas? Wives and other relatives, mistresses, fights over money, oh my!

    The great part is that I visited New Orleans years ago, before Katrina, so as I read, I had reference points in mind for what I was learning about.

    As you said, their descendants are still around, one great example, M. (rather than Mr., I say!) Russel L. Honore (accent on the last e)–military man involved in Katrina efforts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russel_L._Honor%C3%A9

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

      The great part is that I visited New Orleans years ago, before Katrina, so as I read, I had reference points in mind for what I was learning about

      I love traveling while reading something about that place. I discovered this accidentally when I decided to read The Agony and the Ecstasy on a trip to Florence. The book wound up being the best travel guide imaginable. Seeing the art with a real sense of the history made a huge difference. Obviously, non-fiction is even better, but I found a historical novel a great companion to the trip.

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

        Now I see ads for casual sex online dating sites everywhere I turn.

        A Brooklyn woman who sounds like a sex poz feminist is launching Makeoutlabs.com, for casual sex only. Users will be able to specify exactly how casual they want to keep things:

        What’s perhaps the most impressively intuitive aspect of Shevinsky’s site is its acknowledgement of the fact that there’s more than one type of casual sex. Users will be able to convey the type of hookup they’re after, using the options “Casual Sex (Emphasis on Casual)” and “Casual Sex (and you can stay for breakfast). No word yet on whether or not there will be a “Casual Sex (and I will write about you on the Internet)” forthcoming.

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

          In bed today with a cold, so doing a bit of digging re online dating. Some interesting facts:

          “Of the romantic partnerships formed in the United States between 2007 and 2009, 21 percent of heterosexual couples and 61 percent of same-sex couples met online, according to a study by Michael J. Rosenfeld, an associate professor of sociology at Stanford.”

          “More and more college students are turning to online dating as an alternative to the drunken party hookup scene. Why are university students not dating the old fashioned way? Some reasons are:
          • Tired of the party scene
          • Want a serious long-term relationship, not hookups
          • Easier to weed out bad matches online instead of in real life
          • With sites like eHarmony and Chemistry, matches are sent to you rather than
          you searching for them”

          “According to a recent study commissioned by Match.com, online is now the third most common way for people to meet. (The most common are “through work/school” and “through friends/family.”) One in six new marriages is the result of meetings on Internet dating sites. (Nobody’s counting one-night stands.)”

          “I’m a 35-year-old professional wedding photographer, and in my estimate, 20 percent of my clients met on a dating service like Match.com, eHarmony, JDate, etc.”

          “According to a large-scale survey from 2010, around 10 million adult American couples met online. In fact, it’s statistically less likely you’ll find a future sweetheart at a bar, school or work than on the Internet.”

          “Research presented last week at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association found that 22 percent of heterosexual couples surveyed met online, and researchers believe the Web could soon eclipse friends as the primary means of finding mates.”

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

          Percent of women who have sex on the first online dating encounter 33 %

          Girls Prefer
          Nice Guys 38 %
          Bad Guys 15 %
          Blend of Both 34 %
          Any man I can get 6 %

          Guys Prefer
          The modern career girl 42 %
          The girl next door type 34 %
          The hottie 24 %

          http://www.statisticbrain.com/online-dating-statistics/

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

          In 2009, EHarmony created controversy when they published an article in their newsletter on “How to Navigate a One Night Stand.”

          Several years ago, Dr. Neil Clark Warren, founder of eHarmony, was closely associated with Focus on the Family. He separated from the organization after deciding to expand his services to the wider market. However, “Navigating the One Night Stand” takes this a step further by completely breaking eHarmony away from its Christian, pro-marriage beginnings.

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

    J,

    Where is Cyrano when you need him?

    … dunno who Cyrano is, but I always liked how this guy wrote about emotions :

    “My heart is jomping so strong boing boing boing, I think he want to fly to you, never more, never more will I leave you …. I wish you were in myself to see how I love you. What can I do do to let you be certenly of that? I think I done all my best to show you my love and I am steel trying do things to let you be convinched of it. Be sure that your Rico adore you … “

    Who is he then ?

    Enrico Caruso .

  • http://www.iki.fi/keh/ Kari Hurtta

    (I hope, that I do not again screw with HTML!)

    Hope (currently #97):

    I wrote then that I disliked dating sites, always have. I’m glad my husband and I met in a different way, albeit still online.

    This also was online:

    Well, 22 is quite early. ☻

    I’m male, but not very young now. I was about 28 (story, in Finnish) when that happened.

    / Kari Hurtta

  • pvw

    Hi, Susan, thanks for the references and replies.

    Yes, I heard of Skip Gates’ work in this area; that is why I was so intrigued by the genealogical testing he does in his program, and why I pursued it myself….Lots of folks want to know, and especially when the official record is silent. If anything, the markers can help when people reach as far as they can with the genealogical research. From what I understand, for most Americans of African descent, the markers come from West Africa. Some might come from central or East Africa (Angola, etc.).

    I think ADBG makes some good points about the culture shaping people and their experiences, as per the book I mentioned (Fathers of Conscience) and the Known World (fictional account). The culture of that time created its own toxicity, in the same way ours does today. That is why I found the stories in the book I mentioned so interesting–how did these men act when they know the culture around them was toxic, they benefited from it, but they wanted to do the right thing?

  • Escoffier

    “No serious historian …”

    Well, that settles that!

    RE: Jefferson, the circumstantial evidence, which is not strong, suggests Randolph, not Thomas.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Exchanging sex for sex = promiscuity”

    Really? Lets explore this a bit more. Promiscuous is the absence of male investing resources? If not, then what?

    A person who has one FWB for a three years is promiscuous compared to a serial monogamist who has a new girlfriend every four months?

    I don’t see it that way.

    Let’s propose a new definition! Instead of N, let’s count P. P is not just your partner count, P is the number of times one *changes* to a different partner than the last. So, getting back an with an ex counts as a new notch.

    If your P is more than 2 or 3x the age adjusted median…

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

      @OTC

      Promiscuity: A type of relationship in which mating occurs with no strong pair-bonds or lasting relationships.

      Both of your examples qualify.

      In the past I have defined “slut” this way:

      “A slut is a person of either sex who regards sex strictly as a physically pleasurable activity. Sex in and of itself does not include an emotional, spiritual or practical component. Love, emotional intimacy and reproduction are sometimes associated with sex, but are in no way necessary or even desirable as a precondition for sexual activity.”

      In this case, which speaks to intent, the FWB is slutty and the serial monogamy may or may not be.

  • Abbot

    Stop the presses!

    Finally finally, a feminist comes out of the denial closet and tells it like it is! Yes, its about MEN and their dang confounded two-pile system!

    “You can be the kind of girl that everyone’s had, but ‘everyone’ will never see you as the kind of girl good enough to be his girlfriend or wife.”

    So finally, ‘everyone’ is MEN – not society, not culture, no patriarchy … just good ol men.

    “the underlying message goes far beyond simple slut-shaming.”

    It is the ultimate slut shaming because it has huge life satisfaction implications when you can’t change the thinking of the objects of your desire

    “do the men who spout this kind of rubbish ever stop to reflect on how it diminishes them, to be the kind of person who so happily differentiates between women they think deserve respect and those who don’t based on whether or not their penis has been inside her?”

    Well, there is still some denial in that statement. Its other peoples penises. And men don’t feel diminished, but she made a nice try to turn it on them.

    “men don’t like sluts, but they’ll still fu*k them. …It’s partly the reason why women far moreso than men have to cop the punishment for misbehaving”

    There you go. Not getting a boyfriend is the punishment.

    “Any kind of power you might feel from exerting a moral win for buttoning up and keeping things respectable in your down there is hollow. Not only have you betrayed other women to gain your gold stars, in doing so you’ve helped perpetuate the idea that sex is an external force separate to the priorities of women, something they need to safeguard themselves against so that they can secure their real goal – a husband.”

    Translated – we want to screw men and later have them commit to us and you bitches are messing that up.

    http://www.dailylife.com.au/news-and-views/dl-opinion/the-purity-complex-20121127-2a46q.html

    .

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

      Any kind of power you might feel from exerting a moral win for buttoning up and keeping things respectable in your down there is hollow. Not only have you betrayed other women to gain your gold stars

      Wow. I have no words.

  • Abbot

    “Wow. I have no words.”

    She is basically spouting the id of feminists. She is saying that women are pandering to men’s desire to get laid (the fact that most men rarely accomplish that is not raised due to apex fallacy) and the later desire to avoid women who engaged in these behaviors. By women engaging in this pandering, it perpetuates a male-created (actually male evolved) system that makes it difficult for women to be equal to men in career and sexual matters. She knows that its near impossible to get men to change so she is appealing to women to go forth and screw as that will break the stalemate and men will just have to accept what is available for wives.

    Although this stuff is still fringe, men who do find these rants must feel that American women are less worthy than ever and that makes it even worse for the writer of that article.

    Where is this bizarre female/male dance headed?

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    Admit it Abbot, if the femisphere’s heavy artillery is rape, then the counterfire of the manosphere is hypergamy and slut-shaming.

    It’s not about the realities, but about opposing memes, and as such, the lonely combatants must march over a wasteland taunted by their foes … and reviled by their allies.

  • Abbot

    “if the femisphere’s heavy artillery is rape, then the counterfire of the manosphere is hypergamy and slut-shaming.”

    If there is no denial that the quiet avoidance of committing to promiscuous women is slut-shaming, then yes. But few are willing to admit that because its a major ego blow and would display the feminists soft underbelly in the mainstream media – They don’t want to be viewed as sluts who sleep around due to a sexual need for men because they also have a love need from men who have the absolute power to deny them that love. They really are not in a good spot in 2012

  • Abbot

    well, 2013

  • deti

    “Suburbian whites, conservative, often gun owners and or christians, etc. They were also the most ignorant about the rest of the world, and also the most agressively patriotic…

    LOL, that’s the manosphere.”

    I call bullshit. Susan, you do realize, don’t you, that these men are the manly men so many women keep saying they want? You sound like Obama: “people get bitter, clinging to their guns and religion”.

    Congratulations. Your divorce from the manosphere is now complete. You might as well have hoisted your middle finger at the men you say you want your focus groupers to get with. You’ve lost my support with this left hook to Middle America.

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

      @deti

      I call bullshit. Susan, you do realize, don’t you, that these men are the manly men so many women keep saying they want?

      First of all, my comment was factual, not editorial.

      Second, I have never heard a single woman IRL define masculinity or manliness in terms of religion or gun ownership. I live in Boston, so that’s hardly surprising. But neither have I heard that from my focus group members, half of whom are not from MA. I do not believe for one moment that the 77% of Millennials who want to live in urban environments prefer those men. Rural TX? Sure. (BTW, evangelical country has the highest divorce rates in the U.S.)

      Third, the least Christian behavior I have ever witnessed was from so called religious men and women online.

      Fourth, as for Obama, he couldn’t have gotten elected without evangelical types highjacking Romney’s candidacy.

      Divorce granted.

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

    Re: high N guys being ruined for monogamy. I think that part of the problem is that it is hard to get enthusiastic about the prospect of committing your psychological health and net worth to a woman who an unshaven, beanie-wearing “Jacob” previously banged out and covered with his genetic material for the price of a white chocolate mocha.

    Players have probably BEEN Jacob at one point, so they know at the visceral level that this is indeed a risk, but the paranoia is not limited to the operator community: indeed, any man who has taken the proverbial “Red Pill” is now well-aware of the proliferation of WMD Jacob-type Fuck Phantoms. Perhaps this explains why post-Red Pill men tend to cluster in one of two categories: A) STR players who just seek efficiency of sexual access at this point; or B) LTR guys who are extremely concerned about female N and totally intolerant of any indication of casual sex in a woman’s past.

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

      . Perhaps this explains why post-Red Pill men tend to cluster in one of two categories: A) STR players who just seek efficiency of sexual access at this point; or B) LTR guys who are extremely concerned about female N and totally intolerant of any indication of casual sex in a woman’s past.

      What a dilemma for the female population.

  • OffTheCuff

    I think you are inventing your own definitions, that don’t agree with the anyone else’s understanding.

    Wikipedia – Promiscuity, in human sexual behaviour, is the practice of casual sex with multiple sexual partners. MW – miscellaneous mingling or selection of persons or things : indiscriminateness.

    Abbot: “Well, there is still some denial in that statement. Its other peoples penises.”

    You’re on a roll lately. I sprayed my iPad with coffee out my nose… I know it’s a cliché, but it really happened.

  • pvw

    @Susan:
    Any kind of power you might feel from exerting a moral win for buttoning up and keeping things respectable in your down there is hollow. Not only have you betrayed other women to gain your gold stars

    Wow. I have no words.

    Me: Yes, chaste, marriage-minded women with low n counts are sanctimonious and thus unattractive prudes who can’t get laid, so they want to use their failure to join the carousel as a bargaining chip in getting boyfriends and husbands. By criticizing the carousel riders they let team woman down. However, I would argue that they let team woman down when they try to push restricted women (and there are arguably far more of them than the unrestricted sluttish types) onto the carousel in direct opposition to their natural inclination to value having a low n count and sex in committed relationships.

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

      However, I would argue that they let team woman down when they try to push restricted women (and there are arguably far more of them than the unrestricted sluttish types) onto the carousel in direct opposition to their natural inclination to value having a low n count and sex in committed relationships.

      Exactly! Where does she think slut shaming comes from? The flooding of the market with knockoffs.

  • deti

    Susan:

    Seriously? Now you deride and disdain the manosphere as a collection of right wing gun-rack-in-the-back rebel yell hootenanny terbacky-chewin’ hayseeds?

    Come on. You’re better than this.

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

      Now you deride and disdain the manosphere as a collection of right wing gun-rack-in-the-back rebel yell hootenanny terbacky-chewin’ hayseeds?

      What? We were talking about gun-toting evangelicals. I have no idea what percentage of them have gun racks on trucks, whether they yell, attend hootenannies or chew tobacco.

      Do you deny that a significant portion of the manosphere, most notably the MRA wing you inhabit, meets the description of gun-toting and evangelical? That goes for the women, too, btw.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    The vast, vast, vast majority of women wish to be mothers, wives, and stay at home mothers at that (at least part of the time).

    Intelligent women would be asking themselves “Okay, I have this objective, I have a lot of strengths, and admittedly some weaknesses, how do I make this happen for myself and my sisters?”

    Immature women stamp their feet and scream that life isn’t fair while shitting on everyone that they think is hurting them.

    Ever seen an 8 year old play Call of Duty? He logs on, is really cheery, gets killed 20 times in a row because he keeps running into a sniper nest. Then he thinks he is going to win by using a grenade launcher, known in the community as a “noob-tube” because only “noobs” use them, and then gets killed again…

    Because he keeps running into the middle of the fucking map where there are four people waiting for him!

    He then bitches about camping, throws his controller across the room, and runs out of the running screaming obscenities.

    That 8 year old boy is called “feminism.”

  • Sassy6519

    I call bullshit. Susan, you do realize, don’t you, that these men are the manly men so many women keep saying they want?

    I don’t think I’ve heard that many women claim to want such men. Did I miss the memo or something?

    @ Susan Walsh

    Second, I have never heard a single woman IRL define masculinity or manliness in terms of religion or gun ownership. I live in Boston, so that’s hardly surprising. But neither have I heard that from my focus group members, half of whom are not from MA. I do not believe for one moment that the 77% of Millennials who want to live in urban environments prefer those men. Rural TX? Sure. (BTW, evangelical country has the highest divorce rates in the U.S.)

    Yeah, my thoughts exactly Susan

  • JP

    With respect to the Tom Wolfe article, what really happened was the advent of Peak Finance.

    Eventually, the entire HFT system is going to be scrapped because it’s value is negative *and* it’s not cool at all. There’s no constituency for it.

  • Tasmin

    What I find to be most interesting about Slater’s piece is not the question it supposedly addresses re: online dating and marriage but rather the choice he made in terms of his character Jacob. The real story is why characters like these are the chosen vehicles for these half-baked explorations of the current dating culture. In any case, Jacob’s path to marriage has little to do with online dating and everything to do with the fact that he is a piece of shit. This story shouldn’t be about online dating ruining LTR monogamy or marriage it should be about how and why pieces of shit like Jacob are getting sex from all these (supposedly) great women who are (supposedly) looking for the LTR/Marriage.

  • JP

    I’m going to check with a professional Jefferson and get back to you on this Sally Hemmings thing, with general percentages as to the truth of the various potentials.

  • Escoffier

    “as for Obama, he couldn’t have gotten elected without evangelical types highjacking Romney’s candidacy”

    That’s Brookline talking.

  • deti

    “That’s Brookline talking.”

    Yeah. Susan, with your little “LOL that’s the manosphere” and derision of gun-toting evangelicals, you don’t seem to realize you’re coming across as a cloistered, out of touch, “let them eat cake”, East Coast elitist.

  • JP

    “Had to google HBD too. Wish I hadn’t. And how are these guys making headway onto relationship oriented sites?”

    I thought that the HBD people were the same people as the manosphere people.

    Which generally makes them non-evangelical, non-religious scientifiic materialists.

    I don’t know about the gun-toting, though.

  • JP

    Oh, look. We’re driving toward the National Crisis now.

    The 2020’s are going to be so much fun.

    http://www.salon.com/2013/01/05/welcome_to_the_new_civil_war/

  • Escoffier

    I would not be quite that hard on her.

    What I meant was simply this. The assertion that evangelicals lost Romney the election is patently false for a number of reasons.

    1) Because they were simply not that influential in his campaign. Certainly not in the way they were for Bush in both 2000 and 2004.

    2) Because the rank and file nonetheless was heavily evangelical and without those votes Romney would have done much more poorly than he actually did.

    3) Because other, larger factors were far more important in determining the outcome of this election, above all a massive demographic shift in favor of the Democrats (that has been ongoing for decades but coming to fruition now) and the continued unpopularity of the Republican “brand” as a hangover from the Bush years.

    So, pardon me if this summation of your politics is wrong, if so please chalk it up to an honest, yet plausible mistake, but I know so many people like this and your words fit the profile perfectly, so …

    You are basically a culturally blue person who lives in an extremely blue enviornment which is much bluer than even you are. Politically you have several red tendencies including (as we all know) anti-feminism and, I would also surmise, a harder line on issue of crime and war and more “fiscally conservative” leanings as well. This puts you well out of the ideological mainstream where you live and makes you treated sometimes like a rabid right-winger by your neighbors even when you know you are not.

    So you are not a liberal and not an enthusiastic Democrat.

    Neither however do you consider yourself a conservative of any stripe, nor would I guess you are registered as a Republican (though I am guessing you voted for Romney). The problem you have with conservatives any reader of this blog should see. They are basically on the so-called “social issues” which, while you are to the right of radical feminism, you are well to the left of the Republican/conservative mainstream on these issues.

    Plus, you feel more comfortable in the company of, and in communities populated by, true-blue libs whose views you often find assinine than in the company of red-staters whose views might be marginally closer to yours (from the other direction, of course) but whose manners and tastes you find alien.

    The Democrats, you realize, are never going to come your way on those issues where you are to the right of them so you’ve given up on them, though not on voting for this or that Dem you don’t find to be too far left. Rather, you would prefer that the Republican party abandon the “social issues” and stop “pandering” to the red evangelicals you find distasteful. That would be a party you could happily support.

    There are, as I said, many intelligent blue state people who feel this way. The problem is, there are not nearly enough of them to build a majority party. Not even a fraction of one. And they are outnumbered 10 or 20 to one by red state evangelicals. So for the party to kick out this huge cohort that gives it a fighting chance (and, not incidentally, does almost all the ground and grunt work) in order to win over a sliver of people in states it cannot win anyway, would be suicidally insane. Which is why they don’t do it.

    Your analysis, in short, is colored by where you are and who you live and pays way too little heed to the political facts on the ground.

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

      @Escoffier

      Your analysis of me and my views is STEEL ON TARGET. I suspect you would be surprised at how conservative I am on reproductive issues, though not to the point where I am opposed to premarital sex. However, it pains me to consider myself as even remotely aligned with people like Todd Akin or Richard Mourdock. Also, I am not opposed to gender equity feminism. I do oppose what I see as an agenda of female supremacy by misandrists. And of course, I vehemently oppose sex positive feminism. I am liberal on same sex issues. Liberal on gun control. Worried about climate change. I am very conservative about foreign policy. I consider myself an independent.

      As for the future of the Republican party, that should be interesting to watch. I do not believe that evangelicals give them a fighting chance, especially moving forward as demographics continue to change. Mitt Romney was a fairly popular governor, and unrecognizable by the time he had his views remade to fit the Republican party platform.

      Obama had no good reason to be reelected. The fact that the Republicans took a moderate and dressed him in ultra conservative clothing shows how completely out of ideas the party is. They need a total makeover, IMO.

  • OffTheCuff

    Tasmin, perhaps I missed it, what makes Jacob a shit? He doesn’t appear to be running asshole game, real or fake; he doesn’t pump and dump; he doesn’t lie; he even gets into relationships. Is it because he isn’t married?

  • Joe

    That’s a very good analysis, Escoffier at 249. But this has not been a political blog by it’s nature.

    @Susan, 235

    Third, the least Christian behavior I have ever witnessed was from so called religious men and women online.

    Fourth, as for Obama, he couldn’t have gotten elected without evangelical types highjacking Romney’s candidacy.

    So now I have to ask – Susan, why did you bring bring politics (specifically your own political views) into the discussion like that? (We note the second sentence is not a statement of fact but an opinion about the political efficacy of “evangelical types.”) I’m not an evangelical by any means. But even I recognize the first sentence as close to being a slur.

    @Susan, 239

    Do you deny that a significant portion of the manosphere, most notably the MRA wing you inhabit, meets the description of gun-toting and evangelical?

    And in context, this statement comes off as derogatory, both the MRAs and to evangelicals.

    I hope that wasn’t your intent.

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

      @Joe

      usan, why did you bring bring politics (specifically your own political views) into the discussion like that? (We note the second sentence is not a statement of fact but an opinion about the political efficacy of “evangelical types.”) I’m not an evangelical by any means. But even I recognize the first sentence as close to being a slur.

      Actually, Damien introduced it. I found his description funny, and quite apt as it relates to some of the manospherists. Quite a few of them, actually.

      I’m happy to clarify re what I have witnessed from so-called Christians online, particularly at these blogs. The most vicious, abusive, misogynist and derogatory language I’ve ever seen anywhere. Wishing people ill, vague threats of harm, mocking and ridiculing those with differing views. Treating others with respect and civility is not only not valued, it leaves one open to additional abuse. As a Catholic, I’ve been offended by some of the seriously anti RC invective I’ve read, though I have realized for a long time that evangelicals do not consider Catholics saved Christians.

      Basically, I have never met a fundamentalist of any stripe I could relate to or respect.

  • HanSolo

    @Tasmin and OffTheCuff

    You noticed the same glaring omission I did. Why are these women choosing Jacob? Many of my comments upthread focus on this.

    Now, I will not go as far as you do to call him a ‘shit’. He is portrayed as such and seems to have quite a few selfish tendencies but there really isn’t enough info to outright call him a shit (though he may be).

    I was more going along the lines of if he really is as bad as portrayed (though there’s not really any evidence that he’s outright lying to get laid) then why are these women choosing him (and extrapolated to whatever extent similar things happen with other women, maybe 25%, why are they choosing men similar to Jacob)?

    The closer to a shit that he really is though the more pertinent the question of why women are choosing him and men similar to or worse than him.

  • deti

    escoffier at 249:

    Thanks. You’ve described with your nuance what I was trying to get across culturally. Susan’s views are strongly influenced by who she is and where she lives. She’s culturally blue and UMC, having been raised middle class and educated in the best institutions this country has to offer, in a politically liberal environment. She’s lived an upper middle class life on both coasts, as a child in Los Angeles, as an adult in NYC, then in PA at Wharton; then in NYC again and now in suburban Boston — in Massachusetts, the bluest of blue states. The environment she lives in and the people she rubs shoulders with are far, far more liberal than she is. She’s worked as a consultant and at the pinnacle of her profession with top, apex people. Because of her upbringing and lifestyle, she’s much more comfortable with UMC, blue, suburban, East Coast elites, and their manners, tastes, and way of life. She’s not familiar at all, and therefore not comfortable, with Midwestern/”flyover country” tastes, manners, and ways of life.

    This isn’t “bad”. It just informs me where Susan’s coming from.

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

      She’s not familiar at all, and therefore not comfortable, with Midwestern/”flyover country” tastes, manners, and ways of life.

      To the extent I am familiar with gun-toting evangelicals, it is from reading online. I am profoundly uncomfortable with their rude and judgmental behavior.

      I don’t consider the Midwest the seat of the Bible Belt. Here are the 12 most evangelical states:

      Tennesse 47.0
      Oklahoma 46.3
      Alabama 46.1
      W. Virginia 44.2
      Arkansas 44.0
      N. Carolina 40.0
      Kentucky 37.0
      S. Carolina 36.4
      Mississippi 35.6
      Kansas 34.3
      Georgia 32.7
      Virginia 32.7

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    ADBG, my husband plays COD MW3 (the PC version), and he says there are lots of people using cheats and hacks. Have you run into that?

  • Iggles

    @ Escoffier:

    Susan, that guy is going to get fired.

    At the very least, he has handed your girl the power to ruin his life.

    I agree. It’s pretty reckless!

    @ J:

    Lucy, who was a devout Catholic, also had qualms about marrying a divorced man.

    But no qualms about sleeping with a married man?

    SMH.. Yep, it’s hypocrisy at it’s finest!

    @ OffTheCuff:

    Tasmin, perhaps I missed it, what makes Jacob a shit? He doesn’t appear to be running asshole game, real or fake; he doesn’t pump and dump; he doesn’t lie; he even gets into relationships. Is it because he isn’t married?

    Because he’s a shiftless loser, with no ambition and nothing of his own to show.

    The underachieving son of two doctors who plays video games and chases tail online. He’s no prize..

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Hope,

    TBH, I haven’t picked up a video game in months and use my Xbox as a DVD player. :P I’ve got a bunch of different interests and go out a decent bit, so I don’t have much as time for video gaming anymore. When I did play, I spent most of my time doing RPGs, as well: I have well over 200 hours invested into Oblivion, a similar amount into Dragon Age, and probably 150 in Fallout.

    I don’t PC game at all, and I let my Xbox live account go dead. I only used it to play MW2 with my friend late at night, so, meh.

    I don’t see much changing in 2013, either. Trying to learn to cook a few more things, bartend a bit, and I also got a guitar for Christmas. I can successfully hit a F chord now!

  • Jonathan

    The common thread between MRAs/Evangelicals/gun owners is a more realistic view of human nature than the one held by people on the feminist Left. One may acknowledge the validity of this assertion without agreeing with what the MRAs et al do.

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

      The common thread between MRAs/Evangelicals/gun owners is a more realistic view of human nature than the one held by people on the feminist Left.

      Oh man, are those our only two choices? I prefer to avoid extremists altogether.

  • HanSolo

    @Tasmin and OffTheCuff

    I think the underlying factors are that in aggregate men are flexible to do what it takes to get sex. Women are the sex gatekeepers (largely) and set the rules. Men are simply responding to the market place. There are enough women that do put out early, either for NSA or in hopes of finding a relationship, that the casual-seeking side of men is empowered. This allows men to then see that even though NAWALT that enough are and thus pressure the more restricted types and just leave if she doesn’t put out soon enough. Many men are allowed to drift along in both STRs and non-marriage-directed shorter-LTRs and so a lot of men are happy with that.

    In hyperbolic but insightful style, Dave Chapelle entertains an audience with the following choice words:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymNdfdQvdVc

    “I hear women say this all the time…chivalry is dead…don’t you all feel that way…that men aren’t gentlemen anymore?” to the cheers of many women in the crowd. After having slyly gotten the women “on his side,” he delivers the punchline, “That’s right. Chivalry is dead! And women killed it.” A few women can be heard making sounds best described as “oh, you sneaky fucker” and after it sunk in a few seconds later the men cheer wildly. lol He then goes on to offer this nugget of wisdom:

    “If a man could fuck in a cardboard box, he wouldn’t buy a house.”

    So, it may not be very flattering that many men just respond to what it takes to get laid but there’s a lot of truth in it. If women demand a monogamous provider then most men will respond accordingly. If women don’t then many men will take the easy path to sex. Of course there are men who still have provider/accomplishment ambitions regardless of whether it helps them get laid and there are some inherent slackers who did little back in the day when it was more of a prerequisite, but it’s that big middle ground of the male spectrum that is swayed one way or another by what it takes to get laid.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    What a dilemma for the female population.

    Sarcasm? The choice should be straightforward. If you’re STR-oriented, help those red-pill aware men get sexual access. If you’re LTR-oriented, don’t even think of having casual sex. Hardly a dilemma.

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

      @INTJ

      I wasn’t being the least big sarcastic. If the only two choices are players or guys who want virgins, we have a dilemma, because most women will want neither for marriage.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Because he’s a shiftless loser, with no ambition and nothing of his own to show.

    The underachieving son of two doctors who plays video games and chases tail online. He’s no prize..

    It’s amazing how hard the women are coming down on this guy. He is doing absolutely nothing to harm anyone and he’s being treated like the second coming of Hitler.

    Men who are comfortable with their current level of wealth will use it on leisure and pursue women. Video games can satisfy a lot of male “ambition,” because you can do a lot of cool things in video games that take a lot of effort to complete.

    That he isn’t fulfilling YOUR vision of what a “man should be” does not make him a bad person or disgusting.

  • INTJ

    @ deti

    She’s not familiar at all, and therefore not comfortable, with Midwestern/”flyover country” tastes, manners, and ways of life.

    This isn’t “bad”. It just informs me where Susan’s coming from.

    I don’t think she’s that familiar with Blue state lower class culture or immigrant culture either.

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

      @INTJ

      I don’t think she’s that familiar with Blue state lower class culture or immigrant culture either.

      You are both snarky and ignorant.

      I’ve been teaching English to newly arrived Somalians, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Guatamalans, Ecuadorians, Dominicans, Haitians, Cape Verdeans, and Moroccans for more than 10 years.

      What have you got?

  • HanSolo

    @Iggles

    But as Tasmin and I have pointed out, if he is so bad then why are women going for him? That is the elephant in the room that society isn’t addressing much as they come out with their man-up campaigns.

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

      But as Tasmin and I have pointed out, if he is so bad then why are women going for him? That is the elephant in the room that society isn’t addressing much as they come out with their man-up campaigns.

      I’ve provided some stats that address this. About a third of online daters have had sex on the first date. 15-20% of marriages in the US come from online dating.

      Just as in college, we’ve got a divide. There are people meeting up for hookups, and there are people going on real dates.

      It sounds like Jacob is not saying he just wants sex, because he’s about to reluctantly release two women who appear to want more from him. And he’s hiding the fact that he’s seeing other people, apparently, as he silences his texts. (Note: the fact that he doesn’t have his phone on silent during dates is enough of a reason to call him a shit.)

      In any case, we have a sample size here of 1. 1 Jacob and 5 women. Slater chose to present him as representative, probably because it makes for a more sensational story and it buttresses his claims, which Madrigal discredited.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Oh, yes, men responding what it takes to have sex. This came up in a work conversation this week.

    Our female friend, we’ll call her Lisa, recently planned a huge, huge “date” for her best friend, because it was her birthday.

    The next day she said she had a whole new respect for men who pay for dates, because she didn’t realize how ridiculously expensive it was. As she put it, if she were paying, it would only be Taco Bell and Movies.

    Which the guys snickered was still expensive because movies are crazy expensive these days. Silly girl.

    Anyways, I went on a little tangent on how paying for expensive dinner dates was stupid, doesn’t get you the girl, and is a low return on investment.

    She responded with how it is a great way to show a girl you’re really committed and a great way to get girls to like you.

    To which I responded with her previous boyfriend, who, on THEIR first date, did not make dinner plans at ALL, and made HER pay for the drinks. And recounted stories of her past boyfriends that she shared with us, including one who shoplifted stuff from clearance aisles, and gave it to her as birthday presents.

    I never paid for a thing when I was “dating” my SO. Not until we were “official.” Wasn’t necessary to pay for anything.

    Why invest when girls aren’t demanding it…

    Look at what women do. Not what they say.

    Look at what women do. Not what they say.

    LOOK AT WHAT WOMEN DO. NOT WHAT THEY SAY.

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

      LOOK AT WHAT WOMEN DO. NOT WHAT THEY SAY.

      EQUALLY TRUE FOR MEN.

  • INTJ

    @ Hope

    ADBG, my husband plays COD MW3 (the PC version), and he says there are lots of people using cheats and hacks. Have you run into that?

    I don’t play it, but I hear it has a bad reputation for cheats and hacks. Personally though, I play Urban Terror, and cheats there are pretty rare, but unjustified accusations of cheating are quite common.

  • deti

    JOnathan:

    “The common thread between MRAs/Evangelicals/gun owners is a more realistic view of human nature than the one held by people on the feminist Left. One may acknowledge the validity of this assertion without agreeing with what the MRAs et al do.”

    MRAs and gun owners do have a more realistic view of human nature than the Left does. Evangelicals, not so much, because leftists and their ideologies and practices have thoroughly infiltrated and appropriated the mainstream institutions — unless you’re talking about fundamentalist sects, and even they don’t acknowledge much truth about sexuality in general, much less the differences between male and female sexuality. Most Churchians believe female sexuality is all pure and good and should be unleashed to fullest expression. To Churchians, male sexuality is all base and evil and needs to be controlled and restrained.

  • Sassy6519

    Anyways, I went on a little tangent on how paying for expensive dinner dates was stupid, doesn’t get you the girl, and is a low return on investment.

    She responded with how it is a great way to show a girl you’re really committed and a great way to get girls to like you.

    To which I responded with her previous boyfriend, who, on THEIR first date, did not make dinner plans at ALL, and made HER pay for the drinks. And recounted stories of her past boyfriends that she shared with us, including one who shoplifted stuff from clearance aisles, and gave it to her as birthday presents.

    I never paid for a thing when I was “dating” my SO. Not until we were “official.” Wasn’t necessary to pay for anything.

    Why invest when girls aren’t demanding it…

    Look at what women do. Not what they say.

    Look at what women do. Not what they say.

    LOOK AT WHAT WOMEN DO. NOT WHAT THEY SAY.

    Any and all of my previous boyfriends have paid for the majority of expenses during the relationships. Some women may not tacitly request or demand such treatment, but I do.

    I would be a little concerned if a guy didn’t offer to pay for some things while dating me. Call me a gold-digger, if you want, but I’ve never stated that I was above that title.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Sassy, I am 100% confident that “who pays for what” would be the LEAST of our problems if we started dating :P

  • Sassy6519

    @ ADBG

    Sassy, I am 100% confident that “who pays for what” would be the LEAST of our problems if we started dating :P

    Ooooh, now I’m curious. What would be our greatest problems, hypothetically speaking?

  • JP

    @ADBG:

    “That he isn’t fulfilling YOUR vision of what a “man should be” does not make him a bad person or disgusting.”

    His life is accomplishing nothing.

    So, he’s not bad, just without value, so it’s more neutral, although since he’s wasting his life, it shades off into bad.

  • JP

    “But as Tasmin and I have pointed out, if he is so bad then why are women going for him?”

    Because they are as metaphysically useless as he is?

    Maybe they are good matches for each other.

  • Deli

    //8. Conversely, a man who shows basic wit and intelligence, and who can be mildly self-deprecating, would probably appear more considerate of a woman’s needs in bed. Thus, more women would reply to his advert, ensuring a higher probability of him getting laid:

    “Watery eyed albino seeks large gins and absolutely no sympathy from women who aren’t that bothered about the fact that, to me, you probably just look like a shapely, yet smudgy blob in the middle distance. Must be prepared to put up with my walking into doors, abusing people with 20-20 vision and never getting a sun tan.”

    I’m betting this guy has had a few offers.
    //

    Oh f… no. I can’t believe the people in the original link actually wrote that seriously. I was thinking about writing a paragraph like that in my previous post here as a mockery of what a typical mystical new age-y crap looks like. But they wrote it completely unapologetically (or qouted some dude – which makes it even worse)

    Dude, no, just no. As my dad used to say “Don’t point out your own mistakes and weaknesses to other people – there will always be a whole bunch of dicks willing to do it for you.”

    Write in your profile that your life is a high-octane ride of destiny, powered every day with new emotions, new knowledge and new achievements, on it’s way into the horizon of your goals . And this rocket ship of yours just happens to have one empty passenger seat right now.

    The self-deprecation… It burns…

  • Iggles

    @ HanSolo:

    But as Tasmin and I have pointed out, if he is so bad then why are women going for him? That is the elephant in the room that society isn’t addressing much as they come out with their man-up campaigns.

    He could be targeting 2 and 3s for all we know. In that case, he would a “step up” SMV-wise. Getting a lot of women proves little about a man’s character. It’s easy to obtain the low hanging fruit anyway..

    @ JP:

    Because they are as metaphysically useless as he is?

    Maybe they are good matches for each other.

    +1

    Too many unknown factors to say Jacob is a good man because he’s an online player!

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Ooooh, now I’m curious. What would be our greatest problems, hypothetically speaking?

    It starts out with fundamental, basic attractiveness.

    You seem to like tall, handsome men, with interesting lives and a hefty dose of creativity. Plus a motorcycle. I’m 5’10, with skin pale enough to make the Amish proud, not a whole lot of muscle, and you might as well call me Bob from Accounting.

    On my side, while I can definitely “respond” to a lot of different kinds of women, I have a DEFINITE type. Pretty much every girl I’ve ever had a crush on was somewhat shorter than me, with fair skin, even the same shade of hair. I am friends with one on Facebook, she posted a picture and from behind she looks exactly like my current SO.

    You aren’t quite my type, so to speak.

    If we actually managed to make it over that bump, I am a sentimental, romantic type, which you….uhhh…. are not ;)

    The biggest problem beyond all that is that my family is fantastically racist and I would probably not want to subject you to that.

  • HanSolo

    @Iggles

    That may be true that they aren’t so attractive. Just discounting the women as 2 or 3’s is the easy way out. Do you believe that is the most likely scenario?

    What if they are pretty, as Jacob reports? What if he is only slightly exaggerating and they are mildly attractive or, at worst, average? I see far too many women who are doing exactly as embodied by the Jacob story that are not 2 or 3’s, who go for douches, or badboys or slackers.

  • Jonathan

    deti, I take your point. I meant that Christian believers have a sense of the tragic nature of life, the existence of tradeoffs and immutable facts, that leftist/feminist theory tends to ignore.

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

    I agree that people seem to be coming down really hard on Jacob. If his hobby/interests were “restoring classic cars, attending the symphony, and big-game hunting in Alaska and Africa” instead of concerts, video games, and basketball, then he’d probably seem like less of a penniless slacker and more of an Old Money man of leisure/aesthete, but the underlying personality trait clusters would be similar.

    I can only speculate as to the nature of Jacob’s appeal because we have limited information, but to me it sounds like he knows what he likes and probably just needs to find a woman who has an equal appreciation for sex, cooking, sports, and concerts (presumably non-materialistic, although there is no indication of Jacob’s wealth level and he could actually be quite well-off) and he’d probably settle down quite happily. The guy seems fairly self-deprecating and surprised at his sexual success.

    He’s just not inclined to get married to someone if it will entail heavily compromising his ability to do the stuff that he likes to do. But men have to learn to recognize their own rational self-interests because God knows that women are looking out for their own.

    Re: Dave Chapelle’s insights. A common question around the campfire when I do a climbing or hunting trip goes something like this: “Imagine that you are a member of the X-Men and your mutant superpower is the ability to have sex with women—any woman—at will. How would this change your lifestyle, perspective on work, etc.?”

    Most men that I have had this discussion with, though not all, would have structured their lives differently if they had this super-power. For one thing, the general tolerance for office politics, toxic bosses and co-workers, boredom/tedium, etc. goes way, way down. A surprising number of guys who are heavily invested in professional careers will state that they would have pursued eccentric, less-commercial, greater “work-life balance” paths—diving instructor, surfer, hunting guide, wildlife photographer, painter, amateur fighter, military—if they had been given this level of control over sexual access.

    It’s an interesting thought experiment…

  • Sassy6519

    @ ADBG

    Hahaha!! Well, good to know.

    I’ve often wondered what dating some of the men on here would be like, if I were suddenly able to meet some of them in real life. I still recount the longstanding and glorious love/hate relationship I had with Jesus Mahoney. Good times indeed.

  • JP

    ” I see far too many women who are doing exactly as embodied by the Jacob story that are not 2 or 3′s, who go for douches, or badboys or slackers.”

    Because they think it’s fun.

    Maybe it is fun.

    Lots of things are fun, but not healthy or helpful.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    ADBG, the first Dragon Age occupied my attention for over a month, which is pretty good for a single player game. I joked with my husband that Alistair reminded me of him. He had the funny, sarcastic wit and good, knightly vibe.

    Good luck with the guitar stuff. It looks hard! My husband has been playing since he was 6, so he is pretty pro with it. These days he doesn’t really care to play much and prefers to go to the range. But it’s a much more expensive hobby.

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

    PS: In terms of sexual market dynamics, the female equivalent to Jacob would be a woman of modest appearance, work ethic, and accomplishments who somehow used online dating services to meet and marry an attractive multimillionaire husband who then attended to her whims. Would we call her a “loser”?

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

      PS: In terms of sexual market dynamics, the female equivalent to Jacob would be a woman of modest appearance, work ethic, and accomplishments who somehow used online dating services to meet and marry an attractive multimillionaire husband who then attended to her whims. Would we call her a “loser”?

      Well, Jacob is not a provider, and has no intention of becoming one. As that is the #1 female attraction cue, he should be very unattractive for an LTR, and indeed appears to have failed at those.

      The female equivalent would be a woman who is an utter failure at what is most important to men and not wife material.

  • OffTheCuff

    Come out and say it, Iggles. What would make him a non-loser? Earning far more money than he needs to support himself, and spending that on someone else, right?

    I’m guessing he is self-sufficient. Either he is better with money than people say, or, his folks give him all he needs. Why not take advantage of it? If I had free money for life, I’d stop working, too.

    The only people that can really judge him are those who are paying his way.

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

      If I had free money for life, I’d stop working, too.

      I think we’re really talking about values. I would never want my daughter to marry someone who didn’t have work or a purpose in life, regardless of personal wealth. Nor would I have ever chosen someone like that. I am a harsh judge of laziness and those who live off of others. They’re parasites and add nothing to the world.

  • JP

    “Re: Dave Chapelle’s insights. A common question around the campfire when I do a climbing or hunting trip goes something like this: “Imagine that you are a member of the X-Men and your mutant superpower is the ability to have sex with women—any woman—at will. How would this change your lifestyle, perspective on work, etc.?”””

    This reminds me of the argument that my wife and I got into if we won the lottery.

    I wanted to use the money I won in the lottery to ultimately destroy the lottery system because it’s a tax on the stupid and results in massive chaotically random allocations of resources that are generally destructive to the lives of the recipients.

  • JP

    “Come out and say it, Iggles. What would make him a non-loser? Earning far more money than he needs to support himself, and spending that on someone else, right?”

    He needs to be doing what he’s supposed to be doing, which I’m 100% certain isn’t what he’s doing now.

  • Escoffier

    BB, this gets back to a distinction I tried to make a while back that Susan objected to strongly. Jacob–stipulating that his story is true–is an SMP “winner.” He’s getting not only what HE wants but what millions of guys want: sex with pretty girls. Moreover, he’s learned how to quickly replace a girl when he needs to. He’s not a player racking up N for its own sake but he is a man with options.

    In life he may be a “loser” but even that is probably too strong. He is a loser only if we define winner as “bourgeois.” I have nothing against the bourgeois–I am one–but it’s not the only way to live and other ways are not inherently bad.

    OTOH, from a philosophic perspective, Jacob may not be a loser but he is a wastrel and a hedonist. Leisure is necessary for the higher things in life but leisure in the service of, let’s face it, rather common or banal pleasures is not admirable, however harmless it may be in isolation and in the short run.

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

      OTOH, from a philosophic perspective, Jacob may not be a loser but he is a wastrel and a hedonist. Leisure is necessary for the higher things in life but leisure in the service of, let’s face it, rather common or banal pleasures is not admirable, however harmless it may be in isolation and in the short run.

      I think an argument can be made that Jacob is guilty of greed, sloth, lust and gluttony. :)

  • JP

    “OTOH, from a philosophic perspective, Jacob may not be a loser but he is a wastrel and a hedonist.”

    Uh, this is what makes him a loser.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    PS: In terms of sexual market dynamics, the female equivalent to Jacob would be a woman of modest appearance, work ethic, and accomplishments who somehow used online dating services to meet and marry an attractive multimillionaire husband who then attended to her whims. Would we call her a “loser”?

    The purpose of this blog is relationships, so, no, she would be labelled a winner.

    BB, some thoughts if I may.

    A lot of your posts recently are about how the SMP dynamics have changed, and how this would change male behavior. Specifically, a lot of guys in your generation are saying they would have acted totally different if they had the same opportunity that, say, I have now.

    I’m not sure they would be better served trying to become players, or whatever.

    I want to bring up the concept of “regrets” to illustrate this. A few threads ago, you related regrets to casual sex, and said most regrets are for things NOT done, therefore casual sex=good! This was probably somewhat facetious, but this is an actual dictum for our youth: you have to try casual sex, to see if it “works” for you, and that’s okay! Nothing to regret!

    Honestly, I don’t see how this gets spun as “no regret” a lot of the times. Susan, if I can drag you into this? You said you regret none of the casual sex, even though at least once it left you crying, literally, and usually left you feeling empty.

    How can you NOT regret this?

    I can say, from my experience, as a guy who ended up being a 24 year old virgin, partially because he told girls he didn’t want to have ACTUAL sex and therefore has a much higher “technical” N…I don’t regret a single casual opportunity I passed up on. Don’t even think about the girls, now, to be honest.

    They’re irrelevant…which is why they would have been casual to begin with. Nor do I regret not trying to get more girls, which I am sure I would be able to do now. It doesn’t register on my radar at all.

    What I honestly regret, at least in regards to girls, is not trying harder to approach girls who, in retrospect, were probably interested in me, at least a little bit. The three that come to mind right now are Juliet, Ella, and Ashley.

    But fucking more women…yeah, that doesn’t even come close. Other regrets are never getting involved in a political campaign and not being in drama when I was in high school because I thought it was “gay.”

    But I’m only 25, and I can fix that! Among my resolutions this year are to volunteer for the state Republican party, attend a Village Hall meeting every other month, and take acting classes.

    Getting new bedpost notches, which is probably, mercifully, FINALLY within my reach, does not even come close. Even if I broke up with my current SO, I doubt I would chasing that goal: I would be trying to find a new girl that makes me happy and who I can hopefully fall in love with.

    FWIW, that’s my take. I see a lot of guys pursuing the low commitment path, and whatever, but I don’t see them as perfectly happy specimens, either.

    Even this “Jacob” guy seems lifeless, a sort of person who knows something is missing but isn’t sure how to fix it.

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

      @ADBG

      You said you regret none of the casual sex, even though at least once it left you crying, literally, and usually left you feeling empty.

      How can you NOT regret this?

      I believe the crying experience you refer to was actually with an ex, not a stranger.

      I don’t regret my casual experiences because I didn’t experience very negative consequences. If I had contracted an STD I would obviously regret them. Sure, the sex was meh, and I didn’t care to see the guys again, but it was also sort of interesting, and the seduction part was fun. I have never felt that those experiences saddled me with emotional baggage of any kind, nor have they interfered with my relationship with my husband. I can actually see the appeal of the wedding party fling, much to the chagrin of men here.

      It’s true that women take a risk when they have casual sex, because no doubt they shrink the pool of potential partners as their N rises. However, I agree with SayWhaat – virgins pay a far higher price in this SMP than women in the double digits.

      One of my focus groups girls has been dating a guy since May. She’s 24, he’s 29. They finally talked about their numbers – both are at 12, not counting each other. Each of them was 100% OK with this number. I suspect it would only have been a problem if she was at 12 and he was at a much lower number.

  • Deli

    2 OTC
    //Come out and say it, Iggles. What would make him a non-loser?
    I am not Iggles, but let me try:
    – He is not a loser, because he is happy in his life style choice which is NOT built on the unhappiness of others?

    I mean, he is surely not a spearhead of humankind’s driving force. He is not working towards some great scientific, technological or artistic goal.
    He is somewhere in the middle, making the gears turn.
    So what? Since when is this a mark of a loser?

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

      He is somewhere in the middle, making the gears turn.

      How is he contributing to the turning of the gears? We know that he “doesn’t think much” of a 40 hour workweek.

      Drive and industriousness are key female attraction cues. This guy must have low occupational status. What 31 year old man does not want to work a 40 hour week? Women are going to judge him as a loser for LTRs.

  • Sassy6519

    I don’t think Sassy has anything in common with the average black single mother. She lives in a bubble and can’t see that her values don’t work for Black women of lower SES.

    Duh.

    I don’t have anything in common with lower SES black single mothers because…………..wait for it………………….I’m not a lower SES black single mother (*Shocker*).

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

    Edit: Didn’t mean to imply that military service offers “work-life balance.”

    Escoffier, nice post.

    OTC: a variation on your question was posed by psychologist Roy Baumeister. He suggests that the narrative for defining “real maleness” has typically been a man who works very hard and underconsumes relative to his resources, thus freeing up a reserve or surplus capacity. The surplus would then be available for any number of ends, including allocation to a nurturing female in exchange for sexual exclusivity. In exchange for this service, these men were respected and given various authoritative “head-of-household” privileges that today are very non-PC.

    Among other things, feminism has changed the incentive structure for males and reduced the motivation for many men to strive for or maintain such a surplus capacity. Men may respond by lowering their production level to match their own needs (Jacob) or by raising their personal consumption levels to match their production capacity; in either case, fewer resources are available to those who would have been distribution beneficiaries under the old regime.

  • OffTheCuff

    Yeah, Sassy’s done the incredibly difficult math, that having kids takes a lot of time, effort, and money, decides she doesn’t want it, and… shocker, actually avoids getting pregnant. It’s almost as if she possesses the basic, most minimal level of intelligence and foresight expected of a functional adult.

  • Sassy6519

    @ OffTheCuff

    Yeah, Sassy’s done the incredibly difficult math, that having kids takes a lot of time, effort, and money, decides she doesn’t want it, and… shocker, actually avoids getting pregnant. It’s almost as if she possesses the basic, most minimal level of intelligence and foresight expected of a functional adult.

    Hahaha!!

    +1

  • INTJ

    So I think I’ve sorted out a lot of things about attraction now. There are three types of criteria that determine a person’s romantic interest in another person. These are physical attraction, general attraction, and good personality. Roughly speaking, these can also be referred to as, “pretty”, “smart”, and “sane”, respectively.

    Take my interest triggers for example. There is physical attraction. That’s rather straight-forward (indicators of fertility and health). There’s also general attraction. This is what women refer to when they talk about being “attracted” to a person. Unlike physical attraction, which results in wanting to fuck someone, general attraction results in crushes (feminists mix up the two when they go on crusades against “Nice Guys ™” who “want sex”). Triggers for general attraction are harder to identify, but in my case include things like intelligence, shyness, good wit, glasses (the bigger the better), quirkiness, looking cute in a huggable way, to name a few. Finally, there is good personality. In my case, I’d want someone who is loyal, respectful, kind, not career-focused, and wants kids. Now I should note that because of this, Girl Game is not quite analogous to Guy Game because Girl Game seeks to make a girl’s personality more likable, whereas Guy Game seeks to make the guy more generally attractive. In the case of guys, one may refer to these different types of interest as “thinking with your dick”, “thinking with your subconscious”, and “thinking with your conscious mind”.

    Now many of us “nice guys” pride ourselves on not caring as much about looks, unlike other “shallow” guys. However, this pride may be misplaced. Unfortunately, as much as we would like to do so, it is near impossible to make our mating choices solely using our conscious mind. Nature demands a say in the process, and cannot be over-ridden so easily. Interest in someone requires a chemical attraction, not just a conscious decision. When this attraction is not provided by physical attraction, it happens due to general attraction.

    There are two problems with general attraction. First, general attraction is much more picky than physical attraction. Whereas perhaps 60% of the female population might be physically attractive to me, perhaps 10% of the female population will be generally attractive to me. This is a very selective filter and results in a small pool of women to then filter from for personality. Interestingly, women instinctively know this and thus don’t like men who offer commitment too early (i.e. men who have a crush on them). Second, general attraction often takes a long time to develop. This also limits the pool of women that make it through, and also wastes valuable time which should have been spent filtering for good personality. Women also instinctively know this and respond by friend-zoning guys who take too long to demonstrate interest. General attraction is a bad thing. It results in “nice guys” getting oneitis for unavailable or unsuitable girls. Guys need to seriously think about this. Who should you really be going after? The quirky girl that uses you like a doormat or the nice girl who wishes you’d let her be your doormat. Too many guys go for the former, when they should be going for the latter.

    This is an integral part of why players/cads/alpha douchebags are so successful. They use physical attraction rather than general attraction to satisfy the needs for chemical attraction. Thus, if and when they choose to get an LTR, they’re able to select from a very large pool of females they’re attracted to (and who in turn who don’t filter them out), and can thus filter aggressively for good personality.

    There is nothing that precludes restricted guys from adopting the same strategy. They too can excise the irrational and stupid influence of their subconscious by replacing general attraction with physical attraction. To put it bluntly, they should sexually objectify women. By focusing on physical attraction to women, nice guys will find a lot more women attractive and thus be able to be picky enough about good personality. Thus, guys should seek FWB-type relationships. Sure, as restricted guys, they might want to make the FWB arrangement permanent by getting married. But it should be viewed primarily as a sexual and platonic relationship, and only secondarily as an emotional relationship.

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

      This is an integral part of why players/cads/alpha douchebags are so successful. They use physical attraction rather than general attraction to satisfy the needs for chemical attraction.

      But a lot of those guys are actually not physically attractive. What they have is dominance and outcome independence.

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    This reminds me of the argument that my wife and I got into if we won the lottery.

    I wanted to use the money I won in the lottery to ultimately destroy the lottery system because it’s a tax on the stupid and results in massive chaotically random allocations of resources that are generally destructive to the lives of the recipients.

    How could anyone argue with that?

  • JP

    ” This is a very selective filter and results in a small pool of women to then filter from for personality. Interestingly, women instinctively know this and thus don’t like men who offer commitment too early (i.e. men who have a crush on them).”

    This doesn’t make any sense to me.

  • HanSolo

    @Bastiat

    That is an interesting question and response from the men about how things would change if they had the ability to get laid much more easily.

    I did this sort of thing where I did a phd in astronomy but then switched to business consulting, partially because I really like business and solving problems but also because it would make 2-3x as much money and I felt at the time it would help me find a wife.

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    ” This is a very selective filter and results in a small pool of women to then filter from for personality. Interestingly, women instinctively know this and thus don’t like men who offer commitment too early (i.e. men who have a crush on them).”

    This doesn’t make any sense to me.

    Whoops. What I meant was that this prevents significant filtering based on personality. I mean, if you only have a crush on one girl, you’re going to have to take accept her personality, even if it’s terrible and she treats you like crap. Thus, you’re likely to find yourself offering commitment without testing for good personality. Women pick up on this and run for the hills.

  • JP

    I’m at the point in my life where I wish that I did have a Ph.D. in astronomy.

    I really, really need to find a job that doesn’t involve legal writing.

  • HanSolo

    @JP

    You can change, you know. It might require making less money but you might be happier. Or save strongly for a few more years then make the change.

  • deti

    Sassy:

    “Any and all of my previous boyfriends have paid for the majority of expenses during the relationships. Some women may not tacitly request or demand such treatment, but I do.”

    What expenses are you talking about? Do you mean things like drinks, meals, nights out, vacations? Or are you talking about an expectation that he support you?

    And why do you expect that treatment? What does the outlay of money prove to you?

    Out of curiosity, at what point was the man putting out the money a “boyfriend”? Are you talking here about men you had sex with? Was he required to pay the relationship expenses before you would be willing to have sex? Was the payment of expenses required as a showing of good faith before you considered him worthy of sex?

    “I would be a little concerned if a guy didn’t offer to pay for some things while dating me. Call me a gold-digger, if you want, but I’ve never stated that I was above that title.”

    Hmm. That goes both ways. What does “dating” mean? You’re sexually involved? Not too many men I’ve heard of are going to shell out $$$ unless there’s attraction there and she’s responding to escalation.

  • Escoffier

    Well, first, Romney could not have been all that popular, since he declined to run for reelection because the numbers said he would lose.

    Second, that Romney the national Republican nominee was more conservative than Romney the Mass governor should not be surprising, given how far to the left the Mass electorate is compared to the Republican primary electorate. But the 2012 Romney was more centrist than the 2008 Romney. And, anyway, it’s not like the party dressed him as an ultra-con. He wasn’t really an ultra-con (whatever that is) and to the extent that he moved right, that was all his own doing. I will say that his campaign emphasised social issues not at all (unlike both Bush campaigns).

    And, finally, again, if the party had a makeover like the one you want to give it, its natural baseline share of the electorate would be around 25-30% rather than 45%. A huge wave of core supporters would leave and form a new party. R %s might go up marginally in Mass, NY and CA but not enough to win even those states, let alone nationally.

    The demographics for the party are horrible, maybe (likely insurmountable) but your proposal would destroy the party overnight.

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

      The demographics for the party are horrible, maybe (likely insurmountable) but your proposal would destroy the party overnight.

      I don’t have a proposal, just an observation that they are in deep trouble. Some sort of strategic changes will need to be made. I have zero ideas on how that gets accomplished.

  • deti

    Susan:

    The problem with conservatives and liberals is they have exaggerated and caricatured views of each other.

    To liberals, a conservative is a beer swilling, beater-pickup-truck driving, redneck hick shitkicker from the sticks who can’t string a cohesive sentence together, has two teeth, is armed with all sorts of firearms, and dumber than a bag of hammers.

    To conservatives, a liberal is a holier-than-thou, government-loving, I-know-better-than-you-dumb-hicks, Volvo-driving, tea-with-pinky-extended-drinking, Dom Perignon-drinking, brie-and-caviar and-escargot-eating, overeducated, nose-upturned snob from the East or West Coasts.

    The truth of course is somewhere in the middle.

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

      The truth of course is somewhere in the middle.

      Agreed. The caricatures do exist in the long tails of the distribution curve, but most people are somewhere in the middle.

  • Yolanda80

    The demographics for the party are horrible, maybe (likely insurmountable) but your proposal would destroy the party overnight.

    Escoffier you hit it right on target. About 40-50% of the entire story has to do with demographics (legal and illegal immigration). I don’t think some people can see this because they are insulated (some white liberals live in quite gentrified white dominated neighborhoods). And for truly for White liberals and some Asians it’s all about those pesky social issues.

    But this is coming to an end because Bloomberg is old, Feinstein is old, and this matters more to Baby Boomers and Generation X then the youngsters.

    For most young Blacks, Hispanics and some Asians it’s mostly about demographics, nice culture, immigration, being tribal and welfare. The whole feminism thing only creates more single mothers for them unfortunately (bad bad bad). Sure these newer single mothers only have 1-2 kids instead of more, but they’re still single. It didn’t alter the cause or heal it. It just tweaked a bit of the consequences (1-2 kids instead of 3-4 as a single mom).

  • INTJ

    Realized I should write a shortened version of my tl;dr post (#295). Basically, the old saying goes that you can get pretty, smart, and sane, pick two. Pick pretty and sane.

  • JP

    “As a Catholic, I’ve been offended by some of the seriously anti RC invective I’ve read, though I have realized for a long time that evangelicals do not consider Catholics saved Christians.”

    There’s nothing quite like Chick Publications. They were popular with the local Pentecostals when I was growing up. Quite fascinating stuff.

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

    “At least twenty Chick tracts have Catholicism as their subject or as a major theme, including Are Roman Catholics Christians?[13] (arguing that they are not), The Death Cookie[14](a polemic against the Catholic Eucharist), and Why is Mary Crying?[15] (arguing that Mary does not support the veneration given to her by Catholicism).[16]
    Chick also expounds his anti-Catholic views in several comics and other books, including defending the controversial Alberto Rivera.[17][18] Chick also asserts that the Catholic Church, in a grand conspiracy, created “Three Deadly Daughters,” namely Islam, Communism, and Nazism.[19]
    In The New Anti-Catholicism, religious historian Philip Jenkins describes Chick tracts as promulgating “bizarre allegations of Catholic conspiracy and sexual hypocrisy” to perpetuate “anti-papal and anti-Catholic mythologies”.[20] Michael Ian Borer, a sociology professor of Furman University at the time, described Chick’s strong anti-Catholic themes in a 2007 American Sociological Association presentation[21] and in a peer reviewed article the next year in Religion and American Culture.[22]
    Catholic Answers web published a response to the claims of Chick Publications against Roman Catholics and a criticism of Chick Tracts in general called The Nightmare World of Jack T. Chick,[23] detailing the inaccuracies, factual errors, and how a “typical tactic in Chick tracts is to portray Catholics as being unpleasant or revolting in various ways”.”

  • Yolanda80

    I think for young black/hispanic single mothers they have fewer kids. But they are still single. *sighs*

    Didn’t fix the problem. Just delayed some of the bigger consequences.

  • deti

    Any “christians” who suggest Roman Catholics are not or cannot be saved Christians are not themselves Christians and don’t even understand the nature of salvation.

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

      Any “christians” who suggest Roman Catholics are not or cannot be saved Christians

      They *can* be saved if they accept Jesus Christ into their hearts as the only true lord and savior. Problem is, we do that at baptism. We don’t hit the rail for salvation.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Hope#279,

    Just remember: swooping is bad.

    //never played it; my wife wrote one of the better-received fanfics for it

  • Russ in Texas

    @Bastiat#276,

    I’m surprised that so many men would restructure their lives for that. I’m a truly cynical bastard, but that’s the most depressing thing I’ve read all week.

  • JP

    “To the extent I am familiar with gun-toting evangelicals, it is from reading online.”

    To the extent I am familiar with gun-toting evangelicals, it is from living with them in college.

    Basically because they were the most sane of the people I knew and I was tired of living around wackadoos.

    I cared more that they were sane and sober than that they wanted to convert me.

  • Russ in Texas

    OTOH, from a philosophic perspective, Jacob may not be a loser but he is a wastrel and a hedonist. Leisure is necessary for the higher things in life but leisure in the service of, let’s face it, rather common or banal pleasures is not admirable, however harmless it may be in isolation and in the short run.

    Score.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    How does “B) LTR guys who are extremely concerned about female N and totally intolerant of any indication of casual sex in a woman’s past.” translate as “guys who want virgins”?

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

      How does “B) LTR guys who are extremely concerned about female N and totally intolerant of any indication of casual sex in a woman’s past.” translate as “guys who want virgins”?

      In my admittedly limited sample, those men are themselves virgins. If I am mistaken, I’m happy to stick with the original phrasing. The point still stands.

  • J

    And many of these white male ancestors, it turns out, were Irish.

    Not at all surprising. Most overseers were Irish; even before the pototato famine, they were coming here to escape the mess imposed by the British.

    @Esco

    Re: the Randolphs and/or the Carrs

    Jefferson was at Monticello each time Sallly Hemings conceived, and she never conceived when Jefferson was absent.

    @Marellus

    … dunno who Cyrano is

    Cyrano de Bergerac

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrano_de_Bergerac_(play)

  • JP

    “Any “christians” who suggest Roman Catholics are not or cannot be saved Christians are not themselves Christians and don’t even understand the nature of salvation.”

    I’m suspecting that the source of this animosity lies somewhere in the past.

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

  • deti

    Susan 308:

    The divide is more cultural than geographic.

    There are gun toting evangelicals in Massachusetts.

    There are cultural elitist snobs from Backwaterville, Kentucky.

    Your continued reference to “gun toting evangelicals” suggests you view such people as I outlined in my comment at 310: uneducated, uncultured, unrefined, and stupid. I think it’s unwarranted, frankly; and what you see online isn’t representative of Christian firearms enthusiasts.

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

      what you see online isn’t representative of Christian firearms enthusiasts.

      Really? Why not? I’m curious how the online community is non-representative.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Susan#304,

    Need to spend some more time in the south. While I know scores of the very same bigots you describe (and the “we hate RC” is definitely there), for each of them there is some guy or gal who is LASER-FOCUSED on “doing good,” and not worrying about the wherefores and whyfores. (it’s partially because of this that others, rightfully, object to the broad brush — it *tends* to be a form of yankee bigotry rather than being an informed opinion).

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

      Need to spend some more time in the south. While I know scores of the very same bigots you describe (and the “we hate RC” is definitely there), for each of them there is some guy or gal who is LASER-FOCUSED on “doing good,” and not worrying about the wherefores and whyfores.

      No doubt. As always, the squeaky wheel gets the press, e.g. Todd Akin. I have spent a fair amount of time in North Carolina, and my experience has been mixed, much as you describe.

      Obviously, fundamentalism is a dangerous thing in the world. Whether we’re talking about the Spanish Inquisition, KKK or jihad, violence in the name of religion is common.

  • Escoffier

    Susan, a person can be lazy without being a parasite. Jacob certainly sounds unambitious, perhaps even lazy, but there is no indication he is a parasite. By the little info we have, he seems to support himself.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    I’ve been teaching English to newly arrived Somalians, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Guatamalans, Ecuadorians, Dominicans, Haitians, Cape Verdeans, and Moroccans for more than 10 years.

    Ah fair enough. Then it would be nice to every once in a while see a post about the relationship troubles of these groups. Sure, the problems of millionaire HB9s and Vox Betas with highly lucrative careers in Boston are interesting and all, but these issues can sometimes be somewhat foreign for us ordinary folk.

    What have you got?

    Do you really have to ask? I was born to immigrants and nearly all my childhood and college friends have been immigrants or children of immigrants.

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

      Then it would be nice to every once in a while see a post about the relationship troubles of these groups.

      That is information I am not privy to. It would be extremely unprofessional for me to inquire about people’s relationships.

      Do you really have to ask? I was born to immigrants and nearly all my childhood and college friends have been immigrants or children of immigrants.

      Yes, intellectually elite immigrants. What do you know of the lower class, as you bounce between San Francisco and Austin?

  • Escoffier

    “greed, sloth, lust and gluttony”

    I don’t see this at all. You have the strongest case for sloth but even then, he works and supports himself, he just declines to do more than the minimum and has no ambition. That is not sloth.

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

      @Escoffier

      You don’t buy that Jacob is lustful?

      Sloth: Reluctance to work or make an effort; laziness. I think not liking a 40 hour workweek meets this standard.

      As for greed, he is clearly about taking rather than giving – he negotiates every concession for one of equal value according to the article. And he’s acknowledging that he’s becoming an asshole to women who are developing feelings for him. Perhaps that is lack of empathy, but I think you could argue that is related to greed.

      And gluttony – a harem of five women constitutes sexual gluttony. The general definition of a glutton is a “gormandizer.” A womanizer would be the sexual equivalent.

  • JP

    “Susan, a person can be lazy without being a parasite. Jacob certainly sounds unambitious, perhaps even lazy, but there is no indication he is a parasite. By the little info we have, he seems to support himself.”

    There are lots of people who are gainfully employed who are busy making the world a worse place.

    I would prefer that those people be parasites, which would represent an overall improvement in humanity.

  • JP

    “What 31 year old man does not want to work a 40 hour week? ”

    Most of them?

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

      “What 31 year old man does not want to work a 40 hour week? ”

      Most of them?

      That sounds like the “end of men” phenomenon.

  • JP

    “I don’t regret my casual experiences because I didn’t experience very negative consequences. If I had contracted an STD I would obviously regret them. Sure, the sex was meh, and I didn’t care to see the guys again, but it was also sort of interesting, and the seduction part was fun. I have never felt that those experiences saddled me with emotional baggage of any kind, nor have they interfered with my relationship with my husband.”

    So, how did you avoid feeling significant guilt for violating the moral order?

  • JP

    “I don’t have a proposal, just an observation that they are in deep trouble. Some sort of strategic changes will need to be made. I have zero ideas on how that gets accomplished.”

    No, they’re pretty much finished as a party because they have no ideas that will actually work.

    The next step is to see whether the nation fractures into parts in the 2020’s/2030’s when the potential entitlement/debt/world leadership crisis hits.

  • Russ in Texas

    @JP#339,

    It wouldn’t in Boston, where Susan is quite the moderate.

  • JP

    “”They *can* be saved if they accept Jesus Christ into their hearts as the only true lord and savior. Problem is, we do that at baptism. We don’t hit the rail for salvation.”

    I’ve toyed with the idea of becoming a married catholic priest.

    Which, as a Lutheran, it’s well within my power to accomplish.

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

      I’ve toyed with the idea of becoming a married catholic priest.

      Which, as a Lutheran, it’s well within my power to accomplish.

      Yes, that’s an interesting loophole.

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

    Susan, I understand what you are saying. I’m looking at it from the marketplace perspective of a male trying to “buy” sex from a female who wants commitment in exchange for granting sexual intimacy (I’m using “commitment” instead of “resource access” because the latter sounds too much like a john/prostitute negotiation).

    Allegedly, numerous attractive young women are giving Jacob regular and repeated access to sex for deep-bargain prices (in terms of the commitment level demanded prior to their agreeing to have sex with Jacob). He appears to have mediocre personal attributes, but who knows.

    I reasoned that the female equiv would a woman who was able to “sell” access to her sexuality at a very HIGH commitment price on our tidily abstract mating game exchange.

    I think that the tendency to laugh at Jacob and paint him as unsuitable for LTRs may distract us from the point that, for reasons that I admittedly don’t understand, he apparently is HIGHLY SUITABLE for STRs.

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

      I think that the tendency to laugh at Jacob and paint him as unsuitable for LTRs may distract us from the point that, for reasons that I admittedly don’t understand, he apparently is HIGHLY SUITABLE for STRs.

      Indeed. I can understand why men who want STRs would therefore view him as a role model, and women who want STRs would have sex with him right away.

  • Deli

    2 Susan
    //How is he contributing to the turning of the gears? We know that he “doesn’t think much” of a 40 hour workweek.

    Which signifies exactly what? He might be an owner of some low maintenance business, or an owner of some property he rents out, or an entertainer(singer, comedian – whatever) with unscheduled working week. Or maybe he is a professional blogger.

    May buddy worked on oil rigs in the middle of Siberia. No 40h work there. Another one is an entrepreneur – no 40h work.
    Different gigs – different rules.

    //Women are going to judge him as a loser for LTRs.
    Well, this is a different thing than just saying that he is a loser.
    You are saying, that an average woman would not want to sell her supply of “wife” to Jacob.
    Which is funny, because he is not buying either.

  • Escoffier

    “Obviously, fundamentalism is a dangerous thing in the world. Whether we’re talking about the Spanish Inquisition, KKK or jihad, violence in the name of religion is common.”

    OK, what examples can you cite of comparable outrages by Southern evangelicals (in the name of religion)? The KKK was not religious-based. That is, to the extent that it was anti-Catholic, it was out of ethnic and not theological concerns.

  • JP

    @Russ:

    “No, they’re pretty much finished as a party because they have no ideas that will actually work.”

    The Democrats don’t have any ideas that will actually work, either, but, unlike the Republicans, they don’t need ideas, rather, they just need to keep the status quo running as long as possible to remain in power.

  • Escoffier

    RE: Jacob.

    Susan, I don’t see how you, especially, can call him lustful. You approve of or at least will not condemn ONSs, and you have zero problem with serial monogamy, which is what Jacob does. He’s had LTRs that lasted years. In anyone else you would say A-OK. But when he does it, it’s lustful?

    RE: sloth, he works and supports himself. That’s not sloth. Lack of ambition and not realizing one’s potential is not sloth. It may be a shame or regretable but it’s not sloth.

    Greed? No. He seeks lucre only to the extent that he needs it support himself in minimal comfort. That’s the opposite of greed. He clearly cares little about money or material things.

    Gluttony is about food. You can’t conflate it with lust.

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

      @Escoffier

      I don’t think the old Jacob exhibited lust, but the new and improved Jacob does. I don’t see how you can deny it when he aims to have five sexual partners in rotation at a time.

      We do not know that Jacob supports himself. All the article says is that he doesn’t prioritize full-time work or a good credit score, and that he is irresponsible with money. If anything, he sounds like someone who’s maxed out his credit cards. I stand by sloth.

      His greed is not of the material variety – he wants a woman who asks little of him, but he is unwilling to wait for sex even with someone he sees a potential gf.

      Gluttony is about food. You can’t conflate it with lust.

      OK.

      The point is, this dude is not marriageable. He is an unsuitable choice for a relationship.

  • JP

    “That sounds like the “end of men” phenomenon.”

    Most work is stressful, boring, unpleasant to experience, and puts you in a bad mood, so it makes sense that people would want to avoid it.

  • HanSolo

    Susan

    http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/1-in-3-female-online-daters-report-first-date-sex-1528231.php

    Actually it’s 30% and it doesn’t say whether it’s sex on every first date (unlikely) or just ever (more likely). Compared to the 2004 ABC survey (when online dating wasn’t as big yet) that says 42% of men and 17% of women have had sex on a first date (with the usual underestimate of women and overestimate of men to bring the numbers more in line) then it doesn’t seem so far away from people that meet in other ways having sex on a first date.

  • Joe

    @Susan

    We don’t hit the rail for salvation.

    I was going to respond Deti’s post too, and all the others that on the topic, Susan. So you know where I’m coming from, I’m RC too, and more outspokenly so every day. But it’s not in our tradition to proselytize.

    I must say, your experience is different than mine, and certainly, evangelical != Pentecostal != Protestant. Although I live on the east coast now, my roots are mid-western, and I’m comfortable around most all denominations, including Mormon. That, despite a Catholic grammar-school and Catholic university education.

    Not once have I been attacked, even on-line, for my religion. Perhaps I’ve been lucky that way. I have been attacked for being conservative and for not believing in Michael Mann’s Hockey Stick.

    But let’s say you’re right. Let’s say, for the point of argument, that rampant anti-Catholic bigotry is out there. It very well might be. My question then becomes, what’s the response?

    Basically, I have never met a fundamentalist of any stripe I could relate to or respect.

    Is this the way we supposed to react? It may be okay for you, but “could not…respect” it’s not in my comfort zone.

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

      @Joe

      Is this the way we supposed to react? It may be okay for you, but “could not…respect” it’s not in my comfort zone.

      I am willing to accord respect to every individual I meet, and will withdraw it only if I feel that is merited. Personally, I have witnessed much hypocrisy around religion and have found fundamentalists of all stripes very difficult to communicate with. Indeed, the most common experience I have had is to be judged and found wanting precisely because I did not participate in the “right” traditions and practices. I have had this experience with people of varying religions, including secular “religions” like environmental activism.

      If I met a fundamentalist who came across as open minded and non-judgmental, I would certainly respect them and their choices.

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

    Re: 40-hour workweek. Well, Jacob is not alone on this—I run into it with my students all the time now. Running on parallel tracks to the PUA movement is the popular Tim Ferriss school of “lifestyle design” which believes that working like a dog for years (especially for someone else) and then having a retirement at the end when your physicality has sharply declined is a generally bad move from the standpoints of both real-time happiness and end-of-life regrets. It’s seen as a sucker’s game, perhaps even a kind of slavery.

    Ferriss and others of his ilk emphasizes a kind of technology-enabled, lifehacker, minimalist-footprint, low-baggage, Gap Year backpacker mentality in which a person’s career is punctuated by several multi-month “mini-retirements” in which you would go do interesting things and practice new skills, preferably in some exotic part(s) of the world.

    Once again, some of this may have been enabled by feminists managing to change the deep incentive structure for young males. In Baumeister’s construct, a young man would overwork/underconsume to provide an economic surplus because the young woman next to him did not have the same access to schooling and good jobs. This has all changed, and working hard because you have to is different from working hard because someone else wants the option to not have to work (which may be unfair but is how a lot of this is being perceived).

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

      Ferriss and others of his ilk emphasizes a kind of technology-enabled, lifehacker, minimalist-footprint, low-baggage, Gap Year backpacker mentality in which a person’s career is punctuated by several multi-month “mini-retirements” in which you would go do interesting things and practice new skills, preferably in some exotic part(s) of the world.

      Well, first it should be noted that Ferris works 100 hours a week. The promotion of the endless Walkabout lifestyle is real – Chris Guillebeau is perhaps the best known of these guys, and he made his money selling stuff on ebay. There are a couple of PUA/Game bloggers who have done this as well – Mark Manson, Nomadic Neill, Frost. I don’t think the numbers will ever swell much, though. It’s a fantasy in the way that Martha Stewart’s Holiday Extravaganzas are fantasies. We love to read about it and check out the pics, but very few take the leap and do the work.

      Obviously, by definition these peripatetic fellows are not available for relationships. Certainly Manson and Frost never were – both have confessed to extensive cheating and a strong preference to avoid monogamy.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    The thing is that if even a third (or whatever number) are going for the douches, slackers and badboys (and even marrying some of them) then it is creating more demand than in the past for douches, slackers and badboys. And since by and large men respond to what women want, that is creating a problem for those that would like assortive and stable marriages to occur.

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

      The thing is that if even a third (or whatever number) are going for the douches, slackers and badboys (and even marrying some of them) then it is creating more demand than in the past for douches, slackers and badboys. And since by and large men respond to what women want, that is creating a problem for those that would like assortive and stable marriages to occur.

      Agreed. That’s exactly what we’re seeing on college campuses as well. The culture of casual sex is taking over, even though the people pursuing it represent 15-30% of the total. The good news is that by all accounts, both online and in college, many people are finding relationship partners. But it’s definitely far from ideal, and this kind of article is just going to increase the number of aspiring Jacobs.

  • pvw

    @ Susan 298:

    @Escoffier

    Your analysis of me and my views is STEEL ON TARGET. I suspect you would be surprised at how conservative I am on reproductive issues, though not to the point where I am opposed to premarital sex. However, it pains me to consider myself as even remotely aligned with people like Todd Akin or Richard Mourdock. Also, I am not opposed to gender equity feminism. I do oppose what I see as an agenda of female supremacy by misandrists. And of course, I vehemently oppose sex positive feminism. I am liberal on same sex issues. Liberal on gun control. Worried about climate change. I am very conservative about foreign policy. I consider myself an independent.

    Me: I almost laughed out loud when I read this, as I was in a location that would be totally anomalous for me as a blue stater and an academic–a class on firearm safety as Mr. PVW and I are starting a new hobby: recreational gun use (for target practice–we live in a very safe area) and I don’t have a license, although I have handled guns before when he and I visited the in-laws, who got us hooked on this new hobby interest (shooting semi automatic rifles, handguns and shotguns). All of them grew up handling guns as they hunted for fun in Canada and northern New England. But I’m definitely more to the right than the typical blue stater–I’m a middle of the road (politically moderate, similar to you) married woman of color, Mainline Protestant.

    Our state is one where guns are highly regulated, all sorts of hoops, which pisses off Mr. PVW, as he spent years in the military handling all sorts of firearms, before he went to college.

    He was quite proud of me, that I was able to tell the instructor that I had already learned basic firearm safety, and had experience shooting. None of my shots went wild. My target sheet looks kind of nice, I must say….Too cool for words!

  • Escoffier

    I totally agree that he’s not marriageable but that’s a seperate question from his overall goodness/badness. I don’t find him to be very good either, but I also don’t find him to be very bad.

    He’s the kind of person who on an individual level is negligible, neither harmful nor helpful, certainly not admirable, perhaps contemptible but not despicable either.

    However, extrapolate “Jacob” to an entire generation or to society at large and suddenly we have a huge problem.

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

      However, extrapolate “Jacob” to an entire generation or to society at large and suddenly we have a huge problem.

      Exactly, and that is what Slater is claiming. Personally, I feel justified in engaging in Jacob-shaming. The last thing this guy should be getting is high 5s.

  • Escoffier

    “in the way that Martha Stewart’s Holiday Extravaganzas are fantasies”

    I guess this reveals my estrogen levels but I routinely cook 6-7 course meals for dinner parties. Doesn’t even have to be a holiday! next one, Jan 19th, 1/2 lb of black truffle for that one …

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

      @Escoffier

      I guess this reveals my estrogen levels but I routinely cook 6-7 course meals for dinner parties. Doesn’t even have to be a holiday! next one, Jan 19th, 1/2 lb of black truffle for that one …

      And I bet invitations to your home are highly sought after!

      But I bet you don’t craft and calligraphy place cards, have a centerpiece of 5 dozen roses, transform your dining room into a winter wonderland complete with lifesize Steiff woodland creatures and display your collection of colonial era salt cellars.

  • HanSolo

    Drive and industriousness are key female attraction cues. This guy must have low occupational status. What 31 year old man does not want to work a 40 hour week? Women are going to judge him as a loser for LTRs.

    Telling me to be industriousness isn’t going to make them do that. That’s the whole man-up campaign. Men respond much more to what it takes to get women. Since women are giving him sex and medium-term relationships he sounds like he’s getting what he wants. Your efforts would be better placed on altering the direction of the female herd (get them to value providers more than they currently are) so that men will follow where the herd goes.

    Also, you’re extrapolating a bit much saying that he’s not working enough. He may or may not work 40 hrs/wk…maybe he does and just doesn’t like it, or maybe he doesn’t. Anyway, too little info.

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

      Your efforts would be better placed on altering the direction of the female herd (get them to value providers more than they currently are) so that men will follow where the herd goes.

      That is where my efforts are placed. I have no desire or opportunity to speak to the Jacobs of the world. I’d rather spend my time revealing the Jacobs for what they are, which is terrible prospects for future life satisfaction and happiness. Branding Jacob a loser isn’t meant to affect Jacob, it’s meant to inform young women.

      Anyway, too little info.

      Indeed. There’s been way too much extrapolation about Jacob, most of it projection and guesswork.

      As I said in the post, Jacob was the “fun part” – a diversion. I’m far more interested in the direction of the online dating industry and the impact of technology on the paradox of choice and the long-term effect on relationships and commitment.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    But a lot of those guys are actually not physically attractive. What they have is dominance and outcome independence.

    Jesus Christ this is an example of how I’m a bad writer. I didn’t mean women get attracted to those guys because of physical looks. I meant those guys get attracted to women because of physical looks. In contrast to restricted guys who tend to get attracted to women because of personality quirks or what-not.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    That sounds like the “end of men” phenomenon.

    Teapot calling the kettle black – considering that 84% of women view staying-at-home as a luxury they would want.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    In my admittedly limited sample, those men are themselves virgins. If I am mistaken, I’m happy to stick with the original phrasing. The point still stands.

    I’m one of those men, and I’m a virgin. But I don’t consider N>0 a problem by any stretch of the imagination. I do, however view anything above low single digit N or instances of casual sex a major red flag. So yes, the original phrasing is much more applicable than “men who want virgins”.

  • Ramble

    Most men that I have had this discussion with, though not all, would have structured their lives differently if they had this super-power. For one thing, the general tolerance for office politics, toxic bosses and co-workers, boredom/tedium, etc. goes way, way down. A surprising number of guys who are heavily invested in professional careers will state that they would have pursued eccentric, less-commercial, greater “work-life balance” paths—diving instructor, surfer, hunting guide, wildlife photographer, painter, amateur fighter, military—if they had been given this level of control over sexual access.

    This is especially interesting since many of those “careers” would have made them attractive to a large set of women.

  • JP

    “Teapot calling the kettle black – considering that 84% of women view staying-at-home as a luxury they would want.”

    Somebody has to raise the kids, so it’s hardly a luxury.

    Preferably somebody with actually skill with children, which is somebody other than me.

  • JP

    “diving instructor, surfer, hunting guide, wildlife photographer, painter, amateur fighter, military”

    Those “careers” sound worse than practicing law.

  • Ramble

    Susan Walsh January 5, 2013 at 5:18 pm

    LOOK AT WHAT WOMEN DO. NOT WHAT THEY SAY.

    EQUALLY TRUE FOR MEN.

    Yes, but, in general, or, at least, IME, Men tend to be much more aware and honest of what they want than girls are.

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

      @Ramble

      Yes, but, in general, or, at least, IME, Men tend to be much more aware and honest of what they want than girls are.

      I think you are right that men are more self-aware, owing to their far simpler set of attraction cues. I think they’re also much more likely to be dishonest with women to get what they want, i.e. the cad.

  • Tasmin

    @OfftheCuff, et. al
    Jacob may not be a “bad” person and perhaps not even a POS, but my point is that this character was selected for a reason and we should be suspicious of that. The article is suggesting a relationship between online dating and the changing (SMP) environment, expectations, etc. impacting LTR/Marriage. While I am no defender of online dating, I found it to be curious that the character selected to illustrate these changes – these altered views, challenges, and impediments to “success” in terms of LTR/Marriage comes across as some kind of soft, trust-funded, self-absorbed hedonist with a juvenile (at best) view of relationships.

    He “wants” or is willing to engage in a “relationship” and maybe he isn’t running asshole game, but that doesn’t mean he isn’t a POS. His problem isn’t online dating, it is himself. Once again we have some argument about these external conditions that help us rationalize behaviors and continue the discourse off in a direction about a byproduct disguised as a cause. Its online dating! Its not Jacob’s fault, he’s a victim. OR maybe he is empowered and just trying to find a good fit for what he is entitled to… You see, we either debate the machine or we debate his lifestyle, but we dare not ask why he might be portrayed as “normal” or “representative” or why he is even relevant to the discussion that should be happening.

    Either way we won’t have a conversation about character or the values of a relationship or the real work it takes or the fact that it requires giving and not taking, etc. Our culture has devalued such things to the point where we desensitized to egregious deficits right in front of us. That should be part of the discussion. But we can’t call his character into question because relationships are not about that, they are about a marketplace or a forum or the media or whatever.

    The “story” is about how “online romance is threatening monogamy” – yet we are immediately introduced to a character that is admittedly bad at attaining, maintaining, and even exiting relationships and demonstrates very little in term of characteristics or behavior patterns typically in demand for LTR/Marriage. But aren’t we supposed to also assume that monogamy=relationship? So what’s the real message? Are we concerned about the destabilization of serial/ST monogamy or LTR/Marriage or is there a difference anymore?

    Either Jacob is meant to be representative of men today or he is an outlier. Being that he is the only character chosen, it is either really bad writing or purposeful manipulation of how we are to frame the discussion. Are we supposed to see a relationship-oriented man that found internet dating and now doubts his ability/willingness to engage in a LTR because he is getting sex and endless options via his online profile? I guess thats not what I saw.

    Online dating isn’t a CAUSE, it is a RESPONSE. These companies didn’t create the SMP, they are feeding off of it. They are the beneficiaries of 30 years of feminist and consumerist cultural indoctrination, call it pre-marketing to generations of new consumers. The message has already been absorbed and put into action, the algorithms and interfaces and branding are responding to an SMP that demands the commoditized imagery of the opposing sex and the immediate, proximate, and eternally available err disposable relationship model. Why do they demand these things? where is this coming from? The question isn’t if online dating is threatening monogamy, it is why we have a culture that demands such an interface, how/why we have chosen to distill the opposing sex into bit-players in movies of our lives starring US.

    Jacob doesn’t want a relationship; he wants a sex toy that likes the Packers and wont bust his balls about his bar hopping or his meandering career ambitions. The computers may be able to create that – find versions of that woman for him in those specific moments of his life, even modifying according to his preferences over time, but thats not the computers ruining his chances at LTR/Monogamy, thats Jacob never having to do anything but be Jacob, for the low-low price of $15 a month. Its not just about him being a POS or not, it is the fact that the story both shoves him in our face and ignores him, all while wanting us to believe the “it” is about online dating harming monogamy – whatever that means.

    The sense of urgency and pre-qualifying that happens may indeed expedite and further propel people into meaningless sex or optionality paralysis, but the interesting questions aren’t about whether or not Jacob’s (and all he is meant to represent) chances at a LTR/Marriage are being helped or hurt by online dating, the interesting questions are the ones not being asked.

    Reminds me of the fiscal cliff. Wow, that was close! Just don’t mention that we are all complicit in the fact that as a nation we bring in $2.5T in revenue and spend $3.6T. I know, TV is making you fat again.

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

      @Tasmin

      While I am no defender of online dating, I found it to be curious that the character selected to illustrate these changes – these altered views, challenges, and impediments to “success” in terms of LTR/Marriage comes across as some kind of soft, trust-funded, self-absorbed hedonist with a juvenile (at best) view of relationships.

      …You see, we either debate the machine or we debate his lifestyle, but we dare not ask why he might be portrayed as “normal” or “representative” or why he is even relevant to the discussion that should be happening.

      Thank you, I’ve been trying to say this (rather poorly, it seems) from the start. This is the main point of Madrigal’s article. Slater wrote a fluff piece with highly questionable sources and drew some unreasonable conclusions using Jacob as a poster boy. His research appears limited to quotes from founders of dating sites and one feckless repeat customer who never was marriage material, and is unsurprisingly still not after signing up for Match.

      The question isn’t if online dating is threatening monogamy, it is why we have a culture that demands such an interface, how/why we have chosen to distill the opposing sex into bit-players in movies of our lives starring US.

      Great point. I just saw that Twenge’s annual research survey of narcissism in college students is out, and it continues to reveal very, very troubling developments in the rapid increase of narcissistic attitudes. Most interesting is the finding that students rate themselves more highly than in the past, even as their skills are much weaker than past students. So in 1950, say, we have a brilliant writer or engineer who is modest about his or her accomplishments and aptitude, and today we have a mediocre sociology major who expects to be famous one day. I’ll post about it soon.

  • Ramble

    The female equivalent would be a woman who is an utter failure at what is most important to men and not wife material.

    No, you are confusing the two. Marriage is the ultimate goal for (most) women. It is not the ultimate goal for most men, even though it can be very rewarding and enjoyable.

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

      Marriage is the ultimate goal for (most) women. It is not the ultimate goal for most men, even though it can be very rewarding and enjoyable.

      I believe that roughly equal numbers of men and women prioritize marriage and cite it as a “very important life goal.” David Buss discusses this issue in the book on the Evolution of Desire. He says the question of why men want to marry is a puzzle, but that men have indeed evolved to seek and foster long-term pair bonding.

      “Why men marry poses a puzzle. Casual sex without commitment would have sufficed if all he needed was to reproduce. So there must have been powerful adaptive advantages to committing years of investment to a woman.

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

      A second possibility is that infants and young were more likely to die without the prolonged investment from two parents or related kin. Even children who survived without a father would have suffered from the absence of his teaching and political alliances. Fathers often have a strong hand in arranging beneficial marriages for offspring – so children without fathers would be hurt. This gave an advantage to men who married.”

  • Ramble

    What 31 year old man does not want to work a 40 hour week?

    This one.

    .
    .
    .

    (I am picking a nit, so, feel free to ignore.)

    It seems that most men (and, possibly, girls as well) would prefer to either work 110 hours per week, or 0.

    I am outta here so if anyone is interested, maybe I will explain more tomorrow.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “And he’s hiding the fact that he’s seeing other people, apparently, as he silences his texts.”

    Well, I silence my texts too. That might be courtesy, not hiding. Remember it’s ethical to parallel date, don’t ask don’t tell, until the least interested party asks, right?

    Sue: “(Note: the fact that he doesn’t have his phone on silent during dates is enough of a reason to call him a shit.)”

    Then most women count as shits…

    Sue: “I’ve been teaching English to newly arrived Somalians, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Guatamalans, Ecuadorians, Dominicans, Haitians, Cape Verdeans, and Moroccans for more than 10 years.”

    Are any of them your friends? How many of them come to dinner every week?

    Sue: “The point is, this dude is not marriageable. He is an unsuitable choice for a relationship.”

    This is like saying, wow, you’re unsuitable for hard labor, you’re only suitable for sitting on the beach, sipping Mai-Tais.

    So? He doesn’t want marriage, and he has enough relationships of they type he wants to get his fill. Is he supposed to feel sad or something? Are women rejecting his marriage proposals?

    The current incentives create men like Jacob. This is not a problem for Jacob, as much as you try.

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

      @OTC

      Well, I silence my texts too. That might be courtesy, not hiding. Remember it’s ethical to parallel date, don’t ask don’t tell, until the least interested party asks, right?

      From the article:

      He likes the pharmacist most. She’s a girlfriend prospect. The problem is that she wants to take things slow on the physical side. He worries that, with so many alternatives available, he won’t be willing to wait.

      One night the paralegal confides in him: her prior relationships haven’t gone well, but Jacob gives her hope; all she needs in a relationship is honesty. And he thinks, Oh my God. He wants to be a nice guy, but he knows that sooner or later he’s going to start coming across as a serious asshole. While out with one woman, he has to silence text messages coming in from others. He needs to start paring down the number of women he’s seeing.

      He’s already a cad. The paralegal wants a relationship with him, she has escalated emotionally, made herself vulnerable, and his response is to plan his escape, but not yet. He’ll be coming across as a serious asshole, because he is one. It’s just that she doesn’t know it yet.

      Sue: “(Note: the fact that he doesn’t have his phone on silent during dates is enough of a reason to call him a shit.)”

      Then most women count as shits…

      What is your source for this claim? FTR, anyone who leaves their phone on to ping ping during a date is a shit. I imagine Jacob likes the preselection it connotes – “His phone was blowing up all night!” Little bit of dread action there.

      This is like saying, wow, you’re unsuitable for hard labor, you’re only suitable for sitting on the beach, sipping Mai-Tais…This is not a problem for Jacob, as much as you try.

      Haha, well as I stated above, I’m not interested in talking to Jacob. My job is to observe that men like him are unworthy of quality women.

      He doesn’t want marriage, and he has enough relationships of they type he wants to get his fill. Is he supposed to feel sad or something? Are women rejecting his marriage proposals?

      Actually, if you read the article, he does have a history of feeling sad about relationships. He isn’t good at them, his girlfriends are generally unhappy with them, and he has avoided confrontation in hopes they’ll stick around. He states that the good thing about online dating is knowing that he doesn’t have to be alone, because after he gets dumped he can return to the well.

      He also DQ’d his ex (though he didn’t leave her) because she was unsuitable for marriage and his parents are pressuring him. I’m fairly certain that Jacob would say he definitely wants marriage and kids someday.

  • INTJ

    Take 2, with some ambiguities cleared up:

    So I think I’ve sorted out a lot of things about attraction now. There are three types of criteria that determine a person’s romantic interest in another person. These are physical attraction, general attraction, and good personality. Roughly speaking, these can also be referred to as, “pretty”, “smart”, and “sane”, respectively.

    Take my interest triggers for example. There is physical attraction. That’s rather straight-forward (indicators of fertility and health). There’s also general attraction. This is what women refer to when they talk about being “attracted” to a person. Unlike physical attraction, which results in wanting to fuck someone, general attraction results in crushes (feminists mix up the two when they go on crusades against “Nice Guys ™” who “want sex”). Triggers for general attraction are harder to identify, but in my case things that will make me attracted to a girl include intelligence, shyness, good wit, glasses (the bigger the better), quirkiness, looking cute in a huggable way, to name a few. Finally, there is good personality. In my case, I’d want someone who is loyal, respectful, kind, not career-focused, and wants kids. Now I should note that because of this, Girl Game is not quite analogous to Guy Game because Girl Game seeks to make a girl’s personality more likable, whereas Guy Game seeks to make the guy more generally attractive. In the case of guys, one may refer to these different types of interest as “thinking with your dick”, “thinking with your subconscious”, and “thinking with your conscious mind”.

    Now many of us “nice guys” pride ourselves on not caring as much about looks, unlike other “shallow” guys. However, this pride may be misplaced. Unfortunately, as much as we would like to do so, it is near impossible to make our mating choices solely using our conscious mind. Nature demands a say in the process, and cannot be over-ridden so easily. Interest in someone requires a chemical attraction, not just a conscious decision. When this attraction is not provided by physical attraction, it happens due to general attraction.

    There are two problems with general attraction. First, general attraction is much more picky than physical attraction. Whereas perhaps 60% of the female population might be physically attractive to me, perhaps 10% of the female population will be generally attractive to me. This is a very selective filter and results in a small pool of women to then filter from for personality. It often results in guys quickly offering commitment to the one woman they do find attractive – before they have had a chance to filter for good personality. Interestingly, women instinctively know this and thus don’t like men who offer commitment too early (i.e. men who have a crush on them). Second, general attraction often takes a long time to develop. This also limits the pool of women that make it through, and also wastes valuable time which should have been spent filtering for good personality. Women also instinctively know this and respond by friend-zoning guys who take too long to demonstrate interest. General attraction is a bad thing. It results in “nice guys” getting oneitis for unavailable or unsuitable girls. Guys need to seriously think about this. Who should you really be going after? The quirky girl that uses you like a doormat or the nice girl who wishes you’d let her be your doormat. Too many guys go for the former, when they should be going for the latter.

    This is an integral part of why players/cads/alpha douchebags are so successful. They use physical attraction rather than general attraction to satisfy their needs for chemical attraction. Thus, if and when they choose to get an LTR, they’re able to select from a very large pool of females thet they find attractive (and who in turn who don’t filter them out), and can thus filter aggressively for good personality.

    There is nothing that precludes restricted guys from adopting the same strategy. They too can excise the irrational and stupid influence of their subconscious by replacing general attraction with physical attraction. To put it bluntly, they should sexually objectify women. By focusing on physical attraction towards women, nice guys will find a lot more women attractive and thus be able to be picky enough about good personality. Thus, guys should seek FWB-type relationships. Sure, as restricted guys, they might want to make the FWB arrangement permanent by getting married. But it should be viewed primarily as a sexual and platonic relationship, and only secondarily as an emotional relationship.

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    Can’t wait till you drop by. Take a look at my post #380 when you do. I’m curious to hear your take on it.

  • OffTheCuff

    Hell, I’d rather not HAVE to work 40 hours until I die to survive and support my family at our current standard of living. Easy.

    I’d rather work on projects that interest me, when it pleases me, regardless of how much money it earns, and then take as much damn time off as I please with my friends and family to see the world. I’d write and play more music, I’d bartend, I’d be a projectionist again, I would work on interesting open-source software projects, do some short term contract work of high-performance computing project. It would probably wind up being 4 or 5 months of full-time work per year. Paradise.

  • INTJ

    @ OTC

    Hell, I’d rather not HAVE to work 40 hours until I die to survive and support my family at our current standard of living. Easy.

    I’d rather work on projects that interest me, when it pleases me, regardless of how much money it earns, and then take as much damn time off as I please with my friends and family to see the world. I’d write and play more music, I’d bartend, I’d be a projectionist again, I would work on interesting open-source software projects, do some short term contract work of high-performance computing project. It would probably wind up being 4 or 5 months of full-time work per year. Paradise.

    Apparently we’re all despicable lazybums like Jacob who should be looked down upon as useless losers.

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

      Apparently we’re all despicable lazybums like Jacob who should be looked down upon as useless losers.

      It’s not a value judgment. It’s simply a matter of fact that work ethic is extremely important to women, as is occupational status. And it’s not just women who judge lazy men. Trust fund types who opt not to work or be productive in any way have always been disdained by society.

      The problem with OTC’s fantasy is that the family man and the bartender at the Jamaican resort cannot be the same man. Even if he won the lottery, that would be true.

      From a female POV, the woman who wants to marry and have a family must screen for men who are highly motivated to create and produce something other than mai tais.

  • Cooper

    @INTJ

    Interesting.

  • JP

    “First, general attraction is much more picky than physical attraction. Whereas perhaps 60% of the female population might be physically attractive to me, perhaps 10% of the female population will be generally attractive to me. This is a very selective filter and results in a small pool of women to then filter from for personality.”

    I think that about 0.1% of the female popuation is generally attractive to me.

    Perhaps less. There are only three girls who spring to my mind who I actually really wanted to date.

    Normally, I could only find one every couple of years growing up.

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

    The Democrats don’t have any ideas that will actually work, either, but, unlike the Republicans, they don’t need ideas, rather, they just need to keep the status quo running as long as possible to remain in power.

    You’re all missing it: The Republicans will have its victory by merely existing. As the demographics of the whites in the US deteriorate, you will see a trickle of Dem-whites heading to that great white laager, which is the Republican Party.

    It’s not about squabbles over privileges; it’s about power.

    It has always been about power.

    And when the white population realizes, truly realizes, what the horror of political irrelevance really means, that trickle will become a flood.

    So the Republicans will have spectacular victories.

    And more like as not the Republicans will try to appease the minorities by giving them areas where they can govern themselves as they please.

    But this will not work, because of the migration of minority males to white areas where there is greater economic opportunities.

    And their movements will be curtailed, they will have no access to women, and more like as not, will face discrimination at work as well.

    This is a witch’s brew for conflict.

    Why can I say this ?

    It has happened before.

    In 1948 the National Party gained power by hijacking the Afrikaner vote, with the loser being the United Party who represented South Africa’s white English speakers.

    There had been, up to then, bitter animosity between the two groups because of the Boer War.

    But by the 1960’s the National Party had captured the English Vote as well, because the National Party was seen as more pro-white than the United Party.

    Why ? (British Prime Minister) Harold Macmillan gave his famous Winds of Change speech in Cape Town :

    The wind of change is blowing through this continent. Whether we like it or not, this growth of national consciousness is a political fact ……… As a fellow member of the Commonwealth it is our earnest desire to give South Africa our support and encouragement, but I hope you won’t mind my saying frankly, that there are some aspects of your policies ,which make it impossible for us to do this, without being false to our own deep convictions about the political destinies of free men, to which in our own territories we are trying to give effect.

    … and Dr Verwoerd’s reply seduced the English South Africans away from all fealty to the old country :

    The tendency in Africa for nations to become independent, and at the same time to do justice to all, does not only mean being just to the black man of Africa, but also to be just to the white man of Africa …

    We set up a country bare, and the Bantu came in this country and settled certain portions for themselves, and it is in line with the thinking of Africa, to grant those fullest rights, which we also with you admit, all people should have, and believe providing those rights for those people in the fullest degree, in that part of southern Africa which their forefathers found for themselves, and settled in.

    But similarly, we believe in balance, we believe in allowing exactly those same full opportunities, to remain within the grasp of the white man, who has made all this possible.

    (Heady words isn’t it ? It’s coming to the US.)

    So, former enemies, the Afrikaners and (most of) the English South Africans, voted for the National Party, who tried to allay Black Nationalism by that grand buggerup called Apardheid.

    And something similar is coming to the US. Which means there will be conflict as well.

    I hope for your sake, that your country will deliver an Afro-Hispanic of the stature of Nelson Mandela to put a stop to this.

  • JP

    “You’re all missing it: The Republicans will have its victory by merely existing. As the demographics of the whites in the US deteriorate, you will see a trickle of Dem-whites heading to that great white laager, which is the Republican Party.”

    I think you are missing the entire North-South cultural conflict here.

    No way are the Southern conservative whites going to joing with the liberal Northern whites.

    Ever.

  • Escoffier

    Gee, that all worked out really well for the UK, didn’t it …

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    I think that about 0.1% of the female popuation is generally attractive to me.

    Perhaps less. There are only three girls who spring to my mind who I actually really wanted to date.

    Normally, I could only find one every couple of years growing up.

    Yup. I was being very conservative with that estimate.

  • INTJ

    @ Cooper

    Hehe. Any thoughts?

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    ” I am very conservative about foreign policy. ”

    What does that mean? Pro or anti war and nosy meddling into the business of sovereign nations?

    What about drugs? Funny because cons would be “liberal” on that, right? Meaning Big Gov keeps drugs illegal and throws people in jail for making an honest living off of them. While the traditional liberals would be conservative on that issue? Meaning less government control?

    This is why liberal and conservative virtually don’t mean anything.

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

      What does that mean? Pro or anti war and nosy meddling into the business of sovereign nations?

      It means no apology tours.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    deti January 5, 2013 at 10:43 am

    “Suburbian whites, conservative, often gun owners and or christians, etc. They were also the most ignorant about the rest of the world, and also the most agressively patriotic…

    LOL, that’s the manosphere.”

    I call bullshit. Susan, you do realize, don’t you, that these men are the manly men so many women keep saying they want? You sound like Obama: “people get bitter, clinging to their guns and religion”.

    Congratulations. Your divorce from the manosphere is now complete. You might as well have hoisted your middle finger at the men you say you want your focus groupers to get with. You’ve lost my support with this left hook to Middle America.”

    deti, I don’t think the majority of Susan’s commenters identify as Christians, and I doubt the majority owns guns.

    It appears you have simply done what most humans do, assume that your values and way of life are the same as those you come in contact with.

    By the way, you might be interested to learn that most of middle American doesn’t identify as Christian either, nor do the majority of us own guns, though we may not be completely opposed to gun ownership under certain circumstance.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “In SE Asia, the ratio of super hot is much greater than in the West and they are so doe eyed ga ga.”

    Well yeah, greater than in the US anyway, where most men are fat and horribly out of shape. But European men aren’t as bad. SE Asian and European men have culture and are interesting to talk to too. Plus those adorable accents.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    JP January 5, 2013 at 12:31 pm

    “Had to google HBD too. Wish I hadn’t. And how are these guys making headway onto relationship oriented sites?”

    I thought that the HBD people were the same people as the manosphere people.

    Which generally makes them non-evangelical, non-religious scientifiic materialists.”

    Yeah, no way would evangelicals accept “EVOLUTIONnary psychology”.
    And if any of them are trying to cite it, that means they don’t believe in CREATIONary psychology.

  • HanSolo

    Agreed. That’s exactly what we’re seeing on college campuses as well. The culture of casual sex is taking over, even though the people pursuing it represent 15-30% of the total. The good news is that by all accounts, both online and in college, many people are finding relationship partners. But it’s definitely far from ideal, and this kind of article is just going to increase the number of aspiring Jacobs.

    We agree on that. I think, though, that focusing directly on the men will not yield the biggest results. I think that culture needs to realize that men are in large part responding (belatedly) to the changes that women have been doing. I sincerely think that instead of a bunch of man-up campaigns and articles that women are going to have to look in the mirror and decide if they want marriages or they want hookups and STRs. Because, they are somewhat at odds and a lot of men will take the easy route and others that are frustrated will just go their own way. I hate to say it but the ball is really in the women’s court on this one. Trying to help men and or shame them into not being slackers and players may have some effects around the margins but it’s not where the low-lying fruit is.

    Maybe that makes men sound like pathetic responders and women as the agents but I think there’s more truth in that than in just trying to tell men to work and be providers with incomes far beyond their own bare minimal needs when there is not the high odds of getting an assortive wife like in the past.

  • deti

    Rebound:

    “deti, I don’t think the majority of Susan’s commenters identify as Christians, and I doubt the majority owns guns. ”

    I’ve been around here a lot longer than you, so I am sure they don’t.

    “It appears you have simply done what most humans do, assume that your values and way of life are the same as those you come in contact with.”

    No. In your zeal to condemn me as unintelligent and narrow-minded, you assume I did something I didn’t do. I am fully aware most of the commenters here don’t share my values or way of life. I have midwestern roots; except for a few years in Los Angeles, SW is a lifelong New Englander.

    “By the way, you might be interested to learn that most of middle American doesn’t identify as Christian either, nor do the majority of us own guns, though we may not be completely opposed to gun ownership under certain circumstance.”

    I’m aware of that too as my roots are firmly planted in the midwest, culturally and geographically. With all due respect, you’re not educating me on anything. Again: you’ll have to do better than that if you’re going to accuse me of narrow-mindedness or rustic, quaint provinciality.

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

      I have midwestern roots; except for a few years in Los Angeles, SW is a lifelong New Englander.

      Hardly. I’ve spent less than half my life here, and am very much an outsider still.

      NY – Long Island: 10 years
      LA: 15 years
      Phila: 2 years
      NYC: 3 years
      Boston: 26 years

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    deti, I didn’t mean to offend you in any way so if I did I apologize, but what was I to glean from this comment, ” I call bullshit. Susan, you do realize, don’t you, that these men are the manly men so many women keep saying they want? …
    You might as well have hoisted your middle finger at the men you say you want your focus groupers to get with. You’ve lost my support with this left hook to Middle America.”

    Other than that you are under the impression that this is a blog wherein Susan wants her “focus groupers” to “get with” the “manly men” as you called them, who are religiously Christian and own guns” and that, as you said, “so many women keep saying they want”? And that these men, the religiously Christian gun owners are representative of “middle America” because Susan’s reaction to Damien’s comment (basic agreement) was, as you say, a “left hook to middle America”.

    Who and where are these “so many women” that are saying they want the religiously Christian men who own guns and that this is their ideal of “manly men”?

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

    @JP

    I think you are missing the entire North-South cultural conflict here.

    No way are the Southern conservative whites going to joing with the liberal Northern whites.

    Ever.

    Look at this. And now you’re thinking mayhap this photo was taken in Auschwitz ?

    No.

    It’s from a British concentration camp during the Boer War. The Boers adopted guerrilla warfare against the British, and the only way, that the British could retaliate, was by taking the Boer women and children away from their farms, putting those farms to the torch, and bundling all these women and children in concentration camps.

    As you can see, the British took very good care of them.

    Ultimately the Boers had to surrender because of this.

    Hence the very bad blood between the descendents of the Boers and the English speaking population.

    And yet, two or three generations later, these two groups were supporting the National Party, because they feared of Black Nationalism.

    And now you’re telling me that the North-South thingy in the US is different somehow ?

    I doubt it.

    The only thing new in the world, is the history you don’t know – Harry S Truman.

  • http://@ Iggles

    @ SW:

    Indeed. I can understand why men who want STRs would therefore view him as a role model, and women who want STRs would have sex with him right away.

    + 1000

    Which is why, as a LTR oriented woman I called Jacob a loser!

    I think a lot of people have a hard time with the concept that someone may be a good friend, loyal brother, community service volunteer, help old ladies across the street with groceries and STILL be a shit prospect for a relationship!

    Why? You’re not romantically involved with the person so you don’t see that side of them. Many they’re clingy and insecure. Maybe they’re abusive and controlling. Maybe they’re distant and cold. Maybe they come on too strong and escalate too fast! Or have the emotional EQ of a peanut. Who knows?

    My point is, for some men here, in the rush to defend Jacob because he may remind them of other “decent guys” they know – or perhaps themselves – an objective view of his relationship value gets lost.

  • http://@ Iggles

    @ Tasmin,

    + 1 on your whole post #376!

    Puts everything into perspective, especially this part:

    Jacob doesn’t want a relationship; he wants a sex toy that likes the Packers and wont bust his balls about his bar hopping or his meandering career ambitions. The computers may be able to create that – find versions of that woman for him in those specific moments of his life, even modifying according to his preferences over time, but thats not the computers ruining his chances at LTR/Monogamy, thats Jacob never having to do anything but be Jacob, for the low-low price of $15 a month. Its not just about him being a POS or not, it is the fact that the story both shoves him in our face and ignores him, all while wanting us to believe the “it” is about online dating harming monogamy – whatever that means.

    The sense of urgency and pre-qualifying that happens may indeed expedite and further propel people into meaningless sex or optionality paralysis, but the interesting questions aren’t about whether or not Jacob’s (and all he is meant to represent) chances at a LTR/Marriage are being helped or hurt by online dating, the interesting questions are the ones not being asked.

  • http://@ Iggles

    @ Marellus (#386),

    I think you’re right. You have a firm grasp on racial politics as a white man in SA who lived through Apartheid and it’s aftermath. The same sort of dynamics regarding the loss of “power” may indeed be coming here to the US. While I doubt it was manifest in the same way (we’re too PC to pass laws outright resembling Jim Crow laws passed in the American South following Reconstruction, and we struck down nearly 100 years later), I do think you’re country’s history may be the canary in the coal mine for us.

    White privilege has always been about maintaining the power structure. As the white population in the US continues to decrease it will make for some strange bedfellows.. In college I took a course on the history of race and ethnicity in the US, and our instructor (white female of Irish decent, fyi) emphasis how the construction of “race” has always changed according to time and geographical location. She told us in 1840 in New York City the Irish everyone “knew” the Irish weren’t white. But at that same time in the Southwest Territories (Arizona, New Mexico) they were included in whiteness due to the demographics of that area – there were more Mexicans and Native Americans than Anglo Saxon Protestant Whites – to maintain power differences in religion and ethnicity did not trump shared skin color.

    @ JP:

    I think you are missing the entire North-South cultural conflict here.

    No way are the Southern conservative whites going to joing with the liberal Northern whites.Ever.

    Never say never. Throughout history quarreling groups have banded together when faced with a common threat.

  • pvw

    Interesting observations on the North-South divide. Any crossing of the divide will have to come from Northerners who will have to want to cross it as the result of something cataclysmic that forces them to see the world through the eyes of the Southerners…As obviously happened in South Africa.

    Thinking about the electoral map from the last election, I can’t remember how the Midwestern states voted. In any event, a realignment won’t come from the Southern side.

    I find it interesting, as I mentioned, being on the light blue side in a dark blue staet. I don’t fit the caricature of red staters and I don’t fit the caricature of those fully blue. Perhaps I’m purple?

    This definitely made me smile: “gun toting evangelicals” in the North. Some gun owners might very well see themselves as evangelical but on the liberal side…See ie., Jim Wallis, God’s Politics.

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

      @PVW

      I find it interesting, as I mentioned, being on the light blue side in a dark blue staet. I don’t fit the caricature of red staters and I don’t fit the caricature of those fully blue. Perhaps I’m purple?

      There have been articles about purple states and voters. It’s pretty clear that even in a dark blue state like MA, there’s a diversity of views. I think about a third of the state tends to vote conservative. I recall being surprised at how much of the MA vote GWB actually got.
      These purple voters, who I suppose are the independents, are growing in number, it seems to me. I feel no sense of alliance with either party, and I’ve never voted along party lines. Perhaps there will be a shakeup where purple voters congregate.

  • http://@ Iggles

    Gah! Please excuse the typos. Meant to say..

    While I doubt it WILL manifest in the same way (we’re too PC to pass laws outright resembling Jim Crow laws THAT WERE passed in the American South following Reconstruction, and struck down nearly 100 years later), I do think YOUR country’s history may be the canary in the coal mine for us.

    On a sidenote, this thread blew up yesterday! :lol: I wasn’t able to clarify my “loser” comment because I spent the afternoon and evening mostly offline. My bf and I celebrated our 1st anniversary :D

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

      @Iggles

      My bf and I celebrated our 1st anniversary

      Congrats!

  • Mike C

    Re: 40-hour workweek. Well, Jacob is not alone on this—I run into it with my students all the time now. Running on parallel tracks to the PUA movement is the popular Tim Ferriss school of “lifestyle design” which believes that working like a dog for years (especially for someone else) and then having a retirement at the end when your physicality has sharply declined is a generally bad move from the standpoints of both real-time happiness and end-of-life regrets. It’s seen as a sucker’s game, perhaps even a kind of slavery.

    Bastiat,

    Yup. I suspect there is a massive generational divide in life philosophies on this point between Boomers and Gen Xers.

  • Mike C

    The current incentives create men like Jacob. This is not a problem for Jacob, as much as you try.

    There will be more and more Jacobs over time.

  • pvw

    @Iggles, 403: Happy anniversary!

    Regarding realignments, the funny part is that 50 years ago, many Northern liberal whites would have been Republicans, as at that time, they tended to be liberal socially but conservative fiscally. Right after the election, I glanced at the alignments over the past 40 or so years. Today, in places like Mass., they tend to be independents, if I remember correctly. That is the overwhelming registration in the state today, large numbers registered not as Republicans and neither as Democrats, but as independents.

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

      @pvw

      That is the overwhelming registration in the state today, large numbers registered not as Republicans and neither as Democrats, but as independents.

      Interesting, I am registered as a Dem because I want to be able to vote in Democratic primaries. A MA voter gives up a lot by registering as an Independent.

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

    Iggles,

    White privilege has always been about maintaining the power structure. As the white population in the US continues to decrease it will make for some strange bedfellows..

    This.

    *******************************************************************

    pvw,

    Any crossing of the divide will have to come from Northerners who will have to want to cross it as the result of something cataclysmic that forces them to see the world through the eyes of the Southerners…As obviously happened in South Africa.

    This.

    ******************************************************************
    pvw, Iggles

    I have my moments … thank you … but honestly, I’d rather be silly … so how in thee hell, can I elicit an absolute howler of a comment from an irate female, so that I may retort to her … with a rendition of recipes for baking beer-muffins ?

    Any help will be appreciated.

    Sincerely.

    Marellus.

  • pvw

    @Marellus and irate comments on line and beer flavored muffins…with silliness mind.

    I think it works better in real life than on line–beer flavored muffins, provided she likes beer (Mr PVW and I don’t drink it). I am imagining, something flavored with garlic and rosemary, combined with demonstrating your prowess at shooting said beer can at some difficult to reach distance…

    (I’m presuming here that you grew up Afrikaner in S.A. and that it is a given you grew up around firearms, especially if you were of the age to have served in the SADF. If I remember correctly, there was a time when all young white men had to serve.

    Didn’t Dave Matthews of DMB leave South Africa over that? He was born in the US, lived here as a child, but went with his family, only to return here around the age of 18?)

    I find your discussion on S.A. history interesting; although I trained as an Americanist historian, my program required us to have training in a field outside of the U.S. Mine was South Africa. I remember becoming well acquainted with the South African history section of the research library, putting together a reading list for my comprehensive exams.

    I remember reading about Malan as the first N.P. prime minister and the significance of various institutions in building the apartheid state: the NP, Stellenbosch Academy, the Dutch Reformed Church, the media, etc.

  • http://@ Iggles

    pvw – Thanks :)

    Marellus – ha! Yeah, it’s a heavy topic. I hope it won’t ever come to pass but history often repeats..

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

    Susan…re narcissism, this seems relevant: Everyone a Harlot.

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

      @david foster

      Great link. From the article:

      “Throughout the Alt-Right, several writers have criticized “pick-up artist” culture and “game.”

      Because just about the only manly thing that most men are allowed to do is bang, I am more sympathetic. I see what many call game as a kind of gateway masculinity. Game is essentially assertiveness training for a generation of young men who spent most of their lives playing “mother may I?”

      Manliness is like a talent. Some males are more gifted than others, but like any talent, masculinity has to be pushed and developed to amount to anything impressive. Boys who were raised by single moms or overprotective parents and put through the public school feminist brain-washing system were never tried or trained by groups of hard men. You can’t hand a hen-pecked boy a high school diploma and expect him to spit like Clint Eastwood.

      When they talk about game, men in the Manosphere are shoveling through the bullshit that the system tells boys about girls. This is work that needs to be done. If average young guys believe the official malarkey they are told about sex and relationships, they’ll be used and abused by entitled American girls for the rest of their lives. And, as they unpack feminist myths about the sexes, I’ve seen a lot of those guys start to wonder what it really means to be men. This is an important conversation. However, it almost seems like a safer route in today’s cultural climate to make chasing poon a long-term lifestyle choice. That’s where the positive mean slides toward a negative extreme.

      Andy Nowicki wrote that if men really wanted to undermine the matriarchy, they would stop fucking. He may have his own (possibly religious) reasons for saying so, but I think he has a point.

      Our feminist, globalist handlers would love nothing more than to keep young men — the most dangerous and potentially revolutionary group in any civilization – completely distracted by tang. And while it may feel like asserting dominance (in conveniently the most harmless way possible), if everything you do is designed to make you more appealing to women, you’re an eager vibrator. When your muscle is just for show, when everything you do is to make yourself more desirable, you’re playing the female role. When your worth as a man depends on how many women you can lure to your loins, you’re just a gigolo…There’s something particularly desperate, sad and undignified about a man of a certain age who spends too much time looking for sexual validation.

      …Sex may be natural, and it sure is fun, but it’s just a part of life. A society that over-emphasizes sex to the point where it seems like the only thing in life that means anything is grotesque and degraded, and for most people it delivers more emptiness than ecstasy.

      In healthy patriarchies, men push themselves to earn the respect and admiration of other men. They work to prove their strength, courage and competence to each other. Men pride themselves on their reputation for mastery of their bodies, their actions, and their environment. They want to be known for what they can do, not just how well or who they can screw. And they sure as hell don’t waste their time trying to figure out what they can do to bedazzle bimbos.”

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “What is your source for this claim?”

    Observing people in restaurants.

    As for the bartender thing, I think you misunderstand, I fail to see how doing so would make me less of a family man. I am already out of the house 40 hours a week for my salary job, then music hobbies on top of that. Bartending would just be a slightly better paid hobby than music, if I had the cash to do it and still support my family. My point is that being rich wouldn’t turn me off from all my jobs/goals and into some shiftless loser; I’d still do stuff, but have lots more time for family (you missed that) and hobbies.

    By the way, my old office mate at Raytheon did this. She bartended part time for fun and social activity, because she had the skills from before she started her engineering job. Is she less of a mother? That’s what I was talking about.

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

      Sue: “What is your source for this claim?”

      Observing people in restaurants.

      That’s doubly rude! Now I have to hear a stranger’s phone pinging? I once complained about this at a restaurant and the manager asked the guy to silence his phone.

      By the way, my old office mate at Raytheon did this. She bartended part time for fun and social activity, because she had the skills from before she started her engineering job. Is she less of a mother? That’s what I was talking about.

      I would definitely not be pleased if my spouse wanted to bartend as a hobby. But that’s just me.

  • Russ in Texas

    South African politics is not mappable to the US. The US is the way it is because we have numerous cultures rubbing shoulders inside the same state (country). Now, Europeans will protest that they have the same thing going, but it’s not actually much the same at all except in a few places.

    Of these, while there are areas where I would quibble (Dallas, for instance, is a VERY “southern” city, but Forth Worth is not — it is “western” in culture and wants nothing whatsoever to do with Dallas and its cultural issues – Woodward, as yankee, is not sensitive to border-issues between southern and western cultures, not to the extent that El Norte culture is not only freely but applaudedly accepted in large swaths of that region), I prefer Woodward to Garreau.

    http://www.amazon.com/American-Nations-History-Regional-Cultures/dp/0143122029

    Greater New England has a culture which is extremely aggressive, and wants to delegitimize and if possible assimilate the other American cultures. It has a long history of having tried to do precisely that. Woodward, as yankee himself, is not immune to Yankee cultural blindness which it inherited from mainstream English culture at the time, but does at least understand that it exists.

    Other American cultures’ resentment of yankee bigotry is very, very real. This is a course of continuous conflict in American history and culture, and midwesterners like Deti are quite right to get their backs up when a Yankee like Susan slanders a huge swath of the country as cultural troglodytes because they do not meet her cultural expectations. (Whether she *intended* to or not is beside the point — gratuitous disdain from yankeeland is precisely that: gratuitous, and “business-as-usual.” One of its salutary effects is that the rest of the country tends to be immune to Boston Feminism of the Redstockings/Jezebel variety, and disdainful of the yankee assumption that its cultural fad of the moment speaks from a morally superior position.)

    What many foreigners miss, because it runs consistently contrary to yankee narrative, is that the north tends to straitjacket its ethnic groups, and has a strong tendency, outside of a few (truly troglodytic) enclaves, to be FAR more racist than the South is in general. Reach out to the black or mexican communities if this comes as a shock to you — SWPL-land is MUCH less friendly territory for the “wrong” kind of minority than Memphis is. The notion that actual political power would divide racially is a notion which makes sense in South Africa; it makes sense in Europe, which is still, by American standards, shockingly tribal. It doesn’t make sense here.

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

      Susan slanders a huge swath of the country as cultural troglodytes because they do not meet her cultural expectations

      There is no group more exclusive and willing to write off other human beings than evangelicals, IME. They’re every bit as bad as the radfems. Not all of them, of course, just as not all feminists are Jezzies. But in general, I find them to be a very intolerant group.

      FTR, I went to a high school with a very prominent population of “Four Spiritual Laws” Christians – they represented about a quarter of the class. I’ve been damned to hell and back many times. Mormons, who were another third of the class, were far, far more tolerant and inclusive.

      I’m not sure why love of guns correlates so strongly to evangelism. In any case, I really don’t think it has anything to do with cultural expectations per se.

  • http://@ Iggles

    Thanks Susan :D

  • Sassy6519

    Congrats on the 1 year anniversary Iggles!

  • JP

    “Never say never. Throughout history quarreling groups have banded together when faced with a common threat.”

    “I think you’re right. You have a firm grasp on racial politics as a white man in SA who lived through Apartheid and it’s aftermath. The same sort of dynamics regarding the loss of “power” may indeed be coming here to the US. While I doubt it was manifest in the same way (we’re too PC to pass laws outright resembling Jim Crow laws passed in the American South following Reconstruction, and we struck down nearly 100 years later), I do think you’re country’s history may be the canary in the coal mine for us.”

    Let me explain something.

    Half of the hispanic population is white.

    Because they came from….Europe.

    There’s something quite different between Africa and North America.

    Namely the fact that North America is Europe in a funhouse mirror.

    Spain and England are massive.

    Portugal is pretty big.

    France is tiny.

    And there is no Germany.

    What’s happening right now is that the North (England) is getting annoyed with the South (Scotch-Irish) again because they are being themselves and really ticking off the North.

    “In the United States, a White Hispanic or White Latino[17] is a citizen or resident who is racially white and of Hispanic descent. White American, itself an official U.S. racial category, refers to people “having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa” who reside in the United States.[18]

    Based on the definitions created by the Office of Management and Budget and the U.S. Census Bureau, the concepts of race and ethnicity are mutually independent, and respondents to the census and other Census Bureau surveys are asked to answer both questions. Hispanicity is independent of race, and constitutes an ethnicity category, as opposed to a racial category, the only one of which that is officially collated by the U.S. Census Bureau. For the Census Bureau, Ethnicity distinguishes between those who report ancestral origins in Spain or Hispanic America (Hispanic and Latino Americans), and those who do not (Non-Hispanic Americans).[19][20] The U.S. Census Bureau asks each resident to report the “race or races with which they most closely identify.”[21]

    White Americans are therefore divided between “White Hispanic” and “Non Hispanic White,” the former consisting of White Americans who report Hispanophone ancestry (Spain and Hispanic Latin America), and the latter consisting of White Americans who do not report Hispanophone ancestry.

    As of 2010, 50.5 million or 16.3% of Americans were ethnically Hispanic or Latino.[15] Of those, 26.7 million, or 53%, were White.”

    The United States is an Enlightenment European project.

    It’s problems are quite different than South Africa and it’s major problem was only just resolved in the 1960’s.

    The question for the coming decades is whether the United States is going to stay together or disintegrate into different countries, not whether it’s going to have racial problems, per se.

  • JP

    Here’s a Reason article that pretty much explains why it’s a non-issue.

    http://reason.com/archives/2012/02/21/white-majority-minority-2050

    Now, if the West Coast splits off, it has the potential to become an asian-hispanic fusion culture of some sort, but that’s only an issue if the U.S. fractures.

  • Russ in Texas

    “The United States is an Enlightenment European project.”

    Quibble: The American and European Enlightenments are VERY different creatures, and shouldn’t be conflated with each other.

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

    I think Jacob wants to get married—he just wants to get married to Molly Qerim!

    Re: work ethic and attractiveness. I think that word may be finally getting out about scarcity realities, rising spinsterhood, unavoidable trade-offs, and some of these “trading up” debacles.

    I have become conditioned to expect women to have incredibly detailed mate selection checklists because all of the single ladies my age seem to have them. But college students don’t carry the same baggage, and may well be ahead of older adults now in terms of operating from a different, more practical rulebook and adapting to the post-feminist dating landscape.

    Case in point: in the last group of students I had, the little informal survey had *males* rating female ambitiousness and financial independence as extremely important. The women actually had the more modest expectations: they wanted the guys to have degrees, but they mainly listed appearance and hygiene-related traits, as well as emotional independence and some typical jock/badass type things that appeal to a UFC-loving cohort.

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

      in the last group of students I had, the little informal survey had *males* rating female ambitiousness and financial independence as extremely important.

      I was surprised that that was also the most important thing to men in online dating, followed by “girl next door” looks. “Hottie” came in last.

      Does this suggest that Jacobs are looking for Sugar Mamas? Shiftless guy auditions for SAHD role while Mom rocks the Trading desk? Or are a significant portion of men seeking truly assortative mating, the egalitarian marriage with a smart, competent woman? Of course, these “comsumption” UMC marriages are nothing new, as they represent the most stable marriages in American society.

      The women actually had the more modest expectations: they wanted the guys to have degrees, but they mainly listed appearance and hygiene-related traits, as well as emotional independence and some typical jock/badass type things

      Were these the same women who recoiled at talk of marriage and LTRs? Certainly a woman of 20 who sees marriage as something way, way off, at best, is unlikely to prioritize LTR traits. The hot, clean guy who is no emo and plays rugby is perfect fling material.

  • JP

    @Russ:

    Here’s my take on why things are getting worse, Red State/Blue State wise:

    “What’s happening right now is that the North (England) is getting annoyed with the South (Scotch-Irish) again because they are being themselves and really ticking off the North.”

  • Russ in Texas

    Mine is that they never STOPPED being annoyed with everybody else not being them. I think Woodward (himself a yankee) is dead on the money about this.

  • JP

    “Quibble: The American and European Enlightenments are VERY different creatures, and shouldn’t be conflated with each other.”

    My point is that it was essentially a humanist project, meaning that it wasn’t based on tribal affiliation as much as Europe, except for the slave labor.

    It didn’t really grow organically over centuries.

  • JP

    “Mine is that they never STOPPED being annoyed with everybody else not being them. I think Woodward (himself a yankee) is dead on the money about this.”

    Well, right now, the Republicans are just going to keep making them more and more angry, which is going to make things worse, politically.

    Basically because the Republicans need to come up with actual ideas that can be actually implemented.

    If they continue doing what they are doing, they aren’t going to get anywhere because it’s not solving any problems.

  • Dinkney Pawson

    For the non US residents benefit, the Democratic and Republican parties are long term coalitions. We get political stress and crises when they become very polarized.

    The first realignment in the ’60s was when the northern Democrats decided that southern blacks were more valuable addition to their coalition than their existing southern whites, because it would cement the allegiance of the growing northern urban black population.

    To be viable the Republicans need to split off the middle class minorities from the Democratic coalition. Herman Cain had a real chance to do that in 2012. It’s a real shame his campaign imploded. He didn’t have any more skeletons in his closet than Bill Clinton. He was merely in the wrong political party.

    The problem Republicans have is that they play the part of the buffalo in the story of the buffalo, the bird, and the coyote.

  • Ramble

    Test TM

  • JP

    “I would definitely not be pleased if my spouse wanted to bartend as a hobby. But that’s just me.”

    I’m fine having my wife hostess/bartend.

    The problem is the low pay.

    I would prefer that she get 4 quarters of coverage a year for medicare if she becomes disabled.

    I suppose I could pay her myself to boost the credits.

    I should probably do that.

  • Ramble

    @INTJ

    Now many of us “nice guys” pride ourselves on not caring as much about looks, unlike other “shallow” guys.

    It’s true. Nice Guys often “pride” themselves on NOT caring as much about looks, unlike those Shallow Guys.

    Unfortunately, as much as we would like to do so, it is near impossible to make our mating choices solely using our conscious mind.

    One day we will finally crush our base desires and then, in triumph, we will be The New Man.

    To put it bluntly, they should sexually objectify women.

    That’s right. And do not qualify it.

    ↓↓↓

    Do you sexually objectify women?
    Yes.

    So you only see them as sex objects and nothing more?

    Don’t be intentionally stupid.

  • JP

    “FTR, I went to a high school with a very prominent population of “Four Spiritual Laws” Christians – they represented about a quarter of the class. I’ve been damned to hell and back many times. Mormons, who were another third of the class, were far, far more tolerant and inclusive.”

    In high school, I would get my mormon girlfriend into arguments with my fundamentalist friend for entertainment purposes.

    He was an “end of the worlder”.

    In hindsight, this was not the best idea from an interpersonal relationships perspective.

  • Ramble

    No way are the Southern conservative whites going to joing with the liberal Northern whites.

    I’ve got a fair amount of money that (one-time) liberal whites in the Detroit Suburbs have a LOT in common with Conservative Southern Whites. Now, those liberal Whites in Ann Arbor, that is a different story. But, then again, those liberal whites in Ann Arbor don’t deal with the kind of diversity that the whites do in the Detroit Metropolitan area do.

  • Ramble

    I think you are right that men are more self-aware, owing to their far simpler set of attraction cues.

    Yes, and, quite possibly, much more complex emotional attraction cues.

    I think they’re also much more likely to be dishonest with women to get what they want, i.e. the cad.

    Well, I think what you meant to say is that Cads are more likely to be dishonest. Non-cads often have the problem of being TOO honest.

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

      Well, I think what you meant to say is that Cads are more likely to be dishonest. Non-cads often have the problem of being TOO honest.

      Good point.

  • Ramble

    White privilege has always been about maintaining the power structure.

    If “always” includes many of the policies that whites have enacted since 1960, then I strongly disagree. This goes for America and much of (North) Western Europe.

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

    Susan, yes, these were exactly the same women. The survey was about traits desired in a future spouse, so the questions had a young person trying to envision the type that would be desirable down the road.

    This is no surprise to anyone here, but they also appeared less directly materialistic in terms of conspicuous consumption, but more concerned about leisure time; loyalty to a small, stable group of real-life friends; and having localized celebrity status when it came to a larger audience of people they hardly knew at all (via Facebook and the like). In several cases, they admit that they choose lifestyle activities based on a consideration of how readily the activities could be documented and highlighted on FB or youtube.

    These “kids” have spent so much time online and are so wired into mobile web gadgets and interactive games and apps that they probably fit some technical definitions of the word “cyborg”. I think they now psychologically straddle two worlds—the maintenance of a created internet persona with attractive pics and glamorous-seeming lifestyle mosaic has direct feedback to their real-world self-concepts.

    In other words, it’s like a psychotic Dungeons & Dragons game in which you create you own heavily-edited avatar or role-playing character and then use that character as a flattering carnival mirror with which to admire yourself from a weird, voyeuristic third-party detachment perspective. You become both celebrity and your own biggest fan.

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

      @BB

      I think they now psychologically straddle two worlds—the maintenance of a created internet persona with attractive pics and glamorous-seeming lifestyle mosaic has direct feedback to their real-world self-concepts.

      This is a perceptive comment. I’ve witnessed what girls do for pics – it’s like those holiday parties in food magazines when you know everyone is laughing on cue. One of them gets up to snap a photo and suddenly they’re all laughing and having the most wonderful time – entirely faked. Then the pic goes up on facebook and you immediately experience FOMO. (fear of missing out)

  • Ramble

    I believe that roughly equal numbers of men and women prioritize marriage and cite it as a “very important life goal.”

    That’s fine, and understandable, but does not address my point, which I probably did a piss-poor job of communicating.

    Guys do not dream about their wedding day. They do not spend endless hours talking about girls (unless saying, “Yo, I would totally love to bang Kaitlyn.” “Wait, have you banged anyone?” “Nah. But still, I would give her the best 37 seconds of her life.” “Haha. Yeah, I’m awesome too.” counts as talking about girls). They do not see Landing a Wife as the ultimate goal.

    Girls do. With all of the social programming they were supposed to absorb, they have still done a hell of a job of reverting back to pre-modernist standards and goals.

    So, let me try again. Here is what Bastiat had said,

    PS: In terms of sexual market dynamics, the female equivalent to Jacob would be a woman of modest appearance, work ethic, and accomplishments who somehow used online dating services to meet and marry an attractive multimillionaire husband who then attended to her whims. Would we call her a “loser”?

    He was trying to find an equivalent to Jacob. Jacob is a guy who has put in little effort and does not offer much in the eyes of traditional value (i.e. a girl really wants to get married and really wants to get married to a guy who is: Ambitious, Successful, Charming, Tall, Dark, Handsome, Unselfish, etc., etc.) and yet has gotten for himself many of the things he has likely desired (i.e. easy sex, an undemanding work-life, time for his hobbies, leisurely activities, etc.).

    So, if we were to flip this to find the equavalent girl that most men would find disappointing, what would we find?

    My guess:
    – Unattractive
    – Slightly Masculine, or, at least, not feminine
    – Can’t cook
    – significantly interested in celebrity and other gossip
    – etc.

    However, she is not a bad person and she has landed a good husband. To re-ask Bastiat’s question, ‘would you call her a “loser”‘?

  • Damien Vulaume

    Sorry, but long comment on the way.

    @Deti:
    I don’t think Susan’s remark was that much “socio-culturally or politically” motivated, but rather a proud and healthy female reaction to that “manosphere.”
    As a foreigner with a “neutrally “different perspective (neutrality unfortunately doesn’t exist, or maybe only for the weak), I took a piqued, unbiased and empirical approach to that manosphere of yours over there, once being absorbed by this very blog a month ago or so (because of it being something looking like a very decent, civil, razor-sharp-honest and typically no-non sense feminine way of engaging a discussion between the sexes ).
    So, you know, an approach along the lines of: “Well, let’s see what those American guys have to say about genders as well”…
    I only checked a few of those sites, one was called Château (Lol!) hearsite or something, another was VD’s, another one was Dalrock’s and then a couple of other ones I can’t even remember the name of, since they seemed to have picked it up from some cartoon characters. Well, I happened to have a “dual” experience about the US, where I spent two years of my life, ten years apart. The first time was in Indianapolis in my “spring chicken” years as an exchange student, complete with living in an American family and going to high school there (I’ll have very savory anecdotes to share with you all about that), and then one year graduating in Boston. The midwest, New England……Oh là là, obviously two worlds appart within American society… but, the most unsavory characters I met in BOTH places where invariably the same ones…. And, when checking those blogs, the very same ones commenting there…. Incidentally, I checked on those blogs just a few days after that latest “American gun culture gone loose again” atrocity in Connecticut, where the debate was mostly dominated by, to put it in a nutshell, white folks claiming gun ownership individual rights (some being one step away from begging gun makers to manufacture specifically designed fire arms for kids’ small hands, sometimes “in the name of god”)…or which tactics worked best to humiliate women. I could go on for ever, but I hope, and wish, that you got the point.
    There are characters dropping in here with whom I don’t even want to start debating the male/female issue in the first place because of their seemingly uncurable and biased way of seeing women at large. It is funny to note that you, along with Mike C and Ted D sometimes fit that bill yet are obviously intelligent commentators who, at times, contribute in a more than interesting way on the said debate. However, sometimes it looks like you guys again press on some kind of personal itching button out of the blue and immediately turn into the “toutes des salopes”(They’ve hurt me, and therefore they’re all bitches who will have to pay for it) mode again.

    @My would have been chérie only if/aka Rebound lively girl:
    ” I am very conservative about foreign policy. ”
    What does that mean? Pro or anti war and nosy meddling into the business of sovereign nations?”

    That’s exactly what I was going to ask Susan about, and her answer is a bit of a let down.

    @Russ#423
    Great fiery post, and although I can’t engage too deep into it, since I’m not American, I’d co-sign some of your remarks, based on my outsider’s gaze. I have never been in Texas nor any of the southern states, yet often noticed in New England that jaundiced sense of cultural and moral superiority, as well as an even more hypocritical approach towards blacks/whites relations in the US. I’ve met a few of people (either black or white) from the south, and where in a strange way closer to each other or at least talking about those issues in a much more candid way.
    The worst about that was, in my opinion, in the midwest though, where ignorance is shockingly dominant and proudly entertained as such.

    About this: it makes sense in Europe, which is still, by American standards, shockingly tribal. It doesn’t make sense here.
    I already know that you’re not one of those guys who think that Europe is a nation, but a bit more of explanations from you about that statement would be welcomed.

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

      @Damien

      That’s exactly what I was going to ask Susan about, and her answer is a bit of a let down.

      I’m used to that – even with my closest friends I generally avoid discussing politics, so I probably shouldn’t do it here. I don’t get easily offended but I find that my friends do. My brother (a socialist who lives in Italy) and I have no trouble debating world politics, and it’s amazing how much common ground we find.

      Even on foreign policy, though, I’m not easy to pigeonhole. I’m more pro-Israel than any of my Jewish friends, but I’m also in favor of extremely liberal immigration to the U.S. I am profoundly opposed to mea culpas for “American Imperialism,” and would have happily deported those lefties who claimed that America deserved 9/11 during its aftermath.

      But I certainly wouldn’t expect a European to share my view.

  • Ramble
    One night the paralegal confides in him: her prior relationships haven’t gone well, but Jacob gives her hope; all she needs in a relationship is honesty. And he thinks, Oh my God. He wants to be a nice guy, but he knows that sooner or later he’s going to start coming across as a serious asshole. While out with one woman, he has to silence text messages coming in from others. He needs to start paring down the number of women he’s seeing.

    He’s already a cad.

    I am going to say that he is absolutely NOT a cad.

    I would put down $5 that this is the situation:
    He does not WANT to be a cad/douche. He DOES want to date. He also want to parallel date in a manner similar to what Susan might advise. However, in the age of casual sex, and especially the amount of casual sex that might be available to a “relaxed” hobby-focused concert-going male, that parallel dating soons turn into (attempting to) maintaining a “harem”. And, in general, that was not his aim.

    If some girls are determined to call him a cad (based on the little, and possibly inaccurate, info we have on him), then he is a reluctant one that will, in my prediction, bail from that “Alpha” life toward a more relaxed one that involves having only one gf.

    That’s my understanding and guess.

  • HanSolo

    @Susan

    That is where my efforts are placed. I have no desire or opportunity to speak to the Jacobs of the world. I’d rather spend my time revealing the Jacobs for what they are, which is terrible prospects for future life satisfaction and happiness. Branding Jacob a loser isn’t meant to affect Jacob, it’s meant to inform young women.

    Well, I actually disagree that you aren’t speaking to the Jacobs of the world. I imagine a few are reading here. But I digress.

    So, I don’t have a problem in pointing out that Jacob isn’t a good LTR candidate. But why not also point out that the women who are choosing him are being foolish? Is it because you think that directly doing that won’t be as effective as denigrating Jacob and his ilk? I do realize that in other posts you do point out things like you need to avoid cads and slackers and whatever if you want an LTR-provider type.

    Do you feel that the most effective way to get women to stop choosing poorly is to point out the consequences of choosing poorly? As opposed to a more direct confrontation of the fact that many female attraction triggers are easily “tricked” in today’s environment, leading many women who ostensibly want LTRs to try and find those with the charismatic cads and players who are least likely to enter or stay in LTRs?

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

      @Han

      But why not also point out that the women who are choosing him are being foolish? Is it because you think that directly doing that won’t be as effective as denigrating Jacob and his ilk?

      I’m happy to, I just don’t have any information about them. As I said earlier, who has sex on the first date when the first date is usually coffee in the afternoon? I mean, it sounds like we’re talking profound sluttitude here. I have so few readers like that I tend to be more dismissive than anything. If I thought those women were keeping a real prize out of the relationship market, I guess I’d be tempted to advise non-slutty women how to compete for Jacob. As it is, I’m happy to have the sluts and slackers get together.

      As I’ve said repeatedly, I’m not particularly interested in Jacob, as I don’t find him a credible representative of the majority. I honestly did not expect him to get so much attention in the thread.

      Do you feel that the most effective way to get women to stop choosing poorly is to point out the consequences of choosing poorly? As opposed to a more direct confrontation of the fact that many female attraction triggers are easily “tricked” in today’s environment

      I don’t think high MMV women are choosing Jacob. I think lower quality women are choosing guys like him. There may be no shortage of them, but it has never really been my aim to convert women who like Jacobs to my way of thinking. Online dating makes it easier for a woman to get duped, like the paralegal did, because she has no sense of a guy’s history or reputation. He may appear to be a solid citizen for a while before his true lifestyle and character is revealed. To that end, I do try to warn women about red flags and knowing when to drive on. The 22 year old who lived with Jacob for 2 years may have loads of time, but the woman older than him who spent 5 years in that relationship is not well positioned in the SMP.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Susan:

    “I’m not sure why love of guns correlates so strongly to evangelism.”

    That’s because you’ve reversed the causation. If you’ll keep an open mind for a moment, it runs more like this: Greater New England and Left Coast: minimal-to-rare gun ownership in urban and suburban areas, low-average gun ownership in rural areas. Everywhere else: SIGNIFICANT gun ownership crossing all demographic lines (ethnic, SES, urban/suburban/rural). Prevalence of Evangelicals? They tend to be living in “everywhere-else-land” and thus tending to follow their own cultures regarding gun ownership.

    Are many, and arguendo the majority, of evangelicals, bigots? Quite possibly. But on the same hand, one could argue that 100% of the Redstockings membership was also, and a good 70% of Jezebel’s dedicated readership is now. Bigotry and provincialism are *everywhere,* and singling out any given group is, in my opinion, sloppy thinking.

    As a cradle catholic in Texas, among my peers (overwhelmingly non-evangelical and in most cases leaning heavily-RC), for instance, I would be considered ENTIRELY unremarkable in owning two rifles and four handguns between the wife and I.

    Culturally and politically speaking, every place you’ve lived except LA is part of Greater New England/Yankeedom, and parts of the LA area are distinguished only insofar as they’re much further to the left (whereas a patriotic bumper sticker in Boston will only get you sneered at, it’s very likely to get you tagged, keyed, or windowed in Santa Monica).

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

    Iggles,

    Marellus – ha! Yeah, it’s a heavy topic. I hope it won’t ever come to pass but history often repeats..

    1 bottle of beer (12 oz or 1 1/2 cups)

    4 1/2 cups of Bisquick

    3/4 cup sugar

    Blend all ingredients in a bowl (wow – no mixer necessary – I love it).

    Preheat oven to 375 degrees. Fill greased muffin pans with enough mixture to fill 2/3 of each muffin container.

    Bake 20 to 30 minutes or till the top is slightly brown.

    (heheheheheheh)

    *******************************************************************

    pvw,

    I missed doing military diensplig by a year. The guys a year older than me, were the last group to do this.

    So I never had to go and fight in Angola, or go into that hell that was the politicized townships of the time.

    As for Dave Matthews, the name sounds familiar, but I can’t say that I know a lot about him.

    Ever heard of Sixto Rodriguez ?

    He was (in the US) an unknown musician, but for some obscure reason made it big on the SA music charts.

    I love that song by the way.

    As for SA history, the nineteenth century is more interesting. See if you can read Mhudi by Sol Plaatje.

    (It’s a novel written by one of the founders of the ANC)

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

    I generally find religious fundamentalist/evangelist types to be less obnoxious than the political/environmental type. The religious fundamentalist may be quite sure that you’re going to hell if you don’t change your ways; but there’s (usually) no malice in it; he WANTS you to change your ways and go (as he sees it) to heaven.

    Whereas the environmental fundamentalist in many cases really does want you to suffer: some of the gleeful comments during power outages by people carrying the “environmentalist” banner are truly malevolent and appalling.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Damien:

    “I already know that you’re not one of those guys who think that Europe is a nation, but a bit more of explanations from you about that statement would be welcomed.”

    I actually hadn’t intended it to be fiery, but I have a marked tendency to wax strident on some issues.

    As you’ve said and I wholeheartedly co-sign, “Europe” isn’t a single place. The Jantelagen, for instance, is unthinkable in Italy, and I tend to find East-Central Europe most sympathetic. But I have, across Europe (and *especially* in Western Europe), found us/other thinking wherever a different nationality was concerned, and a tendency to immediately describe people from foreign countries inside Europe in a collective, tribal way which defaults to stereotyping. The Lombards disdain the Apulians, who scorn the Sicilians, all of whom are described as something like vermin by the Swiss, who tolerate Hungarian emigres but won’t even speak to a Bulgarian. The Greeks are financially irresponsible (not mentioning, of course, that the entire ECB issue which threatens to tear the Euro apart is designed not to prop up *Greece,* but to bail out French and German banks who foolishly lended into an environment when they shouldn’t have), and the southern Europeans feckless and lazy. I have been in Frankfurt transferring on flights and more than once heard muttering about “dirty Albanians” when there was absolutely no difference in behavior. And, to put it bluntly, I would far rather be black in Tennessee than Paris, where I have heard anti-black and anti-arab bigotry causally spoken on the street that would embarrass an east-Texas Klansman.

  • pvw

    Susan: These purple voters, who I suppose are the independents, are growing in number, it seems to me. I feel no sense of alliance with either party, and I’ve never voted along party lines. Perhaps there will be a shakeup where purple voters congregate.

    Me: That would be ideal, but in the meantime, I feel like I’m sitting in the middle of two camps, and I saw it the most during the holidays.

    To the right of me, the conservative on social issues and fiscal matters “cradle Roman Catholic” corporate lawyer living in a nice doorman building across the street from the fancy park–they need to make it official, move to Texas and register Republican as part of the small minority of people of color who are so registered. To the left of me, the “cradle Roman Catholics” who are conservative on social issues but very liberal on fiscal matters, the social issues don’t matter as much to them, so they will consistently vote Democrat that is where they are registered.

    And finally, me and Mr. PVW: him, libertarian; me, independent, unaffiliated and moderate, as described earlier…So you can well imagine how that went!

    Russ in Texas: Greater New England and Left Coast: minimal-to-rare gun ownership in urban and suburban areas, low-average gun ownership in rural areas.

    Me: I think that it is on the gun range where one might be likely to find the more conservative New Englanders who vote Republican. Evangelical? I would guess they would be more likely to be Roman Catholic or at least have nominal Roman Catholic roots. I’m thinking, these are the types who have traditionally been blue collar, even though they might not be now–the old Reagan Democrat types. Mainline Protestants in New England tend to be overwhelmingly liberal, and are likely to see themselves as evangelical but in a liberal social justice sense.

  • Russ in Texas

    @pvw:

    Agreed. The degree to which “social issues” are actually class issues in disguise is remarkable.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “in the last group of students I had, the little informal survey had *males* rating female ambitiousness and financial independence as extremely important.”

    Sometimes what people say is not what they do.

    In my younger days I would have said this, toeing the feminist party line. Both my parents worked full time. I would have preferred my wife work full-time, DINK for a good 10 years to build up some assets, buy lots of useless shit in a huge house, have kids starting around 30-32, and put them in day care when she went back to work. I viewed SAHM status as a temporary thing, until they hit kindergarten.

    She had other ideas. She wanted to have kids immediately, work part/flex time, stay home when needed. It took a few years to conceive our first and I was early 30’s when the LAST was born. As a result, we learned to live on one income in a rather expensive area, and our only debt is the house. We simply could not afford child care for three unless she was making six figures, and even then… It would be such a waste.

    Things are *much* better this way.

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

      @OTC

      Re your challenge about how many of my ESL students I socialize with, I wonder why you ask. INTJ’s claim was that I know nothing of immigrant culture. My reply demonstrated that I do in fact know a bit about a great many cultures. Is there some reason why I cannot learn in a conversational class? Why is it necessary for me to invite students to dinner? You were clearly getting at something, but I’m not sure what or why.

  • pvw

    @Russ: The degree to which “social issues” are actually class issues in disguise is remarkable.

    Me: Yes, affecting: the extent to which one is willing to support funding for social issues (fiscal conservatives on the upper end of the income scale); the extent to which liberal social behavior influences positive or negative outcomes (upper middle class types and above, especially if the SWPL types v. more impoverished types of whatever racial background); and the extent to which one pursues conservative social behavior in order to avoid the outcomes of liberal social behavior (social conservatives of whatever ethnic/racial background, but especially effective if among the middle class or striving working class, hoping to enter the middle class).

  • HanSolo

    @David Foster

    Interesting article @421

  • HanSolo

    @David Foster

    Moving towards a bonobo masturbation society.

    But that is simply the natural result of a prosperous society where male provider/protecter roles are not needed. Then women have genetic incentive to search for the best genes. However, many of the things that signaled good genes in prehistoric times are no longer good indicators and are easy to fake–like being a badboy because now you can act like a badass and won’t be kicked out of the tribe and don’t really have to prove that you are whereas in the tribal days only very capable males could get away with being badasses.

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

    JP,

    The question for the coming decades is whether the United States is going to stay together or disintegrate into different countries, not whether it’s going to have racial problems, per se.

    Hmmmm, smells like you’re gonna try Bantustans as well.

    *********************************************************************

    Russ,

    The notion that actual political power would divide racially is a notion which makes sense in South Africa; it makes sense in Europe, which is still, by American standards, shockingly tribal. It doesn’t make sense here.

    Why is Spanish radio, TV & whatnot then making lots of inroads into major urban US centers ?

  • Russ in Texas

    @Marellus#463:

    It’s not?? I suppose it might depend on how many Spanish speakers you’ve got, but we’ve got it available on tap all over huge sections of the S/SW, flyover country, and California. (TeleMundo actually tends to do pretty good political reporting, btw)

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Re: lower class immigrant culture. I mingled with a lot of them since I went to public elementary and middle schools. Most of them never went to college and work service industry jobs. The ones with more traditional immigrant mindsets end up in the middle class as clerks, police officers, nurses, etc. and married with kids.

    On gun ownership: it’s actually quite expensive and not something the low SES folks have access to if they’re law-abiding. In most of the country (outside large cities) it is largely the middle class that owns guns. The Democratic party has plenty of gun owners, and the elite liberals risk alienating them to appease the minority.

    Philosophically, gun ownership is a more “masculine” mindset, that of arming the good guys (sheepdog) to keep the bad guys (wolves) at bay. I believe it was Robert Heinlein who wrote, “An armed society is a polite society.”

    But women do not want to have to protect themselves, as this runs counter to primal psychological programming. Only very recently in history has a woman and man gained (nearly) equal ability to kill via weaponry. Now, a woman armed with a gun is as able to be as deadly as a man, but very few women would want to be trained in it.

    I guess I have some rather masculine wiring, because I want to be a good shot. :P

  • OffTheCuff

    BB, I am really enjoying all your posts and observations here. I’ve watched this in person, the whole cyborg thing. A young hair stylist was showing us cat pictures on her phone one day, and she scrolled through thousands – thousands – of self-portraits on her iPhone, with various poses, to find it.

    Sue, I am independent and have voted in primaries. In MA if you are unenrolled you can vote for either. It’s only when you enroll are you locked out.

  • Russ in Texas

    Oh. Misunderstood the question.

    It’s all over the place for the same reason that the world’s first Lithuanian-language newspaper wasn’t printed in Lithuania. Lots of immigrants, especially 1st-gen ones, who do okay with the language but want their native language if they can get it for comfort reasons — they don’t want to “have to brain” just to get an idea what’s going on.

    Are there people who play that angle as demogogues? Absolutely. But I live in a solidly lower-middle/striving-working-class neighborhood, ranch houses not far from the freeway that no SWPL could bear to look at without a sneer, and politically speaking, you absolutely *cannot* say “that guy’s Mexican, so obviously he votes Democrat.” By and large, these dudes exemplify middle-america in their mores and values, with all the variations to suit.

    Q: How can you tell if there are Mexicans in your neighborhood?
    A: Because their lawns are fucking perfect.

    Now, you CAN usually say “Mexi=Dem” in California. But that’s because, pace some fine folks I know out there, California is synonymous for “paradise lost.” I’ve had Mexican guys in SWPL-Cali look at me in SHOCK because I bumped into them and actually apologized, without looking afraid because I’d accidentally touched a Mexican. I’ve heard similar sentiments from guys I’ve picked up on the road and given lifts.

  • JP

    “Hmmmm, smells like you’re gonna try Bantustans as well.”

    http://en.es-static.us/upl/2012/12/US_city_lights_night.jpg

    No, what I’m saying is that the poorly lit part of the country in that link west of the Mississippi is quite detachable because nobody really lives there because it really doesn’t support people.

    Leaving the west coast to China/Mexico, so to speak.

    The question will be to see what happens as the global power of the U.S. declines.

  • pvw

    at Hope 365:

    Philosophically, gun ownership is a more “masculine” mindset, that of arming the good guys (sheepdog) to keep the bad guys (wolves) at bay. I believe it was Robert Heinlein who wrote, “An armed society is a polite society.”

    Me: This is exactly what the gun safety instructor spoke of yesterday afternoon! Arming the good people (again, very middle class appearing group, especially among the older ones). He explained the common reasons for getting a gun: self-defense, a job, recreation.

    Hope: But women do not want to have to protect themselves, as this runs counter to primal psychological programming. Only very recently in history has a woman and man gained (nearly) equal ability to kill via weaponry. Now, a woman armed with a gun is as able to be as deadly as a man, but very few women would want to be trained in it.

    Me: So interesting, but true. I saw an interesting essay on this, a woman of color writing about her interest in guns and she addressed that very issue, of traditional wiring (at least in some subcultures), but not all. In addition, marketers are seeing an increasing trend of women wanting to develop expertise in using firearms.

    As I said, it is about subcultures. It is fascinating, I know of two stories about young women, one an 18 year old widow and another a 12 year old child, each using guns to fend off intruders. The intruder was breaking into her house; she used her 12 gauge to shoot him dead. She put her 3 month old baby boy in another room, gave him a bottle to keep him quiet, barricaded the front door and waited. The child barricaded herself in a bathroom and shot through the door as the intruder tried to break the door down. No surprise, they were each from a more gun friendly state–Oklahoma.

    Hope: I guess I have some rather masculine wiring, because I want to be a good shot.

    Me: I feel the same way, I must be some type of high t woman! From the moment the brother in law asked me whether I wanted to try shooting, I said, absolutely, whatever types of firearms they had…It amuses Mr. PVW to no end; he is excited this is something we can try together, and especially since it draws on his own expertise in firearms.

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

    JP,

    No, what I’m saying is that the poorly lit part of the country in that link west of the Mississippi is quite detachable because nobody really lives there because it really doesn’t support people.

    Leaving the west coast to China/Mexico, so to speak.

    The question will be to see what happens as the global power of the U.S. declines.

    True.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “I think you are missing the entire North-South cultural conflict here.

    No way are the Southern conservative whites going to joing with the liberal Northern whites.”

    I don’t see a great divide. People are more or less the same across the US. Same language, same food, same basic civilization and culture, same TV shows, same Wal-mart, voting for the same two redundant political parties who both serve the same corporations, etc.

    I do see a divide between fundamentalist Christians and everyone else though. Those types of Christians are a small minority and don’t influence mainstream America.

  • J

    The KKK was not religious-based. That is, to the extent that it was anti-Catholic, it was out of ethnic and not theological concerns.

    Esco, what about their anti-Semitism? Racial or religious? Or both?

    BTW, you can cook for me any time. ;-)

    @david foster

    Interesting link. I can;t say I agreed with all the particulars, but I found the main idea to be rather persuasive.

    @Iggles

    Congratulations! Is marriage on the table?

    @OTC

    I can sympathize with your desire to work less and pursue your interests more. I wish DH and I could find a way for each of us to work part-time and play and pursue interests the rest of the time. Not an option for us at this point in time.

    @DV

    However, sometimes it looks like you guys again press on some kind of personal itching button out of the blue and immediately turn into the “toutes des salopes”(They’ve hurt me, and therefore they’re all bitches who will have to pay for it) mode again.

    Huh? So, I guess you DON’T need a vagina to notice that trend.

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

    Russ,

    Q: How can you tell if there are Mexicans in your neighborhood?
    A: Because their lawns are fucking perfect.

    hahahaha.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    On race and the New England/South divide: you’ll see more interracial couples in the rural and semi-rural areas of the South than you will in suburban New England. Its a fact.

  • J

    she scrolled through thousands – thousands – of self-portraits on her iPhone, with various poses, to find it.

    EEeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwwwwwwwww.

  • Ramble

    I don’t think high MMV women are choosing Jacob. I think lower quality women are choosing guys like him.

    Well, this is hard to assume in certain places, like Portland. Portland in a short time has become a pretty expensive place to have a family and now has a fairly entrenched dogmatic culture. These two things can soon be over run with (male) blowhards (i.e. overly ironic, religiously eco-tastic, etc.). If Jacob is a nice looking guy with an easy going attitude and no creepy vibes, many a good girl may take a shot with him before figuring out that he much, much prefers to sit back and hang. For many, it is only then that they figure out that he is not a good piece of clay to be molded bu rather a man who has succeeded in living a very relaxed life and is not that interested in changing it.

    My whole point is, if he is a nice guy, with nice looks and a nice attitude in a “bad” environment, many relatively high MMV chicks will take a shot. (San Fran is another place where this, I understand, common).

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

      My whole point is, if he is a nice guy, with nice looks and a nice attitude in a “bad” environment, many relatively high MMV chicks will take a shot. (San Fran is another place where this, I understand, common).

      Fair enough, but surely they are not in the third who has first date sex. Jacob has already stated he will not wait for sex, even for a potential gf. As always, delaying sex is the best filter for identifying cads.

  • INTJ

    @ david foster

    I generally find religious fundamentalist/evangelist types to be less obnoxious than the political/environmental type. The religious fundamentalist may be quite sure that you’re going to hell if you don’t change your ways; but there’s (usually) no malice in it; he WANTS you to change your ways and go (as he sees it) to heaven.

    Whereas the environmental fundamentalist in many cases really does want you to suffer: some of the gleeful comments during power outages by people carrying the “environmentalist” banner are truly malevolent and appalling.

    Well, personally, I prefer the environmental type, though only by a small margin. The environmental type might have outright hatred for me, but he doesn’t question my humanity. Whereas the fundamentalist might have good intentions for me, but as long as I don’t convert, he’ll look down on me as inferior to him. I personally prefer respectful antagonism to patronization. Yes, the latter might be more well-meaning, but it takes away my self-respect.

  • INTJ

    @ pvw

    To the left of me, the “cradle Roman Catholics” who are conservative on social issues but very liberal on fiscal matters, the social issues don’t matter as much to them, so they will consistently vote Democrat that is where they are registered.

    Yup despite my atheism, my political stances agree quite closely with those of Roman Catholics. I’m morally conservative except on the issue of gay rights (personally I think allowing gays to marry is pro-marriage and pro-morality). On the other hand, I’m rather left-wing on economic issues, as is the Catholic church.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Re your challenge about how many of my ESL students I socialize with, I wonder why you ask. INTJ’s claim was that I know nothing of immigrant culture. My reply demonstrated that I do in fact know a bit about a great many cultures. Is there some reason why I cannot learn in a conversational class? Why is it necessary for me to invite students to dinner? You were clearly getting at something, but I’m not sure what or why.

    You may be able to learn quite a bit in a conversational class, so I wouldn’t dispute your knowledge of immigrants. However, you seem to be a clear example of how upper SES whites compartmentalize their lives and limit their interactions with other groups to certain organized activities. They don’t live next to them, eat dinner with them, have their kids play with each other, or any of the other activities that create much closer and more natural cultural exchange and social understanding.

    But then again, to some extent, upper class whites even compartmentalize their interactions with each other. Everything becomes organized and there is very little “real” social interaction that isn’t scripted to some extent.

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

      @INTJ

      However, you seem to be a clear example of how upper SES whites compartmentalize their lives and limit their interactions with other groups to certain organized activities. They don’t live next to them, eat dinner with them, have their kids play with each other, or any of the other activities that create much closer and more natural cultural exchange and social understanding.

      Again, you shoot from the hip in ignorance. May I ask how you know what my interactions are? Socially or otherwise? Until yesterday, you didn’t know I have been teaching ESL for 10 years as a volunteer. You don’t know what my church is like, my neighborhood (2 projects within two blocks of my home), my locals schools (78 languages spoken at the high school), my friends, family, kids friends’, or future DIL.

      Your superior and smug attitude is offensive. Who are you to judge me? You think that because you have brown skin your pride in your caste goes unnoticed here? What hypocrisy. Do not make assumptions about me or judge me again, or you will not be welcome here.

  • pvw

    @INTJ: despite my atheism, my political stances agree quite closely with those of Roman Catholics. I’m morally conservative…

    Me: my own personal morality is indicative of my Roman Catholic upbringing, but I couldn’t adhere to their conservatism in all respects, so I ran off with the Protestants, but not those of the type you described:

    “Whereas the fundamentalist might have good intentions for me, but as long as I don’t convert, he’ll look down on me as inferior to him. I personally prefer respectful antagonism to patronization. Yes, the latter might be more well-meaning, but it takes away my self-respect.”

    Because at the same time numbers of them dislike Catholics, they really despise a fair number of their Protestant co-religionists, and they have the same attitude towards you as they have towards us! I might read their texts once in a while because I want to know what is going on in the world of Christian thought, but I will not have anything to do with them.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    It would seem to me that aside from your stances on gun control and feminism, you’re pretty much politically the exact opposite of me.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Susan

    I don’t regret my casual experiences because I didn’t experience very negative consequences. If I had contracted an STD I would obviously regret them. Sure, the sex was meh, and I didn’t care to see the guys again, but it was also sort of interesting, and the seduction part was fun. I have never felt that those experiences saddled me with emotional baggage of any kind, nor have they interfered with my relationship with my husband. I can actually see the appeal of the wedding party fling, much to the chagrin of men here.

    Heh, it sounds like what you are saying is that casual sex aint all that bad, except for the, you know, actual sex.

    I get what you’re saying. Believe me, I do, because I’ve also had some casual encounters, and indeed, it’s hard to say I regret them too much. It’s also incorrect to say that I liked them. It’s more correct to say that I nothing-ed them.

    Oh, and some were definitely interesting, in the sense that they make good stories. Not necessarily good for me, though.

    I also get what you’re saying about the thrill of the seductive dance, especially in a wedding scenario. Did I ever tell you about the first time I went to a wedding with my current SO, btw? I caught the garter. Actually, I stepped about 10 feet back from the crowd because I DIDN’T want the damn garter, but the stupid groom overshot everyone and it landed at my feet. So while they were looking around trying to find it, I just reached over and picked it up.

    I was pretttttttttty drunk, so I decided to grab my SO and sneak her into one of the service-worker hallways to make out with her. That was fun :)

    I think that even though the consequences of our actions haven’t “caught up with us,” so to speak, that we should still be paying attention to the relative cost-benefit and the sort of signal we’re sending to other people. We don’t lose anything by encouraging a culture where intimacy is encouraged only for LTRs: our casual experiences were pretty much lame, right?

    It sure might help mitigate some of the consequences of early sex, though, and make things a lot simpler. There were “some” consequences, I guess, you can say, even if I didn’t personally feel them, and neither did you: we’re changing culture marginally, and big cultural changes happen one person at a time.

    So I do feel some “consequence” for my actions, I guess you could say. And hell, I probably would have been happier volunteering at a soup kitchen as opposed to having some casual “sex” anyways.

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

      @ADBG

      There were “some” consequences, I guess, you can say, even if I didn’t personally feel them, and neither did you: we’re changing culture marginally, and big cultural changes happen one person at a time.

      Yes, I take responsibility for that.

  • Russ in Texas

    @INTJ#483,

    Respectfully, this is a poor litmus test; having also been a teacher, I can tell you point-blank that in a number of cases, that kind of personal interaction outside of the classroom would have gotten me fired.

    Common sense no longer dominates in much of the academy, even its junior branches (which is why I’m no longer there). While I don’t know Susan’s particulars (and don’t really need to), what you’re positing is much, MUCH more rare than it used to be before professors/teachers were presumed guilty any time a student squawked.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Russ:
    The Lombards disdain the Apulians, who scorn the Sicilians, all of whom are described as something like vermin by the Swiss
    I would far rather be black in Tennessee than Paris, where I have heard anti-black and anti-arab bigotry casually spoken on the street that would embarrass an east-Texas Klansman.

    ….And the German-speaking Swiss dismiss the French-speaking ones as smelly and lazy, the later who in turn despise the French for being even lazier, the Belgians not being Belgians but either Flemish or Wallons, and so on. That merry-go-round has never had any “brakes” to pull on.
    As for Paris, well, I guess you noticed the ultra right (le front national) percentage of votes in the latest presidential election… However, ask any open minded “Estelle” what she thinks of young Arabs when she’s roaming the streets. Long, multi folded problem. But in all those aspects, I’ve found the Americans very much as tribal as over here on the whole.
    As for central eastern Europe, I hope you haven’t failed to notice the adoration of the Slovaks for the Hungarians, the Bohemians for the Moravians, or all of them for the gypsies……

    @J:
    Huh? So, I guess you DON’T need a vagina to notice that trend.

    Obviously not, maybe just a different perspective, and I’m certainly not a unicorn in that regard.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Again, you shoot from the hip in ignorance. May I ask how you know what my interactions are? Socially or otherwise? Until yesterday, you didn’t know I have been teaching ESL for 10 years as a volunteer. You don’t know what my church is like, my neighborhood (2 projects within two blocks of my home), my locals schools (78 languages spoken at the high school), my friends, family, kids friends’, or future DIL.

    OTC asked you a question. You claimed that the question was irrelevant. I explained why it was relevant. Namely, you seemed to be a typical upper class white liberal. There would have been no need for this had you simply responded to OTC’s question by giving information about your church, neighborhood, local schools, etc.

    As for making assumptions about you, that’s a matter of the teapot calling the kettle black, given the kinds of statements you make about most manosphere people.

    I have observed that your examples and anecdotes nearly always involve high SES, highly educated people. I guessed incorrectly that this was due to limited exposure with other groups. Clearly, I was wrong about the cause, but I still stand by my observation that your anecdotes or HUS articles rarely if ever deal with people outside of your societal group.

    Your superior and smug attitude is offensive. Who are you to judge me? You think that because you have brown skin your pride in your caste goes unnoticed here? What hypocrisy. Do not make assumptions about me or judge me again, or you will not be welcome here.

    And you accuse me of shooting from the hip. I most certainly don’t have any pride in my caste, because I don’t have a caste to be proud of.

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

      @INTJ

      OTC asked you a question. You claimed that the question was irrelevant. I explained why it was relevant. Namely, you seemed to be a typical upper class white liberal. There would have been no need for this had you simply responded to OTC’s question by giving information about your church, neighborhood, local schools, etc.

      OTC has no right to ask me if I have any black friends, and neither do you. That question is out of bounds and not material to the discussion. You stated that I knew nothing about immigrant cultures. I disproved that. I owe neither of you any justification for my choices, my social life, or my relationships. Your comments are essentially racist.

      As for making assumptions about you, that’s a matter of the teapot calling the kettle black, given the kinds of statements you make about most manosphere people.

      I make statements about behavior I have observed first-hand. There is a plethora of information available to anyone who cares to read it. Manospherians are not shy about sharing their views. Assumptions are unnecessary.

      I have observed that your examples and anecdotes nearly always involve high SES, highly educated people.

      Duh! I have never hidden any information about myself or how I have come to write this blog. I routinely need to remind Ted and others that I am writing first and foremost about college culture. It is what I know, and since that gives me half the population to work with, I don’t feel qualified or inclined to go outside that group. If I did, I can assure you that the quality of debate here would plummet, as would the number of comments, as few uneducated people search out blogs and debate.

      You’re doing what the PC left wingnuts have done to Lena Dunham. She can’t write what she knows, she must have token friends of color to reflect the distribution of the Brooklyn population. What bullshit.

      I most certainly don’t have any pride in my caste, because I don’t have a caste to be proud of.

      Apologies if I was incorrect – I seem to recall you bonding with fellow Brahmin Say Whaat, but perhaps that was someone else.

      In that case, what is the source of your smug superiority?

  • JP

    “And the German-speaking Swiss dismiss the French-speaking ones as smelly and lazy,”

    Well, they certainly don’t keep their houses up as well, so as an outside observer there certainly does seem to be something profound lacking in the French-speaking Swiss that is present in the German-speaking Swiss.

    So, there may be an objective superiority to the German-speaking Swiss to the French-speaking Swiss that is summed up in being “smelly and lazy”.

  • JP

    What we really need is an objective “culture scale” so that we can objectively rate cultures on an absolute scale with respect to their quality so that people can know what other cultures they should emulate.

    However, we have to get into ontological debates to get there, such as the purpose of mankind, the purpose of culture and such.

  • Russ in Texas

    Damien,

    Absolutely. The Hungarians have made themselves NO friends, historically. :D And those Slovaks? A bunch of Tots. :p

    I’ve seen lots and lots of racism in America — most of the tribalism I see tends to be based on political bigotry (southerners trash-talking New Yorkers, Yankees trash-talking, well, everybody, that Kansas-Texas rivalry that apparently only the Kansans have actually heard about….) What are the examples you saw? As an outsider, you’ve a definite advantage of “eye.”

  • Damien Vulaume

    @JPSo, there may be an objective superiority to the German-speaking Swiss to the French-speaking Swiss that is summed up in being “smelly and lazy”.(…) However, we have to get into ontological debates to get there, such as the purpose of mankind, the purpose of culture and such.

    Puzzled smile here. Sounds like a facetious provocation of yours again, and your last sentence sounds even more like one coming from a new England scholar, or am I mistaken?.
    All I can say about this is that I always tend to look for the best, or, rather, what is most different yet compatible to my own sensitivities and upbringing in order to live in a foreign culture. There are cultures in which I would be willing to make many compromises in order to live in there, whereas there are some others where, even though they would have many interesting aspects on offer, in which I could never live. By all this I am also of course making an analogy with women.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    pvw, thanks for the interesting stories. Now that I am a mother, stories like that resonate more with me, because I’d want to be able to protect our baby. If it’s just me, I wouldn’t care as much.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    david foster, ” I generally find religious fundamentalist/evangelist types to be less obnoxious than the political/environmental type. The religious fundamentalist may be quite sure that you’re going to hell if you don’t change your ways; but there’s (usually) no malice in it; he WANTS you to change your ways and go (as he sees it) to heaven.

    Whereas the environmental fundamentalist in many cases really does want you to suffer: some of the gleeful comments during power outages by people carrying the “environmentalist” banner are truly malevolent and appalling. ”

    I’ve come in contact with more than my fair share of religious fundies who do not respect my religious freedom of choice and try to force their own particular religion on me, but where are all these “environmental fundamentalists” who want me to suffer?

  • pvw

    @Hope: pvw, thanks for the interesting stories. Now that I am a mother, stories like that resonate more with me, because I’d want to be able to protect our baby. If it’s just me, I wouldn’t care as much.

    Me: You’re welcome; the stories caught at my heart for those very reasons as well.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “I am profoundly opposed to mea culpas for “American Imperialism,” and would have happily deported those lefties who claimed that America deserved 9/11 during its aftermath. ”

    Yeah but this is not a leftie view, no? Lefties are supposedly all about big Government where as rightists would indeed mea culpa over US government expansion so vast that it expands even to far reaching parts of the globe.

    “What we really need is an objective “culture scale” so that we can objectively rate cultures on an absolute scale with respect to their quality so that people can know what other cultures they should emulate.”

    Good idea. But within one culture there a million sub-cultures and people within a larger culture are often an amalgamation of several sub-cultures so it would be an enormous endeavor.

    “However, we have to get into ontological debates to get there, such as the purpose of mankind, the purpose of culture and such.”

    And everyone has their own ideas about those purposes.

  • Abbot

    The way men are using online dating to get to certain fruit means the tree is coming back

    http://gadelali.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/girls-are-like-apples-on-trees.jpg

  • J

    Obviously not, maybe just a different perspective, and I’m certainly not a unicorn in that regard.

    In these parts, you are.

  • Iggles

    Sassy and J – Thanks :D

    Congratulations! Is marriage on the table?

    We’re not there yet but we do see a future together (i.e., old folks sitting on our front porch with lemonade in hand while he yells “hey kids, get off our lawn!”. I shrug and offer them $5 each to clear the fallen leaves. They respond, “That barely covers the weekly insurance rate for our hover boards!” :lol: )

  • J

    LOL. Cute!

  • Damien Vulaume

    I am profoundly opposed to mea culpas for “American Imperialism,” and would have happily deported those lefties who claimed that America deserved 9/11 during its aftermath.

    But I certainly wouldn’t expect a European to share my view.

    By that you mean the likes of Noam Chomsky?
    I won’t get into a debate on US foreign politics, since discussing politics and getting into over heated debates about it is one of the most tiring national sport in France. However, I can only say and hope that most open minded Americans realize how pretty much the rest of the world views the US nowdays more as a potential threat than the “freedom of opportunity” land it once was for many.
    As an aside, I wouldn’t expect Obama, even after Newport, to shed any tears for his drones victims either.
    This “get out of the way, we’re America” foreign policy has never helped making the world a better place, nor Madeleine Albrights’ conviction of “I still think that we can teach democracy and bring a lot of our freedom to the world”, and later on saying that the 500 thousand or so children killed by US embargo in Iraq in the 90’s was, in her own words “a price worse paying.”, in the name of western superior democracy, of course.
    All this reminds me VERY much about the least savory aspects of my very own country, given its colonial past…………..
    All this could also be applied to the man/woman “rooster fight” as well, and you know what I mean.

  • OffTheCuff

    To be honest, I forget the point. We were talking about crossing cultural lines. One can do that by being a “tourist”, or one can actually have friends in that culture. Heck, I lived in Germany for a while, and did all things German for months on end… but I still know very little about it, say, compared one of my college friends who married a national. I think to understand a culture, one has to experience it, daily, for a long, long time, or be close friends with someone who is. Otherwise we see it from the outside, not the inside.

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

      I think to understand a culture, one has to experience it, daily, for a long, long time, or be close friends with someone who is. Otherwise we see it from the outside, not the inside.

      In that case, INTJs criticism that I am deficient in my understanding of immigrant cultures was especially unreasonable.

  • JP

    “In that case, what is the source of your smug superiority?”

    Some people just know that they are the natural aristocracy.

    For instance, I know that I am not God, but you always have to ask yourself:

    “Is the world and all that is in it mine to do with as I please?”

    “Is the natural place of all others beneath me?”

    “Should I weigh others in my scales and decide whether I find them wanting?””

    “What should I do with the fact that the world is inhabited by others?”

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

      Some people just know that they are the natural aristocracy.

      I believe they are called narcissistic sociopaths.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    I don’t think Susan is attempting to present herself as any sort of expert on other cultures. There are bits and pieces that can be gleaned simply by spending time with people from other cultures and that is what Susan gleaned from her ESL classes. She’s not claiming to be an expert on the cultures of any of those immigrant students, nor saying she has extensive experience with them. But she has picked up on some things, probably some combination of good and bad, and she has an opinion. That’s allowed.

  • Tomato

    I have gay friends and I believe they should be able to get married with all the legal benefits.
    I believe that contraception should be easily accessible to all.
    I do not believe that sex should only be performed within marriage and only for the purpose of procreation.
    I do not believe that women should inherently defer to men.
    I think blue laws are ridiculous.

    Those beliefs (and others) put me at odds with evangelicals. So it is.

  • Russ in Texas

    —Some people just know that they are the natural aristocracy.

    I believe they are called narcissistic sociopaths.

    Am not!

  • JP

    “Some people just know that they are the natural aristocracy.”

    “I believe they are called narcissistic sociopaths.”

    I wonder if narcissistic sociopaths are generally racist.

    If they believe that all people are their playthings, do they differentiate by race?

    Hmmm.

    That was something I never thought about before.

    So, I did a Google search:

    “Are narcissitic sociopaths racist?”

    The second and fourth hits gave me Mary Matalin calling Obama a “political narcisstic sociopath.”

    While that didn’t answer my question, it does kind of point to the nature of current American political discourse.

    Fascinating.

  • JP

    “I have gay friends and I believe they should be able to get married with all the legal benefits.
    I believe that contraception should be easily accessible to all.
    I do not believe that sex should only be performed within marriage and only for the purpose of procreation.
    I do not believe that women should inherently defer to men.
    I think blue laws are ridiculous.

    Those beliefs (and others) put me at odds with evangelicals. So it is.”

    I don’t think that the evangelicals believe that sex should only be performed for the purposes of procreation.

    The contraception thing sounds catholic, not evangelical.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Susan:

    “Some people just know that they are the natural aristocracy.”

    I believe they are called narcissistic sociopaths.

    ROFL! Great, you nailed it.
    Now all of a sudden, you have me chanting “God bless America”. I’ll send that comment to some of those upper class people in France.

    @Russ
    What are the examples you saw? As an outsider, you’ve a definite advantage of “eye.”

    Hah, that would take a long time :-)
    But I guess too much based on my own anecdotal experience. I had never heard of that Kansas/Texas rivalry before, sounds hilarious and a good starting point for a film script.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “I think blue laws are ridiculous. ”

    What are they?

    I wish American men were more like European and Asian men.
    Those men aren’t as fat and uncultured and anti-romance as American men. Those men really know how to sweep a woman off her feet. They are really sweet and take pleasure in romancing a woman.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Susan, future DIL? Is your son engaged or close to it? If so congrats!

    Iggles, happy anniversary!

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

      @Hope

      Susan, future DIL? Is your son engaged or close to it? If so congrats!

      They have set up house, and I believe it’s only a matter of time. They speak openly about marriage, their future kids, etc. Anything is possible, but I would be extremely surprised if they do not get engaged within a year or so.

  • JP

    “What are they?”

    The last remnants of the moral order that stand between American civil society and total evil and depravity.

    The last desperate attempt to prevent the judgment of God from wiping away humanity as the United States, the last true hope for the world, aches under the sheer weight of sin that now runs riot across the lands.

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

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “A blue law is a type of law designed to enforce religious standards, particularly the observance of a day of worship or rest. In the US, most blue laws have been repealed, declared unconstitutional, or are simply unenforced; though prohibitions on the sale of alcoholic beverages or prohibitions of almost all commerce on Sundays are still enforced in many areas. Blue laws often prohibit an activity only during certain hours and there are usually exceptions to the prohibition of commerce, like grocery and drug stores. In some places, blue laws may be enforced due to religious principles, but others are retained as a matter of tradition or out of convenience.”

    Doesn’t sound so bad. I’m a believer in the 4 hour work week. ;) More time off the better.

  • Russ in Texas

    Rebound has clearly never tried to date a Korean man.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Rebound has clearly never tried to date a Korean man.”

    Um, and you know that …. how?

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

    Rebound Girl…”I’ve come in contact with more than my fair share of religious fundies who do not respect my religious freedom of choice and try to force their own particular religion on me, but where are all these “environmental fundamentalists” who want me to suffer?”

    1)Please clarify what you mean by “force” their own religion on you. Do you mean they want government (or good squads) to throw you in jail or beat you up if you don’t accept their religious view??–or do you simply mean that they verbally (possibly *very* verbally) try to convince you that their view is the right one?

    2)”environmental fundamentalists” who want you to suffer…as an example, during the NYC blackout of 2003, several callers to an NPR station made comments like:

    “I’m glad when these things happen, it teaches us a lesson”

    and

    “We deserve this, because we’re so wasteful”

    I’ve seen similar comments from “progressives” re the more recent power outages.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    They were saying, “it teaches US a good lesson” and “WE deserve this” so that indicates they had experienced the outages themselves. If that’s the way they interpret their own experience, so be it.

    I’m up for some voluntary, regulated, temporary shortages for the sake of our economy ourselves. That doesn’t mean I want anyone to “suffer”.

    I’ve participated in religious events, even cultural events, where Fundie Christians turned up to protest and cause trouble, shouting violent slogans etc. They have zero concept of religious freedom. I am vehemently against missionaries also. They use means of subversion to “spread the good news”. I’ve more than a few conversations with them where they refused to accept that “I’m just not that into him”. Meaning Jesus.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    When the missionaries came to Africa they had the Bible and we had the land. They said, ‘Let us pray.’ We closed our eyes. When we opened them we had the Bible and they had the land.” Bishop Desmond Tutu

  • Lokland

    @Rebound

    ““Rebound has clearly never tried to date a Korean man.”

    Um, and you know that …. how?”

    Koreans having the longest working hours on the planet.

    Note. Whoever feels like piping up about their uncle Bob who works 12 hour days, not worth explaining.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    Ahhh ok. That was in response to my 4 hour work week comment, not the romantic foreigner one. OK. I’ll concede that. But Koreans over here don’t work that long ;)

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I wish American men were more like European and Asian men.
    Those men aren’t as fat and uncultured and anti-romance as American men. Those men really know how to sweep a woman off her feet. They are really sweet and take pleasure in romancing a woman.

    I shall take this moment to say that I am doing my part to become more cultured and have taken up reading Pride and Prejudice.

    I am also pleased to announce that I have found the female counterpart to Jacob!

    It is every single woman in 19th century England.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    In that case, what is the source of your smug superiority?

    Upbringing. If I believed everything my mother told me, I’d still be living in her basement. :wink:

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    I guess the roles are reversed these days. Fair enough. Play on!

  • JP

    “Koreans having the longest working hours on the planet.”

    They also have one of the lowest fertility rates on the planet.

    It nearly dropped below 1.0 a few years ago.

  • JP

    “I shall take this moment to say that I am doing my part to become more cultured and have taken up reading Pride and Prejudice.”

    I prefer Vanity Fair (becasue it’s on the bookshelf with the other books from the turn of the century), but to each his own.

  • JP

    “I’ve participated in religious events, even cultural events, where Fundie Christians turned up to protest and cause trouble, shouting violent slogans etc. They have zero concept of religious freedom.”

    Why would they want religious freedom?

    Their goal is universal Puritania, to witness to all humans, and thus usher in the Rapture, where everyone but them is killed by the glorious army of Christ. Or something. My memory is fuzzy here, since I’m 20 years out of high school.

    It’s kind of funny that what was once the bright center of the United States theocratic expansionary impulse is now where Susan Walsh lives.

  • JP

    I just wanted to remind everyone who dreams of becoming a French citizen, that the French Foreign Legion remains available as a pathway to French citizenship.

    http://www.legion-recrute.com/en/

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Their goal is universal Puritania, to witness to all humans, and thus usher in the Rapture, where everyone but them is killed by the glorious army of Christ.”

    And deti thinks these are the “manly men so many women say they want”?!?!

  • JP

    OK, here’s the Rapture info. I honestly can’t remember who’s in the glorious army or who’s doing the killing or what is happening.

    Read Revelation for details.

    “Some dispensationalist premillennialists (including many Evangelicals) hold the return of Christ to be two distinct events, or one second coming in two stages. 1 Thessalonians 4:15–17 is seen to be a description of a preliminary event to the return described in Matthew 24:29–31. Although both describe a return of Jesus, these are seen to be separated in time by more than a brief period. The first event may or may not be seen (which is not a primary issue), and is called the rapture, when the saved are to be ‘caught up,’ whence the term “rapture” is taken. The “second coming” is a public event, wherein Christ’s presence is prophesied to be clearly seen by all, as he returns to end a battle staged at Armageddon, though possibly fought at the Valley of Jehoshaphat. The majority of dispensationalists hold that the first event precedes the period of tribulation, even if not immediately (see chart for additional dispensationalist timing views);”

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

  • Damien Vulaume

    I just wanted to remind everyone who dreams of becoming a French citizen, that the French Foreign Legion remains available as a pathway to French citizenship.

    Yeah, but from the comfortable chair on which you’re sitting on. Have you ever met any of those people signing up for the said French foreign legion?…. I have dealt with the French army, and made sure that they would not want me to deal with either. A funny story. But anyway, what is less funny is that I’ve met some of those destitute young kids signing up there. I guess you know about Faust.

  • JP

    I deal with enough 100% service connected disabled from Vietnam (just a few years ago), Iraq, and Afghanistan.

    Nothing quite like reading through several hundred pages of VA medical records.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @JP:
    But that’s quite something else than serving/experiencing the army in the first place. You definitely sound like a New England guy. Lol. Try to get out of your bubble some day…
    Time to log off anyway.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    OTC has no right to ask me if I have any black friends, and neither do you. That question is out of bounds and not material to the discussion. You stated that I knew nothing about immigrant cultures. I disproved that. I owe neither of you any justification for my choices, my social life, or my relationships. Your comments are essentially racist.

    Fair enough. But don’t get all pissed off at me for pointing out why the answer to that question might interest OTC. Also, my comments might be racist, but you can remove all references to race and the point still stands. It’s primarily an issue of class.

    I make statements about behavior I have observed first-hand. There is a plethora of information available to anyone who cares to read it. Manospherians are not shy about sharing their views. Assumptions are unnecessary.

    You go beyond that. You make inferences about Manospherian’s personal traits based on the views they have shared. You have cast aspersions before towards the psychological health of some manosphere bloggers.

    Duh! I have never hidden any information about myself or how I have come to write this blog. I routinely need to remind Ted and others that I am writing first and foremost about college culture. It is what I know, and since that gives me half the population to work with, I don’t feel qualified or inclined to go outside that group. If I did, I can assure you that the quality of debate here would plummet, as would the number of comments, as few uneducated people search out blogs and debate.

    I rest my case… Actually, you’ve made my case for me.

    You’re doing what the PC left wingnuts have done to Lena Dunham. She can’t write what she knows, she must have token friends of color to reflect the distribution of the Brooklyn population. What bullshit.

    I’d say that Lena Dunham knows very little about the non-white population in Brooklyn. If she got all pissed off at me for that and went on to tell me how she teaches English classes to a bunch of immigrants and knows all about them, I’d get kinda confused though.

    Apologies if I was incorrect – I seem to recall you bonding with fellow Brahmin Say Whaat, but perhaps that was someone else.

    I’m only quarter Brahmin, and I don’t know if SayWhaat is a Brahmin or not. We’re both of Marathi ethnicity though, which was why we bonded. We can speak the same language and all…

    In that case, what is the source of your smug superiority?

    http://intjcentral.com/the-compleat-idiots-guide-to-the-intj/2/

    “We are self-confident.
    No type is more self-confident than the INTJ. We have a very keen awareness of our own knowledge and abilities, and – more importantly – of the limits of our knowledge and abilities. Consequently we can come across as arrogant sometimes. This is your problem to deal with, not ours, since it is a problem of erroneous perception (yours).”

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

      @INTJ

      But don’t get all pissed off at me for pointing out why the answer to that question might interest OTC.

      OTC is oddly preoccupied with my social status. *Shrugs.* If I had a dollar for every time he’s used the word “elitist” on this blog…

      Also, my comments might be racist, but you can remove all references to race and the point still stands.

      From the HUS Rules of Engagement:

      Do not include sweeping generalizations about any group of people based on sex, religion, race, age, profession, income, or education level.

      You make inferences about Manospherian’s personal traits based on the views they have shared. You have cast aspersions before towards the psychological health of some manosphere bloggers.

      Based on the views they’ve shared, diagnosis is appropriate. Many of them meet the primary criteria for personality disorders, based on their commentary alone.

      I rest my case… Actually, you’ve made my case for me.

      In which case I fail to see why it was necessary for you to state the obvious in an accusing tone. Where’s the insight in stating that Susan Walsh writes for an intelligent audience about college culture? In fact, you said more than that – you found it appropriate to suggest that having good character means having a social life that includes people not only of various races, but various income levels. As if it is noble to boast having a friend or two below the poverty line.

      We have a very keen awareness of our own knowledge and abilities, and – more importantly – of the limits of our knowledge and abilities. Consequently we can come across as arrogant sometimes. This is your problem to deal with, not ours, since it is a problem of erroneous perception (yours).

      I can deal with arrogance based on real knowledge and abilities, even if it’s not my favorite flavor. You, on the other hand are insufficiently aware of your own knowledge limits, certainly, and perhaps the limits of your abilities as well. I agree that it is my problem to deal with, and my method will be asking you to depart if it continues.

      I have no more to say on the matter.

  • Jackie

    Re: Religious Discussion (Deti, Susan, et al)

    “I’m happy to clarify re what I have witnessed from so-called Christians online, particularly at these blogs. The most vicious, abusive, misogynist and derogatory language I’ve ever seen anywhere. Wishing people ill, vague threats of harm, mocking and ridiculing those with differing views.”
    ====
    I wonder how much of this predicates if their faith is based on fear or love for God. I think the meanest ones *must* come from backgrounds based on fear, tales of hellfire, demons and eternal torment.

    That combined with being told that “God loves you!” would create *immense* cognitive dissonance and dysfunction, I’d imagine. Have you seen the documentary “HELLHOUSE” on Netflix instant? It’s pretty fascinating! I think living like that would be absolutely crazy-making, though. Maybe that’s why they’re so mean.

    Anyway, I think Susan has hit the nail on the head as to why so many people have such visceral loathing and disgust for “ostentatious Christians.”

    How often do we see people wielding religion as a tool of their ego; so called “Christians” overflowing with arrogance, condescension and false superiority? Or using their faith to cloak their evil deeds? Or a tool to control via fear? Or to justify hatred based on race or sexual orientation?

    There’s a reason why the “corrupt preacher fleecing the sheep” is such a strong trope.

    Instead of getting defensive, I think this is a call to accountability for those who follow Jesus. Namely, how do our actions show Christ to others? I think it boils down to two things:

    1) Letting others know they have worth, that they are valued and loved beyond comprehension as a creation of God.
    2) Standing with those society would demonize, the “least of these.” Poor people, the people mocked for their appearance (“the 1s and 2s”), the powerless, the ignored and the abused. The people we cross the street to avoid are the very ones that Christ loved the most.

    (I am trying to imagine how hardcore it must have been to embrace lepers at a time with so many Hebraic restrictions over stuff like shellfish, pork and mixed fibers!)

    This world treats us as very disposable and we are encouraged cut people down rather than build them up. To mock others’ faults in order to keep people from noticing our own. Society teaches us to play life as a zero-sum game, where kindness is seen as a weakness instead of a strength.

    I believe we are called to be courageous and go against this grain. Even one ounce of kindness or one drop of love can let in the Christ. And like the loaves and the fishes, it will be multiplied beyond measure, bringing more goodness than we could ever believe possible.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    http://intjcentral.com/the-compleat-idiots-guide-to-the-intj/2/

    That overview doesn’t explain certain negative intellectual qualities that Susan’s rightly pointed out. But it does explain the V-card and lack of GF experience. Perhaps it’s all interrelated…

  • Bully

    re: Bastiat at 354:

    “Re: 40-hour workweek. Well, Jacob is not alone on this—I run into it with my students all the time now. Running on parallel tracks to the PUA movement is the popular Tim Ferriss school of “lifestyle design” which believes that working like a dog for years (especially for someone else) and then having a retirement at the end when your physicality has sharply declined is a generally bad move from the standpoints of both real-time happiness and end-of-life regrets. It’s seen as a sucker’s game, perhaps even a kind of slavery.”

    The low-footprint lifehacker world traveling Roosh lifestyle works out perfectly well until shit happens, and this being life, shit WILL happen utterly beyond your control no matter how careful you are.. along the lines of “I got mugged in an alley and now I’ve got several broken bones with no savings, no wallet, and no insurance” kind of shit. Granted, that’s kind of an extreme example. But the Jacobs of this world are playing with fire by not building a strong foundation in their freewheeling youth for the rest of their life. Not all of them are going to make it. And I’d put money down that a lot of the older homeless were Jacobs in their youth.

    Not that I’m saying living the SWPL livestyle, living beyond your means constantly, and working in a corporate 9 to 5 mired in debt until your 70s so you can finally retire is a great life either, mind you.

    It’s all about striking a balance. I decided my goal would be to work hard, get a good job, and live far below my means to the point where I can buy a house with cash – no mortgage – by my mid 30s would be a solid goal to strive for.

  • szopen

    @Russ

    The Hungarians have made themselves NO friends, historically.

    Lengyel, Magyar – két jó barát, együtt harcol, s issza borát

    And @Damien and central european craziness… Well everyone knows that in Poland, only we Poznaniaks are good for something. If we could only rule this country, Poland would be next HongKong. And the fully successful Polish uprisings were made by Poznaniaks, while all those losers from Warsaw could do was repeatedly pattern of lose, weep, claim the moral superiority :) :)

    (But in fact I am only 1/2 Poznaniak, the second half is from the Kresy :( )

  • pvw

    @Russ in Texas 452: Greater New England and Left Coast: minimal-to-rare gun ownership in urban and suburban areas, low-average gun ownership in rural areas. Everywhere else: SIGNIFICANT gun ownership crossing all demographic lines (ethnic, SES, urban/suburban/rural).

    Me: My mind ran on your comment as I read a recent follow-up story about that Westchester newspaper that publicized the names and addresses of people in the community who have gun permits, just because they felt they should, in the wake of Newtown. It is a public record, so publicize it, they thought, rather than think about whether it was really necessary to target law-abiding people in such a fashion. Big uproar, and lots of it coming not just from the local community but mostly from across the community. The ultimate irony is that the newspaper has now hired armed guards; where are the armed guards, I wonder, for the people being targeted and harassed for owning guns, as though they were criminals. The worst part as I read further, is not only that these are law abiding citizens minding their business; numbers of them are police officers and corrections people who are now being targeted by convicts.

  • pvw

    excuse me, across the country, ie., in states where there is a lot more gun ownership and serious resentment of those types of attitudes.

  • JP

    “But that’s quite something else than serving/experiencing the army in the first place.”

    I have plenty of second-hand experience being that I grew up in the suburb of the Army War college.

    I’m always impressed when one of my sisters friends freaks out about having to divorce her husband because his arm got blown off and he can no longer stay in the Army.

    I went to a high school that sent more students to West Point than the Ivy League.

  • Russ in Texas

    @JP#533,

    Still is, it’s just the religion’s changed. Huge chunks of the “manosphere” exist precisely because they can’t abide Boston Feminism.

  • Russ in Texas

    Okay, Szopen got me. It’s true, the Poles and Hungarians are friends. But that’s mostly becuase their neighbors suck so badly. ;)

  • Russ in Texas

    @Bully#534,

    I thought Ferriss was pretty impressive for about five minutes, until I found out he won his karate title by blatantly gaming the rules; these guys sound neat, and I suppose it’s an interesting lifestyle, if you’re not actually interested in achieving anything.

    Since my measure of manhood involves having contributed something to the human race, I tend to equate the Ferriss lifestyle with “loser.”

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

      @Russ

      Since my measure of manhood involves having contributed something to the human race, I tend to equate the Ferriss lifestyle with “loser.”

      This is what I meant earlier when I said that the discussion really hinges on values. A key value that we wished to impart to our children was being productive members of society. If one leaves no legacy or contribution, why exist?

      I was thinking about the debate over whether men like Jacob are losers or SMP winners, as Escoffier suggested. Again, this hinges on values. The SMP comprises the entirety of sexual activity in the “marketplace” – ONSs, LTRs, marriage, flings, etc. We might say that Jacob is a winner in the ONS Online Dating Division. Certainly, men who aspire to that “achievement” will look up to Jacob as having excelled, as will women who often choose such men for ONSs.

      Similarly, there is an SMP winner in the Sexy Marriage Division and one in the Great College Boyfriend Division.

      We can argue forever about who’s a winner and who’s a loser, but it’s always relative.

  • Russ in Texas

    @pvw: Yes, I heard about that. What was instructive to me, as I observed the various debates, was that the people owning firearms are treated as class-enemies; the anti-gun folks do not appear to *care* whether or not these people get hurt.

    One can debate with somebody who think of you as a person, or even an opponent. One cannot have a debate with someone who defines you as an enemy.

  • Tomato

    “What are they?”

    JP’s snark aside (heh), it means I can’t buy beer or wine on Sunday because apparently I’m supposed to be in church instead. Oddly enough, it also means all car dealerships are closed on Sunday, although I have no idea why selling cars would offend any deity.

    “One can debate with somebody who think of you as a person, or even an opponent. One cannot have a debate with someone who defines you as an enemy.”

    Also applicable to religious fundamentalists of all stripe.

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

    Rebound…”They were saying, “it teaches US a good lesson” and “WE deserve this” so that indicates they had experienced the outages themselves. If that’s the way they interpret their own experience, so be it.”

    During this blackout, people were trapped in subway cars underground when the power when out. Others were trapped in elevators. Some in hospitals lost air conditioning in stifling rooms (this outage was in summer), and when generators failed (which emergency generators often do), they lost lights and medical equipment as well. Many small businesses, close to the margin of survival, lost desperately needed revenue.

    All these things were widely reported, and should have been known by these NPR listeners. So, yeah, I think the “teach us a lesson” comment reflects malice and/or complete lack of empathy toward their fellow citizens.

  • Russ in Texas

    @Tomato#552,

    It’s everywhere. Not just on the left, not just on the right. It’s a highly-communicable psychological disease.

  • Russ in Texas

    (Nota bene, Susan: your own sweeping generalization regarding evangelical types is part of what started that whole tangent.)

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

      (Nota bene, Susan: your own sweeping generalization regarding evangelical types is part of what started that whole tangent.)

      WADR, it was Damien who made the statement. I just added a LOL that his description sounded a whole lot like the guys who identify themselves as making up the manosphere.

      I have three kinds of experience with evangelicals:

      1. I grew up and went to high school in a community in LA where they were very prevalent.
      2. I have read a lot of “Christian” blogs.
      3. I have observed the political statements and positions of evangelical leaders, both in and out of public office.

      All three experiences have left me with a very negative impression. I have found these groups to be extremely judgmental, exclusive, and ill-informed (Creationism, anyone? Legitimate rape, anyone?). New Englanders and other coastal types may be guilty of the first two, but are far less likely to be ignorant.

      In my experience.

      Others can judge for themselves.

  • J

    I would definitely not be pleased if my spouse wanted to bartend as a hobby. But that’s just me.

    I thnk bartenders fall into two categories: those who flirt with the customers and get involved in the patron’s shenanigans and those who watch with amusement from the sidelines. DH used to tend bar as did several of my father’s friends. The later position is the safest position if you want to keep your job.

    They have set up house, and I believe it’s only a matter of time. They speak openly about marriage, their future kids, etc. Anything is possible, but I would be extremely surprised if they do not get engaged within a year or so.

    Wow. Congratulations. Things seem to be moving right along.

  • JP

    “It’s everywhere. Not just on the left, not just on the right. It’s a highly-communicable psychological disease.”

    That’s because we all know that we are in direct competition for ultimate victory and eternal triumph with the other 7 billion people on this planet.

    There can be only one winner.

    Eventually, we will have to defeat everyone else and make sure that they never arise to challenge us again.

    Winning!

  • Russ in Texas

    @Susan#559

    Agreed. Everybody is a waste of time for SOMEbody.

    @JP#560

    …want…to…respond…mustn’t….walk…into…TRAP…..
    :)

  • JP

    “(Nota bene, Susan: your own sweeping generalization regarding evangelical types is part of what started that whole tangent.)”

    I don’t think that’s driving the current INTJ dust up.

    I just want him here long enough to talk about string theory, so I’m on the “let INTJ stay for reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with this blog” team.

  • Escoffier

    Susan, most people cannot leave a legacy beyond children, and if those children end up in the same “dead-end” jobs and lives of middle class conformity, then what kind of legacy is that?

    The above might be termed the heroic-artistic-poetic objection to the way life is lived by the masses. A more philosophic way to look at it is, first, to accept the baseline truth–most people cannot leave a legacy beyond children whose only legacy will be more children like them. But then, rather than looking down on those people, see the good in them even if that good is devoid of heroism, profundity, poetry, depth or great achievement. Plus. the good in society.

    Anyway, to repeat, an individual Jacob is indifferent to society. He doens’t hurt it or help it. A generation of Jacobs is definitely bad for society.

    But it’s unfair or at least inconsistent of you to come down so hard on Jacob but have little or nothing to say about the females who play along. In addtion, sexually or relationship-wise, he has done nothing that you could countenance as wrong, that you have not specifically either defended or refused to condemn elsewhere, especially when done by girls.

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

      @Escoffier

      Susan, most people cannot leave a legacy beyond children, and if those children end up in the same “dead-end” jobs and lives of middle class conformity, then what kind of legacy is that?

      I think we define legacy differently. I’ve read that in Buddhism, it may be that your entire life’s purpose is moving a flower in a vase from one surface to another. I hope for a bit more than that, but I believe that man should marshall his abilities in service of his fellow man in some way. Whether that be inventing the cure for cancer, developing software, or serving a meal at a shelter is not the point. The point is action beyond one’s personal needs. Having children can accomplish that, unless you’re simply attempting to reproduce yourself, additional beings who are net “takers.”

      Anyway, to repeat, an individual Jacob is indifferent to society. He doens’t hurt it or help it. A generation of Jacobs is definitely bad for society.

      If a lot of Jacobs are bad for society, then one Jacob has a negative impact on society, even if small.

      But it’s unfair or at least inconsistent of you to come down so hard on Jacob but have little or nothing to say about the females who play along.

      We know nothing about them. I have often criticized promiscuous women – do you recall my chart where female promiscuity leads to economic stagnation? :)

      However, sexual jackals, or gluttons as I like to think of them, are almost entirely male. A male focusing exclusively on getting his dick wet is not a productive member of society. End of story.

  • Russ in Texas

    In retrospect, JP, I suspect you’re right.

    But having known evangelicals who are every bit as poisonous as Susan describes, but ALSO having known some who are among the best human beings I’ve ever met, the broad brushes bother me quite a bit.

  • deti

    @ Susan:

    “Hardly. I’ve spent less than half my life here, and am very much an outsider still. ”

    OK. The fact remains that as Esco summarized, you approach life from a cultural and political view that differs much from the midwestern view I’ve discussed. You’ve spent your entire life living on one coast or the other. Whether intended or not, you were immersed and marinated in moderate to liberal cultures, cadences and rhythms of life, and politics. Your upbringing, education, work background, work life, social and sexual experiences, and where you live bespeak and inform a more liberal approach to life than some who comment here.

    You’ve often taken a critical eye to my experiences and background in your efforts to vivisect my comments here and elsewhere, and to challenge my viewpoints. I’m simply doing the same. It explains where you’re coming from; which in turn explains much of the content you post here.

    This isn’t “bad” per se; it simply explains much about the bases of your views.

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

      @deti

      You’ve often taken a critical eye to my experiences and background in your efforts to vivisect my comments here and elsewhere, and to challenge my viewpoints. I’m simply doing the same. It explains where you’re coming from; which in turn explains much of the content you post here.

      This isn’t “bad” per se; it simply explains much about the bases of your views.

      I have no problem with this. I stated in one of my very first comments that I had never heard a woman describe wanting a man like that, perhaps because I live in Boston.

      Of course I am the product of my environment to some degree.

      As for my putting your comments into context, I believe I have only commented on the experiences you have shared openly online. I know little of your background. In fact, I’ve asked you before about your religiosity, and you expressly stated here that you are not religious (Vox Day’s poll) but write commentary that is quite religious elsewhere. I generally find the distinction very telling.

  • Tomato

    “It’s everywhere. Not just on the left, not just on the right. It’s a highly-communicable psychological disease.”

    Absolutely. It applies to the manosphere and radfem as well.

  • JP

    “But having known evangelicals who are every bit as poisonous as Susan describes, but ALSO having known some who are among the best human beings I’ve ever met, the broad brushes bother me quite a bit.”

    That’s because conservative religion of the fundamentalist evangelical-type tends to make bad people worse and good people better.

  • deti

    “But having known evangelicals who are every bit as poisonous as Susan describes,”

    Evangelicals (or Susan’s intentionally pejorative and derisive “gun-toting evangelicals”) can be toxic, sure.

    For every rabid “gun-toting evangelical”, I can identify 10 toxic liberals, atheists, gun control advocates, environmentalist wackjobs, and leftist nutcases.

  • JP

    “For every rabid “gun-toting evangelical”, I can identify 10 toxic liberals, atheists, gun control advocates, environmentalist wackjobs, and leftist nutcases.”

    The difference is that those are not religions, and therefore not self-perpetuating.

    I’m not arguing that you can’t identify them as you state, simply pointing out that there is a distinct difference.

  • deti

    liberals, atheists, gun control advocates, environmentalist wackjobs, and leftist nutcases.

    JP: “The difference is that those are not religions, and therefore not self-perpetuating.”

    I’m just going to say this one thing and then let it drop, because it’s a continued derailment.

    Oh, but liberalism, atheism, gun control, environmentalism, and leftism ARE religions. Their adherents believe in them, have faith in them and proselytize them with a fervor rivaling any cheap tent-revival evangelohuckster.

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

      I would like to clarify that I stated early that my objection was not to religion or religious people but with fundamentalists. That outlook may apply to any belief system, religious or secular. Having looked up fundamentalism, here are the words generally used to describe it, which illustrate why I dislike it so much:

      literal
      strict
      narrow
      authoritarian
      rigid adherence

      I generally do not enjoy interacting with such folks, but am perfectly willing to say it’s a personal preference. I don’t care if they’re Environmentalists, Communists, or rabid Yankees fans. I steer clear.

  • Russ in Texas

    We’re all more sensitive to the poison when a person from a different viewpoint carries it: that’s why groupthink tends to perpetuate extreme positions. I disagree with JP here: *all* religions, moral or civic, are self-perpetuating, or attempt to be.

  • OffTheCuff

    Didn’t mean to get so embroiled or start a fight here. My only point was not to knock you, just that observing culture, isn’t living one. A man who coaches a black football team isn’t really an expert in black culture, IMO. It’s a weak tangential point, nothing really that adds to any argument. Though, I live near Worcester, and our school parent night is a multicultural festival of piercings, tattoos, and single parenthood… almost everyone I hang out with is SWPL types. As for your personal status, it’s only a coincidence because I went to BU (on my employer’s dime, can’t afford it) and know how amazing that area is.

  • Escoffier

    IDK, OTC. I am every bit as SWPL, culturally, as Susan (except way further to the right politically) but she has way more CONTACT than me with (say) recent immigrants. Contact may not make for “expertise” but its at least a basis for knowledge.

    Simililary, a coach of a black team will presumably get to know the players and to some extent their families and I would expect him to know a hell of a lot more about black culture than I do.

  • JP

    “Oh, but liberalism, atheism, gun control, environmentalism, and leftism ARE religions. Their adherents believe in them, have faith in them and proselytize them with a fervor rivaling any cheap tent-revival evangelohuckster.”

    They are much more ephemeral than you think.

    It probably depends on your timeframe as to how you think about them.

  • Damien Vulaume

    “It’s everywhere. Not just on the left, not just on the right. It’s a highly-communicable psychological disease.”

    “Absolutely. It applies to the manosphere and radfem as well.”

    I co sign that as well. I also briefly checked those radfem sites and one of them was run by a Linda something, can’t remember her name. She described herself without joking as “a fucking loud mouth feminist yelling machine”

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

      She described herself without joking as “a fucking loud mouth feminist yelling machine”

      I wonder how many invitations she gets to dinner. Assuming she socializes with similar women, I can’t imagine the conversation.

  • J

    I hate to backtrack, but I have a real issue with a comment of INTJ’s regarding whether or not Susan aspends time socially with her ESL students. Underlying INTJ’s comment is the notion that, if one doesn’t take a good deal to the next level, that good deed is somehow negated or hypocritical.

    I too do some community work as well as teaching Sunday School. I also have recruited others into articipating in various projects. I really hate to see people who are doing good maligned for not doing ENOUGH good. I think most of us realize that friendships exist primarily among similar people. We may have little in common with the people we are called to help and never become close to them, but that doesn’t unteach theEnglish we taught them or empty their bellies of the food we might provide to a food drive. They still benefit from our efforts. Likewise, I don’t feel obligated to have my Sunday School kid over for cocoa even though most live near me; their parents don’t feel obligated to invite me to dinner. You can’t force friendships on the basis of giving or receiving charity or service. That doesn’t negate the good you’ve done for others or your goodness in doing it.

  • OffTheCuff

    Wow, touched a raw nerve here. I never said it wasn’t good, or hypocritical. My post asking if having immigrants as friends wasn’t a criticism of you not doing so (that’s in your mind), but more of a question in the sense of “do you know them as well you think?”. It was an observation that, in my own opinion, culture is very difficult to understand, until you live it. Mere contact or proximity isn’t enough to me.

    Like I said, my point was fairly weak and tangential, and not really worth the bits spilled.

    Esc, good points, I agree completely.

  • Cooper

    Man, watching Ted over on AG is painful. It seems like I’m with him every step along the way, into the gamma corner.

  • Tomato

    Tangent day!

    Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair color.

  • pvw

    @Russ in Texas:

    @pvw: Yes, I heard about that. What was instructive to me, as I observed the various debates, was that the people owning firearms are treated as class-enemies; the anti-gun folks do not appear to *care* whether or not these people get hurt.

    One can debate with somebody who think of you as a person, or even an opponent. One cannot have a debate with someone who defines you as an enemy.

    Me: Yes, they see them as class enemies because they are people who merely have different values and beliefs. And of course, the anti-gun crowd sees them all as crazies who are planning on killing everyone, that is why they have guns in the first place. The irony, of course, is that they don’t care that some of them are law enforcement people who are actually charged with protecting them in their nice SWPL lives.

  • Zach

    @Susan

    I sent a (girl) friend of mine the link to Slater’s article. She’s 25, successful, living in NYC, and gorgeous. She gets hit on every 5 minutes at bars, but has spent the last 1.5 years dating almost exclusively online. Here was her take:

    “but really
    how many of the ppl you’ve met have actually been compatible enough to date
    just bc you can meet more ppl
    doesnt mean they’re all good fits
    i think if anything, online dating has made me value my real connections even more
    and makes me regret how picky i was about some past
    but it could be because im on the other end of it haha”

    It dovetails pretty well with what the writer at Slate said.

    In my experience, having done a good amount of both online and in-person dating, I think it largely replicates the effect of living in a big city. In NYC, there are tons and tons of options offline, and these certainly affect one’s pickyness in choosing a potential LTR partner. When you can get 2+ dates a week almost every week, it’s harder to view any of the girls as particularly special right off the bat. Hell my phone is full of numbers of girls I never even called. However, these problems exist independent of online dating. For those guys who can access the offline girls with some effectiveness (ie those who have decent game, $$, looks, etc), it’s only an increase at the margin. And, in backing up what my friend said above, I think the connections made in online dating don’t match up to those made in person. I’ve slept with a fair number of women (26 at last count), and not a single one of them was a girl I’d met online, even though I’d say my dates are probably 70/30 offline/online split. There just doesn’t seem to be the same sort of spark. Not that I haven’t had the opportunity to sleep with some of the online girls, but for some reason or another I just never am that into it. Now I do have a very successful (Cravath lawyer), good-looking, tall friend who goes on 2-3 dates a week on OkCupid looking just for sex, and he’s gotten laid quite a bit doing it. However, he also does pretty well offline. He’s just too lazy/busy to spend time hitting on/picking up women at bars.

    In following those anecdotes, I would posit that online dating has the largest effect in smaller cities/suburbs, where the dating pool can be much thinner. I think that in those places it may allow “natural” players (ie guys who don’t want to commit) to have more access to women than they would in person. In large cities, where the options in-person are already enormous, I don’t think it makes much of an impact at all. I think the impact there is made entirely by the options the city provides in and of itself, independent of online dating.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    J #557, I agree completely.

    Along those lines, I really loved my ESL teachers. Somehow they could teach us kids who had zero English skills, even though the teachers themselves did not speak Vietnamese/Chinese/Spanish/Greek/Russian/whatever. Thanks to them I was able to catch up to regular classes in three years.

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

      @Hope and J

      I feel compelled to share a couple of my favorite things about teaching ESL. First, I teach Conversation after they’ve already completed the levels of curricula. The class is usually made up of people from at least 8 or 10 countries. You cannot even begin to imagine how interesting the conversations are, and the cultural information that gets shared. We talk about almost everything, including the politics of their nations and how they perceive the U.S. We also talk about food – I once mentioned how much I love Ethiopian food – especially injera, the bread. The next class, a Somalian mother of 9 came in with a full meal for four in containers for me to bring home. I am continually blown away by these people. They are incredibly hard working and want to give their children a better life. One very poor woman from the DR who works as a hotel maid from midnight to 8 am came in one day and said that her daughter had been admitted to Williams College with a full ride. I couldn’t help it, I just burst into tears.

      I can’t imagine what they think of me – that I’m goofy, probably. We do have some good chats, though. We laugh a lot. It’s one of the best experiences I’ve ever had.

  • J

    Man, watching Ted over on AG is painful. It seems like I’m with him every step along the way, into the gamma corner.

    Yikes, is he there again?

  • deti

    Ted’s working it out over at AlphaGame.

    Better to do it there than here.

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

      Ted’s working it out over at AlphaGame.

      Better to do it there than here

      +1,000,000

  • Cooper

    “Yikes, is he there again?”

    Mhmm. I can’t quite bring myself to follow.

    The guys over there want to label his as a gamma in denial – and when you read the description – the unwanted, the often bitter and resentful – I worry that it paints me into the same corner. (Well, thb, it certianly does)

    But, then when I read all the BS from the guys “in the know” about female sexuality, I realize: aren’t they the ones that are resentful? (albiet laid) The manosphere is doused in misogyny. They talk down about gammas/deltas as if what they don’t have is enough acumilated-hate.

    I guess I’m having a blue morning. (With a red speck staring back at me, from my plates)

  • Cooper

    “Better to do it there than here.”

    You may be right.

  • Ted D

    INTJ – Post 380 – I had to read it twice, and to be honest my head is still spinning. I think you may have hit the nail on the head, mostly because when I read it (both times) I felt like I got a firm shot to the gut. Of course “nice guys” don’t use physical attraction. We were told practically from birth to NEVER objectify a woman, especially in a sexual manner. Growing up there were few sins greater short of murder or rape than treating a woman like a sexual object.

    I’m gonna have to chew on this awhile, but the gears in my head are turning so hard I can hear the squeaking…

    Susan – “It’s not a value judgment. It’s simply a matter of fact that work ethic is extremely important to women, as is occupational status.”

    In that case if I ever hit the lottery, I’ll be divorced in short order. Because I promise you that if I woke up tomorrow independently wealthy, it would be the last day of my life that I would ever work, let along put in a 40 hour week. To me, work is nothing more than a means to an end, and that end is being able to feed, cloth, and shelter my family. If those needs were met without “work” effort on my part, I would have zero desire to “work” at all. I’d spend the rest of my life being a lazy ass, and perhaps a bit of a philanthropist, but only if I could do so by tinkering with things I’m naturally interested in. I have a great work ethic, but only because I must feed my kids.

    DV – “It is funny to note that you, along with Mike C and Ted D sometimes fit that bill yet are obviously intelligent commentators who, at times, contribute in a more than interesting way on the said debate.”

    I’m beginning to think that Deti and I were cut from the same cloth. We certainly have different views on some things, and we seem to have different “hot button” issues, but overall I’d say we share at least a large chunk of common views. For my part, I’ll admit that I occasionally trip and end up somewhat close to being a rabid ‘spherian, but normally I get ahold of myself in short order and shore it up. I think Deti pretty much nailed my personal demons down recently on another blog, and I’ve got to figure out exactly what I should do about them at this point. I am indeed bitter and angry, but not at women for being women. I’m angry because I can see things more clearly now than ever before in my life, and I’m finding that what I see is troubling at best, and downright scary at worst. It isn’t so much that I was “lied” to most of my life (by this I mean led astray by woman ON the subject of women…) as much as finding out the world in general is a much darker and dismal place than I truly ever imagined.

    Cooper – “Man, watching Ted over on AG is painful. It seems like I’m with him every step along the way, into the gamma corner.”

    Yep, Deti pretty much knocked my dick in the dirt, but it was exactly what I needed to hear. Time to say fuck the world and do what I need to for myself and my family. In the end it will be much easier to simply not give a shit than to keep caring and being beat over the head for it.

  • JP

    “The manosphere is doused in misogyny. They talk down about gammas/deltas as if what they don’t have is enough acumilated-hate.”

    Yes, there’s nothing quite as productive and helpful as radiating hatred into the world.

  • pvw

    @Russ in Texas, further thoughts: a lot of solipsism and emotional thinking which makes it very difficult for them to think rationally and logically, and so they can’t even think of the dangerous consequences that might follow…VoxDay has had some great posts on this.

  • OffTheCuff

    Atheists also don’t get sweet tax breaks for our club property to party and schmooze at.

    Cooper, I see very little commonality in personality between you and Ted.

  • Ted D

    Cooper – “The guys over there want to label his as a gamma in denial – and when you read the description – the unwanted, the often bitter and resentful – I worry that it paints me into the same corner. (Well, thb, it certianly does) ”

    LOL man, I don’t give a single fuck what Vox or anyone wants to label me. Gamma is just as good as any other.

    The denail part isn’t so much that I will not believe the truth, but that I find much of the truth so absolutely repulsive that accepting it becomes a herculean task for me. Basically now that I’m seeing things from a different persepctive, I’m realizing that my distaste for the Modern West is deeper than I ever imagined.

    At an individual level, I’m making changes and doing what I must. But when I look at the macro level of all this, I can’t help but want to somehow “fix” it, not because I don’t want to put in that individual effort, but because much of that effort is for objectively stupid reasons perpetuated by all of us that just accept it as “the way it has to be” when in fact it can be any way we want. We collectively live in the environment we help create. So, if so many of us are unhappy with the current environment, why not simply change it?

  • Cooper

    “Cooper, I see very little commonality in personality between you and Ted.”

    That meant to be good..???

  • Ted D

    OTC – “Cooper, I see very little commonality in personality between you and Ted.”

    Well, put Cooper in a crappy marriage for 12 years and throw a divorce on the end, and we would probably look pretty similar. :p

    Actually, I think what Cooper has going for him is his age. At least he isn’t growing up in the “heyday” of feminist idealogy. He isn’t nearly as brainwashed as I was at his age.

  • Ted D

    Megaman – Thanks much for the INTJ link! The first page seems pretty spot on, but I’ll check out the rest after work.

  • Escoffier

    Ted, two things, one may give you some hope, the other certainly will not.

    1) Just because the truth about one thing, or some subset of things, no matter how important, may be ugly, that does not mean that the whole truth, the truth about the whole, is ugly. Connected to this is the intrinsic non-ugliness of understanding itself:

    “We cannot exert our understanding without from time to time understanding something of importance; and this act of understanding may be accompanied by the awareness of our understanding, by the understanding of understanding, by noesis noeseos, and this is so high, so pure, so noble and experience that Aristotle could attribute it to his God. This experience is entirely independent of whether what we understand primarily is pleasing or displeasing, fair or ugly. It leads us to realize that all evils are in a sense necessary if there is to be understanding. It enables us to accept all evils which befall us and which may well break our hearts in the spirit of good citizens of the city of God. By becoming aware of the dignity of the mind, we realize the true ground of the dignity of man and therewith the goodness of the world, whether we understand it as created or as uncreated, which the home of man because it is the home of the human mind.”

    2) There is, sadly, nothing that you (we) dissidents can do to stop the tide. All “mixed bodies”—which is to say, human institutions: states, religions, sects, movements, civilizations—have a life cycle. Ample evidence suggest that the ones you are most concerned about are entering the late stages of that cycle, or at best the beginning of the last stage. This is sad but inevitable. The best we could have done, had we been wiser, was prolong things in health a lot longer. Too late for that now. In any event, the end had to come sooner or later. Modern man’s confident belief in his own power and in permanent “progress” is false.

  • Russ in Texas

    My problem with solipsism/emotionalism as presented over at AG is that it’s firmly-embedded in the site’s context. While I tend to agree with Vox that women have, among their strengths, a tendency towards emotional thinking which often self-contradicts without realizing it, I don’t quite think it’s as universal as what I’ve read there puts it (freely admitting I’ve probably not read more than twenty posts or so, so I would be considered a compleat noob on AG), and it would need to be generalized for other discussions.

  • Ted D

    Escoffier – Yeah point 2 is pretty much my concern, but as you pointed out it is probably inevitable.

    I’m reading the site MM posted about INTJ’s while I eat my sandwhich, and this made me laugh loudly at a client location:

    “Q: My INTJ just told me I’m retarded. Should I take offense?

    A: You probably are retarded, by our standards. But don’t take offense. Our standards are so high that even we don’t meet them. We judge ourselves more harshly than we judge others.”

    So. Very. True.

  • Escoffier

    We’ve been through this before but there’s no evidence that Jacob is a net taker and I would surmise from the available facts that’s he not. He earns enough to take care of his basic needs and also to amuse himself.

    The women who sleep with him are not tricked or duped; they know what he is from the get-go. He hides nothing and not only does not try to hide anything, he is brutally up front about his self-centeredness and lack of ambition. The girls sleep with him in spite, or because of, what he is. Yet you have lots of blame for him but none for them.

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

      He earns enough to take care of his basic needs and also to amuse himself.

      We do not know that. We know he’s irresponsible with money, and the son of two doctors. I think it’s very likely he does not earn nearly what he spends.

      The women who sleep with him are not tricked or duped; they know what he is from the get-go. He hides nothing and not only does not try to hide anything,

      That’s not true – he admits to duping the paralegal at the time the article was written, the woman who wants to take things slow – she is clearly present in his life, but he tells Slater he won’t wait for her. He hasn’t told her that. There’s also the woman who asks him for nothing but honesty, and he uncomfortably admits he’s not giving her that. Jacob openly states what he’s about – I don’t need to demonize him.

      Furthermore, we have no idea what he tells these various women. He is clearly trying to prevent them from knowing about one another, as he silences his texts. He’s having some pangs of conscience about his treatment of at least some of the women. And he says himself that he’s going to start coming across as a total asshole.

      I’ll say it again: I have no information about the character of these women. We only know that three had sex with him asap. That’s OK with me if they’re looking for a ONS, and who’s to say they aren’t? I also don’t care if Jacob is all about ONSs. It’s quite clear from the article that he presents himself as being amenable to a LTR, and at least two women are under a false impression.

  • Ted D

    LOL one more from that link and I’ll stop…

    Q: What are the pet peeves of INTJs?

    A: Thanks for asking. Our pet peeves are:
    ■We dislike surprises.
    ■We hate having decisions made for us. We’re INTJs; nobody is more qualified to make decisions than us.
    ■We dislike getting gifts, as it burdens us with the need to reciprocate.
    ■We hate small talk, gossip, and relationship/people talk. Really anything mundane is beneath us.
    ■We get particularly annoyed by attacks on our intelligence, competence, and integrity.
    ■We hate it when people try to manipulate us.
    ■Insincerity and lying.
    ■People interfering with our alone time.
    ■People who are chronically late.
    ■People who talk incessantly. We will just engage our “nod and smile” autopilot and mentally go somewhere else.
    ■People who are stupid, arrogant, opinionated, and/or closed minded.
    ■Crooked/badly placed pictures.
    ■Superficiality (body piercings, pimped out cars, brightly colored anything).
    ■Salespeople. INTJs are immune to emotional manipulation and have zero tolerance for lines of bullshit.
    ■Incorrect grammar and word usage.
    ■People who waste our time (see Salespeople, people interfering with our alone time, etc.).

    Yep, there are a few extras on there, but that pretty much sums up my pet peeves. I was wondering for a second why other MBTI sites didn’t have a page like this, and then I realized it was ONLY an INTJ that would sit and put something like this together. LOL

  • Cooper

    “Q: What are the pet peeves of INTJs?”

    LMAO.

  • Emily

    >> ” I once mentioned how much I love Ethiopian food – especially injera, the bread. ”

    I LOVE Ethiopian food!!!!!!!!! Kitfo is one of my all-time favourite dishes. I’d definitely put it in my top 10.

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

      @Emily

      I LOVE Ethiopian food!!!!!!!!! Kitfo is one of my all-time favourite dishes. I’d definitely put it in my top 10.

      I adore it too, but the raw beef freaks my husband out too much. We used to always order it, but now he says “no way.” You may have a better beef supply than we do.

  • Ted D

    “or rabid Yankees fans.”

    Admitting you are a Yankees fan in my house is as likely to get you an ass whooping as admitting you are a Patriots fan. Luckily I don’t care for baseball (and since I grew up in the home of the Pirates, who blames me?) and my wife is a Steelers fan although she was raised in New Hamshire. She has always been a Steelers fan, but she is all about the Red Sox when it comes to baseball.

  • deti

    Susan 599:

    I’m Christian; I’m just not religious. I believe in Christ; I just don’t put stock in all the rituals, practices and other accoutrements of what many of us call “religion”.

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

      @deti

      Thanks for clarifying. That really does help me put your comments into some context.

  • OffTheCuff

    Well, we have no idea of Jacob is a sexual jackal, though he is surely pursuing parallel options… likewoman high-value woman naturally would. He might only be kissing them all, of course, which is perfectly OK. I’m not sure which “base” it becomes bad, though.

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

      @OTC

      He had sex with three of the five on the first night. And he’s bound and determined to continue this practice, to the point where he stated that he probably is destroying his ability to fall in love with one woman in the future.

      My biggest problem with Jacob is that he is not a good representation of online daters overall, for the reasons Madrigal points out. My lesser problem is that at least two of the women have hopes of a relationship with him that is not happening.

  • Ted D

    “I’m Christian; I’m just not religious.”

    I have about as much faith in “organized religion” (by that I mean any major Church) as I do in the Federal Government. It isn’t the tenants I don’t agree with, it is the political BS that every organized Church suffers from that keeps me away. The Roman Catholic Church being one of the worst offenders of political BS of course sets the bar for the rest of the Christain denominations, but most suffer from it to some extent.

  • Escoffier

    Speculation as to money. It’s more likely that he earns his own. I’ve known UMC parents willing to subsidize thier kids with promising careers in their 20s, but none who are willing to pay adult children in their 30s who are clearly going nowhere. When he says he’s lousy with money, that likely simply means that he doesn’t save much, maybe has CC debt, a lousy credit rating, misses payments, overspends on pleasures, etc. One can be bad with money and not be a net taker.

    You’re also overinterpreting the rest. From what was written, he is doing exactly what you say you did and what you say young women today should do: date around until you find someone with whom you want an LTR. You say repeatedly that no one is obligated to do or even say anything about these activities until exclusivity is established. Indeed, from the description, it appears that his periods of “plate spinning” are alawys short lived and lead to an LTR.

    The women are not deceived. He makes plain what he is and that he doesn’t intend to change. They nonetheless stick aroun–for years in two cases–until it becomes clear that he’s telling the truth. Then they bolt.

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

      The women are not deceived. He makes plain what he is and that he doesn’t intend to change. They nonetheless stick aroun–for years in two cases–until it becomes clear that he’s telling the truth. Then they bolt.

      You’re conflating SMP LTR Loser Ted and SMP ONS Winner Ted. SOWT is not being honest. He admits it in the article. There’s nothing to debate.

  • Zach

    @Susan

    “to the point where he stated that he probably is destroying his ability to fall in love with one woman in the future.”

    My friends and I have actually been talking about this more and more. We all worry about it, and some of us have moved away from casual sex because of it. With too many women, they turn into commodities instead of people, and we really don’t like that.

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

      @Zach

      My friends and I have actually been talking about this more and more. We all worry about it, and some of us have moved away from casual sex because of it. With too many women, they turn into commodities instead of people, and we really don’t like that.

      I have to say, I give you a ton of credit for taking a hard look at your life and being so self-aware. That is precisely what will prevent you from suffering the fate you fear.

      You know well that I am pro-relationship, so of course, I’m pleased that you have come to this conclusion, but mostly I really respect your honesty with yourself and with us. You’ve always been a straight shooter.

  • JP

    ” It isn’t the tenants I don’t agree with, it is the political BS that every organized Church suffers from that keeps me away.”

    I think this has something to do with the fact that they are staffed with, and deal with, people.

  • Zach

    @Susan

    I agree with Escoffier in the sense that he is not deceiving the women he was in relationships with. He never says he cheated on them, and never says that he made false promises about where the relationship was going. He was who he was, and they dated him for being that person. Whether you, Susan, like that person or not isn’t what’s up for debate. He didn’t act like a different person. He just “lived his life” and they eventually got sick of it. I don’t see any particular problem with that.

  • Escoffier

    What?

    “Jacob,” assuming he is real and everything written is true, is who I am talking about. I am saying that you are angry with him but you seem to hold above reproach the women who sleep with him. I am saying that by your own standards, he has done nothing wrong. Or, to the extent that he has, the girls share in the wrong.

    Frankly, Susan, your insistence on saying otherwise strikes me as an example of the dreaded “female imperative.” When a male behaves like Jacob, he is very very bad. When women reward Jacob (none of whom has he tricked, nor have you in any way established that they have), they are innocent.

    Well, either they are both innocent because no sexual “red lines” have been crossed, or they are both guilty. You can’t possibly believe the latter given your relatively liberal attitudes about pre-marital sex, and I think I know what all your “red lines” are and Jacob has not crossed any.

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

      @Escoffier, @Zach

      I am really tired of debating Jacob, tbh. I’ll leave it here. Here is what he said. I think the part in bold implies less than admirable, or even neutral, behavior.

      Many of Jacob’s relationships become physical very early. At one point he’s seeing a paralegal and a lawyer who work at the same law firm, a naturopath, a pharmacist, and a chef. He slept with three of them on the first or second date. His relationships with the other two are headed toward physical intimacy.

      He likes the pharmacist most. She’s a girlfriend prospect. The problem is that she wants to take things slow on the physical side. He worries that, with so many alternatives available, he won’t be willing to wait.

      One night the paralegal confides in him: her prior relationships haven’t gone well, but Jacob gives her hope; all she needs in a relationship is honesty. And he thinks, Oh my God. He wants to be a nice guy, but he knows that sooner or later he’s going to start coming across as a serious asshole. While out with one woman, he has to silence text messages coming in from others. He needs to start paring down the number of women he’s seeing.

      If Jacob has told the pharmacist that he is not willing to wait for sex, and if he has told the paralegal that he is not able to grant her need for honesty (???) then I’d say Jacob hasn’t crossed any lines.

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

    Ted D,

    Where is this comment stream where you were fighting the good fight ?

  • Ted D

    JP – “I think this has something to do with the fact that they are staffed with, and deal with, people.”

    Absolute power corrupts absolutely… The larger the Church, the more corrupt it becomes.

    I realize that indivuduals are only human, and we all make mistakes. But the organized efforts of the Church to keep child abuse allegations under wraps convinced me that they should in NO WAY be leading my spiritual growth.

  • Escoffier

    OK, how many times have you said that it’s the man’s job to escalate sexually? So he is to be blamed for not wanting to wait? I thought it was by now firmly establised that this SMP had driven the floor price for sex down below the floorboard. And since “women are the gatekeepers of sex” (another point we all accept) how can Jacob be at fault for that?

    Second point is ambigious. What does it mean? In the context of the whole piece, I take it to mean, that he will come across as an asshole because he will be unwilling to change his basic selfishness and this will start to grate on her.

    Nonetheless, at least two women spend 2+ years with him before realizing that, just like he said, he was never going to change. So, he is perfectly honest. He is honest that he likes his pleasures and won’t rearrange his life for a woman but that he nonetheless wants a woman in it. And some women willingly sign up for that.

  • Ted D

    Marellus – “Where is this comment stream where you were fighting the good fight ?”

    Sorry but you took that a bit too literally. My point was, I spend a lot of my time upset at the fact that Western Society is so morally corrupt, and it seems that the vast majority of people not only have no desire to fix it, but actually like it the way it is. I constantly frustrate myself because I can’t understand for the life of me why so many people just accept that THIS is as good as it gets.

    Deti simply pointed out to me, in short order, than no matter how much I hate the world as it is, it isn’t going to change. Best I can do is affect change at the individual level, and hope things don’t get so bad that my family and I get pulled down with it. (which frankly IS my biggest concern)

    To me, the “good fight” is trying to bring a sense of morality back to the West. That is the fight I’m going to give up on, because no one else cares.

  • Escoffier

    It’s not that no one else cares, it’s that those who do care have no idea how to accomplish it, for the simple reason that there almost certainly isn’t any way to accomplish it.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    In which case I fail to see why it was necessary for you to state the obvious in an accusing tone. Where’s the insight in stating that Susan Walsh writes for an intelligent audience about college culture?

    Actually, it’s been rather difficult to pin down your position on this in the past. You have claimed in the past to be writing for all relationship-seeking people.

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

      Actually, it’s been rather difficult to pin down your position on this in the past. You have claimed in the past to be writing for all relationship-seeking people.

      Can you refresh my memory? When was I evasive or inconsistent regarding writing specifically about hookup culture?

      An IQ test is not required for participation here, and I welcome anyone wishing to discuss relationships in good faith. I believe that in every instance where I have been challenged to write about the general population, I have reaffirmed that I write for a college and post-college audience. In occasional instances where I have used general data, e.g. CDC, I have specified that.

  • Ted D

    Escoffier – “for the simple reason that there almost certainly isn’t any way to accomplish it.”

    Yeah that is the frustrating part for me. I can see the issues, and I can see many end states that would be better, but for the life of me I have NO idea how to put an action plan together for it. And even if I could, how the hell would anyone get enough buy-in to do it. Well, short of a hostile take-over of the country that is.

    If I could just find someone that has a shot at becomming the first dictator of the United States and get myself into an advisory position…

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    INTJ – Post 380 – I had to read it twice, and to be honest my head is still spinning. I think you may have hit the nail on the head, mostly because when I read it (both times) I felt like I got a firm shot to the gut. Of course “nice guys” don’t use physical attraction. We were told practically from birth to NEVER objectify a woman, especially in a sexual manner. Growing up there were few sins greater short of murder or rape than treating a woman like a sexual object.

    I’m gonna have to chew on this awhile, but the gears in my head are turning so hard I can hear the squeaking…

    I would argue that the perhaps the single biggest problem with our current society is that people look at the worst examples of male behavior (cads and the like) and tell males not to be like them. Of course, the real cads don’t care what society tells them and will keep acting however they please. Instead, the nice guys who actually care will take society’s instructions to heart, and end up being pushed too far away from normal healthy behavior.

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

      I would argue that the perhaps the single biggest problem with our current society is that people look at the worst examples of male behavior (cads and the like) and tell males not to be like them.

      What do you recommend instead? Shaming of beta traits? Shaming females only?

  • Ted D

    “You have claimed in the past to be writing for all relationship-seeking people.”

    Or not, depending on the moment. :P

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    I just want him here long enough to talk about string theory, so I’m on the “let INTJ stay for reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with this blog” team.

    Oh yeah I haven’t given you the description of the Everett relative-state interpretation I had promised earlier. I’ll try to get to it soon. :)

  • Tasmin

    @Zach
    “There just doesn’t seem to be the same sort of spark. Not that I haven’t had the opportunity to sleep with some of the online girls, but for some reason or another I just never am that into it.”

    Your take is in-line with how several of my friends who are similarly positioned in the SMP view online dating. Seems to be that perhaps the “spark” is the power-courting-conquest effect of real-life encounters. IOW, with online dating the selection process is sanitized, thumbing through a catalogue, and much of the pre-date back-and-forth is similarly devoid of the anticipation and risk-reward nature present in real-life encounters, to the point where the “hunt” is more akin to arranging a business meeting.

    Sure it may be a sales call, so there is still some game-negotiation going on, and some unknowns to discover, but it is much more transactional. With the added drawback of minimal investment going in, i.e. both parties are pre-qualified, to a certain extent commoditized, then the situation can result in the emotional high of the chase being distilled down into a cup of coffee.

    The ego or whatever gets off on the pursuit has a hard time generating the mental reward, that “spark”, because it is more like filling an order than really closing a sale. The situation becomes either almost no work to get to sex or it is the same amount – or more – work to unfold them back into a 3D person in order to progress. And the energy it takes to do that w/o feeling the “spark” often seems like more work than it is worth.

    In many cases the opportunity to create that spark has been circumvented, bypassed for the convenience of access to a greater number of options, which also works against that unfolding process, i.e. an endless supply of 2D women, armed with all that we project upon them in terms of attributes and potential is tough competition for the ones who make it to coffee. And for men who enjoy the chase or have a lot of pull in real-life, the process of plugging a few radial dials, tossing some texts around, and then a cup of coffee can never replicate the rewards (sparks) of realizing their power in dynamic real-life scenarios.

    “I think that in those places it may allow “natural” players (ie guys who don’t want to commit) to have more access to women than they would in person. ”

    I agree for the most part. The guys I know who can pull women in real life use online for increasing their sex options only. They phase in/out of the online setting depending on how many plates they have spinning at the moment, often stepping away from the online because it is “too much work”, which seems counterintuitive given that the premise is supposedly to make meeting people less work, but I think it has a lot to do with how they view the work-reward process. It’s not just too much, it’s the wrong kind of work for how their reward center operates.

    Interestingly, the posturing online can make it more difficult on them. That is, if a woman has checked “LTR only” online he may have a harder time than if he met that same woman in a bar. A woman’s online persona can be all business: serious inquiries – LTR only, want marriage, kids, settle down, while in real life they are still open to more “fluid” means to those ends.

    As a side note, a common mistake among women I know who online date is to confuse filtering with screening. I know restricted women IRL who continually pick men online who are no different than the guys who expertly play the bar scene – the ones who would be approaching them anyhow, but for the fact that the guys have done the hard work of a few poetic lines, a couple of adventurous pictures, and checking “definitely want kids”. Then they wonder why the 6’2″, handsome lawyer with luscious hair suddenly stops texting/calling them after the second date. They end up frustrated and jaded fairly quickly.

    The “successful” ones have used the filtering process of online dating to access men who they might not ordinarily meet IRL – who would not typically approach them; they use the internet to end-run the approach challenge, not to optimize their unicorn hunting, and they continue to screen – they don’t give extra-credit for the profile, which is to say they do the work of unfolding into 3D.

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

      As a side note, a common mistake among women I know who online date is to confuse filtering with screening. I know restricted women IRL who continually pick men online who are no different than the guys who expertly play the bar scene – the ones who would be approaching them anyhow, but for the fact that the guys have done the hard work of a few poetic lines, a couple of adventurous pictures, and checking “definitely want kids”.

      The “successful” ones have used the filtering process of online dating to access men who they might not ordinarily meet IRL – who would not typically approach them; they use the internet to end-run the approach challenge, not to optimize their unicorn hunting, and they continue to screen – they don’t give extra-credit for the profile, which is to say they do the work of unfolding into 3D.

      This is so good I wanted to cut and paste it a second time. I think it’s pretty easy for women to filter in the men they might not ordinarily meet. It can be harder to DQ guys because we all hope for the best and tend to give attractive people the benefit of the doubt. Most of the women I know who have wound up going on dates with cads via online dating didn’t learn it until date 2 or 3, when the guys pushed hard for sex. In fact, they weren’t even really dates – more like “Where u at let’s meet up.” Big red flag right there.

      I recall sharing one story here where the girl was feeling really good about the guy, and at the end of the third date she invited him up for a glass of wine. She figured they’d make out. They were getting busy necking when he stood up, pulled down his pants, and looked at her with one eyebrow cocked. She said she wasn’t ready for that. He pulled his pants on and walked out the door without saying another word. I told her she got off lightly. The most dangerous cads are the ones who consider the conquest a sport or form of entertainment, and hang in there for a while while banging other women.

  • Ted D

    INTJ – “I would argue that the perhaps the single biggest problem with our current society is that people look at the worst examples of male behavior (cads and the like) and tell males not to be like them. ”

    And the ‘sphere suffers from the exact same issue. It seems like everyone is more interested in the extremes of “the curve” instead of where most people fall in the spectrum.

    I do believe that much of my “indoctrination” was aimed at ensuring I did not follow the “cad” path as I matured. I don’t think I needed any of it to be honest, because it simply isn’t in my nature to BE a cad. But being as I am the progeny of such a man, I can certainly see why my mother had concerns. Interestingly enough, my half sister (same bioligical father) is very “unrestricted” in nature, and last time I checked was on marriage #3. But that was well over 8 years ago, so she may have another under her belt by now.

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    Or not, depending on the moment.

    Yeah. Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle shouldn’t be applying to a macroscopic person, but that seems to be the case here.

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

      @INTJ

      Yeah. Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle shouldn’t be applying to a macroscopic person, but that seems to be the case here.

      You really are acting like a little bitch, you know that?

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    And the ‘sphere suffers from the exact same issue. It seems like everyone is more interested in the extremes of “the curve” instead of where most people fall in the spectrum.

    Definitely. That’s why I dislike the ‘sphere. I know that mainstream advice isn’t working, but the ‘sphere advice is far too extreme to be a significantly better alternative.

  • INTJ

    @ Ted D

    I was wondering for a second why other MBTI sites didn’t have a page like this, and then I realized it was ONLY an INTJ that would sit and put something like this together. LOL

    Lol so true.

    The main thing in that guide that doesn’t apply to me is the “robot” description. Sure, I may appear robot-like to other people, but in terms of my core values and intuitive attributes, I’m very much unlike a robot.

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

    Ted D,

    Deti simply pointed out to me, in short order, than no matter how much I hate the world as it is, it isn’t going to change. Best I can do is affect change at the individual level, and hope things don’t get so bad that my family and I get pulled down with it. (which frankly IS my biggest concern)

    To me, the “good fight” is trying to bring a sense of morality back to the West. That is the fight I’m going to give up on, because no one else cares.

    We are the music-makers,
    And we are the dreamers of dreams,
    Wandering by lone sea-breakers,
    And sitting by desolate streams.
    World-losers and world-forsakers,
    Upon whom the pale moon gleams;
    Yet we are the movers and shakers,
    Of the world forever, it seems.

    With wonderful deathless ditties
    We build up the world’s great cities,
    And out of a fabulous story
    We fashion an empire’s glory:
    One man with a dream, at pleasure,
    Shall go forth and conquer a crown;
    And three with a new song’s measure
    Can trample an empire down.

    We, in the ages lying
    In the buried past of the earth,
    Built Nineveh with our sighing,
    And Babel itself with our mirth;
    And o’erthrew them with prophesying
    To the old of the new world’s worth;
    For each age is a dream that is dying,
    Or one that is coming to birth.

    -Arthur William Edgar O’Shaughnessy

    Have heart old horse, you’re not done yet. We’re all rooting for ya.

    Now where is this blog post (on AG ?) where you had to drink some gammaberry juice ?

    Thanks for the link.

  • Ted D

    Marellus – http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2013/01/dont-be-feelings-slut.html

    I think it is OK to link AG posts here. If not my apologies Susan.

  • Zach

    @Tasmin

    +1 to all you said. I think a big part of it for me is definitely the lack of the adrenaline stimulation of the physical “chase”. Online dates feel much more like business meetings than a challenge.

    Also, big +1 to “They phase in/out of the online setting depending on how many plates they have spinning at the moment, often stepping away from the online because it is ‘too much work’,”

    For myself, and most of the other guys I know, the mindset is “well, nothing much is going female-wise this week (maybe I didn’t go out last weekend, maybe I was away, etc), let me see what’s online to drum something up”. It gets to be “too much work” when there are a lot of real-life related female leads to follow, and then online isn’t really relevant. So online sort of functions as a back-up.

  • Zach

    @Susan 626

    I don’t see why he has to tell the pharmacist he won’t wait. It’ll be pretty apparent to her by his actions. He’ll either stop seeing her, or he’ll wait. In case 1, that’s really no different from not seeing her for any number of reasons. In case 2, he waited. Who cares if he said he would or not?

  • Ted D

    Zach – “He’ll either stop seeing her, or he’ll wait. In case 1, that’s really no different from not seeing her for any number of reasons. In case 2, he waited. Who cares if he said he would or not?”

    I think the bone of contention is: WHILE he is waiting for her, he is probably having sex with other women. So the issue isn’t that he may or may not dismiss her because she won’t have sex with him, but that he may keep her on the line while having sex with other women, and then possibly dump her after having sex with her. (and it may be legitimate in that they arne’t sexually compatible. Of course he wouldn’t know that until they have sex…) And more to the point, I think the primary concern is that he is ONLY waiting for her because he wants sex, and is only willing to “wait” for her because he is getting sex elsewhere.

  • Ted D

    Marellus – “Have heart old horse, you’re not done yet. We’re all rooting for ya”

    LOL missed this.

    Don’t worry about me, I’ll do just fine on my own. I’d be more concerned that I and people like me are simply giving up hope on the rest of the world.

    To be honest, giving up all hope for improving society will make my life much easier. I can put all of my efforts into preparing my children to face what will probably be an increasingly hostile environment. So be it. I’ll do my best to send wolves out into all those sheep.

    My new quandary is: how do I raise ethical wolves?

  • Escoffier

    According to Susan’s rules, that’s on her. “No sex before monogamy” may or may not be tenable in the final analysis. But at a minimum it means that a girl should not sleep with a guy until she know they’re exclusive. If she sleeps with him without knowing that, she shoulders the risk.

    If–and we don’t know this about Jacob–but if Jacob is screwing several women at once in this way, because none of them insist on clarity from him before they spread, then he’s simply arbitraging the market discrepancies that women themselves have introduced. That’s all according to Susan’s own terms.

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

      @Escoffier

      Simple question for you. How do you interpret this?

      Girl: All I demand from you is honesty.

      Guy (to himself): Oh my God! I’m turning into an asshole.

  • Cooper

    “I think it is OK to link AG posts here. If not my apologies Susan.”

    It’s already on her blog roll, and the particular post mentions her by name, so…

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Oh, but liberalism, atheism, gun control, environmentalism, and leftism ARE religions. Their adherents believe in them, have faith in them and proselytize them with a fervor rivaling any cheap tent-revival evangelohuckster.”

    I get your general point but its apples and oranges. While the more radical of the former may indeed be as zealous as the latter, they are not zealous over something intangible that has not and cannot be scientifically proven.

    The environment is a fact. You are breathing in oxygen right now as I type this. You can see, feel and eat dirt. Guns are a fact. You can see, feel, buy and shoot them. These are objectively existing material phenomena that can be measured and tested.

    God is not.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “We hate small talk, gossip, and relationship/people talk.”

    So then what are you doing on a relationship blog, Ted?

  • Russ in Texas

    @Ted:

    re: “ethical wolves.”

    Don’t. That’s close to what I am, and I can tell you for fact that I know not a few, but dozens and dozens of people who are better people than I am – this is NOT self-flagellation. It’s discomfiting, to say the least. Rather, aim for “happy children who become successful adults.”

  • Lokland

    @Rebound

    “God is not.”

    Please tell me where this was shown.
    Whatever it is, it was not science that did it.

    ‘There is no god’ is not falsifiable and therefore not based in any type of science.

    As for some of your other examples, environment. Entirely debatable as to whether or not the effect is large enough to warrant concern. No consensus from scientists.

  • Russ in Texas

    Rebound Girlfriend:

    Careful there. The tricky part of about that whole God thing, that makes so many physicists get religion, is the whole unmoved mover problem. Our universe appears, so far as we can both tell and test, to be contingent. So how can you have a first thing, and what would you call it?

    Anthropomorphic God? A God who cares about yellow banana-haired tree sharks? Eh, can’t test that, the flying spaghetti monster eated it. But the other part is a bonafide problem.

  • Lokland

    “An IQ test is not required for participation here”

    Whooo, thank god.

  • Zach

    @Russ in Texas

    “is the whole unmoved mover problem.” Simple. Three words. I. Don’t. Know. If you asked me why Bob just decided to pee on the floor instead of the bathroom, and I had truly no idea, would you expect me to say “an all-powerful, omnipotent bearded white man made him do it”? No, you’d laugh me out of the room. You’d expect me to say “I don’t know”.

  • Russ in Texas

    Sure. I’d say “I don’t know,” too.

    Looked around society lately? Your candor and mine are not precisely popular. Spouting off where one has no expertise, otoh, THAT is the sport du jour.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    Russ in Texas, I am not an atheist nor am I opposed to belief in God or the possibility of God existing. But to fight over it, like one can fight over something that has actually been scientifically proven and objectively exists, such as the environment around us that we are all living in and a part of, is completely ridiculous, as is the missionary agenda and conversion fetish.

    Ted D, “I have about as much faith in “organized religion” (by that I mean any major Church) as I do in the Federal Government. It isn’t the tenants I don’t agree with, it is the political BS that every organized Church suffers from that keeps me away. The Roman Catholic Church being one of the worst offenders of political BS of course sets the bar for the rest of the Christain denominations, but most suffer from it to some extent.”

    Um, check this doozy out;

    Letter from King Leopold II of Belgium to Colonial Missionaries, 1883
    The letter which follows is Courtesy of Dr. Vera Nobles and Dr. Chiedozie Okoro.

    “ Reverends, Fathers and Dear Compatriots: The task that is given to fulfill is very delicate and requires much tact. You will go certainly to evangelize, but your evangelization must inspire above all Belgium interests. Your principal objective in our mission in the Congo is never to teach the niggers to know God, this they know already. They speak and submit to a Mungu, one Nzambi, one Nzakomba, and what else I don’ t know. They know that to kill, to sleep with someone else’ s wife, to lie and to insult is bad. Have courage to admit it; you are not going to teach them what they know already. Your essential role is to facilitate the task of administrators and industrials, which means you will go to interpret the gospel in the way it will be the best to protect your interests in that part of the world. For these things, you have to keep watch on disinteresting our savages from the richness that is plenty [in their underground. To avoid that, they get interested in it, and make you murderous] competition and dream one day to overthrow you.

    Your knowledge of the gospel will allow you to find texts ordering, and encouraging your followers to love poverty, like “ Happier are the poor because they will inherit the heaven” and, “ It’ s very difficult for the rich to enter the kingdom of God.” You have to detach from them and make them disrespect everything which gives courage to affront us. I make reference to their Mystic System and their war fetish-warfare protection-which they pretend not to want to abandon, and you must do everything in your power to make it disappear.

    Your action will be directed essentially to the younger ones, for they won’ t revolt when the recommendation of the priest is contradictory to their parent’ s teachings. The children have to learn to obey what the missionary recommends, who is the father of their soul. You must singularly insist on their total submission and obedience, avoid developing the spirit in the schools, teach students to read and not to reason. There, dear patriots, are some of the principles that you must apply. You will find many other books, which will be given to you at the end of this conference. Evangelize the niggers so that they stay forever in submission to the white colonialists, so they never revolt against the restraints they are undergoing. Recite every day-“ Happy are those who are weeping because the kingdom of God is for them.”

    Convert always the blacks by using the whip. Keep their women in nine months of submission to work freely for us. Force them to pay you in sign of recognition-goats, chicken or eggs-every time you visit their villages. And make sure that niggers never become rich. Sing every day that it’ s impossible for the rich to enter heaven. Make them pay tax each week at Sunday mass. Use the money supposed for the poor, to build flourishing business centres. Institute a confessional system, which allows you to be good detectives denouncing any black that has a different consciousness contrary to that of the decision-maker. Teach the niggers to forget their heroes and to adore only ours. Never present a chair to a black that comes to visit you. Don’ t give him more than one cigarette. Never invite him for dinner even if he gives you a chicken every time you arrive at his house.

    “ The above speech which shows the real intention of the Christian missionary journey in Africa was exposed to the world by Mr. Moukouani Muikwani Bukoko, born in the Congo in 1915, and who in 1935 while working in the Congo, bought a second hand Bible from a Belgian priest who forgot the speech in the Bible. — Dr. Chiedozie Okoro

  • Lokland

    @Rebound

    “like one can fight over something that has actually been scientifically proven and objectively exists, such as the environment around us that we are all living in and a part of, ”

    Science cannot prove something to be. Thats the entire foundation upon which the scientific method was developed.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Science cannot prove something to be. Thats the entire foundation upon which the scientific method was developed.”

    God cannot be falsified. Dirt can.

  • Russ in Texas

    aaaaaaand rebound posts a COMPLETELY valid and good response, followed by a quote from one of the most evil human beings to have lived on earth. O.O

  • Escoffier

    I think what he meant was, people what’s worst about the cad and then faslely concluded that EVERYTHING about the cad is bad, and hence indoctrinate men that all legitimate forms of manliness are bad, which leads men to be less manly, which turns off women. And so on.

  • JP

    “The environment is a fact. You are breathing in oxygen right now as I type this. You can see, feel and eat dirt. Guns are a fact. You can see, feel, buy and shoot them. These are objectively existing material phenomena that can be measured and tested.

    God is not.”

    Part of the problem is that religion / spiritual events are based upon experience that can’t be measured and tested because it’s not open to experience and testing.

    And the experiences have sensory components, but they are not easily repeated.

  • OffTheCuff

    I wouldnt say it’s the biggest problem in society… there are a lot more important things. But it is a large problem in the mating game.

    Male shaming, as currently practiced, only widens the gap between the haves and have nots, by giving natural alphas a free pass, while making natural betas even more beta. This is because breaking the rules itself, factors so deeply into female attraction.

    If I were paranoid, I could say its meant to be this way, that it’s a test, to cull the weak from the strong. But I honestly don’t think that – I think women just are having problems assuming all boys are natural alphas.

    For the solution? I’m not big on such ideas, but I would say that a big step would be to only apply these strong anti-sex sanctions on certain boys.

    Making a single rule (no sex before marriage/monogamy/whatever) and trying to apply it to everyone, disproportionally effects people who follow the damn rules. In the men’s case, it has the extra effect of making them even less attractive.

    You don’t round up all the boys in the room and tell them sex is bad, like we do now. You round up the ones who are likely to, or already are, fucking their way through the entire 7th grade class. Everyone else needs *positive* encouragement from a male role model who has attained success, without outside interference. Look at the Joseph of Jackson problem where he got booted form his church for teaching social skills, and assertive masculinity. That shit is everywhere.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Part of the problem is that religion / spiritual events are based upon experience that can’t be measured and tested because it’s not open to experience and testing.

    And the experiences have sensory components, but they are not easily repeated.”

    Well there’s a lot of testing now of Buddhist monks and nuns meditating and the affects that has on the brain.

  • Escoffier

    I don’t know, it’s a non-sequitur, on the the face of it.

    The guy has been totally honest. His pitch to women is “This is who I am. I am 30+, not ambitious, don’t have a great career and never will, careless with money, will never be a great provider. Also, I value my own pleasures–chiefly sports, bars and concerts–above all else and I am not going to scale them back for a girlfriend. So, if you want to hang out in my world, you are welcome to, but I will never change.”

    He doesn’t lie. He doesn’t cheat. When they agree it’s exclusive, he keeps it exclusive. I don’t see where he is being dishonest at all.

    As for “asshole,” my interpretation of that is, after some months of being with the guy, girls eventually figure out that is, genuinely, a selfish hedonist who does not care about them as much as he cares about his (other) pleasures and that he will not change for them or invest much in them. He knows that when this finally clicks for her, she will think “what an asshole.” And on some level even he agrees that his own self-centeredness makes him an asshole.

    All that said, he’s not evil or malicious or detestable. He’s, at worst, sad and contemptible. But not for anything he’s done TO anyone, rather for choosing to live a rather low and pointless life.

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

      @Escoffier

      His pitch to women is “This is who I am. I am 30+, not ambitious, don’t have a great career and never will, careless with money, will never be a great provider. Also, I value my own pleasures–chiefly sports, bars and concerts–above all else and I am not going to scale them back for a girlfriend. So, if you want to hang out in my world, you are welcome to, but I will never change.”

      That was in the past. He clearly is not saying that now. The reason he says, OMG I feel terrible is because when she earnestly tells him that she needs honesty, he knows he’s not giving it to her. That is the only way the statement makes any sense. He felt like a heel when she said that because he knows he is misleading her. It may not even be intentional, it may be “don’t ask, don’t tell,” but in her telling him that, she’s saying “tell me now if you don’t want a relationship with me.” And he is not saying it, though he does not want more than sex from her. That’s what makes him an asshole, and his saying that he knows he will start coming across that way refers to the fact that women will eventually realize they’ve been played.

      That is how I read it, anyway. We don’t have enough information to settle this debate.

  • JP

    I’m pretty sure that meditation is a specific mental state, so I would expect that you can test effects on the brain from being in such a mental state.

  • OffTheCuff

    We don’t know. “Honesty” might mean answering a direct question truthfully, or it might mean volunteering that he has other women in rotation unasked.

    “Asshole” might be deceit, or merely his own self-assement of the morality of playing the field.

    I can tell you that I used to fear being an “asshole” for even asking ONE woman out. Beta conditioning. So the term means little.

    You’re choosing to interpret as maximally-cad. I see it as a man doing don’t-ask-don’t-tell (OK in your book) but actually feeling a little guilty about it. A true cad wouldn’t give a fuck, and happily bang them all without any worry, and dump the chick who didn’t put out fast enough.

    We are probably both wrong…

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

    O/T

    What is the answer to 4 x 4 + 4 x 4 + 4 – 4 x 4 = ?

    Apparently 73% of people get this one wrong.

    I see most people give the answer as 20, while some give 320, and one lone genius got 128 out of this.

    My answer is 512.

  • Escoffier

    But he does want relationships! He sticks around for years and never actually dumps anyone (that we know of). However, he is insouciant about being dumped himself because he is not invested, which in turn is because he knows he can always get another. So if you mean that he does not want _quality_ relationships, I guess I could see that, but quality on whose terms?

    I just don’t see how these women have been played. He never puts on a false front (that we know of). He’s a slacker, introduces himself as a slacker and then proves to be a slacker boyfriend. The women leave him when they realize that his slackerdom is perpetual.

    What would make him an a-hole in my book is if he gave some chick the HanSolo speech about having all this love to give, melted her heart, maybe put a week or two into the effort, and then reverted to behaving like the ur-slacker.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    I believe that in every instance where I have been challenged to write about the general population, I have reaffirmed that I write for a college and post-college audience. In occasional instances where I have used general data, e.g. CDC, I have specified that.

    Learn from experience. When you’ve blogged on college-related topics you know about and have experienced, and cited facts and evidence, what’s been the standard response from the Backfire Boys around here? “Your data’s crap. Common sense is never wrong.”

    Do you really think it’d be any different if you expanded your understanding of other SE groups and blogged about them? I seriously doubt it. After all, look at the draconian/PC views expressed about community college students… just the tip of the iceberg.

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

      @Megaman

      Do you really think it’d be any different if you expanded your understanding of other SE groups and blogged about them?

      No I do not. There will always be those who are eager to take potshots. Given INTJ’s age and maturity, I can’t help but feel I’m dealing with a kid who’s being bratty and rebellious. Next it will be “I know you are, but what am I?” I’m too old for this. I’ve already finished raising two teens.

  • JP

    What is the answer to 4 x 4 + 4 x 4 + 4 – 4 x 4 = ?

    I thought that you did order of operations.

    Multiplication, then addition/subtraction.

    So,

    16 + 16 + 4 – 16 = ?
    = 20

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

    JP, #676

    You’re right, I switched the order of the operators around … ai yai yai …

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “His pitch to women is “This is who I am. I am 30+, not ambitious, don’t have a great career and never will, careless with money, will never be a great provider. Also, I value my own pleasures–chiefly sports, bars and concerts–above all else and I am not going to scale them back for a girlfriend. So, if you want to hang out in my world, you are welcome to, but I will never change.”

    I’m willing to date people like that provided they are hot and have a personality I gel with. I appreciate the straightforwardness which is rare.

  • Emily

    >> “4 x 4 + 4 x 4 + 4 – 4 x 4 = ?”

    Yeah, I did it the same way that JP did. Is it not 20? Enlighten us Marellus!

  • JP

    I’m currently deep into checking order of operations homework on a regular basis.

    Having elementary school kids means that you get to do lots of homework review.

    It’s not something you think about on a day to day basis, so I think I recently relearned it.

  • Emily

    Whoops! Cross-posted. Oh well, thank you for the math homework! :P

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

    @Emily,

    Check my comment #677 … now before I explain this any further, let me just say ……………….

    … oh wait … there’s something lying on the floor … ah, I shouldn’t worry … it’s just my ego …

  • Ted D

    Russ in Texas – ” Rather, aim for “happy children who become successful adults.”

    The issue for me is how to define “successful” adult. By modern standards that means wealthy and powerful, which is fine other than the fact that most people get that way by unethical (or at least morally questionable) means. It also doesn’t help that at this point in my life, I can’t say with any assurance that I qualify as “successful”, other than to say I’ve done better for myself than my family before me.

    But the higher issue for me is this: if most people don’t play “by the rules” why should I try to instill that sense of morality in my children? At the root of my frustration is the fact that I’m still trying to follow the “rules” even though I now know they are pure BS. I don’t want my children to spend their lives frustrated over it as well, so I can’t in good conscious try to impart my morality on them, because that is where being a moral person in an immoral world leads you. But without a sense of morality, they would became self-serving, self-absorbed people. Although that might actually make them happy and successful…

    Ethical wolf seems like a happy medium to me. Self serving but not to a fault. Lives by a code of ethics, but not necessarily a common social set of ethics.

  • Cooper

    Since Marellus started it….

    What’s 6/2(1+2) = ?

  • HanSolo

    @Cooper

    6/2*(1+2) =3*3=9

  • Russ in Texas

    @Ted,

    You’re the parent. They’re the child. YOU don’t get to decide what your kid’s definition of successful is — your job’s just to make sure that they have the toolset to go get it once they’ve figured out what it is.

    As to “the rules,” well…what’s the rule? Is it meaningful, mere tradition and can be picked up or put down at will, or bullshit? “Society” is a null term.

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

    @Cooper

    6/2(1+2) = 6/2(3) … now is it 6/6 = 1 … or 3(3) = 9 ? Since I’m feeling lucky, I’m opting for 9.

  • Cooper

    @Marellus, Han

    See, some people online will say that they were taught to consider 2(1+2) as [2*(1+3)] and NOT interchangeable for 2*().

    As the short hand of removing the * annotates that there is another set of brackets around the operation; thus 6/2(3) is short hand for 6/[2*(3)]

    That’s where some people so wrong.

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

    Ethical wolf seems like a happy medium to me. Self serving but not to a fault. Lives by a code of ethics, but not necessarily a common social set of ethics.

    Unethical pigeon seems like a happy medium to me. “Servings” from yourself, but it’s their fault. Lives by a cooing of ethics, but not necessarily a flight from set social ethics … heh … sorry … couldn’t help myself Ted-sama.

  • JP

    ” YOU don’t get to decide what your kid’s definition of successful is — your job’s just to make sure that they have the toolset to go get it once they’ve figured out what it is.”

    What?

    Kids are little balls of clay that need to be molded to achieve the multi-generational tasks that you set but are unable to achieve due to your impending mortality and lack of resources.

    Ideally, you mold them so that they are able to mold *their* children to achieve your multi-generational tasks.

    How can you possibly control the future so that history transpires the way you want it to if you can’t make sure that your will is executed after your passing?

    I think of it like the Pentagon thinks of Full-spectrum dominance:

    “Officially known as full-spectrum superiority and defined by the U.S. military as:

    The cumulative effect of dominance in the air, land, maritime, and space domains and information environment that permits the conduct of joint operations without effective opposition or prohibitive interference.[1]

    The United States military’s doctrine has espoused a strategic intent to be capable of achieving this state in a conflict, either alone or with allies[2] by defeating any adversary and controlling any situation across the range of military operations.

    The stated intent implies significant investment in a range of capabilities; dominant maneuver, precision engagement, focused logistics, and full-dimensional protection.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full-spectrum_dominance

  • HanSolo

    @Cooper

    Not sure where you got that idea from, that 2(1+2) is the same as (2*(1+2)), but I’m open to the possibility if you can show me a source for that rule.

    Google does it the way I did–enter 6/2(1+2):

    http://www.google.com/search?q=2%2F2(1%2B2)&oq=2%2F2(1%2B2)&sugexp=chrome,mod=17&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=1&gs_ri=serp&pq=2%2F2(1%2B2)&cp=1&gs_id=3&xhr=t&q=6/2(1%2B2)&pf=p&tbo=d&sclient=psy-ab&oq=6/2(1%2B2)&gs_l=&pbx=1&fp=1&biw=1116&bih=622&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&cad=b&sei=KFbrUPLyBrDxiQKbuoGgDQ

    I was using the rules that order of operations involving multiplication and division go from left to right.

    Since in any kind of computer language (that I’m aware of) or math software you have to explicitly put in the operations then I just put in the * that was omitted.

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

    Cooper,

    Now here’s a doozy for you. I got it from a compendium of very old Reader’s Digest articles, which was a gift from a born-again old auntie, who tried to chase a few demons out of me (long story). Here goes :

    There is a book, and this book has exactly 100 pages. Now put that book on a shelf, and imgaine 9 other (and similar) books right next to it. So there are 10 books on that shelf, and each one of them has 100 pages.

    Now if a worm starts eating from the first page of that first book, to the last page of the last book, through how many pages has that worm eaten then ?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Ethical wolf seems like a happy medium to me. Self serving but not to a fault.

    Not many people are designed to be happy in solitude. And it usually feels good to do well by others, too.
    Just some additional thoughts on the matter

  • Cooper

    @Han
    Oh, I know. There is no such rule. It’s what I’ve seen argued over the meme.

  • Cooper

    “Now if a worm starts eating from the first page of that first book, to the last page of the last book, through how many pages has that worm eaten then ?”

    998?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    The list of pet peeves for INTJs reminds me that I am definitely not an INTJ.

    My biggest pet peeves are when people don’t say what they friggin mean and pretend to have expertise they don’t have, as well as wasting my time, or insisting that I listen to THEIR crap.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @Cooper

    nope

  • HanSolo

    @Marellus

    500 pages (or sheets) of paper. :) Assuming that the covers don’t count and it starts before page 1 of the first book and ends after page 100 of the 10th book.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @HanSolo

    nope

  • JP

    If you’re driving your sailboat across the desert and your wing falls off, how many bananas does it take to glue your engine back together?

  • HanSolo

    @Marellus

    400. I think that’s right. lol

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    JP,

    … none, the flying monkeys will do it for peanuts …

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    HanSolo,

    nope

  • JP

    Marellus,

    Nope.

  • HanSolo

    Marellus, I guess it could be 0 if the 1st book is to the immediate right of the last of the 9 other books.

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

      You guys are doing brain teasers to torture me. My family knows I hate puzzles of all kinds, and they constantly do these brain teasers with each other just to annoy me!

      I’m not smart enough to ever get the answer first, that’s why I hate playing. :(

  • INTJ

    @ Marellus

    What is the answer to 4 x 4 + 4 x 4 + 4 – 4 x 4 = ?

    According to order of operations, this is (4×4)+(4×4)+4-(4×4)=20.

  • INTJ

    @ Marellus

    nvm looks like you guys already figured that out.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    JP,

    How many bananas to glue up the engine ? And there’s no flying monkeys that’ll work for peanuts ? Well no matter what the number is, I’m sure some gorilla accounting will be involved …

    @HanSolo

    Solve JP’s problem and I’ll give you the answer. I’m not up to any monkey business. I promise.

  • HanSolo

    @Marellus

    lol

    Well, if there all in a row with the 1st to the far left and the last at the far right then it would be 400 sheets. If you count the covers as pages/sheets too then it would be 418. Anyway, too many unspecified options.

    No idea about JP’s. Good luck.

  • HanSolo

    Or 800 pages (2 pages per sheet) or 400 sheets plus maybe 18 covers if you count them.

  • http://Marellus.wordpress.com Marellus

    @HanSolo,

    The correct answer is 802 pages. The worm misses 99 pages from the first and last books. Nonetheless there was ambiguity. Next time I ask this, I’ll use sheets instead of pages.

  • HanSolo

    So, you’re saying no covers count and not tricking people into thinking that 2 pages of print is only 1 piece of paper. In that case, I would say it is 800 because the worm starts to the right of pg 1 as viewed from in front of the book shelf and moves to the right, never passing through page one. Likewise arrives at page 100 of the 10th book but never passes through it.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    Given INTJ’s age and maturity, I can’t help but feel I’m dealing with a kid who’s being bratty and rebellious.

    That’s been obvious to me since Day 1. The constructive dialogue is barely there. Rebelliousness (with accompanying leather jacket) supposedly translates into “chick magnet” IRL, but online it just comes across as irritating, like herpes, or so I’ve been told. :wink:

    For anybody actually concerned about other SE groups, and I happen to be (grew up lower-MC, now “middle” MC, not so easy in CA), the real question is why they’re delaying marriage just as long as college graduates? Median age is 28 for both groups, but not for the same reasons. Cohabitation hasn’t affected the college-educated divorce rate, which continues to be pretty low…

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “You’re the parent. They’re the child. YOU don’t get to decide what your kid’s definition of successful is — your job’s just to make sure that they have the toolset to go get it once they’ve figured out what it is.”

    Completely disagree. Ted’s kid’s definition of success might be becoming a pimp/madam or drug dealer. Its not “Ted’s job” to make sure he/she has the tool set to get it. Its Ted’s job to instill his values into his children.

  • J

    My new quandary is: how do I raise ethical wolves?

    My philosophy is to raise kids to make moral choices but to be aware that others don’t. Goodness is not necessarily naivete.

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

    HanSolo,

    So, you’re saying no covers count and not tricking people into thinking that 2 pages of print is only 1 piece of paper. In that case, I would say it is 800 because the worm starts to the right of pg 1 as viewed from in front of the book shelf and moves to the right, never passing through page one. Likewise arrives at page 100 of the 10th book but never passes through it.

    Let’s do this again :

    You have ten books on a shelf.

    They all have one hundred sheets.

    A worm eats from the first sheet of the first book, to the last sheet of the last book.

    The worm doesn’t grow thicker and longer at any naughty pictures.

    The worm doesn’t become skew at any mention of Bill Clinton.

    The bloody worm goes straight.

    In a linear direction.

    Like Barny Frank at a Biker Convention.

    And you can ignore the bloody cover pages.

    Now that worm is gonna eat 100 sheets from 8 of those books. That means 800 sheets.

    But I said from the first sheet of the first book, to the last sheet of the last book.

    And sheet number 1 is not on the far left of the first book, and sheet number 100 is not on the far right of the last book.

    The worm is gonna miss 99 sheets from each of those two books.

    So that worm is gonna eat 1 page from each of those two books … and that is because my daddy is bigger than your daddy.

    And that’s also because my daddy can inject pink stuff into a witchdoctor that makes the witchdoctor scream blue-bloody murder ( so that the witchdoctor no longer wants to matakata him)

    It’s also because my daddy can watch Oprah without bursting into tears, and finally it’s because my daddy once asked a Texan if he’s from Canada.

    So that worm eats two more sheets.

    That means 802 sheets.

    Capeesh?

  • HanSolo

    It depends which side of the 1st sheet the worm starts from. Since you said page one then that means on the side of the sheet facing inward so the worm doesn’t eat through the first page, nor through the last. 800! :)

  • szopen

    @tomato

    Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair color.

    I just want to say that I will keep that sentence in my short list of motto’s to use in different forums which I read and in which I write.

    @Russ in Tex
    You see, you forgot Poland :)

  • szopen

    @Rebound Girl
    You forgot that in order to use “scientific method” you must first believe in a lot of things. For example, that the world exists; that our senses are vehicles allowing us to find real things, really existing. That’s a lot of things to believe :)

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

    HanSolo,

    It depends which side of the 1st sheet the worm starts from. Since you said page one then that means on the side of the sheet facing inward so the worm doesn’t eat through the first page, nor through the last. 800! :)

    Ahhh, this is a brilliant retort; skirting my reframe in #718 so innocently … very well … I’m gonna play …

    Now let’s look at that reframe of my reframe then :

    … Since you said page one then that means on the side of the sheet facing inward so the worm doesn’t eat through the first page …

    Oh but the worm does Han. You see Han, that worm has gotta coil itself up. It needs some momentum like a sprinter at the starting blocks to get the job done.

    So the worm pushes itself back against page one. And one must assume that its asshole will come into intimate invasive contact with page 1, so as facilitate a buildup of blasting pressures for launching.

    In plain English: It’s arse goes through page 1. It becomes aware of this. It becomes farting upset of this. And hence the worm gets propelled forward quite shittily.

    So the worm ingests page 1.

    Now the worm is on the cusp of reaching its goal near the tenth book.

    All the shit is nearly done.

    So what does the worm do ?

    It starts yelling :

    Yeehaaaaaaa … *chomp* … *chomp* … shit … shit shit shit !!!! … this is page 100 of the last book I’ve bitten through !!!

    Yes Han, the last *chomp* for the last page.

    So the worm actually did 802 pages.

    I rest my case.

  • Abbot

    “challenging male privilege creates a much more negative reaction than empowering women—we’ve created a generation or two where the number of women who feel empowered way outstrips the number of men who are truly ready to relinquish privilege. That’s why the dating market is hard.”
    — Amanda Marcotte

    In the “dating market” (btw the market reference is the first by Marcotte) it is unclear how men have any sort of privilege. In fact, the women have the sole privilege of effortlessly mounting the carousel at will. Marcotte may want to challenge the privilege men have to accept or reject such women and that indicates she is assigning the propaganda term “privilege” to what everyone understands is a personal preference.

  • Abbot

    As this trend reaches a slightly older crowd, its sure to cut back on carousel usage –

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/adolescents-memes-cyber-bully-article-1.1235246

    .

  • Ted D

    Russ in Texas – “your job’s just to make sure that they have the toolset to go get it once they’ve figured out what it is.”

    Sure. And what I’ve learned over the last few years is the “toolset” I was given as a child is wrong, or at least less than optimal in regards to succeeding in the current environment. If we were back in the 1050’s or 60’s perhaps my “tools” would still be current.

    “As to “the rules,” well…what’s the rule? Is it meaningful, mere tradition and can be picked up or put down at will, or bullshit? “Society” is a null term”

    In this case “the rules” refers to what used to be a set of common moral standards we held as a society. You know, the rules where liars and cheaters were shamed instead of promoted at the office. The rules that said you should treat people the way you expect to be treated. The rules that said if you work hard you will get ahead. Some of it is tradition surely, some of it to me is just common decency. We are lacking both today.

    ADBG – “Not many people are designed to be happy in solitude. And it usually feels good to do well by others, too.
    Just some additional thoughts on the matter”

    Oh I know. But here is the rub: if I raise my kids with solid moral values, who do you think they will feel comfortable being around? Part of the reason I don’t like “people” is because I don’t trust them. And the reason I don’t’ trust them is: they DO NOT share common moral and ethical values, so I can’t know what their “rules” are until after I get to know them.

    “The list of pet peeves for INTJs reminds me that I am definitely not an INTJ.”

    Well a few of those don’t matter to me, as Rebound pointed out. I don’t really like gossip, but the subject of sexuality interests me and having young kids I feel like I have a dog in the fight. But, for the most part, that list is pretty accurate for me.

    What I find funny is that INTJ’s tend to dislike close-minded and stubborn people. However, every INTJ I know personally (meaning not a guess from online) IS one of those people. I don’t think I’m literally closed-minded, but it takes an AWFUL lot for me to change my mind on something. Funny thing is, it takes just as much for me to convince myself to change my mind as it does for someone else to kick start the process, and in fact I think I may require more “proof” from myself…

    The Rebound GF – “Its not “Ted’s job” to make sure he/she has the tool set to get it. Its Ted’s job to instill his values into his children.”

    FWIW I consider both of these to be my “job” as a parent. To me, values is simply one tool in the box for dealing with life.

    J – “My philosophy is to raise kids to make moral choices but to be aware that others don’t. Goodness is not necessarily naivete.”

    This. This is what I’m trying to figure out. You see, I definitely fell into the “ naive” category for most of my life it seems. Not only did I do my best to be moral, but I truly believed that everyone else did as well. Of course, just as with my issues early on regarding women, I saw plenty of examples of people NOT being moral, and in each case I simply decided that those people were the minority as SURELY most people are good and moral folks. Of course, as it turns out, I’d say there is about a 50-50 shot the stranger in front of me at the grocery is a decent and moral person, or a total douchebag asshat. Around where I live, those percentages lean much more towards the douche category.

    So what I keep asking myself is: if no one else is going to bother with the extra work of being moral, why should I hinder my children with that baggage? I mean, from a spiritual and personal standpoint the idea is to instill those values so that they live on past my days on this planet. The problem is, I’m not so sure my values and morals are useful or even merited in our current environment. I can only see trying to be morally and ethically superior as a detriment to success, and it certainly doesn’t seem to help in the least, so at best it adds unnecessary complication. Of course the idea of my children growing up to be douchebag asshats is distasteful, but the question is: would they be better off? Part of me wants to load them up on morality and send them out to “do battle”, but I feel like that is for personal reasons and not in their best interests. After all, my kids will be competing with all these other children that won’t give a second thought to being moral or ethical in getting what they want. Where would that leave my kids? Waiting patiently for their turn as everyone else cuts in line?

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    J

    My new quandary is: how do I raise ethical wolves?

    My philosophy is to raise kids to make moral choices but to be aware that others don’t. Goodness is not necessarily naivete.

    Agreed. Not all those with teeth are wolves. There are sheepdogs.

  • Ion

    Abbot agree!

    “In the “dating market” (btw the market reference is the first by Marcotte) it is unclear how men have any sort of privilege.”

    Men have privileges and women have privileges, but her definition of privilege doesn’t make any sense because privilege is relative to what you want, and privilege you DO have is almost always invisible to you.

    It’s like saying a successful career woman has privileges other women don’t have because she can always buy a low value mate if she wants and other women don’t have that privilege. I’m sure Marcotte would say this is not a privilege, because compared to what most women want, they don’t see that option.

    She is hypocrite because she has (and used) the same privilege she is assigning to men by rejecting men she perceives as lower value than her, while shaming men for exercising that same right. She won’t hold women accountable for selecting from a limited pool, she will hold men accountable for selecting from a limited pool.

  • Ted D

    Hope – “Agreed. Not all those with teeth are wolves. There are sheepdogs.”

    True, but aren’t Sheepdogs generally someone’s pet and/or labor resource?

    I think it is an appropriate metaphor since wolves and dogs share many common traits. Dogs are essentially domesticated wolves (setting aside the fact that we have modified their biology through selective breeding which makes them easier to train and control) just as betas are “domesticated” men. By that I mean, a man is a man biologically speaking, but clearly men’s behavior varies a great deal over the spectrum from doormat to douche, and if we assume common biology (as with dogs and wolves) the primary difference between them is: their domestication.

    Morality is very much human domestication: that is, taking the human “animal” and training it to be civil, just as a dog is housebroken and taught to heal. The process of raising a child is similar to animal domestication and training in that the idea is to raise children to behave in socially accepted ways. So the issue to me is: I do not find the common socially accepted views on “behavior” to be adequate, so training my children to behave to my standards would put more work on them than would be necessary to function effectively. In other words, I want them to think and act better than the majority, but just doing so will make them outsiders and misfits. It will single them out among their peers, and not in a way that would be beneficial. It will make them brighter and easier targets.

    They are just getting to the age where this is becoming easily apparent. My wife and I have had words with our Principal, Superintendent, and the truant officer for our school district because of other kids giving our children shit, primarily because our children don’t walk around talking shit and acting like thugs. We hear from the school and other parents how well behaved and polite our kids are, (which I greatly appreciate) but all it gets them in school is concern from teachers and abuse from students. It seems all to clear to me that being respectful and decent gets you nowhere outside of “polite” society, which we are not a part of. There are no ivory walls of protection for them, so I’m faced with staying the course, or teaching them how to deal with their environment in a more direct manner. That “direct manner” would contain some advice I wouldn’t have put any faith in a few years ago, and certainly nothing short of bad behavior as outlined during my youth from my family.

    Sheepdogs are great, but in the wrong environment they cannot flourish. They need someone else looking out for them, as their domestication means they would find it difficult to make it alone. Wolves are not fit to be kept as pets, but they are able to survive in their surroundings without assistance, because they are in tune with their environment and will do what is necessary to survive. They are not inhibited by domestication. (which to complete the circle is exactly why they make bad pets…)

    So is teaching a child to be more moral and/or ethical than society requires inhibiting them by domestication? Because in many ways I believe that my own “domestication” has hindered me a great deal, and not simply in matters of love and marriage. In fact, I’d say that is only a small part of the bigger picture, and perhaps simply a side effect of it.

  • HanSolo

    @Marellus

    You sly fox, you, adding in the info at the very last moment so you can be right! lol

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Ted D, sheepdogs can move environments. If the wolves are too numerous, there are other pastures.

    If I were in your shoes, I’d look into sending the kids to a different school. See if they are smart enough to test into a magnet school or look into financial aid at private school. I also went to public school with thugs for a little while, but I got out of that system.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Ted D, to continue the analogy, wolves may not be domesticated, but they also only flourish in packs. Gangs of thugs and selfish people can survive, but one wolf among lots of sheepdogs cannot. Likewise sheepdogs also need to find their pack. Good places with good people still exist.

    You want to make your kids into wolves, that’s your choice. Just be aware they will have to hang around other wolves, who may out-wolf them and harm them a great deal. It is far preferable to give them the ability to defend themselves but send them into environments where it is not needed.

    You were domesticated to be sheep, not a sheepdog. That is the difference.

  • deti

    Ted:

    You’re getting closer to where you need to be, but you’re still raging against the machine. This does you no good and only expends energy trying to control that which you cannot; instead of finding solutions to the issues you face.

    The world is a broken place and getting more broken all the time. To me at least, it’s far more profitable to live in the world as it is and not as I want it to be. I deal with the world as much as I have to and shut the rest out. When I deal with the world I do so with a realist’s eye, ear and mind. There is still value in instilling moral values in children. Teach your kids to be good, but not “nice”; moral but not pushovers. The old biblical advice is still pretty good: be wise as a serpent but gentle as a dove.

    And let go of your idealized versions of the world. Let go of the fact that no one taught you the truth. Yes, you were deprived of much. Yes, you were hurt and so were your kids. No, it wasn’t fair. But then, you knew that anyway because you know life isn’t fair. You have a plan. You’ll be OK no matter what happens. Even if your second marriage doesn’t work out, even if your kids mess up (they will), even if things don’t go smoothly (they won’t always), you will still have a leg up on others, because you know the truth about intergender relations.

    The problem for you right now is you know the truth. You just don’t want to accept it or integrate it into your life or live it out, because the truth is ugly and it hurts sometimes. Also, you are where you are because acceptance and life integration would mean your life up to about 2 years ago was a lie. You look away at this truth because you can scarcely believe it is true, but you KNOW it is.

    Also you are where you are because acceptance and life integration would mean you will have to continue changing, you will have to risk, and you will have to take the chance that no, this might not work out with wife 2, and not because of you or anything you do or are. Much as you want to, you cannot control her. She will have to make her own decisions, come hell or high water.

    You are where you are because acceptance and life integration would mean you’re sending your kids out into a world where you KNOW they’ll get hurt, they’ll fuck up, and they will have disappointment. Well, OK. You did too. They, like you and like your wife, will have to make their own decisions. You can’t control them either. All you can do is the best you can, and leave the rest up to them and to God. When they are out and about you’ll no longer have any skin in their games.

    Accept. Let go. Integrate what you know into your life. Yes, there’s risk. Yes, it might not work out. Yes, you might get hurt. If so, well, them’s the breaks. You will be OK if you integrate the truth into your life and start living it.

  • Ted D

    Deti – All true. I’m perfectly OK with doing my own thing and getting by. I’m not in the least fearful of another failed marriage. Not because I wrongly believe it can’t fail, but that I’ve been down that road once before, and hopefully know enough now to choose a different path. For the first time in a long time, I’m actually pretty hopeful about my own life and where it will lead, but only because I now feel free of the extra burden I carried around trying to live up to other people’s standards.

    So with that in mind, how can I in any fairness set a standard for my children that is any harder than the one I’d choose for myself? I simply don’t know how to install my sense of morality without the Blue Pill outlook it was packaged in, because once you remove that packaging, what is left doesn’t make sense in the context it was given. What I mean is: without the Blue Pill trappings of right and wrong, morality becomes a very flexible idea and prone to interpretation and personal bias. The Blue Pill world had rules and structure, the Red Pill world has limitless possibility and few restrictions on how to get what you want. It is a failing of mine that I do not function well in undefined environments, and I struggle to find any meaning in life post Red Pill other than to do what makes me happy since I no longer have faith or belief in those Blue Pill rules. However, my moral sense tells me that seeking happiness for the sake of happiness itself is immature and selfish, and that without some greater sense of purpose to the whole, what the individual does is basically pointless and irrelevant.

    I think I might have accidentally fallen into a real mid-life crises, which I find rather humorous considering the massive upheaval my life has weathered the last few years. Now that I’m past the direct and personally concerning issues, I’m trying to figure out how it all fits into the big picture, and although I can see things fitting nicely, they don’t fit in any order that I recognize as good and meaningful.

    Hope – “If I were in your shoes, I’d look into sending the kids to a different school. See if they are smart enough to test into a magnet school or look into financial aid at private school.”

    We’ve considered cyber-school, but my opinion of it is still on shaky ground in terms of how well it works. For some it probably works wonders. but for the less self-motivated child (and when it comes to schoolwork most aren’t that motivated) it seems like a recipe for disaster. We make far too much money for any kind of financial aid, but not nearly enough to send three kids to private school. When she first moved here (before we met) my wife applied to a few private schools. She was told, and I quote “your children are not (insert name of school here) material. Perhaps you should look at moving to another school district.” I’m sure the fact that she was a single mother (still married but her ex moved to another state before she came to Pittsburgh and the divorce was in process) and only made low 30s a year had something to do with it.

    And keep in mind, our school district wasn’t always like this. At one time this was a prosperous high tax revenue area. Over the last decade or so it went down hill dramatically. I’d say things are much better today than they were two or three years ago, but I suspect it will take at least another 5 to 10 to get things back on track. We have had state and federal drug task forces in and out of the area for a couple years which has done wonders, and pushed much of the unsavory activity to towns further away from the city. Unfortunately, the folks involved in those activities are still around, they just don’t bother “doing business” on the streets anymore. Their children and mine are classmates, and although I’m sure these thugs are the minority (in terms of numbers not race) they are the ones setting the tone, so to speak.

    We haven’t had any issues this year (knocking on wood…) so far. The worst of our “problems” was expelled and is currently in Juvenile detention for neglecting to obey a police officer. (He actually got tased for physically threatening the police and his mother spent the night in a cell for coming to his “rescue” after they got cuffs on him. He was 14 at the time…)

    I actually just went and looked at the crime stats for my town, and indeed the crime index dropped from 384.4 in 2001 to 316.3 in 2011, which now puts us below the national average of 319.1! That being said, the town I grew up in which isn’t too far away has a crime index of 281.4 but is much closer to the city and the airport, with a much better tax base. (meaning few abandoned/empty properties and lots of people working and paying taxes) Our property taxes went up 25% this year so we can continue to employ our police officers, which are desperately needed. The other “solution” offered was to outsource police protection to the next town over. I’m sure those cops were about as thrilled with the idea as we residents were.

  • J

    @Hope

    I contine to love the sheepdog metaphor.

    @Ted

    So what I keep asking myself is: if no one else is going to bother with the extra work of being moral, why should I hinder my children with that baggage.

    Because it’s not baggage, it’s a toolbox. I’ll give you an example. A few months ago, my younger boys comes home from school all pissed off because “It’s a fcuking zoo, and everyone lives like a fcuking animal.” Some kid told him YOLO and said that he wanted to die young before age slowed him down. My kid asked him if he was “so mired in his own physicality” that he couldn’t envision a life beyond partying.

    Now, as you might imagine, I’m not the mother of the most popular kids in the school. I do have the luxury though of assuming that, if nothing changes, at 40, my sons will be reasonanbly happy and healthy men.

  • J

    Where would that leave my kids? Waiting patiently for their turn as everyone else cuts in line?

    Not. Don’t equate being moral with being a fool/doormat. In that circumstance, my sons generally look at the line cutter as though they are too ignorant to understand how a line works and then explain in a polite but assertive tone where the end of the line is. Most cutters get embarrassed and comply. OTOH, my kids generally respect the rights of others and don’t cut lines.

    The world is a broken place and getting more broken all the time. To me at least, it’s far more profitable to live in the world as it is and not as I want it to be. I deal with the world as much as I have to and shut the rest out. When I deal with the world I do so with a realist’s eye, ear and mind. There is still value in instilling moral values in children. Teach your kids to be good, but not “nice”; moral but not pushovers. The old biblical advice is still pretty good: be wise as a serpent but gentle as a dove.

    THIS. I especially like the Bible quote and good, but not “nice.”

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

    HanSolo,

    You sly fox, you, adding in the info at the very last moment so you can be right! lol

    … you’ve just ruined my chances of enrolling at the Sheepdog Academy.

  • HanSolo

    Forget the sheepdog clothing…an eloquent fox with unexpected but infrequent romantic quips and pushing her up against a wall and showing her what a passionate kisser you are is a better fit for you. :)

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

    Deti,

    And let go of your idealized versions of the world. Let go of the fact that no one taught you the truth. Yes, you were deprived of much. Yes, you were hurt and so were your kids. No, it wasn’t fair. But then, you knew that anyway because you know life isn’t fair. You have a plan. You’ll be OK no matter what happens. Even if your second marriage doesn’t work out, even if your kids mess up (they will), even if things don’t go smoothly (they won’t always), you will still have a leg up on others, because you know the truth about intergender relations.

    … well said this …

  • deti

    Susan:

    “to the point where he stated that he probably is destroying his ability to fall in love with one woman in the future.”

    Zach said: “My friends and I have actually been talking about this more and more. We all worry about it, and some of us have moved away from casual sex because of it. With too many women, they turn into commodities instead of people, and we really don’t like that.”

    Susan replied: “I have to say, I give you a ton of credit for taking a hard look at your life and being so self-aware. That is precisely what will prevent you from suffering the fate you fear.

    “You know well that I am pro-relationship, so of course, I’m pleased that you have come to this conclusion ***”

    Susan, I’m curious about something. Do you believe sexual promiscuity can damage and even destroy pair bonding ability in women? My past communications with you suggest you don’t believe this happens in women, but here you acknowledge one man’s belief that his ability to love one woman might become damaged. It seems you accept this for men, but reject it for women. Can you explain?

    (By the way, I understand your disagreement that one premarital sexual act destroys pair bonding ability; and that’s not what I’m asking about. I’m asking if you believe in general that promiscuity CAN damage OR destroy pair bonding ability in women.)

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

      @deti

      Do you believe sexual promiscuity can damage and even destroy pair bonding ability in women?… It seems you accept this for men, but reject it for women. Can you explain?

      This is a really good question. I believe that promiscuity is correlated to poor bonding in both sexes, but the mechanisms are different.

      In the case of males, we have two kinds of men with high N:

      Men of very unrestricted sociosexuality who avoid commitment and specialize in STRs.

      Men of moderate sociosexuality who are naturally very attractive to women and receive frequent offers of no-strings sex. Even if they are selective, this generally results in a higher N. (FTR, I put Zach in this latter category.) Obviously, the latter group is the beneficiary of a casual sex culture. Before the Sex Rev, these men would have happily married their high SMV girlfriends after college.

      We know that men with many casual experiences, i.e. promiscuous men, are less likely to want or be able to sustain monogamy. I wrote a post that specifically addresses the question of why male promiscuity makes it much harder for men to be monogamous. I think it’s more related to choice than the “ability to pair bond.” This post describes several things particular to males. In short, once a guy has had a lot of variety, monogamy is a much greater challenge.

      Can a Manwhore Ever Really Settle Down, Even If He Wants To?

      With females it’s a bit different. Because we are the gatekeepers, women who are habitually promiscuous generally are very unrestricted in their sexuality. (Though Zach has made the case that really hot women have to turn down so many guys that their N can climb even when they are extremely selective. This may explain why men with high N are far less invested in a woman having a very low N.)

      Here is a post I wrote about the correlation in women between promiscuity and mental health:

      Which Comes First – Promiscuous or Crazy?

      The research is on the question of female promiscuity is still very active. It seems likely that prenatal exposure to higher levels of androgen (relative to estrogen) create hardwiring for several behaviors, including promiscuity:

      1. Poor bonding to fathers
      2. Shorter intimate relationships with males
      3. Preference for more dominant males
      4. Resist bonding to partners

      IOW, it appears that poor female bonders are born, not made. There is also other evidence that genes influence personality traits that contribute to promiscuity in both sexes (low conscientiousness, low agreeableness, high risk taking, high novelty seeking), as well as a mutation on a dopamine receptor that correlates highly to addictive behavior, including sex.

      In general, dopamine chasers of both sexes tend to live dangerously, having more short-term sex. Helen Fisher calls them “Explorers.”

      So I think we have a lot of genetics influencing the ability to bond, but for men there is the additional issue of having so much sexual variety in youth that they can not sexually bond to one woman.

      I don’t doubt that there are some women who are restricted in their sexuality but wind up being promiscuous anyway, and I would imagine they would suffer some long-term psychological effect as a result, but I have never seen this described. Here too, there seems to be a chicken and egg question, in that behaving so incongruently most likely predicts serious issues, e.g. poor self-esteem, distrust of relationships, etc.

      Finally, I do not know at what N these effects kick in. The study on male premarital sex partners suggests it kicks in quite early, but I am dubious about this. Like the Teachman study on female premarital partners, it’s very limited in scope and has had not been replicated. I take it with a grain of salt.

      In any case, I believe one should not marry without firm evidence of your partner’s having bonded to you, regardless of their sexual history.

      I hope that answers your question – that’s pretty much all I know.

  • Ted D

    J – I see those stupid YOLO shirts on kids at our school all the time. I actually had to look it up. (I’m getting too old to be ‘cool’ I guess…) Yeah, sounds like a great way to live your life, if you want to rationalize away all your stupid mistakes.

    Worst part? I’ve seen a few parents wearing them as well. *rolls eyes*

  • J

    Worst part? I’ve seen a few parents wearing them as well.

    Cripes!

  • deti

    SW:

    Interesting. The research seems to suggest that to the extent a particular woman is unable to bond or doesn’t bond, it’s inborn and not a direct result of promiscuity, but it is still inconclusive.

    If this research is to be believed then Roissy was right all along. I seem to remember a post in which he argued the most promiscuous women were probably high T women and had some male physical characteristics: manjaw, high 2-4 finger digit ratio, flat ass, high waist-to-hip ratio, broad shoulders, deeper voice. I’m not saying I accept this necessarily, but it’s interesting.

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

      If this research is to be believed then Roissy was right all along. I seem to remember a post in which he argued the most promiscuous women were probably high T women and had some male physical characteristics: manjaw, high 2-4 finger digit ratio, flat ass, high waist-to-hip ratio, broad shoulders, deeper voice.

      Yes, he was. In fact, when I wrote a post about the androgen exposure, I went through his archives because I recalled him writing about females with lantern jaws, haha. IIRC, he concluded these women are the daughters of natural alphas. I’ve definitely observed that anecdotally as well. Alpha dad with beautiful feminine mom, daughter is very masculine.

  • deti

    SW:

    If you’re correct, then when a man meets his honey’s parents he should give equal scrutiny to dad as well as mom. He should assess dad’s physical characteristics. And dad’s history: high paying job or working class? Divorced from honey’s mom because of his infidelity? Before marriage did he have a high N? Did her dad have a history of failed relationships or promiscuous behavior? Does dad like to flirt? Dad have a history of being a bad boy, a ladies man or a womanizer? Does her dad like high risk behaviors? Does dad run Game on everyone?

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

      If you’re correct, then when a man meets his honey’s parents he should give equal scrutiny to dad as well as mom.

      Yes! Andrew at Rules Revisited just wrote a post on how you need to see a woman’s mom before committing to her. That’s really only half the story. My daughter doesn’t look anything like me and never will. She got her father’s long, lean body type and fair coloring. My son, on the other hand, is much more a Walsh. He’s 5 inches shorter than his dad.

      But you make a more important point. Since personality traits appear to be about 50% heritable, then looking at your mate’s parents should definitely shed some light. I never thought of this before – I’ve read that kids of divorce are more likely to get divorced, and I’ve always figured it’s because they were damaged by the experience. But what if they’re just a lot like their parents?

      Complicated questions, no easy answers. But yes, I think knowing a person’s family is a very important part of assessing compatibility.

  • deti

    Well, it’s all a continuum and a spectrum. I have no doubt at all that there are some high T women who are naturally promiscuous and can’t bond or less able to bond. But this does not by any means explain all promiscuous women or why other women engage in promiscuous behavior.

    It’s clear some are unrestricted because of behavior modeling from others; following the herd; alcohol or drug abuse/addiction; personality disorders; mental disorders; and other factors. It’s clear there are some restricted women who engage in unrestricted behaviors either long term or short term.

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

      @deti

      It’s clear there are some restricted women who engage in unrestricted behaviors either long term or short term.

      I agree. What we know about hookup culture confirms this. It is a common strategy for women to “roll the dice” with unrestricted behavior in hopes of getting a bf. It does not appear that many women do this often, but I believe one study showed that a quarter of female freshman have sex in a hookup their first semester. The number of truly unrestricted women is not that high, so it suggests women are following the hookup script as a means of getting a relationship, despite the low odds.

  • pvw

    Re. high t women, I find more interesting the high t women who embody the best of being high t (masculine traits) at the same time they cultivate feminine traits, ie., a woman who has the high t look, but she is not promiscuous, is very much a right brain, logical thinker, can work well in fields and pursuits seen as traditionally male-dominated, ie., is athletic, yet she is feminine, ie., marriage and family oriented, is a good homemaker, etc. So on the face of it, they have the high t look, but their behavior avoids the worst of it–the promiscuity.

    I think that might fit a fair number of the female commenters at HUS?

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

      @Pvw

      I agree, that profile is applicable to our female regulars. I know very little about how hormones are distributed in the female population, or whether these levels are malleable (in the way men can increase their testosterone). But Helen Fisher has spoken of men who are both high testosterone and high estrogen – she cites Bill Clinton as an example. It stands to reason that there are women with high T and E levels as well. Some women that come to mind off the top of my head are Elizabeth Dole and Kay Bailey Hutchison, Donna Brazile, Nancy Pelosi. The women look like women and think like men. I think they pull off the balance quite well.

  • deti

    I would suspect that promiscuity in non high T women or unrestricted women, or even in restricted women, can lead to inability to bond simply through producing a warped view of relationships and their role in a person’s life; inability to relate to men outside of sexual conduct; and/or deep distrust of men in general.

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

      @deti

      I would suspect that promiscuity in non high T women or unrestricted women, or even in restricted women, can lead to inability to bond simply through producing a warped view of relationships and their role in a person’s life; inability to relate to men outside of sexual conduct; and/or deep distrust of men in general.

      I agree with you 100%. I think that sex should be meaningful and loving. Obviously, the more sex one has that is neither, the more tenuous that association is going to become, to the point where it is destroyed altogether. That seems obvious, at least to me. What I don’t know is when that happens, and whether that “number” varies by individual.

      This topic is so un-PC I don’t hold out much hope for seeing it studied anytime soon, but I’ve been surprised before. Some of the evo psych guys, like Mark Regnerus (openly Christian, btw) are tackling some tough questions.

      Deti, I have a funny feeling you and I are going to wind up on the same page. Wild.

  • Cooper

    I’ve found the “high 2-4 finger digit ratio” to actually ring true.

  • Ghhn9

    pvw 748 is trying to “have it all”. lol

    (most girls aren’t high T)

    Anyhow the reason the divorce rate for college-educated people is low is because typically these people are part of the upper-middle class (most people in the USA are not college educated).

    The working class, the lower middle class and the upper-class all have higher divorce rates than the upper-middle class because they can either afford it or have nothing to lose by divorcing.

    Liberal men like Brad Pitt and George Soros have divorced. Because they are rich. And can afford it.

    So they are part of the class that is “just right”: rich enough to stay married, but not super rich enough to divorce. The poor have nothing to lose.

    And that’s a third to maybe half of the story. The other parts are just nonsensical.

  • pvw

    Re. my musings on high t women; not “trying to have it all,” whatever that means, I’m merely trying to reconcile some observations….

  • deti

    “The number of truly unrestricted women is not that high, so it suggests women are following the hookup script as a means of getting a relationship, despite the low odds.”

    I have to believe the first part of this is true, because there just can’t be that many truly unrestricted women. But the second part I have trouble with. I know you keep saying a lot of women follow the hookup script to try for a boyfriend. I have trouble believing this because it’s such a poor strategy if getting a BF is the goal. It just doesn’t seem to work very often. It seems awfully hit-and-miss for finding a compatible partner. It just looks like it’s doomed to failure. If this strategy worked, this site would be out of business because all hooking up would be smart.

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

      deti, deti, deti, what are we going to do with you? As our resident Janus, this is your month, perhaps an auspicious time for us to part ways. I’m tired of trying to reconcile your comments and demeanor here, “nice deti,” with your statements elsewhere, “7th grade Queen Bee deti.”

      You speak of wanting to “hold forth” and learn, but you don’t really change your views at all, do you? You don’t really even consider them. How disappointing. You can’t step outside your own frame of reference long enough to see an alternative.

      You stated yesterday (elsewhere, of course) that HUS is of very limited value to women and no value to men. Why you comment here is a puzzle, but I am tired of your disingenuousness. I actually spent half an hour yesterday doing my best to thoughtfully answer your question. That’s time I’ll never get back. I don’t wish to waste any more of it, nor do I want you wasting the time of readers here with your “nice deti” persona. It’s a contagion.

      I hope you find what you are looking for, and that your marriage survives the present difficulties.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Can you refresh my memory? When was I evasive or inconsistent regarding writing specifically about hookup culture?

    An IQ test is not required for participation here, and I welcome anyone wishing to discuss relationships in good faith. I believe that in every instance where I have been challenged to write about the general population, I have reaffirmed that I write for a college and post-college audience. In occasional instances where I have used general data, e.g. CDC, I have specified that.

    The search function doesn’t include comments, so I’ll have trouble digging up your past posts where you’ve claimed to have the goal of helping the entire restricted population meet each other. However, I’m sure other commenters remember you saying this.

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

      The search function doesn’t include comments, so I’ll have trouble digging up your past posts where you’ve claimed to have the goal of helping the entire restricted population meet each other. However, I’m sure other commenters remember you saying this.

      You can often get to comments via Google search. In any case, it’s true I have often said this, but always in the context of college and after. At least that is what I meant. If that was not clear, my apologies. I have never purported to be writing for people who will not experience hookup culture in college. Assume that unless I indicate otherwise.

  • http://www.rosehope.com/ Hope

    INTJ “The search function doesn’t include comments”

    In Google you can use the syntax site:www.hookingupsmart.com (insert keywords here) to do a search on that site only, which will search everything including comments.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @intj

    However, I’m sure other commenters remember you saying this.

    Since you won’t quote the Blog Hostess properly, despite it being quite easy to do so, bottom line: what is the *point* of your point? :???:

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “My daughter doesn’t look anything like me and never will. She got her father’s long, lean body type and fair coloring. My son, on the other hand, is much more a Walsh. He’s 5 inches shorter than his dad.”

    Hypothetical question.

    If you had had two sons, the one now and one more like his father would you have treated them differently?

    Very un-PC and highly inappropriate and even somewhat rude, I know, feel free to disregard it.

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

      @Lokland

      If you had had two sons, the one now and one more like his father would you have treated them differently?

      That is a very un-PC question, as it implies being short is a disability. I can remember very distinctly one day when my son was in middle school. He came home from school and he was clearly bummed. I asked him what was wrong and he said, “I’m going to be short, aren’t I?” My heart broke. I said, “Oh sweetie, I’m so sorry, that’s my genes.” (All of the males in the Walsh clan are under 5’10”.) We then went on to catalog everyone’s physical imperfections for fun and wound up laughing.

      There comes a time when each kid, usually in adolescence, realizes what their physical imperfections are. Some have more to deal with than others. Life isn’t fair.

      He did get voted “Best Eyes” in his senior class, so that was nice.

  • Lokland

    “It’s clear there are some restricted women who engage in unrestricted behaviors either long term or short term.”

    I’ve been using an inner analogy of restrictedness and relations to behaviour via the weatherman and the daily and longterm forecast.

    Most of the time he is right. Sometimes he is wrong.

    If your interested in an LTR, the long term is important but relationships are lived day-to-day. No one wants to be rained on unexpectedly, even occasionally.

  • pvw

    Regarding INTJ personality types; I wonder whether certain traits are held by male INTJs as compared to female ones. Of course, there are bound to be all sorts of other determinants of personality, wherever they come from.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    Interesting story.

    “That is a very un-PC question, as it implies being short is a disability.”

    Actually I could produce an argument for equal treatment and/or favouritism of one or the other. What I want is to see which is correct, btw, you dodged the question :P

    Also, disability, no. That implies an inability to do something.
    Disadvantage, yes.

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

      @Lokland

      Actually I could produce an argument for equal treatment and/or favouritism of one or the other. What I want is to see which is correct, btw, you dodged the question

      Uh oh, I don’t want to be accused of that. I thought my story illustrated an answer.

      I might treat them differently, in that they would each have different needs. I would not love either son more or less, I am sure of that.

  • deti

    I asked the question because I was genuinely interested in your opinion and am coming around to your way of thinking on that particular issue. I’m surprised to see this brushback.

  • Kathy

    “You stated yesterday (elsewhere, of course) that HUS is of very limited value to women and no value to men. ”

    Gee, Deti. Thought you were better than that, man.

    You should have had the courage and decency to tell Susan this, here on her own blog.

    She has been honest and accommodating in her engagements with you.

    You on the other hand have been a snake in the grass. :(

  • JP

    “There comes a time when each kid, usually in adolescence, realizes what their physical imperfections are. Some have more to deal with than others. Life isn’t fair.”

    Shorter people generally live longer because the heart doesn’t have to work as hard.

    It’s really a trade-off.

    For example, I have no speed at all. None. I will lose 99% of the sprints that I am in.

    Which means that my muscles are basically 100% endurance, which was always amusing when I would basically not exercise, then run a distance race beating someone who was clearly physically superior to me and in much better shape.

    The funniest thing that I ever had happen in high school was when I was in a race with a younger guy who was a much better athlete.

    Basically, he said “how in the world did I lose to you? That isn’t even possible!”

    At the time, I was equally confused because I essentially agreed with him, but it was still funny.

  • https://en.gravatar.com/jimbocollins Megaman

    @SW

    I’m tired of trying to reconcile your comments and demeanor here, with your statements elsewhere.

    Different places, different faces. A good case study in the psychology of online anonymity + performing for other audiences. Doesn’t change his track record though, even if he does change his handle…

  • J

    The number of truly unrestricted women is not that high, so it suggests women are following the hookup script as a means of getting a relationship, despite the low odds.

    I think it’s less of a conscious strategy and more naivete. These are young, inexperienced women who really believe that the guy cares for them and is offering a relationship and are often tricked into sex and deeply hurt when they realize they’ve been played. And the guys wo do this are generally older, upperclassmen who have done this before.

  • Ted D

    Deti – Got yourself in the dog house again? Seems like we are on an alternating schedule. :P

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

      @Ted

      At least you’re always the same Ted, I know who I’m dealing with. :P

  • J

    If you had had two sons, the one now and one more like his father would you have treated them differently?

    I do have two sons; the younger is practically a clone of DH, the older once looked a lot like DH but, by 12 or so, looked more like me. He now resembles my dad. Weirdly, the younger has also inherited his dad’s personality and mannerisms, and the older is a lot like me. Both DH and I are closer to the kid that resembles us, but we both also find that kid more grating. We also find that the kid who looks like us is the one who needs to pull harder away from us in order to establish some independence.

  • Ted D

    J – “I think it’s less of a conscious strategy and more naivete. These are young, inexperienced women who really believe that the guy cares for them and is offering a relationship and are often tricked into sex and deeply hurt when they realize they’ve been played. And the guys wo do this are generally older, upperclassmen who have done this before.”

    So this means that men AND women are being lied to by parents, teachers, (insert authority figure here)? Young men seem to be naive about what women really want from them in terms of relationships, and young women seem to be under the impression that any man showing her a bit of attention and wanting to sex her up is in love.

    The elephant in the room to me is: why? Why are we going to such great lengths to misinform our youth about sexuality, and why are we trying so damn hard to cover over the basic truths? Is it that damn hard for people to come to grips with the fact that people want to have sex? Are we embarrassed because of it? I’m asking honestly, because I cannot figure out WHY we ended up so sexually oppressed on the surface but are so sexualized and promiscuous underneath.

  • J

    Deti – Got yourself in the dog house again? Seems like we are on an alternating schedule

    It’s a different thing, Ted. You are pretty consistently yourself, no matter where you post. People may be annoyed by your tendency to psychologize, but no one thinks you play games.

  • J

    I don’t know, Ted. I think that young women are just sort of relationship-hungry. They really do want to have a man who loves them, often to the extent that they just won’t believe that a guy is a player. It’s like finding fool’s gold. You know that you should be careful, but you really want to believe you’ve struck it rich. Sometimes it takes a few hurts to realize that when parents advise caution, they’re right.

    I’m not sure (non-player) boys are much different. My boys are pretty resistant to the idea that beautiful =/=good. For example,

    On a Monday—

    Me: I don’t care much for that Allison.

    Son: Why? Allison is gorgeous, she’s amazing, I adore her.

    Me: Allison looks like a bitch and a user.

    Son: You don’t understand.

    On a Wednesday–

    Son: Allison turned out to a bitch and a user.

    Me: Huh? Who knew?

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

      @J

      OT, but a funny story about how to pick out the bitches. When my daughter was in 7th grade, I was carting about 5 girls to chorus practice. It was my first time meeting most of them. They started playing a funny game – someone would give a choice, e.g. Coke or Pepsi?, and they would all yell out their preference. It got very funny, with “napkins or tampons?” and even “soccer players or football players?” They were all just being goofy. A girl named Susie suddenly said, “Kate or Maddie?” There was a silence, and then another girl said, “Ooooh, I choose Kate. Maddie’s kind of strange.” Another said, “Yeah, Maddie is not even cute.” Later than night I told my daughter, “Susie is toxic. Do not be her friend.” Of course, she denied it, said Susie was just kidding around. But I knew she was a mean girl and a negative influence. Fast forward 10 full years to 2011 and Susie did something extremely hurtful and disloyal, which finally ended that friendship. I was so happy to see her go!

  • Lokland

    @J

    “I do have two sons; the younger is practically a clone of DH, the older once looked a lot like DH but, by 12 or so, looked more like me. He now resembles my dad. Weirdly, the younger has also inherited his dad’s personality and mannerisms, and the older is a lot like me. Both DH and I are closer to the kid that resembles us, but we both also find that kid more grating.”

    This is part of what I was getting at.
    I’m a clone of my father, we speak, move and act the same. Literally, I say the same stupid things he does and can’t even stop myself, it started when I turned 20 or so.

    As a teenager we damn near killed each other. Upon entering uni I told him to fuck off and never speak to me again. Three years until I spoke to him.

    I’ve always gotten along with my mom.
    I’m now much closer to my Dad now that I’m not a prick.

    However its only half the answer.

    If theres a limited amount of resources to be invested, which child receives the bulk or entirety of those resources.
    We live in a culture of plenty so this is mostly a non-issue but it would not have been surprising to find that when one son had to starve it was probably the shorter kid. Greater genetic worth.

    “I might treat them differently, in that they would each have different needs. I would not love either son more or less, I am sure of that.”

    See above.
    Thats an easy statement when there is no choice to make. What about when its on or the other?

    Also, love, is good and fun and warm but it doesn’t keep you out of debt in school, buy you a house etc.
    (All of which happened to my taller, hotter, stupider brother. For awhile it looked like he would be famous, you might have heard his name, didn’t pan out. Me and my sister stopped existing to my mother for 2-3 years.)

    Again, its easy when their is not a choice to be made.

    Also, when I say stupid brother I mean that he was an average-above average student. My sister is actually a genius, like perfect through university, I fall a touch below her.

    My brother was a mid-80 student and he had to work for it. So still a very bright guy.

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

      @Lokland

      Thats an easy statement when there is no choice to make. What about when its on or the other?

      Have you ever read the book Sophie’s Choice? I imagine none of us knows what we would do if we could only save one child and let the other one be herded to the gas chamber. A hypothetical answer would be meaningless.

  • J

    A girl named Susie suddenly said, “Kate or Maddie?”

    That is just nastiness, pure and simple. I hope Kate and Maddie were not in attendence.

    The sad thing is that those little bitches grow up to be PTA presidents. I take great joy in pissing off women like that.

    I have to tell you this. My phone just rang, and a friend of mine told me the weirdest story. I’ve mentioned her before. This is my older friend whose husband just got up from the dinner table, keeled over and died about 18 months ago. She is in her early 70s, short and a bit chunky with a large bosom. She was on her way to attend a senior educational program and was in the elevator alone with a somewhat older male classmate. He copped a feel and then got offended when she yelled at him. Then he ran off. What do you make of that!?!

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

      She was on her way to attend a senior educational program and was in the elevator alone with a somewhat older male classmate. He copped a feel and then got offended when she yelled at him. Then he ran off. What do you make of that!?!

      LMAO! All I can think of is this, you’re old enough to remember:

      li

      Seriously, though, that is clearcut sexual assault. If I were her I would pursue, get grandpa thrown in jail.

  • HanSolo

    @J

    What a horny old bastard! Viagra should definitely not be covered by health care plans. lol

  • Tomato

    “I’m asking honestly, because I cannot figure out WHY we ended up so sexually oppressed on the surface but are so sexualized and promiscuous underneath.”

    Well, the obvious culprit is our puritanical, religious society that pushes, whether overtly or covertly, that sex outside of marriage is wrong and that sex for pleasure instead of procreation is wrong. We are all sexual beings, but being repressed into such a limited expression of sexuality likely leads some to push back in the form of promiscuity.

    See also the dichotomy of the Madonna/whore complex and the pressure on women to be sexual, but not TOO sexual.

  • JP

    “She was on her way to attend a senior educational program and was in the elevator alone with a somewhat older male classmate. He copped a feel and then got offended when she yelled at him. Then he ran off. What do you make of that!?!”

    Sounds like perfectly normal older adult behavior.

    Once you lose that filter, it never come back.

    You need to talk to nursing home employees and hear some of those stories.

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

      You need to talk to nursing home employees and hear some of those stories.

      My husband’s 91 year old grandmother was found naked under the sheets in a male resident’s bed. She was lying in wait. He LJBF’d her, lol.

  • JP

    “Well, the obvious culprit is our puritanical, religious society that pushes, whether overtly or covertly, that sex outside of marriage is wrong and that sex for pleasure instead of procreation is wrong.”

    No, the problem is the nature of sex.

    Namely that it’s outside of otherwise more easily regulated/controlled and less emotionally charged human interactions/activities.

  • Ted D

    J/Susan – “It’s a different thing, Ted. You are pretty consistently yourself, no matter where you post.”

    “At least you’re always the same Ted, I know who I’m dealing with. ”

    I was really just trying to make light of the situation. I appreciate that at least I come across as an equal opportunity pain in the ass thought. ;-)

    J – “I don’t know, Ted. I think that young women are just sort of relationship-hungry.”

    OK, I can understand how being “relationship hungry” would lead a young woman to take stupid risks, but I guess I’m at a loss as to why they are so relationship hungry in the first place. I know I’m getting old and all, but I do remember a little bit about high school. I do remember wanting to have a GF so I could “fit in”, but I never felt that desire strongly enough to take any women that wanted the title. Of course, being that I wasn’t very popular I wasn’t exactly beating any women off with a stick. Oh to be sure, I had lots of women wanting me to orbit them, but not a single one interested in a relationship. (well actually there was just one, and I was with her for over 4 years starting in 10 grade.)

    So I realize that young people (men and women) do stupid things from lack of experience. But, once upon a time, parents took it upon themselves to educate their children about relationships and how to interact with the opposite sex. I can’t say that all the advice was good and correct, but the effort was made. Now? The more I talk to parents about it the more I realize that FAR too many simply do NOT want to even engage in the “sex talk” and of the few that do the information is mostly about how not to get pregnant. Nothing about interacting with each other, nothing about what a healthy relationship should look like, no practical advice of any sort other than not to get pregnant, which at least in my neck of the woods doesn’t appear to be working. How did we go from men telling boys how “women work” and women telling daughters how to care and feed a husband to “don’t get pregnant!” as the only information covered? (Oh add in STD’s) I mean, if boys and girls simply knew more about how they worked, there would be less teenage pregnancy IMO. But for whatever reason (PC, puritan roots, etc.) the U.S. seems completely ashamed of discussing the real nitty gritty of sexual relationships, but has NO problems whatsoever showing naked women on late night TV, and commercials for Viagra and feminine products during prime time. Am I the only one that finds this completely ass backwards?

    “He copped a feel and then got offended when she yelled at him. Then he ran off. What do you make of that!?!”

    I’m beginning to think that humans end the way they started. Let me explain:

    So as a baby a person is obviously uneducated, unaware of their surroundings (for the most part. At least from an intellectual level) and can’t survive on their own. As they age, they become more independent and learn to make their own way. Somewhere in middle age I believe that piques, and from there it is downhill back to where you started. I firmly believe that my mother is currently in her second older-teen trouble-making years. Meaning, she argues, fusses, and fights against things that would otherwise be sensible. (As an example, she refuses to get her bum knee looked at and instead insists that some herbal stuff will “cure” her)

    I would say that your ‘feel and run’ guy is probably in his later grade school years right now, meaning he is acting like a boy on the school playground trying to show a girl he likes her. (although that usually takes the form of light punching, pinching, bumping, kicking type stuff in grade school, but adults know hitting isn’t allowed… LOL)

    My biggest concern is I’ll actually live to the point that I’m back where I started: helpless, oblivious, and with a shitty diaper. :P

  • Ted D

    Tomato – “We are all sexual beings, but being repressed into such a limited expression of sexuality likely leads some to push back in the form of promiscuity.”

    I would buy that if we didn’t see sex on TV, Movies, and every single magazine in line at the grocery. Perhaps we used to be a sexually repressed nation, but I think we are the only ones that still believe that. The rest of the world just shakes their heads at us in disbelief as we talk from both sides of our collective mouths.

    Sex is literally everywhere in the U.S. so how can we claim to be sexually repressed with a straight face?

  • Emily

    >> “She was on her way to attend a senior educational program and was in the elevator alone with a somewhat older male classmate. He copped a feel and then got offended when she yelled at him. Then he ran off. What do you make of that!?!”

    …Roissy in 30 years?

  • Tomato

    “Sex is literally everywhere in the U.S. so how can we claim to be sexually repressed with a straight face?”

    American society both wants and dreads sex. Look at the insistence on abstinence-only sex education (which failed miserably). Look at the backlash when schools consider offering condoms. Look at the backlash with the HPV vaccine. Look at purity balls. Look at how movies with graphic, violent deaths get lower ratings than movies with nudity and sex. Little, if any, of that happens in more “sexually progressive” Europe.

  • Escoffier

    Tomato, you are a riot.

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

      @Escoffier

      You mischief maker, you. Nicely done.

      “when lower urges of female nature are allowed to indulge themselves”

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “@Rebound Girl
    You forgot that in order to use “scientific method” you must first believe in a lot of things. For example, that the world exists; that our senses are vehicles allowing us to find real things, really existing. That’s a lot of things to believe”

    szopen, we both agree that we’re communicating on a blog via the internet, right?

    See what I mean?

  • Ted D

    Tomato – “Look at the insistence on abstinence-only sex education (which failed miserably).”

    This is due to our puritanical roots for sure. It is mostly the religious extremists pushing abstinance-only sex ed. Like I said, that shit isn’t working around my neck of the woods…

    “Look at the backlash when schools consider offering condoms.”

    Honestly I’m on the fence with this. I personally don’t think the schools have ANY business being involved in the sex lives of minors. Their job is to educate. That being said, since parents are not filling the role of sex educator very well, someone has to do the job. In our house, the boys know where my stash of condoms is and I’ve made it perfectly clear that if they need one, they should take one. (I pray they don’t need one for a few more years. 13 is too damn young!)

    “Look at the backlash with the HPV vaccine.”

    My issue with this is: it’s kinda new. I’m not one of those people that think medicine is the work of the devil, but I tend to side on the “unless you absolutely need it, don’t take anything!” That includes shots. I do not get a flu shot because I don’t need one. If I get the flu, I’ll live. If I don’t, well I won’t be around to complain I didn’t get the shot so…

    “Look at purity balls.”

    Again mostly a religious extremist thing I think. I honestly don’t know much about these other than how odd it seems that the ceremonies often look like weddings, only the “groom” is dad. (creepy assed shit to me!)

    “Look at how movies with graphic, violent deaths get lower ratings than movies with nudity and sex.”

    I have no clue on this, but the popularity of violent movies leads me to believe that both sex and violence gets good ratings from movie going crowds. Maybe not movie reviewers, but who takes them seriously anyway?

    “Little, if any, of that happens in more “sexually progressive” Europe.”

    I’ve never been to Europe, and what I know comes from TV and the ‘net, so I won’t try to deny or defend this statement. From my POV they are certainly much more mature and level headed when it comes to sexuality that we are on this side of the pond, but they have plenty of marriage/relationship issues just as we do, so maybe they are no better off than we are at the end of the day.

  • The Rebound Girlfriend

    “Look at the backlash with the HPV vaccine.”

    Yeah, lets look at that backlash;

    http://truthaboutgardasil.org/

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    In any case, it’s true I have often said this, but always in the context of college and after. At least that is what I meant. If that was not clear, my apologies. I have never purported to be writing for people who will not experience hookup culture in college. Assume that unless I indicate otherwise.

    Ah that clarifies things. I guess part of the reason I misunderstood you was that in my mind, “hookup culture”, or at least something like it, isn’t exclusive to college. Depending on the local demographics, it can be quite prevalent in high school.

  • INTJ

    @ pvw

    Regarding INTJ personality types; I wonder whether certain traits are held by male INTJs as compared to female ones. Of course, there are bound to be all sorts of other determinants of personality, wherever they come from.

    Wanting kids is the one that comes to mind. Also, attitudes towards feminism are highly correlated with gender for INTJs.

  • INTJ

    @ JP

    Shorter people generally live longer because the heart doesn’t have to work as hard.

    Yeah but women get that advantage of shortness without being “looked down upon” by society in every other part of life.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Have you ever read the book Sophie’s Choice? I imagine none of us knows what we would do if we could only save one child and let the other one be herded to the gas chamber. A hypothetical answer would be meaningless.”

    Googled it. The story was essentially son to work camp, daughter to gas chamber.

    To put the cynical biological view on it, the son had a way better chance of surviving a work camp than did the daughter. More fit for the task at hand makes him have a relatively higher genetic worth.

    Beyond that, I know a couple people where two equally talented children went to separate schools and were given very different levels of investment.

    Think R1 vs. community college. Typically when asked the argument for was that one child was less deserving than the other via personality traits that made them unsuitable for an R1 institution. Sometimes I agreed, sometimes I did not.

    The only real difference was the potential marketability of the kids wrt attractiveness. That was nearly universal in the decision.

    Note. I’ve seen similar things done wrt girls. Who gets braces, who doesn’t.
    The fact thats its not mentioned and un-PC does not mean it is not real.
    It also doesn’t make it wrong.

  • JP

    @TRB:

    “szopen, we both agree that we’re communicating on a blog via the internet, right?

    See what I mean?”

    I had a mini-panic the other day when I yet again wondered if I actually existed.

    Fortunately, that doesn’t happen too often anymore, since I remind myself that I exist and that I need to more on to thinking about things that I have more control over.

  • Cooper

    @Susan

    My dad and I visited my grandma (90) on Christmas Eve, because she wanted to stay there for dinner. Which was very odd for her consider she usually can’t wait to get away from the place, and complain about the food.

    When we were leaving a older fellow (maybe 80s), was wondering the halls. My name knew him. Apparently him and his wife would sometimes eat dinner with my grandma. And.. his wife has just crosses over from the unassisted to medical assisted side of the residence. Needless to say, my grandma has “swooped in.” Hahaha.

    While we walked away, we could hear him entering my grandmas suite, with a smirky “Mmmeeerry Chriistmaas!!”

    I said to my Dad “well, maybe they just really, really enjoy each others company over dinner.”
    My dad laughe